Transcript Highlights:

• two language for section one and section two language for section one and section two and<00:49:56.160
• <04:42:00.480> it<04:42:00.958> requires<04:42:01.680> that<04:42:02.400>
• > that<04:42:11.840> that<04:42:12.160> doesn't<04:42:12.480> apply<04:42:12.718
• So,<05:42:01.840> that<05:42:02.160> is<05:42:02.320> what<05:42:02.718> that's
• <05:42:04.320> Um,<05:42:04.638> this<05:42:04.878> is<05:42:04.958> not<

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee met on April 14 and began by welcoming a new member, Representative Samban Denier, who briefly described his background as a Clarkson University environmental engineering graduate and Air Force veteran. The committee then moved into a work session on five energy-related bills, starting with Senate Bill 65 on stormwater management for solar arrays. Representative McGee presented amendment 1594H, which would exclude projects in shoreland areas from the bill’s permit-by-notification process and require the standard alteration-of-terrain permit review instead. Members asked for clarification, and McGee explained the amendment was requested by the New Hampshire Lakes Association and others to preserve the fuller review process for shoreland projects. The committee appeared satisfied with the explanation and moved on. The committee next discussed Senate Bill 230 on electric utility restructuring and investment in distributed energy resources. Members concluded that section one was unnecessary because a better definition of advanced nuclear resources had already been added to House Bill 710, and that section two would allow investment in advanced nuclear resources in a way they had already rejected in another bill due to ratepayer risk. Several members agreed the bill was redundant and supported an ITL motion. They also discussed Senate Bill 232 on net metering terms and conditions, focusing first on whether hydroelectric generators could be listed in ISO New England while also taking net metering credits. Granite State Hydropower Association representative Heidi Kroll testified that generators are subject to checks and balances, that double-dipping is not occurring, and that rules and tariffs already require participation in one market arrangement or the other. Discussion on Senate Bill 232 then shifted to section two, which would bar retroactive changes to net metering tariffs in place as of January 1, 2025. Representative McGee proposed alternative language to protect existing customer generators, group hosts, and municipal hosts from retroactive changes, while others said the language was needed to provide stability for current participants operating on thin margins. Some members supported the clearer wording; others argued the committee should not tie the hands of the PUC and DOE, noting future circumstances could require regulatory flexibility and that conflicts could be resolved in court if necessary. The committee did not take a final vote in the portion of the meeting provided, and the discussion was still ongoing when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• is a new section section 13 has been is a new section section 13 has been added<00:05:18.680>
• :15.640> underneath<00:42:16.119> the<00:42:16.280> recent<00:42:16.640> FAQs
• uh<00:42:21.359> Dei<00:42:21.960> particularly<00:42:22.319> in<00:42:22.440
• c> and<00:42:27.640> that<00:42:27.880> while<00:42:28.440> the<00:42:28.680
• 42:30.839> it<00:42:31.119> it<00:42:31.319> does<00:42:31.599> have Representative

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Postsecondary Education met to consider House Bill 4, relating to postsecondary education. Before taking up the bill, the committee adopted a committee substitute. The substitute removed language creating a private right of action and immunity provisions, added a definition of “indoctrinate,” revised language tied to the Attorney General, and added a new section directing the Auditor of Public Accounts to review compliance every four years. If an institution is found out of compliance, it would have 180 days to cure the issue or become ineligible for formula funding increases in the following fiscal year, with an opportunity to petition the Attorney General. The substitute also added language barring licensing authorities from requiring diversity, equity, and inclusion training as a condition of initial or renewal licensure. Representative Decker presented the bill as an effort to end what she described as unconstitutional DEI practices in Kentucky’s postsecondary system and to refocus colleges on academic instruction, equal opportunity, and affordability. She argued that DEI offices and initiatives have cost taxpayers heavily and have not improved enrollment outcomes for low-income and underrepresented students. Michael Frasier, testifying in support, framed the bill as an equal-protection measure rather than simply an anti-DEI bill, saying it targets preferential treatment and discrimination while exempting traditional civil-rights compliance offices such as Title IX, disability, and other anti-discrimination functions. He also argued that the bill aligns with recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent and that Kentucky should shift toward socioeconomic-based approaches. Several members raised concerns about the bill’s assumptions and effects. Representative Willner questioned the claim that DEI initiatives caused enrollment declines and asked why the state would not make such programs more inclusive instead of eliminating them. Representative Stalker argued that the bill ignored decades of exclusion in higher education and asked what would replace DEI efforts aimed at closing achievement gaps and preventing brain drain. Supporters responded that the bill addresses unconstitutional preferences and that the state should move toward equal treatment and socioeconomic factors rather than race-based criteria. After discussion, the committee substitute was adopted, and the committee continued consideration of House Bill 4.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:42:12.280> said<00:42:12.520> range<00:42:12.920> anxiety<00:42:13.400><
• > hooked<00:42:16.720> a<00:42:16.800> trailer<00:42:17.079> on<00:42:17.280
• :42:19.280> was<00:42:19.440> cold<00:42:20.119> and<00:42:20.240> he<00:
• 42:27.520> is<00:42:27.760> needs<00:42:28.000> to<00:42:28.160> be<00:42
• going<00:42:37.520> to<00:42:37.839> replace<00:42:38.400> them<00:42:38.800>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• the the<00:42:18.160> paraphernalia<00:42:18.720> that<00:42:18.880> he's<00:42
• <00:42:24.720> you<00:42:24.960> would<00:42:25.200> get<00:42:25.760> um
• c><00:42:27.920> of<00:42:28.319> foreign<00:42:29.359> substance<00:42:29.760><
• <00:42:34.160> I<00:42:34.319> mean,<00:42:35.359> I<00:42:35.520> don't<
• 01:42:40.639> we<01:42:40.880> do<01:42:41.040> it<01:42:41.280> to<01:42

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 2246, which would expand public financial disclosure requirements. The State Ethics Commission strongly supported the bill, saying broader disclosure could help restore public trust and potentially deter corruption, and it offered a clarifying amendment to make clear the requirement applies to board and commission members rather than all employees of listed agencies. Several organizations and individuals also testified in support. A committee member asked about the amendment, and the commission explained it was intended as a clarification rather than a substantive change. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2250, which would add homeless facilities to the locations covered by the drug-free-zone offense for promoting controlled substances. The Public Defender opposed the measure, arguing that many homeless facilities are unmarked and not easily identifiable, creating notice, fairness, and due process concerns and risking arbitrary enforcement. The Honolulu Prosecutor’s Office and Honolulu Police Department supported the bill, saying it targets distributors rather than users, that notice can be proven through evidence, and that the law is aimed at protecting vulnerable people in shelters and similar facilities. In questioning, senators asked how homeless facilities would be identified and whether the bill would cover all shelter models; the prosecutor said the definition is cross-referenced in statute and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii and other groups testified in opposition, while several service and advocacy groups testified in support. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 2325, which would allow courts to review and potentially reduce sentences for certain juvenile offenders after 15 years if the person is not a danger to the community. Judiciary staff said the court supports the bill’s intent but noted Hawaii’s indeterminate sentencing structure leaves no alternative sentence for a court to reduce to, suggesting the measure may need structural sentencing changes or could instead be directed to the Hawaii Paroling Authority. Public defender representatives and youth-justice advocates supported the bill, emphasizing rehabilitation, adolescent brain development, trauma, and the need for a meaningful opportunity for release. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• 00:42:14.880> um<00:42:15.599> is<00:42:15.880> it<00:42:16.880> Alex rewarding
• > in<00:42:22.280> and<00:42:22.640> um<00:42:23.040> begin<00:42:23.359>
• > portion<00:42:42.839> it's<00:42:42.960> an<00:42:43.160> honor<00:42:43.400
• 42:45.160> I'm<00:42:45.319> here<00:42:45.480> on<00:42:45.680> behalf<00
• <00:42:46.920> evolving<00:42:47.680> which<00:42:47.800> is<00:42:47.920> an

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <02:42:49.200> coordinate<02:42:49.760> and<02:42:50.080> report<02:42:50.399
• > of<02:42:54.560> workers<02:42:55.040> in<02:42:55.280> our<02:42:55.560
• 42:41.359> government<03:42:42.160> and<03:42:42.720> I<03:42:43.120> believe
• 03:42:50.479> I<03:42:50.720> believe<03:42:50.960> the<03:42:51.120> answer<
• I mean,<03:42:52.000> this<03:42:52.160> is<03:42:52.399> this<03:42:52.479>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <02:42:30.000> There's<02:42:30.160> no<02:42:30.319> other<02:42:30.479>
• <02:42:31.520> And<02:42:31.760> either<02:42:32.080> they<02:42:32.399>
• 42:38.800> them<02:42:39.439> or<02:42:39.680> they<02:42:39.840> get<02:
• Now the rules<02:42:50.000> are<02:42:50.240> not<02:42:50.399> as<02:42:50.640>
• . section. section.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened hearings on SB 69, including a germane amendment on school board votes to accept or reject gifts and donations, and a non-germane amendment creating a virtual early childhood readiness family engagement program for preschool children not yet in kindergarten. Prime sponsor Rep. Glenn Cordelli said the literacy program was modeled on earlier HB 671, would be funded through gifts and donations rather than state appropriations, and would include reporting requirements to the governor and legislature. Members questioned changes from the earlier bill, including the move away from center-based language, the lack of a dollar threshold for school board action on donations, anonymous gifts, and whether the amendment preserved enough evaluation data. Testimony on the donation provisions raised concerns about broad language, timing, and public-meeting requirements. Rep. Timothy Han and Becky Wilson of the New Hampshire School Boards Association both noted that school districts already have policies and asked how the bill would work for routine donations, anonymous gifts, and situations that might require non-public discussion under right-to-know law. Wilson cited examples such as field-trip scholarships, backpack drives, and sports uniforms, and said the association was not taking a position but wanted clearer guardrails. Rep. Han said school boards may need to discuss some gifts in non-public session and that the bill should better address those circumstances. On the early literacy amendment, Wilson and others questioned whether the program was sufficiently developed, whether it was appropriate to rely on a primarily online model for very young children, and how it would interact with special education services and IEPs. A representative from Waterford.org, Rob Riley, testified in support, saying the program would be supplementary, adaptive, and family-engagement based, and that Waterford could provide devices and internet access for families who need them. He said the program would work alongside school districts and IEP teams rather than replace existing services. No vote was taken during the hearing; the chair said the committee would later exec the bills and try to get reports in for the calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh<00:42:01.040> but<00:42:01.320> in<00:42:01.440> brief,<00:42:02.080> uh
• 00:42:16.120> for<00:42:16.240> Gram<00:42:16.560> and<00:42:16.680> Gram.
• Um,<00:42:18.520> while<00:42:18.760> I<00:42:18.840> appreciate<00:42:19.440>
• <00:42:25.280> establish<00:42:25.880> clear<00:42:26.320> rules<00:42:26.680>
• Um,<00:42:36.640> these<00:42:36.840> are<00:42:36.960> licensed<00:42:37.520>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But<00:42:01.280> when<00:42:01.440> it<00:42:01.599> comes<00:42:01.760> to<
• <00:42:09.599> Scaling<00:42:10.000> the<00:42:10.720> estate<00:42:11.280><
• 00:42:18.640> bill<00:42:19.280> isn't<00:42:19.680> going<00:42:19.839> to
• > the<00:42:21.760> heirs<00:42:22.240> of<00:42:22.400> all<00:42:22.720
• the<00:42:47.520> vote<00:42:47.760> on<00:42:48.000> the<00:42:48.160><

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, May 20, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:42:04.400> to<00:42:04.640> comply<00:42:04.880> with<00:42:05.040> the
• drafting requirements<00:42:06.000> of<00:42:06.240> KRS<00:42:06.720> chapter<
• 14.720> for<00:42:14.960> a<00:42:15.200> new<00:42:15.599> 1915 907 KRS
• <00:42:35.200> to<00:42:35.440> comply<00:42:35.680> with<00:42:35.839> the
• > requirements<00:42:36.880> of<00:42:37.119> KRS<00:42:37.680> chapter<00

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the minutes, and then took up several administrative regulations. The first was an Office of the Attorney General regulation creating an online submission process for an annual certification report to replace prior quarterly notarized certification forms; there were no amendments or questions. The main discussion centered on Personnel Cabinet regulations 101 KAR 2:034, 2:102, 3:015, and 3:045, which include staff-suggested technical amendments and address state employee compensation and leave. The compensation provisions clarify salary and rehiring/demotion rules, increase critical position premiums from one to three, and update weekend premium and ACE award practices. The leave provisions would provide up to six weeks of paid leave per 10-year interval for birth, adoption, foster placement, or a serious health condition, and allow one paid adverse-weather day per year with supervisor approval. Staff explained that annual and sick leave already accrue and roll over, and that the new six-week benefit was intended as an additional enhancement tied to the 10-year and 20-year sick-leave milestones.

Transcript Highlights:

• Complaints that we<00:42:43.280> had<00:42:43.520> made<00:42:43.760> were<00:42
• <00:42:46.000> was<00:42:46.160> never<00:42:46.319> an<00:42:46.560> absolute
• > and<00:42:48.480> there<00:42:48.640> was<00:42:48.800> no<00:42:48.960
• <00:42:52.480> As<00:42:52.640> the<00:42:52.800> weeks<00:42:53.119> went
• As the weeks went on,<00:42:53.680> the<00:42:53.839> sit<00:42:54.160> the<00:42

Bills: HB0159

Keywords: student rights, free expression, K-12 education, speech protection, religious views, political speech, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ><00:42:00.720> put<00:42:00.960> by<00:42:01.119> the<00:42:01.280> wayside.
• :20.000> but<00:42:20.240> we<00:42:20.480> came<00:42:20.640> back<00:42
• again in 203.<00:42:24.400> Um,<00:42:25.119> we<00:42:25.359> had<00:42:25.520
• > to<00:42:25.680> deal<00:42:25.839> with<00:42:25.920> the<00:42:26.079
• :30.960> no<00:42:31.200> targets<00:42:31.599> and<00:42:31.839> it<00:42

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• :00.080> please<03:42:00.720> uh<03:42:01.040> uh<03:42:01.279> iail<03:42
• <03:42:05.479> does<03:42:05.640> anybody<03:42:05.880> have<03:42:06.000> any
• 42:47.439> this<03:42:47.600> bill<03:42:47.800> would<03:42:47.960> likely
• > my<04:42:06.120> Section<04:42:06.320> 8<04:42:06.560> tenants<04:42:06.958
• > now<04:42:07.360> do one two of my Section 8 tenants now do one two of my Section 8 tenants

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• you<03:42:13.120> give<03:42:13.279> us<03:42:13.439> some<03:42:13.600>
• 03:42:14.640> that<03:42:14.880> just<03:42:15.040> because<03:42:15.840> I'm
• <03:42:18.720> Could<03:42:18.880> you<03:42:18.960> get<03:42:19.120> a<
• >> Yes.<03:42:21.439> So<03:42:21.680> I<03:42:21.840> was<03:42:22.000>
• ><03:42:26.080> as<03:42:26.239> I<03:42:26.399> am<03:42:26.479> with<03

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• :29.479> fund<03:42:29.720> as<03:42:29.880> per<03:42:30.080> the<03:42:
• to<03:42:39.920> speak<03:42:40.120> to<03:42:40.279> the<03:42:40.439><
• we're<03:42:43.760> done<03:42:44.040> this<03:42:44.159> is<03:42:44.359> his
• <03:42:44.760> um<03:42:45.239> this<03:42:45.359> is<03:42:45.479> his
• > he<03:42:46.159> put<03:42:46.359> forth<03:42:46.880> so<03:42:47.040>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee met to review Division One of a very large budget package, with the chair explaining that the budget was being analyzed in three divisions over multiple days. Members first discussed procedure, including when amendments and line-item votes would be taken, and agreed to proceed with the division’s presentation before questions. Representative Maguire then outlined the division’s approach as a series of tradeoffs to close a large budget gap, emphasizing cuts, some revenue changes, and a focus on overall spending levels as well as individual reductions. The presentation covered a wide range of agencies and policy areas. Major proposed changes included cuts or eliminations to several boards and commissions viewed as costly or duplicative, such as the Housing Appeals Board, Board of Tax and Land Appeals, Human Rights Commission, Commission on Aging, Office of the Child Advocate, and the Personnel Appeals Board, with some functions consolidated into other boards. The division also proposed back-of-the-budget cuts to the Information Technology Department, Judicial Branch, Justice Department, Retirement System, Corrections, and Environmental Services, along with fee increases in several areas. Other notable items included ending marketing for Paid Family Leave, reducing job advertising and tourism promotion, defunding the Arts Council, moving liquor enforcement functions out of the Liquor Commission, and shifting some funds such as the College Savings Commission money to Division Two. Several members questioned specific cuts, especially the elimination of the Council on Aging, the reduction in regional planning commission grants, and the large cut to tourism advertising. Maguire defended the choices as necessary budget tradeoffs, arguing that some programs duplicated work done elsewhere, that regional planning grants were not among the most essential items, and that tourism promotion was a form of spending he viewed skeptically. He also explained that the public defender’s budget was partially restored after a credible claim of a governor’s budget error, and that the committee would continue refining corrections-related cuts because the House was only halfway through the budget process and further changes could still occur in the Senate and conference committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• 42:55.520> as<00:42:55.960> a<00:42:56.480> at<00:42:56.600> the has paid
• > there's<01:42:13.920> nothing<01:42:14.280> in<01:42:14.440> here<01:42
• , you know, but<01:42:17.240> you're<01:42:17.400> making<01:42:17.760> it<01:42
• cause to<01:42:23.960> be<01:42:24.080> able<01:42:24.280> to<01:42:24.400>
• I<01:42:33.200> I<01:42:33.640> I I I I I I I don't<01:42:35.200> foresee<01:42:

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• move<00:42:23.559> the<00:42:23.760> appropriation<00:42:24.280> amount<00:42
• /c> uh<00:42:29.520> members<00:42:29.920> any<00:42:30.160> questions<00:42:30.559
• :42:35.240> for<00:42:35.400> the<00:42:35.520> committee<00:42:35.800> of
• 39.200> Vice<00:42:39.440> chair<00:42:39.599> for<00:42:39.760> the<00:42
• vice chair<00:42:47.000> vote<00:42:47.599> I<00:42:48.599> um<00:42:48.720>

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:

• :02.040> and<00:42:03.040> the<00:42:03.200> ruling<00:42:04.079> I<00:42
• <00:42:05.680> here<00:42:05.880> this<00:42:06.040> was<00:42:06.280> an
• :42:09.400> to<00:42:09.920> handle<00:42:10.920> uh<00:42:11.359> if<00:
• federal<00:42:12.440> income<00:42:12.920> tax<00:42:13.200> law<00:42:13.480><
• > so<00:42:35.640> it's<00:42:35.880> not<00:42:36.319> the<00:42:36.559>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on HB 402, a bill to repeal a provision in RSA 194-F:2 stating that Education Freedom Account (EFA) funds “shall not constitute taxable income” to the parent or student. The bill sponsor argued the current language is misleading because the state cannot determine federal tax liability, and said the bill would simply remove inaccurate tax advice from state law. He cited IRS guidance and prior federal legislation, including a Ted Cruz proposal, to suggest some EFA uses may be taxable under federal law, while others may not, and said the bill could be amended if needed to avoid confusion. Testimony was sharply divided. Py Campbell opposed the bill, arguing it would unfairly single out EFA students and could amount to a tax on education funds, including for self-employed families, and recommended it be voted inexpedient to legislate. Stephen Matthew French, a tax preparer, also opposed the bill, saying IRS Publication 970 already makes clear that scholarship-type payments used for tuition and related expenses are not taxable, and that the bill addresses a problem that does not exist. He warned that adding tax reporting requirements could create administrative costs for families and the program administrator. Bill Ardinger, a tax attorney, supported the repeal of the statutory language, saying the state should not place potentially incorrect tax advice into law. He explained that under federal tax law, only certain scholarship-like uses are exempt, while many EFA-eligible expenses may not be, especially for families using the program for homeschooling or other nontraditional expenses. He said the current statute could mislead families into thinking all EFA payments are tax-free and could expose the state to future legal problems. The hearing ended after questions from committee members; no vote or final action was taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• fighting among<00:42:03.560> plans<00:42:04.079> and<00:42:04.240> Who's<00:42:
• else<00:42:06.000> in<00:42:06.160> the<00:42:06.280> county<00:42:06.680>
• <00:42:09.760> the<00:42:09.920> choice<00:42:10.520> let's<00:42:10.800> the
• <00:42:13.599> decisions<00:42:14.480> to<00:42:14.680> me<00:42:14.920>
• c><00:42:18.560> saving<00:42:19.000> money<00:42:19.599> we're<00:42:19.800>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• :06.400> one<00:42:06.599> case<00:42:06.800> it<00:42:06.920> is<00:42:07.079
• <01:42:04.520> just<01:42:04.880> I'll<01:42:05.080> speak<01:42:05.480>
• <01:42:07.080> Amendment<01:42:07.560> chair<01:42:08.360> um<01:42:09.199> so
• 0620<01:42:13.880> um<01:42:14.880> and<01:42:15.440> essentially<01:42:16.000>
• citizenship<01:42:21.480> can<01:42:21.639> be<01:42:21.880> verified<01:42:22.520

Keywords: 1191, senate, all