Transcript Highlights:

• The Republicans in the House passed a reconciliation bill that will have a significant impact on our
• The Republicans in the House passed a reconciliation bill that will have a significant impact on our
• The Republicans in the House passed a reconciliation bill that will have a significant impact on our
• The Republicans in the House passed<00:38:19.280><c> a</c><00:38:19.520><c> reconciliation</c> passed
• a reconciliation passed a reconciliation bill<00:38:22.000><c> that</c><00:38:22.240><c> will</c><00

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:13:32.440><c> the</c><00:13:32.560><c> state's</c><00:13:32.960><c> tax</c> reconciliations, the
• state's tax reconciliations, the state's tax compliance,<00:13:34.600><c> uh</c><00:13:34.760><c> and
• . reconciliations. reconciliations.
• You're um, you're correct that since the passage of HR1, the federal reconciliation bill this summer,
• bill this summer, states reconciliation bill this summer, states will<01:14:30.440><c> for</c><01:14

Committee: House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm glad to be joined by my colleagues this evening to talk about our progress on the reconciliation
• </c> track is the beautiful reconciliation track is the beautiful reconciliation bill<08:33:35.200><c
• And our reconciliation package is the first step in that direction. Mr.
• Uh, we've talked, my colleagues have talked a bit about reconciliation.
• We've heard so much about the reconciliation process and the dangers of not getting this done.

Bills: HR881 , HB1503

Keywords: immigration, law enforcement, ICE, border protection, violence, security threats, forced organ harvesting, trafficking, human rights, organ donation, sanctions, international law

Transcript Highlights:

• recent years, and we have the opportunity to make those generational investments through the reconciliation
• Defense is in the process of attempting to pass a reconciliation bill, much of which will deal with the
• Because of the rule rules that we are required to operate under, the Defense Reconciliation Bill must
• Reconciliation bill. Mr. Cadenasi. Yes, sir. Vice Admiral Papano. Yes, sir.

Committees: Senate Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel , Senate Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces

Keywords: defense industrial base, small business, workforce development, acquisition processes, national security, cybersecurity, critical minerals

Summary: The meeting of the committee revolved around critical discussions on enhancing the defense industrial base, focusing on small business engagement and the importance of streamlined processes in defense contracting. There was a significant emphasis on the need for more investment in the defense manufacturing sector, particularly in the face of competition from countries like China. Some members expressed frustration over the treatment of small businesses, citing barriers that prevent these innovative companies from effectively participating in defense contracts. The need for a workforce capable of meeting the common challenges posed by evolving technologies and geopolitical threats was also highlighted throughout the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• For payment reconciliation, staff now runs reports in the bank and credit card portals twice per month
• Ledger reconciliation.
• They perform weekly and monthly bank reconciliations.
• A GFM accountant performs weekly and monthly bank reconciliations for these accounts.
• Every Friday, a GFM accountant performs weekly and monthly bank reconciliations for these accounts.

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:

• First, I want to thank Representative Corman for that good explanation of the reconciliation process.
• And then if those purchases are above or below that proxy price, there's a reconciliation at the end
• um from all default reconciliations um from all default service<04:41:34.878><c> customers.
• And I'll just say the reconciliations.
• </c> was you know an annual reconciliation was you know an annual reconciliation which<05:16:13.040><

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• treatment-related purposes within the scope of practice: comprehensive assessment, medication reconciliation
• We are also told that we should check the PDMP for medication reconciliation in that step.
• Across the country where we're required to check PDMP to facilitate medication reconciliation.
• And part of that assessment is medication reconciliation.
• And part of that assessment is medication reconciliation.

Committee: House Joint Committee on Administrative Rules

Summary: The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules met with a quorum and approved the minutes from the prior meeting. Members announced that two Department of Natural Resources rules had been withdrawn, leaving only the Missouri Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) rule proposal for consideration. Public testimony focused on a proposed expansion of PDMP access to additional licensed behavioral health professionals, including licensed clinical social workers, licensed master social workers, marriage and family therapists, professional counselors, and psychologists, along with related clarifications to delegate access categories such as medical assistants and clinical nurse specialists. Testimony from the PDMP director and supporters from Compass Health and the Department of Mental Health argued the changes would improve care coordination, medication reconciliation, and overdose prevention within multidisciplinary behavioral health teams, especially in CCBHC settings. They said access would remain limited to licensed Missouri professionals working under supervision or collaboration with a prescriber or dispenser, and that the system is intended for treatment-related, view-only use. Opponents and skeptical committee members raised concerns that the rule would expand access beyond the original statutory framework without legislative change, could create privacy risks or misuse in non-treatment contexts such as custody disputes, and might exceed the committee’s rulemaking authority. One public witness opposed the rule, warning it could deter patients from seeking counseling and arguing the change should be made, if at all, by statute. After testimony, committee members debated whether the proposal was a permissible clarification or an impermissible substantive expansion of the law. Supporters of disapproval said the issue was legality, not the merits of PDMP access, and urged the department to seek a bill sponsor if it wanted the change enacted. A motion was made and seconded to disapprove Rule 1 CSR 60-1.010 on the grounds of lack of statutory authority, conflict with state law, and arbitrariness/capriciousness. The committee then took a roll-call vote and approved the motion by 7 ayes to 1 no, disapproving the rule and adjourning with no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• predictability of future outcomes; two, monetary incentives to retain unspent state funds through a reconciliation
• Reconciliation and Risk Corridors. This slide represents two aspects of the model once implemented.
• First is the reconciliation of child months.
• Per the reconciliation process, budget can be moved between the CBCs within Tier 3 as surpluses arise
• Tier 3, you serve a thousand kids, you get paid for a thousand kids; that's the reconciliation process

Bills: S0042 , S0578 , S0624 , S7018

Committee: Senate Children, Families, and Elder Affairs

Keywords: child protection, medical records, investigation, abuse, neglect, healthcare, Child Protection Team, diagnosis, Alzheimer's disease, Alzheimers, dementia, related dementias, brain health, early detection, caregiver support, elderly affairs, Department of Elderly Affairs, Department of Health, public health outreach, memory loss

Transcript Highlights:

• The reconciliation bill is going to result in the loss of federal funding for more than 50 safety net
• The federal reconciliation bill requires that states With hospital programs like New Mexico's, where
• Chair, Senator Brandt, there is, as part of the Reconciliation Bill, $50 billion I believe that is for

Committee: Senate Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• So, as you're aware, we are doing a very large effort of bond reconciliation.
• Is of, you know, looking at actual enhancements and improvements versus, like, deferred reconciliation
• With this bond reconciliation process, it's really good.
• potential motion for council approval to adopt the resolution notification certification and reconciliation

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> years a pretty intensive reconciliation years a pretty intensive reconciliation process<01:54:02.560
• So that reconciliation process, we are very confident in that reconciliation process, but there are a
• process we are um very reconciliation process we are um very confident<01:56:43.840><c> in</c><01:56
• reconciliation process confident in that reconciliation process but<01:56:45.599><c> there</c><01:56
• </c> um different different reconciliation um different different reconciliation processes<01:59:13.000

Summary: The Department of Education’s Bureau of School Finance provided an adequacy-funding training for Division II, led by Mark Mello. He walked the committee through the adequacy formula using Albany, Allenstown, and Alton as examples, explaining average daily membership, base adequacy aid, and differential aid for free/reduced-price meals, special education, and English language learners. He also noted a recent change requiring home-education differential aid and emphasized that these aid streams are generally unrestricted district funding rather than money tied to specific students or programs. A major focus was the ongoing litigation over the adequacy base amount and the statewide education property tax, or SWEPT. Mello explained the historical basis of the current base amount, the 2008 legislative report that set the original methodology, and the later court ruling that the adequacy amount should be $7,356, which is now before the Supreme Court. He also described how SWEPT currently raises a fixed statewide amount of $363 million and how that revenue is used to offset the state’s adequacy obligation. For the example towns, Albany and Allenstown receive state adequacy grants because their SWEPT revenue is below their calculated adequacy cost, while Alton is an excess SWEPT community because its local SWEPT revenue exceeds the cost of adequate education. The discussion then turned to the pending “excess SWEPT” issue in the Supreme Court and what would happen if excess collections had to be remitted to the state. Mello said the Department is preparing a hypothetical walkthrough and explained that, if the court upholds the Superior Court ruling, DRA would likely be directed to collect excess SWEPT. Members raised concerns about whether SWEPT must be used for educational purposes and about the cash-flow burden on towns if money had to move from municipalities to the state and then back to districts. Mello and members discussed possible administrative workarounds, such as credits against other state aid distributions, and noted that the committee would continue reviewing the mechanics if the court decision comes down during budget work.

Transcript Highlights:

• for Native reconciliation process for Native Hawaiians.
• </c><00:12:27.360><c> also</c><00:12:27.720><c> requires</c> but reconciliation also requires but reconciliation
• Reconciliation matters. Long-term stewardship matters as well.
• </c><00:19:58.000><c> Reconciliation</c> Restoration matters. Reconciliation Restoration matters.
• Reconciliation matters. matters. matters.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the reconciliation bill will add to the federal debt. It's going to increase that.
• The vast majority of those funds are not being impacted by the federal reconciliation.
• But I think you've largely addressed the federal reconciliation changes during the special session.
• talk about today, but there's additional funding in that expansion category for implementing the reconciliation
• we do have different buckets of individuals who are facing coverage losses as a result of the reconciliation

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here on behalf of the Mid-Missouri Fellowship of Reconciliation.
• and to Senator to Representative Murphy, appreciate you sponsoring this bill yet again. ...of reconciliation
• I'm here on behalf of the Mid-Missory Fellowship of Reconciliation.
• Thanks to the chair and the fill-in chair for helping to hold. of reconciliation thanks to the chair

Committee: House Corrections and Public Institutions

Transcript Highlights:

• So if you go down I reference this reconciliation, you'll see that that is an $86,000 change for memorial
• So if you go down I reference this reconciliation, you'll see that that is an $86,000 change for memorial
• :21:00.200><c> this</c> So if you go down I reference this So if you go down I reference this reconciliation
• 01.320><c> see</c><00:21:01.560><c> that</c><00:21:01.760><c> that</c><00:21:01.920><c> is</c> reconciliation
• you'll see that that is reconciliation you'll see that that is an<00:21:02.160><c> $86,000</c><00:21

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, so the elephant in the room, the big beautiful bill, the reconciliation bill that has passed the
• Okay, so the elephant in the room, the big beautiful bill, the reconciliation bill that has passed the
• 10.680><c> beautiful</c><00:05:11.040><c> bill,</c><00:05:11.600><c> the</c><00:05:11.840><c> reconciliation
• </c> big beautiful bill, the reconciliation big beautiful bill, the reconciliation bill<00:05:12.919>
• Um, the reconciliation bill that could be impacting it.

Summary: The 2025 Artificial Intelligence Task Force met for its first meeting of the year and heard updates on federal AI policy, state implementation of Senate Bill 4, and the business community’s perspective on AI regulation. Co-chairs noted that federal legislation could affect the task force’s work later in the year, but said Kentucky still has significant issues to study, including energy, land use, education, social media, and children’s engagement with AI. The task force had quorum and no votes were taken. Kate Shanks of the Kentucky Chamber said the business community supports continued discussion but favors a federal approach over a patchwork of state laws. She described the Trump administration’s new AI executive order as emphasizing innovation over regulation, noted the pending federal AI action plan, and discussed congressional action including the Take It Down Act and industry-specific changes to existing laws. She warned that state-by-state AI rules could increase costs and burden businesses, and said the Chamber would prefer incremental, flexible policy that avoids conflict with existing law and limits private rights of action. Members asked about uniform model legislation, education uses of AI, and civil liability; Shanks said a model approach could help avoid fragmentation and that liability should generally be handled through consumer-protection-style enforcement rather than broad litigation. The Commonwealth Office of Technology then reported on implementation of SB 4, saying it has worked with industry, agencies, other states, and vendors to build an AI policy framework now in final review. Officials said an AI Governance Committee has been established and will meet in July, and a draft RFP is being prepared to meet the bill’s tracking and documentation requirements. They said no major implementation challenges have been identified so far, but the impact of pending federal rules remains uncertain. Members also discussed the need to educate students and teachers about AI, with one member emphasizing that schools should teach both how to use AI and how to think critically about information online.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, that brings me to, of course, budget reconciliation.
• The American Rescue Plan was passed through reconciliation.
• The Inflation Reduction Act was through reconciliation, and now we're seeing it being used once again
• No discretionary funding can be touched in reconciliation.
• There's limitations in reconciliation on how long they can spend money for.

Summary: The Interim Joint Committee on Education met for its first interim meeting and established a quorum before taking up its first topic, Kentucky’s new assessment and accountability model. Commissioner Robbie Fletcher, joined by KDE staff and superintendents, described a multi-year effort involving the Kentucky “Now We Learn” Council, more than 50 educators and stakeholders, at least 18 pilot districts, surveys, focus groups, town halls, and four prototype frameworks. He emphasized three priorities for the new model: vibrant learning experiences, innovation in assessment, and collaboration with communities. Fletcher said the state accountability portion would continue to meet federal requirements and identify CSI/TSI/ATSI schools, while shifting toward more emphasis on individual student growth, grade-level equivalency in reading and math, career and technical education, graduation rate, and English language proficiency. He also said science would remain a required assessment but be reported separately rather than counted in the CSI/TSI calculation. He stressed that the model should focus on growth, local flexibility, and meaningful measures that reflect community expectations, while still preserving a statewide framework. The committee also heard from Bullitt County superintendent Jesse Bacon, who described his district’s local accountability work. He said Bullitt County formed a community coalition with broad representation from across the district, business leaders, and community members, met six times during the school year, and worked toward a public-facing dashboard that would show community expectations, evidence of accountability, and areas for improvement. Bacon said the district identified six community-defined pillars, beginning with student learning and foundational academic knowledge, as part of a system intended to communicate strengths and improvement areas to the public.

Transcript Highlights:

• > reconciliation for competitive reconciliation for competitive electricity<03:28:26.640><c> supply</
• c><04:13:50.560><c> which</c> not deferring reconciliation, which not deferring reconciliation, which
• Um, we view that as a separate issue from this reconciliation issue.
• Uh and so our view reconciliation issue.
• ><04:21:04.880><c> would</c> the reconciliation process would the reconciliation process would discover

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• It talked about the $69,578,000 request that was a reconciliation for payments for federally qualified
• change in scope looks historically, so once it is finally approved, we must reconcile, provide reconciliation
• It talked about the 69 million 578 request that was a reconciliation for payments for federally qualified
• they are owed under federal law, and so the Social Security Act requires that states do these reconciliation
• that said that we would pay the managed care organizations, and then they would go make those reconciliation

Summary: The committee heard a budget presentation on the Division of Medicaid within the Department of Health and Welfare, including an overview of the division’s five programs, staffing, spending trends, and the large share of the budget that goes to trust and benefit payments. Ms. Williamson explained the difference between ongoing and one-time enhancements, the role of population forecast adjustments, and why the fiscal year 2026 and 2027 numbers change significantly. Members asked about the growth in the budget, the FMAP match rate, the impact of provider rate changes, and the shift of some positions into Medicaid from other divisions after last year’s reorganization. A major topic was House Bill 345 and related budget changes, including the hospital assessment fund alignment, the 4% provider rate reduction, and the effect on Medicaid expansion and other populations. The committee discussed the decline in expansion enrollment, rising costs in traditional Medicaid populations, and the governor’s recommendation to offset part of the 2027 increase with additional reductions. Members raised concerns about access to care, especially for dental, behavioral health, developmental disability, and home- and community-based services, while the deputy director said the department is trying to contain costs through prior authorization, fraud and abuse work, and policy changes. The committee also focused on the MMIS replacement project, which is in year four of a five-year procurement and is funded through dedicated and federal dollars tied to milestones. Another significant item was estate recovery, where the department requested funding to replace an outdated case management system and add contractor support to address a backlog of roughly 20,000 cases; members questioned the return on investment and asked for more detail on the software and staffing split. The deputy director also explained the federally qualified health center reconciliation issue, saying the state had not been properly paying change-in-scope amounts and is now using a new process with interim payments and later reconciliation. In addition, lawmakers asked about program integrity staffing, the use of AI, and whether the department could better target fraud, waste, and abuse investigations. The deputy director said the department is reviewing AI use cautiously and sees opportunities for it in claims review and anomaly detection, but emphasized that the current request is for dedicated receipt authority rather than general funds. No formal votes were taken in the excerpt, but the committee received the presentation, asked extensive questions, and was told that some follow-up information would be provided later.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're going to, they used to get more like 80 or 85% or 90% upfront and then there was a reconciliation
• agreement was 65% upfront should allow them to get through their fiscal year and then do the reconciliation
• This changes up to 65% reconciliation.
• <00:48:15.520><c> the</c> their fiscal year and then do the their fiscal year and then do the reconciliation
• And this is a one-time reconciliation.