Transcript Highlights:

• is necessary to protect consumers, and simply removing any protection whatsoever puts them at considerable
• um is necessary to level of protection um is necessary to protect<00:59:24.039> consumers<00:
• simply removing protect consumers and simply removing any<00:59:25.599> protection<00:59:26.160
• consumers um if move in and protect consumers um if there's<01:05:09.319> some<01:05:09.640><
• protect consumers money in these protect consumers money in these transactions<01:05:20.559>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• we're protecting, how can we be sure that we have the most consumer protections that we need?
• This consumer protections that we need?
• quote, consumer protection. quote, consumer protection.
• Consumer protection section in here, but we don't need to deal with those consumer protections until
• > the consumer protection problems after the consumer protection problems after the primary<00

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, a roll call, and confirmation that a quorum was present, then moved to committee reports. The main floor debate centered on a Rules Committee report involving the referral of a sports betting bill. Senator Rasmussen and others argued the bill should go first to the State and Local Government Committee because gambling falls within that committee’s jurisdiction, while Senator Franzen, Senator Klein, and others defended the Rules Committee’s 6-2 decision to send it to Commerce, emphasizing committee discretion and past referral practice. After clarification that the vote was only on adopting the committee report, the Senate rejected the report by a vote of 22-44. The Senate then handled second readings of a slate of Senate and House bills and introduced two new Senate files: SF 4759, eliminating Cesar Chavez Day, referred to State and Local Government, and SF 4760, changing employment/occupation rules related to criminal convictions, referred to Judiciary and Public Safety. In motions and resolutions, several bills were re-referred with little or no opposition: SF 2689 was moved from State and Local Government to Judiciary and Public Safety but failed on a 30-35 vote; SF 4194 was moved from Taxes to Health and Human Services; SF 4274 was moved from Judiciary and Public Safety to Transportation; SF 4332 was moved from Environment, Climate, and Legacy to Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband, and Rural Development; and SF 4592 was moved from Judiciary and Public Safety to Jobs and Economic Development. SF 4455 was also given a second reading and placed on General Orders. The session ended as the Senate moved into special orders.

Transcript Highlights:

• C., Chair of the Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee in the Senate.
• > with consumer protection committee deals with consumer protection committee deals with thank
• The DCCA Office of Consumer Protection, good morning.
• <00:22:03.559> Protection uh dcca Office of Consumer Protection uh dcca Office of Consumer
• much uh dcca Office of Consumer much uh dcca Office of Consumer Protection<00:29:12.559> with

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee held its first hearing of the 2025 session and reviewed several measures. SB 102 would restrict third-party restaurant reservation services from listing or selling reservations without a written agreement from the restaurant; the Attorney General recommended amendments to strengthen the bill against First Amendment and Contracts Clause challenges, and the Hawaii Restaurant Association strongly supported it, saying restaurants should control who represents them. The committee also heard SB 137 on electric utility mergers and acquisitions, with support from Ulupono Initiative and IBW Local 1260. Supporters said the bill would preserve state policy protections, including renewable energy and rate-making goals, and protect workers; IBW also suggested amendments, including a severability clause. The committee discussed a possible alternative approach from the PUC involving solicitation of bids from non-investor-owned utilities, and Ulupono said it would consider that idea but was concerned about preserving time for co-op formation. Members then heard SB 142, which would require insurers paying claims by check to send them by certified mail with restricted delivery and return receipt. The Insurance Division stood on its written testimony, while the Hawaiian Insurers Council, State Farm, NAMIC, and the American Property Casualty Insurance Association opposed the bill. A senator questioned whether the measure was too prescriptive and could create problems for claimants displaced by disasters; the response was that insurers and claimants usually remain in contact and that other payment methods may already be available depending on the carrier. SB 157 would ban algorithmic price setting in Hawaii’s rental market and require a public education program; the committee noted written testimony in support and comment, but no oral testimony was taken before moving on. SB 158 would create a state-owned bank implementation board within DCCA; DCCA’s financial institutions division, the Budget and Finance Department, and the Legislative Reference Bureau submitted comments, while the Hawaii Bankers Association opposed and the Hawaii Credit Union League commented. The committee also heard SB 318, which would require DCCA to adopt privacy rules for direct-to-consumer genetic testing and specify whether genetic information may be used for investigative genetic genealogy. The Office of Consumer Protection and Andrew Crossland opposed the bill, saying federal law and existing state protections already cover much of the area and that rulemaking would be a better way to address it; members raised concerns about federal changes and the need for state protections, but OCP said the bill was not the best approach. SB 332 would prohibit bundling foreclosed homes at public sale and delay finality of sales; L. Strong and written testimony supported it, citing Lahaina’s post-fire foreclosure risks and warning of investors profiting from the disaster. The final measure, SB 525, would require written notice and consent before mortuaries, cemeteries, or pre-need funeral authorities sell or recycle precious metals recovered after cremation. DCCA’s consumer protection and licensing divisions offered comments, while the Hawaii Funeral and Cemetery Association opposed the bill, saying it was surprised by the measure and was unaware of current consumer problems in the industry.

Transcript Highlights:

• > if<00:21:05.480> you state Consumer Protection Law uh if you state Consumer Protection Law
• <00:21:23.880> Protection than virtually every Consumer Protection than virtually every Consumer
• > again<00:21:42.440> do consumer protection laws which again do consumer protection laws
• concerns expressed by Office of Consumer concerns expressed by Office of Consumer Protection<00:
• Marketplace and um consumer protection Marketplace and um consumer protection rights<00:23:53.679>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint hearing of the House Committees on Tourism, Housing, and Economic Development and Technology began with House Bill 604, which would raise the transient accommodations tax by 1 percentage point starting January 1, 2026 and direct the revenue to the Hawaiian Homes General Loan Fund. The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands supported the bill as a source of consistent funding, while the Grassroots Institute of Hawaii and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii opposed it, warning that Hawaii already has very high tourism taxes and that further increases could hurt visitors, workers, and the broader economy. The committees later voted to pass HB 604 with amendments as an HD1 and to defer the date; the vote was adopted, with one member noted as having reservations in the housing committee vote and one no vote in that committee. The committees then heard House Bill 973, which would require transient accommodations brokers and others to display all resort fees, taxes, and government-imposed charges upfront in advertised prices and would establish penalties. The Office of Consumer Protection expressed concerns about the bill’s intent requirement and noted a forthcoming federal FTC rule on junk fees; the Hawaii Hotel Alliance strongly supported the measure as promoting transparency and uniformity, and a public witness also supported price transparency while questioning the size of the penalties. After questions about federal rescission of the FTC rule and enforcement authority, the committees voted to pass HB 973 with amendments as an HD1, including removal of the intent requirement and technical changes, and the recommendation was adopted unanimously. House Bill 594, relating to hotel service disruptions, would require hotel keepers to give notice of disruptions to guests and third-party vendors and allow damages. The Attorney General’s office recommended amendments to add a purpose section and savings clause to address First Amendment and contract clause issues, and Unite Here Local 5 supported the bill, saying guests are not always notified of disruptions and that the measure would improve transparency; the union agreed with the legal amendments. The committees voted to pass HB 594 with amendments as an HD1 and to defer the date, adopting the recommendation. The final measures were House Bill 448 and House Bill 449, both related to technology enablement and economic development for small businesses, including tourism-related businesses. HTDC strongly supported both bills but emphasized that technology should be targeted to the actual problem and coordinated with sister agencies rather than applied broadly; the Hawaii Food Industry Association and Chamber of Commerce also supported HB 448, and HB 449 received support from HTDC and HFIA. The committees adopted amendments to HB 448, including moving a $250,000 appropriation to the committee report, and to HB 449, including deleting duplicative language tied to HB 448 and moving a $500,000 appropriation to the committee report; both bills were passed as HD1s with deferred dates, and the hearing adjourned after the votes were adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• > confidence protect consumers, and foster confidence protect consumers, and foster confidence in
• rules of the road to protect consumers? rules of the road to protect consumers?
• Consumers are protected. digital assets. Consumers are protected.
• consumers are protected and businesses consumers are protected and businesses have<02:10:57.520>
• At the same time, we're gutting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that protects consumers.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, July 17, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to officially begin this hearing of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional
• The bill would protect a cornerstone of consumer protection and competition in the live event industry
• Beyond individual circumstances, protecting transferability fosters consumer savings.
• Transferability is a cornerstone of consumer protection and ticketing.
• The purpose of licensing a field is to protect consumers from harm.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee opened a hearing of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure and reviewed a broad agenda including credit card fees, event ticketing, music therapy licensure, senior psychologist licensure, CPA pathways, school mental health licensure, and a bill regulating alternative healing therapies. The chairs explained hearing logistics, including three-minute testimony limits and submission of written testimony, and noted that more than 70 people had signed up to testify. Legislators and advocates were heard out of order throughout the day. A major portion of the hearing focused on credit card surcharge and interchange legislation. Restaurant owners, the Massachusetts Restaurant Association, NFIB, and other small-business witnesses supported bills allowing merchants to add convenience fees and, in one proposal, preventing card companies from charging fees on tax and tip portions of transactions. They argued that swipe fees are a major and growing cost, especially for restaurants, and that Massachusetts is one of only two states that bars surcharges. Opponents from the Cooperative Credit Union Association, the Electronic Payment Coalition, and the Electronic Transactions Association warned that the proposals would create compliance burdens, fragment the payment system, raise legal preemption issues, and disrupt a system they described as efficient and secure. The committee also heard competing testimony on ticket transferability and ticket resale. Supporters, including the National Consumers League and Sports Fans Coalition, said bills on ticket transferability would protect consumers who cannot attend events and would increase competition and savings in the secondary market. Opponents, including United Musicians and Allied Workers and theater owners, argued that mandatory transferability would weaken artists’ and venues’ ability to prevent scalping and predatory resale, and that some ticket sellers should be exempt from the broader ticketing regulations. Separate testimony supported music therapy licensure, senior psychologist licensure, and new CPA education pathways, with witnesses saying these measures would expand access to care and strengthen the workforce while maintaining professional standards. The hearing also drew extensive opposition to S.261 on alternative healing therapies, with practitioners and clients arguing it would overregulate spiritual and holistic practices and was not an effective response to human trafficking concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• <02:46:44.720> consumers<02:46:45.279> from massive job to protect consumers from massive
• American consumers need and deserve these common sense protections.
• effective to protect consumers are fully effective to protect consumers are fully effective and
• protection bills that these uh consumer protection bills that we're<03:11:21.359> considering
• This is another very important bill as part of this consumer protection agenda today.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, April 28, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So Senate Bill 157 will ensure consumer So Senate Bill 157 will ensure consumer protections<00:02
• Senate Bill 189 is it's a consumer Senate Bill 189 is it's a consumer protection<00:06:43.120>
• consistent state level consumer consistent state level consumer protections. protections. protections
• <00:11:28.560> protection<00:11:29.279> and<00:11:29.600> fraud consumer protection
• c> I'm the consumer protections and so I'm the consumer protections and so I'm voting<00:27:03.600

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:01 Discussion SB 157 00:23 Vote SB 157 05:22 Discussion SB 189 05:57 Vote SB 189 26:49, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 157, which would align Kentucky’s mortgage loan fee rules with federal standards by exempting certain first and second mortgages from the state’s total net income cap when they meet federal points-and-fees thresholds. The sponsor and Rocket Mortgage testified that the bill would make it easier for borrowers to buy down mortgage interest rates with discount points, helping affordability without changing borrower costs, while preserving the existing 4% cap for loans outside the federal standard. Members discussed how rate buydowns work in practice, and the bill passed with a favorable expression after a roll call vote. The committee then heard Senate Bill 189, as amended by a committee substitute, which would create a licensing and regulatory framework for virtual currency kiosks, or crypto ATMs, in Kentucky. The sponsor described widespread scam losses tied to these kiosks, especially among older adults, and said the bill would add consumer protections such as licensing, financial safeguards, transaction limits, refund or hold requirements, disclosures, receipts, and enforcement authority for the Department of Financial Institutions. He also said the substitute was based on other states’ models and that further changes might be needed, including possible floor amendments. AARP Kentucky testified in support of regulating crypto kiosks but said the committee substitute weakened consumer protections and urged stronger safeguards, including lower transaction limits, fee caps, identity verification, receipts, and scam warnings. AARP representatives cited data on scam complaints and losses in Kentucky and nationally, and said the point of transfer is the best place to prevent harm. Committee members generally agreed the issue was consumer protection, but one senator cautioned against overregulating personal financial choices and noted that scams exist in many forms. The discussion ended with acknowledgment that the bill would continue to be refined, including in coordination with the House and stakeholder groups.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to call the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. Okay.
• We're going to call the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee to begin.
• Since this is the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee, I want to talk about why this bill matters
• Since this is the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee, I want to talk about why this bill matters
• I'd like to thank Assembly Member Calderon for offering this important consumer protection measure.

Summary: The committee heard several bills and took up multiple votes. AB 576, dealing with updates to California’s charitable fundraising platform registry after AB 488, was presented as a technical fix to help charities and platforms more quickly update eligible listings; there was no opposition testimony, and the measure was later moved on a due pass basis. AB 1160, on law enforcement drone programs, was presented with proposed amendments requiring U.S.-based data storage and limits on sharing or selling collected data; supporters said it would protect sensitive drone-collected information while preserving affordable drone use, while there was no opposition testimony, and it was also later passed out on a due pass as amended basis. AB 75, which would require insurers to give notice before collecting aerial images of homes and provide homeowners access to those images, drew support from the Department of Insurance and consumer advocates, while insurers opposed it unless amended, arguing aerial imaging is a cost-saving inspection tool and that the bill could worsen availability and affordability; the bill was moved to Appropriations on a due pass basis, with the roll held open for absent members. The committee spent the most time on AB 325, which would address algorithmic price-fixing and collusion. The author and supporters argued that competitors using the same pricing software or algorithm to set prices can function as collusion even when the agreement is hidden behind code, and cited examples involving housing, frozen potatoes, gas pricing, and other industries. Opponents, including apartment, business, hospital, retail, chamber, and tech groups, said the bill was too broad, could sweep in lawful software and public-data market research, and might chill legitimate pricing tools, especially for small businesses and housing providers. Committee members raised concerns about clarity, intent standards, and whether the bill should focus more narrowly on nonpublic competitor data; despite those concerns, AB 325 was moved to Appropriations on a due pass basis, with the roll held open. Later, AB 1221 was presented as a workplace surveillance bill that would prohibit certain invasive or discriminatory surveillance tools, require notice to workers, limit sharing of worker data, and require corroborating evidence before discipline based on surveillance outputs. Labor and consumer groups supported the bill, saying modern surveillance technologies can track speech, movement, emotion, and other sensitive traits and can be biased or abusive. The Security Industry Association opposed it, warning that the bill’s broad definitions could restrict legitimate security systems, emergency sharing with first responders, and employer responses to misconduct or unsafe behavior. The transcript cuts off before any final vote on AB 1221 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:20:17.120> protection, all ordinary consumer protection, all ordinary consumer protection
• <00:20:37.760> protection and other important consumer protection and other important consumer
• Protection Bureau focused the Consumer Protection Bureau focused on<00:33:02.240> condominiums.
• a consumer protection division.
• c> are<01:19:05.840> the consumer protection bureau what are the consumer protection bureau

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Both consumers and businesses.
• I think that when we talk about cost to consumers, many consumers think that they're purchasing lower
• We share the author's commitment to environmental safety and consumer protection, and yet banning integrated
• consumers.
• Californians deserve the same protection.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• H.639 will provide among the strongest genetic privacy protections for Vermont consumers.
• <00:37:34.720> The protections for Vermont consumers.
• The protections for Vermont consumers.
• as any other violation of Vermont's consumer protection statutes.
• <00:45:48.480> um<00:45:48.720> this protect consumers in this of um this protect consumers

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House opened with a devotional, the Pledge of Allegiance, and the formal swearing-in and seating of newly appointed Representative Jack Bighgam of St. Albans Town, who was also assigned to the Committee on Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry. The chamber then introduced House bills 911 and 912 and referred them to the Agriculture, Food Resiliency, and Forestry Committee and the Judiciary Committee, respectively. Several other bills were referred to money committees under House rules, including H.558 and H.775 to Ways and Means and H.632 and H.778 to Appropriations. Members also made announcements recognizing visiting groups, including fire and rescue personnel, community action agencies, 4-H participants, and other guests, along with caucus meeting notices. The House then took up H.907, a Government Operations and Military Affairs Committee bill to review and repeal outdated reporting requirements. The committee explained that the bill categorizes reports into those repealed, those to be reviewed again in four years, and those retained permanently, with an effective date of July 1, 2026. The committee reported unanimous support, and the House ordered the bill to third reading after agreeing to the committee recommendation. Next, the House considered H.205, dealing with agreements not to compete and stay-or-pay provisions. The Commerce and Economic Development Committee described the bill as generally prohibiting non-compete agreements, especially for lower-wage workers, while allowing narrow exceptions, and limiting stay-or-pay provisions to voluntary, reasonable, and clearly disclosed arrangements. During questioning, a member raised concern about a specific carveout for teacher contracts, arguing it could be used to restrict teacher mobility; the presenter said the language was intended to clarify that the bill did not conflict with existing teacher-contract law. The House adopted the committee amendment and ordered the bill to third reading. The House then began second reading of H.639 on genetic data privacy. The committee described the bill as creating strong protections for consumers’ genetic information, requiring express opt-in consent for collection, use, disclosure, transfer, retention, and marketing uses; allowing revocation of consent; requiring deletion of data and biological samples upon request; restricting storage and transfer outside the United States; and prohibiting disclosure to insurers, employers, and most government access without a warrant. The committee also said the bill would impose security requirements and anti-discrimination protections, and the detailed presentation continued as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's enforced by the Consumer Protection Act.
• another consumer protection bill. another consumer protection bill.
• And it's enforced by the Consumer And it's enforced by the Consumer Protection<01:03:50.600>
• protections for consumers in the world. protections for consumers in the world.
• consumer protection act. consumer protection act.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• protection bills that we're passing today.
• I want to rise in support of this bill, which takes an important step toward protecting consumers from
• I want to rise in support of this bill, which takes an important step toward protecting consumers from
• I want to rise in support of this bill, which takes an important step toward protecting consumers from
• This bill, which takes an important step toward protecting consumers from online hidden algorithmic price

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate convened, approved the journal, and took up a series of motions to discharge identical Assembly bills to the Third Reading Calendar, along with committee reports and amendments. The chamber also received an introduction from Senator Gonzalez honoring Maria Raine and her advocacy for guardrails on AI chatbots after the death of her son, and later adopted a Rules Committee report sending several General Business Law bills directly to Third Reading. The resolution calendar was adopted with some exceptions, and the Senate recognized several previously adopted resolutions honoring individuals and observances, including Barnabas McHenry, Arthur Jones Jr., Floyd Todd Peterson III, the Lexington School for the Deaf, Tadeusz Kosciuszko, Apraxia Awareness Month, Fibromyalgia Awareness Day, Prevention Week, Physician Anesthesiologists Week, and Golf Day in New York. The Senate then considered and passed numerous bills, many on consumer protection and public policy topics. Measures included bills on General Business Law, Public Health Law, Correction Law, Environmental Conservation Law, Executive Law, Vehicle and Traffic Law, Public Officers Law, Not-for-Profit Corporation Law, Public Housing Law, Education Law, Labor Law, and Public Service Law. Several bills were laid aside, including a Public Health Law bill by Senator Fernandez and a Public Service Law bill by Senator Parker. The chamber also passed a concurrent constitutional resolution by Senator Stec proposing an amendment to Article 14. During floor debate, senators explained votes on several measures. Senator Ramos spoke in support of paid sick leave for domestic workers, describing the bill as a long-overdue labor protection for a workforce historically excluded from such rights. Senator Fernandez described her bill as the Manufacturer Disclosure and Transparency Act, aimed at requiring notice and public disclosure of certain pharmaceutical patent settlement agreements to improve transparency and competition in prescription drug pricing. Senator Ryan and Senator Martins supported a bill restricting hidden algorithmic price manipulation online, and Senator May supported a bill limiting excessive rental car fuel charges as part of a broader consumer protection package. The Senate also passed a memorial highway bill naming a portion of Route 19 in LeRoy for Lieutenant Gary A. Scott, with Senator Borrello explaining the veteran’s service and sacrifice.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would like to officially begin this hearing of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional
• Today, the committee will be hearing matters relating to consumer protection, health-related matters,
• protections for consumers with disabilities, filed by Senator Cronin.
• It's obvious why the clerk's office would refer a bill about consumer protections here.
• This legislation will protect consumers from unprofessional, unscrupulous contractors.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure opened with logistical remarks about testimony procedures, time limits, accessibility supports, and the large number of witnesses. The first bill discussed was H. 451, which would allow professional license applicants who do not have a Social Security number to use an ITIN instead. Supporters said the bill would help qualified workers, especially immigrants, enter licensed trades and professions without lowering training or testing standards, while addressing workforce shortages. Committee members asked a few questions, and the bill was framed as a uniform statewide licensing reform. The bulk of the hearing focused on S. 210 and H. 1278, two bills aimed at improving wheelchair repair and warranty protections. Supporters included the Attorney General’s Office, disability advocates, wheelchair users, clinicians, and legislators, who described long repair delays, missed work and medical appointments, loss of independence, hospitalizations, pressure injuries, and other harms caused by broken wheelchairs and slow service. They argued for stronger timelines, two-year warranties, required parts availability, loaner chairs, and enforcement mechanisms, with H. 1278 modeled on a Connecticut-style repair deadline and S. 210 focused on warranty protections. Several witnesses emphasized that wheelchairs are essential medical equipment, not ordinary consumer goods. Opposition came from NCart, which said it supports solutions but raised concerns that the bills, as written, could be difficult to implement for complex rehab technology. NCart said some warranty provisions may not fit wear-and-tear components and noted that MassHealth has already taken steps such as preventive maintenance, reduced prior authorization, and transportation support. Other witnesses and advocates countered that the current market is dominated by a few profitable companies and that the legislature needs to impose clear standards because voluntary fixes have not worked. The committee also heard testimony on S. 195, a toxic-free kids bill from Senator Comerford and Representative Hawkins, which would restrict PFAS and other toxic chemicals in children’s products and create disclosure and phase-out requirements. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Safer Consumer Products Program is carefully designed to...
• in products that are harmful to consumers.
• And they're there for a reason, to protect health and safety.
• has a critical role to play in protecting public health.
• We were part of creating the Safer Consumer Products program.

Summary: The joint oversight hearing focused on DTSC’s implementation of SB 158 reforms, including enforcement, community engagement, fee stability, the hazardous waste management plan, permitting backlogs, and the Safer Consumer Products program. Senators and Assembly members emphasized protecting overburdened communities and asked how DTSC and the Board of Environmental Safety are using their authority to improve accountability, reduce delays, and address hazardous waste facilities and consumer product chemicals. The hearing also included discussion of extended producer responsibility programs and whether DTSC can support them more efficiently, including through coordination with CalRecycle. DTSC Director Katie Butler said the department is now more transparent, accountable, and fiscally stable, citing stronger enforcement actions, an interactive inspections map, expanded community outreach, and emergency response work on the Los Angeles wildfire cleanup. She said DTSC has made progress on fee reform, the hazardous waste management plan, cleanup grants, permit renewals, and safer consumer products rulemaking, including adding microplastics to the candidate chemical list. Board Chair Andrew Rakestraw said the board has held multiple public meetings and hearings, is working on fee rates and performance metrics, and is revising the hazardous waste management plan after public comment, including removing a proposal to send certain contaminated soil to municipal landfills. He also noted remaining concerns about fee structure, permit delays, and the pace of the safer consumer products program. Public witnesses offered sharply different views. A representative of the California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance said SB 158 reforms have improved permitting and transparency, but urged more attention to risk-based decision-making, reduced duplication, and possible General Fund support for plan implementation rather than relying only on fees. Earthjustice argued DTSC remains too slow and that communities continue to suffer from long-delayed permits and weak protections, urging the Legislature to take a more active role and to prioritize eliminating hazardous substances rather than minimizing costs. Committee members pressed the witnesses on permit renewals, community impacts, and the pace of the safer consumer products program, while DTSC defended its progress and said further legislative collaboration may be needed on hazardous waste management and emerging waste streams.

Transcript Highlights:

• Consumer Consumer Protection<00:11:34.399> okay<00:11:35.399> you<00:11:35.519> can
• trust the consumer protection and anti trust the consumer protection and anti trust Bureau<00
• ability to enforce the consumer ability to enforce the consumer protection<00:30:03.279> act<
• around consumer guarantee protections around consumer guarantee contracts<01:21:52.639> we<01
• That would be under consumer protection, anyway.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on HB 733-FN, a bill on third-party litigation financing (TPLF). Representative Cole, the prime sponsor, described TPLF as outside investors financing lawsuits in which they have no personal stake, arguing that the practice is largely unregulated, can involve foreign entities, and contributes to litigation abuse, higher insurance costs, and what he called a “tort tax.” He said the bill is modeled on an NCOIL proposal and would require disclosure of TPLF agreements, with specific references to foreign-entity restrictions, consumer-protection guardrails, and reporting requirements. He also noted a few technical fixes to the draft, including adding the word “knowingly” and restoring a section that had been omitted. Committee members questioned how the bill’s foreign-entity language would work, including whether a governor or the Department of Safety would designate countries of concern, and whether the bill would bar foreign parties from using litigation funding. Cole and others clarified that the bill was intended as a reporting measure, not a ban on litigation funding itself, and that the goal was to disclose who is funding lawsuits and to what extent. Representative Sal asked whether the bill would prevent a litigant from getting outside financing; Cole answered no, emphasizing disclosure rather than prohibition. Brandon Grat of the Attorney General’s Consumer Protection and Antitrust Bureau testified that the bill’s enforcement provisions were too limited. He said the draft appears to give the Attorney General only a civil-penalty remedy, likely too small to deter violations, and not the broader Consumer Protection Act tools such as injunctions, restitution, or investigation authority. He also raised concerns about whether the Attorney General or Insurance Department would have proper jurisdiction, given that the product may be financial or insurance-related. Insurance Commissioner DJ Benton Court said the department sees possible benefits from transparency because disclosure of litigation funding could help insurers assess risk, improve underwriting, and potentially ease hard-market pressures, especially for nonprofits and child care providers. He also said the bill’s language likely needs further work to clarify agency authority and suggested involving the Attorney General, Insurance Department, and banking regulators. Opposition testimony came from the New Hampshire Trial Lawyers Association. Marissa Chase and Samantha Hering argued the bill is one-sided because it requires disclosure only on the plaintiff side and not from defendants or insurers. They said New Hampshire already has court rules and discovery procedures that cover relevant disclosures, making the bill unnecessary, and questioned whether the existence of a funding contract is even relevant in litigation. The hearing ended with the committee continuing to discuss possible revisions and enforcement options, but no vote or final action was taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Workers, consumers, and the environment.
• I think that when we talk about cost to consumers, many consumers think that they're purchasing lower-cost
• We share the author's commitment to environmental safety and consumer protection, and yet banning integrated
• And removing compliant, tested products from legal shelves will not protect consumers.
• Californians deserve the same protection.

Summary: The committee heard several environmental and consumer-safety bills. AB 405, the Fashion Act, would require fashion companies to disclose and manage toxic chemicals in their supply chains; supporters said it would reduce worker and consumer exposure and align with existing industry frameworks, while retailers and business groups argued it would duplicate existing laws and raise costs. After questions about DTSC workload, international standards, and affordability, the bill was moved on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Natural Resources and held on call with three votes. AB 762 would ban the sale and distribution of disposable vape devices; supporters emphasized battery-fire risks, recycling contamination, and waste impacts, while cannabis and convenience-store interests warned it would push consumers to illicit markets and harm legal businesses. The bill passed on a due-pass motion to Business and Professions with three votes and was held on call. The committee also adopted the consent calendar with six votes. AB 794 would direct California to keep in place the federal PFAS drinking-water standard if federal protections are weakened, with supporters citing health risks and the need for certainty, and water agencies opposing the emergency-rulemaking authority and potential costs. Members debated whether the bill was too broad and whether federal funds would cover implementation; the bill passed on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations with four votes and was held open. AB 1148, the Safer Food Packaging Act, would restrict certain chemicals in food packaging; supporters cited cancer and reproductive-health concerns, while chemical, beverage, and manufacturing groups argued the bill should go through existing regulatory processes and that some chemicals lacked feasible alternatives. The author said she would remove antimony trioxide later in the process after hearing opposition concerns; the bill passed on a due-pass motion to Judiciary with four votes and was held open. Finally, AB 1338 would allow local air districts to recover costs for implementing fence-line air monitoring at metal shredding facilities, building on prior legislation and local air district efforts in AB 617 communities. The author said the bill would preserve local control and improve efficiency, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District testified in support. The transcript ends as the district witness begins testimony, with no vote yet taken on AB 1338.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill, among other things, will significantly enhance consumer protection by providing stronger disincentives
• I'm proud of the board's continued steadfast commitment to consumer protection, our role as a leader
• Just title protection.
• consumers, safeguards public health, and restores faith in the legal cannabis market. ...protects consumers
• This bill is a consumer protection bill.

Summary: The Assembly Business and Professions Committee heard a full agenda of bills focused on reproductive health, professional licensing and sunset reviews, consumer protection, and business regulation. Early testimony centered on AB 260, which would protect access to medication abortion, mifepristone, and telehealth reproductive care in California; supporters emphasized state protections against federal restrictions, while an opponent argued the bill removed safety safeguards. The committee also heard AB 714 on closing a loophole in regulation of low-cost commercial driving schools, AB 968 on allowing pharmacists to prescribe non-hormonal contraception, AB 671 on streamlining restaurant permitting, AB 1027 on strengthening cannabis product testing oversight, AB 1271 on broadband pricing and speed transparency, and AB 1332 on narrowly allowing medicinal cannabis shipments for seriously ill patients. Several sunset bills were also taken up, including AB 1482 on animal shelter and breeder transparency, AB 1501 on the Podiatric Medical Board and Physician Assistant Board, AB 1502 on the Veterinary Medical Board, AB 1503 on the Board of Pharmacy, and AB 1504 on the Massage Therapy Council. Testimony was largely in support of the measures, with many bills drawing co-sponsors or support from industry, consumer, or professional groups. AB 1503 generated the most sustained opposition, with nurses, physicians, and drug industry representatives objecting to expanded pharmacy technician ratios, standard-of-care language, and therapeutic interchange authority; supporters argued the bill would modernize pharmacy practice and expand access. AB 1504 also drew mixed testimony, with massage therapy groups supporting continuation of the council but raising concerns about proposed public records and governance provisions. AB 1271 drew a policy dispute over whether broadband reporting requirements duplicated federal FCC processes, while supporters argued California needed its own consumer-facing data and complaint system. After quorum was established later in the hearing, the committee began taking roll-call votes. AB 1271, AB 1332, AB 1482, AB 1501, and AB 1502 were all reported out on due-pass motions, with AB 1271 amended and the others generally amended or as introduced as noted. Earlier bills including AB 260, AB 671, AB 714, AB 968, and AB 1027 also received motions and were approved once the quorum was present. The chair repeatedly noted the lack of quorum during the hearing, but once one was secured, the committee completed votes on the agenda items and advanced the measures to Appropriations.

Transcript Highlights:

• And with that, we will move to the Consumer Protection Restitution Account overview.
• Um, we are going to present on the Consumer Protection Restitution Account, but we're going to let AARP
• rest<00:04:23.520> institution the consumer protection rest institution the consumer protection
• As an aside, this is my bit of consumer<00:10:48.560> protection.
• I love to leave the consumer protection.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard an update on the Consumer Protection Restitution Account, also called SPRA, from the Minnesota Attorney General’s office and AARP Minnesota. AARP described the fund as a first-of-its-kind consumer fraud restitution program that should encourage scam reporting, give the AG’s office more incentive to pursue cases, and provide financial recovery to victims, especially older adults. The AG’s office explained that the fund is financed by 50% of consumer enforcement recoveries up to $5 million per year, plus unclaimed or undistributable restitution, and said about $4.6 million had been deposited since July 1, 2025, largely from a Johnson & Johnson settlement. Jessica Whitney outlined how claims are processed: consumers file complaints, the office obtains a court order, then determines whether defendants have collectible assets before distributing funds in chronological order based on the date of the court order. She said the first major case is Woodbury Dental Arts, a defunct dental clinic whose patients filed more than 300 claims; the office estimates about 75% are likely valid, is reviewing them, and hopes to issue checks within a month. She also described upcoming cases involving High Road Builders and another home remodeling contractor, along with more than 100 individual fraud complaints, including nine claims totaling more than $5.2 million. Committee members raised concerns about delays, communication with constituents, and whether victims know if their cases are being processed. Whitney said the office is trying to improve outreach through press releases, community visits, senior centers, AARP, and Commerce senior outreach. She also flagged two possible legislative issues: restitution that cannot be distributed may not be subject to the $5 million cap, and the statute’s prohibition on pro rata payments may need reconsideration because available funds appear insufficient to pay all claims in full. The office said it would provide a fuller report in October and continue processing claims this fiscal year.