Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:15:11.840><c> their</c><01:15:12.000><c> care</c> patients and patients can get their care patients
• They've advocated for their patients to ensure that their patients receive the appropriate care.
• It protects patient a protocol.
• </c> patients and health systems. patients and health systems.
• . patients. patients.

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It might limit a child's intake of the recommended foods.
• /c><03:52:23.399><c> of</c><03:52:23.520><c> their</c><03:52:23.680><c> food</c><03:52:24.199><c> intake
• </c><03:52:25.199><c> in</c><03:52:25.399><c> fact</c> the bulk of their food intake in fact the bulk
• of their food intake in fact last<03:52:25.880><c> year</c><03:52:26.040><c> in</c><03:52:26.199><c>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee took up HB 651, a school-funding bill that would raise the base cost of an adequate education and increase differentiated aid for students in poverty, English language learners, and special education. The chair opened with housekeeping notices about parking and eating in committee spaces, and noted a revised fiscal note would be distributed. Representative David Luneau presented the bill as part of a broader package of public school funding measures, explaining that HB 651 builds on HB 550 and is intended to respond to court rulings and the ongoing school-funding litigation by adjusting both the base adequacy amount and equity-based funding factors. Luneau said the bill would raise the state’s adequacy grant from about $4,100 to $7,351 per student and increase differentiated aid, while also updating statutory language so future recalculations include the court-identified resource elements. He argued the measure is about fairness and shifting more of the burden from local property taxpayers to the state, not about increasing overall education spending. He reviewed fiscal-note figures indicating the bill would add roughly $576 million to the state share of school funding, bringing the total state share to about $1.65 billion, and said the note also mentions possible effects on charter schools and vouchers. Committee members asked about the evidence supporting higher costs for low-income and English learner students, how long ESL funding should continue, why free-and-reduced-lunch aid remains higher than special education aid, whether the formula is based on enrollment or average daily membership, and whether the bill is truly equitable across districts of different sizes and needs. Luneau and later witness Zach Shen of the New Hampshire School Funding Fairness Project said the bill is supported by research and court findings, that the current formula relies heavily on local property taxes, and that shifting more funding to the state would reduce property-tax pressure and help address disparities among districts. Shen also cited broad public support for the related HB 550 testimony and said HB 651 is intended as a step toward a more equitable funding system. No vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 1973 ensures patients get timely care from providers, AB 1973 ensures patients get timely care from
• Patients are often required to pay out of pocket.
• Most of my patients will need lifelong therapy until a cure is found, and some patients are at high risk
• That's how we do quality care for patients.
• They're critical for this patient population.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard a long agenda of health-related bills, with most items presented for later vote once quorum was reached. Early in the hearing, the committee adopted a consent calendar of multiple bills with motions for due pass to Appropriations, and it noted that AB 2029 had been pulled from the agenda. The committee also took up AB 1973, a bill by Aguiar-Curry to expand who may provide procedural abortion care. Supporters, including physicians and certified nurse midwives, argued the bill would align law with current training and improve access, while opponents said later-term abortion procedures require physician-level surgical training and raised safety concerns. The author emphasized hands-on training, consultation, and transfer protocols, and the bill was held pending quorum with a motion and second recorded. The committee then heard AB 1558 by Arambula, which would adopt the Uniform Emergency Volunteer Health Practitioners Act to speed the use of out-of-state licensed volunteers during declared disasters. Supporters from the Uniform Law Commission and the Red Cross said the bill would reduce delays and clarify legal authority for volunteer health workers; there was no opposition testimony. AB 2282 by Alanis, a temporary rural emergency stabilization center for Patterson while a permanent hospital is built, drew support from local emergency responders and a late opposition from the California chapter of ACEP. The chair praised the bill as a creative local solution and agreed to coauthor it; a motion and second were recorded, with the vote to occur later. Several public health access bills followed. AB 1843 by El-Hawari would limit prior authorization and align hepatitis C treatment coverage with medical guidelines; supporters said it would remove barriers to a curable disease, while health plans opposed it as a mandate, citing premium impacts and the recent SB 306 prior-authorization process. AB 2247 by El-Hawari would create the THRIVE program for mental health services for youth affected by gun violence; Youth Alive and other supporters described trauma-informed, community-based care, and the chair and another member asked to be added as coauthors. AB 2138 by Krell would expand access to certified peer support specialists in enhanced care management and remove automatic disqualifications based solely on criminal history; supporters said peers are essential to engagement and recovery, and the bill was held with a motion and second. Later, AB 1682 by Hart would require coverage of scalp cooling for chemotherapy patients, with emotional testimony from cancer survivors and clinicians; insurers opposed it as another mandate, but the author stressed the modest per-member cost and the bill was moved with a motion and second. AB 1879 by Dixon would standardize data reporting for alcohol and drug treatment facilities, including private providers, to improve statewide information on outcomes and access; the bill drew broad support from recovery organizations and the prior opposition was withdrawn after amendments. AB 1906 by Aguiar-Curry would require coverage of at-home cervical cancer screening kits without cost sharing; supporters cited improved access for rural and working Californians, insurers opposed it on affordability grounds, and the bill passed on a recorded roll call after quorum was established. Finally, AB 1556 by Haney would clarify and support drug-free recovery housing and return-to-use policies; supporters said it would expand sober housing options, while opponents warned it could allow evictions after relapse and conflict with Housing First principles. The hearing ended with the bill still under discussion and opposition-unless-amended concerns noted.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's about 25,000 patients per week.
• We called our patients to find out; we have about 25,000 undocumented patients.
• Now that patient has...
• Again, we called thousands of patients, and we called hundreds of patients.
• half of the patients said yes.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s Medi-Cal program and on community health effects from recent immigration enforcement actions. Committee leaders said H.R. 1 would sharply reduce federal funding, increase administrative burdens, and worsen access to care, especially for Medi-Cal enrollees, immigrant families, rural communities, and reproductive health patients. The second half of the hearing examined how ICE raids and related federal actions are creating fear, reducing clinic and emergency department use, and disrupting children’s access to schools and early childhood education. Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Bass outlined the main H.R. 1 provisions affecting Medi-Cal: work requirements, semiannual eligibility redeterminations, shorter retroactive coverage, new cost-sharing, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, reduced federal support for emergency and lawful immigrant coverage, and a one-year ban on Medicaid funding for prohibited abortion providers. She estimated millions could lose coverage, with tens of billions of dollars in federal funding at risk. Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California warned the defunding provision could force clinic closures, service reductions, and loss of access to family planning, STI testing, and cancer screenings. The California Hospital Association said the financing changes could cut hospital revenue by tens of billions over 10 years and threaten access, especially for rural and safety-net hospitals. The Western Center on Law and Poverty argued the law would increase churn, paperwork, and uninsured rates, disproportionately harming working adults and people experiencing homelessness. Committee members asked about implementation timelines, notification systems, administrative costs, the effect on immigrant eligibility, and whether California could delay or mitigate some provisions. Bass said the state was still assessing federal guidance, planning county and provider outreach, and exploring a possible delay for work requirements and a transition period for provider-tax changes. Members also discussed how state budget actions may need to be revisited in light of H.R. 1, and how California might preserve access through state-only funding or other policy changes. In the second panel, CHIRLA, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, and the Children’s Partnership described the health consequences of immigration enforcement. Speakers said raids and data-sharing fears are causing anxiety, trauma, and avoidance of care, with Los Angeles County reporting declines in emergency, urgent care, and clinic visits after enforcement actions. The Children’s Partnership said school and early childhood absences are rising in some communities and that enforcement is undermining children’s emotional well-being and access to education. Members asked for more data and discussed possible state protections, telehealth, mobile care, and legal and policy responses to reduce fear and preserve access to health and education services.

Transcript Highlights:

• office, not the patient.
• I've worked with patients suffering from severe infections, patients requiring sedation, and patients
• cost to patients.
• So on behalf of my patients, on behalf of their families, for the sake of my patients.
• We don't, and we get these patients. Correct. To take care of these patients, to admit them.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Health heard a series of bills focused on access to care, insurance coverage, and public health. AB 387 on youth sports AED access drew support from the author and safety advocates, but opposition from school, park, city, and county groups over liability, cost, and access concerns. The author said he would continue working on amendments to shift the bill toward requiring access to existing AEDs rather than mandating facility procurement. Committee members emphasized the life-saving purpose of the bill while also raising affordability and access concerns for youth sports programs. The committee also heard AB 1682, which would require health plans and insurers to cover FDA-cleared scalp cooling devices for chemotherapy patients. Supporters, including breast cancer survivors and health groups, described the emotional and quality-of-life benefits of preventing hair loss and said cost is the main barrier to access. There was no formal opposition, though one senator raised concerns about whether the mandate could exceed essential health benefits. The chair and members expressed support for the bill’s goals and said it would be taken up when quorum was established. AB 2093, a follow-up to the 988 crisis line law, sought to clarify statewide leadership, improve coordination among 988, 911, and mobile crisis teams, and create a more sustainable funding structure. Behavioral health organizations and crisis center representatives supported the bill, saying implementation challenges and demand growth require statutory fixes. Committee members generally supported the concept but noted the bill was a gut-and-amend and that additional work was needed with county and behavioral health stakeholders. The committee then heard AB 1843 on hepatitis C treatment, AB 1629 on dental assignment of benefits, AB 2540 on community college access to medication abortion services, and AB 1929 on disclosure of health plan investments. AB 1843 had broad support from medical and public health groups but opposition from health plans, which argued it conflicted with the prior-authorization framework in SB 306 and could raise drug costs. AB 1629 was supported by dental and patient advocates but opposed by dental plans and insurers over concerns about network participation and out-of-pocket costs. AB 2540 drew strong support from reproductive health advocates and student representatives, while community college health services and some others opposed or were neutral pending amendments; the author said the bill was about equity and accepted amendments to reduce burdens. AB 1929 was backed by labor and immigrant rights groups as a transparency measure, but opposed by health plans and insurers who said Covered California was not the right entity to administer the disclosures and that the information was already publicly available. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly weighed public access and transparency against cost, administrative burden, and implementation concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I would argue that patient care, good patient care, was truly the end product.
• </c><00:40:40.880><c> A</c> a patient wearing a MAGA hat. A a patient wearing a MAGA hat.
• </c> patients receiving the care they need. patients receiving the care they need.
• </c> their patients interests and well-being. their patients interests and well-being.
• </c> that were written for patients. that were written for patients.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Health Services met with a quorum and first moved through administrative regulations without comment. The committee then heard Senate Bill 56, sponsored by Senator Gerald Neal, which would require Medicaid and its managed care entities to treat non-opioid pain medications on equal footing with opioid analgesics by prohibiting more restrictive coverage controls, prior authorization, or step therapy for non-opioids. Neal argued the bill would improve access to safer pain treatment options and reduce the risk of opioid use disorder, and Billy O'Brien of Young People in Recovery testified in support, describing personal experiences where non-opioid options were difficult to obtain despite a desire to avoid opioids. After discussion, the bill received a motion and second and passed the committee on a 10-0 vote. The committee then took up Senate Bill 72, sponsored by Senator Don Douglas and presented with Greg Chaffin of Alliance Defending Freedom. Douglas described the bill as a provider recruitment and retention measure intended to protect health care workers from being compelled to act against their conscience and to address workforce shortages and pressure in health care settings. He said the bill would protect individual beliefs while maintaining professionalism. A large number of witnesses then testified, and the chair limited public comments to two minutes each because of the number of speakers and the controversy surrounding the bill. Most public testimony opposed SB 72. Speakers including representatives of the Kentucky Council of Churches, a psychologist, an ordained minister and nurse, a nurse practitioner, and an ACLU policy strategist argued the bill was overly broad, could allow refusals of care by a wide range of health care workers, and could delay or deny treatment, especially for vulnerable patients and in rural or emergency settings. Several cited concerns about discrimination, patient safety, and the lack of adequate protections for patients. One witness recounted the death of an 18-year-old pregnant patient as an example of the harm that can result from delayed care. The transcript ends during additional testimony on SB 72, before any committee vote or final action on that bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> patients in New Hampshire. patients in New Hampshire.
• </c> for New Hampshire patients. for New Hampshire patients.
• </c> medical program for very sick patients. medical program for very sick patients.
• So several patients in that patient.
• c> their</c><01:37:50.159><c> designated</c> patients patients and their designated patients patients

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , one-to-ones with patients in seclusion and restraint.
• So we've... ...one-to-ones with patients in seclusion and restraint.
• And again, like I said, when you are releasing patients faster, there is a likelihood that patients are
• And for patients that... ...have two of them on our Salem campus.
• Patients will have adverse events, and we will absolutely do our best.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The joint Senate and House Behavioral Health committee met for informational presentations on the Oregon State Hospital and civil commitment, followed by a planned tour of the hospital. Oregon Health Authority and Oregon State Hospital leaders reported that Sean Murphy will become the next permanent superintendent on July 13, with Sarah Castle to follow as permanent chief nursing officer on July 20. They described recent leadership turnover, a major organizational restructure, and efforts to build a culture of safety, transparency, and accountability. Officials said the hospital regained Joint Commission accreditation and CMS compliance, and they highlighted daily safety huddles, incident review processes, stronger escalation procedures, and improved management of seclusion and restraint. Committee members pressed hospital leaders on past prolonged seclusion practices, falls, staffing, and the need for better public reporting; OHA said it is building a public dashboard of key safety and workforce metrics. The committee then heard a civil commitment overview from the Oregon Judicial Department. The presenter explained that civil commitment is a separate legal process from criminal cases, usually beginning with a hospital hold, investigation, court review, appointed counsel, and a hearing within five days. She summarized changes made in House Bill 2005, including revised standards for danger to self, danger to others, and basic-needs commitments, plus a second 14-day diversion option. She cautioned that the new law has only been in effect since January and that it is too early to draw firm conclusions from the data, though there has been a recent uptick in commitments and a decrease in diversions. Testimony from NAMI Oregon and a forensic psychiatrist emphasized that Oregon still relies too heavily on jails and state hospitals because community services, housing, and outpatient supports are insufficient. They argued that the state needs more less-restrictive alternatives, including better use of assisted outpatient treatment or outpatient civil commitment, and more supported housing so people do not cycle between homelessness, incarceration, and hospitalization. A family member described a relative remaining psychotic in jail for more than 120 days before ending up back at the state hospital, urging faster intervention and better collaboration among courts, counties, hospitals, and state agencies. Committee members and witnesses also discussed workforce shortages, the expansion of secure residential treatment beds, and the need for broader system reforms beyond the hospital itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• , along with about 170 ALS patients.
• , along with about 170 ALS patients.
• We just want to say thank you for making this real as a patient and patient advocate.
• of our patients like family.
• It simply expands patient choice.

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2433, which would require insurers offering Medicare supplement policies to also offer them to people under 65 who qualify for Medicare because of ALS or end-stage renal disease, with enrollment periods and premium protections. Supporters, including patient advocates and an ALS patient, said the bill would improve access to needed coverage and transplant-related care and could have only a small premium impact. Opponents, including Blue Cross Blue Shield/AHIP, argued it would shift significant costs onto older seniors and shrink the Medigap risk pool. The bill was ultimately given a do-pass recommendation on a 12-0 vote. House Bill 2593 would appropriate $1.5 million to the University of Arizona for the Arizona Perinatal Psychiatry Access Line. The sponsor and physicians testified that the line helps providers quickly treat pregnant and postpartum patients with depression, psychosis, OCD, and suicide risk, and also supports pediatric mental health care. Supporters said it improves outcomes and reduces emergency and referral costs. The committee approved the bill with a do-pass recommendation by a 10-1 vote, with one member present. The committee also passed House Concurrent Resolution 2013, proclaiming June 2026 as Celebrate Life Month, after emotional testimony from a woman born with spina bifida and another supporter. Several members objected that the state should focus on concrete supports such as health care and family leave, but the resolution still received a 7-5 do-pass recommendation. House Bill 4010, creating a licensing and regulatory board for genetic counselors, also advanced 11-1 after testimony from genetic counselors and a cancer survivor who said licensure would protect patients and improve access. House Bill 2196, addressing pharmacy benefit manager reimbursement and dispensing fees, passed 11-1 despite opposition from PBMs and employers who warned of higher costs; independent pharmacies argued the bill would help them cover costs and stay open. The committee then adopted a strike-everything amendment to House Bill 2182 requiring insurers and health plans to report claims denial and prior authorization data to DIFI, which would publish aggregated information and hold a later stakeholder review. Supporters said Arizona needs state-specific transparency data, while opponents called it redundant to federal CMS reporting; the amended bill passed 12-0. House Bill 2189, directing the Board of Nursing to update rules for licensed health aides and collect annual data, also passed unanimously after the board said it was already working on curriculum and implementation. The committee held House Bill 2813 and 2725, and began discussion of House Bill 2404, as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's service to patients.
• It's service to patients.
• </c><00:23:50.919><c> driving</c> region where we have patients driving region where we have patients
• </c> you guys do with your patient you guys do with your patient education<00:44:26.520><c> um</c><00
• those patients, and again, most of them are going to Maine. patients and again most of them are patients

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The work session focused on HB 54, which would allow New Hampshire’s alternative treatment centers to operate for profit. Chair David Nagel opened by identifying the main concerns: whether members agreed with the bill conceptually, whether the proposal could be shaped to avoid a gubernatorial veto, and whether it could lead to “big cannabis” taking over. He also emphasized that the bill would not change the existing oversight structure, which remained under RSA 126-X. Representative Wendy Thomas said the governor’s objections in past sessions appeared to center on the state’s preference for a state-run model and broader policy concerns, but no one present knew the current governor’s position. Several speakers argued the bill was primarily about financing and access, not expanding the number of dispensaries. Matt Simon of Granite Leaf Cannabis said the current nonprofit structure makes it difficult to raise capital, pay down debt, and open additional access points, and that the bill would be a corporate restructuring rather than a change in day-to-day regulation. Brandon Pollock of TASCAL Wellness said medical cannabis programs in most other states are for-profit, and that New Hampshire’s nonprofit requirement has left ATCs burdened with high-interest debt and higher prices that push patients to Maine, Vermont, or the street market. He said converting to for-profit status could allow conventional financing, lower prices, and help keep patients in the regulated program. Members also discussed whether for-profit ownership would invite outside corporate control. Witnesses said the bill would not open the market to new operators, would not change advertising rules, and would include restrictions on ownership transfers for a period of time; “foreign corporation” was explained as an out-of-state entity. One speaker noted that the bill is similar to earlier versions that passed both chambers with strong support but never became law. No vote was taken during the work session; the discussion was informational and aimed at addressing concerns before the bill moved forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:02:17.280><c> Patients</c> taken up by nonacute patients.
• Patients taken up by nonacute patients.
• </c> we're also seeing more acute patients. we're also seeing more acute patients.
• We all recognize that patients' medical records are really the property of the patient.
• </c> well as responding to patient messages. well as responding to patient messages.

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• By reducing the time patients spend in the examining room, coordinating care for patients with chronic
• diseases, and increasing access to care for new patients, we need to place patients ahead of paperwork
• By reducing the time patients spend in the examining room, coordinating care for patients with chronic
• diseases, and increasing access to care for new patients, we need to place patients ahead of paperwork
• The fact that 19% of doctors said a patient was hospitalized because of delays and 13% said the patient

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard several bills focused on health care access, oversight, and affordability. The first major item was SB 306 by Senator Becker, a prior authorization reform bill. Becker and supporters, including the California Medical Association and California Hospital Association, argued that prior authorization delays care, adds administrative burden, and can lead to serious patient harm. The bill was substantially amended late in the process to have DMHC and CDI identify services and drugs to exempt from prior authorization based on utilization data, with safeguards for fraud, waste, abuse, and patient safety. Health plans and insurers opposed the measure as written, saying prior authorization remains an important utilization-management tool and raising concerns about the 90% threshold, drug inclusion, and how modifications are counted. The committee also heard SB 35 by Senator Umberg, which would let cities or counties inspect unlicensed sober living homes if DHCS does not act promptly on complaints. Supporters said the bill would address weak enforcement and protect residents, while one behavioral health directors group opposed it unless amended. Members generally supported the measure, citing problems with unlicensed facilities and the need for local enforcement backup. The committee then heard SB 62, which would codify California’s updated essential health benefits benchmark if approved by the federal government. Senator Wiener said the package would add hearing aids, durable medical equipment, and infertility treatment including IVF, acknowledging that premiums could rise but arguing the benefits were worth it. Health Access California and other advocates supported the bill, while the California Family Council opposed it. The committee also took up SB 596 by Senator Menjivar, which would tighten the rules for hospitals claiming an on-call list as a defense to nurse staffing ratio penalties. Supporters, including nurses and SEIU, said hospitals have used vague or ineffective on-call practices to avoid accountability and that the bill would improve enforcement and patient safety. Hospital groups opposed it, arguing that staffing is highly dynamic, that hospitals need flexibility to manage acuity and emergencies, and that the bill could increase costs and interfere with collective bargaining arrangements. Finally, the committee heard SB 40 by Senator Wiener, the Insulin Affordability Act, which would cap insulin copays at $35 for a 30-day supply and restrict step therapy unless a plan covers at least one insulin in each drug type. Supporters, including physicians, diabetes advocates, nurses, students, and patient groups, said insulin is life-saving and too often unaffordable, forcing patients to ration or choose between medication and basic needs. There was no formal opposition testimony, though one member questioned why insulin remains so expensive. The committee also began discussion of SB 363, but the transcript cuts off before that bill’s full presentation or any action on the measures. No votes are recorded in the portion provided, and several bills were noted as consent items earlier in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:32:40.440><c> to</c> can be difficult for many patients to can be difficult for many patients
• </c> information more available to patients information more available to patients and<00:32:57.519><
• Then the patient is on that more expensive drug regimen with no patient assistance.
• Then the patient is on that more expensive drug regimen with no patient assistance.
• a patient assistant treatment a patient a patient assistant programs<01:53:21.880><c> Financial</c><

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 1973 ensures patients get timely care from providers, AB 1973 ensures patients get timely care from
• Patients are often required to pay out of pocket.
• Most of my patients will need lifelong therapy until a cure is found, and some patients are at high risk
• That's how we do quality care for patients.
• They're critical for this patient population.

Committee: House Health

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• office, not the patient.
• Today, I serve as a board-certified patient advocate, working directly with patients, families, and providers
• I've worked with patients suffering from severe infections, patients requiring sedation, and patients
• cost to patients.
• For over a decade, I've had the privilege of caring for high-risk patients, low-risk patients, and everything

Committee: Senate Health

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A qualifying patient is a person who is a patient of a health care provider who has been diagnosed with
• And this is particularly important for patients in rural communities.
• This is in the best interest of the patient as well as the nurse.
• It prevents patients from timely transfer. It is burdensome.
• Many patients being transferred between hospitals are critically ill.

Summary: The Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee held public hearings on several House bills and later took executive action on two others. The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2242, which would let the Department of Health issue immunization recommendations and tie preventive-service coverage to federal recommendations as of June 30, 2025, while preserving access to vaccines and other preventive services. Supporters, including the Governor’s office and the Insurance Commissioner, said the bill would protect access, affordability, and stable vaccine purchasing; opponents argued it politicizes vaccine policy and gives too much influence to state agencies and outside groups. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 2152, allowing terminally ill patients in hospitals, nursing homes, and hospice facilities to use medical cannabis under facility policies, with supporters emphasizing dignity, symptom relief, and safeguards, and House Bill 2088, joining the dietitian licensure compact, which supporters said would help military spouses, telehealth, and workforce shortages. House Bill 2110, on ambulance inter-facility specialty care transports, drew support from rural hospitals seeking more staffing flexibility and opposition from nurses and EMS personnel concerned about training, accountability, and patient safety. House Bill 2247, on veterinarian-client-patient relationships and telemedicine, drew support from the sponsor and some stakeholders as a workforce and access measure, but also criticism from the state veterinarian and others who said it could conflict with federal VCPR requirements and public health protections. House Bill 2340, expanding substance use disorder monitoring program eligibility to nursing assistants and stipend support, was presented as a way to help low-wage health workers stay in the workforce; there were no in-person testifiers against it. In executive session, the committee considered House Bill 2155, concerning the use of nursing titles, and House Bill 2531, aligning the ambulance transport fund quality assurance fee with federal regulations. Both bills received do-pass recommendations and were sent to the Rules Committee. For the public hearings, no final committee votes were taken on the other bills in this transcript, and testimony concluded on each measure after the committee heard from sponsors, agency officials, advocates, and opponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's worse patient care for Idahoans.
• safety and by limiting the patient workforce.
• So how does that help you care for patients?
• So how does that help you care for patients? Ms. Call.
• It is critical that that patient return to get the care to treat that condition.

Summary: The Senate Health and Welfare Committee first approved the minutes from February 25 and February 26, 2026, then took up House Bill 928, the Merit-Based Health Care Act. The bill’s sponsor said it would prohibit DEI-related considerations in Medicaid-funded health care hiring, promotion, contracting, and training, while preserving compliance with federal law and allowing certain clinical and quality-improvement activities. Committee members questioned how the bill would apply in practice, especially to hiring and patient preferences, and the sponsor said an amendment would remove certain terms to align with federal code. The committee heard extensive testimony on HB 928. Physicians and the Idaho Academy of Family Physicians opposed the bill, arguing it would restrict evidence-based training, create legal uncertainty, worsen recruitment and retention in a state already facing provider shortages, and interfere with use of social determinants of health and implicit bias training to improve patient care. Supporters, including a plastic surgeon, Idaho Family Policy Center, and the bill sponsors, argued DEI undermines merit and that taxpayer-funded health care should be based on qualifications and excellence. After debate, the committee voted to send HB 928 to the 14th order for possible amendment, with Senators Harris and Wintrow recorded as opposed. The committee then heard House Bill 916, which would create a legislative rural health transformation oversight committee to monitor federal rural health funds flowing to Idaho. The sponsor said the committee would provide legislative stewardship over the money without appropriating funds, while some senators raised concerns that the bill did not require rural representation on the committee and that appointments should reflect rural advocacy. After testimony from a supporter emphasizing oversight and taxpayer stewardship, the committee voted to hold HB 916 in committee. The meeting ended with notice of a two-hour committee meeting scheduled for the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chronic disease, sometimes undiagnosed chronic disease in these patients, knowledge of the patient, provider
• Half of stroke patients were discharged home.
• What would you do as a patient? What would I do as a patient?
• We've had less than 1% of the patients that we've supported—I think it's seven patients overall—have
• For us, the FQHCs are already seeing these patients, and they're coming in as... ...of those patients

Committee: Joint Health Care Committee

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then heard a detailed annual presentation from Dr. Thomas Arnold, chair of the Maternal Mortality Review Committee, on maternal mortality trends and review findings. He explained the committee’s structure, the de-identified review process, and the distinction between pregnancy-associated and pregnancy-related deaths. He said national maternal mortality has declined from its 2021 peak, but mental health conditions, substance use, overdose, suicide, cardiovascular disease, hemorrhage, infection, and embolism remain major causes. He emphasized that many deaths are preventable, with especially high rates among non-Hispanic Black women and in the American Indian/Alaska Native population, and noted that a large share of deaths occur after 42 days postpartum. Committee members asked about suicide, domestic abuse, pregnancy testing in unexplained deaths, and the role of home births and midwife training. Dr. Arnold said the committee is adding a caseworker, exploring post-mortem pregnancy testing in suspicious cases, and working with coroners and forensic officials; he also said home births and untrained midwifery pose safety concerns and that better public education and facility-based care are important. The committee then heard from State Fire Marshal Dr. Matt Clark on cigarette ignition propensity standards and fire prevention. He recommended updating North Dakota’s cigarette ignition legislation to the current national standard and also considering legislation requiring fast-breakaway oxygen tubing, citing fatal fires involving smoking around home oxygen. He explained that his office verifies manufacturer testing and maintains certification for cigarettes sold in the state, but does not itself conduct the testing. Members asked about implementation, cost, and whether the standards apply in tribal communities; Clark said he would follow up with cost information and additional details, and that he had not seen evidence of a major issue on tribal lands but would look further. Christine Greff of the Department of Health and Human Services presented the North Dakota Stroke System of Care report. She described the statewide network of two comprehensive stroke centers, four primary stroke centers, and 30 acute stroke-ready hospitals, along with the stroke registry and quality-improvement efforts. She reported that most strokes are ischemic, that the median stroke patient age is 71.5, and that common risk factors include hypertension, dyslipidemia, obesity, and diabetes. She highlighted improvements in door-to-CT, thrombolytic treatment times, dysphagia screening, EMS pre-notification, and interfacility transfer performance, and said new priorities include hemorrhagic stroke quality measures and standardized EMS stroke screening tools. Members asked about the VA hospital’s participation, and Greff said she would pursue outreach. After a break, the committee heard testimony from Taha Khan of Vertex Pharmaceuticals as part of the prior authorization study, focused on non-opioid pain treatment. He argued that prior authorization can delay access to acute pain treatment and may push patients toward opioids, especially in the critical 24- to 72-hour post-discharge window. He cited data showing that even short opioid exposure can increase the risk of long-term use and said prior authorization is often a barrier for physicians and patients. Khan recommended open access with a quantity limit rather than prior authorization, suggesting a 14-day limit supported by the product’s data and an episode-of-care approach. Members asked about dental use, payer discussions, and cost; he said the product’s wholesale acquisition cost is about $16.10 per tablet, with patient assistance available, and that he would follow up on payer and comparison-cost questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• For the GEI patient journey, again, GEI stands for guilty except insanity.
• , one-to-ones with patients in seclusion and restraint.
• So we've... ...one-to-ones with patients in seclusion and restraint.
• And again, like I said, when you are releasing patients faster, there is a likelihood that patients are
• Patients will have adverse events, and we will absolutely do our best.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The joint Senate and House Behavioral Health committees held an informational meeting focused first on the Oregon State Hospital (OSH). OHA Director Sajal Hathi introduced the hospital’s incoming permanent superintendent, Sean Murphy, and praised interim superintendent Jim Deagle for stabilizing operations, restoring CMS compliance, and helping drive a culture change centered on safety, accountability, and transparency. Deagle and Chief Medical Officer Dr. Amit Bavon described OSH’s role as the state’s highest-level forensic psychiatric hospital, the patient populations it serves, its partnerships with courts, counties, jails, hospitals, and advocates, and recent leadership changes across the hospital. They also reported improved accreditation and regulatory status, including Joint Commission accreditation and CMS compliance, and said the hospital is now using daily safety huddles, incident review meetings, stronger escalation procedures, and revised seclusion/restraint practices to reduce risk and improve oversight. Members pressed hospital leaders on past seclusion practices, asking how prolonged seclusions could have occurred under federal standards. Leaders said they could not explain past decisions but emphasized that current leadership has changed processes, training, reporting, and oversight so that seclusion and restraint are reviewed in real time and cannot be normalized. Questions also covered staffing, falls, and future planning. OSH said it is generally staffed to budget, though it still has RN and mental health technician vacancies and is working on recruitment, training, and better staffing distribution. Hathi said the hospital is building a public dashboard with key performance and safety metrics, including workforce data, and described the long-term goal as a consistently safe, disciplined, high-functioning institution that responds quickly to mistakes and remains accountable to the public. The committee then shifted to an informational overview of civil commitment. Oregon Judicial Department representative Chanah Newell explained the civil commitment process, including who can initiate it, the role of community mental health providers and courts, the five-day timeline to hearing, and the standards for danger to self, danger to others, and inability to meet basic needs. She summarized changes made in House Bill 2005, including revised statutory language and new provisions allowing a second diversion period, but cautioned that the data are too early to show clear trends. Testimony from NAMI Oregon’s Chris Bonif and psychiatrist Dr. Stephanie Lopez argued that Oregon still relies too heavily on jails and state hospital commitments because the broader community system lacks enough treatment, housing, and less restrictive alternatives. They urged the legislature to focus on upstream services, supported housing, and possible outpatient commitment tools so people can receive treatment before reaching crisis. The meeting ended with acknowledgment that additional reports and follow-up discussions are expected, including on residential treatment capacity and related behavioral health system reforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• to protect our patients.
• to protect our patients.
• Two patients, exact same procedure.
• One patient, the first patient, was someone who was white, and when the procedure was done, for those
• The next patient, same procedure, same team, nothing changed except the race of the patient, the perceived

Summary: The committee heard AB 2575 on health care AI guardrails, with the author and supporters from the California Nurses Association and labor groups arguing that AI should support, not replace, clinical judgment. They said the bill would require basic disclosures about AI tools, protect workers from retaliation for overriding AI in good faith, and prevent developers or employers from shifting liability to frontline clinicians. Opponents including the California Medical Association, CalChamber, hospitals, and other health care organizations argued the bill would add costs, create uncertainty, and discourage useful AI applications. Committee members discussed bias in health care and accepted amendments narrowing the disclosure provisions; the bill was moved with a 7-1 vote and re-referred to Labor, Public Employment, and Retirement. AB 634 would ban the manufacture, sale, and distribution of products containing tianeptine, described by supporters as “gas station heroin.” The author and law enforcement supporters said the substance is dangerous, easily accessible, and can cause opioid-like addiction, while no opposition came forward. The committee also heard AB 1607 to extend the Maddy EMS Fund, which reimburses emergency providers for uncompensated care. Supporters said the fund is essential to keeping emergency departments staffed, especially amid expected coverage losses; an ACLU representative opposed the funding source because it relies on criminal and traffic fines. Members supported the need for the fund but raised concerns about the fairness and long-term stability of the revenue source, and the bill advanced on a 8-0 vote. AB 1906 would require coverage of at-home cervical cancer screening tests without cost sharing, and the author said the bill would improve early detection and reduce disparities, especially for rural and working Californians. Support came from Planned Parenthood, Health Access, and several health and labor organizations; insurers said they appreciated the amendments and were reviewing their position. The committee adopted amendments aligning the bill with clinical guidelines and passed it 6-0 to Appropriations. The committee also took up AB 2247, the Thrive Act, to create a pilot program for trauma and mental health services for youth affected by gun violence in four counties. Supporters described barriers survivors face in accessing counseling, while members questioned the narrow focus on gun violence, the choice of counties, documentation requirements, and whether the program should instead be housed in victim compensation. The bill passed 8-0 to Judiciary. Later, AB 2531 would expand California’s uncompensated care program so veterans denied abortion care through the federal VA system could receive coverage in California, and would add an abortion resources link for veterans. Supporters framed it as filling a gap created by federal restrictions; opponents argued state funds should not support abortion. Members noted the VA already provides many reproductive services but not this one, and the bill passed 7-0 to Military and Veterans Affairs. The committee also heard AB 1915, which would modernize restaurant facility rules and create a self-certification pathway for some equipment installations. Restaurant and business groups supported the bill as a way to reduce costly delays, while the Contractor State License Board opposed the self-certification provision over safety and inspection concerns. Members generally supported streamlining but echoed public safety concerns and indicated further work was needed.