Transcript Highlights:

• Please proceed, Ms. Clark.
• Please proceed. Miss Clark. Please proceed. Miss Clark.
• . could state your name um and proceed.
• If you could introduce yourself and proceed.
• Please introduce yourself and proceed. Great. Uh, Mr.

Bills: HF2435

Keywords: healthcare, dementia services, public health funding, opioid prevention, women's health, community health boards, mental health, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Proceed with your testimony.” “Thank you.
• Proceed with your testimony.
• Proceed with your testimony.”
• consideration thank you Alexa proceed consideration thank you Alexa proceed with<01:05:45.559>
• Proceed. My name is Jack Baro.

Bills: HF29, HF921, HF922, HF1048, HF1049

Keywords: railroad, infrastructure, transportation funding, environmental remediation, capital investment, HF921, tax increment financing, TIF, excess tax increment, school district aid, levy adjustment, property tax levy, education finance, Minnesota education aid, decertification, local government finance, school funding formula, state aid reduction, referendum equalization aid, debt service equalization

Transcript Highlights:

• Please proceed. Do I need to say my name and all that stuff?
• Please proceed, Mr. Yamachika, or representative. There you are, sir. Please proceed.
• <01:18:06.239> Mr Hawaii are they online please proceed Mr Hawaii are they online please proceed
• Have a good day. proceed I'm a native hor descendant proceed I'm a native hor descendant prior<01:25:
• Please proceed. Aloha, Ernie Lao, Board of Water Supply.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 410, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ biennium operating budget. OHA asked for a modest increase over its base budget, including $1.2 million to fund 13 new full-time positions for a strategy and implementation team tied to its long-term plan, with emphasis on housing, education, health, and economic resilience. OHA also described a broader effort to work directly with executive branch departments to improve outcomes for Native Hawaiians. Testimony was largely supportive, with several individuals speaking in favor and one testifier expressing strong frustration about Native Hawaiian rights and access to resources. The chair noted there were 38 additional written/supporting testimonies and three in opposition. Members asked about OHA’s funding sources and public land trust revenues; OHA said it is not receiving the full 20 percent share, described a public land trust working group and system issues, and said a related bill would seek funding to begin an inventory. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then considered House Bill 304, which would make the Hawaiian version of a law binding when the law was originally drafted in Hawaiian and later translated into English. The Judiciary supported the bill, saying it reinforces Hawaiian as an official language and looks to the original language for legislative intent. The Attorney General supported the intent but recommended narrowing the bill with a proviso to avoid ambiguities, limiting it to laws originally drafted in Hawaiian that were not later amended, codified, recodified, or reenacted in English. Public testimony was generally supportive, though one speaker raised broader sovereignty concerns. Members questioned how many laws would be affected and whether the proposed amendment would undercut the bill; the Attorney General said the amendment was meant to address uncertainty in interpretation. No final action was reported. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 603, which would direct OHA to administer a Native Hawaiian business marketing program to promote Native Hawaiian-owned businesses through marketing and technical assistance. OHA supported the concept, saying a label or branding program could help consumers identify and support Native Hawaiian-owned businesses, but requested that funding be redirected to a working group to study program design, implementation, enforcement, and long-term viability. The chair noted four supportive testimonies had been received, and a member asked OHA to confirm that its programs serve all Hawaiians, not only those eligible for homelands; OHA said it serves all Hawaiians in the state. The transcript ends before any vote or further action on HB 603.

Transcript Highlights:

• hearing by setting the context in which the hearing will be conducted and also around how we will proceed
• questions regarding the Yellow Book standards for bias, conflicts of interest, and how the audit would proceed
• First, that the Attorney General allowed the audit initiative proposal to proceed to the November 2024
• It depends how it proceeds. Okay.
• If an auditor or the audit organization identifies any threats to independence, they must proceed to

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• and proceed with your testimony. and proceed with your testimony.
• and proceed. and proceed.
• please proceed with your bill. please proceed with your bill.
• Please introduce yourself and proceed with your testimony.
• Uh when and proceed with your testimony.

Bills: HF4277, HF3819, HF3489, HF4408, HF3901, HF4316

Keywords: child care, child care center, day care, licensed child care, video security cameras, surveillance, security cameras, maltreatment, child abuse, child safety, public and shared areas, camera mandate, child care assistance program, CCAP, Great Start Compensation Support, early learning scholarships, licensed provider, Minnesota Statutes 142B.68, Harvey's Law, privacy

Transcript Highlights:

• Please introduce yourself for the record and proceed.
• Please proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Proceed. Thank you.
• Please reintroduce yourself for the record and proceed.
• Please reintroduce yourself for the record and proceed.

Bills: HF1, HF2

Keywords: Office of Inspector General, inspector general, legislative audit, fraud prevention, waste and abuse, public funds, grant oversight, state grants, grant management, whistleblower protection, retaliation, subpoena power, data practices, government transparency, accountability, law enforcement referrals, sanctions, debarment, payment withholding, public assistance fraud

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Sharpe to inquire, please proceed. Good morning.
• Please proceed. And this may have been said. I am trying to wake up. Sorry, good morning.
• Please proceed. Thank you. Talk to me a little bit more about the funding stream.
• Proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The committee first met in executive session and approved Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 913 on a do pass motion by a vote of 16 ayes and 3 noes. The transcript then moved to a public hearing on Senate Bill 1033, presented by Senator Jason Bean. The bill would exempt certain older covered farm vehicles used in local farming operations from emissions inspection requirements, and it also included language to ease permitting for cotton gins by removing the need for air dispersion modeling in certain construction permit applications. Bean also referenced related air pollution control funding language from Senate Bill 953. Testimony on SB 1033 was uniformly supportive. Cotton producers, Missouri Farm Bureau, the Missouri Corn Growers Association, Missouri Soybean Association, Missouri Pork Producers, Missouri Cattlemen’s Association, the Missouri Mining Association/Infra, the American Council of Engineering Companies, and Associated Industries of Missouri all spoke in favor. Supporters said the bill would reduce regulatory and retrofit costs for farm vehicles, help cotton gins remain competitive with neighboring states, and provide a more stable funding stream for the state air pollution control program, which witnesses said is projected to become insolvent in fiscal year 2028. Committee members asked several questions about the cotton gin permitting changes, the number of farmers affected, and the air program funding mechanism. Witnesses explained that the funding provision would redirect a small portion of sales and use tax revenue from electric power distribution into the air pollution control program and would prevent sweeping of unused funds to general revenue. No one testified in opposition, and the chair closed the hearing on SB 1033.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Gregg, please proceed. To inquire. Please proceed. Thank you.
• Representative Gregg, please proceed. That sounds like a story I heard in Reeds Spring, possibly.
• Kimble, please proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, sir, for coming in.
• Representative Mansur, please proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You may proceed to Senator Alahar. Madam Chair, I move to amend.
• not money that would could be considered recurring money every year because that fund outcome, the proceeds
• They would tell us what the proceeds were from the previous year.
• All we can do is spend the proceeds every year. Follow up, Senator Hicks. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• I think having some legislative control over some of this money, the proceeds of some of this money,

Bills: HB3327, HB3711, HB4104, HJR1077, HB3329, SB2184, SB171

Keywords: State Board of Education, Oklahoma education board, board appointments, school governance, education reform, governor appointments, legislative appointments, speaker of the house, president pro tempore, senate confirmation, board vacancies, removal for cause, public education, state superintendent, school board training, board member qualifications, emergency clause, Oklahoma statutes 70 O.S. 3-101, school funding, transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to proceed to public testimony and we do recognize your right to close.
• Please proceed. Thank you, sir.
• Seeing then we're going to proceed to public testimony, sir. We recognize your right to close.
• If there's no questions, we're going to proceed to public testimony, and we do recognize your right to
• If there are no further questions, we'll proceed to public testimony, and you can reserve your right

Transcript Highlights:

• Please proceed. Oh, good morning, Mr. Chairman and members.
• If not, we'll proceed to testimony. Thank you. She calls up Ray Hunt.
• Please proceed. OK.
• The proceeds from these bonds were used to buy land, which was then resold to veterans.
• If there are no further questions, we'll proceed to testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Please proceed.
• If not, we'll proceed to testimony. Thank you.
• Proceed.
• The proceeds from these bonds were used to buy land, which was then resold to veterans.
• If there are no further questions, we'll proceed to testimony.

Bills: HB3015, HB3521, HB5632, HJR182, SJR57

Keywords: healthcare, direct primary care, insurance deductibles, Texas Health Benefit Plans, telemedicine, police retirement, disability pension, municipalities, law enforcement, retirement benefits, retirement, beneficiary, Employees Retirement System of Texas, divorce decree, beneficiary designation, Veterans' Land Board, general obligation bonds, constitutional amendment, veterans, housing assistance

Transcript Highlights:

• You may proceed. You may proceed. Thank you so much. Uh, good afternoon, everyone.
• Alright, please proceed. Thank you, sir.
• and testifying for House Bill 168, the Tehira Justice Center, testifying for herself also you may proceed
• You may proceed.

Bills: HB168

Keywords: certificates of obligation, local government debt, municipal finance, county finance, public works, bond election, voter petition, registered voters, refinancing certificates, Texas Local Government Code, municipality, county, hospital district, infrastructure financing, public improvement, debt issuance, general obligation alternative, public oversight, local bonds, historic preservation

Transcript Highlights:

• Introduce yourself for the record and proceed. State Representative Dan Fister, District 56.
• 04:34.800> in<00:04:34.960> Kentucky<00:04:35.520> thank you<00:04:39.080> proceed
• 40.479> to<00:04:40.639> point<00:04:40.840> out<00:04:41.000> we you proceed
• I also want to point out we you proceed I also want to point out we have<00:04:41.280> a<00:04
• Please proceed with anybody you've got. Introduce yourself before you get started.

Keywords: 00:00 – Introduction 00:20 – Attendance Roll Call 1:32 – Discussion of HB 24 03:00 – Roll Call Vote 04:00 – Discussion of HB 304 07:19 – Roll Call Vote 08:54 – Discussion of HB 186 09:46 – Roll Call Vote 11:00 – Discussion of HB 315 13:09 – Roll Call Vote, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, heard brief announcements, and moved quickly through four House bills. House Bill 24, as amended by a committee substitute, would raise the audit threshold for conservation districts from $750,000 to $1 million and also clarify that temporary roads, highways, and structures may be built on certain easements if they are removed when work is complete. The substitute was adopted, the bill passed on a roll call vote, and a title amendment was also adopted. House Bill 304, presented by Rep. Ryan Bivens with support from the Kentucky Soybean Association, would adjust soybean checkoff language so the state checkoff could rise from one-quarter to one-half percent if the federal checkoff ever ends, keeping funding levels effectively the same and allowing the state board to continue promotion, research, and education work. Members asked about the cost impact on farmers, and sponsors said there would be no added cost because the language is intended as a backup to match the current federal rate. The bill passed unanimously with favorable expression. House Bill 186 would streamline rules for churches and nonprofits providing food to homeless shelters or people displaced by declared natural disasters, reducing regulatory barriers for safe, wholesome food service. The sponsor argued current requirements are too restrictive for simple food distribution. The bill passed. House Bill 315, with a committee substitute, would protect agricultural land from entities tied to designated hostile governments, while also allowing some land to be used or leased for research purposes; the sponsor noted the substitute reflected prior work and concerns from bankers about lien priorities, which he said he would address later on the floor. The committee substitute was adopted and the bill passed unanimously. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Please proceed. Mr.
• Please proceed. Mr.
• Please proceed. body. Please proceed.
• Please proceed.
• Please proceed. Announcement, Mr. President. Please proceed.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a roll call establishing a quorum. The chamber approved the prior journal, excused absent senators, and received a House message noting passage of several House bills, including House Bill 1 despite the governor’s veto. The clerk also reported committee recommendations on a number of House bills, which were placed on the calendar, and new resolutions were introduced recognizing Chloe Yates, student wellness and physical activity in schools, and the Kentucky State Long-Term Care Ombudsman program. The main floor action centered on House Bill 1, which implements the Federal Education Opportunity Program in Kentucky. Supporters argued the measure would bring federal tax-credit dollars into Kentucky to expand educational opportunities for students and families at no cost to the state budget, while opponents urged sustaining the governor’s veto and raised concerns about accountability and the bill’s structure. After debate, the Senate voted 31-5 to override the veto, and House Bill 1 was finally passed notwithstanding the governor’s veto. The Senate then took up Senate Bill 183 on proxy advisory services. The House committee substitute exempted certain nonprofits with less than $500,000 in annual gross revenue from proxy advisor services from the bill’s cause-of-action provisions while preserving attorney general enforcement authority. The chamber concurred with the House substitute and then passed the bill as amended. Senators also passed Senate Bill 263, the School of Innovation cleanup bill, which makes technical changes, requires KDE support for waiver applications, and creates a pilot project for three schools of innovation with proposed matching grants. Senate Bill 281 on grandparent visitation was also adopted with committee substitute and passed unanimously after discussion focused on balancing grandparents’ access with parental rights and existing case law. Later, the Senate began consideration of Senate Bill 324 on the film industry credit, with the sponsor describing technical changes and expanded provisions to support film, video, gaming, and related production activity in Kentucky.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have a quorum and we will proceed with our business today.
• We do have a quorum and we will proceed with our business today. We have one bill on the agenda.
• So, the floor is proceed to a vote. So, the floor is yours. yours. yours.
• Please introduce yourself for the record, and you may proceed. My name is Jesse Green.
• Yes, Miss Boss, please introduce yourself and you may proceed.

Keywords: Meeting start: 00:00 Roll call: 00:05 HB 227 discussion: 01:10 HB 227 voting: 49:38, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum to consider House Bill 227, a time-sensitive measure focused on social media use by minors. The bill sponsor, Rep. Matt Lockett, and supporters including counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, the Attorney General’s office, and the Family Foundation argued that social media is addictive and harmful to children, contributes to mental health problems and exploitation, and that the bill would give parents more control while regulating addictive features rather than banning speech. Supporters said the bill is narrowly tailored, content-neutral, and designed to withstand constitutional scrutiny; the Attorney General’s office said it would defend the bill if challenged and described ongoing multi-state litigation against major platforms. One committee member also described seeing inappropriate AI-generated content on a 16-year-old’s phone as an example of the problem the bill seeks to address. Opposition testimony came from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, NetChoice, and the Computer and Communications Industry Association. They argued the bill raises First Amendment concerns because it conditions minors’ access on parental consent, regulates how private platforms communicate with users, and could function as a de facto speech ban. They also warned that the age-estimation requirement could force platforms to collect more sensitive data, creating privacy and security risks, and that the ban on “addictive features” was overly broad and could sweep in personalized feeds, notifications, autoplay, and other common tools. Opponents said the bill could especially harm vulnerable youth who rely on online access for community or safety information and urged the committee to craft a constitutional alternative. During questions, members asked how the state could enforce the law against national companies and were told enforcement would come through the Attorney General within Kentucky and potentially through multi-state litigation. Members also discussed the bill’s practical effects, including advertising revenue from youth users and the need for guardrails to protect children. The discussion continued with questions about the bill’s scope, parental consent, age estimation, and liability provisions, but no final vote or other committee action was shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• We did provide some language to allow for this if you did want to proceed with it.
• proceed accordingly. Thank you. proceed accordingly. Thank you.
• So, do you feel that this bill can proceed prior to them?
• proceed prior to them? proceed prior to them?
• staffing and funding to proceed? staffing and funding to proceed?

Bills: SB3179, SB2872, SB2391, SB3282, SB2836, SB2181

Keywords: educational workers, harassment, workplace safety, temporary restraining orders, investigation procedures, retired education employees, teacher shortage, rehired retirants, entry level salary, collective bargaining agreements, pension benefits, education, teacher salaries, automatic increments, collective bargaining, teacher retention, workforce development, Pell grant program, short-term education, eligibility

Summary: The joint committee first heard SB 3179, which would require the Department of Education and charter schools to report harassment incidents involving educational workers and adopt procedures for handling them. DOE supported the bill, while the Attorney General recommended clarifying amendments to limit the measure to harassment directed at workers because of their position, to limit DOE legal assistance to temporary restraining order actions, and to clarify whether the harassment must come from outside the school system. Members also discussed whether the bill should cover non-DOE individuals on campus, whether investigations could be handled in-house, and whether training should be embedded in existing workday or school-year training rather than added as a separate requirement. The committee later voted to pass the bill with amendments as SD1. The committee then took up SB 2872, which would require retired teachers or administrators rehired into shortage or hard-to-fill positions to be paid the entry-level salary for that position. DOE supported the bill, and the Attorney General requested clarifying language about its effective date and that it would not affect already matured rights and duties. The Employees’ Retirement System administration emphasized that the bill should retain a 12-month break in service to preserve the pension system’s tax-exempt status and noted the importance of consistent classification of eligible positions. Members expressed support for using retired educators to help fill staffing gaps, but no final action was taken in the portion provided. The committee also heard SB 2391, which would provide annual step increases for public school teachers under bargaining unit 5, subject to funding. The Attorney General said the bill could conflict with collective bargaining procedures and Chapter 89, while DOE said unit 5 includes more than teachers and asked that the benefit be considered for other bargaining units as well, with funding provided if enacted. HSTA strongly supported the measure, arguing that annual step movement is already recognized in the collective bargaining agreement as a recruiting and retention tool. Testimony totals were noted as 16 in support, two in opposition, and three comments. Finally, the committee heard SB 3282, which would establish a statewide framework for the federal workforce Pell Grant program to fund short-term workforce education and training. The Attorney General suggested clarifying that the matter is one of statewide concern because UH is involved. UH and the Chamber of Commerce supported the bill, and DLIR testified that it is coordinating with DOE, the Workforce Development Council, and national groups on implementation. Members questioned whether the Workforce Development Council or DLIR should handle rulemaking and administration, and DLIR said the council is advisory while the department has grant administration expertise. The committee then moved into decision-making after discussion of possible amendments and implementation concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:35:54.560> Please<00:35:54.800> proceed.
• Aloha Chair Takayyama and proceed.
• Hi, Kako, please introduce yourself and proceed.
• Please proceed. Thank you.
• Please proceed. Thank Chair, thank you. Please proceed.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard several health-related resolutions and received testimony on each. HCR 28/HR 27 would ask the Department of Health to reconvene a working group on water and air contamination and remediation tied to the Pu‘uloa Range training facility; supporters said nearby residents and the broader public may be exposed to lead and heavy metals, and that further testing and eventual relocation of the range are needed. HCR 35 would request an auditor’s report on the social and financial effects of mandatory insurance coverage for biomarker testing, and HCR 36 would request a similar report on colorectal cancer screening coverage. The Department of Health and cancer advocates supported both, saying biomarker testing helps match patients to the right treatment and that earlier colorectal screening improves outcomes; DOH also cited screening data showing lower screening rates among uninsured people. HCR 134, on limiting cost sharing for diagnostic and supplemental breast imaging, drew support from the Susan G. Komen Foundation and others, who said out-of-pocket costs can delay diagnosis and treatment. HCR 171, on mandatory coverage for continuous glucose monitoring, also drew support from health and disability advocates. HCR 185, on coverage for Native Hawaiian healing and cultural practitioners through federally qualified health centers, received support from Papa Ola Lōkahi and a community testifier who described the value of traditional healing and access gaps. HCR 173, urging DOH outreach and vaccination drives at schools with low vaccination rates, drew support from DOH, DOE, and public health and disability advocates, but also strong opposition from several testifiers who argued the measure was government overreach and raised concerns about vaccine safety and parental choice. Testimony on HCR 173 was the most divided, with supporters emphasizing the need to raise immunization rates to prevent outbreaks and protect vulnerable children, while opponents argued schools should not host vaccine drives and that parents should make vaccination decisions without government involvement. The Department of Health said it is already working with schools and community partners to expand school-based immunization efforts and would prioritize schools with rates under 30%. The State Health Planning and Development Agency also supported the measure, saying rates below 50% are a serious public health concern. No votes or final committee actions were announced in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, we'll proceed with a vote.
• Hearing none, we'll proceed with the vote.
• Uh, please go ahead and proceed.
• <00:52:04.480> Madam please go ahead and proceed. Madam please go ahead and proceed.
• proceed to moving into a close session. proceed to moving into a close session.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Please proceed.
• Please<00:44:54.240> proceed. Please proceed. Please proceed.
• Please proceed. You know, this measure. Please proceed.
• Please proceed.
• Please proceed.

Keywords: 912, senate, all