Transcript Highlights:

• They are top-notch these cases.
• prosecutors had to dismiss those charges with prejudice because the agents lie in those cases.
• Time is always of the essence in these cases.
• <00:57:26.000> Also,<00:57:26.319> we the essence in these cases.
• Also, we the essence in these cases.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• and I think that's important where ideas can be discussed thoughtfully, and that has always been the case
• and I think that's important where ideas can be discussed thoughtfully, and that has always been the case
• and I think that's important where ideas can be discussed thoughtfully, and that has always been the case
• and I think that's important where ideas can be discussed thoughtfully, and that has always been the case
• And yet they're going to be Ideas can be discussed thoughtfully, and that has always been the case here

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We looked for cases of fraud and abuse and we asked what could we do to stop these things?
• And yes, I would believe that is the case. Not seeing any other questions.

Bills: HB3329, HR1039, HR1040, HB3413, HB3414, HB3415, HB3416, HB3417, HB3418, HB3419, HB3420, HB3706, HB3711, HB4139, HB1268, HB3660, HJR1023, HB3298, HB3056, HJR1084, HB3934, HB3919, HB4118, HB4119, HB3791, HB4260, HB4178, HB4215, HB4324, HB3270, HB4352, HB4305, HB2955, HB3315, HB3066, HB1245, HB4125, HB3075, HB3129, HB3239, HB4153, HB3265, HB4491, SB680, HB4263, HB4268, HB1675, HB3885, HB2984, HB3697, HB2959, HB3671, HB3852, HB2933, HB3057, HB3802, HB4294, HB4285, HB3708, HB3979, HB3977, HB3986, HB3985, HB3588, HB3742, HB3845, HJR1070, HB3590, HB3595, HB3391, HB3183, HB3764, HB3765, HB1002, HB4434, HJR1086, HB4060, HB3881, HB3500, HB4408, HB3648, HB3127, HB3606

Keywords: long-term care, advisory board, sunset legislation, mental health, psychologists, University of Oklahoma, gymnastics, NCAA, congratulations, sports excellence, recognition, honor, athletics, Joseph Castiglione, leadership, education, sports management, HB3413, public finance, state budget

Transcript Highlights:

• That is simply untrue based on case law as it's moved forward today. It was first passed in 1994.
• is simply That is simply untrue<00:08:43.159> based<00:08:43.479> on<00:08:43.640> case
• law as it's moved untrue based on case law as it's moved forward<00:08:45.080> today.
• Annunciation case Annunciation case planned<00:15:55.400> this<00:15:55.600> for<00
• The one thing that I've seen in all of these, and it's not just this case, in multiple school shooting

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• . ...asking the court to review their case.
• This is just about the underlying case or the underlying facts.
• Underlying case or the underlying facts of the case, rather, it is a petition to ask the judge to reconsider
• I think would be beneficial. ...case. I think would be beneficial.
• If that's the case, you have failed to look thoroughly in the Webster dictionary.

Bills: SJR 18, SCR 5, SCR 13, SCR 25, SB 3, SB 6, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 15, SB 17, SB 18, SB 35, SB 388, SB 412, SB 441, SB 495, SB 666, SB 687, SB 706, SB 740, SB 815, SB 842, SB 917, SB 925, SB 995, SB 1006, SB 1281, SB 1300, SB 1379, SB 1451, SB 1902, SJR 36, SJR 18, SJR 12, SCR 13, SCR 25, SCR 5, SCR 22, SB 565, SB 372, SB 495, SB 842, SB 765, SB 62, SB 19, SB 18, SB 666, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 706, SB 847, SB 290, SB 11, SB 10, SB 13, SB 412, SB 441, SB 1248, SB 740, SB 14, SB 1006, SB 504, SB 917, SB 925, SB 388, SB 1902, SB 1121, SB 995, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 35, SB 6, SB 815, SB 3, SB 1281, SB 1379, SB 1300, SB 1497, SB 1499, SB 1498, SB 1451, SB 1061, SB 15, SB 65, SB 241, SB 304, SB 402, SB 499, SB 621, SB 974, SB 1023, SB 1024, SB 1025, SB 1106, SB 686, SB 112, SB 371, SB 204, SB 400, SB 609, SB 1447, SB 670, SB 502, SB 427, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1555, SB 1362, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 987, SB 1539, SB 893, SB 447, SB 875, SB 406, SB 509, SB 985, SB 965, SB 17, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 12, SB 24, SB 57, SB 1194, SB 1253, SB 1215, SB 1532, SB 1268, SCR 12, SCR 24, SB 1302, SB 856, SB 650, SB 583, SB 673, SB 840, SJR 18, SB 11, SB 441, SB 10, SB 18, SB 412, SB 495, SR 238, SR 264, SR 266, SR 267, SR 268, SR 270, SR 271, SR 272, SR 278, SB 1169, SB 1169

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming

Transcript Highlights:

• The Kennedy case made coercion the new test.
• So if that's the case, why?
• You familiar with that case?
• In that case, as it got up to the Supreme Court...
• I think so in this case because in this case because he knew that I was probably gonna get hazed on it

Bills: SJR18, SCR5, SCR13, SCR25, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB35, SB388, SB412, SB441, SB495, SB666, SB687, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB917, SB925, SB995, SB1006, SB1281, SB1300, SB1379, SB1451, SB1902, SJR36, SJR18, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SB565, SB372, SB495, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB412, SB441, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SCR12, SCR24, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming

Transcript Highlights:

• practice for schools not to store unofficial records in a student's cumulative file, thus in many cases
• I agree with Assemblymember Hoover that, in cases where there's a question of whether we should share
• Yet, as was recently held in the Mirabelli case cited in my letter, that is precisely when children need
• you might get an adult, you may get somebody who doesn't understand that, and that will not be the case
• ; nearly 400 of those cases address disability discrimination.

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard a full agenda of bills, first adopting a consent calendar of 11 measures without individual presentations. The committee then took up AB 1412, which would require California schools to implement or adopt a transferred special education student’s IEP within 30 days for out-of-state transfers and to coordinate more quickly on records. The author and military-family witnesses said the bill would reduce delays for highly mobile students, especially military children; a school administrators group opposed it. The bill received initial support from committee members and was moved on call. The committee also reconsidered AB 281, which would require notice to parents when outside consultants provide sex education instruction; the author accepted amendments removing a copy-right provision, but the bill remained on call after a split vote. The committee heard AB 1005, which would create a statewide drowning-prevention education and swim-lesson voucher framework for underserved communities. The author and supporters described drowning as a preventable public health and equity issue, while the bill was clarified as developing a plan rather than immediately launching a voucher program. It was voted out on a 3-0 roll with the measure placed on call. AB 908, as amended, would add compliance monitoring for existing requirements that schools use LGBTQ-inclusive instructional materials and curriculum under the FAIR Act. Supporters said the bill would improve implementation and student safety; opponents raised concerns about privacy, girls’ sports, and school burdens. The committee approved the bill 5-2 and sent it to Appropriations. The committee then heard AB 1401, which would affirm parents’ access to school records, including unofficial records unless exempt by law. The author argued that parents need clearer access to information held by schools and vendors, while school officials and teachers’ union representatives warned the bill was too vague and could sweep in personal notes, journals, and other sensitive material. The bill failed on a 2-3 vote and was placed on call. Finally, AB 727 would require student ID cards to include the Trevor Project hotline for LGBTQ youth; supporters framed it as a suicide-prevention measure, while opponents argued it conflicted with parental rights and religious beliefs. Committee discussion focused on whether 988 already provides similar access and whether the Trevor Project is an appropriate resource to print on IDs; the hearing continued with the bill still under consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• all three counties from the neighbor islands first, and that way people can ask questions just in case
• Vidina Stadium is home to the KF, and in case people are unaware, KF is the one island where the county
• viinaa stadium is home to the KF<00:33:25.919> and<00:33:26.240> in<00:33:26.440> case
• They reported that 78% of all their cases are taking now are newly arrived individuals.
• <01:15:14.120> I and and you know what I in many cases I and and you know what I in many cases

Keywords: 910, house, all

Bills: SJR60, SJR62, SJR65, SJR66, SJR67, SJR68, SCR27, SCR28, SCR29, SB1576, SB1577, SB1578, SB1579, SB1580, SB1581, SB1582, SB1583, SB1584, SB1585, SB1586, SB1587, SB1588, SB1589, SB1590, SB1591, SB1592, SB1593, SB1594, SB1595, SB1596, SB1597, SB1598, SB1599, SB1600, SB1601, SB1602, SB1603, SB1604, SB1605, SB1606, SB1607, SB1608, SB1609, SB1610, SB1611, SB1612, SB1613, SB1614, SB1615, SB1616, SB1618, SB1619, SB1620, SB1622, SB1623, SB1624, SB1625, SJR60, SJR62, SJR65, SJR66, SJR67, SJR68, SCR27, SCR28, SCR29, SB1576, SB1577, SB1578, SB1579, SB1580, SB1581, SB1582, SB1583, SB1584, SB1585, SB1586, SB1587, SB1588, SB1589, SB1590, SB1591, SB1592, SB1593, SB1594, SB1595, SB1596, SB1597, SB1598, SB1599, SB1600, SB1601, SB1602, SB1603, SB1604, SB1605, SB1606, SB1607, SB1608, SB1609, SB1610, SB1611, SB1612, SB1613, SB1614, SB1615, SB1616, SB1618, SB1619, SB1620, SB1622, SB1623, SB1624, SB1625

Keywords: SJR 60, Texas constitutional amendment, property tax exemption, ad valorem taxation, rainwater harvesting, graywater system, water conservation, water reuse, residential tax incentive, local government finance, county commissioners court, appraisal value, environmental incentive, November 2025 ballot, Article VIII, tax relief, healthcare workforce, education funding, higher education, economic growth

Transcript Highlights:

• cases.
• case law to interpret it? case law to interpret it?
• :59.920> cases.
• pursue these cases. pursue these cases.
• The same in this case.

Bills: SF0087, SF0088, SF0092

Keywords: felony, law enforcement, police officer, criminal penalties, public safety, sex offender, child care facility, residency restrictions, criminal law, sex offenders, child care facilities, legislation, false claims, civil penalties, state accountability, whistleblower protection, fraud prevention, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• However, that is not the case.
• I just... it's sort of unfathomable to me that, that being the case, we wouldn't look into it.
• ,<01:04:09.440> we<01:04:09.640> wouldn't that that being the case, we wouldn't that
• that being the case, we wouldn't look<01:04:10.880> into<01:04:11.240> it.
• that we have seen, for the fraud cases that we have seen, have<01:37:48.360> all<01:37:48.560

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• /c><00:09:43.000> also<00:09:43.320> makes<00:09:43.600> the<00:09:43.720> case
• certification and it also makes the case certification and it also makes the case that<00:09:44.079
• A 12-hour shift in the cold is a high legislative priority for the Minnesota Pipe Trades.
• They have literally, in some cases, over a hundred billion dollars in cash on hand, but we're put in
• They have literally, in some cases, over a hundred billion dollars in cash on hand, but we're put in

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The state joins us in the site visits and the case reviews.
• It's mostly in case growth versus case hours.
• They have assigned cases, and it is high—35 to 500 cases.”
• They have assigned cases. And it is three, you know, it is high. 35 to 500 cases.
• So if that's the case, I guess I didn't know.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the governor’s IHSS budget proposals and then took public testimony from the administration, LAO, county representatives, labor, consumer advocates, and an aging/disability advocacy group. The administration described IHSS as a large Medi-Cal long-term services program serving more than 900,000 recipients and proposed three changes: shifting some growth costs tied to authorized hours per case to counties, eliminating the statewide backup provider system, and aligning IHSS terminations with Medi-Cal terminations. The administration also discussed the earlier CFCO reassessment penalty change for counties and said overdue reassessments had dropped significantly. LAO said the governor’s overall IHSS cost estimates appeared reasonable, but raised concerns about the hours-per-case cost shift, including unclear root causes for growth, limited county control over statewide averages, and uncertainty about the eventual savings. County Welfare Directors Association, SEIU, and consumer/advocacy witnesses opposed the hours cost shift, arguing counties use state tools, the proposal would pressure counties to cut services, and it could harm older adults and people with disabilities by increasing institutionalization and shifting costs elsewhere. The chair and members repeatedly questioned the rationale for the proposal, the lack of a defined baseline, and whether the current assessment tools or MOE structure should instead be revisited. On the backup provider system, the administration said the program is underused and costly to administer relative to service spending, while LAO suggested the Legislature consider whether administrative costs could be reduced instead of eliminating it. County, labor, and consumer witnesses opposed the cut, saying the system is a critical emergency safety net even if utilization is low, especially for rural areas and people with complex needs. Members also asked about data quality, county backup systems, and whether consumers know the program exists. On the Medi-Cal/IHSS alignment proposal, the administration said automation would stop General Fund-only spending when recipients lose Medi-Cal and restore IHSS automatically when Medi-Cal is regained; LAO and others noted the proposal had been rejected before and urged better notices and safeguards. Witnesses warned that automatic termination could create gaps in care and unpaid work for providers, while the department said counties already manually terminate in some cases and that automation is ready if approved. No votes were taken in the excerpt, and the chair indicated the committee would continue with public comment and later items before a hard adjournment time.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of these cases was in New Mexico, in which, One of these cases was in New Mexico, in which Ray, a
• Critchfield case.
• And the SCOTUS case of the Scrimetti case recently shows that the Supreme Court is moving the direction
• On a case-by-case basis, it's understandable why a police officer or law enforcement personnel would
• On a case-by-case basis, it's understandable why a police officer or law enforcement personnel would

Bills: SB7, SB14

Keywords: gender designation, civil penalties, private civil rights, multiple-occupancy spaces, Texas Women's Privacy Act, law enforcement, confidentiality, personnel files, employee records, misconduct

Summary: The Committee on State Affairs heard testimony on Senate Bill 7, the Texas Women’s Privacy Act, with the author and committee substitute explaining that the bill would require public facilities to designate multi-use private spaces by biological sex, restrict access to women’s restrooms, locker rooms, showers, sleeping quarters, shelters, and correctional facilities, and create civil penalties and enforcement mechanisms. Members asked about how the bill would apply to family violence shelters, children in mixed-family settings, venue layout, and venue for lawsuits; the author said the bill was similar to prior legislation but with stronger penalties and the 15th Court of Appeals as the exclusive intermediate appellate court for challenges, while clarifying that trial venue should generally be local except for state agencies. The committee also heard that the bill would be amended to better address local venue concerns and shelter-related issues. Invited testimony was largely in support of the bill from witnesses who described personal experiences in women’s sports, prisons, shelters, and public facilities, arguing that single-sex spaces are necessary for privacy and safety. Supporters included parents, former incarcerated women, a Republican county chair, a legal advocate, and a prison educator, who cited incidents involving transgender-identifying individuals in locker rooms, shelters, prisons, and restrooms, and said the bill would restore sex-based boundaries and protect vulnerable women and girls. One witness from Texas Values said the bill was needed despite the recently enacted Women’s Bill of Rights, and another ADF witness said the measure would protect privacy in schools and shelters. Opponents testified that the bill would harm transgender and intersex Texans, create harassment and “gender policing,” and expose cisgender women and children to invasive enforcement. Several witnesses argued there is no evidence that transgender women pose a restroom safety threat, while others said the bill would worsen mental health, employment, and school conditions for trans people and could conflict with prison standards and federal law. Family violence advocates urged changes to protect shelter operations and clarify that children can stay with parents, while other witnesses said the bill would create barriers for victims seeking help. The hearing featured extensive public testimony on both sides, but no final vote or committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• This year we've seen 27 cases, or I should say last year 27 cases.
• This year we've seen 27 cases, or I should say last year 27 cases.
• Preparation mode in case we have to Preparation mode in case we have to respond<00:24:54.320> to
• <00:25:00.399> over significant uptick in rabies cases over significant uptick in rabies cases
• survived so um a larger number of cases survived so um a larger number of cases than<00:25:22.360

Bills: HF601, HF271, HF1101, HF979

Keywords: agriculture, depredation compensation, livestock, crop damage, elk, wolves, wildlife management, skills path program, career and technical education, CTE, dual credit, postsecondary options enrollment, apprenticeship, apprenticeship readiness, dual training, work-based learning, career pathways, skilled trades, workforce development, high school to career

Transcript Highlights:

• That is, you know, a proclamation from the General Court of New Hampshire saying this should be the case
• interpretation is that's a proclamation that we're sending as a legislative body saying this should be the case
• legislative body saying this should be legislative body saying this should be the<00:36:13.680> case
• the case. the case.
• Nice warm room on a cold day. Yes. >> Uh, my name is Donna Scitec.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In any of these that we do assign cases, it'll depend on the particular case.
• like the opioid cases, like the social media cases, these almost serve as a financing mechanism for
• do work in conjunction on other cases do work in conjunction on other cases with<00:10:31.680>
• /c><00:10:44.959> have<00:10:45.200> under cases that we currently have under cases that
• Uh, but I do think we have mid-range cases that are in-state cases that would be perfect for that.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first established a quorum, approved the minutes from the November 10 meeting, and then approved a large agenda of contracts and related items, with the total agenda amount stated as $359,638,393.88. Most items were approved without objection, but two contracts were pulled for discussion: attorney general panel counsel contingency fee contracts and a Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission personal services contract. For the attorney general’s office, Chris Lewis explained that the contracts were panel counsel contingency fee agreements, with 14 qualified awards from 16 applicants. He said the contracts were contingency-based, so no money would be paid unless cases were successful, and that the fee structure worked out to roughly 5% under the statutory waterfall. Senators asked about the size of the contracts, whether the terms were uniform, why no Kentucky firms were among the awardees, and how the public should understand the large dollar figures. Lewis said one Kentucky firm applied but was disqualified for a late submission, other Kentucky firms had inquired but did not apply, and local firms could still work with national firms on cases. The committee then approved the contracts. The Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission contract drew more extensive questioning. Commission representatives said they had previously had a contract disapproved because the proper process was not followed, so they used an RFI process posted on the state and commission websites for at least three weeks. They received one applicant, a Kentucky firm, and set the rate at $125 per hour. Members questioned whether the commission was acting beyond its ethics mission, whether staff were helping draft complaints against legislators, and whether the commission was taking on a prosecutorial or human-resources role. The commission said its role is limited to enforcing the legislative code of ethics, providing advisory guidance, and following the formal complaint process; it does not pursue matters outside that code. Members also raised concerns about the earlier procurement misstep and the commission’s credibility, and the commission apologized, said it had corrected the process, and pledged to comply going forward. The committee then approved the contract.

Transcript Highlights:

• More measles cases in Massachusetts?
• More measles cases in Massachusetts?
• Two Massachusetts court cases and two Supreme Court cases have protected our religious rights.
• Two Massachusetts court cases and two Supreme Court cases have protected our religious rights.
• Laura Friedland Case. Laura Friedland Case. Hi there.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health held a hearing on several vaccination-related bills, including proposals to eliminate non-medical or religious exemptions for school immunizations (notably H. 2554 and S. 1557), a bill to require or improve reporting and administration of immunization data and exemptions (described as the Community Immunity Act, S. 1618), and H. 2431, which would prohibit COVID-19, mRNA, or gene-altering vaccine requirements. The committee also heard testimony on H. 2463, which would classify funeral directors as public health workers for vaccine-priority purposes during emergencies. The chair reviewed testimony rules and repeatedly asked speakers to keep comments orderly and brief so the committee could hear as many people as possible. No votes were taken during the hearing. Testimony on H. 2554 and S. 1557 was sharply divided. Pediatricians, infectious disease specialists, public health advocates, and groups such as the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Massachusetts Medical Society, March of Dimes, Massachusetts Families for Vaccines, and several parents supported eliminating religious exemptions, arguing that vaccination protects medically vulnerable children and adults, improves herd immunity, and helps prevent outbreaks of measles, pertussis, and other diseases. They cited local school data showing pockets of lower coverage and incomplete reporting, and several speakers referenced outbreaks in other states and the need for stronger, more consistent reporting and exemption management. Opponents argued the bills would infringe on religious freedom and parental rights, force families to choose between faith and education, and unfairly target a small number of families; some also said Massachusetts already has high vaccination rates and that the real issue is incomplete data or the gap population rather than religious exemptions. H. 2431 drew testimony from supporters who said COVID-era mandates caused job losses, privacy concerns, and harm, and that the bill would prevent future requirements for COVID, mRNA, or gene-altering vaccines in schools, workplaces, and public settings. Supporters described personal experiences with alleged vaccine injury or mandate-related hardship. H. 2463 was supported by the Massachusetts Funeral Directors Association, which argued funeral directors work in infection-facing settings and should be eligible for vaccine priority during public health emergencies. The hearing featured extensive public testimony but no committee action beyond hearing the bills and taking questions from members.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm just getting over a cold, so I will try and grin and bear it.
• I'm just getting over a cold, so I will try and grin and bear it.

Bills: HF3676, HF3683, HF3395

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Summary: The committee first approved minutes from February 19 and February 26, while skipping the February 24 minutes because of a drafting error that would be corrected later. It then took up House File 3676, a Safe at Home program bill described by Rep. Nash as arising from a constituent’s dangerous identity exposure and intended to tighten protections for participants, including allowing emancipated minors to enroll. Testimony from the Secretary of State’s office explained that the bill would clarify who may apply for a minor, require proof of guardianship, strengthen court findings before a participant’s physical address can be disclosed, increase penalties for harmful disclosure, prohibit discrimination based on participation, require state agencies to designate a Safe at Home contact person, allow use of the Safe at Home card as proof of residence for certain ID purposes, and require judge training. Members raised concerns about federal compatibility, constitutionality of court-related provisions, and the need for a fiscal note on the felony penalty. Several sections were noted as being removed or modified in a later engrossment, and the committee voted to re-refer HF 3676 to the Transportation Finance and Policy Committee. The committee then heard House File 3683, which would direct the state budget forecast to include the estimated cost of fraud. Rep. Nash argued that fraud is a significant but unquantified drain on state resources and said the bill would adapt existing forecast language used for inflation to track fraud costs. Minnesota Management and Budget Deputy Commissioner Anna Mingi testified that fraud is unacceptable and that the agency works to prevent and detect it, but said the twice-yearly forecast is not the right tool for this kind of retrospective analysis. She explained that if fraud is identified, the forecast would reflect reduced spending through program integrity actions rather than a separate fraud-cost line item. The bill was moved and referred to the general register after a roll call was requested.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, in a primary that's going to actually shorten the time, and in some cases, like other rural
• In this case, whether she is misspeaking on a bill number or something like that, I understand those
• Representative, I'll... ...legislature are not in this case.
• Representative, I'll legislature are not in this case.
• It is cold. I do not support this measure, and I'm going to tell you why.

Summary: The House convened, completed roll call, approved the journal, and took up several Senate bills and one Senate concurrent resolution through motions to reconsider, return bills for reconsideration, and refer measures to additional Committee of the Whole sessions for further amendment. Early actions included returning SB 1175 and SB 1198 to the Senate for reconsideration, rescinding passage of SB 1336 so it could be reconsidered, and referring SB 1111 and SB 152 to an additional COW. The House also recognized Representative Travers for a personal privilege statement honoring National Women Veterans Recognition Day and recorded attendance. In Committee of the Whole, members adopted floor amendments and recommended passage for SB 1511, SB 1552, SB 1198, SB 1110, SB 1618, SB 1431, and SCR 1004, with some debate on SB 1110’s home-confinement/reentry program, SB 1618’s Military Affairs Commission changes, and SB 1431’s city and town authority over residential project standards and streetscapes. The House later adopted the COW reports and moved the measures to engrossing or third reading as appropriate. SB 1336 and SB 1519 were also advanced from committee, while SB 1004 was reconsidered and ultimately failed on reconsideration. On third or final reading, the House passed SB 1127, SB 1180, SB 1428, SB 1198, SB 1336, SB 1511, SCR 1004, SB 1552, HB 2104, HB 2105, HB 2114, HB 2311, HB 2729, and HB 4117. SB 1687, SB 1004, SB 1519, and SB 1502 failed. Members explained votes on several measures, including support for tax administration clarity in SB 1180, objections and support for the May primary proposal in SB 1687, concerns about sex offender monitoring in SB 1004, support for the Arizona Beef Council in SB 1198, and debate over the photo enforcement referral in SCR 1004. The session also included recesses for caucuses, lunch, and dinner, plus a brief technical outage of the live stream.