Transcript Highlights:

• One is through incentives and the other is through policy work.
• Seeing none, let's go ahead and go on to incentives. Mr.
• Seeing none, let's go ahead and go on to incentives. All righty. Uh, Mr.
• Seeing none, let's go ahead and go on to incentives. All righty. Uh, Mr.
• go on to incentives. go on to incentives. >> All<00:15:41.040> righty.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When you're talking about building housing at this scale, these incentives do in fact matter.
• And so that question of opting out of some of these incentives, I do see that as a pressure point for
• We want those incentives to spur private development, but that means we collect less.
• , the tax abatement incentive, but it is also a source of revenue for their large projects.
• Let's change that and provide an incentive to do that.

Summary: The committee met to hear a panel on workforce and attainable housing, with presentations from Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Pensacola Habitat for Humanity, Wendover Housing Partners, the City of Tallahassee, and Escambia County. Speakers described how state and local tools such as SHIP, the Live Local Act, land trusts, accessory dwelling units, infill development, and public-private partnerships are being used to expand housing supply and preserve long-term affordability. Several panelists emphasized that housing demand is rising across income levels, that workforce households often need subsidy to buy or rent, and that housing location, transportation access, and proximity to jobs and services are critical. They also highlighted challenges including rising construction costs, limited land, insurance, NIMBY opposition, and the need for more flexible financing tools and employer participation. Members asked about area median income thresholds, whether current programs are reaching the households most in need, and what additional tools might help. Florida Housing said its traditional rental programs generally serve households at or below 60% AMI, while need is increasingly reaching up to 80% AMI statewide and higher in some regions; staff also provided examples of AMI levels by county. Other discussion focused on the impact of local government opt-outs, tax abatements, corporate ownership of single-family homes, insurance costs, Fortified construction standards, and whether bonuses or other income calculations can unintentionally disqualify applicants. Panelists urged more political will, more local flexibility, and additional incentives for employers and landowners to support housing near jobs. The committee also used an anonymous interactive polling exercise, and members identified partnerships, SHIP funding, local government action, cost, and insurance as key issues. In closing, the chair said the committee would continue a member-driven process and likely hold a workshop on housing-related topics. No formal votes or bills were taken up in the meeting, and the session adjourned after the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• ranking Member Nixon Representative Al Work here, Representative Alvarez here representing their incentive
• There are incentives that are available. 2 businesses.
• There's a person with a discipline that some incentives that are there.
• But as far as incentive, there is a tax incentive project. 10 does have a job development training that
• And so she would take those tax incentives and share that information with employers.

Transcript Highlights:

• They sell drugs to wholesalers who have poor incentives to compete by lowering prices, and they sell
• drugs to pharmacies who have poor incentives to lower their prices.
• They do an excellent job of trying to curb some of those perverse incentives and move PBMs to what they
• In so doing, drug companies faced diminishing incentives to compete by lowering prices.
• The problem that we have is that pharmacies, wholesalers, and drug companies have poor incentives to

Summary: The Senate Insurance Committee met on May 13, 2026, adopted the May 6 minutes, and then took up several bills dealing with pharmacy benefit managers, prescription access, behavioral health coverage, and Citizens Property Insurance. HB 938, as amended, was the main PBM reform measure. After the committee adopted a large amendment set that narrowed the bill, members heard extensive testimony in support from Mark Bloom, Justin Joseph of Capital Rx, and Kathy Ue of Pontchartrain Cancer Center, all emphasizing transparency, pass-through pricing, reverse auctions, and patient access. Supporters described savings from reverse auctions and administrative models, while the cancer center testified that PBM-owned specialty pharmacy requirements can delay cancer medications and create financial hardship. The committee reported HB 938 favorably with amendments. The committee also heard HB 1154, which prohibits prior authorization for certain generic medications prescribed by qualified physicians, with a $250 cap discussed as a safeguard against higher-cost generics. The bill was supported by representatives from Ochsner Health and the Louisiana State Medical Society and was reported favorably. HB 909, which requires commercial coverage for behavioral health crisis services, was amended to clarify the insurers covered and then reported favorably with support from the Office of Behavioral Health and several outside groups. Testimony on HB 909 focused on reducing emergency room and law enforcement burdens and expanding crisis response capacity across the state. HB 1187, dealing with excess emergency assessment funds from Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, was explained by the Insurance Commissioner as a way to transfer remaining Katrina-era assessment funds to the Fortified Roof Program. The committee reported the bill favorably. Finally, SB 511 and SB 512 were deferred and converted into a study resolution approach because there was not yet consensus on the underlying issue. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• this but just for the benefit of the committee I think there could be a broad agreement on tax incentives
• That's quite an incentive, but in addition to that a tax break, maybe eliminating sales... implementation
• 00:04:52.680> on a broad agreement on a broad agreement on uh uh uh tax<00:04:55.160> incentives
• for those that use tax incentives for those that use materials<00:04:58.560> that<00:04:58.800
• but in addition to quite an incentive but in addition to that<00:05:19.360> a<00:05:20.040>

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 4223 was presented as an appropriation to implement and jump-start the Strengthening Our Homes program enacted in 2023. Rep. Elkins said the goal is to help homeowners strengthen roofs using standards promoted by the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety, citing other states such as Alabama as examples where hardened homes performed better in major storms. He emphasized rising homeowners insurance costs, especially for affordable apartments, older condo buildings, and seniors on fixed or limited incomes, and said the grants would help people who may not have the upfront cash to make improvements. Committee members generally supported the concept, describing it as a way to reduce storm damage and lower insurance premiums. One member highlighted that the income threshold for grant eligibility could reach a large share of Minnesota homeowners and potentially harden nearly a million homes, while another noted the program’s focus on lower-income households. A Commerce Committee discussion was referenced in which an alternative approach was raised: tax incentives, including possible sales tax relief, for materials and labor used to harden homes against hail and other weather risks. Rep. Elkins responded that labor is an important part of the cost and that many potential beneficiaries are seniors with little taxable income, making a grant program more practical than a tax-based incentive. Another member agreed the upfront cost is a major barrier and said the grant design appears thoughtful. No vote was taken; the bill was laid over for further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Will remain an important incentive to incentivize investment in microgrids.
• I think in terms of aligning the incentives, you know, he mentioned performance metrics.
• And then from there, if you want to create incentives, the energy efficiency framework has an incentive
• And do you create some incentive on top of that?
• I at least am made whole and do you create some incentive on top of that?

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think, again, the incentives are there for health care organizations to want to try things with AI,
• I think, again, the incentives are there for health care organizations. market to do or not do.
• I think, again, the incentives are there for health care organizations to want to try things with AI,
• They need financial incentives to do this governance.
• So the incentive structure is not quite where it needs to be for robust governance.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Assembly Health and Privacy Committees focused on generative AI in health care, with opening remarks emphasizing both its potential to improve care and its risks around privacy, bias, liability, workforce impacts, and unequal access. Chair Bauer-Kahan and Chair Bonta framed the discussion around how California can encourage beneficial innovation while protecting patients, especially given the sensitivity of health data and the possibility that AI could worsen existing disparities if not carefully governed. The first panel featured representatives from Cedars-Sinai, Kaiser Permanente, Penguin AI, and Google, who described current uses of AI such as ambient clinical scribes, nursing documentation tools, imaging triage, maternal-fetal risk prediction, and administrative automation. Speakers said these tools can reduce clinician burden, improve patient experience, speed treatment, and in some cases improve outcomes, including a reported mortality benefit from a Kaiser predictive model and faster thrombectomy times at Cedars-Sinai. Members raised concerns about accuracy with accents and multilingual visits, whether predictive tools could reinforce bias or lead to more interventions such as C-sections, and how to ensure a human remains in the loop for important decisions. The second panel, including representatives from the California Health Care Foundation, UC Berkeley, and Stanford, focused on policy and governance challenges. Testimony highlighted examples of AI supporting homelessness outreach and community health work, but also warned that biased algorithms can encode inequities, especially when trained on data that reflect under-treatment of Black, rural, or low-income patients. Witnesses urged clearer standards for trustworthy AI, stronger monitoring and governance structures, better data access for accountability, and attention to the safety net’s limited resources. Several speakers argued that states should require health systems to have AI governance processes, clarify liability between developers and deployers, and regulate downstream uses of AI while preserving access to data for lifesaving research and oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• We strongly applaud the expansion of the teacher incentive allotment.
• We strongly applaud the expansion of the teacher incentive allotment and the additional incentives included
• We strongly applaud the expansion of the teacher incentive allotment and the teacher incentive allotment
• and the We strongly applaud the expansion of the teacher incentive allotment and the additional incentives
• Programs like the teacher incentive allotment are helping to change that.

Bills: HB2

Keywords: disaster preparedness, emergency management, flooding, mass fatality, mass casualty, fatality tracking, body recovery, autopsy, justice of the peace, medical examiner, county judge, sheriff, mayor, emergency coordinator, emergency manager license, volunteer management system, volunteer registration, criminal history check, background check, Texas Division of Emergency Management

Summary: The committee continued public testimony on House Bill 2, which would make major changes to public school funding, teacher pay, special education, early learning, school safety, and related programs. Many superintendents and education advocates supported the bill’s overall direction but urged changes, especially a larger basic allotment and more flexible funding for rural and small districts. Witnesses from Paint Creek, West Hardin, Cushing, Blooming Grove, Mildred, Buffalo, Plano, and rural school groups said the bill’s targeted raises and new requirements would not fully cover inflation, TRS/Medicare costs, transportation, insurance, or support staff salaries, and several asked the committee to restore the House version’s higher basic allotment and small-school allotment. Charter school representatives supported the facilities funding changes and said charter schools need state help because they cannot levy taxes, while also noting the funding gap with ISDs. Fine arts advocates asked the committee to restore the fine arts allotment, arguing arts improve engagement, attendance, and academic outcomes, especially in rural and at-risk communities. Early learning and special education witnesses supported parts of the bill but raised concerns about pre-K restrictions, disability-related pre-K access, and the need to preserve or clarify special education provisions and mental health oversight language. Several witnesses praised the teacher pay raise, teacher incentive allotment expansion, and teacher preparation investments, saying they would help recruit and retain educators and improve student outcomes. Others, including counselors and support staff advocates, argued the bill should also include raises for counselors, nurses, librarians, bus drivers, custodians, aides, and other non-teaching employees who keep schools running. One witness from the Texas Counseling Association opposed the substitute because it removed a counselor pay provision, warning of counselor shortages and inequities. A parent and special education advocate said the bill’s structure creates too many strings attached and asked for a larger basic allotment instead of more targeted funding. Another witness from Mental Health America urged keeping the collaborative task force on public school mental health services through 2031, and a disability rights advocate said the committee substitute appears to omit some special education items that were in the House version. The committee also briefly took up House Bill 6, a school discipline bill. After questions about automatic mandatory expulsion for vape possession and concerns about younger students, the committee adopted the substitute and voted to report HB 6 favorably to the full Senate by a 9-1 vote, with Senator Menendez voting no and Senators West and Menendez expressing reservations but supporting further discussion. After that vote, testimony on HB 2 resumed. Senators used the hearing to ask about the bill’s cost, the difference between the basic allotment and the bill’s targeted funding buckets, and whether the permanent teacher pay increase shifts pressure off districts. The bill’s supporters emphasized that it represents an historic, roughly $8 billion investment and that many of the new funding streams are intended to be permanent or to address specific district needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• New incentives are permitted.
• substitute clarifies that a health maintenance organization or health plan may provide cost-sharing incentives
• So there are different ways to share the incentives.
• shared savings cap: the substitute clarifies that enrollee eligibility to receive shared savings incentives
• Senator Hancock to explain the changes: This substitute simply clarifies that incentives may not be offered

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• New incentives permitted.
• substitute clarifies that a health maintenance organization Or health plan may provide cost sharing incentives
• So there are different ways that you can share the incentives. Shared savings cap.
• The substitute clarifies that an enrollment eligibility to receive shared savings incentives Is limited
• Members, this substitute simply clarifies that incentives may not be offered by the enrolling visit to

Transcript Highlights:

• And as a result, that... person has no incentive to save, and they really don't get the benefits that
• It allows... the patient to have an incentive to save money, it provides the insurance companies an incentive
• You definitely are creating incentives, but we're concerned that you may be creating bad incentives.
• , a cash incentive, to go get something that they may not have gotten before.
• It is essentially blocked by state law for us to tier your benefits. and give you those incentives by

Bills: SB437, SB528, SB626, SB636, SB884, SB968, SB1044, SB1608, SB2336

Keywords: healthcare, training, abuse, neglect, penalties, chemical dependency, safety, regulation, inpatient competency restoration, competency restoration, forensic mental health, mental health law, criminal competency, incompetent to stand trial, Chapter 46B, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission, state hospital, behavioral health, local mental health authority

Transcript Highlights:

• We want to provide some sort of incentive for folks who don't need their parking every day by providing
• them a financial incentive to opt out of that employee parking.
• sort<00:04:38.360> of we want to provide some sort of we want to provide some sort of incentive
• for folks who don't need their incentive for folks who don't need their parking<00:04:40.680> every
• to opt out of that financial incentive to opt out of that employee<00:04:45.280> parking<00:04

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing of the Government Operations and Transportation, Culture and the Arts committees considered three bills. SB 1092 would establish a transportation demand management program for state employees, including a parking cash-out option. Testimony was largely in support, including from state planning, energy, labor, and several individuals, while committee members raised concerns about whether the program was mandatory and whether there was a full implementation plan. The bill’s proponents said it was voluntary and intended to reduce long parking waitlists by incentivizing employees to opt out of parking. The committees ultimately recommended SB 1092 be passed with amendments, and the measure was adopted in both committees. SB 1093 would create a parking demand management program and require DAGS to transition state employees from monthly parking to daily-rate parking. Testimony included strong opposition from most individuals and several agencies, with one supporter. A committee question focused on the loss of pre-tax payroll deductions under a daily-rate system, and the Deputy Attorney General explained that the current monthly arrangement allows deductions from gross pay, which would not work the same way with daily payments. Given the opposition and concerns, the committees recommended deferral indefinitely. SB 1121 would establish a procurement preference, beginning in 2027, for construction companies with electric vehicles. Testimony included comments from DAGS, the Department of Transportation, and others, with opposition noted from DOT. Committee members questioned charging infrastructure and battery disposal for electric vehicles used in construction. After discussion, the committees concluded it was in the best interest to defer the measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's IMS's own incentives warrant scrutiny, not a free pass.
• It's IMS's own incentives warrant scrutiny, not a free pass.
• It's IMS's own incentives warrant scrutiny, not a free pass.
• It's IMS's own incentives warrant scrutiny, not a free pass.
• Uh incentive to to to deny any payment.

Bills: HCR92, HCR46, HCR172, HCR147, HCR112, HCR100, HR84, HR42, HR139, HR104, HR92

Keywords: automated external defibrillator, AED, cardiac arrest, state buildings, health education, public health, lifeguards, first responders, public safety, ocean safety, emergency response, Hawaii, workers' compensation, auditor, procurement audit, compliance, Department of Human Resources Development, transparency, accountability, medical care

Transcript Highlights:

• As in support in, in concert with, with my friend that left, um, really looking at, at the incentives
• Every time you pass a tax, it provides incentives and disincentives, and, and that's true for whatever
• So it's an incentive to earn more, to work more hours or to, to seek raises.
• in our work program, we've also included other economic development incentives.
• but 70 is, is enough incentive to drill new wells.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill addresses the issue by relocating those state-only sections into more appropriate parts of
• addresses<03:10:55.760> the<03:10:56.000> issue<03:10:56.240> by<03:10:56.479> relocating
• <03:10:57.200> those addresses the issue by relocating those addresses the issue by relocating

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to relocate that provision to subsection D in section two and section three, and clarify its intended
• and<03:38:39.520> I<03:38:39.760> want<03:38:39.840> to<03:38:40.080> relocate
• <03:38:40.640> that<03:38:40.960> provision Uh and I want to relocate that provision
• Uh and I want to relocate that provision to<03:38:42.160> subsection<03:38:42.880> D<03

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs heard testimony on HB 1875, which would expand Hawaii’s existing protections to include gender-affirming health care, clarify permitted disclosures of protected health information, and bar certain adverse actions by malpractice insurers and health carriers against providers of lawful reproductive or gender-affirming care. The Insurance Division of DCCA supported the bill with a technical amendment, suggesting language tied to actuarial analysis rather than the phrase “actuarially sound.” The Office of Information Practices also provided comments. Most testimony was strongly in support. State agencies and advocacy groups, including the Hawaii State Youth Commission, State Health Planning and Development Agency, Commission on the Status of Women, Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Public Health Institute, Stonewall Caucus, ACLU of Hawaii, PFLAG Oahu, Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates, the Healthcare Association of Hawaii, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said the bill would protect patient privacy, reduce chilling effects from out-of-state litigation, and help retain providers in a state already facing shortages. Several testifiers said gender-affirming care is medically necessary, evidence-based, and life-saving, and emphasized that Hawaii should protect its own health care decisions from outside political pressure. A few individuals testified in opposition, arguing the bill was unnecessary or that it protected providers more than opponents of the bill, but these views were not echoed by most of the testimony. The chair repeatedly reminded testifiers to keep comments brief and maintain decorum. The transcript provided does not include a final committee vote or disposition on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• When harm reduction access is restricted or altered, substance use does not stop; it relocates.
• stop,<01:50:14.400> it substance use does not stop, it substance use does not stop, it relocates
• .<01:50:15.760> Outreach<01:50:16.239> teams<01:50:16.639> typically relocates.
• Outreach teams typically relocates.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• cruel and unusual, but one actively impeding tourism and endangering the state economy by forcing relocation
• 33:59.279> economy<03:33:59.600> by<03:33:59.840> forcing<03:34:00.239> relocation
• <03:34:00.720> of state economy by forcing relocation of state economy by forcing relocation

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We also need modernization incentives, low-interest loans, grants, or matching funds for backup power
• A state-supported risk-reduction mechanism combined with modernization incentives would allow farmers
• Incentives for buyers of Fresh From Florida products like dairy, and more funding into the program for
• The Transportation Regional Incentive Program, TRIP, assists counties with funding to improve regionally
• The Transportation Regional Incentive Program Trip assists counties with funding to improve regionally

Summary: The Committee on Agriculture convened, took roll, and heard Senate Bill 58 by Senator Harrow, which would create regulation for companion animal cremation. Harrow described a case involving mishandled pet remains and said the bill would require written service descriptions, prohibit false or misleading statements, require certification with returned remains, authorize Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services rulemaking, and impose civil penalties for violations. With no questions or public opposition, the committee voted the bill favorably. The committee then heard presentations on robotics in agriculture and aquaculture. Dr. Nathan Boyd of UF/IFAS discussed the rapid growth of agricultural robotics, including AI-driven weed detection, targeted spraying, autonomous tractors, and harvesting technology, emphasizing reduced pesticide use, lower input costs, and labor-saving automation. Dr. Nicole Kirchoff of Live Advantage Bait and Adrian Johnson of the Florida Shellfish Aquaculture Association highlighted aquaculture’s economic and environmental value, Florida’s strong position in the industry, and challenges including hurricane losses, lack of insurance, land-use instability, capital access, and water quality. They urged support for working waterfronts, risk mitigation, and policies to help the sector commercialize and expand. The committee also heard from dairy producers Kevin Lusher and Jacob Larson. Lusher described his family’s dairy and artisan cheese business, noting reliance on USDA grants, rising costs, labor shortages, and regulatory burdens, and asked for more grant support, marketing for Fresh From Florida products, and permanent funding for Farmers Feeding Florida. Larson discussed the broader dairy market, declining herd sizes due to efficiency gains, high production costs in Florida, and competition from out-of-state processing, suggesting incentives for local processing and supply management. Finally, FDOT Chief Planner Wayway Schen presented on arterial and local road funding programs, including ART, ARTW, SCOP, SCRAP, CIGP, and TRIP, and said rural road needs remain significant, with more than $16 billion in unfunded or partially funded project needs. The committee adjourned after brief discussion and thanks to the presenters.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those incentives were not used.
• They were set up as a incentives set up?
• We have statutory incentive understood.
• Those incentives were not used. process. Those incentives were not used.
• I always feel good about an incentive I always feel good about an incentive that<00:32:19.440>

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:04 Economic Development Projects Funding 00:01:25 Blue Oval SK 00:05:20, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum to hear a recap of the 2021 special session legislation, Senate Bill 5, and then receive testimony from the Secretary of Economic Development on the Blue Oval SK project and related economic development issues. Staff explained that Senate Bill 5 appropriated five amounts from the budget reserve trust fund for a project tied to a minimum $2 billion investment: $350 million for forgivable loans through the Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority, $10,639,600 to pay off a Hardin County loan tied to 47 tracts of property, $20 million for Bluegrass State Skills Corporation training grants, $5 million for KCTCS training grants, and $25 million for a KCTCS on-site training center. Staff also noted there were no job-related requirements in the bill itself. The secretary said the Blue Oval SK incentive was structured as a $250 million forgivable loan rather than the state’s usual pay-as-you-go incentives, with clawback provisions tied to jobs, wages, investment, and changes in ownership or operations. He said the project had already exceeded the $2 billion investment threshold, that corporate guarantees were required from SK On and Ford, and that the agreement’s compliance period begins in December 2026 with payments starting in March 2027 and running through 2038. He said the state’s goal after the joint venture dissolution was to protect taxpayers, support affected workers, and preserve future job creation, while also ensuring the money would be repaid if performance targets are not met. Members asked about the workforce impact, the training programs, and whether the jobs targets would be revised. The secretary said the project had about 1,850 workers at the site, with both production and salaried employees affected, and described state-led job fairs, a job portal, and other rapid-response efforts to help displaced workers find new jobs or training. He said Ford had agreed to continue discussions, invest an additional $2 billion in the site for energy storage solutions, and pursue roughly 2,100 new jobs, while the state sought to keep the company accountable for the full repayment obligation if jobs are not created. One senator raised broader concerns about mega-projects displacing small businesses and creating infrastructure burdens in surrounding communities.