Video & Transcript Research : 'speed control'
Page 87 of 500
HI
Hawaii 2025 Regular Session
CPN, CPN DEFER Public Hearings 01-31-2025
Transcript Highlights:
- is to have an insurer manage whatever entities resulted from this legislative session in terms of speed
- is to have an insurer manage whatever entities resulted from this legislative session in terms of speed
- shortages factors outside of our control shortages factors outside of our control yet<00:58:00.599
- that's required to facilitate the process to stand up solutions to address this market problem at speed
- address this Market problem at speed address this Market problem at speed because because because
Summary:
The committee opened by outlining hearing procedures, including a two-minute limit for live testimony, a request not to repeat written testimony, and a reminder about decorum. The first bill heard was SB 697, which would create a nonrefundable individual income tax credit for expenses to retrofit residences with wind-resistive devices. The Insurance Division said it supported the concept but noted it may need an appropriation or outside expertise to develop certification standards, while the Department of Taxation said the bill should retain a third-party certification requirement if the Insurance Division cannot administer the credit. The Hawaii Insurers Council supported the bill, and the Tax Foundation suggested a subsidy-style program would be more efficient than a tax credit and criticized the bill’s 100% credit structure. A testifier in support argued the measure would help homeowners fortify houses against hurricanes and reduce shelter demand; written testimony from several others, including HIEMA, was noted as supportive.
The committee then moved through SB 76, which would require the Hawaii Property Insurance Association to provide commercial property coverage after two private-market denials, and SB 83, which would require insurers to give advance written premium-change notices and explanations to common-interest community policyholders and the insurance commissioner, along with a report on premium increases. For SB 76, the State Insurance Division stood on its written comments, and testimony in support came from Michael Honda, the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, and Jessica Herzog. SB 83 drew more extensive discussion: the Insurance Division supported the need for better transparency, while the Hawaii Insurers Council opposed the bill, arguing that agents—not insurers—typically communicate with AOAO boards and that the measure could worsen an already difficult market. Insurance Division staff acknowledged widespread complaints from condo associations about lack of transparency and said the division had received many calls about premium increases and nonrenewals.
The discussion on SB 83 expanded into broader concerns about condo insurance, nonrenewals, surplus lines, and the difficulty of getting timely explanations for large premium increases. Committee members and testifiers described older buildings struggling to fund repairs and upgrades while facing steep insurance costs, and some urged the committee to craft baseline statutory protections for unit owners. The Insurance Division said surplus lines serve a critical gap-filling role and warned against regulating that market in a way that could slow access to coverage. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.
MN
NM
New Mexico 2025 Regular Session
IC - Science, Technology and Telecommunications Sep 23rd, 2025
Science, Technology & Telecommunications Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- There are, yes, 800 control families under NIST 853, and within those control families, there are two
- The control may be that you're going to need an antivirus program.
- So there are a lot of controls. You only share the data.
- Moving on to the next page, who controls a virtual power plant?
- So, there's a lot of discussion about how this is controlled.
HI
Bills:
HB2315, SB2471, HB306, HB1692, HB1842, HB2171, HB2207, HB2343, HB2296, HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, HCR200, HCR144, HCR33, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR206, HCR166, HCR31, HCR85, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR137, HCR179, HCR32
Keywords:
vacation payout, down payment assistance, state employee benefits, housing crisis, homeownership, Department of Health, SB2471, Hawaii, corporate powers, artificial persons, business entities, election spending, political spending, campaign finance, ballot measure, ballot issue, electioneering, corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC
HI
Bills:
HB2315, SB2471, HB306, HB1692, HB1842, HB2171, HB2207, HB2343, HB2296, HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, HCR200, HCR144, HCR33, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR206, HCR166, HCR31, HCR85, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR137, HCR179, HCR32
Keywords:
vacation payout, down payment assistance, state employee benefits, housing crisis, homeownership, Department of Health, SB2471, Hawaii, corporate powers, artificial persons, business entities, election spending, political spending, campaign finance, ballot measure, ballot issue, electioneering, corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC
HI
Bills:
HB2315, SB2471, HB306, HB1692, HB1842, HB2171, HB2207, HB2343, HB2296, HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, HCR200, HCR144, HCR33, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR206, HCR166, HCR31, HCR85, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR137, HCR179, HCR32
Keywords:
vacation payout, down payment assistance, state employee benefits, housing crisis, homeownership, Department of Health, SB2471, Hawaii, corporate powers, artificial persons, business entities, election spending, political spending, campaign finance, ballot measure, ballot issue, electioneering, corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC
HI
Bills:
HB2315, SB2471, HB306, HB1692, HB1842, HB2171, HB2207, HB2343, HB2296, HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, HCR200, HCR144, HCR33, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR206, HCR166, HCR31, HCR85, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR137, HCR179, HCR32
Keywords:
vacation payout, down payment assistance, state employee benefits, housing crisis, homeownership, Department of Health, SB2471, Hawaii, corporate powers, artificial persons, business entities, election spending, political spending, campaign finance, ballot measure, ballot issue, electioneering, corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC
HI
Bills:
HB2315, SB2471, HB306, HB1692, HB1842, HB2171, HB2207, HB2343, HB2296, HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, HCR200, HCR144, HCR33, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR206, HCR166, HCR31, HCR85, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR137, HCR179, HCR32
Keywords:
vacation payout, down payment assistance, state employee benefits, housing crisis, homeownership, Department of Health, SB2471, Hawaii, corporate powers, artificial persons, business entities, election spending, political spending, campaign finance, ballot measure, ballot issue, electioneering, corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC
HI
Bills:
HB2315, SB2471, HB306, HB1692, HB1842, HB2171, HB2207, HB2343, HB2296, HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, HCR200, HCR144, HCR33, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR206, HCR166, HCR31, HCR85, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR137, HCR179, HCR32
Keywords:
vacation payout, down payment assistance, state employee benefits, housing crisis, homeownership, Department of Health, SB2471, Hawaii, corporate powers, artificial persons, business entities, election spending, political spending, campaign finance, ballot measure, ballot issue, electioneering, corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC
HI
Bills:
HB2315, SB2471, HB306, HB1692, HB1842, HB2171, HB2207, HB2343, HB2296, HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, HCR200, HCR144, HCR33, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR206, HCR166, HCR31, HCR85, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR137, HCR179, HCR32
Keywords:
vacation payout, down payment assistance, state employee benefits, housing crisis, homeownership, Department of Health, SB2471, Hawaii, corporate powers, artificial persons, business entities, election spending, political spending, campaign finance, ballot measure, ballot issue, electioneering, corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC
HI
Bills:
HB2315, SB2471, HB306, HB1692, HB1842, HB2171, HB2207, HB2343, HB2296, HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, HCR200, HCR144, HCR33, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR206, HCR166, HCR31, HCR85, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR137, HCR179, HCR32
Keywords:
vacation payout, down payment assistance, state employee benefits, housing crisis, homeownership, Department of Health, SB2471, Hawaii, corporate powers, artificial persons, business entities, election spending, political spending, campaign finance, ballot measure, ballot issue, electioneering, corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC
HI
Bills:
HB2315, SB2471, HB306, HB1692, HB1842, HB2171, HB2207, HB2343, HB2296, HB389, HB469, HB1510, HB1573, HB1705, HB1858, HB1875, HB1946, HB1961, HB1962, HB2001, HB2093, HB2096, HB2097, HCR200, HCR144, HCR33, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR206, HCR166, HCR31, HCR85, HCR103, HCR117, HCR180, HCR112, HCR18, HCR105, HCR173, HCR137, HCR179, HCR32
Keywords:
vacation payout, down payment assistance, state employee benefits, housing crisis, homeownership, Department of Health, SB2471, Hawaii, corporate powers, artificial persons, business entities, election spending, political spending, campaign finance, ballot measure, ballot issue, electioneering, corporations, nonprofit corporations, LLC
WY
Transcript Highlights:
- <00:06:54.000>
determine we do is we let local control determine we do is we let local control - The community wants to have local<00:26:11.120>
control. - This is our idea, you local control.
- like turning a battleship at full speed. like turning a battleship at full speed.
- That is a legislative control.
TX
Texas 89th Regular
Appropriations - S/C on Articles I, IV, & V Feb 26th, 2025
Appropriations - S/C on Articles I, IV, & V
Transcript Highlights:
- The Paso County Commissioner's Court recently had a resolution regarding the high speed chases that are
- It's a controlled deflation of the. tires.
- And we'll need a medical, we'll need a control center, we'll need a gymnasium.
- Rather it funds more violence, more deadly high-speed chases, and militarily. of border communities.
- First of all, temperature control.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- The LBO looked at the annual report from the Gambling Control Board.
- the Minnesota Department of Revenue and also conducted an interview with folks from the Gambling Control
- interview with folks from the gambling interview with folks from the gambling and<00:14:50.240>
control - And so overall the and control board.
- with higher wind speeds and viable site<00:58:30.240>
locations.
US
US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session
US House Floor Proceedings (Friday, May 15, 2026)
US Federal House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- Perry, and a member opposed each will control five minutes.
- and a member opposed each will control and a member opposed each will control five<00:21:30.559>
- Stwie, and a member opposed each will control five minutes.
- Each will control five member opposed.
- You can speed that is unbelievably fast.
ND
North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Budget Section Commerce and Legal Service Division Jun 24th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- And what we are doing now is we are really getting up to speed and trying to get those as up to date
- Next up is the Medical Fraud Control Unit, otherwise known as MFUCU. Be careful how you say that.
- So she's right out of central casting for a Medicaid fraud control unit director.
- And with that, I will turn it over to her to talk about the Medicaid fraud control unit. Good.
- The Internet speed is faster.
Summary:
The committee met to review the Attorney General’s budget and related agency operations, beginning with Legislative Council staff walking members through compliance reports and a blue-sheet base budget document. Staff highlighted current-biennium items such as FTE changes, one-time appropriations, litigation funding, opioid settlement receipts, continuing appropriations, and major special and federal funds. Members asked for clarification on items including the Missing Indigenous People Grant Fund, the Internet Crimes Investigation Fund, and the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit grant funding.
Assistant Attorney General Clare Ness then gave an overview of the office’s structure, staffing, and budget pressures. She emphasized the office’s broad statutory duties, the value of its legal services to state and local government, and concerns about attorney pay lagging behind other agencies. Members discussed whether attorney compensation should be benchmarked more consistently across state government and whether some legal work could be consolidated within the AG’s office. Ness also addressed questions about AG opinion turnaround times, boards-and-commissions training, the new-and-vacant FTE pool, operating expense cuts, office leases, and the state’s criminal justice information systems.
The crime lab presentation drew significant attention. Director Jennifer Penner described severe space, safety, and infrastructure problems at the current lab, including cramped work areas, glycol leaks, outdated fire and burglar alarms, air-handling limits, and equipment failures that have delayed toxicology work. She said the 2024 study projected a much larger facility would be needed and that the preferred location would be near the current health department site, but in a new building. Members asked about possible evidence risks, backlog status, and whether the proposed building would solve the current problems; Penner said it would and noted backlogs have improved overall, though some delays remain.
The committee also heard from the new Medicaid Fraud Control Unit director, who described the unit’s civil and criminal work, federal-state funding split, and examples of fraud such as billing for services not provided or upcoding. The gaming division reported continued growth in charitable gaming and e-tabs, with members expressing concern about large trust-account balances, site competition, and possible misuse of proceeds. Finally, BCI outlined its caseload, cybercrime work, missing Indigenous persons task force, and the surge in CSAM cyber tips; members asked about AI-generated CSAM, and the AG’s office noted that last session’s law increased penalties and expressly allowed AI-generated CSAM to be prosecuted like other CSAM. No formal votes or actions were taken beyond approval of the minutes.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Local Government Committee Jun 17th, 2026
Local Government
Transcript Highlights:
- Really, what this bill is about is making sure that there's local control.
- Yes, and Senator, local control... ...come up with this very creative and beneficial program.
- Yes, and Senator, local control will still be sustained.
- Requiring these remote inspections will speed up the process for homeowners and building departments,
- And there's, you know, local control still rules the day.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
- None of us are, it's controlled down there. There it is. Okay, there we go. There we go.
- , making sure that everyone had access to the internet and a laptop in one-to-one recovery or high-speed
- I think there's some inherent tension between local control and flexibility and the public desire to
- the country and there's certainly evidence that suggests some of that is the change to the local control
- We have got to get better at this and then the balance between like I said at local control and state
FL
Florida 2025 Regular Session
January 15, 2025 - 01:00 PM
Transcript Highlights:
- I'm a former air traffic controller and small business owner. Thank you, Mr.
- Something that went along with just this idea of communities being able to sort of control their own
- So it isn't just about government authority or government control.
- We control everything on a job site from people entering the job site to their breaks as it relates to
- Control a lot of what happens there. We had attendance rights bills.
Summary:
The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee held its first meeting of the 2025 session and focused on an overview of county and municipal home rule powers and state preemption. After roll call and member introductions, Chair Alex Rizzo and Vice Chair Griff Griffiths explained the constitutional and statutory basis for local self-government, the distinction between charter and non-charter counties, and how express and implied preemption limit local authority. Griffiths emphasized that home rule gives local governments broad power to address community needs, but the Legislature can override that authority through clear preemption, with courts ultimately deciding disputes. Representatives Holcomb and LaMarca added that local issues should generally be addressed locally first, but statewide standards can be appropriate when uniformity is needed or local action is ineffective.
The committee then heard from a panel representing counties, cities, business, and construction interests: Ginger Delegal of the Florida Association of Counties, Carolyn Johnson of the Florida Chamber of Commerce, Rebecca O'Hara of the Florida League of Cities, and Carol Bowen of Associated Builders and Contractors of Florida. Delegal and O'Hara argued that home rule is rooted in local autonomy, policy experimentation, and accountability to voters, and warned against broad or “vacuum” preemptions that remove local authority without replacing it with state regulation. Johnson and Bowen supported preemption when local rules create a patchwork that hurts statewide competitiveness, raises costs, or complicates business operations, citing examples such as labor rules, heat safety, permitting, and procurement preferences. The panel also discussed the 2023 local ordinances law, which requires business impact estimates and provides attorney’s fees in certain challenges, as a mechanism to resolve disputes locally before resorting to preemption.
Members questioned the panel about the 2024 heat-safety preemption and how to protect workers in the absence of local ordinances. Business representatives said existing OSHA duties and industry best practices already require employers to provide safe conditions, while local governments and the state should avoid inconsistent standards across jurisdictions. Another discussion centered on construction permitting, licensing, and local boards that may slow projects and increase costs; Bowen suggested eliminating redundant local fees and barriers while preserving statewide licensing and enforcement against bad actors. No votes were taken, and the meeting remained informational, with the chair inviting continued discussion on when preemption is appropriate versus when local governments should retain authority.