Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm happy to talk about those kinds of ideas too. OK, thank you, Ms.
• And, and there are a lot of ideas floating around, I think, about transparency, about spending limits
• Perhaps James will have some ideas on that.
• Perhaps a supermajority vote to approve bonded indebtedness would be a good idea.
• There are a few ideas that I know folks are working on.

Bills: HB8, HB9, HJR1, HB 22

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Transcript Highlights:

• Link, I have no idea what you just said.
• Link, I have no idea what you just said.
• So I like the idea.
• But we’d be happy to share some ideas.
• I mean, we've got all kinds of ideas.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Link, I have no idea what you just said.
• Chairman and Representative Machinbucker, that's a great idea.
• So I like the idea.
• But we'd be happy to share some ideas.
• I mean, we've got all kinds of ideas.

Summary: The committee convened, approved the prior meeting minutes, and received a memo summarizing major audit items. The State Auditor’s office and outside auditors then presented a series of audits, many of which were clean with unmodified opinions and no findings, including the Bank of North Dakota, the Guaranteed Student Loan Program, the Office of the Governor, the State Treasurer, the Office of Management and Budget, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Environmental Quality, Lake Region State College, and the Office of the Governor. The North Dakota Stockmen’s Association audit was also clean overall, but it repeated findings about limited segregation of duties and auditor assistance in preparing financial statements, which the auditor said were expected to continue because of the organization’s small size. Committee members asked about out-of-state board addresses, and the association explained those members were North Dakota residents using South Dakota mailing addresses. Several audits did include findings. The Council on the Arts audit identified two issues: payroll charged to federal awards without supporting time records, and $12,825 in Cultural Endowment Fund spending that was not allowable under state law, including staff training, retreats, and executive director candidate travel. The Department of Public Instruction audit found unsupported scholarship applications in the paraprofessional-to-teacher program, but additional testing confirmed the funds were credited properly and students completed required school district work, so no improper payments were identified. The University of North Dakota audit found a lack of documentation and transparency in School of Law admissions decisions; the auditor said the law school used a holistic process but did not keep notes or evaluation tools to show why applicants were admitted, waitlisted, or denied. UND leadership said the school is in good standing with the American Bar Association and agreed better documentation is needed, and the auditor said the issue was the missing documentation, not ABA accreditation itself. The most extensive discussion centered on the North Dakota Racing Commission audit, which found four findings: overspending the promotion fund’s 25% operating cap, grant conditions not being met, improper breeder fund awards, and improper procurement. The auditor said promotion fund spending exceeded the cap by $327,447 and the fund balance dropped sharply over the audit period. Racing Commission director Bruce Johnson said the agency had become complacent, that grant requests were treated as routine, and that controls and documentation need to be tightened. He also explained that the breeder fund overpayments involved two horses whose ownership transfers were not properly documented before racing, and that the procurement issue stemmed from an advertising contract that proceeded without proper written procurement procedures after a misunderstanding with the State Procurement Office. The auditor said the Racing Commission will now be audited every two years because of the findings. The committee also received updates on Dakota College at Bottineau’s bank reconciliations, which Minot State University said had been brought current after an 18-month backlog, with only one account still needing cleanup; members asked for a written report on the corrective actions. The North Dakota Fair Foundation was reported to have dissolved, with remaining funds transferred to another nonprofit account for continued support of the state fair. Finally, the Department of Public Instruction provided an update on school meal debt, revising the earlier estimate to about $1.1 million based on incomplete district survey responses, and said the Anti-Lunch Shaming law likely increased meal debt because schools must feed students regardless of account balance. Members discussed the need for a more accurate year-end debt figure and possible future reporting at a later committee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I had also looked at the idea of the effective date, wondering if we should make sure that July 1st
• Um I had also looked<00:12:26.880> at<00:12:27.040> the<00:12:27.200> idea<00:12
• I think the idea of having >> Uh thank you.
• We can just have the idea. Actually, let's make the motion.
• We can just have the idea. session. We can just have the idea.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, I believe that's the idea behind it. It's written fairly broadly.
• It's it's written fairly idea behind it.
• committee can have plenty of new ideas committee can have plenty of new ideas instead<01:05:55.920
• Um, I think to that end, I like the idea of this clearinghouse concept.
• We have these great ideas very douche.

Bills: SF0101

Keywords: Second Amendment, firearm regulation, state legislation, public safety, civil penalties, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a bad idea. Thank you. How you guys doing? My name's Francisco Yanez.
• We supported the idea of taking your record and cleaning it off, the idea that all of a sudden, you know
• Other than that, the idea that, you know, the overall idea of—and that we've already heard from the people
• In particular, I'd like to flag the idea that municipal waste is a feasible feedstock.
• I don’t mean to suggest that you aren’t married to the ideas that are in the bill.

Summary: The committee hearing centered first on AB 1243, the Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act of 2025, which would direct CalEPA to identify major fossil fuel companies, study California’s climate damages, and assess fees on the largest polluters to fund resilience, recovery, and related projects. The author and supporters argued the bill would make polluters help pay for climate harms, protect taxpayers, create jobs in construction and clean energy, and dedicate at least 40% of funds to disadvantaged communities. Support testimony came from environmental justice groups, labor, youth advocates, health organizations, and many individual witnesses, while opponents from the building trades, chambers of commerce, petroleum, and business groups warned it would raise fuel and consumer costs, threaten refinery jobs, and create legal and economic uncertainty. Committee members debated the bill’s impact on affordability, jobs, refinery closures, and whether cap-and-trade already addresses climate funding needs. The committee ultimately voted to give AB 1243 a due pass recommendation to the Judiciary Committee, with the roll left open. After AB 1243, the committee moved to another bill on wildfire mitigation and related resilience work. The author said the measure addresses a long-running wildfire problem and accepted committee amendments, describing the bill as a response to increasingly severe wildfire seasons and the need to help communities stay safe and rebuild after disasters. The transcript cuts off as that presentation begins, so no final action on the second bill is shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have already met with other IGs across the nation to try to get ideas.
• we're taking uh any and all good ideas we're taking uh any and all good ideas uh<00:06:53.599>
• Oh, I have no idea, zero idea, this morning what we are discussing, what we’re voting on, what we’re
• <00:39:42.800> zero<00:39:43.480> idea to change oh I I have no idea zero idea to change
• oh I I have no idea zero idea this<00:39:44.119> morning<00:39:45.119> what<00:39:45.280

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I have no idea on that. I do not. No, no.
• Do you have any, last question, do you have any idea why it would be a good idea for the legislature
• The idea that the Democratic Party would...
• I have no idea what you can put back.
• Let me tell you something: I have no idea.

Bills: HB4

Keywords: district composition, congressional election, Texas, legislature, voting districts, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Glenn McElfresh is going to provide some testimony on why this bill is a good idea.
• So this is another one of those new ideas that’s coming into this hearing.
• <01:10:57.440> that did the agent give you any idea that did the agent give you any idea that
• I think the idea that other states haven't done it yet doesn't deter us.
• persuaded though Mr Chair by the idea persuaded though Mr Chair by the idea that<01:57:43.440>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• /c> smaller populations and the idea of smaller populations and the idea of socializing<00:57:16.720>
• Squash that idea. We had it in the midshore. Squash that idea.
• We had it in the Squash that idea.
• Squash that idea. I'm sure midshore. Squash that idea.
• It's a bad idea. And I I think efforts. It's a bad idea.

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Monday, April 13, 2026, 960, senate, all

Summary: The Senate reconvened with a quorum and first honored Nancy Crawford with a resolution recognizing her 46 years of state service, including 20 years as Senator Pam Beidle’s chief of staff. Senator Beidle then spoke at length about her own retirement plans and public service, reflecting on her career in the House and Senate, her work on the Finance Committee, and thanking her staff and colleagues. The chamber unanimously journalized the remarks. The Senate then moved into business on House and Senate messages, including House Bill 139 and Senate Bill 311, and adopted a conference committee report on House Bill 1532, the Utility Relief/Reducing Energy Load for Inflation measure. The report was described as a broad energy and utility package that had already passed the Senate 38-4 and was said to address short-, medium-, and long-term issues, including rate relief, in-state generation, data center policy, consumer transparency, and low-income utility assistance. During debate on the conference report, the majority leader explained several changes from prior versions: no legislative ban on forecast test years, instead deferring to the Public Service Commission; removal of gas programs from Empower to avoid inequities across service territories; modest opening of the retail supply market with guardrails; and rejection of some floor amendments, including a gas line extension provision and a study amendment. The minority leader argued the bill offered only limited relief, focused too much on talking points and short-term savings, and said many bipartisan amendments were not retained. The majority leader responded that the bill would save ratepayers real dollars through provisions on utility adders, executive bonuses, FERC-related returns, and new generation, and urged adoption of the conference report.

Transcript Highlights:

• After a brief discussion, an idea struck me. We were approaching the breeding of the G litter.
• <00:04:26.160> struck After a brief discussion, an idea struck After a brief discussion, an
• But I think these reports and the follow-ups are a good idea.
• have been really burdened about the idea have been really burdened about the idea about<00:56:20.520
• I don't know I've no idea what things.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it's a wonderful idea.
• I think it's a wonderful idea.
• I think it's a wonderful idea.
• I think it's a wonderful idea.
• I think it's a wonderful idea.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, the the I can the<00:07:48.960> idea<00:07:49.400> behind<00:07:49.800> the<
• People just had ideas in their heads and went to go threaten people.
• Um I am resistant to the idea Um I am resistant to the idea that<00:43:07.800> our<00:43:
• I have no idea if they did or not.
• Um and so, uh the idea circumstances.

Bills: HF3542, HF3819

Keywords: data privacy, investigative data, welfare system, public funds, transparency, child care, licensing, inspections, compliance, program integrity, 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3542, authored by Representative Hudson, and first adopted the February 25 minutes. Hudson explained that the bill, as amended in a DE1, would require agencies to disclose to the public, legislators, or the press the existence of certain investigations only after the subject has been notified and the agency has decided to reduce, suspend, or withhold payments. He said the amendment was intended to avoid tipping off subjects before notification while still increasing transparency about investigations involving public funds. A separate A3 amendment was withdrawn after the DE1 was adopted. Several members questioned the bill’s scope and timing, asking what “existence of an investigation” meant and whether the proposal would disclose information before findings were complete. Hudson clarified that the bill was aimed at identifying who is being investigated, not revealing investigative details. The committee then heard extensive public testimony from child care providers and advocates, who opposed the bill and argued it would expose providers to harassment, threats, and stigma before any findings were made. Testifiers described recent threats, ICE-related disruptions, audits, overpayment findings, and the burden of CCAP compliance, saying the bill would punish providers for paperwork errors and worsen safety concerns, especially for Somali and other providers of color. A board member of the Minnesota Child Care Association also opposed the bill, saying providers had been chilled from speaking publicly because of death threats and harassment, and warning that disclosure of investigations could intensify that climate. In response, Hudson said the bill was not about targeting child care providers generally and was limited to confirmed ongoing investigations after notice to the subject. The committee then heard from Inspector General Keys, who explained that CCAP investigations are administrative, not criminal, and are based on evidence of repeated errors or financial misconduct rather than intentional fraud. He said the office looks for patterns beyond simple mistakes and that the bill’s notice requirement would not impede investigations. The discussion ended amid a brief procedural dispute over comments directed at Hudson, after which the chair returned to the bill and the Inspector General’s testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• of of 80% of the state money whole idea of of 80% of the state money before<00:38:00.320> and
• some kind of idea of when they're<01:01:09.440> going<01:01:09.520> to<01:01:09.599>
• idea of what the results should be. idea of what the results should be.
• That may be a good way, you know, because the idea of leaving the money in a pot for building aid, I
• Um, I understand I've got a pretty good idea why, but but I've got a pretty good idea why, but but it

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee began its first meeting on retained education funding bills, focusing on HB 366, which concerns school building aid for eligible projects, and HB 295, which would make school building aid program funds non-lapsing. The chair framed the discussion around broader questions about how school building aid should work, noting the state’s limited available funding, the existing debt service obligations, and whether the current formula should continue or be changed. He also raised concerns about the state’s overall revenue constraints and the need to consider renovation, new construction, and possibly leasing within any future program. Members and the Department of Education representative discussed whether school building aid is a state or local responsibility, the current backlog of projects, and the condition of school facilities statewide. Tim Carney of the Bureau of School Facilities described his background and answered technical questions about current programs. Representative Luno argued that under the ConVal decision the state has responsibility for school buildings, including construction and renovation, and that the program also serves an equity function by helping districts with less property-tax capacity. Representative Papich urged the committee to focus on policy structure and fairness rather than just available dollars, saying the current system creates winners and losers and suggesting a simpler per-capita or similar allocation model, while acknowledging a possible transition for projects already in the pipeline. The discussion also covered CTE facilities and leasing. Carney explained that charter schools, and possibly CTE centers, can receive limited leasing aid, and that CTE capital requests are funded through a state capital process, while federal Carl Perkins funds cannot be used for construction. He and others described a separate rotational funding approach for CTE centers, but several members said that model can leave programs waiting too long and may not match changing workforce needs. The chair and others noted that a report from a related study group on CTE policy and funding was still pending, and that its absence could affect legislation for FY28. No votes were taken and no bill was acted on in the portion of the meeting provided; the discussion ended with interest in modeling alternatives, reviewing the waiting list, and examining the tradeoffs of reducing upfront state aid versus funding more projects overall.

Transcript Highlights:

• But there are kernels to that good idea which we're trying to bring to that now.
• > that kernel of the good idea within that kernel of the good idea within that Sanford<01:20:32.760
• We don't necessarily have to have every single one, just kind of a general idea.
• We don't necessarily have to have every single one, just kind of a general idea.
• We don't necessarily have to have every single one, just kind of a general idea.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:08:20.000> I that are that are really good ideas I that are that are really good ideas
• Well, DEED and DOLI, I have no idea who this is. My approach is going to be very simple.
• Well, DEED and DOLI, I have no idea who this is. My approach is going to be very simple.
• Well, DEED and DOLI, I have no idea who this is. My approach is going to be very simple.
• Well, DEED and DOLI, I have no idea who this is. My approach is going to be very simple.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee held an introductory organizational meeting for the newly named Workforce and Economic Development Committee, with Chair Dave Baker noting a quorum and that no votes or formal actions were scheduled. Members and staff introduced themselves and described their districts, backgrounds, and priorities. Several members emphasized worker protections, labor experience, small business concerns, rural economic issues, and the importance of balancing employer and employee interests. Others highlighted education-to-workforce pathways, affordability, support for seniors, and opportunities for immigrant and refugee communities. Chair Baker said he wants the committee to find a balance between protecting labor and ensuring a strong employment base, fair rules, and fair taxes, while also acknowledging concerns about recent policy trends and the need to get proposals right before they leave the committee. Members from both parties echoed themes of collaboration and economic opportunity, though some Republicans criticized past rules and regulations as burdensome on small businesses. The committee also welcomed nonpartisan staff and DFL/GOP staff, including the committee administrator, legislative assistant, House Research, and fiscal analysis staff. The committee then received an overview from DEED Commissioner Matt Varilek and deputy commissioners. Varilek described DEED’s mission as empowering growth of the Minnesota economy for everyone, increasing prosperity and extending it broadly, and coordinating with other agencies such as Labor and Industry to avoid duplication and use taxpayer dollars efficiently. He said DEED focuses on business attraction, retention, and expansion, workforce development, and helping Minnesotans—including people with disabilities—prepare for jobs and independent living. A deputy commissioner began outlining the economic development division’s structure and operations, but the transcript cuts off before the full presentation was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the idea at the time was that that would be about half of the salary.
• So, we have an idea of where we're at and how much a change makes.
• And I can follow up with ideas on how we adjust that in the supplemental. >> Chairman Salazar?
• Um throw another idea out there. We do have a Department of Insurance in the state.
• I'll entertain any additional thoughts from the committee on any additional ideas.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 00:13:58.480> is those and the idea is those and the idea is we<00:13:59.880> we<00:14:
• So the idea there is to allow them some administrative costs. So that's the change, Madam Chair.
• He’s online, and he has brought really innovative ideas to this committee.
• He’s online, and he has brought really innovative ideas to this committee.
• It's not an idea or a right now.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, that's the idea behind this amendment. I don't know the answer.
• And so, that's the idea behind this amendment. I don't know the answer.
• And so, that's the idea behind this amendment. I don't know the answer.
• And so, that's the idea behind this amendment. I don't know the answer.
• And so, that's the idea behind this amendment. I don't know the answer.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 3791 was laid over for possible inclusion later, with Rep. Green and Rep. Noor presenting it as a response to rising threats against Minnesota elected officials and public officers. They cited increased threat reports, the June 2025 killings of Speaker Emeritus Melissa Hortman and her husband, the shootings of Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, and other recent threats as evidence that current protective resources are insufficient. The bill would create a state officials protective services unit within the State Patrol, provide security and threat-assessment services for principal state officials, and require reporting on credible threats. Rep. Noor said the proposal would be triggered by leadership when there is a credible threat, would include legislators and constitutional officers, and would be funded at about $3.98 million in FY 2027 with an ongoing base of $3.25 million, with some ability to contract with local law enforcement for support in official-capacity situations. Members raised concerns about scope, jurisdiction, and cost. Rep. Olsen argued the bill was not narrow enough and worried it could allow Capitol Security to provide home or event security too broadly, rather than limiting the work to the Capitol and catastrophic incidents. Rep. Joy offered an A1 amendment to use existing funds instead of adding new spending, saying local sheriffs and police already handle many situations. That amendment failed on a voice vote. Rep. Olson then moved an A2 amendment focused on clarifying who should be in charge of protection at home and how local law enforcement would be involved; discussion centered on whether Capitol Security, State Patrol, or local agencies should lead response and how credible threats would be determined. Supporters of the bill, including Rep. Green and Rep. Muir, said the events of June 14 showed the need for a dedicated, coordinated protective service and that local responses were uneven across jurisdictions. Rep. Muir described delayed or inconsistent police responses after the attacks and said lawmakers need a more reliable system to keep members and their families safe. Rep. Keagle also testified about personal threats and harassment at home, including a prank pizza delivery that made her fear someone knew when she was home. The committee did not take final action on the bill beyond laying it over, and the A1 amendment failed; discussion on the A2 amendment and the bill’s details continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• You're not going to have any idea whether or not you'd get it.
• An idea of what to expect in the coming session when it comes to the state conformity legislation.
• If we can pay for them, maybe a child tax credit of some kind is a great idea.
• If we can pay for it without... ...tax credit of some kind is a great idea.
• So any member that has other ideas and wants to work with me, I talk to people.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The joint House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees met to hear identical conformity bills, HB 2153 and SB 1106, which would align Arizona tax law with the federal Internal Revenue Code as of Jan. 1, 2026, including some retroactive provisions for tax year 2025. Staff explained that the bills would exclude three federal provisions: the higher federal SALT deduction, the new senior deduction as written in H.R. 1, and the deduction for interest on new car loans. They would instead include a $6,000 retirement-income deduction for taxpayers age 60 and older, a $6,000 Roth IRA contribution deduction, a higher dependent tax credit, and a deduction for child and dependent care expenses above the federal credit. JLBC estimated the package would reduce general fund income tax revenue by about $441.3 million in FY 2026. Members also discussed that the Department of Revenue’s forms had been issued assuming full conformity, and staff and supporters argued the bills were needed quickly to avoid confusion and amended returns during filing season. Committee members and sponsors largely framed the bills as tax relief and a way to provide certainty for taxpayers and preparers. Supporters said the package would help families, seniors, and workers, and noted that the Arizona version was negotiated to keep the overall tax relief roughly comparable to full conformity while shifting benefits away from the SALT deduction and toward child credits, retirement income, and child care. The sponsors also criticized the governor’s executive action and urged prompt passage so taxpayers would know how to file. Opponents argued the bills would reduce state revenue, worsen the budget outlook, and disproportionately benefit higher-income taxpayers and corporations. Several witnesses and members also raised concerns about the child care deduction, the retirement-income deduction, and the business expensing provisions, while supporters responded that the bill was designed to help working families and encourage saving and investment. Public testimony was mixed. The Arizona Society of Certified Public Accountants and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club supported the bills, emphasizing early conformity, filing certainty, and reduced confusion for taxpayers and software providers. Opponents included Save Our Schools Arizona, the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, Opportunity Arizona, and several individuals, who argued the package would deepen budget problems and favor the wealthy. One witness objected to a federal school-choice-related provision she said was being tied to the bill, though committee members said the measure before them was a tax conformity bill and not a school finance bill. The hearing included extended debate over the fiscal impact, the governor’s prior requests for some of the same tax changes, and whether taxpayers would need to file amended returns if the legislature later changed course. The transcript ends during testimony from NFIB, with no final committee vote or action shown in the excerpt.