Ilana Rubel — Asked a follow-up question about the reporting requirement and the role of IESDB.
Ilana Rubel — Asked why all failed screening results must be sent to IESDB within seven days and what IESDB does with the reports.
Ilana Rubel — Asked about IESDB's role in the reporting process.
Ilana Rubel — Emphasized the importance of early hearing identification and referenced prior work on insurance coverage for children's hearing aids.
Jaron Crane — Identified as the original sponsor of the bill.
Heather Scott — Representative Healy responded to questions about the bill by introducing a witness to explain its history, then addressed cost and funding concerns, saying the screening cost is the same whether at home or in the hospital, that she does not know the per-screening amount, and that the federal funding is less than half a million dollars per year though she does not know how much of it is used.
Heather Scott — Asked to confirm which bill was referenced as having passed the floor yesterday.
Heather Scott — Confirmed that the hearing-test language applies to the bill being discussed.
Heather Scott — Asked whether the sponsor would accept a language change.
Heather Scott — Responded that she is considering the proposed language change.
Heather Scott — Explained that the bill requires referral by birthing centers and other non-hospital settings, not infant screening.
Heather Scott — Reiterated that the bill requires referrals, not screening, in non-hospital settings.
Heather Scott — Recorded as voting yes in the roll call.
Heather Scott — Recorded as voting yes in the roll call.
Heather Scott — Expected to carry Senate Bill 1294 on the floor after passage.
Heather Scott — Referenced in the closing remark about carrying the bill and Senate proceedings.
Lisa Coleman — Lisa Coleman testified in support of the bill, explaining that her personal experience as a parent of two daughters with hearing loss and her role on the Idaho Sound Beginnings Board motivated the legislation. She described how out-of-hospital births often do not receive newborn hearing screening, leading to delayed diagnosis—often around age two—and costly rehabilitation. She cited Idaho data showing roughly 15 to 20 babies are diagnosed late each year, noted that the bill could improve parent understanding and participation in newborn screening, and pointed out that last year 1,222 out-of-hospital births occurred but only 500 received or participated in newborn screening.
Chris Mathias — Representative Erickson shared a detailed personal story about his daughter’s hearing loss, explaining how earlier screening could have sped up intervention and how school-based support, specialized classes, advocates, and eventually hearing aids helped her. He compared hearing screening to vision testing and emphasized the importance of early detection and access to services for children.
Ms. Coleman — Was welcomed in the room as someone who had worked on the issue previously.
David Leavitt — Representative Furman asked Representative Erickson a follow-up question after Erickson shared a personal story, and Erickson acknowledged Furman in his response.
David Leavitt — Said he should not have mentioned the half-hour time limit and then began a comment on the legislation.
— Referenced as the speaker's daughter who is now in the Senate; name not given.
Britt Raybould — Was called on for a comment; likely a transcription error for a member name.
Britt Raybould — Was called on for a comment, but the microphone was not working.
Britt Raybould — Said the bill sounds mandatory, objected to the federal funding aspect, and stated opposition.
Tanya Burgoyne — Was referenced in relation to the point that mothers would know if something were wrong.
Megan Egbert — Representative Egbert first moved to approve the committee minutes from Thursday, March 12th and Friday, March 20th. He later spoke in support of the original motion, referencing ongoing and constructive discussions with the Senate side. Finally, he was recorded in the roll call vote as voting no.
Megan Egbert — Representative Egbert defended the bill, arguing that it does not regulate parents but instead regulates medical providers, which he said is consistent with the committee’s usual approach. The discussion then concluded with Egbert being recorded as voting yes in the roll call.
Jordan Redman — Moved to hold House Bill 864 to a date certain of March 27th.
Jordan Redman — Representative Redman asked what prompted the bill and whether there has been an increase in deaf babies, and the discussion continued as Representative Healy addressed Redman while introducing the witness.
Lori McCann — Representative McCann moved to substitute and send House Bill 864 to the floor without recommendation, and later voted yes on the roll call for that motion.
Lori McCann — Argued that parents always have the right to choose, regardless of the bill.
Rob Beiswenger — Argued that the bill would impose significant penalties and urged delaying it for committee review.
Rob Beiswenger — Recorded as voting no in the roll call.
Steven Tanner — Representative Tanner spoke against the substitute motion and said he did not want House Bill 864 to advance without amendment. He clarified that he supports banning synthetic forms but wants the bill amended to remove the natural form before it moves forward.
Steven Tanner — Representative Tanner asked a series of related questions about the bill’s hearing-screening provisions, including the cost of screening, the federal-funding contingency in Section 5, and clarification of the IESDB referenced in the reporting requirement for failed screenings.
Steven Tanner — Representative Tanner was called on after a no vote and then immediately addressed the sponsor with a question about the bill, continuing the same legislative exchange.
Marco Erickson — Recorded as voting 'Yay' in the roll call.
Marco Erickson — Representative Erickson shared a personal story about his daughter, who was born prematurely and spent time in the NICU but was not initially screened. He explained that when they later obtained a screening, they discovered a hearing-related issue and other developmental deficits, leading to referrals, specialized surgeries, and support services. He used the example to underscore the importance of early screening and intervention.
Dori Healey — Representative Healy presented Senate Bill 1294, explaining that it would require newborn hearing screenings to be offered to babies born outside hospitals, such as in birthing centers or home births when a qualified attendant is present, within 21 days of birth. She emphasized that the bill is about expanding access to early intervention, not mandating treatment, and that parents may decline the screening without repercussion or CPS involvement. In response to questions, she clarified that the requirement is to offer or refer for the screening, that parents retain the right to refuse, and that the bill addresses gaps where some newborns were not screened because services or equipment were unavailable.
Jack Nelsen — Questioned whether the bill requires screening or merely offering screening, and asked about enforcement if parents decline.
Jack Nelsen — Asked about the bill's mandatory language and enforcement if parents decline screening.
Jack Nelsen — Was addressed in the response to his question about enforcement and opt-out.
Jack Nelsen — Asked how the bill would work for a home birth with a midwife present.
Josh Wheeler — Representative Wheeler first sought clarification on the bill’s language about the birthing attendant’s responsibility to ensure screening, including whether failures would be reported to CPS and whether the bill would apply to home births. After this brief line of questioning, he moved to send Senate Bill 1294 to the floor with a do pass recommendation.
Ilana Rubel — Representative Egbert supported the motion and explained that many home births and some birthing centers do not have hearing-screening equipment, so the bill’s purpose is to provide referral information for follow-up screening.