Transcript Highlights:

• There is a slight reduction in the budget impact, and the savings are on line 286.
• There is a slight reduction in the budget impact, and the savings are on line 286.
• And there it's showing up in two places: one in DOC, and I think we matched the Senate on that line.
• And there it's showing up in two places: one in DOC, and I think we matched the Senate on that line.
• ,</c> protection statutes related to matches, protection statutes related to matches, flame<00:42:22.480

Transcript Highlights:

• Looks like savings, dzroway.org.
• Looks like savings due to a competitive contract rebidding process for PBM.
• Those are live saves, live extended.
• And I will say for every dollar that we spend on prevention we save $29.
• We always like to hear about cost savings.

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• We want the federal government to give us that 75% match.
• We want the federal government to give us that 75% match.
• We want the federal government to give us that 75% match.
• When trainees match to a program, they commit for three to eight years.
• I believe that was the OBA's largest savings cited. The second part is the dark purple.

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• helped that we're saving.
• helped that we're saving.
• I'd rather save 4 grand, right?
• I'd rather save 4 grand, right? I'd Me? I'd rather save 4 grand, right?
• </c> we'll save them 4,000 a month. we'll save them 4,000 a month.

Transcript Highlights:

• for various reasons, who have chosen sterilization over health. pregnancy in a state that will not save
• The life of the MOTHER Act will save lives. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Rabbi Gail Suedro.
• SB 31 matches the definition of medical emergency to existing state law.
• The bill not only saves women's lives, but it protects their future. future fertility.
• Well, the Life of the Mother Act will save lives. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Keywords: SB31, medical emergency, reproductive health, testimonials, abortion laws, Texas

Summary: This transcript is from a Faith Days at the Capitol press conference supporting Texas abortion-related legislation, especially Senate Bill 31 and House Bill 44, referred to as the “Life of the Mother Act.” Speakers said the bills would clarify the medical-emergency exception in Texas law so doctors can provide evidence-based care when a pregnancy threatens a patient’s life or health, and several noted concerns about delayed treatment, loss of fertility, and women leaving Texas because of uncertainty under current law. Faith leaders from Baptist, Lutheran, Episcopal, Methodist, Presbyterian, Catholic, Jewish, and other traditions described pastoral experiences with women and families affected by the abortion ban and said their religious beliefs support protecting the life of the mother. Multiple speakers emphasized that the current legal climate has created fear for pregnant Texans, especially those facing miscarriage or high-risk pregnancies, and argued that SB 31 would restore clarity, physician discretion, and religious freedom. Several also linked the issue to broader concerns about maternal mortality, including the higher risks faced by Black women, and framed the bill as a matter of bodily autonomy and family well-being. A Catholic attendee and clergy members shared personal stories about daughters, granddaughters, and congregants who could be harmed by delayed care. Representative Charlie Geren, the House author of HB 44, said the bill was the most important he had carried in his 24 years in the Legislature and pledged to work to get it passed. Representative Josie Garcia also spoke in support, saying existing medical ethics and malpractice rules already hold providers accountable and arguing that supporting mothers is consistent with being pro-life. The event concluded as a coordinated advocacy effort, including mention of a postcard campaign that had gathered more than 6,000 submissions since January 14.

Transcript Highlights:

• They've saved and got their money to have matching funds, and this won't be a one-time fix.
• The first being tax savings.
• The first being tax savings. savings. savings.
• And in wrapping up, I know you're concerned about local match.
• The city concerned about local match.

Bills: HF1569 , HF460 , HF850 , HF707 , HF798 , HF852 , HF366 , HF365 , HF836 , HF866 , HF885 , HF959 , HF1196 , HF1788 , HF1349 , HF2272 , HF2652 , HF1251 , HF607

Committee: House Capital Investment

Keywords: transportation, bond issuance, capital investment, infrastructure, road improvements, HF460, Sibley County, Highway 21, County State-Aid Highway, bonding bill, state bonds, bond proceeds fund, transportation grant, infrastructure improvements, sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, stormwater, public works, local infrastructure

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe this amendment would save roughly $100,000 I believe this amendment would save roughly $100,000
• It saves, it should, the point is to save money, and it does save the whole system money—workers, employers
• I do value having more case workers and I do see the cost savings.
• It saves, it should, the point is to save money, and it does save the whole system money, workers, employers
• I do value having more case workers and I do see the cost savings.

Bills: HB2689 , SB5420 , SB5868 , SB5877

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: Working Connections Child Care, child care subsidy, subsidized child care, Washington DCYF, Department of Children, Youth, and Families, low-income families, child care providers, licensed child care centers, family child care, market rate survey, subsidy rates, income eligibility, state median income, SNAP, Basic Food, collective bargaining, provider reimbursement, daily payment, half-day care, partial-day care

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe this amendment would save roughly $100,000...
• It saves, it should—the point is to save money, and it does save the whole system money: workers, employers
• I do value having more case workers and I do see the cost savings.
• It saves, it should, the point is to save money, and it does save the whole system money, workers, employers
• I do value having more case workers and I do see the cost savings.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on Substitute Senate Bill 5828, which would restore and adjust Washington College Grant and College Bound Scholarship award levels for students attending private, not-for-profit four-year institutions. Staff explained the bill would set the awards at 90 percent of the regional and state college rate rather than 50 percent of the research rate, with an estimated fiscal impact of $3.3 million in fiscal year 2027 and $18.6 million over four years. Testimony was largely in support from private college presidents, students, and school counselors, who said the bill would help low-income and first-generation students and preserve access and enrollment choices; some public college student representatives said they did not oppose the bill but argued that cuts to public-school aid should be restored first. The committee also heard Substitute Senate Bill 5911, which would prohibit DCYF from using benefits or funds of youth in extended foster care as reimbursement for their cost of care beginning in 2027, while requiring support for benefit management and payee arrangements and allowing protected accounts such as ABLE accounts. Staff estimated a net fiscal impact of $608,000 in fiscal year 2027 and $2.2 million per biennium thereafter. Testimony in support said the bill would end the practice of withholding SSI and other benefits from youth in care and better support disabled youth transitioning to adulthood. Members asked questions about fiduciary responsibility and representative payee arrangements. In executive session, the committee adopted amendments and advanced several bills. It adopted Amendment Clark 350 to House Bill 2689, raising the required provider response rate for the child care market rate survey to 65 percent, and then reported the bill out with a due pass recommendation by a vote of 18-11, with two excused. It adopted Amendment H-3743.1 to Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5395 on retrospective prior authorization denials and reported that bill out unanimously. It also adopted Amendment Pool 272 to Senate Bill 5420 and reported that bill out unanimously. For Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5496, the committee adopted several amendments clarifying scope and penalties but rejected amendments that would have delayed the bill or replaced it with a study; the bill was then reported out with a due pass recommendation. The committee also heard amendment briefings on other bills, including 5981, 6026, 6160, 6184, and 6211, but deferred action on some items heard that morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• It gives us an opportunity, once again, to expand more property tax savings for local folks.
• And that would be universal, and then everybody saves. Answers. Thank you.
• So it would be a significant savings.
• Helping Texans save water is crucial.
• Remind you of one other thing: they say the energy we save is cheaper than any energy we can buy.

Bills: HB485 , HB1367 , HB1370 , HB1827 , HB1879 , HB2032 , HB2133 , HB2357 , HB3581 , HB3830 , HB4060 , HB4085 , HB4270 , HB4979 , HB5217 , HB5268 , HB5478 , HJR96 , HJR97 , HJR119 , HJR195 , HJR209 , SB4 , SB23 , SJR2 , SJR85 , SB 4 , SB 23 , SJR 2

Committee: House Ways & Means

Keywords: healthcare, insurance, access, affordability, public health, emergency services district, sales tax, gas and electricity, residential use, tax exemption, emergency services, gas, electricity, HB 485, ESD, use tax, residential utilities, utility tax, local option tax, Texas Health and Safety Code

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, you'll see somebody play Save the Whales and all that.
• Matching dollars encourage families to buy more fruits and vegetables.
• Today, families can receive up to $60 a month in matching funds.
• There's not matching dollars encouraged families to buy more fruits and vegetables.
• Today, families can receive up to $60 a man in matching funds.

Summary: The committee heard a series of child and family services bills, with testimony from authors, county officials, advocates, and members of the public. AB 2083 would authorize a regional child care special district for Marina Valley and Paris; there was no public opposition, but a vice chair raised concerns about lack of outreach to Riverside County and possible added fees for residents. The bill was held pending quorum and later noted as enjoying a due pass recommendation, though no final roll was taken in the excerpt. AB 1579, which expands the Children’s Crisis Continuum Pilot Program to allow additional CDSS-approved residential models, drew strong support from San Francisco County, Seneca Family of Agencies, and several counties and advocacy groups, who argued the current crisis residential model is financially and operationally unworkable and leaves youth in hospitals or emergency departments. The Youth Law Center and allied organizations opposed the bill, saying it departs from the original small, community-based crisis model and could lead to more institutional care. The committee passed the bill 6-0 to Appropriations. AB 1628 would extend California’s safe surrender window for newborns from 72 hours to 30 days. The author and fire service supporters said the change would better reflect postpartum recovery and help prevent unsafe abandonment; there was no opposition, and the bill passed 6-0. AB 1634, dealing with the “Kids” specialty license plate program, sought to raise plate fees and revise distribution formulas to generate more revenue for child safety and child care programs. Supporters said the update would modernize outdated 1992 pricing and expand county access, while a committee member objected that the bill would reallocate funds away from state agencies and private nonprofits; the bill was moved on a 5-0 vote with some members not voting. AB 1643 would streamline child support enrollment by having courts transmit support orders directly to child support agencies unless a custodial parent opts out. Supporters said automatic enrollment would reduce poverty and remove paperwork barriers, while opponents warned it could undermine parent choice and create problems for families with sensitive circumstances. The committee passed the bill 6-0. AB 1708 would require regions receiving HHAP homelessness funds to more meaningfully engage smaller cities; many city officials supported it as a way to include jurisdictions that are doing local homelessness work, while Los Angeles’ mayor’s office opposed it. The bill passed 5-0. AB 2395 would standardize access to the child support debt reduction program; supporters described it as a way to help low-income obligors escape uncollectible government-owed debt, while receiving parents and child support agencies warned it could reduce money owed to families and needs more work. The bill passed 4-0. The committee then began AB 1914, which would require local governments to plan for child care in general plans; supporters framed child care as essential infrastructure, while at least one member raised concerns about state mandates on local jurisdictions, and the excerpt ends before any vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the local government road fund has a 25% match, whereas the transportation project fund has a 5% match
• And so it's a very different local match on those different funds. And I believe, Mr.
• So you're saving $200,000 general fund dollars, but we're still funding the appropriation. Great.
• So you're saving $200,000 general fund dollars, but we're still funding the appropriation.
• So are we planning on taking those federal dollars and using them to save $35 million from the general

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• had a license, passport, or birth certificate and proof of domicile but whose maiden name did not match
• had a license, passport, or birth certificate and proof of domicile but whose maiden name did not match
• had a license, passport, or birth certificate and proof of domicile, but their maiden name did not match
• had a license, passport, or birth certificate and proof of domicile, but their maiden name did not match
• </c> Uh but their maiden name didn't match Uh but their maiden name didn't match up.<01:17:54.320><c>

Committee: House Election Law

Transcript Highlights:

• The SAVE Act hasn't been enacted. So post-SAVE Act, remind me again of how the process will change.
• “The SAVE Act is, the purpose of the SAVE Act is to prevent non-U.S. citizens from voting in our elections
• The SAVE Act this year is not exactly identical to the SAVE Act as last year.
• nothing in the SAVE Act that says states cannot have all elections under the requirements of the SAVE
• There's nothing in the SAVE Act prohibiting a state from There's nothing in the SAVE Act prohibiting

Committee: House Special Committee on Redistricting

Summary: The Special Committee on Redistricting held a public hearing on House Concurrent Resolution 48, which urges support for the federal SAVE Act. Representative Michael Davis presented the resolution, explaining that the bill would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register for federal elections, photo identification to vote, and additional procedures for absentee voting and name-change issues. He argued the measure would protect election integrity and prevent non-citizens from voting, while noting that the resolution simply expresses support for the federal legislation already passed by the U.S. House. Committee members from both parties questioned Davis extensively. Supporters said the proposal would add a needed citizenship verification layer and cited examples of non-citizen voting or mistaken registration. Opponents argued that Missouri already requires voter ID, that non-citizen voting is rare, and that the SAVE Act would create burdens, costs, and potential disenfranchisement for married women, students, rural residents, elderly voters, disabled voters, military families, and others who may lack easy access to birth certificates, passports, or other documents. Several members also raised concerns about federalism, the cost to election officials, and whether the resolution belonged in a redistricting committee. The committee then heard public testimony. Witnesses opposed to HCR 48, including representatives of the League of Women Voters and several individual voters, said the measure would make voting harder and could require duplicate or repeated documentation, affidavits, or separate systems for different election types. One witness testified in favor, saying proof of citizenship is easy to provide and would help ensure fair and honest elections. After all testimony and questions, the chair closed the hearing; no vote or other action was taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so the 300—so we're $60 million that we've saved overall, and then $16 million in the general fund
• So, again, we're down to—we saved less than one-half of one percent of the total budget.
• If we're doing a one-to-one, I can save you $13 million on the SIF account.
• Alternatively, I suggested a 50-50 match, but that would still put the...
• A 50-50 match, but that would still put the dollars out there, whether they do it or not. Okay.

Bills: SB2015

Committee: Senate Appropriations - Human Resources Division

Summary: The committee met to review revised long sheets and section-by-section language for a human services/health budget bill, with much of the discussion focused on how to present block grant funding and full-time equivalent (FTE) positions for behavioral health clinics and CCBHCs. Members debated whether to keep FTE counts in the budget at all, ultimately leaning toward removing or zeroing out the FTE references while keeping the dollar authority, and reducing the salaries-and-wages block grant by about $4.75 million. They also discussed public health federal authority, agreeing to remove about $60 million in unused federal spending authority tied to COVID-era funds, and clarified that if federal money later becomes available it could be requested through the Emergency Commission. A major topic was the provider inflation increase. The House version had 2% and 2%, while members debated alternatives and appeared to settle, at least for further work, on 2% in the first year and 1.5% in the second year, with staff asked to recalculate the fiscal impact. The committee also reviewed FMAP changes, noting a revised 2027 FMAP estimate and its effect on general fund and other funds, and discussed whether to adjust public health and other line items accordingly. Several members emphasized that many of these numbers are still tentative and will be refined before final action. The committee also touched on several policy items and capital-related provisions, including behavioral health services, Medicaid expansion, the moratorium on new ICF beds, and a proposed amendment for a medical homes/fourplex-related item that would show a $400,000 legislative investment with repayment from a developer. There was extended discussion of the All True hospital/facility proposal, with some members favoring leaving it in with a smaller initial commitment and others preferring to remove it and revisit later in conference committee. The meeting ended with staff asked to continue updating the bill language and members instructed to review remaining sections before the next meeting; no final votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• the investments and the opportunities we have with capital projects and the funding there, that matching
• At NDSU we develop several primers that match or beat chromated systems and one of them was licensed
• Loans have been secured for local match components.
• It is not going to streamline efficiency or result in cost savings in any respect.
• Again, I don't know that these translate into cost savings.

Committee: Joint Higher Education Institutions Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• The SAVE Act is just about American citizens. So the SAVE Act wouldn't have prevented..."
• “It’s important that we adopt the SAVE Act or to encourage the federal government to adopt the SAVE Act
• The SAVE Act this year is not exactly identical to the SAVE Act as last year.
• We would have to do it the way the SAVE Act says.” “Now, even if we...” “The way the SAVE Act says.
• of the SAVE Act.

Committee: House Special Committee on Redistricting

Transcript Highlights:

• So, I'm asking you for my son and for every young life we still have the chance to save.
• I'm the CEO of Save Suicide Awareness Voices of Education.
• So, I'm asking you for my son and for every young life we still have the chance to save.
• So, we don’t have a true exact savings.
• Um, but this is something we savings.

Bills: HF2779 , HF1645 , HF1885 , HF1289 , HF1534 , HF2707 , HF1675 , HF3046

Committee: House Health Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:10:23.040><c> us</c><00:10:23.200><c> a</c> and it'll save us a and it'll save us a few<00:10
• We have matched it graciously with the governor's IIJA match funding that you guys set aside for those
• don't have a state match for?
• Um, to know that we have an ongoing source of matching funds.
• </c> have an ongoing source of matching have an ongoing source of matching funds.<02:19:55.680><c> And

Committee: Joint Transportation, Highways & Military Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill could have saved his life.
• This is about saving lives, and this is a good bill.
• All the other lives that have been lost and the lives that we can save.
• This is a bill that is going to save lives.
• I WOULD MATCH FLORIDA'S STATE WORKFORCE UP AGAINST ANY OTHERS IN THE COUNTRY.

Bills: SB 2 , HB 2 , HB 2000 , HB 2196 , HB 213 , HB 222 , HB 645 , HB 1458 , HB 1022 , HB 141 , HB 502 , HB 643 , HB 3093 , HB 1700 , HB 117 , SB 503 , SB 2 , HB 120 , HB 20 , HB 150 , HB 6 , HB 100 , HB 210 , HB 215 , HB 1393 , HB 1151 , HB 1268 , HB 142 , HB 451 , HB 124 , HB 2 , HB 2000 , HB 2196 , HB 213 , HB 222 , HB 645 , HB 1458 , HB 1022 , HB 141 , HB 502 , HB 643 , HB 3093 , HB 1700 , HB 117

Transcript Highlights:

• The Legislature has found previously that funding wildfire preparedness activities can save the state
• However, a Department of Revenue review found that 65% of the taxpayer savings resulting from that tax
• data can be provided by the DOR review that took place in 2024 that showed that 65% of the taxpayer savings
• Happy to answer any questions you might have. that 65% of the taxpayer savings resulting from the tax
• new language, as you mentioned, because it is very complicated to make sure the words on the page match

Summary: House Finance met on Friday, January 23rd, and heard three bills. On House Bill 2194, staff explained that the bill would allow a county and a city within that county to both impose the cultural access sales and use tax at the same time, with the county providing a credit for the city tax. Representative Parsley said the change would let more jurisdictions support cultural, arts, science, and school-related programs. Olympia and Thurston County officials testified in support, describing grant funding for cultural organizations, free programming, and school access benefits; a committee member raised a question about how the change could affect county bond obligations. The committee then heard House Bill 2089, which would narrow a B&O tax preference for first mortgage interest by removing the requirement that a financial institution be located in 10 or more states, and direct the resulting revenue to the wildfire response, forest restoration, and community resilience account. Staff said the bill would raise significant revenue and have implementation costs for the Department of Revenue. Representative Scott said the bill was intended to restore wildfire funding and limit the preference to community banks, while opponents from the Washington Bankers Association and Community Bankers of Washington warned the bill could harm community banks and mortgage lending if not drafted carefully. The Department of Natural Resources and a public employee representative supported restoring wildfire preparedness funding. Finally, the committee heard a proposed third substitute for House Bill 1960, which would replace property taxation for new or repowered large renewable energy facilities and battery storage systems with a state and local excise tax structure, while also creating a local investment distribution account and a tribal capacity grant program. Staff and the sponsor described the bill as a way to reduce property tax shifts onto nearby taxpayers and provide more stable, predictable revenue for local governments and tribes. County officials, assessors, treasurers, and some clean energy and conservation groups supported the concept but asked for clearer definitions, payment timing, and rate adjustments; utilities and renewable developers said they supported the goal but opposed the bill as drafted because of concerns about the rates and the treatment of centrally assessed utilities. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after closing the hearings on all three bills.