Transcript Highlights:

• And so in that way, preclearance is designed to be preventative, right?
• And so in that way, preclearance is designed to be preventative, right?
• Wright said about preclearance.
• And that's why preclearance is so important.
• And that's why preclearance is so important.

Summary: The committee held a work session on voting rights in the United States and Washington, beginning with testimony from Marissa Wright of Campaign Legal Center and David Montes of the ACLU of Washington. They described the federal Voting Rights Act’s main protections—preclearance, vote suppression, and vote dilution—and argued that Supreme Court decisions such as Shelby County v. Holder and Brnovich have weakened those tools. They said Washington should consider stronger state-level protections, including a preclearance program and broader safeguards against discriminatory voting practices. Members asked about Washington’s history of discrimination, voter roll purges, noncitizen registration, and remedies under the Washington Voting Rights Act, including ranked-choice voting and district-based systems. The committee then heard from the Office of Equity and several commissions, which described their roles in advising state government and working with communities. They focused on the immigration sub-cabinet created under Executive Order 2509, saying it is intended to improve coordination across agencies, the legislature, the courts, and community organizations on issues such as data privacy, language access, health care, education, and accountability under the Keep Washington Working Act. Members asked about the use of NGOs, accountability for KWW violations, and the sub-cabinet’s goals, and the panel said the effort is meant to help government respond more quickly and collaboratively while centering immigrant, disability, LGBTQ, and other communities. The final panel was from the University of Washington Elections Database Project, which presented data on vote-by-mail ballot challenges, cures, and rejections from 2020 to 2024. They reported that about 1.5% of ballots are signature-challenged in most elections, roughly 60% of challenged ballots are cured, and overall rejection rates are about 1% in general elections and 1.5% in primaries. The researchers said voters of color, younger voters, and some tribal-area voters experience higher rejection rates, and that differences appear tied to signature mismatch, language access, ballot timing, and familiarity with the system. In the last panel, Maria Fernandez and Vicki Frausto of EIA described voter education and civic engagement work in Yakima County and Sunnyside, including concerns about intimidation, language barriers, signature mismatch, and at-large election systems; they said stronger Washington Voting Rights Act protections would help communities elect candidates of choice. No votes were taken during the work session.

Bills: SB7, SB22, SB39, SB40, SB45, SB46, SB86, SB95, SB107, SB7, SB22, SB39, SB40, SB45, SB46, SB86, SB95, SB107

Keywords: voting rights, absentee ballot, protected classes, Alabama Voting Rights Act, felony conviction, election integrity, preclearance, Alabama Jobs Act, incentives, job creation, economic development, recapture provisions, capital investment, employment, board governance, occupational licensing, Sunset Law, public accountability, training requirements, SB40

Transcript Highlights:

• Holder, the Supreme Court struck down the preclearance formula in the Voting Rights Act and hamstrung
• following that decision, Texas implemented the voter ID system that had previously failed that preclearance

Transcript Highlights:

• The case weakened Voting Rights Act preclearance protections.
• The case weakened Voting Rights Act preclearance protections.
• Center, the white-Black turnout gap nationwide increased roughly 15% in states formally covered by preclearance
• In states where formally covered by preclearance, including Alabama, that gap grew faster than the national
• reason that people, you know, think that us citizens, that think that everybody now you don't need preclearance

Keywords: 920, all

Summary: The Alabama Senate convened with prayer, the pledge, and a roll call establishing a quorum of 34 senators present. The chamber then received a House message referring House Bill 1 on primary elections to the Committee on County and Municipal Government, and moved to Senate Bill 1, also dealing with primary elections and tied to ongoing court action over Alabama’s legislative maps. Senator Elliott explained SB 1 as a prospective measure meant to set up a special election if federal courts lift injunctions on the state Senate districts, while opponents argued the bill was being rushed and could disrupt voters, candidates, absentee voters, and election administration. Much of the debate focused on whether the bill would effectively change election rules too close to an election and whether it conflicted with a 2022 statewide amendment requiring election-related changes to take effect at least six months before a general election. Supporters said the bill simply preserves the legislature’s enacted maps and responds to recent court rulings, while opponents said it could disenfranchise voters, especially military, elderly, absentee, rural, and Black voters, and that the underlying litigation and federal Voting Rights Act issues remained unresolved. Several members also referenced a Brennan Center report and broader concerns about racial turnout gaps and minority representation in Alabama. Senator Coleman offered an amendment to give the state discretion rather than mandate a special election, arguing it would better align with the current court order; the Senate rejected it on a roll call vote, 8 yeas to 25 nays. Senator Vivian Figures then offered a notice-focused amendment requiring adequate public notice before any election changes, arguing that voters need time to learn new dates, polling places, deadlines, and ballot information; that amendment also failed on a roll call vote, with the clerk announcing it did not pass. The transcript ends with further discussion beginning after the failed amendment votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because now through those cases, these utilities can basically get preclearance. we should be making.
• Because now through those cases, these utilities can basically get preclearance.
• Because now, through those cases, these utilities can basically get preclearance that if you do these

Summary: The Senate Committee on Nominations held its final nomination hearing of the session and considered three nominees: J.B. Goodwin for the Texas Real Estate Commission, Courtney Yaltman for the Public Utility Commission of Texas, and Thomas Gleason as PUC chairman. Goodwin described his long career in real estate and charitable work, and senators questioned him extensively about the Real Estate Commission’s self-directed, semi-independent status, housing affordability, institutional homebuyers, property insurance costs, disclosure issues, and the Burnett v. National Association of Realtors case. Yaltman and Gleason were questioned about PUC oversight of ERCOT, post-Winter Storm Uri reforms, utility resilience and vegetation management after Hurricane Beryl, water and telecommunications oversight, staffing and transparency, and rising infrastructure and utility costs. Much of the discussion focused on housing and utility affordability, with several senators urging the nominees to keep consumer protection and public trust at the forefront. Goodwin said housing affordability and large-scale investment purchases were not within the Real Estate Commission’s direct purview, though he supported further study. Yaltman and Gleason said the PUC had increased oversight of ERCOT, improved communication and accountability with utilities, and was working on resiliency plans, rate-setting issues, and infrastructure planning while trying to avoid overburdening ratepayers. The committee first voted to favorably report nominees left pending from the May 5 agenda by a 6-0 roll call vote. After public testimony was opened and closed, the committee then voted on the nominees heard that day and favorably recommended all three to the full Senate for confirmation by a 7-0 vote. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• Holder, the Court ended the federal preclearance program, which required jurisdictions with histories
• The Court ended the federal preclearance program, which required jurisdictions with histories of discrimination

Keywords: 1064, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Holder, the Court ended the federal preclearance program, which required jurisdictions with histories
• The Court ended the federal preclearance program, which required jurisdictions with histories of discrimination

Bills: HB344

Keywords: campaign finance, elections, transparency, political committees, reporting requirements, enforcement

Summary: The Senate Elections and Government Affairs Committee heard several election- and campaign-related bills. House Substitute 2 for House Bill 155 would make Public Integrity Commission reports publicly available on the commission’s website, add a specific travel-expense reporting category, and remove the FOIA requirement for accessing reports; Senator Richardson said he supported the transparency measure and asked to be added as a co-sponsor. The committee also took up House Bill 444, the Delaware John Lewis Voting Rights Act, which would create state protections against voter suppression and vote dilution, expand language access, prohibit intimidation and deception, and allow court remedies for violations. The bill drew strong support from advocacy groups including YWCA Delaware, the League of Women Voters, the ACLU, and the Legal Defense Fund, and several senators voiced support and interest in moving it quickly. House Bill 430, a constitutional amendment proposal, would make explicit that only natural persons may vote in Delaware elections, including municipal elections, in response to concerns about corporate or other artificial-entity voting in some towns. The discussion focused heavily on Fenwick Island, where the mayor testified that the town’s charter has long allowed certain artificial entities to vote in local elections and said the system is limited and has worked for years; other speakers argued the bill was needed to prevent corporate dilution of residents’ votes. Senator Richardson expressed concern about restricting entities with a local stake, while Senator Hoffner and others emphasized the principle of one person, one vote. Senator Townsend presented House Bill 344, which would tighten campaign finance rules by requiring Delaware bank accounts for candidates and committees, recurring training, better documentation of candidate loans, longer record retention, automatic filing extensions, and inactive status for noncompliant committees; one public commenter opposed the bill on cost grounds. He also presented House Bill 448, which would allow campaign funds to be used for reasonable security expenses for candidates and elected officials, with guardrails, and a commenter suggested allowing electronic security systems without a cap. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 472, a local de-annexation measure for Noble’s Pond in Cheswold to remove scattered residential lots from town boundaries and resolve uneven tax treatment; Senator Hoffner noted local law enforcement supported the change. The committee adjourned after hearing no further public comment on HB 472, and the vote to adjourn was unanimous.

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, I note that Florida, the VRA used to have a preclearance regime.
• Florida was never in the preclearance regime for race, ever. So...
• Again, I note that Florida, the VRA used to have a preclearance regime.
• Florida was never in the preclearance regime for race, ever. So... Okay.

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum and heard a Governor’s Office presentation on a proposed congressional reapportionment map. The governor’s counsel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be considered at all in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection law and should be treated as non-severable. The presentation also discussed the pending U.S. Supreme Court case Louisiana v. Callais and the Florida Supreme Court’s Black Voters Matter decision as part of the legal rationale for the map. Jason Parada, who said he drew the map alone, described the map as based on 2020 census block data, with county-level population estimates used only as a guide to identify faster-growing areas. He said the plan keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores similar to the current benchmark map, and uses traditional geographic and political boundaries such as roads, railways, county lines, and municipal lines. He walked through regional changes, emphasizing a race-neutral redesign that significantly altered South Florida, including changes to districts in Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade, and the Everglades, while leaving several northern districts largely unchanged. Members questioned the witnesses extensively about the legal theory, the use of partisan data, the role of race, population growth, and the timing and review of the map. The witnesses said partisan data was considered along with other traditional redistricting criteria, but race was not used. They also said they could not speak to who else reviewed the map beyond EOG staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns about the map’s compactness, county and city splits, the apparent partisan effects, and the fact that the map was released shortly before the special session. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, I note that Florida, the VRA used to have a preclearance regime.
• Florida was never in the preclearance regime for race, ever. So...
• Again, I note the Florida, the VRA used to have a preclearance regime.
• Florida was never in the preclearance regime for race, ever. So... Okay. You had...

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Court with justices like Chief Justice John Roberts and Samuel Alito, who decided to strike down preclearance
• Court with justices like Chief Justice John Roberts and Samuel Alito, who decided to strike down preclearance
• You mentioned something about preclearance earlier.
• So if a map will come out— You mentioned something about preclearance earlier.
• ever since— But it would be a good indicator of potentially— If a map came out that aligned with preclearance

Bills: SB116, SB121, SB130, SB407

Keywords: redistricting, congressional districts, Louisiana, 2020 census, elections, precincts, voting, election, political representation, 2026 precincts, demographics, Louisiana congressional map, U.S. House, election districts, precinct shapefiles, Voting Districts, VTD, 2020 Census, 2026 Precinct Shapefiles, apportionment

Transcript Highlights:

• Holder, the Supreme Court struck down the preclearance formula in the... the Voting Rights Act, and Hamstrong

Keywords: legislation, public policy, testimony, committee meeting, debates

Summary: The committee meeting involved various discussions pertaining to legislative initiatives and public policy concerns. Members engaged in debates around significant topics, highlighting their diverse perspectives. The atmosphere was lively with members presenting arguments for and against certain measures. Testimonies from the public were also a key feature, shedding light on community sentiments related to proposed bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is it already been distributed or is this like a preclearance?

Summary: The Texas Ethics Commission convened at 9:03 a.m. and held an executive session, reconvening at 10:18 a.m. During the meeting, the Commission approved a settlement agreement with Michael Quinn Sullivan, ending ongoing litigation. The agreement involved Sullivan dropping his legal challenges regarding a civil penalty previously imposed by the Commission. The Commission also announced personnel changes, including the departure of the director of enforcement, Marie Prim, and the appointment of Jordan Hun as interim director. The Commission discussed outside counsel contracts, approving the addition of Bickerstaff, Heath, Delgado, Acosta LLP to their pool of qualified vendors. They scheduled their next meeting for September 23rd and approved minutes from previous meetings. The agenda included several rulemaking items, with three rules adopted and five proposed for publication in the Texas Register. Notably, amendments to Chapter 20 regarding reporting contributions and expenditures were approved, as well as changes to lobbyist registration thresholds in Chapter 34, which were proposed for publication. The Commission also addressed advisory opinions, adopting several, including one regarding political advertising by charter schools and another concerning the revolving door prohibition for former state employees. Appeals for administrative waivers and reductions of fines were considered, with several fines waived or reduced based on individual circumstances. Lastly, the Commission discussed policies related to alternative dispute resolution and clarified responsibilities between the Commission and staff, concluding the meeting at 11:15 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to restore what the Supreme Court gutted when it ripped out preclearance
• Every law that was passed in my state of Louisiana had to be precleared by the Justice Department, and
• EVERY LAW THAT WAS PASSED IN MY STATE OF LOUISIANA HAD TO BE PRECLEARED BY THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, March 31, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They killed preclearance in 2013.
• They killed preclearance in 2013.
• They killed preclearance in 2013.
• They killed preclearance in 2013.
• They killed preclearance in 2013.

Keywords: House streaming session for Saturday, April 11, 2026, 957, house, all

Summary: The House convened with 122 members present, heard a prayer, and the Speaker urged members to remain respectful as difficult bills were expected later in the day. The chamber then moved through several ceremonial floor presentations honoring retiring members, including Delegate Barry S. Celebrity and Delegate Pam Queen, with resolutions read congratulating each on their years of service and lasting impact. The House also recognized an “interim birthday caucus” with a lighthearted resolution celebrating members born outside the session, followed by remarks and thanks from the Speaker and members. After the presentations, the House turned to business, including concurrence and nonconcurrence actions on Senate amendments. The chamber refused to concur in Senate amendments to House Bill 339 and House Bill 512, while House Bill 512 was then concurred in, read for final passage, and passed with 118 votes in favor and none opposed. The House also received messages indicating conference committees for several bills, including House Bills 107, 153, 769, 1063, and 1118. The House adopted favorable committee reports on a series of bills, sending many to third reading. These included measures on earned wage access, security guard certification renewal, county board and alcohol licensing matters, animal regulation, veteran status notation, procurement transparency, Public Information Act divorce records, election board qualifications, and a local sourcing database. During discussion of the local sourcing database bill, the minority whip asked whether business groups that had opposed the bill remained opposed after amendments; the floor leader explained the amended bill would require the Department of Commerce to create a searchable Maryland Local Sourcing Portal to connect businesses with local sources of tariff-impacted goods and services.

Transcript Highlights:

• The inability to select representation since Section Five preclearance was gutted has been a significant
• Prior to preclearance being dropped from the Voting Rights Act, Texas was always under federal oversight

Keywords: 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Jonathan Weber: By striking down the preclearance provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the court

Transcript Highlights:

• Holder gutted the heart of the Voting Rights Act by striking down the preclearance formula that protected
• Our bill would rebuild the preclearance system that was destroyed by Shelby.
• They started with Shelby County, where they paralyzed the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, May 12, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Voting Rights Act was weakened greatly when Section 4 of it was declared unconstitutional, and the preclearance
• This Voting Rights Act would have helped to reinstate a version of the preclearance process.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, January 9, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• allow voters the chance to vote in their own language, and we're creating the most comprehensive preclearance

Keywords: 1146, all

Transcript Highlights:

• this amendment would authorize the city to send its ballot language to the Secretary of State for preclearance

Bills: SB15, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SB6, SB2878, SB13, SB30, SJR87, SB7, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB57, SB512, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB1346, SB2753, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB552, SB646, SJR1, SB15, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SB926, SB1494, SB251, SB456, SB500, SB1307, SB2615, SB2995, SB2321, SB973, SB974, SB865, SB506, SB781, SB1522, SB1558, SB510, SB667, SB763, SB2073, SB1858, SB1660, SB505, SB2900, SB1433, SB1540, SB1964, SB1300, SB1644, SB2217, SB2373, SB2431, SB1758, SB2480, SB3039, SB3047, SB3073, SB2920, SB2781, SB826, SB766, SB2460, SB527, SB1946, SB2885, SB1243, SB2610, SB2595, SB857, SB2501, SB66, SB268, SB331, SB618, SB414, SB1394, SB2425, SB898, SB993, SB442, SB735, SB784, SB2538, SB1919, SB1013, SB2215, SB2322, SB626, SB570, SB747, SB2183, SB673, SB1015, SB1447, SB1370, SB1784, SB1897, SB2873, SB2891, SB2933, SB2540, SB2681, SB2695, SB1965, SB2203, SB872, SB875, SB1030, SB1277, SB1730, SB1681, SB1152, SB2969, SB2747, SB2705, SB2541, SB1708, SB2080, SB2721, SB1986, SB2392, SB2539, SB2857, SB2799, SB2785, SB2782, SB1531, SB1927, SB1263, SB1098, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SCR9, SB21, SB1198, SB1405, SB2601, SB2778, HB5560, HB762, HB1584, HB 107, HB 114, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323, HB4341, HB6, HB171, HB143, HB449, HB3486, HB4263, HB5246, HB2, HB2011, SB17

Keywords: SB 15, Texas Local Government Code, zoning preemption, housing affordability, small lots, lot size, lot density, single-family zoning, residential subdivision, municipal land use, local control, state preemption, parking requirements, setbacks, infill development, missing middle housing, lot width, lot depth, homebuilders, housing supply