Transcript Highlights:

• Please call back LBB to come back, because I think that would probably be a question for them.
• Welcome back. Thank you.
• If your job cuts back, you're out.
• Or what is the, in order for you to be able to pay your bills, right, and pay staff and all that?
• I retired and came back.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• back into that.
• need to pay back into that. need to pay back into that. Okay.<00:36:43.200> Yeah.
• that and come back to it another day? that and come back to it another day?
• Then MnDOT subsequently came back 35% additional, so it went back up to $254,000.
• /c> came back 35% additional so it went back came back 35% additional so it went back up<01:22:00.000

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You pay sales tax when you charge externally, and then you pay this, uh, what's called alternative fuel
• It just keeps coming back.
• back for it. back for it.
• back to WYDOT to repair roadways. back to WYDOT to repair roadways.
• generator is back feeding outside. generator is back feeding outside.

Bills: SF0095, SF0107, SF0112

Keywords: driver's license, motor vehicle services, third-party providers, Wyoming, regulatory compliance, motor vehicle, registration, license plate, electronic system, State Department of Transportation, county treasurers, vehicle fees, public records, license plates, replacement cycle, vehicle registration, motor vehicles, state fees, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So everybody can pat Josh on the back, and he has moved on.
• I mean, they'll be up there instead of bringing them back and forth.
• I want to go back related to the... Thank you. Thank you, Liam.
• My question is: as you go back and review them, will you be enforcing that they must pay what they owe
• last one, especially all the questions and back and forth.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee first heard the Arizona Auditor General’s sunset review of the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The audit found some strengths, including timely licensing and complaint resolution in the sample reviewed and rules that matched statutory curriculum requirements, but it also identified a major finding that the board had imposed inconsistent discipline for similar violations and lacked documentation for deviations from its disciplinary guidelines. Other issues included missing reciprocity education requirements, weak application quality control, incomplete school and establishment oversight, and compliance concerns involving open meeting law, public records, and conflicts of interest. The report made 25 recommendations total, including two tied to the disciplinary finding and three suggested statutory changes on esthetics scope of practice, cease-and-desist authority, and eyelash technician training. The board’s executive director said the board agreed with the findings, had already implemented several recommendations, updated disciplinary policies and conflict-of-interest procedures, and was working on legislation and rule changes. After questions about enforcement consistency, licensing verification, cash handling, complaint volume, and conflict disclosures, the committee voted 7-0 to recommend the board be continued for six years, until July 1, 2032. The committee then took up the Arizona Department of Gaming, the Arizona Racing Commission, and the Arizona Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts Commission together. The Auditor General reported that the department correctly distributed more than $158 million in tribal contributions in fiscal year 2024 and issued event wagering licenses to reviewed applicants, but found several problems: the department did not consistently obtain and review independent audit reports for event wagering and fantasy sports operators, did not fully comply with conflict-of-interest disclosure requirements, and lacked comprehensive complaint-handling processes. The review also found delays in distributing Compact Trust Fund payments to some tribes, gaps in IT security and horse-racing license checks, and incomplete fee-setting and public-records practices. The report made 36 recommendations to the department, six to the Racing Commission, and 13 to the Boxing and MMA Commission, and all three entities said they agreed and would implement them. In response, the Department of Gaming director said the agency was already making changes, including a historical look-back on operator audits, updated guidance to operators, a new constituent services unit and complaint-tracking process, and improved conflict-of-interest training and forms. She also explained the Compact Trust Fund dispute, saying the department administers the fund but the beneficiary tribes must agree on the revenue baseline formula, which has been complicated by COVID-era closures; no Category Three distributions had yet been made. Committee members asked about possible revenue losses, penalties, and the status of 2024-2025 audits, as well as prediction markets and whether they are legal under Arizona’s event wagering framework. The director said the department had issued cease-and-desist letters to unlicensed prediction-market operators, would review licensed operators for suitability if needed, and would continue to enforce Arizona law. The transcript ends while questioning on prediction markets is still underway, before any vote on the gaming-related reviews is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• We pay the...
• They can confirm funding for us, or if we pay a bill and it comes back to us rejected from the Comptroller
• They can correct it within the system, route it back, and we can pay.
• working and paying back into the state.
• working and paying back into the state.

Keywords: 977, all

Summary: The committee met to receive a detailed financial operations presentation from the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) agency, with staff walking members through funding sources, budgeting, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and grants management. Sabrina Walker explained VR’s blended funding structure, including federal grants, state appropriations, program income, and interagency contracts, and emphasized that state funds are essential to meeting the federal match and maintenance-of-effort requirements. Members asked repeatedly about transparency, audit controls, and the risk that state cuts could reduce federal drawdowns; staff responded that all reports reconcile back to the SCEIS accounting system, are subject to state audits and internal reviews, and that even modest state reductions could significantly reduce total available funding. The committee also discussed pre-employment transition services for students with disabilities, with staff confirming services are offered through school districts, charters, and private schools, and that contracts are monitored for performance and compliance. The presentation then shifted to budgeting and internal controls. Walker described a zero-based departmental budgeting process, monthly monitoring reports, contingency reserves for unexpected expenses, and a formal annual cycle that culminates in board approval. Members asked about facilities tracking, culture, and how the agency maintains accountability; staff said facilities staff inspect buildings and equipment, supervisors justify line-item requests, and the process has become smoother over time as departments learned the system. Cynthia Johnson followed with an accounts receivable overview, describing invoicing, receipting, aging, customer verification, year-end reporting, and the use of cross-training, shared email inboxes, and spreadsheets as checks and balances. She also explained work training center billing, interdepartmental transfers, and the revolving fund used to issue consumer checks more quickly than standard vendor payments. Olivia Perez presented accounts payable operations, including invoice processing through SCEIS and OnBase, the three-way match, travel reimbursements, revolving fund checks, State Treasury Office interactions, and handling of reversals, rejections, and levy notices. She reported that AP processed 67,723 SCEIS payments, 13,670 case management system invoices, 3,379 travel reimbursements, and 15,693 revolving fund checks in fiscal year 2025, with only 70 payment rejections. The final portion of the meeting covered Grants and Funds Management, where Walker explained federal reporting, drawdowns, payroll allocation, asset tracking, lease and IT contract reviews, cost allocation, and closing packages. She noted upcoming system changes such as S/4HANA, Workiva, and SC Pro, but said the agency is receiving training and feedback opportunities. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the presentation portion beyond approval of the prior minutes and a brief recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:07:19.200> for Senator Pappas, and this is paying for Senator Pappas, and this is paying
• The employees are paying for that, but The employees are paying for that, but for<00:10:31.040> the
• uh, safety benefit um, account that pays uh, safety benefit um, account that pays for for for uh
• The second required to pay for that.
• it back?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm back again.
• I apologize, back up.
• <01:57:48.560> No, them to to pay part? No, them to to pay part?
• Um, so my question goes back to um, there are a lot of children pay for their own college education.
• they pay or not. they pay or not.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• little bit more efficient is uh pay little bit more efficient is uh pay attention<00:04:50.240><
• back so they can put the money back back so they can put the money back where<03:36:33.880> they
• They generally pay.
• This is to entice them to pay sooner so we can be made whole and get back up and functioning again.
• Welcome back. Thank you very much. It's good to be back. Thank you for the record.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee held a hearing on HB 566, which would require permit applications for new landfills to include a detailed leachate management plan. The bill sponsor said the measure was prompted by recent reporting on leachate problems at New Hampshire landfills, including alleged violations at a Bethlehem facility and deficiencies at other sites, and argued the bill is meant to improve public health protections without dictating specific treatment methods or hindering innovation. The sponsor also said the proposal was developed with input from the Department of Environmental Services (DES) and industry representatives, and that a forthcoming amendment would revise the bill’s language to better fit the permitting process. The sponsor explained that the amendment would move several requirements out of the contract section and into the planning section, change references such as “permit for construction” to “operating approval,” include landfill expansions, and remove language that could be read as requiring long-term contracts. Questions from members focused on whether the bill would create enforceable consequences if a plan is not followed, whether it would limit operators’ flexibility, and whether existing DES rules already cover the subject. The sponsor said enforcement details should be addressed by DES and emphasized that the bill would not lock operators into any particular contract or technology. The Business and Industry Association testified in opposition to the bill as introduced, saying it appeared unnecessary because DES already regulates leachate through existing rules, including Env 806.53, and has authority to update those rules as technology changes. The witness argued that putting the requirements into statute could freeze the regulatory framework, create conflicts with future rulemaking, and make it harder for DES to respond quickly to new treatment methods or operational issues. No vote or final action was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:22:48.559> fees they file monthly reports and pay fees they file monthly reports and pay
• Newber I'm sure we'll let you get back Newber I'm sure we'll let you get back to<00:36:34.040>
• <01:18:07.159> state federal funds to help us um pay state federal funds to help us um pay
• <01:21:35.159> back increasing and it's not coming back back increasing and it's not coming
• back back down<01:21:37.120> um<01:21:37.920> we<01:21:38.360> our<01:21:38.800

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Department of Safety presented an overview of highway fund and unrestricted revenue collections, focusing on the Division of Administration, the Road Toll Bureau, and the Division of Motor Vehicles. Amy Newbery explained that the main unrestricted funding sources are highway funds and general funds, with highway fund revenue of about $263 million in FY 2024 and a FY 2025 projection of $261.2 million. She said revenue growth has been modest and has not kept pace with costs, creating structural deficits that required general fund transfers of $50 million in FY 2022-23 and another $10 million in FY 2024-25 to balance the fund. Jennifer Hall described Road Toll operations, including motor fuel tax collection at the distributor level, compliance enforcement, and licensing for fuel distributors, transporters, IFTA carriers, and oil discharge/pollution control. Members asked about IFTA, dyed-fuel enforcement, the possibility of using the state forensic lab for dyed-fuel testing, and whether audit positions had been filled; the department said it recently hired a part-time fuel enforcement officer, still uses IRS testing, could explore lab testing, and had no audit vacancies. Hall also discussed factors affecting fuel-tax revenue, including gas prices, crude oil forecasts, weather, tourism, GDP, and inflation, and said FY 2024 road toll revenue was $127.5 million, above plan, with FY 2025 projected at $127.71 million. The committee then turned to DMV-related revenues. Newbery said motor vehicle registration revenue was $93.1 million in FY 2024 and is projected at $90.4 million in FY 2025, with the state share going directly to the highway fund. Members asked about the state/town fee split, the five-year registration cycle dip, the distribution of registration revenue by vehicle weight category, and the impact of electric-vehicle surcharges; the department said the five-year dip is still occurring and will fade over time, and it would follow up on the weight-category breakdown. The presentation also noted that driver-license revenues have stabilized, inspection revenues remain steady, plea-by-mail revenue was added to the highway fund in FY 2024, and general fund revenues tied to the department are relatively small and have declined as some functions moved to OPLC. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• I go way back to: why do government agencies pay taxes? Because they're paying with tax dollars.
• Why do government agencies pay Yeah. Why do government agencies pay taxes?
• /c> about what they pay us, um, pays me about what they pay us, um, pays me $22.38<01:32:31.600> for
• <01:33:44.960> And to pay for this. And to pay for this.
• Welcome back to the table, Miss Grum. Welcome back to the table, Miss Grum.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Members back in the game.
• But back to 14:30.
• pay more taxes. pay more taxes.
• They deserve to be able to keep their overtime pay and not have to keep paying taxes on it.
• You would pay tax on it.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I had a few bills back in the day that kept getting killed.
• But I think we need to come back to why H.R. 1.
• Because they're already paying two and a half to the county.
• Because they're already paying two and a half to the county.
• back $18 billion of that, because the governor and the majority party refused to pay back the $18 billion

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate took up a series of bills focused on consumer protection, housing, worker safety, privacy, and local fiscal authority. Measures discussed included SB 1312 on abandoned cemeteries, SB 1112 on towing fee notices, SB 877 on insurance claim transparency after wildfire losses, SB 1046 on Cal/OSHA standards for Tijuana River Valley pollution exposure, SB 1091 on anti-displacement housing preservation, SB 951 on notice and protections when AI displaces workers, SB 1030 repealing the “man in the house” rule for public assistance, SB 1218 tying vehicle registration to unpaid illegal dumping fines, SB 1013 regulating automated license plate reader data, SB 1116 making technical changes to the starter home housing law, SB 1201 protecting veterans from food assistance cuts, and SB 1164 strengthening state voting rights protections. The Senate also considered SCR 171, declaring May 20, 2026, California Nonprofits Day, and welcomed Berkeley Mayor Adina Ishii during floor introductions. Debate was often divided along policy and fiscal lines. Supporters of the local tax authorization bill AB 1768 argued it would let voters in Los Angeles and Contra Costa counties decide whether to backfill major health and human services cuts tied to federal changes, while opponents said it would raise costs, bypass normal tax-policy review, and worsen affordability. SB 1013 drew strong support from senators who said ALPR data needs tighter safeguards, but opposition warned the bill would hamper law enforcement investigations. SB 951 on AI-related layoffs received support as a worker-protection measure, while SB 1164 drew opposition over concerns about litigation and expanded Attorney General oversight. SB 1030 was framed as a long-overdue repeal of a discriminatory welfare rule, and SB 1201 was presented as a way to shield vulnerable veterans from federal food assistance cuts. Most measures passed on strong bipartisan votes, often unanimously. SB 1312, SB 1112, SB 877, SB 1046, SB 1091, SB 1030, SB 1218, SB 1116, SB 1201, SB 1164, and SCR 171 were adopted, and AB 1768 passed as an urgency measure after extended debate. SB 951 also passed, with some no votes. The Senate then announced committee meetings for budget subcommittees and adjourned until the next floor session.

Transcript Highlights:

• We know that families are struggling to pay bills at the end of the month, pay the rent, to endure these
• gas prices... ...struggling to pay bills at the end of the month, pay the rent, to endure these gas
• But let's take $668 million to pay the interest. That's the... $668 million to pay the interest.
• Okay, we are back on to concurrence file on number nine, we're going to Okay, we are back on to concurrence
• I stand here before you, and I refuse to balance this budget off the backs of the sick, off the backs

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly convened, established a quorum after a roll call, observed a moment of silence for the fatal B-52 crash at Edwards Air Force Base, and proceeded with routine procedural business, including re-referrals of numerous Senate bills to different committees and several rule suspensions to allow bills to be heard or moved. Assembly Member DeMaio attempted to amend and then return AB 109 to the Senate to add health care premium reductions, but the motions were ruled out of order and his request to suspend the rules failed on a 13-45 vote. The main floor action was on AB 109, the 2026-27 state budget. Assembly Member Gabriel presented the budget as balancing fiscal responsibility with protections for health care, schools, housing, wildfire prevention, and the safety net, while opponents argued it raised costs, underfunded education and public safety, and relied on gimmicks. Supporters emphasized investments in hospitals, Medi-Cal, IHSS, child care, food banks, housing, and reserves, and repeatedly defended the budget’s approach to Proposition 36 funding and prison closures. After extensive debate, the Assembly voted to concur in the Senate amendments to AB 109, and the bill was immediately transmitted to the Governor. Later, the Assembly took up SCR 89 on diversity, equity, and inclusion. Members from several caucuses spoke in support, arguing DEI is central to equal opportunity, civil rights, and California’s identity, and warning against federal efforts to roll back such programs. Assembly Member DeMaio spoke in opposition, saying DEI treats people differently based on immutable characteristics. The transcript ends during that debate, with the resolution still under consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• In fact, the folks coming back.
• The first is about who pays.
• The first is about who pays. And I want to try to stay within your, ...about who pays.
• Should the state pay? Should local governments be paying? Should homeowners be paying?
• Then if they're going to pay into that, they need to get something on the back end, which then covers

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Insurance held an informational hearing on how climate change, wildfire risk, and related catastrophes are affecting California’s insurance market, affordability, and availability. Chair and members framed the issue as a statewide challenge tied to resiliency, land use, utilities, legal liability, and the FAIR Plan. Senator Becker noted the hearing was connected to SB 254 and its recent report, while the Vice Chair emphasized that the state’s current regulatory framework limits flexibility and that industry testimony would also have been useful. Amy Bach of United Policyholders described worsening availability and affordability, driven by climate impacts, insurtech/risk scoring, inflation, and the growth of surplus lines coverage. She said the Sustainable Insurance Strategy is beginning to show progress, but the FAIR Plan remains too large and non-admitted carriers create concerns because they are less regulated and do not share FAIR Plan or guaranty fund obligations. She stressed that mitigation incentives, grants, and voluntary insurer rewards for wildfire-hardening are important, but that many households cannot afford the needed improvements. In response to questions, she said underinsurance remains a major problem, especially after recent fires, and suggested stronger insurer responsibility for replacement-cost estimates or broader replacement-cost endorsements. Actuary Nancy Watkins and Stanford’s Michael Wara argued that California must both reduce wildfire risk and allow actuarially sound pricing if it wants a healthier market. Watkins compared the market to a household with rising expenses and said the state needs a mitigation framework focused on the highest-risk communities, especially older neighborhoods and homes near the wildland-urban interface. Wara said premiums must roughly equal expected claims plus expenses, and that California is “burning down too many houses,” which drives both availability problems and higher rates. He highlighted the role of structure-to-structure spread, older housing stock, utility ignitions, and the need to focus on community hardening, not just vegetation management. Both speakers said mitigation should be targeted, science-based, and sustained rather than one-time or scattered. Frank Freebalt of Cal Poly and Michael Gullner of UC Berkeley continued the discussion on fire modeling and risk reduction. Freebalt said the problem is best understood as a structure ignition and urban conflagration problem, requiring integrated land-use, utility, and community mitigation, with evidence-based priorities and better analytics. He emphasized that the state should focus on the highest-risk intersections first and that targeted mitigation can multiply the effectiveness of suppression and evacuation resources. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing was informational and focused on testimony, questions, and policy discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would ask you to consider that when we come back.
• It helps to describe how we pay taxes.
• To have this kind of deduction that normally you would pay.
• They don't pay them on everything, but they pay them on enough.
• Here in Las Cruces, we pay a little over 8% tax.

Transcript Highlights:

• That we have at the pay rates that we are able to pay.
• Offhand, it seems like we have folks who park in the back, and there is loading dock and back of house
• Private business is pointed at that we're not paying good funds, you know, paying our wages and salaries
• So I'm going back to just page 6.
• So in this particular context... pay down, contribute, down payment, because you're not actually pre-paying

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:17:28.240> for reasonable uh resources for paying for reasonable uh resources for paying
• <00:17:48.640> for education trust fund will help pay for education trust fund will help pay
• I'm a self-employed businessman so I pay I'm a self-employed businessman so I pay the<00:18:09.039
• The city does not pay them; property owners pay them.
• not pay them we pay for us the city does not pay them we pay them<03:13:38.359> as<03:13:38.720

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a public hearing on HB 402, a bill dealing with whether Education Freedom Account (EFA) payments should be described in state law as not constituting taxable income. The bill sponsor argued that the current statute is misleading because New Hampshire should not imply a federal tax result, and said the bill would remove that language and could also be amended to clarify that families should consult tax advisors. He emphasized that the measure was not intended to impose a state tax on EFAs, but to avoid giving inaccurate advice about possible federal tax liability. Testimony was divided. A retired representative and a tax preparer both opposed the bill, saying EFA payments are already treated consistently with IRS rules and that the bill would create confusion, administrative burden, and possible tax consequences for low- and moderate-income families. They argued the bill is a solution in search of a problem and warned that requiring 1099s could add costs for the scholarship organization and recipients. A tax attorney supported the bill’s repeal of the state language, saying New Hampshire should not put tax advice into statute and that the current wording is inaccurate because federal law, not state law, controls taxability. He cited IRS Section 117 and Publication 970, explaining that only some scholarship-like payments are tax-free and that many EFA-eligible expenses may not qualify for federal exemption. Members asked questions about what would be misleading, whether the bill was trying to tax EFAs, and the cost of issuing 1099s. The sponsor and witnesses repeatedly said the bill was not a state tax on voucher payments, but a clarification about federal tax treatment. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I pay them. >> Correct. And I pay them.
• You're going to pay<02:01:20.000> them. pay them. pay them. >> Correct.
• to pay them whatever you want to pay to pay them whatever you want to pay them<02:02:05.840>
• , pay cycle, and pay frequency.
• So, if I pay cycle, and pay frequency.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed House Bill 1150, which would require disclosure of complaints to public employees within five business days. Members said the sponsor was still working on an amendment, so the bill was held for another week with the understanding it would be executed next week if no amendment was ready. The chair also outlined the committee’s schedule, including upcoming floor reports and the goal of finishing the remaining committee bills on time. The committee then took up House Bill 1168, concerning employer documentation requirements. Supporters argued the bill would give employers more time to gather payroll records, especially when claims arise years later, and said the current system should be adjusted for fairness to businesses. Opponents, including several members, said payroll records are usually electronic and should be produced quickly so workers waiting on wages are not delayed. The Department of Labor deputy commissioner testified that employers can already request extensions and that further extensions could still be requested under the current process. The committee voted 11-9 to ought to pass HB 1168. Next, House Bill 1250, dealing with notice, documentation, and job reinstatement requirements for leave related to childbirth, postpartum care, and pediatric appointments, was considered. Members said the statute was newly enacted, had been carefully negotiated, and should be allowed to work before being revised. The committee voted 20-0 to recommend inexpedient to legislate, and the bill was placed on the consent calendar. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 1043, which would allow private employers to adopt their own minimum pay policies for report-to-work situations instead of being bound by the current two-hour minimum, so long as the policy is established in advance. The sponsor said the bill would modernize an outdated law and preserve the current default if no policy is adopted. Members raised questions about collective bargaining agreements and whether the bill could weaken existing worker protections, while the sponsor and supporters said it was intended to provide flexibility rather than a mandate. The hearing continued with questions and discussion, but no final vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've got a welcome on the back row in... I've got a welcome on the back row in the north gallery.
• Your bride’s in the back, that’s why. Your bride’s in the back, that’s why.
• It's our pay bill.
• He's back like he never left. He's back like he never left.
• We'll be back later today. We'll be back later today if you want to just set it aside or not.

Keywords: MS House Floor - 1 April, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, but we pay for that.
• And so, but we pay for that.
• And so, but we pay for that.
• And so, but we pay for that.
• of her skin is back range of motion<04:59:38.680> is<04:59:38.958> back motion is back

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard testimony on House Bill 167, a PFAS-related measure to add ski, snowboard, and boat wax to the state’s list of banned consumer products containing PFAS. The sponsor said the product is already banned in many other places, alternatives exist, and the concern is that these products go directly into water rather than landfills. She cited high PFAS levels in several New Hampshire lakes and argued the bill would help stop further contamination. A member of the public also described personal experience with ski wax products disappearing from the market, suggesting PFAS may have been the reason. The chair then closed the hearing on HB 167. The committee next opened a hearing on House Bill 312, dealing with college athletes’ name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights. Representative Moffett explained the bill was prompted by the U.S. Supreme Court’s NCAA v. Alston decision and was modeled on New Jersey law. He said the bill would prevent colleges from restricting NIL compensation, require athletes to use licensed attorneys or registered sports agents, and limit certain endorsements involving addictive drugs, adult entertainment, firearms, and weapons. He framed the measure as a proactive response to a changing college sports landscape and noted possible future conflicts involving schools, agents, and endorsements. Committee members raised several concerns and suggested changes. One member questioned the bill’s exclusion of two-year institutions, another objected to the weapons restriction, and others asked how the bill would affect scholarships. The sponsor said the intent was to protect scholarships, especially athletic scholarships, and clarified that need-based scholarships were not meant to be affected. He also acknowledged discomfort with the endorsement restrictions and said the committee might want to broaden or revise the language. The hearing remained open for further consideration, with no vote taken in the excerpt.