Jordan Redman — Presents RS 33-208 and explains concerns about third-party litigation financing.
Jordan Redman — Requests introduction of RS 33-208.
Jordan Redman — Introduces RS 33-065 and explains it is based on Housing and Land Use Interim Committee recommendations.
Jordan Redman — Addressed as Chairman Redman during the transition to the motion.
Jordan Redman — Says there was no consultation with cities or counties and expects they may come to a full hearing if interested.
Jordan Redman — Addressed for a follow-up question about updates and recommendations from the task force.
Jordan Redman — Reassumes the chair after the vote.
Jordan Redman — Addressed as Chairman Redman during the witness introduction.
Jordan Redman — Bruce Skog was introduced to present his RS and identified himself as a representative from District 10. He then explained that the bill was aimed at addressing predatory lending and usury by non-regulated lenders, drawing on his experience as a city councilman and legal practice to illustrate the problem. He noted that he and Chairman Redmond had independently been working on similar legislation, and later clarified that Redmond’s original bill used different rate numbers while his version differed. The discussion remained focused on the same RS and its purpose throughout.
Richard Cheatum — Introduced himself as Rick Cheatham, representing District 28, and presented RS 33-267.
Richard Cheatum — Addressed by Representative Harris regarding the heat detection language.
Richard Cheatum — Says he was not aware of the rules-package issue and will look into it before the hearing.
Richard Cheatum — Respondent to the question about what the RS changes.
Richard Cheatum — Explains that the cost savings come from eliminating sprinkler systems and related infrastructure.
Richard Cheatum — The legislation is discussed in the context of prior negotiations over sprinkler requirements.
Richard Cheatum — The speaker says he will vote to introduce the RS out of respect to Representative Cheatham but not support moving it forward.
Richard Cheatum — Asks whether travel insurance is still available through airport kiosks.
Richard Cheatum — Appears to respond before the motion is made; the transcript is garbled and likely refers to Representative Cheatham.
Richard Cheatum — Referenced in a joking comment about a faux pas.
Richard Cheatum — Representative Richard Cheatum is addressed (mis-transcribed as 'Representative Birch') during a brief exchange, first with a thank-you and then with a follow-up question asking whether he is referring to HB 530 or the substitute bill.
Richard Cheatum — Richard Cheatum drew on his long experience in the loan and credit union business to discuss predatory lending. He noted the common industry concern that if the state imposes caps on products like payday, title, or check-in loans, lenders will simply adjust, but he also acknowledged that the problem is real in Idaho, where payday loans can reach 800%, and agreed these loans are very difficult for borrowers to escape.
Kyle Harris — Raises a question about whether heat detection can be removed from the rules package because it is already included there.
Kyle Harris — Representative Kyle Harris questioned why the bill specifically refers to internet-based or application-based companies when the broader term 'person or entity' already appears sufficient, prompting an explanation of the drafting language.
Kyle Harris — Representative Kyle Harris asked for clarification on how the bill would treat oral chemotherapy compared with pharmaceutical coverage, specifically whether it would move oral chemotherapy into regular health coverage to create parity. The following response acknowledged that it was a good question and addressed the parity issue.
Kyle Harris — Representative Harris was recognized following the vote on House Bill 530 and then commented that the committee was anticipating a motion on the RS.
Kyle Harris — Representative Harris said he had looked up Idaho usury laws and noted the state’s existing 12% cap, then questioned why the committee was proposing a new statute instead of simply removing the payday-loan exemption.
Steve Berch — Representative Berch asks for clarification on what is changing in the RS and how the proposed cost savings are being achieved, and the sponsor responds to his question.
Steve Berch — Steve Berch makes a brief lighthearted comment, then states that while he will support the motion, he wants to hear from local governments and the Association for Cities and Counties about the bill’s potential impact on zoning and related issues. He emphasizes that their perspective would be important in understanding how the measure might affect them.
Steve Berch — Possibly referenced as 'Bruce' in the transcript; likely a transcription error in the chair's address to a member.
Steve Berch — The transcript appears to say 'Bruce and Green'; context suggests discussion with Representative Bruce and Representative Green, but only Green is in the expected list. The text is uncertain.
Jaron Crane — Representative Jaron Crane states support for the motion and makes a Rule 80 declaration.
Jaron Crane — Representative Jaron Crane questioned House Bill 530 and the substitute bill about the removal of the $250 out-of-pocket cap for orally administered anti-cancer medication. He asked why the cap was removed, what patients would pay without it, and whether patients would be better off under the original bill or the substitute. He indicated he might reinsert the cap into the substitute bill to protect patients from excessive costs.
Jaron Crane — Jaron Crane participates in the committee’s discussion of House Bill 530 by questioning whether the bill includes parity and whether the cap should be removed, then he makes the motion to send HB 530 to the floor with a do-pass recommendation, referencing RS 3322 as a fallback. He later reiterates support for the motion, saying the committee is voting on the bill as it stands.
Jaron Crane — The transcript says 'Representative Scott,' but the context indicates Representative Skog is continuing his response about high-risk loans and bringing more information to hearing.
Jason Kreisenbeck — Jason Kreisenbeck, a Boise contract lobbyist representing the United States Travel Insurance Industry Association, testifies in support of RS 33-022. He argues the proposal would benefit consumers and regulators, urges the committee to introduce the RS, and says he can return with industry representatives or experts to answer more detailed questions at a future hearing.
Josh Wheeler — Josh Wheeler first makes a lighthearted aside, then participates in committee procedure by handing the gavel off and later returning it. He then asks a series of substantive questions about how the proposal would interact with employer-based benefit arrangements, including multi-employer funds, self-funded plans, ERISA plans, employee-to-contractor transitions, and whether a contractual relationship is required for the bill to apply, including whether third-party contributions such as from a grandmother would be covered.
Ms. Foster — Referenced in a joking question about travel opportunities.
Jason Monks — Announced as the next agenda item, but the chair says he is presenting in JUDEN Rules.
Jason Monks — Representative Jason Monks presented RS 33-274 and explained that it would create a portable benefits plan for contractors. He introduced himself for the record, then answered questions about how the bill would apply, clarifying that it is limited to contractors rather than employees moving between employers, that contributions are tied to a contractual relationship with the hiring party, and that the internet-based/application-based language was included as a drafting precaution rather than a substantive requirement. He concluded by offering to answer further questions.
Jason Monks — Representative Jason Monks questions the rationale for capping charges only for this oral chemotherapy issue rather than for all services or procedures. The discussion remains focused on why this category is being singled out, and it ends with a remark that if Monks wants to bring a broader cap proposal later, others would support that as well.
Jason Monks — Jason Monks questioned whether capping lender profits could have the unintended consequence of discouraging lenders from making higher-risk, short-term loans, potentially reducing credit access for borrowers. He followed up by asking whether some of these loans are only for a week and clarified that his concern was focused on very short-term loans rather than longer-term ones.
Brent Crane — Moves to introduce RS 33-065.
Brent Crane — Was likely intended in the phrase 'my great county of Idaho and my district' but not clearly named; no direct correction made.
Brent Crane — Was also addressed as a possible respondent to the question about House Bill 530.
Brent Crane — Representative Crane first proposed an amended substitute motion, then withdrew it after being advised that the actions needed to be handled as separate motions. A few minutes later, he returned to the same procedural issue by advising Representative Bruce on the proper strategy and recommending that the RS be introduced through a separate motion to avoid confusion.
Jeff Ehlers — Moved to introduce RS 33-274 and spoke in support of the bill.
Jeff Ehlers — Requested that the motion maker repeat the motion because he was unsure what the motion was.
Brooke Green — Representative Brooke Green introduced herself and then testified in support of oral chemotherapy parity legislation, drawing on her own cancer treatment experience to explain why access to care matters. She described the burdens of infusion chemotherapy—ports, long chair time, repeated visits, and travel burdens for rural patients—and argued that patients should not be financially penalized for receiving treatment by pill instead of IV. She clarified that the bill is a parity measure, not a new mandate or price-setting bill, and explained that the original copayment cap was removed after stakeholder negotiations. She also cited her own current chemo pill cost to illustrate affordability concerns and emphasized her motivation to remove barriers to care for Idaho patients.
Brooke Green — Invited to give closing remarks after public testimony concluded.
Brooke Green — Gives closing remarks emphasizing patient and family impact and urging passage of parity legislation.