Kim Carver — Kim Carver is referenced throughout the bill discussion: his name is corrected, he is thanked for bringing the bill and improving usability, he is identified as the bill author who would typically make the motion, and he then closes on HB 749 by emphasizing its benefits for security and user experience.
Kim Carver — Identified as the sponsor of the last bill, HCR 14.
Kim Carver — HCR 14 was identified as his resolution.
Kim Carver — Presented HCR 14 and thanked the Chair for co-authoring it.
Kim Carver — Argued that the U.S. Department of Education is unconstitutional, ineffective, incompetent, and unnecessary, citing student aid management and failed audits.
Kim Carver — Continued arguing that the department is unnecessary because states and local governments educated children before it existed.
Kim Carver — Argued the department is expensive and referenced visits by the Secretary of Education to Louisiana.
Kim Carver — Continued describing the department as expensive, citing staffing and salary costs.
Kim Carver — Argued that education should be handled by states, districts, families, and teachers rather than a federal bureaucracy, and praised Louisiana's outcomes.
Kim Carver — Cited a New York Times article praising states like Louisiana and Mississippi for literacy and numeracy efforts.
Kim Carver — Finished his presentation and invited questions.
Kim Carver — Responded that the resolution only encourages Congress and that the legislature lacks authority to eliminate the department.
Kim Carver — Explained that the resolution asks Congress to act and argued the department has already shifted functions to state agencies.
Kim Carver — Said the resolution would not change civil rights law or enforcement and that the Department of Justice would still enforce it.
Kim Carver — Was praised for his presentation on the resolution.
Kim Carver — Was thanked for the resolution and presentation.
Kim Carver — Thanked Rep. Amedee for support and co-authorship; the discussion then turned to Rep. Freiberg's opposition.
Kim Carver — Voted yes.
Kathy Edmonston — During roll call, Representative Kathy Edmonston was called and responded present, confirming her attendance.
Kathy Edmonston — Kathy Edmonston questioned whether the bill is effectively codifying the federal McKinney-Vento requirement into state law and then followed up by asking whether stakeholders were now satisfied after the amendments.
Kathy Edmonston — Was addressed after Rep. Tarver's question and then asked follow-up questions.
Kathy Edmonston — Asked who would be charged fees and confirmed ABLE accounts should be exempt.
Kathy Edmonston — Closed her question after hearing that the fee would be a percentage of the amount.
Kathy Edmonston — Identified as the member asking questions about the amendments.
Kathy Edmonston — Questioned the use of the term 'medically necessary' and sought clarification about ABA services.
Kathy Edmonston — Thanked after asking questions on the amendments.
Kathy Edmonston — Rep. Edmonston thanked the witnesses and asked whether the child's IEP specifies classroom services.
Kathy Edmonston — Rep. Kathy Edmonston is called on, briefly comments that the law may already require the action but is not being followed and asks for specific guidelines, and then moves to report HB 201 favorably at the appropriate time; the motion is subsequently noted as having been made.
Kathy Edmonston — Credited with moving favorable before Rep. Owen.
Kathy Edmonston — Made the motion to report H.C.R. 14 favorably.
Barbara Freiberg — Marked present during roll call.
Barbara Freiberg — Commended Representative LaFleur for working with stakeholders and asked about how the process would work in schools.
Barbara Freiberg — Asked how the screening would work in schools and who would perform it.
Barbara Freiberg — Said she was still confused about how the bill would work but noted there was no fiscal note and indicated support at the appropriate time.
Barbara Freiberg — Referenced indirectly as 'Representative LaFleur' in the witness's explanation of why hungry children cannot learn.
Barbara Freiberg — The chair noted that Representative Freiberg had already made a motion.
Barbara Freiberg — Representative Freiberg was referenced as having already spoken, though the transcript says Sarah Kelly already spoke; this likely refers to the prior witness.
Barbara Freiberg — The chair stated that Representative Freiberg had made a motion to report HB 218 with amendments.
Barbara Freiberg — Her motion to report HB 218 with amendments was adopted without objection.
Barbara Freiberg — Asked for the full name of the acronym and questioned whether outsourcing administration would make oversight more difficult.
Barbara Freiberg — Closed her questions and then raised a question about third-party administration and the absence of a fiscal note.
Barbara Freiberg — Asked about the timing of the transition and noted she had not seen the fiscal note.
Barbara Freiberg — Explained that the fiscal note was not attached to the agenda but was delivered that morning.
Barbara Freiberg — Made the motion to report the bill favorably.
Barbara Freiberg — Barbara Freiberg is referenced throughout a continuous discussion seeking clarification on amendment language and service location, then shifting into questions about supervision requirements for behavior analysts and technicians, including whether a supervisor must be present in every school or can oversee multiple schools.
Barbara Freiberg — Rep. Freiberg is part of a brief, continuous discussion on Rep. Mack’s bill and a proposed amendment. The exchange centers on support for the bill, Rep. Freiberg’s questions about who would pay for the services, and follow-up remarks from Rep. Owen addressing her comments and discussing expectations and IEPs.
Barbara Freiberg — Rep. Freiberg questioned whether HB 201 could open the door to additional seals for other subjects, such as math or science, and asked whether the Department of Education had taken a position. The response simply thanked her for the question.
Barbara Freiberg — Rep. Freiberg defended the Department of Education’s role and importance, directly disagreeing with the description of it as bloated and unaccountable. The exchange concluded with a brief acknowledgment from the other speaker.