Transcript Highlights:

• >> I think I finally got it. >> I think I finally got it.
• uh make those kind of decisions. uh make those kind of decisions.
• make the decision on its own? make the decision on its own?
• So,<01:19:56.920> decisions<01:19:57.600> that So, decisions that So, decisions that go
• So, a new spending decisions.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Budget Process 00:02:28 Allotment Process 00:10:30 School Facilities Construction Commission 00:29:10 Role of KDE in School Facilities Funding 00:47:00 Kentucky School Boards Association 01:13:25 Elementary and Secondary School Construction 01:20:40 Perkins V Funding 01:35:32, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > with<00:36:26.440> the Finally, we are concerned with the Finally, we are concerned with
• > OECD<00:42:13.280> members Finally, the number of OECD members Finally, the number of OECD
• Uh final words to Representative Agbaje. Uh final words to Representative Agbaje.
• > those<01:14:53.880> policy All of those decisions those policy All of those decisions those
• Cuz decisions have implications, right?

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard presentations on two tax bills: House File 4123, by Representative Agbaje, would expand Minnesota’s net investment income tax to include certain business income, especially income from S corporations and LLCs not subject to federal self-employment taxes, while keeping the current rate and million-dollar threshold; she said it would raise an estimated $88.7 million next year. House File 4616, by Chair Gomez, would impose a 1% annual tax on fortunes above $10 million. Gomez framed the bill as a response to growing wealth inequality and argued that wealthy households and large fortunes should contribute more to public services, while Agbaje said her bill would broaden the tax base and help meet state needs. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project, Erica Mominee of the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, Lauren Richards, and teacher Kristen Sinicariello, said the bills would help address wealth and income inequality and provide needed revenue for public health, education, and other public services. They pointed to federal tax cuts for high-income households, cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, and strains on state agencies and schools. Richards said small businesses already pay more than large corporations like Amazon, and Sinicariello argued that higher revenue would support classrooms and help equalize opportunity. Opponents, including Brian Cook of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, Dalton Danielson of the Minnesota Business Partnership, and John Beschi of NFIB Minnesota, warned that both bills would hurt business competitiveness and investment. They argued that HF 4123 would effectively create a new higher tax tier for pass-through businesses and that HF 4616 would be difficult to administer, could force sales of illiquid assets, and could discourage entrepreneurship and capital investment. No votes or final committee action were taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the committee moved through bill presentations and public testimony before member discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• And sometimes these are very difficult decisions.
• Who's going to make the final determination? My office will.
• That ruling has been appealed, and we await the appellate court decision.
• Finally, now is an ideal time to do this audit.
• DPR reversed the CAC decision on eight of those appeals.

Summary: The committee heard several audit requests and related testimony. The first major item was an audit of Coachella Valley Unified School District’s contract and fiscal management. The author and supporters described long-standing fiscal mismanagement, large budget shortfalls, layoffs, contracting concerns, and questions about the district’s foundation and use of public funds. District representatives and the Riverside County Office of Education said the district is already under fiscal oversight, has a stabilization plan, and is working to reduce deficits and improve student outcomes. After extensive debate and public comment, the motion to approve the audit was put on call because the committee did not have the required votes from both houses at that moment. The committee then approved an audit of East Bay transit agencies in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Senator Wahab argued the region’s many overlapping transit agencies create fragmentation, duplication, and inefficiency, especially amid a fiscal cliff and possible future tax increases. Transit agencies and labor representatives opposed the audit, saying the agencies already undergo multiple audits, serve distinct local needs, and are implementing regional coordination efforts. After testimony from agency leaders and public commenters, the committee voted to approve the audit. The next item was an audit of California Community Colleges’ unrestricted reserves. Senator Archuleta and supporting faculty representatives said reserves have grown substantially and may be diverting resources from student services, instruction, and workforce programs. They argued there is little oversight when reserves become too high. The Chancellor’s Office and Calbright College were invited to respond, and the audit objectives focused on reserve growth, reasons for high balances, oversight by the Chancellor’s Office, and effects on students and staff. The transcript cuts off during the Chancellor’s Office response, so the final committee action on this item is not shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• After years, we finally found the right biologic.
• When we finally did start a biosimilar, she didn’t respond the same.
• After years, we finally found the right biologic.
• When we finally did start a biosimilar, she didn't respond the same.
• My patients trust me to make decisions based on their individual cases.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a local school board decision.
• Make logical decisions and people are making logical decisions.
• That stipulates the ta has to confer with lbb and comptroller prior to adoption a final or um any final
• Probably made it to 13%, 12.8% was our final number.
• And finally, I'll just have we've been able to do that.

Keywords: infrastructure, water supply, flood mitigation, Texas Water Fund, community projects, funding allocations

Summary: During this committee meeting, the focus was on discussing critical infrastructure funding, especially related to water supply and flood mitigation projects. Chairwoman Stepney and the Water Development Board presented extensive details regarding the Texas Water Fund, which included $1 billion appropriated to assist various financial programs and tackle pressing water and wastewater issues. Additionally, funding allocations aimed at compromising the state's flood risk and improving water conservation were hotly debated, emphasizing collaboration among committee members and the necessity of addressing community needs in such projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• executive the final decision of the executive the final decision of the executive director<02:36:
• again. uh you know they get a decision again. uh you know they get a decision decision<02:39:05.680
• Um, or this bill would give you one of the directed right to appeal a final decision to somebody at the
• <02:51:18.000> decision<02:51:18.800> to right to appeal a final decision to right
• to appeal a final decision to somebody<02:51:19.359> at<02:51:19.600> the<02:51:19.760>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We anticipate, if they go according to schedule, we will receive decisions in June.
• We share the information so that when they make decisions, fiscal decisions about where to invest, hopefully
• it informs that decision.
• sure we may not have final numbers, but to the best that we can...
• We're now going to the final issue six, and then we will be taking public comment.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee heard presentations on the Office of the State Public Defender, statewide public defense workloads, legal aid funding, and Judicial Branch operations. OSPD requested permanent funding for positions that had been temporarily funded to implement the Racial Justice Act, explaining that the workload has become ongoing and now includes additional Supreme Court briefing, habeas proceedings, investigations, expert analysis, and data work. The State Public Defender also presented findings from the California Public Defense Workload and Staffing Report, which concluded that county public defense systems are structurally understaffed, lack sufficient investigators and support staff, and operate without statewide standards; members discussed the need for phased state funding, rural recruitment, and the impact of recent policy changes such as Prop. 36. In the legal aid panel, advocates and a Los Angeles Superior Court judge described severe unmet civil legal needs, especially in eviction defense, homelessness prevention, domestic violence, and immigration detention cases, and requested a $50 million increase to the Equal Access Fund, $20 million to restart homelessness prevention services, and $10 million for health care access services, along with additional targeted investments from the California Access to Justice Commission. The committee also asked for follow-up information on services, outreach, and funding losses, including reduced federal support and the scale of the justice gap. For the Judicial Branch, the Judicial Council and trial court representatives supported the Governor’s proposed budget, including a $70 million increase for trial court operations, $21.7 million for employee health and retirement costs, additional funding for appellate counsel and case processing, and courthouse construction and facilities funding. They said the money is needed to offset inflation, supply costs, and staffing retention problems, and to preserve access to justice through timely case processing and remote proceedings. Senators raised concerns about interpreter shortages, the difficulty of hiring staff interpreters for less common languages, and the lack of a midyear process for courts to request more language-access funding; Judicial Council staff said they reallocate interpreter funds among courts and continue to work on recruitment. The committee also pressed the branch and the Department of Finance on courthouse facilities needs, noting that the long-term backlog is far larger than the current budget can address; Finance said the estimated need discussed previously was about $22.5 billion to start 68 projects and $29.4 billion to complete the remaining projects. No votes were taken during the hearing, but members requested follow-up materials and additional budget information.

Transcript Highlights:

• We finally achieved that. We're back above 2.2 million student headcount.
• One final example I'll give you just to transition is AB 323.
• But ultimately, it's, you know, these are decisions. These are really difficult decisions.
• We're going to be moving on to our final panel.
• And this is all after that decision, that $17 million decision was made.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee held an oversight hearing on how federal actions are affecting California higher education, with opening remarks from the chair and members emphasizing the importance of state-federal shared governance and the need to protect access, affordability, and campus diversity. The first panel included leaders from the CSU, University of the Pacific, California Community Colleges, and UC, who described broad impacts from federal grant terminations, changes to student aid, loan limits, visa and immigration policy, and proposed reductions to research support. Testimony focused on the elimination of Grad PLUS loans, caps on Parent PLUS and Pell-related changes, the loss or suspension of hundreds of grants, and the resulting harm to student support services, research, workforce pipelines, food assistance, and health care training. UC and CSU representatives warned of major losses in research funding, indirect cost reimbursement, and student opportunities, while community college leaders highlighted uncertainty around federal grants and the need to maintain services for low-income, first-generation, undocumented, and other vulnerable students. Committee members asked how the state could respond, including through intersegmental partnerships, dual enrollment, transfer pathways, and support for basic needs and nutrition programs. Witnesses said California could help by sustaining financial aid, protecting minority-serving institution programs, and investing in research, housing, and workforce development. Several speakers stressed that federal changes were creating instability for students and campuses, and that the effects would likely be long-lasting, especially in health care, teaching, STEM, and social work pipelines. A second panel then focused on equitable access. The California Student Aid Commission described state efforts such as the $3.9 billion investment in aid programs, the Cal Grant system, the Dream Act, and possible reforms to better serve adult learners, foster youth, undocumented students, and students with dependents. The Los Angeles Community College District reported that federal cuts and policy shifts are discouraging students from applying for aid, threatening TRIO and MSI/HSI-funded services, and reducing support for basic needs, counseling, and workforce programs. The Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities and the CSU Academic Senate echoed concerns about FAFSA confusion, international student restrictions, grant losses, and the erosion of equity-focused programs. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and discussed possible state responses.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yep, and that's just getting it into the, uh, final form as far as, uh, just changing when, um, appointments
• Yep, and that's just getting it into the, uh, final form as far as, uh, just changing when, um, appointments
• they would make decisions they would make decisions um<00:10:11.160> that<00:10:11.519>
• We're just going to lay the bill over, so any final comments? Representative Craft, thank you, Mr.
• Seeing no other member comments, Representative Myers, your final comments, please?

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• That decision made this issue feel incredibly real to me.
• It is something that guides decision-making forward. As noted, it is not retroactive.
• It is something that guides decision-making forward.
• And then finally, the bill tries to earn the trust that is. emission targets.
• I'll let the secretary call them out as a final. We had 14 ayes. Thank you.

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee heard several bills focused on active transportation, transit, road safety, and local enforcement. SB 569 would restrict removal or downgrading of bikeways built with state General Fund dollars for at least 20 years, require public hearings before major changes, and was supported by bicycle advocates and some local and environmental groups. The City of Encinitas opposed the bill, arguing it could limit needed safety fixes and should apply only to future projects; committee members discussed whether the bill still allowed safety-based modifications. The bill passed on a due pass vote to Appropriations. SB 741 would streamline the Low-Carbon Transit Operations Program by reducing administrative burden and giving transit agencies more flexibility to use funds for service improvements, fare programs, and other transit needs while maintaining oversight and disadvantaged community requirements. Transit agencies and advocacy groups supported the measure, saying it would help agencies respond to post-pandemic ridership and financial challenges. The committee approved the bill on a due pass as amended vote to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 1167, which would tighten consumer protections by clarifying that high-powered e-motos and similar motor vehicles are not e-bikes, requiring clearer disclosures and labels, and improving crash reporting. Supporters said the bill would reduce confusion and improve safety for riders, pedestrians, and parents; the Motorcycle Industry Council opposed unless amended, arguing the term “e-bike” is used broadly and the bill could affect existing businesses. The bill passed to Appropriations. Later, SB 953, dealing with vehicular manslaughter cases dismissed through misdemeanor diversion, would add DMV points so fatal conduct remains reflected on driving records; the bill was supported by the victim’s family and safety advocates and passed to Appropriations. The committee then heard SB 1218, which would let local agencies boot vehicles tied to repeated unpaid illegal dumping citations instead of using DMV enforcement. Oakland officials and community groups supported the bill as a needed deterrent, while the ACLU opposed it as punitive debt collection without a sufficient nexus to the vehicle. The bill passed to Appropriations. Finally, SB 739 would revise the Clean Miles Standard for rideshare companies by allowing CARB and CPUC to adjust electric vehicle mileage targets in light of current market conditions; Uber and Lyft supported the flexibility, while clean air advocates began raising concerns about weakening climate goals as the transcript cut off.

Transcript Highlights:

• Guyon appealed that decision to Ms.
• > by<00:05:28.920> the The decision was appealed by the The decision was appealed by the
• The decision was appealed.
• The decision of the Court of Appeals was appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
• It is quite a to finally be here.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Joint House and Senate Subcommittee on Claims convened on April 30, first without quorum and then with quorum, at which point the committee corrected and approved the prior minutes. Members then reviewed several claims held over for informational purposes, including injury claims for Fraser, Larson, Schmidt, Stuart, and Washington, and property claims for Lidberg, Robecky, and Young, with no action taken on those items. The committee dismissed a claim by Ms. Prevally seeking reimbursement for funds liquidated from irrevocable trusts after hearing that the matter had already been litigated in court and that subcommittee rules bar claims for public assistance compensation. The panel then approved two exoneration claims: James Jovan Davis, whose murder conviction was vacated after postconviction proceedings and who settled for $250,000, and Clayton Douglas Groves, whose sexual-conduct convictions were vacated after evidence of prior false accusations was admitted and who settled for $350,000. Testimony from counsel for both claimants emphasized wrongful conviction, the length of incarceration, and negotiated settlement amounts, with members asking about the basis for the compensation and attorney-fee allocations. The final exoneration claim, Marvin Haynes, was also approved. The committee heard that Haynes was convicted as a teenager, later exonerated after new evidence showed false evidence and suggestive eyewitness identification, and that the state and claimant had reached a $4.5 million settlement. The committee then turned to Department of Corrections injury claims, denying Arnold Baker’s claim for lack of evidence of a compensable permanent injury, and approving Mark Carroll’s claim for a $4,570.40 award after he suffered a compensable ankle fracture while working. In property claims, the committee discussed Anthony Edwards’s claim for food, a JPay tablet, and shoes. After testimony from Department of Corrections counsel about property inventory procedures and the lack of a current replacement tablet program, members agreed to compensate Edwards $70 for the missing shoes, deny the food claim, and deny the tablet claim because the tablet had been returned and any malfunction was reported outside the department’s reporting window.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't want you to rush into any other decisions for us or updates for us, but, um, Mr.
• It is also an unnecessary mandate that erodes the decision of the local community.
• It is also an unnecessary mandate that erodes the decision of the local community.
• It is also an unnecessary mandate that erodes the decision of the local community.
• those communities Senator bar any final those communities Senator bar any final comments<00:29:43.080

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Finally, Hawaii Primary Care Association.
• We finally have Mr. Ben Creps, or not? Finally, Mr. Ben Creps, Public First Law Center.
• <00:13:52.639> or help you in making that decision or help you in making that decision or
• 1187 if not we will go on to the final 1187 if not we will go on to the final bill<00:42:37.800>
• <00:52:10.400> uh much you guys uh and then finally uh much you guys uh and then finally uh

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 412 HD1, which would expand the definition of lobbying to include certain communications with high-level officials about procurement decisions and create presumptions regarding lobbying on behalf of private clients. The State Ethics Commission and State Procurement Office supported the measure, saying it would improve transparency and align Hawaii with other states, while the Hawaii Primary Care Association opposed it over concerns that employers and others could be swept in too broadly. No public testimony or questions led to any action on the bill during the hearing. The committee then took up House Bill 131, which would allow agencies to disclose government records to researchers for certain research purposes and clarify the Office of Information Practices’ rulemaking authority. OIP and the Public First Law Center supported the bill, arguing it would create uniform standards and that concerns could be handled through rules. The University of Hawaiʻi system, DBEDT, DHS, DLNR, and others raised concerns about the breadth of the terms “research” and “researcher,” privacy, confidential information, and possible misuse; Hawaiian Electric also warned about access to sensitive infrastructure information. Members questioned whether the bill was premature and whether definitions should be narrowed in statute, and OIP said it would consider working with agencies and the University on clearer definitions. House Bill 792 HD1, relating to the Office of the Legislative Analyst, drew no testimony beyond a late written support from the Hawaii Children’s Action Network, and the committee moved on without discussion. The committee then heard House Bill 1424, which would restrict transfers between appropriated funds for positions and operating expenses. Budget and Finance explained that current practice allows transfers from payroll to other current expenses when there are savings, but legislative appropriations for specific purposes must still be spent for that purpose. Several agencies expressed opposition or concerns, saying the bill could reduce flexibility, especially in response to federal funding changes or vacant positions, though members emphasized transparency and accountability. Budget and Finance suggested a reporting approach instead, and the committee discussed quarterly reporting as a possible alternative. Finally, the committee began House Bill 1153 HD1, which concerns funding adjustments for state programs and capital improvement projects and establishes a protocol fund. Budget and Finance, DAGS, and the State Procurement Office supported the measure, while the General Contractors Association and several construction-related groups opposed section two, arguing it would undo recent procurement protest-bond safeguards adopted in Act 162. The hearing then moved on toward House Bill 1297, but the transcript cuts off before that bill was fully discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• schedule a meeting for decision making. schedule a meeting for decision making.
• 325 and we are doing decision-m only. 325 and we are doing decision-m only.
• Um any members voting decision making.
• Our final bill today, STR 34 Okay. Okay.
• - concludes our hearing and decision- concludes our hearing and decision- making<00:38:17.119>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then if you make the decision that you haven't decided one way or the other, that decision would
• And then if you make the decision that you haven't decided one way or the other, that decision would
• The minor can then make a decision; it's recorded in the registry as an informational decision, and it
• preserves the parental right to have the final say over the minor's decision.
• I worry we'd make the wrong decisions.

Summary: The committee heard a personal privilege update on HB 1227, which Representative DeWitt said would return next week as a proposed HCR for a two-year study of the three-doctor panel after discussions with Dr. Nia Colotta. Better Louisiana also presented its new Leadership Louisiana Health Fellows Program, describing it as a data-driven leadership initiative focused on health care workforce, rural access, chronic disease, and other system issues; members discussed whether the program could also help generate policy research, including on managed care organizations. The committee then considered SB 427 on anatomical gifts. After adopting technical amendments, Senator Presley and Dr. Jeff White explained that the bill would strengthen organ donation law by creating a decision registry that records both yes and no choices, clarifying the legal effect of refusal, and codifying ethical principles such as the dead donor rule. Questions focused on organ viability, registry procedures, minors, and a Monroe case involving a disputed donor designation. Supporters included LOPA and the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops, and the bill was reported favorably. HB 946, dealing with hospital price transparency and compliance with federal pricing rules, drew extensive testimony. Representative Landry and a witness from Patient Rights Advocate described it as a consumer transparency measure, but the Louisiana Hospital Association opposed the bill’s state-level enforcement and debt-collection provisions. Landry offered an amendment removing the debt-collection and affirmative-defense language, but after debate the substitute failed on a 5-6 vote and the bill was voluntarily deferred. The committee also reported favorably on SB 109, which revises membership qualifications for the Louisiana Emergency Medical Services Commission; SCR 20, urging federal flexibility on Medicaid redetermination for elderly and disabled beneficiaries; SB 216, allowing coroners to rely on licensed practical nurses for medical pronouncements of death; and SB 45, exempting certain gratuitous hospice houses from licensure, with testimony from hospice house operators and supporters. Finally, HCR 71 by Representative Chasson sought an LDH study of how Louisiana’s law and guidance on pregnancy-related emergency medications is working in hospitals, urgent care, and retail settings. Supporters said providers are hesitant to use medications such as misoprostol because of stigma and uncertainty, while opponents from Louisiana Right to Life argued the resolution was unnecessary and could create controversy. The discussion centered on whether the study should be narrowed or made more objective, but no final action on the resolution was reached in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Title and placed on final passage.
• The question now recurs on final passage of SB 158.
• passage. on final passage.
• Time by title and placed on final passage.
• passage. title and placed on final passage.

Bills: HB 1500, HJR 7, HJR 112, HB 34, HB 133, HB 112, HB 119, HB 128, HB 130, HB 132, HB 2756, HB 166, HB 406, HB 186, HB 271, HB 331, HB 380, HB 1583, HB 1584, HB 1819, HB 621, HB 303, HB 552, HB 366, HB 463, HB 1211, HB 1327, HB 1461, HB 923, HB 1760, HB 2043, HB 2467, HB 5333, HB 5265, HB 1592, HB 1576, HB 1552, HB 2018, HB 3511, HB 1781, HB 2013, HB 2340, HB 2349, HB 2508, HB 2970, HB 2520, HB 865, HB 2851, HB 3385, HB 3336, HB 3529, HB 3309, HB 1127, HB 1232, HB 1397, HB 4236, HB 1804, HB 1926, HB 4041, HB 1965, HB 1964, HB 2679, HB 2730, HB 3698, HB 3699, HCR 77, HB 3354, HB 163, HB 201, HB 272, HB 333, HB 405, HB 519, HB 569, HB 654, HB 694, HB 791, HB 1006, HB 1136, HB 1240, HB 1266, HB 1275, HB 1437, HB 1532, HB 1675, HB 1842, HB 1868, HB 1888, HB 1894, HB 1943, HB 1990, HB 2029, HB 2061, HB 2286, HB 2523, HB 2622, HB 2626, HB 2652, HB 2692, HB 2842, HB 2885, HB 2914, HB 3016, HB 3096, HB 3129, HB 3248, HB 3251, HB 3255, HB 3479, HB 3611, HB 3623, HB 3701, HB 3724, HB 3803, HB 3804, HB 3805, HB 3806, HB 3810, HB 3816, HB 3832, HB 3887, HB 4127, HB 4129, HB 4130, HB 4131, HB 4163, HB 4187, HB 4229, HB 4238, HB 4454, HB 4588, HB 4643, HB 4736, HB 4738, HB 4739, HB 4945, HB 5015, HB 5616, SB 767, SB 1619, SB 1738, HJR 5, HJR 2, HB 1399, HB 388, HB 114, HB 205, HB 2789, HB 2791, HB 499, HB 2960, HB 3163, HB 3135, HB 2427, HB 1672, HB 1722, HB 2618, HB 879, HB 1126, HB 4134, HB 3513, HB 1445, HB 1893, HB 1734, HB 3229, HB 3306, HB 1276, HB 3516, HB 4145, HB 1585, HB 4810, HB 2558, HB 2742, HB 1695, HB 33, HB 144, HB 109, HB 103, HB 148, HB 3809, HB 2217, HB 220, HB 2421, HB 2363, HB 421, HB 2455, HB 3711, HB 2559, HB 2775, HB 3126, HB 3666, HB 3595, HB 3260, HB 3376, HB 3826, HB 3770, HB 1831, HB 2614, HB 3113, HB 322, HB 431, HB 869, HB 1203, HB 1244, HB 1875, HB 1950, HB 2152, HB 2341, HB 2809, HB 2856, HB 3012, SB 1415, SB 1058, SB 487, SB 1499, SB 513, SB 1697, SB 1197, SB 1437, SB 1809, SB 836, SB 1879, SB 1145, SB 963, SB 1038, SB 1147, SB 914, SB 711, SB 1409, HB 3707, HB 589, HB 1360, HB 2337, HB 2391, HB 718, HB 23, HB 2436, HB 1500, HJR 7, HJR 112, HB 34, HB 133, HB 112, HB 119, HB 128, HB 130, HB 132, HB 2756, HB 166, HB 406, HB 186, HB 271, HB 331, HB 380, HB 1583, HB 1584, HB 1819, HB 621, HB 303, HB 552, HB 366, HB 463, HB 1211, HB 1327, HB 1461, HB 923, HB 1760, HB 2043, HB 2467, HB 5333, HB 5265, HB 1592, HB 1576, HB 1552, HB 2018, HB 3511, HB 1781, HB 2013, HB 2340, HB 2349, HB 2508, HB 2970, HB 2520, HB 865, HB 2851, HB 3385, HB 3336, HB 3529, HB 3309, HB 1127, HB 1232, HB 1397, HB 4236, HB 1804, HB 1926, HB 4041, HB 1965, HB 1964, HB 2679, HB 2730, HB 3698, HB 3699, HB 3354, HB 163, HB 201, HB 272, HB 333, HB 405, HB 519, HB 569, HB 654, HB 694, HB 791, HB 1006, HB 1136, HB 1240, HB 1266, HB 1275, HB 1437, HB 1532, HB 1675, HB 1842, HB 1868, HB 1888, HB 1894, HB 1943, HB 1990, HB 2029, HB 2061, HB 2286, HB 2523, HB 2622, HB 2626, HB 2652, HB 2692, HB 2842, HB 2885, HB 2914, HB 3016, HB 3096, HB 3129, HB 3248, HB 3251, HB 3255, HB 3479, HB 3611, HB 3623, HB 3701, HB 3724, HB 3803, HB 3804, HB 3805, HB 3806, HB 3810, HB 3816, HB 3832, HB 3887, HB 4127, HB 4129, HB 4130, HB 4131, HB 4163, HB 4187, HB 4229, HB 4238, HB 4454, HB 4588, HB 4643, HB 4736, HB 4738, HB 4739, HB 4945, HB 5015, HB 5616, SB 767, SB 1619, SB 1738, HCR 77

Keywords: Information Resources, Department governance, cybersecurity, state assistance, procurement training, technology resources, advisory committees, water fund, Texas water supply, constitutional amendment, state revenue, infrastructure, parental rights, child upbringing, government interference, Texas legislation, science park district, economic development, technology innovation, higher education collaboration

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:10:41.839> and encourage healthy decisions and encourage healthy decisions and participation
• I finally submitted a prior authorization request, but it was denied.
• By the time her appeal was finally approved, she had already experienced a trip to the emergency room
• It's a reminder that behind every medication decision is a person trying their best to stay well, and
• <00:40:33.440> about intelligent informed decisions about intelligent informed decisions about

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There being 86 ayes, 47 nays, Senate Bill 8 is finally passed.
• But I'm for making good policy based on good decisions.
• Final passage. The question occurs on final passage. It's a record vote. Clerk, ring the bell.
• Senate Bill 37 finally passes.
• And finally, I would just say this.

Bills: SB835, SB3070, SB22, SJR59, 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, SB37, SB8, SB10, SB227, SB261, SB12, SB15, SJR27, SB552, SB835, SB3070, SB22, SJR59, SB25, SB57, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB512, SB241, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2035, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB310, SB1346, SB2753, SB2703, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, 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, SCR9, HB5560, HB762, HB 107, HB 114, HB300, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323

Keywords: sexual abuse, nondisclosure agreements, confidentiality agreements, public policy, victim rights, lottery, bingo, regulation, Texas Lottery Commission, Department of Licensing and Regulation, criminal offenses, state administration, audits, transfers, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation

Transcript Highlights:

• you in the final bill. you in the final bill.
• decision of the appeals court. decision of the appeals court.
• everything, would put put that decision everything, would put put that decision solely<01:06:37.120
• referendum and then make a decision. referendum and then make a decision.
• ,<01:18:31.200> uh, be finalized, uh, be finalized, uh, uh,<01:18:32.640> later<01:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There are lots of ways to resolve the case, particularly a family court case, besides a final hearing
• With respect to parental responsibility, that refers to the parent's ability to make decisions for the
• They are both understanding and able to make decisions in the best interest of the children.
• That's the final order that goes out. You all have it in your meeting packet.
• Last final. No questions, right? Well, my door is always open. My phone is always on.