Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, and then you also made the statement that you would be willing to consider to work forward on the
• I was trying to be clear in my opening statement: it is within the law now and is not proposed to be
• As I said in my opening statement, there's an existing exemption for donated gift cards. Okay.
• I think certainly the problem statement that you've articulated, that your witnesses have articulated
• I think certainly the problem statement that you've articulated, that your witnesses have articulated

Summary: The committee hearing covered several bills related to privacy, consumer protection, and online harms. SB 259 by Senator Wahab would prohibit surveillance pricing based on device data such as geolocation or battery level; supporters argued it would curb discriminatory and predatory pricing, while opponents raised concerns about geolocation definitions, legitimate location-based pricing, and impacts on discounts and loyalty programs. The bill was moved on a due pass motion to the Judiciary Committee and passed 8-1, with members noting amendments and ongoing discussions with stakeholders. SB 22 by Senator Laird would raise the amount of gift cards that can be redeemed for cash, with the author saying the goal is to update the long-standing $10 threshold for inflation and preserve consumer value. Consumer advocates supported the bill, while retailers, restaurants, grocers, and chambers of commerce opposed or opposed unless amended, citing fraud concerns, safety issues, and the need for clarification on donated or returned gift cards. The committee voted the bill out on a 6-1 vote and kept it on call. SB 576 by Senator Umberg would apply broadcast-style loudness rules to streaming advertisements. The author said the bill is intended to prevent ads from being much louder than programming, especially for children, while the opposition argued that streaming ad insertion is technically different and that existing industry standards and FCC oversight already address the issue. The bill passed 8-0. SB 683 by Senator Cortese would clarify that people can seek injunctive relief, including a TRO, for unauthorized use of name, image, or likeness; supporters said it strengthens privacy protections, while opponents warned about prior restraint and First Amendment concerns. The bill was moved out on a due pass motion and kept on call. The final bill discussed, SB 771 by Senator Stern, would clarify that existing civil rights and hate-related laws apply to social media platforms and their algorithms, with higher penalties for intentional or reckless violations. Supporters, including the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Islamic Networks Group, described online hate as fueling real-world violence and urged stronger accountability; opponents argued the bill could conflict with Section 230, chill lawful speech, and create vague standards. Members raised questions about constitutionality, definitions, and whether the bill would be workable, but several expressed support for the author’s goals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that a fair statement? That's a fair statement. All right, thank you.
• Is that a correct statement or not? Yes, yes.
• They always make affirmative statements, you know.
• But you're not trained— And you said I disagree with that statement.

Bills: HB1106, HB3284, HB541, HB713, HB1403, HB1586, HB1942, HB2070, HB2844, HB2851, HB3151, HB3749, HB3940, HB3963, HB4454, HB4466, HB4795, HB5154, HB5394, SB1357, HB1052, HB4099, HB4638, HB5147

Keywords: child abuse, neglect, gender identity, sexual orientation, child welfare, marriage, family, Texas Commission, family welfare, marriage support, stability, premarital education, child development, strong families, direct patient care, healthcare, physicians, medical services, insurance regulation, maternal health

Transcript Highlights:

• committee's website through the position letter portal and before I go any further I have a standard statement
• And recently the chairs of the caucuses came together and published the following statement.
• We've uncovered statements from schools and district leaders like, there are too many Jews, acknowledge
• And what I heard when I heard those statements is a need for the education that we would provide, if
• like to make, I think a case study that's really important is a teacher being reprimanded for a statement

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If we want to go to the statement of purpose, we can. But, in essence, they have two employees.
• And basically what we did with this budget, we did add in, and as you go to the amendment, or the statement
• And basically what we did with this budget, we did add in, and as you go to the amendment, or the statement
• And basically what we did with this budget, we did add in, and as you go to the amendment, or the statement
• Or the statement of purpose on the amendment is we added $550,000 to retention for, and basically there

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 2271, which would formally place adult residential facilities in code and rebase their Medicaid reimbursement rates. Sponsor Chairman Ruby and HHS staff explained that these facilities, often serving people with dementia or acquired brain injury, are reimbursed at a much lower rate than skilled nursing care and help reduce bottlenecks in higher-level facilities. Members questioned how the program differs from basic care and nursing facility memory care, and the bill was referred to the HR section for deeper review before possible action on Monday. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2396, as amended, which would authorize an independent third-party performance audit of the Department of Commerce and the North Dakota Development Fund, with findings shared with the state auditor. Sponsors said the proposal was prompted by concerns raised in testimony and that a private audit could begin faster than a state audit. The committee adopted an amendment adding an emergency clause and directing the report to the Legislative Audit and Fiscal Review Committee, then passed the bill 20-0 with 3 absent. Next, Representative Clemine presented Senate Bills 2226, 2036, and 2037. SB 2226 would presume an incarcerated person indigent at initial appearance so counsel can be provided at that critical stage; the commission said the appropriation would fund contract attorney hours, and the bill was sent to HR for further review. SB 2036 would create procedures for determining juvenile fitness to proceed in delinquency cases, with a $500,000 appropriation for mental health evaluations, and SB 2037 would begin a juvenile criminal code framework and include a $300,000 appropriation for fitness-to-proceed evaluations; both were also referred to HR, with some concern raised about staffing and overlapping functions. After a short break, the committee heard education-related appropriations bills. SB 2234 would replace expired ESSER funding for Choice Ready grants, but members noted the program was not included in the K-12 budget and sent it to E&E for comparison with existing appropriations. SB 2286, a University of North Dakota request for a new nursing school facility, drew extensive discussion about the age and condition of the current building and the size and scope of the project; the committee ultimately adopted a do-not-pass motion 22-0. SB 2213, the “science of mathematics” bill modeled on the science of reading initiative, would fund math professional development and implementation; it was also referred to E&E for further review. The committee then briefly passed the Racing Commission budget, SB 2023, and began discussion of the Trust Lands budget, SB 2013, including a proposed retention increase for investment-related positions.

Transcript Highlights:

• OK, just some clarifying statements. So, we do have a statewide bill, 3094. This is not that bill.
• I is that, am I saying the right statement? Sure, for the franchise tax, yes.
• Uh, so this is kind of like a projected view of what the financial statement, the financial impact could
• Um, I do want to echo, uh, Representative Hicklin's statement that we fully support the disabled veterans
• taxpayers, and if any cities are against this amendment, they should not be based on their past statements

Transcript Highlights:

• I would be more than happy to clarify my last statement of... Of cost in the elections.
• I don't think those statements are accurate.
• There was also a statement made that we would...
• first and the largest bucket, and some of the arguments you've heard today, are demonstrably false statements
• They were able to predict when polling locations would be running out of supplies of ballots, statement

Bills: HB376, HB817, HB 1297, HB1478, HB1661, HB1783

Keywords: HB 817, Texas Election Code, majority vote, majority threshold, ranked-choice voting, preferential voting, instant runoff voting, vote reassignment, ballot ranking, election administration, public office election, Election Code Section 2.0215, runoff elections, plurality vs majority, voting systems, education reform, budget allocation, teacher retention, student performance, accountability measures

Transcript Highlights:

• Committee on Families and Children, and each report shall include a complete operating and financial statement
• Committee on Families and Children, and each report shall include a complete operating and financial statement
• Committee on Families and Children, and each report shall include a complete operating and financial statement
• Committee on Families and Children, and each report shall include a complete operating and financial statement
• Each report shall include a complete operating and financial statement of the Office of Vocational Rehabilitation

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Roll Call 00:13 SB 15 Discussion 00:45 SB 15 Vote 08:40 SB 103 Discussion 11:12 SB 103 Vote 29:49, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Committee for Economic Development, Tourism, and Labor heard two bills. Senate Bill 15, sponsored by Sen. Amanda Bledsoe, was presented with testimony from Major League Baseball in support of exempting minor league baseball players from Kentucky wage-and-hour treatment. Witnesses said the bill would preserve the negotiated collective bargaining structure for players, avoid impractical time-tracking requirements, and keep Kentucky aligned with other states. Senators discussed minor league salary levels, the importance of baseball to Kentucky communities, and the bill’s relationship to minimum wage law. The committee then took a roll call vote and passed the bill with unanimous support from members present. The committee next heard Senate Bill 103 from Sen. Danny Carroll, which would require the Office of Vocational Rehabilitation to adopt regulations under Chapter 13A, limit reciprocal agreements with other states until in-state provider contracts are exhausted, establish procedures for service fee memos before a new fiscal year, and require an annual report with operating and financial information. Testimony from community rehabilitation providers and disability advocates emphasized that the bill would increase transparency, protect local providers, and improve services for people with disabilities seeking competitive employment. They said Kentucky has a large disability population, that many working-age individuals with disabilities are not employed, and that better oversight could help address workforce shortages and reduce reliance on public assistance. Senators asked about the disability population, age ranges served, funding, and recent changes to provider rates and selection processes. The committee then voted to pass Senate Bill 103 unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you please just ask somebody before you make that statement that it will no longer be two separate
• But I don't know we can make the statements or the belief you have because it could go the other way
• I'm questioning the truth and veracity of statements made by members here because all I have is a bill
• Senator Fine: What this bill does, I point out, Senator Gruters and I are not making these statements
• In the last 24 hours within the same three hour window as the Governor made a statement.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to invite the members to make any opening statements and introduce staff, if they would so choose
• Is that a fair statement? That's correct.
• Is that a fair statement? Mr. Miller, how you doing? Good, good. Good to be with y'all. Mr.
• Since then, the governor and the president have also issued that statement.
• I think that's a fair statement.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On the statement that you've made a few times, Chair Hooper, on the statement that you've made a few
• Senators, that statement I just read? Not my words.
• What has changed since this legislature made a bold and rare bipartisan statement to come together to
• immigration policy to the extent that we work with the federal government, and making political statements

Summary: The Appropriations Committee took up SB 2B, a major immigration bill by Senator Gruters, described by supporters as a Trump-aligned package to strengthen Florida’s role in immigration enforcement. The bill would create a grant program for local law enforcement, expand jail-ICE agreements beyond sheriff-operated jails, establish a chief immigration officer and a state immigration enforcement council, require more coordination on E-Verify and detention-bed reporting, allow immigration status to be considered in bail decisions, increase penalties for certain offenses tied to illegal reentry and voting, and repeal in-state tuition waivers for undocumented students. Much of the sponsor’s presentation and debate emphasized focusing on criminal offenders, improving coordination with federal authorities, and using state resources to support detention and enforcement. Committee questioning focused heavily on the tuition-waiver repeal, reimbursement for jail costs, E-Verify coverage, and whether the bill could lead to street-level immigration enforcement in schools or churches. Senator Smith, Senator Pizzo, Senator Polsky, Senator Sharief, and others challenged the tuition repeal as unfair to students who were brought to Florida as children and argued for grandfathering current students or studying the fiscal impact first. Senator Fine defended the repeal as ending a state subsidy for people who are not lawfully present and argued the change would save tens of millions of dollars. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified that the bill was limited to jail-based enforcement, said there was no current street-level 287(g) program in Florida, and stated he did not believe the bill raised concerns for law enforcement or schools/churches. A representative of the Florida Supervisors of Elections supported the voting-related section, while a Florida Highway Patrol representative said state agencies would need additional funding if they were expected to take on more enforcement duties. The committee adopted Senator Gruters’ late-filed amendment correcting a drafting error. Senator Smith’s amendment to require an OPAGA study on the tuition-waiver policy was withdrawn after discussion, and his handwritten amendment to delete the repeal of in-state tuition for undocumented students failed on a roll-call vote. The bill then advanced as amended, with several members speaking in debate both for and against it. Supporters framed it as a focused public-safety and enforcement measure; opponents criticized the special-session process, the cost, and the tuition repeal’s impact on students already enrolled.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:29:53.679> of correctly in your statement of correctly in your statement of evaluating
• So<00:31:28.159> your<00:31:28.880> statement<00:31:29.440> also<00:31:29.880>
• also that you are sure So your statement also that you are sure that<00:31:31.919> this<00:31
• around the philosophy of quick statement around the philosophy of the<00:41:12.319> program.
• > start<00:42:04.960> with important statement to start with important statement to start

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee opened its second meeting on House Bill 742, which would require catastrophic special education aid to be drawn from the education trust fund, and discussed whether to also examine differentiated aid within the adequacy formula. The chair said the committee had previously heard from HHS/Medicaid officials and now wanted to hear from local special education directors about how the aid system works in practice, including billing, training, data collection, and whether districts handle claims consistently. Members also referenced Arkansas as a possible comparison state and said they hoped to develop ideas by November to address the current funding process. Committee members focused on the current special education aid thresholds and the impact of proration. The chair described the existing formula as requiring districts to absorb costs up to 3.5 times the state average per student, with the state paying 80% from 3.5 times through 10 times and paying above that, and said FY25 appropriated about $34 million while actual claims were about $50.1 million, leaving roughly a $16 million shortfall that caused proration. Members also raised the possibility of lowering the threshold to 2.5 times and asked how that would affect the number of eligible students and costs. Another member asked about how districts decide whether services are education-related or medical-related and how Medicaid or private insurance reimbursement affects later state aid claims. District representatives from Boothby Therapy Services, Bedford, and Guilford introduced themselves and described their roles. Guilford’s director said the district tracks students with paraprofessional support, nurses, transportation, or specialized programming, uses a data system to log every service touchpoint, and tries to maximize both Medicaid and special education aid; she said a lower threshold would likely capture all students with paras or nurses and that rising staffing and service costs would increase the number of students over the cap. Bedford’s assistant director said the district uses a different system, tracks roughly 60 to 80 students a year, and pursues Medicaid and special education aid simultaneously but does not pursue private insurance if it would affect FAPE; she said reducing the threshold to 2.5 times would likely double the number of qualifying students. Members asked follow-up questions about software, data entry, and how districts decide whether to bill Medicaid or seek state catastrophic aid, and the directors explained that their systems log services by staff type and student, with some districts using the same data for both Medicaid and state reimbursement claims.

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, I wanted to make a statement.
• And at the time, the Secretary of State issued a statement declaring an emergency.

Summary: The Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee met on May 8, 2026, with eight members present and a quorum established. The chair reviewed public testimony procedures, emphasized that no votes would be taken that day, and explained witness card and media rules. The meeting was intended primarily for public testimony on filed maps and related matters. Before testimony began, Senator Carter raised concerns about the governor’s suspension of Louisiana’s congressional elections and asked for a representative from the Secretary of State’s office. No one from that office was present. Carter repeatedly asked about the status of early ballots and ballots already cast—whether they would be counted, preserved, or discarded—but the chair said he could not answer those questions and had not contacted the Secretary of State. The exchange centered on uncertainty over the handling of votes in the suspended congressional election, but no substantive answers were provided. The chair reiterated that the committee was there for public testimony on the maps and not to vote on any bills. No bills were presented or acted on in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Are there any members that would like to make a statement?
• Without any further statements the executive session is now adjourned.

Keywords: nominees, economic growth, financial stability, public testimony, consumer protection

Summary: The meeting centered around the confirmation of four significant individuals nominated for leadership positions within various financial institutions. Members engaged in heated discussions regarding the nominees' qualifications and past track records. Concerns were raised over the potential implications of these appointments on economic stability and consumer protections. Each nominee was scrutinized, with particular emphasis on their political alignments and prior influence in their respective agencies. Despite the contentious atmosphere, there was a clear focus on the need for strong leadership to guide economic policies during challenging times.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any questions or statements? Senator Collins, thank you.
• This statement does not. destroying histories and culture tied to the United States of America.
• And what a timely statement to hear in this current time in our country's history.
• I wanted to just quickly respond to some ignorant statements from a representative very early in this
• I wanted to just quickly respond to some ignorant statements from a representative very early in this

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing covered a wide range of bills, with substantial testimony on commemorative days and several local development measures. Early testimony focused on competing proposals about Indigenous Peoples’ Day: Senator Comerford and others supported redesignating the second Monday in October as Indigenous Peoples’ Day, while several Italian American legislators and advocates opposed changing Columbus Day and instead urged a separate Indigenous Peoples’ Day on August 9 or another date. Committee members noted the long-running debate, discussed the state flag and motto review process, and emphasized that any changes would require legislation. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee also heard strong support for a Fred Korematsu Day bill, with testimony from advocates, legal organizations, community leaders, and Korematsu’s daughter. Witnesses described Korematsu’s resistance to Japanese American incarceration during World War II, argued that his story remains relevant amid current immigration and civil liberties concerns, and said the designation would help educate students and the public. A separate bill to designate September as PCOS Awareness Month drew testimony from Senator Miranda and health advocates, who described the disorder’s prevalence, frequent misdiagnosis, fertility and pregnancy risks, and the value of public awareness and education. Other bills discussed included a Domestic Workers’ Rights Day proposal, supported by Representative Garcia and Representative Sousa, who spoke about the invisibility and vulnerability of domestic workers and the importance of recognizing their labor. The committee also heard support for a veteran suicide awareness and remembrance day, a Boston branch library and affordable housing project in Dorchester, and a Fall River waterfront redevelopment bill transferring land to the local redevelopment authority for a major mixed-use project. In addition, Senator Miranda testified in favor of a memorial portrait for former Representative Doris Bunty, highlighting her pioneering role in the legislature and Boston public housing. The hearing was hybrid and lengthy, with the chair repeatedly asking witnesses to be concise and noting that testimony would be public record.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Overdorf, I wanted to focus on the ballot statement itself.
• Representative Oberdorf, I wanted to focus on the ballot statement itself.
• There is a general law statement there at the end of it. You are correctly pointing that out.
• So far, you just made statements. You have a question. Make those choices in this back fills.
• I looked at the mortgage statements of a couple of people.

Summary: The House met in special session, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, approved the journal, and adopted the special order report setting the day’s calendar. The chamber then took up CS/House Joint Resolution 1F, the Governor’s property tax proposal, which would raise the homestead exemption for non-school taxes, lower the annual assessment cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5%, and restrict county and municipal ad valorem revenue to public safety and certain other uses. Sponsor Rep. Overdorf said the measure would return money to homeowners and give local governments flexibility, while opponents repeatedly argued the ballot language was misleading and that the proposal could create large local revenue shortfalls, shift costs to other taxpayers, and threaten local services and debt obligations. Members debated a series of amendments aimed at protecting specific programs from the bill’s effects. Rep. Bartleman’s amendment to exempt Children’s Services Councils and Children’s Trusts was defeated 25-74 after supporters said those entities fund child care, mental health, aftercare, and family support, while opponents said local governments could still choose to fund them. Rep. Cross’s amendment to include water management districts in allowable uses of ad valorem taxes was also defeated, despite testimony that the districts are essential for flood control, water supply, Everglades restoration, and drought response. Rep. Eskamani’s amendment to require the Legislature to backfill public safety funding failed 25-71 after debate over whether the proposal could reduce police and fire budgets and response times. The House then rejected Rep. Woodson’s amendment to require state backfill for senior services, with supporters citing Meals on Wheels, transportation, adult day care, and other aging services, and opponents saying the state already funds senior programs. Finally, Rep. Gant’s amendment to protect veteran services was introduced and debated, with members emphasizing housing, mental health, transition assistance, and homelessness concerns for veterans; the transcript cuts off before the vote on that amendment. Throughout the debate, sponsors and supporters of the main resolution maintained that local governments would retain spending discretion and could use other revenue sources, while critics argued the measure lacked clear backfill provisions and could force cuts or tax shifts at the local level.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that would that be an accurate overall general statement?
• The members, the motion before the body is suspension of Rule 6-8B as to the physical impact statement
• We can't cut taxes without a fiscal impact statement that is issued by a bureaucracy who can, if they
• And there was no, we got a physical impact statement, but in the physical impact statement, it says there
• Could you please expand on that final statement about one trial? Thank you for the question.

Bills: HJR1088, HJR1090, HJR1091, HB1370, SB2154, HJR1092, HJR1093, HJR1095, HJR1099, HJR1100, HB3021, SB893, SB206, SB248, SB259, SB423, SB563, SB604, SB633, HJR1077, SB667, SB1224, SB1257, SB1264, SB1319, SB1360, SB1437, SB1531, SB1543, SB1806, HB3004, SB1572, HB4342, SB1618, SB2, SB237, SB1632, SB1687, SB1726, SB1859, SB1894, SB1461, HB4432, SB1948, SB1589, SJR52, SR46, HCR1030, SB2071, SB2182, SB1451, HJR1088, HJR1090, HJR1091, HJR1092, HJR1093, HJR1095, HJR1096, HJR1099, HJR1100, SB2185, SB893, HB3021, SR46, SB206, SB237, SB248, SB259, SB423, SB563, SB604, SB625, SB633, SB667, SB1224, SB1257, SB1264, SB1319, SB1360, SB1378, SB1437, SB1531, SB1543, SB1572, SB1618, SB1632, SB1687, SB1726, SB1806, SB1859, SB1894, SB1948, SB2071, SJR52, HB1370, HJR1077, SB2, SB1451, SB2182, HCR1030

Keywords: education rules, administrative rules, joint resolution, Oklahoma State Department of Education, higher education, State Regents for Higher Education, Teachers' Retirement System, charter schools, Statewide Charter School Board, career and technology education, CTE, OEQA, rule approval, legislative oversight, permanent rules, school governance, teacher retirement, education agencies, Oklahoma Register, Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry

Transcript Highlights:

• If you say that it stretches 120 miles, I certainly would not dispute your statement.
• I I certainly would not dispute your statement.
• Were they required to make their statements under oath in front of the Senate Rules Committee, sir?
• That statement specifically omitted compliance with the Florida Constitution.
• I don't know what the point of that statement was. We're not getting an extra congressional seat.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituted with House Bill 1D, both establishing Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Senator Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a proposed redistricting plan on short notice and argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional. He repeatedly said the Legislature was not being asked to prove the Governor’s legal theory, only to consider the proposal, and noted that no amendments were offered. A lengthy question-and-answer period followed, with senators raising concerns about the rushed process, lack of statewide public hearings, and the map’s effects on minority communities, compactness, communities of interest, and partisan fairness. Senators questioned whether the map cracked Latino and Black communities, whether partisan data was used, whether the Governor’s office had outside consultants, and whether the plan complied with the Florida Constitution, the Fair Districts Amendment, and the Voting Rights Act. Gates generally deferred on legal conclusions, said the Governor’s representatives had testified the map was race-neutral and used political data only as one factor, and emphasized that any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. After a motion to temporarily postpone failed by a recorded vote of 12 yeas to 23 nays, the Senate continued debate. Senators Rouson, Bernard, and others spoke in opposition, arguing the proposal was rushed, partisan, and harmful to communities of interest and minority voting power. Gates maintained that the Governor had a constitutional prerogative to propose the map and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The House companion bill was then substituted for the Senate bill, read a third time, and the chamber moved into final debate on the congressional redistricting plan.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you say that it stretches 120 miles, I certainly would not dispute your statement.
• I I certainly would not dispute your statement.
• Were they required to make their statements under oath in front of the Senate Rules Committee, sir?
• That statement specifically omitted compliance with the Florida Constitution.
• I don't know what the point of that statement was. We're not getting an extra congressional seat.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If you say that it stretches 120 miles, I certainly would not dispute your statement.
• I I certainly would not dispute your statement.
• Were they required to make their statements under oath in front of the Senate Rules Committee, sir?
• That statement specifically omitted compliance with the Florida Constitution.
• That statement specifically omitted compliance with the Florida Constitution.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If you say that it stretches 120 miles, I certainly would not dispute your statement.
• I I certainly would not dispute your statement.
• Were they required to make their statements under oath in front of the Senate Rules Committee, sir?
• That statement specifically omitted compliance with the Florida Constitution.
• I don't know what the point of that statement was. We're not getting an extra congressional seat.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituting identical House Bill 1D, to establish Florida’s congressional districts. The opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance were followed by procedural remarks, then extensive floor discussion focused almost entirely on the redistricting proposal, its timing, and its legal basis. Senator Gaetz, explaining the bill, said the Governor had transmitted the map two days earlier, argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is not prohibited by law, and said the Governor’s stated reasons were to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts. He also said the legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal. Much of the debate centered on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Louisiana decision and whether it affected Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators Smith, Rouson, Sharief, Polsky, Arrington, Bracey Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and others questioned the short notice, lack of public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony, and whether the map diluted minority voting strength or fragmented communities of interest. Gaetz repeatedly said he was not offering legal opinions, that the Governor’s counsel believed the Fair Districts race-based provisions were inconsistent with federal law, and that any legal challenge would be for the courts. He also said the Governor’s mapmaker reported using census and demographic data, along with political data as one of many inputs, and claimed the map’s compactness was comparable to the current map. A motion by Senator Smith to temporarily postpone consideration of the bill failed on a 12-23 vote. After the Senate returned from a 30-minute break to review the new Supreme Court decision, debate continued. The chamber then substituted HB 1D for SB 8D, read the House bill, and advanced it to third reading. The transcript ends during debate on final passage, with Senators Rouson and Bernard speaking in opposition and arguing the map was procedurally rushed, legally vulnerable, and politically motivated.