Transcript Highlights:

• I retract that last statement. We're through with, uh, there's no more.
• Thank you for your statement. Thank you all for being here, and I'll go to the next witnesses.
• Chair recognizes Senator Hinojosa for a statement. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Bills: SB9, SB1047, SB1048, SJR17, SJR49, SB40, SJR1, SJR5, SB 9, SB 40, SJR 1

Keywords: bail reform, defendants, pretrial detention, public safety, criminal justice, charitable bail organizations, criminal procedure, public safety report, victim notification, family violence, bail bonds, public funds, political subdivision, injunction, taxpayer rights, violent crimes, sexual offenses, community safety, constitutional amendment, trafficking

Transcript Highlights:

• If anybody wants to speak afterwards, we'll stay here as long as you want to make statements.
• Can I enter my statement into the record? Sure, without objection. Thank you so much. Mr. Chairman?
• directly and personally, his comments regarding wildfires in the past and his refusal to retract his statements

Transcript Highlights:

• Go ahead with your statement. Thank you, Chair Tolson.
• So that requires a statement of economic interest, annual statement, and you'll see that on line 2.13
• So that requires uh statement of 10.01.
• :10:37.199> statement<01:10:38.080> and economic interest annual statement and economic
• that statement as well. that statement as well.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And when we left 9 and 1/2 hours later, we had a completely different problem statement.
• And when we left 9 and 1/2 hours later, we had a completely different problem statement.”
• And when we left 9 and 1/2 hours later, we had a completely different problem statement.”
• The witness continued, “That matter to identify what a core problem statement is and then what are all
• And when we left 9 and 1/2 hours later, we had a completely different problem statement.

Bills: HB0150

Keywords: Wyoming business council, economic development, task force, evaluation, policy reform, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• is probably in I I think your statement is probably in line<00:12:44.120> with<00:12:44.399><
• Budgets are statements of our values, and that includes tax expenditures.
• We also agree with Senator Hauschild's statements about Minnesota exceptionalism.
• We also agree with Senator Hauschild's statements about Minnesota exceptionalism.
• We also agree with Senator Hauschild's statements about Minnesota exceptionalism.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for employment it it it has a statement for employment it says<00:30:53.519> yes<00:30:53.640
• <00:30:55.519> for<00:30:56.360> uh says yes or no it has a statement for uh says yes
• I understand the concerns that they want specifically oral statements from the judges as to why they're
• <00:31:48.519> from want specifically orally statements from want specifically orally statements
• earlier um of those the uh statements earlier um of those people<01:10:09.520> in<01:10:09.719

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 114, which would create a presidential preference primary for the 2028 election. The Office of Elections said the bill would cost about $4.1 million. Supporters, including the Hawaii Democratic Party and the League of Women Voters, favored moving the process to a state-run primary, while several opponents, including the Hawaiian Islands Republican Women and multiple individual testifiers, argued it would be too expensive, would shift control away from the parties, and would replace volunteer-run caucuses with a mail-in system. Committee members questioned the chief election officer about election timing, certification, and how a primary might be scheduled with other elections. Testimony was recorded as 11 in support, 41 opposed, and 3 comments, and no vote was taken in the excerpt. The committee then took up SB 725, which would require judges to make findings about a defendant’s ability to afford bail. Judiciary and Attorney General witnesses asked that the bill be deferred or amended, saying the Judicial Council is already reviewing pretrial bail reform and that the bill’s language could create practical problems for police, sheriffs, and courts. Supporters, including the Correctional System Oversight Commission, the public defender, the Community Alliance on Prisons, the ACLU of Hawaii, and disability rights advocates, said cash bail disproportionately harms low-income defendants, increases pretrial detention costs, and should require clearer findings and records. Opponents included the Hawaii County prosecuting attorney. Members questioned how bail is initially set, what records exist, and whether the bill would change current practice; Judiciary witnesses said initial bail decisions are often made by police or judges and later reviewed on the record, while supporters argued the bill would strengthen front-end due process. The ACLU said it supported the bill with amendments, including clearer standards for ability to pay and written findings. The committee also began hearing SB 733, a proposed constitutional amendment to establish a continuous legislative session. Early testimony was strongly supportive, with advocates arguing that the current 60-day session limits public participation, makes it hard for working people to testify, and prevents lawmakers from collaborating effectively. Supporters said a year-round model could improve transparency, reduce duplicate bills, and better accommodate neighbor island legislators. The excerpt ends during the opening testimony on SB 733, before any committee action or vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• With reprimand, what happens is a statement comes out, but, being less formal, the individual does not
• <00:39:04.720> comes<00:39:05.040> out, what happens is a statement comes out, what
• And this is a true statement.
• Those are statements made by an elected official who is a representative of his constituents and also
• <01:02:21.200> uh<01:02:21.359> powerful statement that would be uh powerful statement

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I just wanted to echo the statement that Maggie Williams just gave.
• And I just wanted to echo<00:04:33.440> the<00:04:33.759> statement<00:04:34.080> that
• <00:04:34.320> Maggie<00:04:34.720> Williams echo the statement that Maggie Williams
• echo the statement that Maggie Williams just<00:04:35.440> gave.
• the bank's asset statement. the bank's asset statement.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Make the statement when you folks come up and in favor, you better understand the measure, okay?
• Make the statement when you folks come up and in favor, you better understand the measure, okay?
• Make the statement when you folks come up and in favor, you better understand the measure, okay?
• Make the statement when you folks come up and in favor, you better understand the measure, okay?
• when you folks come make the statement when you folks come up<00:05:11.600> and<00:05:12.160>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism heard testimony on several bills, with much of the discussion focused on Enterprise Zones and related economic development measures. On SB 125, the committee heard support from DBEDT, the Department of Taxation, the Tax Foundation of Hawaiʻi, the Hawaiʻi Farm Bureau, and the Farmers Union. Members questioned how the bill would affect job-creation requirements and learned that existing companies and new companies are treated differently under the program, with existing companies generally subject to a 15% annual employment increase and new companies to a 10% increase, while the bill would extend the program period from seven to nine years. DBEDT also said the program has been effective, citing 1,162 jobs created or maintained at a cost of about $1.2 million, and noted that agriculture, manufacturing, and wholesaling are the main sectors involved. The committee then took up SB 729, also relating to Enterprise Zones, which would expand eligibility to better accommodate local manufacturers and value-added businesses that sell directly to retail rather than only wholesale. Testifiers from the Holua Collaborative and Hawaiʻi Farm Bureau supported the measure, saying it would help small manufacturers and agricultural producers add value and adapt to internet-era sales patterns. A committee discussion clarified that the bill would add value-added processing as an allowable activity within the zones, and DBEDT explained that the current rules were written for a wholesale-dominated market. The Attorney General’s office also testified, raising a supremacy clause concern and recommending language changes to avoid conflict with federal law. On SB 129, relating to labeling requirements for fish, the Attorney General and the Department of Agriculture both raised concerns about federal preemption and enforcement. The AG explained that federal law governs fish labeling but includes an exception for processed fish, and recommended narrowing the bill to processed fish and defining that term to fit the federal carve-out. The Hawaii Longline Association supported the bill but suggested excluding canned tuna while including products such as poke, sashimi, and sushi. The Department of Agriculture said it does not currently enforce this kind of labeling requirement and would need to determine whether another agency should handle enforcement. The committee also heard SB 581, which would establish an aerospace and aeronautics development program within DBEDT. Testimony was generally supportive, but members pressed for a fiscal estimate, and the bill’s sponsor said a prior version of the office had operated on about $400,000 annually with a small staff. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a statement of fact, and that is the basis with which we believe this case might not apply.
• We have a statement of fact, and that is the basis with which we believe this case might not apply.
• It is not an accurate statement to say that all of our 28 colleges have capacity.
• The question was made, or the statement was said, that they are taking... 90 students.
• I also want to make a statement that this isn't because I don't believe in immigration.

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum, prayer, and the Pledge of Allegiance, then read an amended joint proclamation expanding the special session call to include financial penalties for government officials, criminal penalties for offenses committed by illegal aliens, and programs and appropriations to support law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. No committee reports, governor’s messages, or House messages were on the desk before the chamber moved to the special order calendar. The main item was Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2B, the immigration bill, along with a late-filed strike-all amendment by Senator Gruters. Gruters said the amendment aligned terminology with federal law, increased penalties for crimes by unauthorized aliens, added transnational crime organizations to gang definitions, required stronger participation in the federal 287(g) program, created financial penalties for noncompliance, offered a $1,000 bonus for officers assisting ICE in large operations, directed more information-sharing with federal agencies, and barred DHSMV from issuing licenses or IDs to unauthorized aliens. He framed the bill as supporting President Trump’s immigration agenda and focusing on criminal illegal aliens rather than street-level enforcement. A long question-and-answer period followed, with Senators Polsky, Pizzo, Smith, Jones, Roscoe, Berman, and others pressing the sponsor on scope, legality, costs, and implementation. Questions focused on whether the bill would require participation beyond jails and detention centers, whether schools or churches could be affected, liability and immunity for local agencies, the size and purpose of the proposed appropriations, and the impact on undocumented students receiving in-state tuition waivers. Gruters and Senator Fine said the 287(g) provisions were intended to apply to jails and detention facilities, that green-card holders and lawful residents would not be affected, and that the tuition waiver repeal would end discounted tuition for students in the country illegally while not affecting their ability to attend. Fine also defended the mandatory death penalty provision for certain capital offenses committed by illegal immigrants, acknowledging it would likely be challenged in court but arguing the bill was designed to test and advance the policy. No final vote or other action on the bill is reflected in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a statement of fact, and that is the basis with which we believe this case might not apply.
• It is not an accurate statement to say that all of our 28 colleges have capacity.
• The question was made, or the statement was said, that they are taking... 90 students.
• The question was made, or the statement was said, that they are taking spots away from Americans.
• I also want to make a statement that this isn't because I don't believe in immigration.

Summary: The Senate opened with a prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and the reading of an amended joint proclamation expanding the Legislature’s immigration agenda. The proclamation added items calling for financial penalties for government officials, enhanced criminal penalties for offenses committed by illegal aliens, and programs and appropriations to support law enforcement in enforcing federal immigration law. The chamber then took up the special order calendar, beginning with Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2B, the immigration bill. Most of the meeting was devoted to debate and questions on the strike-all amendment to SB 2B. Sponsor Senator Gruters described the bill as a broad immigration enforcement package aligned with President Trump’s agenda. He said it would require greater cooperation with federal immigration authorities, strengthen participation in the 287(g) program, create a chief immigration officer and council, authorize financial penalties for noncompliance, provide bonuses for officers assisting ICE, and direct information-sharing with federal agencies. He also said the bill would bar DHSMV from issuing licenses or ID cards to unauthorized aliens and would end in-state tuition waivers for undocumented students. Senators Polsky, Pizzo, Smith, Jones, Berman, Osgood, and others questioned the scope of the bill, whether it would affect schools, churches, cities, nonprofits, and green-card holders, and how the 287(g) provisions would work in practice. Gruters repeatedly said the operational focus was on jails and detention facilities, not street-level enforcement. A major point of controversy was the bill’s proposed mandatory death penalty for unauthorized aliens convicted of certain capital offenses. Senator Fine said the covered crimes were the most serious capital felonies, including murder, child sexual battery, destructive-device offenses causing death, and certain trafficking offenses, and argued the provision was intended to withstand constitutional challenge. Senator Pizzo raised Eighth Amendment concerns and questioned whether the bill could mandate death sentences. The tuition waiver provisions also drew extended debate: Fine said the state would save about $41 million by ending discounted tuition for undocumented students, while Democrats argued the savings would not return to general revenue and that the policy would harm students who are already enrolled. Fine and Gruters said green-card holders would not be affected and that the bill targeted only students in the country illegally. The discussion also covered appropriations and implementation. Senator Smith asked about the bill’s large funding levels, and Fine broke down the spending as including $375 million for the chief immigration officer, $100 million in grants to local law enforcement, $29 million for the new Office of State Immigration Enforcement, and $10 million for an unauthorized-alien transport program. Gruters said the funds would reimburse local governments and help address staffing shortages, while critics questioned the lack of benchmarks and the fiscal impact. No final vote or disposition on the bill appears in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if you have an opening statement, that'd be great. Pablo Vargas: All right. Thank you.
• So would you agree with that statement of mine or no? Chairman Gleason: Yes.
• If you have an opening statement, introduce yourself. We'll start with Chris.
• And if you have an opening statement, give it and we'll just go down the line.
• Chairman: And your opening statement. We'll move down the line. Kirk Phelan: Yes, sir.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the bill clarifies, among other things, that a family member must affirmatively sign a statement
• That family member must affirmatively sign a statement that they want the coverage to protect the counties
• So, like, so for example, let’s say someone files a ballot statement or ballot title worksheet, claiming
• So I'm just finishing up my statement, which I'm allowed to do. Yes, please proceed.
• But you did say in your last statement to me that you understand and you support democracy and people

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met as a subcommittee until quorum was established, then heard a series of election- and public-trust-related bills. Early items included AB 2592, which would move lobbyist training from legislative ethics committees to the FPPC starting in 2029 and make it available online on demand; it drew support from the FPPC and an oppose-unless-amended request to make the training public and ensure lobbyists pay fees. AB 2573 would refine California’s confidential voter registration protections for candidates and elected officials, with support from the Secretary of State and county election officials after amendments narrowed some family-member coverage. AB 2753 would bar registered sex offenders from running for or holding local or state office; it prompted extended debate about public trust, second chances, and where to draw the line, but was ultimately advanced on a 5-0 vote with one member not voting. AB 2691 similarly would expand disqualifying felony convictions to include sexual assault and human trafficking, and it also passed 5-0 after testimony from victim advocates and discussion about survivors, restorative justice, and the power dynamics involved in public office. The committee also advanced AB 2413, which would prohibit public funds from being used for large-format ads featuring elected officials, and AB 2281, which would direct the Office of Election Cybersecurity to assess replacement resources after federal cybersecurity support cuts and allow consultation with academic researchers. AB 1664 would require local election officials to notify the Secretary of State and Attorney General within one business day of warrants, subpoenas, or investigations involving election records or voting systems; supporters said it would help the state respond quickly to improper seizure of election materials, and it passed 5-0. AB 2484, concerning San Diego MTS, would let voters authorize a local sales tax initiative for transit funding and exempt it from an existing cap; it drew support from transit leaders and labor, opposition from the Realtors, and a lengthy exchange over Prop. 13, Prop. 218, and whether the measure created a special deal, before passing 6-1. The committee then heard AB 2230, which would create buffer zones around voting centers and child care facilities to keep immigration enforcement away from those locations. The author said the bill was meant to reduce fear and intimidation for voters and families, while the opposition argued it was unenforceable, lacked evidence of a problem, and would interfere with federal officers doing their jobs. Members supporting the bill cited reported ICE profiling and intimidation in California communities, while others raised jurisdictional and practical concerns. The transcript ends during this debate, with no final vote shown for AB 2230.

Transcript Highlights:

• And of course there's also the statement in this that says that the state does not take a stand on any
• And of course there's also the statement And of course there's also the statement in<00:27:07.000
• That's why they are also included with... ...this is included statements from our founders letting us
• I find myself so often having to make this statement. I am a Christian. But, um... >> Mr.
• I find myself so often having to make this statement. I am a Christian.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Who do you represent and any statement you wish to make? One in the nation.
• Not only do we have to turn over witness statements, but we have to disclose what witnesses we are going
• You've provided no statements, anything that you intend to rebut the state's case.
• We're not taking those first statements.
• How are we to know this information when it is not included on a probable cause statement or as part

Bills: SB330, SB663, SB1020, SB1152, SB1164, SB1896, SB2111, SB2196, SB2383, SB2581, SB2797, SB2798, SB2371

Keywords: county funding, prosecutors' offices, elections, law enforcement, local government, community supervision, budget approval, corrections department, strategic plan, judicial oversight, SB 1020, Texas, personal bond office, pretrial release, electronic monitoring, GPS monitoring, global positioning system, bond conditions, probation, parole

Summary: The committee heard several criminal justice bills, with testimony largely focused on public safety, court procedures, and local criminal justice administration. SB 2371 would expand mandatory skimmer-reporting requirements from gas pumps to ATMs, point-of-sale systems, and virtual currency kiosks, with the Texas Financial Crimes Intelligence Center saying centralized reporting would improve investigations, preserve evidence, and help identify organized criminal groups. SB 2581 would repeal a special law governing commissary funds in certain large counties; the sponsor and the Sheriff’s Association said it would restore parity with other counties while keeping spending subject to audit and inmate-benefit limits. Both bills were laid out and left pending after testimony, with no public witnesses opposing them at the hearing. The committee also heard SB 330, which would require voter approval before counties over a certain size reduce prosecutor funding, similar to an existing law for law enforcement budgets. Supporters argued prosecutors are essential to public safety and need stable funding, while an opponent from the Texas Civil Rights Project said the bill would restrict local budget flexibility and impose costly elections. SB 663 would remove district judges’ approval role for community supervision and corrections department budgets, replacing it with judge review after TDCJ-CJAD approval; probation officials said the change would reduce delays and confusion without reducing judicial oversight. SB 1020 would require more immediate sharing of ankle-monitor violation information and clarify that such records are not judicial work product; the Harris County DA’s office and Crime Stoppers supported it, citing inconsistent local practices and delays that can hinder prosecutions. The committee then took up SB 1164 on emergency detention and court-ordered mental health services. The bill, from the Texas Judicial Commission on Mental Health, would update emergency detention forms, clarify officer duties, allow filings in the county where a person is apprehended or located, and add a factor related to a person’s inability to recognize symptoms or appreciate treatment risks. Supporters included family members, law enforcement, and mental health and judicial witnesses who described cases where earlier intervention might have prevented tragedy; opponents warned the broader language could be misused and emphasized due process and the need for dangerousness to remain the standard. SB 2111 on indigent defense would expand access to counsel at first hearings, strengthen managed assigned counsel programs, create internships and fellowships, and adjust other defense-related procedures; the Texas Indigent Defense Commission and county defense program leaders supported it, while the committee substitute removed some provisions to reduce fiscal impact. Finally, SB 2383 would let recently retired DPS officers return to work in limited roles to help address staffing shortages, and SB 2797 would create reciprocal discovery requirements for criminal cases; prosecutors and some committee members said it would reduce trial surprise and improve truth-seeking, while others questioned whether the bill fully matched the state’s disclosure obligations and whether it could burden defense rights. Several bills were left pending after testimony, and the committee established a quorum later in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Like, where did we get that statement from, financially robust? That's a great question.
• And our statement was that it is confusing for consumers to know...
• And our statement was that it is confusing for consumers to know which communities are CCRCs and which
• Two, on the disclosure statements, there's a description of physical facilities.
• That includes the audited financial statements of these organizations.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met to review its draft final report on continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs), with most of the discussion focused on whether recommendations required unanimous consensus and how to handle disagreements in the report. Members agreed that consensus meant no stated opposition, and several participants argued that unresolved issues should still be described in the report rather than omitted. The chairs said the report would include agreed-upon recommendations, note areas without consensus, and preserve written comments or dissent letters submitted by members. The draft report’s findings and slides were reviewed charge by charge, including CCRC definitions, financial condition, entrance fee refunds, regulatory oversight, advertising practices, and closure/change-of-ownership procedures. Members suggested several factual and wording edits, including clarifying financial data sources, correcting a presenter’s name, refining language about entrance fee use and refund timing, and revising statements about Attorney General authority and CCRC advertising. There was also discussion about the need to distinguish nonprofit and for-profit CCRCs and to better explain how different care levels and licensing structures are described. On recommendations, the commission kept the proposal to advance the disclosure bill (S. 478) and update the consumer guide, but removed a recommendation for annual open board meetings after objections that it was inadequate. The group spent considerable time debating whether to recommend resident representation on CCRC boards, timely refund requirements for entrance fees, and possible state registration or definition changes for CCRCs, but no consensus was reached on those items. The chairs said the final report would be completed by the statutory August 1 deadline, with final written comments due before then and the report and meeting materials posted on the legislature website.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do any other members have any statements you wish to make? Senate side, Mr.
• don't know who those people were, her legal team, her boss, I don't know—DSHS provided me with a statement
• This is a statement provided to me from DSHS to provide to you, and it is wrong.
• So hearing none, members, I wish to get the following statement...
• I wish to get the following statement: Today we pause to remember the lives that were lost, the families

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• House Resolution 2004, concurrent resolution expressing disapproval of certain public statements by the
• Number one, the fact is that Attorney General Mays made a statement condoning attacks on law enforcement
• But yet we have other facts, such as the governor denounced the statement of the Attorney General.
• A failed record, a terrible statement, a denouncement by the governor, and I vote aye.
• A failed record, a terrible statement, a denouncement by the governor, and I vote aye.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The House opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a moment of silence honoring two Arizona Department of Public Safety personnel killed in a helicopter crash while responding to an active shooter incident in Flagstaff. Members also introduced numerous guests and Capitol Day visitors, including the Arizona Society of Anesthesiologists, the Arizona Dental Hygienists Association, and organizations serving deaf, hard of hearing, and deaf-blind Arizonans. A proclamation was read designating September 4 as Taekwondo Day in Arizona. The chamber then processed a large number of bills through first reading, second reading, and Committee of the Whole. Measures receiving due-pass recommendations included HB 2075, HB 2120, HB 2155, HB 2328, HR 2004, HB 2051, HB 2072, HB 2178, HB 2203, HB 2395, HB 2010, HB 2043, HB 2108, HB 2135, and HB 2310. Several bills drew substantive debate, including HB 2051 and HB 2072 on lactation services and consultant certification for Medicaid reimbursement, HB 2203 on eliminating duplicative reporting requirements, HB 2395 on a voluntary mental health-related measure, and HB 2043, which sparked a sharp partisan exchange over whether it was a cleanup to felony-murder statutes or an anti-abortion/personhood measure. On third reading, HB 2008, dealing with school libraries and public funding for library associations, passed 33-25 after debate over whether it would help keep ideology out of schools or further weaken library support. House Resolution 2004, a nonbinding resolution expressing disapproval of Attorney General Chris Mays’ public statements, also passed 33-25 after extensive floor debate over her comments, her record on law enforcement and consumer protection, and whether the resolution was appropriate. The House then adopted the Committee of the Whole reports, referred the passed measures for engrossing, and adjourned until Monday, February 9, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• 1% of an organization state general fund appropriation if they fail to submit complete financial statements
• organization state general fund appropriation if they feel to submit submit complete financial statements
• and federal expenditure reports If they fail to submit complete financial statements and federal expenditure
• I will again read the statement that Representative Wynn provided for HB 2417, which focuses on excessive
• Seeing none, I will read Representative Wynn’s statement. HB 2763 is a firearm range-related bill.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The meeting covered a large number of bills and resolutions across education, federalism, government, health, commerce, and judiciary-related topics. In education, members heard bills on moving the statewide testing window later, allowing paper-based testing in more cases, posting school administrator compensation data, expanding who may receive student directory information, reviewing duplicative ADE reporting requirements, requiring religious excusals, creating a school fitness recognition program, and a proposed ballot measure on sex-designated school sports and private spaces. In federalism, the committee discussed banning foreign nationals from funding ballot-measure committees and a proposal to eliminate voting centers and return to precinct-based voting. Other items included memorials urging the U.S. to withdraw from the United Nations and the IMF, and a government bill penalizing agencies that fail to submit financial reports on time. Health and human services bills focused on lactation care, a state certification program for lactation providers, prohibiting gender transition procedures for minors, requiring chief medical officers at state agencies to hold active licenses, clarifying air ambulance statutes, seeking a SNAP waiver to restrict non-eligible food purchases, and collecting hospital patient immigration-status data for reporting. Sponsors generally framed these as consumer protection, public health, or administrative cleanup measures, while some members raised concerns about cost, privacy, and possible legal conflicts. In commerce, the committee heard bills on digital goods disclosure, protections for child content creators, liability limits for river outfitters, landlord utility billing transparency, appraisal management company definitions, unemployment eligibility verification, and association-based health plans. Several measures were pulled from consent or flagged for amendments. The judiciary portion included bills creating a civil cause of action for violations of anti-DEI laws, expanding hate-crime-style penalties to include political affiliation and expression, adding reporting requirements for name changes by sex offenders, penalizing possession of falsified commercial driver’s licenses by unlawfully present individuals, adding penalties for mailing abortion-inducing drugs, allowing speed-limiting devices as an alternative to license suspension, extending inmate transition services, increasing penalties for sexual extortion involving older teens, requiring legislative approval to close state shooting ranges, and advancing an Article V convention resolution for congressional term limits. Several sponsors emphasized public safety, parental rights, election integrity, or government accountability, while some members raised constitutional or implementation concerns, particularly on liability, voting systems, and the term-limits resolution. Multiple bills were reported as being on consent calendars, with some pulled for amendments or further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am reading a statement from one of our permanent temporary workers at the National Hispanic Cultural
• I'm an organizer for CWA Local 7076, and I will read a statement from one of the set and exhibit designers
• I'm an organizer for CWA Local 7076, and I will read a statement from one of the set and exhibit designers
• I'm reading a statement today for one of the permanently temporary workers at the National Hispanic Cultural
• I have a number of questions here, but I got a statement before we start talking about that.

Keywords: 996, all

Summary: The House Labor, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee met and first heard House Memorial 7, which asks Legislative Council Service, the State Personnel Office, DFA, and GSD to study the use of temporary, term, seasonal, casual, on-call, and other non-regular classifications in state government. The memorial was presented as a response to concerns that some workers are repeatedly terminated and rehired, sometimes after a one-day break, to avoid regular status and associated benefits. Testimony from CWA and AFSCME described long-term temporary workers at the National Hispanic Cultural Center and other agencies who allegedly do full-time work without health insurance, retirement, leave, or consistent pay progression, and who in some cases were denied union coverage. Committee members questioned the scope, definitions of temporary employment, and whether the issue should instead be referred to the state auditor; the sponsor said the study would gather data and recommendations first. The committee voted due pass, and House Memorial 7 passed unanimously. The committee then heard House Bill 177, which appropriates funds to the Veterans Services Department to contract for shelter and care of service and companion animals so veterans can access housing, medical care, and other services without fearing separation from their pets. Support came from the Veterans Services Department, Animal Protection New Mexico, and the Veterans and Military Families Caucus/Veterans Integration Center, all of whom said pets are often a barrier to veterans seeking care and that existing community-based animal boarding models could be used. The bill received no opposition, and the committee voted due pass with no opposition. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 43, a PERA cleanup bill intended to update and clarify the Public Employees Retirement Act and align it with administrative practice. Testimony focused on a provision allowing PERA to use licensed physicians, including out-of-state physicians who can be licensed in New Mexico, to serve on the disability review process when needed so disability cases are not delayed. Committee members raised concerns about ensuring medical expertise and avoiding abuse of the licensing flexibility, but PERA explained the change was meant to address recruitment difficulties and maintain timely review. The committee voted due pass on House Bill 43.