Transcript Highlights:

• limits in our regulated entities.
• <00:57:07.680> That's and there are limits on that. That's and there are limits on that.
• limits um in our regulated entities. limits um in our regulated entities.
• Um, are the Supreme Court still upholds spending limits and, uh, some of our contribution limits.
• legislation like this, which limits legislation like this, which limits speech,<01:13:42.960>

Bills: HF4133, HF3419

Keywords: homeowner's insurance, peace officer, property damage, just compensation, exclusion policy, corporate powers, entity law, business corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC, limited liability company, cooperative, partnership, trust, foreign entity, campaign finance, election spending, political spending, ballot measure, ballot initiative

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a limited amount of with HHRF. There is a limited amount of time<01:16:56.640> left.
• The current maximum coverage limit or dwelling limit is $450,000.
• dwelling limit is coverage a limit or dwelling limit is $450,000. $450,000. $450,000. $450,000.<01:24
• still seeing this $350 million so limit still seeing this $350 million so limit and<01:26:27.199
• that uh pol that uh insured value limit that uh pol that uh insured value limit of<01:26:37.280>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The limit is 10% of unrestricted revenue of the previous fiscal year.
• so without passing the going to a limit so without passing the limit<00:34:17.960> and<00:34:
• 19.440> of<00:34:19.679> un limit and the limit is 10% of un limit and the limit is 10%
• The state law provides a limit, but it's a generous limit, I guess I will say, because we never want
• um the state state law provides a limit um the state state law provides a limit and<00:44:30.760

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Public Works and Highways committee held a capital budget orientation led by Legislative Budget Assistant Office staff, who walked members through the budget materials, the capital budget process, and the committee’s compare sheet. The presentation explained that agencies begin developing capital requests nearly a year in advance, submit them by May 1, and that the governor’s recommended capital budget is a reduced version of the much larger agency wish list. Members were told the agencies initially requested about $1.1 billion in projects, the catalog was trimmed to just over $400 million in general fund projects, and the governor’s recommendation in the pink book totals about $143 million in general fund capital appropriations. The committee also reviewed the prior capital budget and related statutes and committee procedures. Several specific projects drew discussion. The Department of Education’s CTE projects were explained as having been shifted into the operating budget in the prior cycle and now returning to the capital budget recommendation; members asked whether there was a backup CTE project and whether local approval had been secured for the named project. The Cannon Mountain tramway request was highlighted as a $20 million recommendation, with the presenter explaining that an earlier $18 million appropriation would be lapsed back to the general fund to help balance the budget. The Department of Corrections’ new prison project was also discussed; members were told the state has already appropriated $50 million for planning and site evaluation, but the governor’s current capital budget does not include a new prison construction appropriation because the project is not yet ready for that phase and may need to be funded differently, possibly through a separate, staggered appropriation. State Treasurer Monica Mezzapelli then presented on debt affordability and the state’s borrowing capacity. She said the state’s credit position has improved, with the debt-to-revenue ratio falling from 8.2% in 2015 to 3.8% in 2024, and explained that RSA 6-C limits debt authorization to 10% of unrestricted prior-year revenue. She noted that the Treasury’s planning assumes $60 million in annual bond issuance, with the prison-related $40 million now expected to be issued in 2026 rather than 2025 because the project is not ready to spend the funds. She said the state can still borrow more, but additional debt service must be paid from operating funds, and recommended keeping capital bonding in the $120 million to $130 million range to preserve affordability and the state’s credit rating. Members asked for clarification on the CTE funding shift, the prison schedule, and the meaning of the large agency request totals. The chair and treasurer discussed the governor’s $143 million recommendation versus the committee’s usual target range, and the treasurer said $130 million would be more comfortable than $140 million, with $135 million described as a possible compromise. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion provided; the meeting was informational and ended with the presenters offering to answer follow-up questions as agencies come before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Worse, when a provider obeys the limits Worse, when a provider obeys the limits instead<00:43:07.600
• related to proposed billing limitations. related to proposed billing limitations.
• > in<00:50:48.160> the Providers will be limited in the Providers will be limited in the
• Um you know, there's so much limit.
• We are putting a limit on a one billing code that currently has no limit.

Bills: HF4207, HF4338

Keywords: housing aid, local housing trust, funding projects, income provisions, technical changes, human services, medical assistance, Medicaid, provider enrollment, provider revalidation, fraud prevention, program integrity, background study, background check, fingerprinting, licensing, license revocation, payment withholding, payment suspension, prepayment review

Transcript Highlights:

• There are very limited requirements on ownership structures, financing, or performance.
• Um, combined with capital that is raised from limited partners, PE firms can use large amounts of debt
• capital that is raised from limited capital that is raised from limited partners,<00:03:38.959><
• We are very limited<00:08:18.879> by<00:08:19.120> state<00:08:19.440> specific<
• by state specific data and as a limited by state specific data and as a result<00:08:21.440> we

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up two bills concerning health entity ownership and heard invited testimony before acting on them. Dr. Yasha Singh of Brown University testified about private equity in healthcare, describing how PE firms use debt-financed acquisitions, short investment horizons, and roll-up strategies that can avoid disclosure requirements. He said the lack of transparency makes it difficult to track ownership and outcomes, and cited research linking PE ownership to higher costs in outpatient care, more ancillary service use, workforce turnover, and worse outcomes in hospitals and nursing homes. He also noted Minnesota-specific concerns, including PE involvement in opioid treatment programs, and said the policy challenge is balancing needed capital investment with protections for patients and workers. Sam Brooks of the National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care testified in strong support of the legislation, focusing on nursing homes. He argued that private equity ownership is associated with worse resident outcomes, including higher mortality, more pressure ulcers, more hospitalizations, and more deficiencies, and said leverage buyouts divert money from staffing and care into debt service, management fees, and lease-back arrangements. Brooks said staffing levels and quality ratings decline under PE ownership and pointed to recent bankruptcies as examples of instability. He said the bills would add safeguards such as transparency, attorney general approval of acquisitions, and requirements that a large share of public funds go to direct resident care. The testimony framed the bills as responses to concerns about private equity ownership in healthcare and long-term care, especially the effects on quality, staffing, and financial stability. No vote or final committee action was described in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Public testimony will be limited to 3 minutes per speaker.
• Right, so county employees, they're very limited.
• Counties are really limited on what they're allowed to do without the state's blessing.
• The current $2000 limit was established.
• Increasing the limit will ensure ESDs can manage expenses for modern equipment such as fire apparatus

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to be limiting testimony to two minutes.
• There has to be a limit on how much things can change.
• The substitute limits the bill only to protests and appeals solely on...
• The expansion is granted limited eminent domain powers and the ability to issue bonds.
• Disability or the city limit follows a template in all respects, and there's no known opposition.

Bills: HB9, HJR1, SB1331, SB1375, SB1443, SB1578, SB2251, SB2519, SB2553, SB2655, SB2764, SB2907, SB3030, SB3033, SB3035, SB3036, SB3037, SB3043, SB3047, SB3050, SB3051, SB3056, SB3057, SB3063, HB9, HB467, HB331, HB1244, HB1399, HB2559, HB2730, HB3307, HJR1, HJR99, SB3048, SB3052, SB3053, SJR78, HB1327, HB2723

Keywords: HB 9, Texas Tax Code, property tax, ad valorem tax, voter-approval tax rate, no-new-revenue tax rate, truth in taxation, local government finance, municipality, county, special taxing unit, sales and use tax, sales tax revenue, tax rate calculation, tax levy, maintenance and operations, debt rate, unused increment rate, disaster relief rate, taxing unit

Transcript Highlights:

• Please note that testimony will be limited to 10 minutes per organization.
• That faster rate than their sales since 2019, which of course limits profitability.
• Has it had effects in hiring, limiting how many people they can hire?
• We know limited access to capital remains a top barrier.
• We know limited access to capital remains a top barrier.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Business held an informational hearing focused on the conditions facing small and micro businesses in Massachusetts and the state programs intended to support them. Chairs Andy Vargas and Adam Gomez opened by emphasizing equitable economic development, the importance of CDFIs, and the need to help underserved entrepreneurs, especially women, minorities, veterans, immigrants, and other groups facing barriers. Committee members noted the hearing would not take up bills, and testimony was limited to 10 minutes per organization. State and quasi-public agency witnesses described current programs and funding. Dico Gibral of the Executive Office of Economic Development highlighted the Business Front Door, multilingual access, small business office hours in Gateway Cities, and funding in the Mass Leads Act, including support for CDFIs, small business technology, and capital grants. Tom Hooper of Commonwealth Corporation described workforce training programs such as the Workforce Training Fund, Workforce Competitiveness Trust Fund, and Career Technical Initiative, saying they help small businesses train workers, fill labor shortages, and support returning citizens and people with disabilities. Committee members asked about federal funding uncertainty, workforce migration, training schedules, and program uptake. Business and advocacy groups focused on cost pressures and regulatory burdens. The Massachusetts Restaurant Association urged continuation of outdoor dining and takeout alcohol sales, and pressed for relief from high credit card swipe fees, support for surcharging, and streamlining municipal licensing. The Retailers Association of Massachusetts cited survey results showing inflation, utility costs, payroll taxes, health insurance, and interchange fees as major concerns, and said many members might sell or close within five years; it also backed ending the state prohibition on surcharging and creating an Office of Main Streets Massachusetts. MACDC, BECKMA, and the Coalition for an Equitable Economy emphasized the need for more technical assistance, CDFI and small business funding, and protections against rising costs, tariffs, supply chain disruptions, and immigration enforcement impacts on immigrant-heavy business districts. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Would a court find that place, or any limitations imposed on suitability.
• When we talk about whether the term suitability will limit judicial discretion, limiting judicial discretion
• This will limit their ability to protect themselves.
• This will limit their ability to protect themselves.
• SB 1173 restores a tool in a balanced and limited way.

Summary: The committee heard several public safety bills and took testimony on each, with members often noting amendments and continuing negotiations. SB 1009 by Senator Becker would require juvenile courts to find that less restrictive alternatives are unsuitable before ordering detention, and would require periodic review of continued detention and consideration of alternatives at disposition. Supporters argued it would reduce unnecessary youth detention and improve transparency; probation, judges, and police groups opposed it as an undue limit on judicial discretion and potentially unsafe in serious cases. The chair said he would recommend an aye with amendments, but the bill was held pending quorum and later remained on call. SB 1130 by Senator Gomez Reyes would update privacy law for wearable recording devices such as smart glasses, requiring consent before recording in places where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy and banning devices or accessories designed to defeat recording indicators. Supporters said the bill addresses secret recording and invasive surveillance; opponents from tech and hospitality groups sought clarification to avoid unintended liability for businesses and exempt workplace communication devices. Members discussed those exemptions, and the chair recommended an aye, but the measure also remained on call. Senator Blake Spear presented SB 99, which would let courts consider military protective orders in domestic violence proceedings and require better communication between civilian law enforcement and military authorities. Supporters from the Department of Defense, local officials, and military representatives said it would close protection gaps for military families; the ACLU opposed it on due process grounds because MPOs are issued without judicial process. The chair and author emphasized that the bill only allows consideration of MPOs and does not require civilian enforcement of them. The bill passed out on a vote, though it remained on call for additional members. The committee also heard SB 937 by Senator Gonzalez, restricting flashbang use for crowd control and banning flashbangs and explosive breaching charges in immigration enforcement, and SB 1022, creating a statewide anti-trafficking task force. SB 937 drew support from civil rights and community groups and opposition from police and sheriffs over the use-of-force standard and limits on tactics; it passed out on a vote but remained on call. SB 1022 was supported by survivor and faith groups and opposed by public defenders and sex worker advocates who raised concerns about racial disparities and enforcement harms; it also passed out on a vote. Later, SB 1395, extending criminal protective orders for certain felony sex offenses against minors up to 20 years, and SB 1230, increasing penalties for repeat illegal dumping, were both heard with mixed testimony and were held on call after committee votes. The committee also adopted a consent calendar and several bills were moved forward with amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• the, uh, it limits, well, there's two things.
• And those, those don't limit the evidence.
• The bill doesn't limit care. It doesn't cap damages.
• So you can limit not the liability, you could impose caps, let's say Mr.
• Um, in a way that would Limit justice and recovery for those catastrophic injuries.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have a two-minute time limit on testimony, both on Zoom and in person.
• But the idea is that we have limited resources.
• <00:36:58.000> I<00:36:58.240> fully that we have limited resources.
• I fully that we have limited resources.
• c> restrictions limitations on geographical restrictions limitations on geographical restrictions

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on HB 126, which would change civil asset forfeiture law. The Attorney General’s Office, Honolulu Police Department, and county prosecutors opposed the bill’s proposed SD1, arguing that requiring a criminal conviction and changing how forfeiture proceeds are distributed would weaken or effectively end the tool, create fiscal and law enforcement problems, and make it harder to address organized crime or cases where an owner cannot be identified. The Public Defender’s Office, Community Alliance on Prisons, Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, and other supporters argued the measure would improve transparency and accountability, protect property rights, and reduce abuses that disproportionately affect low-income people. The chair questioned law enforcement about fairness, storage of seized property, and access to counsel, and the discussion focused heavily on whether forfeiture should depend on a conviction. No vote was taken. The committee then heard HB 280, which would make the Community Outreach Court permanent and appropriate funds for it as a division of the First Circuit district court. The Department of the Attorney General and Judiciary supported the concept and described the court’s success in helping people resolve cases, clear license stoppers, recall bench warrants, and access services, but suggested amendments to remove the Attorney General from the bill’s definition and funding mechanism. The Public Defender, Department of Human Services, mental health and substance use advocates, neighborhood and community groups, and others strongly supported the bill, emphasizing its benefits for people facing housing instability, behavioral health issues, and transportation barriers. No opposition was voiced, and no vote was taken. The committee also heard HB 370, which would increase partial public campaign financing for elective offices. The Campaign Spending Commission supported the original bill and asked the committee to restore the original percentage amounts, keep the proposed funding increases, and reinstate funding for two additional full-time staff positions. Supporters said the public financing system has not kept pace with inflation and needs modernization to be viable; a few testifiers opposed the measure. The committee reported 30 in support, two opposed, and one comment, and then moved on without a vote. Finally, HB 371 was heard, a campaign contribution bill that would bar state and county contractors, grantees, and certain related persons from contributing during the contract period. The Campaign Spending Commission said the bill is intended to address pay-to-play concerns and false-name contributions, while the State Procurement Office raised concerns about the burden of requiring agencies to provide contract information for all contracts regardless of dollar value. The testimony ended with the commission saying it was working with procurement and the Attorney General on implementation details; no vote was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• shephering limitation. shephering limitation.
• /c><00:10:06.640> conserved limited authority to shepherd conserved limited authority to shepherd
• The bill participation limitations.
• the time limit and reporting. the time limit and reporting.
• It's really limiting in exist.

Bills: SF0050, SF0084, HB0133, HB0116, HB0011, HB0044

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, irrigation, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, conservation districts, supervisors, elections, agriculture, local governance, beneficial use

Transcript Highlights:

• the limitations that this bill would remove: the cap on the size of the resources, limiting the time
• came together we we negotiated a limited came together we we negotiated a limited Authority<00:49
• the size of the resources um limiting the size of the resources um limiting the<00:50:10.839>
• I would think it would make sense to have a 3-megawatt limit actually match the municipal host limit,
• Yeah, is there a limit to how big?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It also sets out a statute of limitations for statements published on the internet. Thank you, Mr.
• It also sets out a statute of limitations for statements published on the internet.
• courts have recognized that the First Amendment plays an important role in protecting speech and limiting
• about perhaps some material that is not considered obscene to adults, but it is to minors, and it limits
• what the Miller test was from the perspective. ...obscene to adults but it is to minors, and it limits

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Rules Committee considered several Senate bills for constitutional and proper-form review. Senate Bill 1099, dealing with defamation claims and a statute of limitations for internet publications, was flagged for possible anti-abrogation and First Amendment issues, but was still recommended by a 4-2 vote. Senate Bill 1148, which would require the Arizona Supreme Court to handle attorney licensing and bar membership requirements, drew separation-of-powers concerns because it would direct how the Court exercises its exclusive authority over the practice of law; it was nevertheless recommended 4-2. The committee then reviewed Senate Bill 1435 and Senate Bill 1567, both addressing sexually explicit materials and minors in schools, libraries, and government settings. Staff raised vagueness and First Amendment concerns, especially around the terms “facilitating” and the breadth of the materials definitions, but said amendments could likely cure the issues. Members questioned the state’s interest in protecting minors and whether narrower definitions could resolve the constitutional problems. Both bills were recommended, each by a 5-2 vote. After correcting the recorded vote on SB 1099, the committee took up a mass motion covering many additional Senate bills. Staff said each measure in the motion had been reviewed and was constitutional and in proper form. The mass motion passed unanimously, 7-0, with one member absent, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the proposed amendments, Appendix E, extension of credits to customers, higher limits, Appendix G
• So there's the changes: the higher limits, expansion of credit, electronic table games, and what was
• So if you could talk a little bit about how that's going to be implemented, what the credit limits will
• It increases the higher limits for tables, higher limits for the tribal lottery system.
• So the extension of credit, it is incumbent upon the tribe to go ahead and set what those limits are.

Summary: The Senate Business, Financial Services and Trade Committee held a public hearing on a proposed tribal gaming compact amendment involving the Lummi Nation and the Washington State Gambling Commission. Tina Griffin, director of the Gambling Commission, explained the compact amendment process under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, the role of the commission and legislative ex officio members, and noted that the proposal had reached tentative agreement and would next go to hearings before the commission and the House. She said the commission and tribe have a long-standing collaborative relationship. Lummi Nation Vice Chairman Terence Adams and other tribal representatives described the tribe’s gaming history and the purpose of the amendment. The proposal would add or update compact provisions for higher table and lottery limits, extension of credit to customers, electronic table games, and conforming definition changes. Tribal representatives said the changes would support tribal governmental services and economic development while maintaining strong regulation and internal controls. Commission staff said similar provisions have already been approved for other tribes and that the tribe would be responsible for setting responsible credit limits and controls, including customer vetting and self-exclusion checks. Senator Hasegawa asked about how credit would work and what oversight would apply, and staff said they would follow up with more detail. Senator Fortunato clarified that the request was for Lummi to receive provisions already available in other tribal compacts. Committee members also asked about the timing of public comment, and staff said it would be taken at the end of the hearing if any was signed up. No public comment was offered, and the chair closed the hearing without any vote or formal action taken by the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that, excuse me, follow-up, so that it doesn't limit them to three unrelated people if you make them
• /c> that excuse me followup so that it that excuse me followup so that it doesn't<00:04:27.280> limit
• And when you have a town that's open three days a week for limited hours, it could be 10 weeks.
• No, they're going to try to find ways to limit possibilities, and we're addressing them up front.
• Limit road frontage to 75 feet and 50 feet for setbacks, and the effective date that's the same.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee on SB 170 opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and then worked through the bill section by section, focusing first on a housing-related provision that would prohibit municipalities from requiring occupants to be related by blood or marriage. The chair proposed adding “school enrollment status” as a protected class to prevent towns from limiting where students may live, especially in Durham. Members debated whether that phrase was too vague and whether “educational status,” “enrollment status,” or “school enrollment status” was the best wording. Public testimony raised concerns that adding a new protected class could have broader implications under the state’s anti-discrimination law and could also affect municipal zoning authority, while supporters argued the bill was aimed at preventing local rules that restrict student housing and group living arrangements. The subcommittee did not take a final vote on that language during the discussion. The committee then turned to land-use and subdivision provisions. The Department of Environmental Services testified that its test-pit and related land-development rules are already protective of groundwater and surface water, and that municipalities sometimes impose stricter setbacks or other requirements locally. Builders and housing advocates argued that more stringent local requirements for test pits, well siting, and related approvals add time and cost and can impede housing development, while some municipal concerns were raised about aquifer and wellhead protection overlay districts and local groundwater safeguards. Public testimony also supported making state standards uniform across municipalities, though one speaker noted that local and state review processes can differ and that the bill could simplify approvals. The subcommittee also discussed a road-length provision, with one member supporting limits on municipal caps that could impede development and another suggesting a possible water-and-sewer-capacity qualifier. Additional sections were explained as allowing utilities and infrastructure to be placed in subdivision open spaces or perimeter buffers, and requiring municipalities to act quickly on plan changes after initial review. The chair indicated support for several of the sections as drafted, and the discussion ended with the committee moving through the remaining provisions without recorded final votes in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• the vehicle at the speed limit.
• The technology has, um, knows where you are in the car and knows the speed limit and then limits you
• from going over that speed limit.
• be a 10 miles under the speed limit be a 10 miles under the speed limit because<01:03:49.839>
• you<01:04:25.440> from the speed limit and then limits you from the speed limit and then limits

Bills: HF3429, HF3418, HF3431, HF1597

Keywords: intelligent speed assistance, transportation, speeding offenses, public safety, license restrictions, speed control, pedestrian safety, traffic safety, roadway improvements, nonmotorized transportation, crosswalks, sidewalks, bike lanes, complete streets, Vision Zero, Toward Zero Deaths, MnDOT, Department of Transportation, Department of Public Safety, local road authority

Transcript Highlights:

• bills to to limit ourselves and do this. bills to to limit ourselves and do this. Why?
• Uh, number one is, uh, unlike other statute of limitations, there is no statute of limitations for an
• , unlike other uh statute of limitations, unlike other uh statute of limitations, there<00:22:59.200
• <00:23:00.799> for there is no statute of limitations for there is no statute of limitations
• > limits<00:24:36.960> the >> That limits the that limits the >> That limits

Bills: HB41, HB149, SB230, SB87, SB169, SB238, SB233, HB72, HB41, HB149, SB230, SB87, SB169, SB238, SB233, HB72

Keywords: sexual offenses, penalties, rape, sodomy, criminal justice, Judicial Branch, Alabama State Bar, legal profession, commissioners, government agency, campaign finance, security measures, candidates, elected officials, legislative protection, civil procedure, statute of limitations, real estate appraisers, legal complaints, appraisal board

Transcript Highlights:

• And ask that the bill limit the prioritization to large loads participating in the program over other
• Um, this bill aims to place reasonable and consistent limits on legal services that can be passed on
• Limited access to gainful employment is a significant barrier for people that have a criminal record.
• And you'll see where Texas is one of, 8 that has zero limitations.
• election and legislative candidates are limited at $5500 per election per donor.

Bills: HB 1951, HB 2715, HB 3092, HB 3237, HB 3278, HB 3511, HB 3592, HB 3675, HB 3778, HB 3782, HB 3826, HB 3970, HB 4016, HB 4049, HB 4341, HB 4344, HB 4406, HB 4427

Keywords: collective bargaining, public works, government contracts, labor agreements, state funding, removal from office, political subdivisions, local government, judicial proceedings, administrative judicial region, electric transmission, public convenience, landowner consent, utility regulation, energy infrastructure, energy consumption, higher education, governmental entities, sustainability, electricity reduction

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislation prohibits insurance companies from imposing time limitations on short-term and long-term
• Not all disability insurance plans sold in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have these limitations on
• Mandating that an individual disability insurance policy cover mental and nervous limitations limits
• The use of limitations for disabilities arising from mental health disorders was developed in response
• Actuarially, the cost to consumers to eliminate the choice for mental nervous limitations equates to

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services heard testimony on a wide range of insurance-related bills. Topics included public adjusters (H. 1100/S. 785), electronic cancellation notices (H. 1123/S. 701), insurance rebates and loss-mitigation devices (H. 1233), flood hazard determinations (H. 1087 and related flood bills), organ donor insurance protections (H. 1248/S. 727), mental health parity in disability policies (S. 780), motor vehicle service contracts (H. 1139/S. 812), modernization of business-to-business insurance transactions (H. 1105), and a bill changing the GIC withdrawal notice deadline (H. 1150). Committee chairs set a three-minute testimony limit and heard from legislators, industry representatives, advocates, and affected consumers. Testimony on public adjusters was sharply divided. Insurance agents and property-casualty industry representatives argued that bills barring insurers from prohibiting public adjusters would interfere with policy terms, while public adjusters and several consumers described cases where adjusters helped secure substantially higher settlements and said some surplus lines policies already contain anti-public-adjuster endorsements. On electronic notices, the insurance industry supported consumer opt-in email communications, while agents warned that email-only cancellation notices could cause consumers to miss cancellations. On rebates/loss mitigation, insurers supported allowing risk-mitigation devices outside the policy to encourage innovation, while agents opposed the bill as an improper inducement. Flood-related bills drew opposition from insurers who said flood determinations are complex and federally governed. The committee also heard strong support for organ donor protections from a kidney transplant recipient and the American Kidney Fund, who said the bill would prevent insurance discrimination against living donors and could encourage more donations. On disability parity, a disability insurance specialist opposed S. 780, arguing that mental health limitations are a consumer choice that helps keep coverage affordable, while the bill’s sponsor said it would prevent unequal limits on behavioral health claims. The committee also heard support for H. 1139/S. 812 from the service contract industry, and support for H. 1105 from APCIA as a modernization measure for specialty commercial lines. No votes were taken; after testimony concluded, the chairs closed the hearing.