Transcript Highlights:

• conditions, for certain patients, and only if the physician has determined, in their professional judgment

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services took up two bills. Senator Burgess presented SB 116, the Senate Veterans Package, which would reduce the number of Veterans Hall of Fame nominations, expand FDVA health survey and coordination efforts, add mental health training to the veterans suicide prevention pilot program, fix statutory references, improve coordination between Veterans Florida and FDVA, and require FDVA to develop a plan for adult day health care facilities for veterans and their families. An amendment was adopted to appropriate $300,000 for the suicide prevention training pilot and $50,000 for the health survey. The bill was supported in debate, especially for the adult day care provision, and CS/SB 116 was reported favorably by roll call vote. The committee then heard SB 294 by Senator Harrell, which would exclude specified cardiac conditions—such as heart failure, coronary heart disease, and cardiac arrhythmias—from the list of chronic health conditions that may be managed under collaborative pharmacy practice agreements. Senator Harrell argued that these complex conditions require direct physician involvement and that pharmacists should not be making medication changes for severe cardiac patients based on protocols alone. Senator Rouson asked why heart conditions had been included previously, and Vice Chair Davis asked about fiscal impact; Harrell said there would be no state cost, though patients might face additional out-of-pocket expenses, which she said could be offset by avoiding more serious complications. Public testimony on SB 294 was divided. The Florida Pharmacy Association opposed the bill, arguing that collaborative practice agreements are voluntary, physician-controlled, and already include safeguards, and that pharmacists are highly trained to help manage chronic conditions and improve access and outcomes. A cardiologist with the Florida Chapter of the American College of Cardiology supported the bill, warning that cardiac patients are complex and that pharmacists may make dangerous decisions without the full clinical picture. Senator Burton also supported the bill, saying the original collaborative practice framework was not intended to let pharmacists diagnose or treat serious cardiac disease. SB 294 was then reported favorably by roll call vote. At the end of the meeting, Senators Rodriguez and Garcia asked to be recorded in the affirmative on SB 116, and the committee adjourned without further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• For us is, you know, we do oppose this, but it's not necessarily the foreclosure aspect of it.

Bills: HB1700

Keywords: housing, expedited permits, disabilities, access, functional needs, local government, affordable housing, reporting requirements, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees heard several housing, land use, and infrastructure bills. HB 6019 HD2 on electric vehicle infrastructure and HB 1728 HD1 on rainwater catchment systems both drew limited testimony and were advanced. For HB 1728, the chairs said they would designate the Department of Health as the regulator and incorporate suggested technical amendments from plumbing and rainwater industry groups. Both measures were reported out with recommendations to pass, with HB 6019 passed unamended and HB 1728 passed with amendments. HB 1844, which would have required the Land Use Commission to reclassify lands designated for urban growth, drew significant opposition from the Hawaii Farm Bureau and Sierra Club, who argued it would bypass land-use review and threaten agricultural land, water planning, and long-term resilience. Grassroot Institute supported the bill, and the Land Use Commission said the bill raised concerns. After discussion, the chairs deferred the measure in one committee and later the recommendation to pass it with amendments was not adopted in the other committee. HB 1990 on penalties and liens for unresolved residential zoning violations was advanced with amendments. The chairs adopted Grassroot Institute’s suggested changes requiring any county sale of such property to be at no less than fair market value and requiring excess proceeds to be returned to the owner. HB 2424, which would allow county planning agencies to petition for temporary reclassification of certain agricultural lands to rural, also drew mixed testimony; the Land Use Commission raised due process concerns, and agriculture interests opposed it. One committee advanced it with amendments, but in the other committee the recommendation failed after members cited lack of county support. The later portion of the hearing began on HB 1738 and HB 1739. HB 1738 would expand county authority to amend district boundaries for housing on parcels over 15 acres; OHA, Sierra Club, and the Hawaii Farm Bureau opposed it, while Grassroot Institute supported it. HB 1739 would require transit-supportive densities in county TOD areas and limit local restrictions; DPP raised concerns about timing, permitting, and conflicts with existing TOD frameworks, while OPSD and Grassroot supported it. The transcript cuts off before final action on these later bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• someone's When you have these fines and fees, are they always placed on someone's current report as a judgment
• It does show up on your credit reports as a judgment. Thank you.
• What the House amended was to lower the limitation from three judgments in 24 months to two judgments

Keywords: 1064, all

Transcript Highlights:

• standard of care and practice is, and to what degree health care providers can exercise professional judgment
• standard of care and practice is, and to what degree health care providers can exercise professional judgment
• standard of care and practice is, and to what degree health care providers can exercise professional judgment
• standard of care and practice is, and to what degree health care providers can exercise professional judgment

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Special Committee on COVID Response Efficacy for New Hampshire held its first organizational meeting. The chair read the committee’s updated mission statement, which says the bipartisan committee will fact-find on the state’s COVID-19 response and its impact on the healthcare system, with focus areas including federal guidance, federal funds, emergency use authorization vaccination efforts, long COVID, the Patient Bill of Rights, and vaccination policies. The chair also announced committee staffing changes: Linda McGrath stepped down as vice chair and Representative Gerard was named vice chair; Representative DeRoy was named clerk. The chair emphasized the committee’s work is intended to be science-based and fact-finding, not anti-vaccine, and noted that the committee may issue follow-up reports and recommendations. Members discussed a broad list of topics for future hearings, including long COVID treatment, ongoing vaccination policies, reporting of COVID deaths, standards of care and provider discretion, COVID-related funding such as ESSER/CARES Act money, and communication of treatment developments during the pandemic. Representative Pollina argued the committee should examine specific treatments and outcomes, including remdesivir, oxygen/intubation practices, and ivermectin, and raised concerns about whether some treatments were harmful or suppressed. He also focused on pediatric vaccination policy, saying the committee should review New Hampshire’s recommendations for children and medical students, and questioned the state’s reliance on federal guidance versus independent review. The chair responded that shifting federal positions may justify an independent New Hampshire evaluation and asked him to gather more information and potential witnesses. In open discussion, members suggested additional witnesses and topics, including local funeral directors, nursing homes, and emergency medical services, as well as how nursing homes were affected by positive tests and admission restrictions. Another member suggested the committee consider what products it should produce, such as a final report, possible bill recommendations, and better documentation or footnotes tying findings to testimony and scientific sources. The chair said the committee’s deliverables could include reports, letters to department heads or legislative leaders, and other actions, and noted that the committee’s 2024 report and supporting documents are available on the House committee page. No votes or formal actions beyond the organizational appointments were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's a question that I leave to your capable judgment, but I ask that you do not let this behavior
• leave to And that's a question that I leave to your<00:18:44.480> capable<00:18:44.880> judgment
• > but<00:18:45.760> I<00:18:45.880> ask<00:18:46.240> that your capable judgment
• , but I ask that your capable judgment, but I ask that you<00:18:46.919> do<00:18:47.040> not

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Or perhaps some of these, you know, you think that's fine, and that's obviously your judgment.
• And and that's obviously<00:07:33.800> your<00:07:33.920> judgment.
• /c><00:07:34.840> Uh<00:07:34.960> you'll<00:07:35.160> also obviously your judgment
• Uh you'll also obviously your judgment.

Transcript Highlights:

• We all have our good and bad days, but we don't cast judgment.
• 21.400> cast our good and bad days, but we don't cast our good and bad days, but we don't cast judgment
• 22.720> We<00:41:22.840> respect<00:41:23.360> one<00:41:23.520> another, judgment
• We respect one another, judgment.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• never meant to be subject matter experts; they are work-a-day Americans who vote rather than pass judgment
• statements like “the cops are here” or “ISIS in the neighborhood,” unfortunately, against my better judgment
• Unfortunately, against my better judgment, our First Amendment-protected statements.
• Kavanaugh, you said “against your better judgment.”

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It is largely, in our judgment, due to the persistently good economy that we've been working in, where
• ><00:43:16.720> largely<00:43:17.359> in<00:43:17.599> our<00:43:17.839> judgment
• It is largely in our judgment due time.
• It is largely in our judgment due to<00:43:19.839> um<00:43:20.240> the<00:43:21.040>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It just seems to me that there's a lot of judgment that's being made here and these terms are not defined
• It just seems to me that there's a lot It just seems to me that there's a lot of<00:43:25.440> judgment
• 26.240> being<00:43:26.480> made<00:43:26.720> here<00:43:26.960> and of judgment
• that's being made here and of judgment that's being made here and these<00:43:27.520> terms<00

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 219, which would revise the renewable portfolio standard. Representative Bose explained that the bill would modify class one definitions, eliminate class two, reduce the utility obligation for class one thermal renewable energy certificates from 2.2% to 1.7%, and adjust alternative compliance payments for classes one, three, and four. He said the changes were intended to save ratepayers an estimated $5.7 million annually, would not materially harm the renewable portfolio standard, and would have little effect on class two because that market is already saturated. Members questioned the impact on consumers, the state budget, and the renewable energy fund; Bose said the fund had already been redirected in the state budget, and another member noted an amended fiscal note showing a $1.2 million reduction in general fund revenue. The committee also discussed the bill’s history, including that it had been added to HB 2 and later removed by the Senate, and Bose said the Senate’s eventual action was hard to predict. The committee then heard House Bill 164 on local records retention from Secretary of State David Scanlan. He said the long-standing local records manager position had never been funded, but that the need for it had grown as towns increasingly digitize records and must ensure accessibility, including ADA compliance. He described the bill as a way to provide state support and expertise to municipalities, especially smaller towns with limited resources, and said the fiscal note for hiring the position remained accurate, though broader website and storage costs could rise over time. Members asked about retrieving lost records, the cost of a public website, and whether records should remain local or be stored at the state level; Scanlan said the state would serve as a resource rather than take control of local records. Finally, the committee began work on House Bill 365, also with Secretary Scanlan, concerning proof of U.S. citizenship for indigent voters. He said the bill would help voters who may lack required documents under the new voter registration law by allowing the state to verify qualifications through federal, private, or other state databases and by providing vouchers to cover the cost of obtaining documents such as birth certificates. He compared the proposal to earlier voter ID accommodations and said the goal was to help qualified voters meet the new requirements without weakening them. Members raised questions about defining “indigent,” how out-of-state birth records would be handled, and the practicality of the verification process; Scanlan said the term would likely need further discussion and that the state would try to assist voters before election day whenever possible.

Transcript Highlights:

• some of the challenges that I saw from that, I think that the idea of trying to push all medical judgment
• 01:05:50.039> push<01:05:50.279> all<01:05:50.520> medical<01:05:50.920> judgment
• <01:05:51.760> only trying to push all medical judgment only trying to push all medical judgment

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a public hearing on House Bill 493, a proposal to require physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants to complete child abuse and neglect training as part of licensure and continuing education. The bill’s sponsor and supporters said the measure addresses a gap in provider training, especially because abuse can be difficult to recognize and voluntary training has had low participation. They described a free Dartmouth online course and argued that mandatory, repeated education would help providers identify signs of abuse, know when to involve specialists or DCYF, and improve child safety. Supporters also noted the bill was amended to clarify coverage for nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and nursing hours, and to address language concerns raised by the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification. Committee members and OPLC counsel raised implementation questions, including whether the bill would apply to all physicians regardless of specialty, whether it created a new licensure condition rather than only a continuing education requirement, how often the training would need to be repeated, and whether the accreditation language fit nursing rules. OPLC also noted that psychiatrists would be covered as physicians, while psychologists would not. A child abuse pediatrician testified that in his experience, children were sometimes seen by providers who missed early signs of abuse, leading to worse outcomes, and that mandatory education was needed because voluntary programs had poor uptake. The New Hampshire Hospital Association opposed the bill, saying health care professionals already have reporting duties and that the legislature should not single out one training mandate when similar requirements are generally left to licensing boards. The Office of the Child Advocate supported the bill, citing cases from 2023 involving non-ambulatory infants with fractures, conflicting medical testimony in court, and a low completion rate for the existing free online course. The Child Advocate said the bill should be mandatory and recurring so providers stay current on evolving science and law. No vote was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that young person who perhaps maybe this was an aberration, maybe this was a poor judgment as
• Maybe this was<00:59:36.080> a<00:59:36.160> poor<00:59:36.520> judgment<00:59:37.200
• c> as<00:59:37.360> opposed<00:59:37.840> to<00:59:37.960> a was a poor judgment
• as opposed to a was a poor judgment as opposed to a precursor<00:59:38.880> to<00:59:39.040><

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 963, which would make crimes against elders age 60 and over strict liability offenses by removing the requirement that the perpetrator knew or should have known the victim’s age. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the bill, arguing that removing the state-of-mind element would create unfair and subjective results and suggesting sentencing enhancements or broader vulnerability-based language instead. Supporters, including Sandy Wong and another testifier with elder-abuse experience, said the current knowledge requirement creates a loophole that lets offenders avoid the elder enhancement even when they target vulnerable older adults. No vote was taken on the measure in the portion provided. The committee also heard HB 384, which increases penalties for promoting minor-produced sexual images, extends probation terms for felony obscenity offenses, tolls the statute of limitations during a victim’s minority, and requires sex offender registration for certain felony obscenity offenses involving minors. The Public Defender opposed the bill as overly broad and warned of absurd results, while the Department of the Prosecuting Attorney supported it, saying the bill addresses sextortion and other exploitation cases where adults solicit images from minors and that the 3-year age-gap threshold preserves ordinary teen relationships. Committee members questioned whether the bill was aimed at adults only and whether the age-gap carveout was narrow enough; the prosecutor said it was intended to cover adult predators and not consensual peer conduct. No final action was reported. HB 1100, which renames the Neighbor Islands Blind and Visually Impaired Service Pilot Program to use “low vision” instead of “visually impaired,” was supported by the Department of Human Services and disability advocates, who said the current term is derogatory and that the change responds to the blind community. The department said it was beginning work on administrative rules and expected to seek an appropriation, with implementation hoped for in 2026. The committee then heard HB 1283, exempting paternity proceedings from mediation when domestic abuse is alleged; the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence and others supported it as consistent with divorce law and important for survivor safety. HB 689, creating safe harbor protections for survivors of sexual exploitation who seek medical or law enforcement help, drew support from HPD, Emua Alliance, the Judiciary, and others, who said it would prevent traffickers from using prostitution charges to silence victims. Finally, HB 383, reinstating mandatory minimum jail terms for successive violations of protective orders and removing the court’s ability to suspend those minimums, drew opposition from the Public Defender, who said some repeat violations stem from mental health or substance use issues, and support from the Prosecuting Attorney, who argued the bill treats protective orders like temporary restraining orders and preserves judicial discretion within a misdemeanor framework.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't want to make value judgments, but it certainly is at a minimum as good as Hovarts. Okay?
• I have to trust your judgment on that within the context of the way you've chosen to provide instruction
• That is what professional judgment looks like.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And if it were proven in court, then obviously it would be illegal in my judgment as a non-lawyer based
• And if it were proven in court, then obviously it would be illegal in my judgment as a non-lawyer based
• And now the governor has asked us, he's told us, and that in his judgment, in his legal opinion, that

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituting identical House Bill 1D, to establish Florida’s congressional districts. The opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance were followed by procedural remarks, then extensive floor discussion focused almost entirely on the redistricting proposal, its timing, and its legal basis. Senator Gaetz, explaining the bill, said the Governor had transmitted the map two days earlier, argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is not prohibited by law, and said the Governor’s stated reasons were to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts. He also said the legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal. Much of the debate centered on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Louisiana decision and whether it affected Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators Smith, Rouson, Sharief, Polsky, Arrington, Bracey Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and others questioned the short notice, lack of public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony, and whether the map diluted minority voting strength or fragmented communities of interest. Gaetz repeatedly said he was not offering legal opinions, that the Governor’s counsel believed the Fair Districts race-based provisions were inconsistent with federal law, and that any legal challenge would be for the courts. He also said the Governor’s mapmaker reported using census and demographic data, along with political data as one of many inputs, and claimed the map’s compactness was comparable to the current map. A motion by Senator Smith to temporarily postpone consideration of the bill failed on a 12-23 vote. After the Senate returned from a 30-minute break to review the new Supreme Court decision, debate continued. The chamber then substituted HB 1D for SB 8D, read the House bill, and advanced it to third reading. The transcript ends during debate on final passage, with Senators Rouson and Bernard speaking in opposition and arguing the map was procedurally rushed, legally vulnerable, and politically motivated.

Transcript Highlights:

• clear, this bill does not mandate curriculum, change instructional practice, or replace educator judgment
• And data can be overinterpreted and broadened to make judgments about students and their readiness, which
• SB 1147 replaces that standard with nearly a thousand district-level judgments.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• clear, this bill does not mandate curriculum, change instructional practice, or replace educator judgment
• And data can be overinterpreted and broadened to make judgments about students and their readiness, which
• SB 1147 replaces that standard with nearly a thousand district-level judgments.

Summary: The committee heard SB 1067, which would require annual math screening for kindergarten through second grade students beginning in 2028-29 to identify early numeracy difficulties and connect students to evidence-based supports. Senator Weber and supporters, including EdVoice, UC Davis researcher Charles Wilkes, and several education and community advocates, argued that California’s math performance is too low and that early screening would help close gaps before they widen. Opponents, including the California Mathematics Council, county superintendents, and the CTA, said the bill could narrow instruction, overemphasize deficit-based measures, and should instead be paired with stronger investments in teacher training and implementation of the California Mathematics Framework. Committee members generally expressed support for the bill’s goals while discussing how the screener would work and what kinds of follow-up supports would be needed. The committee also heard SB 1110 on child care subsidy administration, which would restructure funding for alternative payment programs and core contracts as the state moves to enrollment-based funding. Supporters said the bill would stabilize child care providers, improve payment timelines, and better reflect the administrative work of enrolling families and managing services; there was no opposition testimony. SB 1374, supported by the CSU and UC systems, would allow public higher education institutions to seek temporary restraining orders when credible threats are directed at a campus rather than a specific person. Supporters described recent campus threats that created safety concerns but did not fit current restraining-order law; there was no opposition. Senator Nilo presented SB 1321, which would direct the State Auditor to review remedial course use and student preparedness at selected UC and CSU campuses after a UC San Diego report showed a sharp decline in incoming students’ math readiness. Supporters argued the audit would help identify gaps in college readiness and the effects of K-12 changes, while some members raised concerns about bypassing the usual legislative audit process; the bill was held on call. The committee then took up SB 1086 on microschools, which would define microschools and direct model ordinances for local land-use regulation. Supporters said it would create a clearer path for small, individualized learning communities, but several members questioned whether the concept was sufficiently defined and whether the state had enough information to draft model ordinances; the bill was also placed on call after a quorum was established. Finally, SB 1181 was presented as a limited pilot program in Central Valley counties to connect schools with regional threat assessment centers when credible safety concerns arise. The author and supporters, including the mother of a student killed in a shooting and several students, said it would improve early intervention and communication; committee members raised privacy and federal-sharing concerns but indicated support, and the bill was moved forward on a vote once quorum was present.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I don't know how long your loans are for, but we'll, I guess, reserve judgment until we see.
• 57.400> reserve for, but we'll I guess we'll reserve for, but we'll I guess we'll reserve judgment
• <00:38:00.160> Thank Judgment until we see. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Green.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You've been in the business for a fairly long time, so I trust your judgment and what you're going to
• symptoms where there are multiple potential diagnoses, like the coughing dog, I use my professional judgment
• I use my professional judgment to discuss those differentials with the client and go over how skipping

Bills: SB1176, SB1186, SB1235, SB1286, SB1446, SB1458, SB1515, SB1616, SB1641, SB1668, SB1670, SB1678, SB1747, SB1787

Keywords: stormwater, water storage, replenishment credits, groundwater, aquifer, Arizona Revised Statutes, disclosure, state contracts, procurement records, donations, transparency, EMS, reciprocity, interstate compact, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, licensure, public safety, military personnel, veterinary telemedicine

Transcript Highlights:

• We're just giving the veterinarians more flexibility when their professional judgment thinks it's okay
• We shouldn't be constraining professional judgment and medical professionals.
• And obviously, that comes with rigorous clinical judgment.

Bills: SB1021, SB1144, SB1164, SB1178, SB1181, SB1241, SB1247, SB1286, SB1415, SCR1011

Keywords: health profession, regulatory boards, criminal activity, notification, auditor general, investigations, veterinary technicians, certification, education alternative, Arizona Revised Statutes, veterinary education, ALTCS, providers, ownership change, healthcare, Arizona Long Term Care System, naturopathic physician, naturopathic medicine, naturopathic doctor, naturopathic physicians medical board

Transcript Highlights:

• And I just want to emphasize: these critical needs really were derived from the court's judgment.
• issues that have been identified to correct it, and we're also reacting to the Yazi Martinez court judgment
• walk in a building and a kid walks into a building whether it's accurate or not, they're making judgments