Transcript Highlights:

• this reform. this reform.
• cost with PBM reform. cost with PBM reform.
• we need PBM reform. we need PBM reform.
• This is PBM reform. it in there. This is PBM reform.
• That's PBM reform. areas. That's PBM reform.

Keywords: Public Health and Welfare - Room 216, 3 March, 2026; 3:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1622, a strike-all amendment to create a pilot program for certain small-community hospitals to receive limited certificate-of-need exemptions. The bill would allow qualifying hospitals to open a geriatric psychiatric unit without a CON, permit each hospital one additional CON exemption for a service otherwise requiring one, cap dialysis-unit exemptions at eight hospitals, continue existing moratoriums with periodic Department of Health review, allow facilities in Issaquena or Humphreys Counties under limited conditions, and add a loser-pays rule for unsuccessful CON court challenges. Technical corrections were made, the strike-all amendment was adopted, and the bill was reported do pass as amended by voice vote. The committee then moved to House Bill 942, where Senator McMahan offered an amendment to allow a Lee County chiropractor to advertise as a neurologic chiropractor and list related credentials. Members questioned whether chiropractic neurology is recognized in Mississippi and raised concerns about the practitioner’s prior discipline by the board, but the chair ruled the amendment germane. The amendment failed on voice vote, and the bill itself then passed and was reported to the floor. The committee next considered House Bill 1034, but no amendment was offered. It then took House Bill 479 off the table. That bill extends the temporary licensing period for psychology and marriage-and-family-therapy boards from 30 to 60 days to allow more time for criminal background checks. Senator Blackwell offered a clarifying amendment to make clear that temporary licenses must be revoked if required background checks or other licensure requirements are insufficient, and that the temporary license does not replace the underlying education, training, and examination requirements. The amendment was adopted and the bill was reported do pass as amended. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 1067, the Rural Health Transformation Program. Senator Hickman explained that the bill would require procurement procedures and reporting for the state’s rural health transformation funds, prioritize projects tied to the original application, and direct funds toward rural and underserved areas such as health professional shortage areas, low-income counties, and places without hospitals. Senators questioned whether the added state rules would layer on top of existing federal requirements and whether the bill could slow distribution or invite litigation, but supporters said it was meant to add transparency and guardrails rather than change the federal program. The bill was discussed at length, but the transcript ends before a final vote on HB 1067.

Transcript Highlights:

• Of course, zoning reform is only part of the solution.
• This reform... ...for each unit of new construction built.
• Those are all huge reforms that have taken us really far forward.
• Those are all huge reforms that taken this. dwelling units as of right those are all huge reforms that
• And lastly, as has been mentioned, these reforms are popular.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on zoning, Chapter 40B, and related housing bills. Much of the testimony focused on the “Yes in My Backyard” bill (H. 1572/S. 962), which would expand by-right development of missing middle housing, reduce barriers such as minimum lot sizes and parking mandates, and support duplexes, triplexes, and other small-scale housing. Supporters included housing advocates, developers, local officials, and municipal leaders from places like Cambridge, Salem, and Braintree, who argued that state action is needed because local zoning often blocks needed housing and that the bill would help create more affordable, neighborhood-compatible homes. Several witnesses also backed a companion “Yes in God’s Backyard” bill (H. 2347), which would allow faith-based institutions to build housing on their property by right, with testimony emphasizing the potential for new units, added municipal tax revenue, and partnerships between religious organizations and housing developers. The committee also heard testimony on Senate Bill 1021 to modernize Chapter 40R incentives. Senator Pavel Payano and others said the program’s payments have not kept pace with inflation since 2004 and should be increased to better encourage smart-growth zoning near transit and town centers. Another major topic was H. 2298 on site plan review, which would codify and standardize the process in state law. Rep. Kristin Kassner and witnesses from MAPC and NAIOP said current site plan review practices vary widely across the state, creating confusion, delays, and litigation, while a uniform framework would give municipalities clearer tools to review by-right projects without undermining local oversight. The hearing also included testimony on Chapter 40B reform, including S. 1005 and H. 1537. One witness supported further review of 40B and stronger regional planning, while another backed a proposal to allow certain pre-2010 40B condominium owners to sell at market value under a framework that would recapture some of the subsidy benefits. Committee members asked several questions about local zoning changes, housing goals by county, and how the proposed bills would affect communities. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs indicated that written testimony would be welcomed for technical details and additional comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• This reform steps us in the right direction in many ways.
• This reform steps us in the right direction in many ways.
• Mandated reporting reform is taking root across the country.
• And lastly, with foster care rate reform, CalAIM, and other behavioral health reform, this need for collaboration
• We applaud DCSS's hard work to implement this important reform.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held an informational hearing on child welfare, foster care, child support, and related prevention efforts. The chair opened by emphasizing mandated reporting reform, foster care system improvements, and community-based prevention, and noted that no votes would be taken. Public testimony focused first on mandated reporting, where a lived-experience advocate and several organizations argued that the current system overreports families, especially Black, Native, and Latino families, causes trauma, and should be reformed through standardized training, clearer thresholds, and stronger community supports rather than more hotline referrals. Casey Family Programs cited data showing nearly 90% of reports are unsubstantiated, while CDSS said it is already forming a Mandated Reporting Advisory Committee, updating training, and exploring community pathways and possible changes to the list of mandated reporters. CWDA and SEIU supported training and alternative response concepts but stressed child safety, county capacity, funding, and the need for careful implementation and accountability. The committee then discussed a proposal to create a foster care multi-agency office within the California Health and Human Services Agency, led by a chief foster youth advocate with authority to coordinate across departments. Advocates said foster youth often need services from education, health, housing, and behavioral health systems that do not coordinate well, and argued that a central office with real authority could improve placement stability and access to services. CDSS responded that existing structures already provide coordination, including AB 2083 interagency teams, the Child Welfare Council, complex care steering committees, and the foster care ombudsperson, but said it was open to technical assistance. Members raised concerns about whether the new office would have enough authority and funding to avoid becoming another layer of bureaucracy, and the chair emphasized the need for real “teeth” and better interagency action. The final major topic was the continuation and expansion of Promise Neighborhoods. A community leader described strong early results from the state-funded neighborhoods, including improved kindergarten readiness, reduced chronic absenteeism, higher graduation rates, food access, housing supports, and mental health services, but warned that current funding sunsets in June 2025 and that a fiscal cliff could jeopardize staff and services. CDSS said the four funded neighborhoods have reported positive outcomes and valuable flexibility, but also noted challenges with one-time funding, student mental health, and long-term planning. Assemblymember Mia Bonta urged continued investment, saying the place-based model is difficult to rebuild once lost, and the chair asked LAO to help identify the minimum funding needed to preserve the existing infrastructure while evaluation results are still pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, first of all, the medical malpractice reform. So how do we reform medical malpractice?
• So, these are ways to reform punitive damages.
• To reform punitive damages, the best way to reform our medical malpractice is to end what we call vendor
• Now, finally, on the medical malpractice reform, we need to reform the Medical Review Commission.
• Medicaid reform—we got screwed by the feds.

Keywords: 996, all

Bills: HR310, HR314, HR316, HR317, HR321, HR275, HR276, HR279, HR282, HR286, HR289, HR292, HR295, HR302, HR319, HCR112, HR307, SCR59, SCR61, SCR62, SCR68, SCR69, SCR70, SCR54, SCR55, SCR64, SCR75, HCR79, HCR104, HB75, HB410, HB719, HB750, HB944, HB1098, HB1220, HB1252, HB359, HB210, HB468, HB1117, SB382, HB368, HB552, HB732, HB870, HB1236, SB29, SB42, SB43, SB149, SB208, SB274, SB300, SB312, SB387, SB389, SB401, HR74, HB998, HB901, HR20, HCR65, HCR71, HCR98, HB284, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB646, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1191, HB1240, HB1255, SB82, SB89, SB97, SB123, SB237, HB36, HB42, HB74, HB119, HB159, HB258, HB259, HB302, HB414, HB459, HB848, HB956, HB1017, HB1028, HB1095, SB217, SB283, SB469

Keywords: oil and gas, orphan wells, inactive wells, shut-in wells, marginal wells, plugging and abandonment, well decommissioning, site remediation, site restoration, Oilfield Site Restoration, OSR program, financial security, bonding, taxpayer liability, public liability, offshore wells, onshore wells, coastal erosion, Department of Conservation and Energy, natural resources

Bills: HR310, HR314, HR316, HR317, HR321, HR275, HR276, HR279, HR282, HR286, HR289, HR292, HR295, HR302, HR319, HCR112, HR307, SCR59, SCR61, SCR62, SCR68, SCR69, SCR70, SCR54, SCR55, SCR64, SCR75, HCR79, HCR104, HB75, HB410, HB719, HB750, HB944, HB1098, HB1220, HB1252, HB359, HB210, HB468, HB1117, SB382, HB368, HB552, HB732, HB870, HB1236, SB29, SB42, SB43, SB149, SB208, SB274, SB300, SB312, SB387, SB389, SB401, HR74, HB998, HB901, HR20, HCR65, HCR71, HCR98, HB284, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB646, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1191, HB1240, HB1255, SB82, SB89, SB97, SB123, SB237, HB36, HB42, HB74, HB119, HB159, HB258, HB259, HB302, HB414, HB459, HB848, HB956, HB1017, HB1028, HB1095, SB217, SB283, SB469

Keywords: oil and gas, orphan wells, inactive wells, shut-in wells, marginal wells, plugging and abandonment, well decommissioning, site remediation, site restoration, Oilfield Site Restoration, OSR program, financial security, bonding, taxpayer liability, public liability, offshore wells, onshore wells, coastal erosion, Department of Conservation and Energy, natural resources

Bills: HB20, HB463, HB469, HB649, HB963, HB1163, HB1334, HB1481, HB1509, HB1511, HB1514, HB1515, HB1516, HB1518, HB1519, HB1523, HB1524, HB1546, HB1548, HB1550, HB1553, HB1573, HB1574, HB1576, HB1588, HB1591, HB1618, HB1619, HB1628, HB1642, HB1643, HB1656, HB1658, HB1664, HB1667, HB1679, HB1682, HB1688, HB1692, HB1696, HB1700, HB1705, HB1707, HB1710, HB1711, HB1713, HB1716, HB1718, HB1721, HB1728, HB1737, HB1740, HB1741, HB1749, HB1752, HB1753, HB1768, HB1782, HB1800, HB1804, HB1810, HB1823, HB1839, HB1842, HB1854, HB1858, HB1864, HB1870, HB1875, HB1881, HB1886, HB1888, HB1890, HB1894, HB1897, HB1898, HB1920, HB1929, HB1946, HB1959, HB1961, HB1962, HB1973, HB1974, HB2001, HB2005, HB2020, HB2021, HB2022, HB2023, HB2062, HB2078, HB2093, HB2095, HB2096, HB2097, HB2101, HB2137, HB2152, HB2207, HCR137, HCR181

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, eviction, housing access, tenant rights, judicial reporting, disassociation, disability, parking, travel placard, accessibility, mobility, small boat harbors, moorage, harbor permits, commercial use permit, commercial fishing

Bills: HB20, HB463, HB469, HB649, HB963, HB1163, HB1334, HB1481, HB1509, HB1511, HB1514, HB1515, HB1516, HB1518, HB1519, HB1523, HB1524, HB1546, HB1548, HB1550, HB1553, HB1573, HB1574, HB1576, HB1588, HB1591, HB1618, HB1619, HB1628, HB1642, HB1643, HB1656, HB1658, HB1664, HB1667, HB1679, HB1682, HB1688, HB1692, HB1696, HB1700, HB1705, HB1707, HB1710, HB1711, HB1713, HB1716, HB1718, HB1721, HB1728, HB1737, HB1740, HB1741, HB1749, HB1752, HB1753, HB1768, HB1782, HB1800, HB1804, HB1810, HB1823, HB1839, HB1842, HB1854, HB1858, HB1864, HB1870, HB1875, HB1881, HB1886, HB1888, HB1890, HB1894, HB1897, HB1898, HB1920, HB1929, HB1946, HB1959, HB1961, HB1962, HB1973, HB1974, HB2001, HB2005, HB2020, HB2021, HB2022, HB2023, HB2062, HB2078, HB2093, HB2095, HB2096, HB2097, HB2101, HB2137, HB2152, HB2207, HCR137, HCR181

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, eviction, housing access, tenant rights, judicial reporting, disassociation, disability, parking, travel placard, accessibility, mobility, small boat harbors, moorage, harbor permits, commercial use permit, commercial fishing

Bills: SCR8, SR10, SCR90, SR85, SCR110, SR103, SCR54, SR52, SCR107, SR101, SCR178, SR173, SR76, SCR40, SR30, SCR145, SR137, SCR62, SCR95, SR90, SCR45, SR44, SCR119, SR112, SCR63, SR57, SCR21, SR18, SCR27, SR24, SCR75, SR69, SCR7, SR7, SCR149, SCR55, SR53, SCR180, SR175, SCR86, SR77, SCR59, SCR41, SR31, HB1678, HB1824, SCR177, SR172, SCR5, SCR85, SR75, SCR139, SR131, SCR146, SR138, SR84, SCR31, SR27, SCR46, SR45, SCR48, SR47, SCR9, SR11, SCR83, SR73, SCR20, SR17, SCR56, SR54, SCR87, SCR39, SR29, SCR142, SR134, SCR203, SR191, SCR200, SR188, SCR196, SR184, SCR194, SR183, SCR114, SR107, SCR166, SR157, SCR96, SR91, SCR172, SR163, SCR109, SR102, SCR50, SR49, SCR64, SR58, SCR184, SR165, SCR81, SR71, SCR19, SR16, SCR22, SR19, SCR32, SR28, SCR57, SR55, SCR58, SR56, SCR103, SR97, SCR159, SR150, SCR163, SR154, SCR169, SR160, SCR68, SR63, SCR105, SR99, SCR112, SR105, SCR198, SR186, SCR11, SR9, SCR132, SR124, SCR189, SR179, SCR26, SR23, SCR93, SR88, SCR117, SR110, SCR164, SR155, SCR165, SR156, SCR170, SR161, SCR168, SR159, SCR173, SCR197, SCR47, SR46, SCR94, SR89, SCR99, SR93, SCR100, SR94, SCR130, SR122, SCR78, SR82, SCR154, SR145, SCR195, SR192, SCR162, SR153, SCR201, SR189, SCR202, SR190

Keywords: building permits, seniors, health care, disability, safety modifications, county regulations, expedited processing, older adults, disability access, healthcare, permit processing, home modifications, kupuna, accessibility, parking, business hours, aging population, parking accessibility, private business hours, affordable housing

Transcript Highlights:

• To increase the efficacy of U.N. programs, we must drive reform.
• We've talked about these reforms.
• I think there are reform opportunities that we need to work on.
• Reforming is about improving over the long term.
• Important levers to wield authority to bring about reform?

Transcript Highlights:

• They did pass along savings from reform.
• They did pass along savings from reform.
• We continue to have them oppose reform.
• They have not been able to increase their profit margins since reform.
• They have not been able to increase their profit margins since reform.

Summary: The Assembly Banking and Finance Committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 407, which would expand the California Pollution Control Financing Authority. The author said the measure would increase flexibility and access to resources, and the bill was approved 7-0 and sent to the Committee on Local Government. The committee also adopted the consent calendar, which included AB 76, by a 7-0 vote. A lengthy portion of the meeting focused on AB 1065, which would prohibit swipe fees on the sales tax portion of credit card transactions. Supporters, including small business owners, restaurant and grocery representatives, and a payments-policy expert, argued the bill would reduce costs for merchants and consumers and rein in dominant card networks. Opponents, including banks, credit unions, and payment industry groups, argued the bill is likely preempted by federal law, would be difficult to implement, and could disproportionately affect community banks and credit unions. After extensive questioning about preemption, fraud, implementation, and consumer impacts, the committee rejected the bill on a 6-0 vote, but then granted reconsideration by a 7-1 vote. The committee then heard AB 1365, which would create the Cal Account Program, a zero-fee, zero-penalty state banking account for unbanked and underbanked Californians. Supporters said the program would help low-income households, survivors of abuse, and others facing barriers to traditional banking, while opponents from community banks and credit unions argued existing low-cost accounts and the Bank On program already address the need and raised concerns about cost, feasibility, and duplication. The bill advanced on a 6-0 vote and later received enough votes on the reopened roll to move forward to the Committee on Labor and Employment. The committee also approved AB 1052, which would create a legal framework for digital assets and address unclaimed digital property and restrictions on public officials issuing or promoting digital assets, and AB 1180, which would create a pilot program for paying state fees with digital financial assets and require a report on broader adoption. Both bills passed with broad support after brief testimony and discussion. Final roll calls later confirmed AB 1052 and AB 1180, along with AB 407 and AB 1365, were moved out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, we talk about workforce reform with regard to employers and workers getting better services
• That often creates a barrier to reform and an organizational and program culture.
• If Governor Leavitt is going to do workforce reform, the public assistance program should be part of
• and create the welfare reform movement of the 1990s.”
• That's why we have the 1996 reform.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The meeting focused on the state’s “one door/no wrong door” workforce and social services modernization effort, with consultants Mason Bishop and Cameron Christie presenting recommendations. They argued that Arkansas should shift from fragmented programs and multiple access points to a more integrated system that promotes upward mobility, longer labor force attachment, better employer access to talent, greater efficiency, and faster adaptation to changes such as AI and economic shocks. They described the current system as overly siloed, with separate offices, portals, and funding streams that force job seekers and employers to navigate multiple doors and bureaucratic handoffs. The consultants emphasized that Arkansas should treat workforce and safety-net programs more like a coordinated franchise model, with a single point of access, one team, and integrated governance, service delivery, and financial administration. They discussed federal workforce waivers already submitted, a possible cost-allocation plan with the federal Office of Management and Budget, and a potential benefits-cliff pilot. They also said Arkansas Launch is a useful tool but not a full service-delivery system. Members asked how the proposal would affect DHS offices, local workforce boards, TANF, and disability-related services, and the consultants said TANF should be viewed as a workforce program and that Arkansas could consider co-locating or integrating staff, or even merging agencies as Utah did. Committee members repeatedly cited Utah as a model, noting its high workforce participation and lower reliance on Medicaid and SNAP, and asked whether Arkansas could use TANF and other programs to cross-train DHS workers and make county offices more work-focused. The consultants explained Utah’s 1990s reforms, later audits showing improved customer service, and the role of cost allocation in blending funds behind the scenes. They also addressed federal flexibility and said current waiver efforts are a fallback after a broader federal pilot proposal did not advance. The meeting ended with a request to continue examining case management, specifically whether Arkansas should case-manage people rather than programs, and the chair adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• These reforms are straightforward, and they are consumer protections.
• These reforms are straightforward, and they are consumer protections.
• Getting some market certainty in California through our new reforms.
• With our current 2025 reality, these reforms are certainly necessary.
• Because these reforms are happening.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 597, a bill to strengthen consumer protections for disaster survivors who use public adjusters. The author and the Department of Insurance said the measure would cap public adjuster fees at 15% for claims tied to declared disasters, require clearer contracts, prohibit solicitation during emergency conditions, and allow consumers to rescind contracts that were solicited during prohibited periods. Insurance industry groups supported the bill, while public adjuster representatives opposed it as written but said they were willing to work on revisions. The committee approved the bill and re-referred it to Appropriations; the roll call was ultimately recorded as 16-0. The committee then held its fourth oversight hearing on the Department of Insurance’s Sustainable Insurance Strategy, with Commissioner Ricardo Lara giving an extensive update on wildfire-related market reforms and consumer protections. He said the recent Southern California wildfires had not derailed the strategy and described actions including advance claim payments, a one-year moratorium on residential non-renewals in affected areas, a new fraud strike team, smoke-damage claim guidance, additional living expense protections, and a consumer claims tracker. He reported more than $12.1 billion in claims paid, over 37,000 claims filed, and more than 7,000 survivors assisted directly. He also discussed related bills and reforms, including AB 597, SB 495, SB 547, SB 429, SB 616, AB 888, and AB 2026. Members questioned the commissioner about the Fair Plan’s growing exposure, the $1 billion assessment, rate increases, non-renewals, underinsurance, and whether the reforms would actually stabilize the market. Lara said the assessment was already approved, that policyholders would not be hit with one large bill because insurers have two years to recover costs, and that the department was pushing insurers to use catastrophe modeling and reinsurance tools in exchange for commitments to write more policies in wildfire-distressed areas. He said the department expects to see market stabilization by 2026, though he emphasized the timeline depends on insurer participation, implementation of the new regulations, and future disaster activity. Members generally expressed support for the goals of the strategy while pressing for clearer expectations for consumers and faster action on mitigation and market reform.

Transcript Highlights:

• During the pretrial release period or any post-conviction conditional release period, such as parole

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The committee first approved the previous meeting’s minutes, then took up House Bill 4198, which would require all employers to use E-Verify to confirm new hires’ work authorization. Counsel explained that the bill would add enforcement by the Division of Labor, create tiered penalties including warnings, fines, debarment from state contracts, and possible business license revocation, while also removing criminal penalties tied to hiring unauthorized workers in light of federal law. Members raised extensive concerns about drafting problems, including circular and conflicting language, unclear references to existing verification and recordkeeping provisions, the meaning of terms like “seeks to employ,” and whether the bill could unintentionally apply to babysitters, lawn care, and other casual or household arrangements. Questions also focused on whether the bill would apply to public versus private employers, how compliance would be shown, and how penalties would work for small businesses or employers who never actually hire the person in question. The bill sponsor defended the measure as a straightforward extension of the federally required I-9 process, saying E-Verify is a quick, free online check that helps employers verify work authorization and protects them from liability for unknowingly hiring unauthorized workers. He said the bill was intended to be mandatory, not permissive, and argued that it would help law-abiding employers compete fairly. After the questioning, the committee rejected a motion to table the bill and instead sent House Bill 4198 to a seven-member subcommittee to clean up the drafting, resolve inconsistencies, and review the penalties and scope of the measure. The subcommittee was directed to meet the next morning and report back quickly. The committee then moved to House Bill 4710, with an amendment that would require a person to be registered with a political party or as an independent 210 days before filing a certificate of candidacy. Counsel explained that the bill is aimed at preventing candidates from switching parties after losing a primary and then running as independents in the general election. Members discussed how the 210-day requirement would interact with both primary and general election filing deadlines, and the Secretary of State’s office clarified that the measure would affect candidates who change affiliation shortly before filing. The discussion continued with testimony from the Secretary of State’s general counsel about how the bill would operate in practice, but no final action on the bill was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• He is meeting with victim families ahead of today's parole hearings.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Individuals claiming parole or protected under color of law and pregnant individuals are excluded from

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held the first of several hearings on the Governor’s May Revision for health care, with opening remarks focused on the state’s projected $12 billion deficit, looming federal Medicaid changes, and the potential impact on Medi-Cal, public health, reproductive health, and safety-net providers. Several members criticized the proposal as balancing the budget on vulnerable Californians, while others defended the need for cost containment and questioned the administration’s assumptions. The chair set ground rules for respectful, focused questioning and outlined three topics: the Medi-Cal proposals, Proposition 35, and Proposition 56. DHCS Director Michelle Baas presented the May Revision’s Medi-Cal package, saying the department’s budget totals $200.6 billion overall, including $45.2 billion General Fund, and that the proposals are intended to address rising caseloads, pharmacy costs, and managed care spending. She described proposed changes for adults with unsatisfactory immigration status, including a freeze on new full-scope enrollment for those 19 and older, $100 monthly premiums beginning in 2027, elimination of adult dental and long-term care coverage, removal of PPS/RAP payments to FQHCs and rural health clinics for that population, and a pharmacy rebate aggregator. Other proposals included eliminating certain OTC drug classes, removing GLP-1 coverage for weight loss, prior authorization and step therapy changes, reinstating the Medi-Cal asset test, eliminating acupuncture as an optional benefit, allowing utilization management for hospice, raising the managed care minimum medical loss ratio to 90%, reducing PACE capitation rates toward the midpoint of the actuarial range, eliminating the skilled nursing facility workforce and quality incentive program, and suspending the SNF backup power requirement. The LAO said the revised Medi-Cal spending estimate is about $2.5 billion higher than the Governor’s Budget in the budget year, and that the increase appears driven more by higher per-enrollee costs than by caseload alone. The LAO said the budget solutions are concentrated in a few areas, are largely ongoing, and should be considered in light of federal uncertainty, but suggested the Legislature could explore alternatives such as more targeted income thresholds for the undocumented expansion and simpler asset-test rules. Department of Finance officials said the proposals are difficult but necessary to address a third consecutive deficit and rising Medi-Cal costs. Members then pressed the administration on the methodology and impacts of the proposals, especially the enrollment freeze, premiums, asset test, hospice controls, PACE reductions, and the elimination of benefits and provider payments. No votes or formal actions were taken at this hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So first of all, the medical malpractice reform. So how do we reform medical malpractice?
• So these are ways to reform punitive damages.
• So we need to reform our malpractice law.
• Now, finally, on the medical malpractice reform, we need to reform the Medical Review Commission.
• Medicaid reform, we got screwed by the feds.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from its fourth meeting, held October 27-28 in Santa Fe, with Representative Duncan moving approval and no opposition. The chair then introduced a panel on the cost of providing medical care in New Mexico, focusing on physician shortages, rising practice costs, and access problems, especially in southern New Mexico and Las Cruces. Panelists included family physicians, a pediatrician, a cardiologist/electrophysiologist, and a community health center medical director, who described their backgrounds and practices before turning to the policy discussion. The doctors argued that New Mexico is losing physicians because of three main pressures: medical malpractice exposure, gross receipts tax on medical services, and low Medicaid reimbursement. They said malpractice premiums are much higher than in neighboring states, punitive damages and venue shopping increase risk, and the patient compensation fund and attorney fee structure create additional costs. They also described administrative burdens from insurance billing and referrals, the high debt and long training period for physicians, and the effect of corporate medicine and private equity on practice decisions. One panelist emphasized the economic impact of each physician on jobs and local spending, while another noted that shortages force patients into emergency rooms and delay specialty care. The panel presented a list of proposed solutions: reform punitive damages, limit venue shopping and stacking, restore lifetime medical payments from the patient compensation fund, enact apology protections, cap attorney fees, continue Medicaid funding improvements, and eliminate gross receipts tax on medical and dental services. Committee members generally agreed the presentation was thorough and useful, but several noted that some proposals fall outside this committee’s jurisdiction and would likely need to move through other committees, especially judiciary and tax. Some members supported drafting legislation or working on separate bills, while others urged caution, requested more input from hospitals and economists, and raised concerns about local government revenue impacts from GRT changes. The chair concluded by encouraging members to continue discussions offline and noted that the tax-related issue would be taken up further in the next day’s work.

Transcript Highlights:

• permitting reform language, but we're not going to be doing a one-sided Republican uh reform package
• <00:04:43.919> Um,<00:04:44.240> there's permitting reform language.
• Um, there's permitting reform language.
• permitting reform some good bipartisan permitting reform language,<00:04:51.199> but<00:04:51.440
• doing a one-sided Republican uh reform doing a one-sided Republican uh reform package.<00:04:55.199

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• That often creates a barrier to reform and an organizational and program culture.
• Governor Leavitt reacts to that audit and says, I want to reform these... That was done.
• Governor Leavitt reacts to that audit and says, I want to reform these programs.
• and create the welfare reform movement of the 1990s.
• That's why we have the 1996 reform.

Summary: The committee met to hear consultants Mason Bishop and Cameron Christie discuss Arkansas’s “one door/no wrong door” workforce and social services modernization effort. Bishop argued that the current system is fragmented across multiple agencies, offices, and portals, making it hard for job seekers and employers to access services efficiently. He said the goal is to create a more integrated system that promotes upward mobility, longer labor force attachment, better employer access to talent, greater efficiency, and faster adaptation to changes such as AI and other economic disruptions. Bishop repeatedly pointed to Utah as a model, describing how that state combined workforce and public assistance functions into a single agency, used statewide cost allocation to blend funding streams, and improved customer service and outcomes after reform. He said Arkansas should consider integrating governance, service delivery, and financing, including possible waivers, a statewide cost allocation plan, and a benefits-cliff pilot. He also said Arkansas’s current local workforce board structure creates duplication and weak coordination, and that Launch is a useful tool but not a full service-delivery system. Committee members asked how the proposal would work in practice, including whether TANF could be used to cross-train DHS workers, how federal waivers might be obtained, how local boards would be affected, and how disabled clients would be handled. Bishop said TANF should be treated as part of a workforce strategy, that federal pilot authority for workforce reform nearly passed but did not, and that waivers are now the practical path. He also said Arkansas could either merge functions more fully or at minimum co-locate workforce staff in DHS offices statewide. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with plans to continue the discussion in August, including a focus on case management and whether the state is managing programs or people.

Transcript Highlights:

• That often creates a barrier to reform and an organizational and program culture.
• Governor Leavitt reacts to that audit and says, I want to reform these...
• Governor Leavitt reacts to that audit and says, I want to reform these programs.
• and create the welfare reform movement of the 1990s.
• That's why we have the 1996 reform.

Summary: The committee met to hear an update from consultants Mason Bishop and Cameron Christie on Arkansas’s “one door” or “no wrong door” workforce and social services modernization effort. The discussion focused on moving the state toward a work-first system that better connects job seekers, employers, education, and public assistance programs, with goals of increasing upward mobility, improving labor force attachment, reducing inefficiencies, and adapting to changes such as AI and other economic disruptions. The consultants argued that Arkansas’s current system is fragmented across multiple offices, portals, agencies, and funding streams, and that people often have to navigate separate doors for workforce services, TANF, SNAP, Medicaid, and related supports. Bishop repeatedly pointed to Utah as the model, describing how that state integrated workforce and human services into a single department, used cost allocation to blend funding behind the scenes, and saw improved customer service and outcomes after reform. He said TANF should be treated as a workforce program, not just a benefits program, and suggested that Arkansas could use TANF and other tools to cross-train DHS staff, co-locate services, and create a more unified service delivery model. Members asked about federal flexibility, waivers, and whether the state could use one large waiver or a broader restructuring to simplify the system. Bishop explained that a federal pilot authority proposal failed in Congress, so the current approach relies on waivers, cost allocation plans, and possible state-level changes. The committee also discussed the relationship between DHS and workforce offices, the role of local workforce boards, how disability and vocational rehabilitation cases would be handled, and how the governor’s Restore Hope/Hope Hub and faith- and community-based initiatives might fit into the broader plan. Bishop said Arkansas already has rehabilitation services within the workforce department and emphasized that case managers should focus on people rather than programs. No votes were taken. The chair said the committee would revisit case management at its August meeting and adjourned the meeting after thanking the consultants.