Tony Vishnevsky — Introduces himself as representing District 5, Post Falls, Kootenai County, and begins explaining the bill.
Don Grandi — Introduced as a friend from North Dakota and an attorney who has helped introduce similar bills in other states.
David Webb — Referenced as the author of The Great Taking, with the speaker saying the argument is not solely based on Webb's claims.
Steve Berch — Steve Berch asks a series of related questions about the bill and the adequacy of current law: why the existing statute would not already address future incidents, whether there are real-world examples of the problem beyond edge cases, and whether the issue is better handled as a federal matter rather than through a state-by-state approach.
Steve Berch — Representative Steve Berch moved to hold House Bill 702 in committee at the call of the Chair, then explained that he supported delaying action because he wanted more understanding and input before proceeding. He later spoke against the motion, saying he did not feel he knew enough about the bill or its consequences to support it, and the sequence concluded with his recorded no vote on the roll call.
Steve Berch — Briefly stated he had no questions.
Steve Berch — Thanked the witness for service and asked about clinical education, standardized examinations, treatment planning, assessments, and counseling theories.
Steve Berch — Asked about clinical treatment planning, assessments, and counseling theories.
Steve Berch — Asked whether there were people signed up to testify.
Jordan Redman — Addressed as 'Mr. Chairman' in the committee exchange.
Jordan Redman — Called as chairman during the roll call.
Jordan Redman — Was addressed as Mr. Chairman in the introduction of the Vice Chair's testimony.
Jordan Redman — Was addressed as chairman during the discussion of House Bill 585.
Jordan Redman — The section continues discussion of legislation before the committee, with no direct speech from the chair in this excerpt.
Jordan Redman — Jordan Redman is repeatedly addressed as the chair/chairman during a continuous committee exchange. The discussion moves from asking the chair to stand for a question, to acknowledging him as Mr. Chairman, and then to procedural remarks confirming the committee is debating motions. The mentions are all part of the same ongoing parliamentary interaction.
Mr. Grady — Responds that the relevant amendment was in 1994.
Mr. Grady — Explains that he has official comments and law review articles from the mid-1990s supporting his position.
Mr. Grady — Gives the Lehman Brothers example from the 2007-2008 housing crisis.
Mr. Grady — Begins a response, but the transcript cuts off after a single word.
Mr. Grady — Mr. Grady explained that SIPC protection is limited: it is not highly funded, is designed to handle only a small broker-dealer failure, and covers securities rather than insurance contracts or other non-covered arrangements. He then shifted to the bill’s treatment of margin accounts and pledged securities, noting that margin accounts involve stock pledged as collateral and that Article 8, Section 5 requires broker-dealers and custodians to maintain sufficient unencumbered assets for entitlement holders. He warned that if investor assets are improperly pledged and the intermediary fails, the statute can give priority to the bank or other third party, making compliance by that third party critical. He also noted that earlier draft language referenced margin accounts but was removed, argued the priority provision applies only when there is an actual competing claim, and concluded by discussing jurisdiction and choice of law, saying those issues are addressed in two sections of the bill and that Idaho law would ultimately govern while existing account agreements would continue to control initially.
Kyle Harris — Representative Kyle Harris commented that the bill is unusual and then asked a series of related questions about its practical and comparative implications, including whether it would require stockbrokers to rewrite existing sales contracts and how many other states have seen or passed similar legislation.
Kyle Harris — Voted yes on the roll call.
Kyle Harris — Referenced by Representative Sauter as having asked about the 30-day issue when the bill was introduced.
Kyle Harris — Representative Kyle Harris said he liked the legislation, noted he is working on related pending legislation, and asked Representative Wheeler how many third-party inspectors are currently operating in the state.
Kyle Harris — Representative Kyle Harris asks how many chaplains like the witness are currently in Idaho and how many would be affected immediately by the issue being discussed, while also thanking the witness for his service.
Kyle Harris — Representative Harris questioned whether the comparison between the MDiv and MA requirements was truly apples-to-apples, noting that the MDiv appears to require more hours and asking whether the missing elements in the MA comparison are covered by additional chaplain procedures or military training. He then clarified that both pathways are through Liberty University and may assume similar experience levels, but ultimately suggested the question would be better addressed to Mr. Gifford when he returns.
Kyle Harris — Kyle Harris spoke in support of the original motion to advance the bill with a due pass. He argued that the proposal would serve a small but important niche, particularly military members dealing with depression, PTSD, and suicide risk, and emphasized the candidate’s military background and approachable manner. He also said the liability concerns were covered and urged the body to send the measure to the floor with a due pass.
Vito Barbieri — Asked how an individual can own a stock yet not own it, and how securitization can be controlled by a clearinghouse.
Vito Barbieri — Representative Vito Barbieri discussed the bill, emphasizing the goal of returning control of an unsecured, unpledged asset to the individual, then made an amended motion to send the bill to the floor with a due pass recommendation, and later voted yes on the roll call.
Vito Barbieri — The chair acknowledges Representative Vito Barbieri, and Barbieri then asks Representative Sauter whether the bill would override existing insurance contract provisions that require 30 days' notice, noting that some carriers may already have that language in their contracts.
Vito Barbieri — Vito Barbieri questioned whether Dopple's ability to keep up with timelines meant service had improved under the previous year's bill. The discussion centered on whether the bill had actually improved service, with the response suggesting that a politician might claim it had.
Vito Barbieri — Representative Vito Barbieri is recognized by the chair and questions the witness about whether the witness’s training is sufficient to provide suicide counseling, pressing for clarification on that point.
Vito Barbieri — Representative Barbieri is referenced in connection with comments that suicides are increasing, with the second mention reiterating the same suicide-rate discussion.
Jeff Ehlers — Representative Ehlers repeatedly questioned the scope and effect of the bill, arguing that his reading was narrower than the witness’s description and that it appeared to apply only to a specific collateralized subsection of the UCC. He asked for the exact statutory language supporting that interpretation, challenged why the bill changes only one UCC section instead of all related sections, and later opposed the substitute motion because he believed it did not do what was described. He ultimately voted no and said he wanted to continue exploring the impact of changing local law.
Richard Cheatum — Asked how many security intermediaries are in Idaho and continued questioning the bill's scope.
Richard Cheatum — Continued the questioning by referring to Representative Ehlers's concerns and citing page 5 of the bill.
Richard Cheatum — Called during the roll call; vote not captured in the transcript excerpt.
Richard Cheatum — Representative Cheatham moved to send House Bill 585 to the floor with a due pass recommendation.
Richard Cheatum — Representative Cheatum asked whether military chaplain training is uniform across all branches of the military, including full-time, reserve, and Guard components.
Richard Cheatum — Named as one of the members recorded on the vote.
Josh Wheeler — Voted no on the roll call.
Josh Wheeler — Josh Wheeler, the Vice Chair and sponsor/presenter of House Bill 585, introduced himself and the bill, then continued discussing the measure by welcoming a favorable motion to send it to the floor with a due pass recommendation. In response to questions, he said he had spoken with several third-party inspection companies and explained that while he could not claim service had necessarily improved, the prior building code inspection law had respected existing best practices and kept providers within reasonable bounds.
Josh Wheeler — Representative Josh Wheeler is recognized and speaks on the bill, expressing concern that it would eliminate the standardized national test requirement. He then follows up by asking how difficult the test would be for the witness and others in the state, keeping the discussion focused on the bill’s testing implications.
Josh Wheeler — Asked when a clinical mental health counseling student can take the NCE.
Josh Wheeler — The Vice Chair is addressed during the exchange and appears to be the one asking for a brief question.
Josh Wheeler — Identified as the member with questions for the bill sponsor.
Josh Wheeler — Named as one of the members recorded on the vote.
Brent Crane — Brent Crane first voted yes on the roll call, then participated in the ensuing procedural discussion by asking whether the bill would be brought back under the call of the chair or simply held in committee.
Brent Crane — Brent Crane asked about the bill’s implementation date and whether the sponsor would be open to changing the effective date for policies already in place. He followed up by clarifying that the bill appears to provide advance notice rather than the current 30-day notice, noting that carriers likely know in advance when they are exiting a policy and that the extra notice would help consumers shop for coverage or negotiate protections. The discussion also touched on the motion on House Bill 562 and the proposed implementation date change.
Brent Crane — Asked whether the MDiv degree plan is for pastors.