Transcript Highlights:

• school meal programs in Virginia's local education agencies, LEAs.
• In conducting its evaluation, the work group shall survey and evaluate alternative funding models to
• This program was canceled at the federal level in 2025.
• and the Virginia Fresh Match program.
• Because summer meals programs... ...time of the year, how we start talking about summer meals programs

Keywords: Virginia Commission to End Hunger, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• so far, the in-state program.
• investment program maps directly to the policy specific to the in-state investment program... ...maps
• In the new policy versus the old policy, and then evaluation and review that maps directly to the evaluation
• In the new policy versus the old policy, and then evaluation and review that maps directly to the evaluation
• What this in-state investment program is.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If there are potentially significant impacts, then a more detailed evaluation is done.
• And if there are no or minimal impacts, then a shorter evaluation period is used.
• My name is with the Solid Waste Program at the Department of Ecology.
• And one of the programs that we're very proud of is the take-back program at grocery stores.
• And one of the programs that we're very proud of is the take-back program at grocery stores for recycling

Summary: The committee held a work session on state environmental policy act (SEPA) implementation and carryout bags. Ecology staff Diane Buterak described the Clean Energy Programmatic Environmental Impact Statements (PEISs) completed for utility-scale solar, onshore wind, and green hydrogen, plus a new PEIS underway for sustainable aviation fuel. She explained that PEISs provide broad planning-level analysis to help developers and agencies avoid or mitigate impacts, but do not replace project-level review. Members asked about permitting timelines, greenhouse gas emissions from different hydrogen production methods, water use, agricultural land conversion, battery fire risk, and tribal consultation. Buterak said the PEISs identify potentially significant impacts and mitigation measures, including fire response planning, early tribal outreach, and agrovoltaics as an option for solar projects. EFSEC’s Amy Hofkimer then presented the transmission-facility programmatic EIS required by SB 5165 for 230 kV and higher transmission projects. She said the statewide review covers new lines and certain upgrades/modifications, analyzes impacts to water, cultural and tribal resources, habitat, and other areas, and uses general measures, design considerations, avoidance criteria, and sensitivity maps to guide siting and corridor planning. She said the final document would be issued in early October. Questions focused on reconductoring, tribal lands, scenic areas, and whether the review could affect existing lines crossing tribal lands. A Grant County planning director, Jim Anderson Cook, said Ecology’s PEIS would help with cumulative impacts for clustered solar projects, but noted tight local review timelines and the need for strong pre-application coordination, especially on cultural resource studies and decommissioning plans. Yakama Nation attorney Shona Leverett argued SEPA is only an assessment tool and said tribes face barriers from short comment periods, limited confidential tribal input, weak cumulative impact analysis, and challenges in the FSEC process; she urged better upfront developer diligence and more effective tribal coordination. Puget Sound Energy’s Sarah Leverett said the utility needs efficient and predictable permitting to meet clean energy mandates while maintaining reliable service and aging infrastructure. She described the scale of needed clean energy and transmission buildout, including a 10-year process for the Energize Eastside transmission rebuild, and said more consistent SEPA and PEIS processes could help. Members asked about future generation sources, reliability, and hydropower as a firming resource; she said PSE is pursuing an “all of the above” approach and would welcome more firm, dispatchable clean energy options. The committee then shifted to carryout bags. Staff Jacob Lipson and Tracy Taylor reviewed Washington’s bag law, its preemption of local ordinances, the current 8-cent charge, the scheduled increase to 12 cents, and the 2025 change delaying the 4-mil thickness requirement until 2028 while adding a temporary 4-cent penalty for thicker bags. Ecology’s Peter Lyon said the agency emphasizes education and complaint-based enforcement, has received 872 reports, and has not yet imposed any fines. Commerce’s Kirk Esmond summarized a WSU study finding fewer plastic bags distributed but more plastic by weight, and said Commerce and Ecology support keeping the 2.25-mil standard and not allowing thinner single-use bags again. Retail industry testimony from Brandon Housekeeper said grocers comply with the law but oppose the added 4-cent penalty and thicker-bag requirement, citing higher costs and confusion in the policy changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• 53 agencies. and programs.
• During the evaluation phase.
• Our dental programs, our vision programs, we go out to bid.
• the SNAP Program.
• We also have a program that we call the lock-in program.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for the Education Savings Account Program.
• for this program.
• program?
• However, when I finished reviewing their evaluation data with them, we developed an educational program
• There are evaluation staff who are critical to completing the evaluations that have to be completed.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• GSEP is no longer a program for just replacing gas pipes. It's a gas transition program.
• GSEP is not a safety program.
• GSEP is not a safety program.
• And part of that is the evaluation of non-pipeline alternatives.
• So beginning with the GSEP program.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on two related issues: gas utilities’ climate compliance plans filed with the Department of Public Utilities and the recent DPU orders reforming the Gas System Enhancement Program (GSEP). Chair Creem and other senators emphasized that Massachusetts must reduce gas use, shrink the gas distribution footprint, and move customers to alternatives such as heat pumps, network geothermal, and non-gas pipeline alternatives (NPAs). DPU Chair Jamie Van Nostrand said the new GSEP orders lower the annual revenue cap from 3.0% to 2.5%, phase it down toward 1.5%, eliminate carrying charges, require more rigorous risk prioritization, and push utilities to consider advanced leak technology, relining, repairs, and NPAs. He also described the climate compliance plans as the start of a longer process covering decommissioning, stranded costs, line extension allowances, integrated energy planning, and targeted electrification demonstrations. Senators pressed the DPU and utility witnesses on the lack of specificity in the climate compliance plans, especially the absence of numeric goals for gas usage reduction, customer conversions, and near-term deployment of NPAs. Utility representatives from Eversource and National Grid said their plans include NPA frameworks, integrated energy planning, targeted electrification pilots, network geothermal, and workforce transition efforts, but argued that implementation takes time, requires customer participation, and depends on coordination with electric utilities and communities. They said some NPA and electrification projects are being evaluated now, while larger-scale deployment is expected later in the decade. Senators also raised concerns about line extension allowances, with utilities explaining that new customers may be charged based on whether existing ratepayers would otherwise be harmed, while National Grid said it has begun increasing customer contributions to send stronger price signals. Attorney General Mary Gardner supported the DPU’s GSEP reforms and said the office favors eventually stepping the GSEP cap down to zero by 2030, with repair and replacement costs recovered in base rate cases instead. She argued that the utilities’ plans still rely too heavily on business-as-usual approaches, do not adequately quantify scope 3 emissions, and leave unresolved questions about the obligation to serve and the future of line extension allowances. Advocacy witnesses from the Conservation Law Foundation and Acadia Center were more critical, saying the plans lack the detailed modeling, targets, and transparency needed to show how the utilities will help meet the Commonwealth’s heating and cooling sublimits and broader climate goals. No votes were taken; the hearing consisted of testimony and questioning.

Transcript Highlights:

• He explained that they want to be able to evaluate proposals as fairly as possible.
• Uh to me, that sounds like a programs.
• So the evaluation committee um Yes sir.
• So, the evaluators are not provided cost.
• <00:37:57.040> and providers enrolled in the program and providers enrolled in the program

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee opened with a moment of silence for Representative McCool, who was absent due to a family death, then approved the April 14 minutes and noted the agenda contained 482 items totaling about $138.6 million. The first deferred item involved the Office of the Controller and a brokerage services contract. Senators questioned why the new contract was roughly $1 million a year when a prior vendor had been paid about $300,000 annually, why the procurement was rebid after years of no-bid arrangements, and why past performance was not heavily weighted. Agency witnesses said the prior vendor had held the work for more than 20 years, the new RFP drew more competition, technical evaluators did not see cost until after technical scoring, and AON received the highest technical score despite being an out-of-state vendor with its closest office in Nashville. After discussion, the committee voted to take no action, and the contract advanced to the Finance Cabinet for final decision. The committee then considered a DCBS memorandum of agreement amendment. Members asked what funding was being redirected to cover an increase of about $265,000. DCBS explained that reduced spending on interpreter services, due to more commonly used forms being translated into other languages, freed up funds to support the contract. The committee approved the item. Next, the committee reviewed an initial contract for the Kentucky Board of Hairdressers and Cosmetologists. The board explained that its small legal staff was handling 11 active cases and needed outside counsel with investigators and additional attorneys because of ongoing litigation and disciplinary changes tied to prior legislation and a recent LOIC report. Members asked whether the contract was a not-to-exceed amount and whether the board could afford it; the board said the $50,000 was a ceiling, not an expected spend, and that the board was fully funded through licensing fees and currently running a surplus. Senator Thomas urged support, citing recent reforms in Senate Bills 14 and 22 and the need to help the board work through corrective action. The committee approved the contract. The Board of Pharmacy item was then deferred at the agency’s request until the June 2025 meeting, and the committee approved that deferral.

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, I’m familiar with CBRE and, you know, the DEER programs, but I would say that those programs
• but I would say that I mean programs but I would say that I mean those<01:18:15.920> programs
• which is the grid service program which is the grid service program<01:21:48.440> that<01:21:
• about the impact of of these programs about the impact of of these programs being<01:29:55.360><
• the public safety power shut off program the public safety power shut off program um<01:35:30.760

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Energy and Environmental Protection heard testimony on Senate Bill 897, which would create a Wildlife Liability Trust Fund within DCCA for administrative purposes. The chair opened by noting the hearing had to end by noon because of floor session, and that written testimony would be considered if not all witnesses could speak. Testimony included support from DCCA, the Attorney General’s office, the Public Utilities Commission, Charter Communications, Ulupono Initiative, AES Hawaii, Hawaiian Electric, Clearway Energy Group, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative, Hawaiian Telcom, and IBW Local 1260, with opposition or concerns from the Hawaii Association for Justice and some others. Hawaiian Electric strongly supported the bill and asked for amendments, saying the fund would help address wildfire liability, protect customers and the economy, and support restoration of investment-grade credit; it also proposed a larger shareholder contribution and said the bill was part of a broader effort to raise settlement funds and improve grid safety and resiliency. Committee members focused heavily on whether the bill would actually lower costs for ratepayers and improve credit ratings. DCCA said there was a nexus between limiting liability, creating a sufficiently large wildfire fund, and transparent mitigation requirements, but acknowledged there was no guarantee of a credit-rating improvement or precise estimate of rate impacts. Members questioned Hawaiian Electric about the assumptions in its cost comparisons, the 30-year securitization structure, and whether funding could be shifted later to shareholders after credit was restored. Hawaiian Electric responded that the bill assumes the fund is paid through securitization, that removing that presumption could undermine the credit-rating benefit, and that its models suggest credit-spread savings could offset the customer charge over time; it also said it would follow up with additional analysis. The company and Ulupono both described the measure as a difficult but potentially necessary way to socialize wildfire risk and avoid a larger crisis later. The Hawaii Association for Justice opposed the bill’s liability caps and raised concerns about consumer rights, oversight discretion, statute-of-limitations changes, and evidence rules. Hawaiian Telcom suggested amendments to clarify compliance with FCC pole-attachment agreements. No vote or final action was taken during the portion of the hearing provided, and members indicated they wanted more analysis before being comfortable with the bill’s long-term ratepayer impacts.

Transcript Highlights:

• So an alternative program would be a regular education placement because alternative programs are not
• students within that program.
• alternative program.
• education program within it so special education program within it so they<00:51:16.319> have<
• that special education program within that alternative<00:51:49.000> program<00:51:49.480>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The work session focused on special education, especially the differentiated aid component and special education aid, which members noted is still often called “catastrophic aid.” The chair said the committee was trying to better understand how special education costs are growing, how districts are delivering services through SAUs or internally, and how reimbursement formulas affect local costs. Members also discussed the need for better data before making decisions on several education funding bills, and Representative Brown was tasked with capturing questions for follow-up information from the department or elsewhere. Testimony from the state special education director, Becky Fad, centered on why student counts in various disability categories have shifted over time. She said the categories themselves have not changed much, but autism has increased because of greater understanding and identification, developmental delay has grown because it applies to children under age 10 who may not yet have a clear diagnosis, and some students previously classified under speech/language or other health impairment are now identified in more specific categories such as autism. She emphasized that the IEP is based on a child’s individual needs, so a change in category would not necessarily change services, though it may help educators support the student differently. Members asked about whether the shifts reflect better diagnostic capability, whether the department should gather more data on the reasons for the changes, and whether autism-spectrum data could be broken down further. Fad said the department does not currently have data on the causes of the shifts or on where students fall within the autism spectrum, but that collecting and analyzing such data is on its list of priorities and a new data manager had recently been hired. She also explained that each child is counted only once on the chart by primary disability, that the IEP or eligibility team determines the primary category based on evaluations, and that any child can be referred for special education by a parent, teacher, or doctor, after which the district must meet within 15 days to decide whether to evaluate. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• and kind of ongoing program, similar to the Clean Water Trust's other programs. ...similar to the Clean
• Water Trust's other programs.
• and kind of ongoing program, similar to the Clean Water Trust's other programs.
• We co-administer the SRF program with the trust.
• What makes this program so effective is its efficiency and reach.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on S.2542, the Mass Ready Act, a $3 billion environmental bond bill aimed at climate resilience, water infrastructure, conservation, and related permitting reforms. Secretary Rebecca Tepper and administration officials described the bill’s major investments in flood control, coastal resilience, DCR roads/bridges/dams and parks, drinking water and wastewater upgrades, PFAS remediation, land conservation, food security infrastructure, and expanded Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness funding. They also explained proposed streamlining measures for environmental permitting, flood risk disclosures, a Connecticut River Resilient Commission, and a new Resilience Revolving Fund to provide low-cost financing for municipal resilience projects. Committee members asked about affordability, useful life of projects, how the revolving fund would be capitalized, and how the bill would help communities such as Lawrence, Methuen, and coastal towns; officials said the fund would initially use existing trust resources, not new fees, and could later support special obligation bonds once it has a track record. Several witnesses supported the bill but urged larger authorizations or additional provisions. Boston Harbor Now asked for more funding for MVP and the state’s resilient coast plan, and supported permitting reforms for nature-based and hybrid solutions. The Massachusetts Rivers Alliance urged inclusion of drought-management language from separate bills, plus a statewide flood buyout program and a water reuse commission. Green Roots called for dedicated funding for outdoor and indoor air quality monitoring and indoor air quality improvements, especially in environmental justice communities affected by traffic and airport pollution. Conservation and forestry advocates requested more funding for urban tree canopy, local nurseries, and workforce training, while also raising concerns about PFAS impacts and the need for clearer municipal reforestation language. Agriculture and water infrastructure groups focused on food security and drinking water needs. The Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership and the Mass Food System Collaborative backed the food security infrastructure grant program and farmland protection funding, warning that the program needs continued support in fiscal 2027 and that farmland loss is accelerating. The Massachusetts Waterworks Association said the bill does not go far enough on drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure, citing large statewide capital needs and PFAS compliance costs, and asked for recurring funding and broader eligibility for climate resilience grants. A Product Stewardship Council representative also urged funding for a waste reduction needs assessment, citing growing landfill constraints and rising disposal costs. No votes were taken during the hearing."}{

Transcript Highlights:

• There's also a pilot program for educators.
• So the next two years are obviously our build-out for the program.
• I had some questions on the teacher evaluations.
• only public schools, but for the private school voucher program.
• only public schools, but for the private school voucher program.

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Selection committees are instructed to evaluate the nominee based solely on the application.
• Selection committees are instructed to evaluate the nominee based solely on the application.
• Miss Cameron responded by reading the evaluation criteria: the committees are asked to evaluate the application
• <00:12:23.480> um<00:12:23.600> an process not to evaluate um an process not to evaluate
• <00:26:45.120> um community engagement award program um community engagement award program

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Amber Cameron of the University of Minnesota’s Office for Public Engagement about the University’s Outstanding Community Service Awards and, specifically, the community partner award given to Communities United Against Police Brutality in 2021 and 2024. Cameron explained that the awards program recognizes faculty, staff, students, and community partners, that nominations are reviewed by University selection committees using criteria such as positive societal impact, innovation, extraordinary results, and overall impression, and that the committee evaluates only the application materials. She said the nomination for Communities United Against Police Brutality described a long-standing partnership with the University through student learning, including work through the Center for Community-Engaged Learning and a student white paper connected to the passage of Travis’s Law. Committee members raised concerns about the organization’s history, its public messaging, and whether it was appropriate for the University to honor it. One member argued that the group’s IRS records showed it was formally organized in 2020, questioned claims that it had existed for 25 years, and objected to the organization’s letterhead and activism. Cameron responded that the award does not require formal tax status and that the selection process relies on the nomination packet rather than outside information. She also said the award nomination documented work with 130 course offerings across 17 academic departments and about 1,000 students over 24 years. Cameron further said the award program was being phased out and retooled into a new internal Engaged Scholar Awards program focused on community-engaged scholarship rather than volunteer service. No vote or formal action was taken during the exchange, and the discussion ended with questions about the nomination materials and how the University defines the organization’s work with students and faculty.

Transcript Highlights:

• Finally, it requires the PUC to re-evaluate the 4CP and directs the PUC to adopt rule changes regarding
• This 4CP and trying to come up with the proper methodology to evaluate? Yes, sir.
• that the commissioner will be using to evaluate these.
• So does the PUC currently evaluate anything on the other side of the meter with respect to large loads
• This program was set up as a competitively procured program where...

Bills: SB6, SB11, SB33

Keywords: electric power, interconnection, utilities, ERCOT, large load customers, water supply, sewer service, demand management, school prayer, Bible reading, religious text, public schools, Texas Education Code, student prayer, silent prayer, meditation, religious liberty, First Amendment, Establishment Clause, church and state

Transcript Highlights:

• Waiting for an evaluation, yes, sir.
• Our non-Medicaid programs, I think you were already talking about a bit.
• The other one we're doing is the community reintegration program.
• So we do those forensic evaluations. There had been a backlog of forensic evaluations.
• So they provide a service... ...evaluation and provide some services.

Summary: The House Health Services Subcommittee met to approve the October 7, 2024 minutes and then shifted to behavioral health as the main topic. Representatives Woodridge and Vaught described the work of the behavioral health working group, saying Arkansas needs a more proactive system that improves access, reduces red tape, and focuses on a few achievable policy changes for the 2027 session rather than many bills. Members discussed barriers such as low reimbursement, workforce shortages, licensing and credentialing hurdles, rural access problems, and the need to better use community providers, compacts, and step-down services. Director Paula Stone of DHS’s Office of Substance Abuse and Mental Health gave a detailed overview of the behavioral health system. She said Medicaid pays for more than 75% of behavioral health services in Arkansas and explained that when people are jailed or admitted to the state hospital, Medicaid generally stops, leaving state general revenue to cover care. She described current efforts including family-centered treatment for children, community reintegration group homes, a new adolescent substance use disorder residential unit, expanded community mental health center contracts, a secured restoration unit to reduce state hospital backlogs, and an IMD waiver to allow Medicaid payment for certain residential services. She also said DHS is working on crisis services, forensic evaluations, and provider rebidding in areas previously served by ERISA. Members asked about reimbursement for jail services, the lack of a statewide behavioral health dashboard, civil commitment options, crisis stabilization units, and whether Arkansas should expand step-down or long-term facilities for people who cannot safely return to the community. Stone said the state hospital backlog remains significant, average stays are still about 14 months, and crisis stabilization units have had mixed success, with Fort Smith and Jonesboro performing better than Fayetteville and Little Rock. The meeting ended with a commitment to continue the work, with more substantive discussion planned for August.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> Yes, there's a lot of especially experiential learning programs, hands-on learning programs that really
• <00:20:13.200> for are having some sort of program for are having some sort of program for
• on an IEP program? on an IEP program?
• <00:21:55.039> for that like is is an amazing program for that like is is an amazing program
• supervision, and evaluation of staff. supervision, and evaluation of staff.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the October 15 minutes and a brief discussion of the committee’s report process, including the likelihood of a minority report and a deadline of November 1 for any separate report. Members then heard from Jod Adams of the New Hampshire Alliance for Public Charter Schools, who gave an overview of charter schools in the state: there are 37 charter schools, with 6,034 students last year, and schools are formed by certified teachers, parents, or nonprofit organizations. She said charter schools receive about $9,180 per pupil in adequacy aid and charter school grant funding, must fundraise for additional money, and are governed by their own boards under their charters and bylaws. Members asked about admissions, governance, transportation, and special education. Adams said charter schools are open enrollment, not geographically based, and may use lotteries when applications exceed available seats. She explained that districts and charter schools coordinate on special education and busing, with the sending district responsible for special education coordination and certain transportation obligations depending on where the student lives and attends. She also said charter schools are public schools, not selective, and that each school’s board operates independently of the local district school board, though some schools may have special arrangements. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on funding and statutory obligations. Adams and members discussed how special education aid follows the student, while charter schools do not receive some district-level aid such as catastrophic aid; free and reduced lunch funding and Title funds can go to charter schools. Members also raised concerns that some state laws and administrative rules do not clearly specify whether they apply to charter schools, creating confusion and, in some cases, causing districts to perform services such as dyslexia screening for charter students without additional funding. Adams agreed that clearer statutory language would help and noted that charter schools are subject to many state requirements, including testing and reporting, even though not every public-school rule applies to them.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a wonderful program.
• So, you must choose either the master's program or the JD program.
• When this program was first permitted by the ABA, one of choose either the master's program or the JD
• program.
• So whether that be evening programs, whether that be longer-term programs that account for that.

Bills: SB1, SB3

Keywords: interstate medical licensure compact, physician licensure, medical license reciprocity, expedited licensure, medical practice act, New Mexico medical board, compact commission, physician mobility, telemedicine, license portability, background check, disciplinary action, joint investigation, reproductive health care, gender-affirming care, scope of practice, medical board transparency, multistate compact, licensure renewal, health care workforce

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:08:21.720> was<00:08:21.879> a plan in the evaluation was a plan in the evaluation
• <00:08:51.839> as another uh element that was evaluated as another uh element that was evaluated
• I would just say that that's part of what gets evaluated when they're doing this right now.
• They're in the space-planning process, so that is what they're evaluating, and back to you.
• Finally, Admin has one budget-neutral correction for the insulin repayment program.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Will there be an opportunity to speak about the non-exemptive program? Mr. Chairman.
• , the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy.
• You just told me that you were gonna re-evaluate it.
• And it's like, these are things that we should at least discuss and evaluate.
• As you may know, Tylenol does not have a regulation requiring a REMS, a risk evaluation medication.

Keywords: nominations, labor, health, veterans, Social Security, Elon Musk, transparency, government accountability

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on various executive nominations and their implications on labor and health affairs. Significant discussions surrounded the nomination of Mr. Sonderling as the Deputy Secretary of Labor, with members expressing concerns about workforce cuts affecting veterans and Social Security employees. There was also a debate led by a member regarding the authority and influence of private individuals, specifically citing Elon Musk's involvement in government decisions. Such discussions raised questions about transparency and accountability within governmental agencies, leading to a proposal for Mr. Musk to provide testimony before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• continues<00:08:18.479> because Fraud in this program continues because Fraud in this program
• The family public assistance programs.
• this program a career ending decision. this program a career ending decision.
• evaluation, and diagnosis. evaluation, and diagnosis.
• So diagnosis has to be different than assessment and evaluation. >> They are. >> And evaluation.

Bills: HF3521, HF3563, HF82, HF2689, HF1794, HF3544, HF3516, HF1752

Keywords: hospital moratorium, hospital construction, bed capacity, hospital expansion, health care facilities, hospital licensing, safety-net hospital, level I trauma center, Ramsey County, Minnesota health law, hospital beds, new hospital exception, certificate of need, inpatient capacity, emergency care, trauma services, health system regulation, state moratorium, hospital modernization, health infrastructure

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm sorry, with what program? OK.
• That means we evaluate and quantify the injury.
• Um, how will it be evaluated?
• They're very instrumental to our program.
• The great thing about our program, um, Mr.