Legislature's investigation panel could get more power
The House State Affairs Committee on Monday recommended passage of House Bill 1204. The full House of Representatives will consider it Tuesday afternoon.
A new task force on prisons clears a Senate committee
Its prime sponsor, Republican Rep. Julie Auch, wants to reverse a 2018 law that requires the Legislature's Government Operations and Audit Committee to receive clearance beforehand from the Legislature's Executive Board.
That's an unnecessary step, according to Auch. 'It needs to be taken care of, managed, and move on,' she told the House panel.
The 2018 law was in response to then-Sen. Stace Nelson requesting that GOAC use its subpoena authority as part of investigating the GEAR Up scandal. The legislation to add the Executive Board's approval came from then-Rep. Jean Hunhoff and then-Sen. Deb Peters, who were GOAC's chair and vice-chair at the time.
The state Department of Revenue last year resisted subpoenas that GOAC members issued for Revenue Secretary Mike Houdyshell and another official to testify. The subpoenas have since been reissued for a GOAC meeting that will be held after the 2025 legislative session ends March 31.
Houdyshell didn't testify against the bill but responded to a question about why he wouldn't testify. He said there was an ongoing investigation that prevented him as a lawyer from disclosing details to the legislators.
GOAC has been looking into various state-government scandals that surfaced last year, including in the state Department of Revenue's motor-vehicle division.
Republican Rep. Jon Hansen called Monday for the House committee to endorse Auch's legislation. He is the House speaker and co-chair of the current Executive Board.
Requiring the Executive Board's approval adds time, provides an opportunity for state officials to lobby Executive Board members, handcuffs GOAC and brings an additional level of politics to the process.
'That all takes time – too much time under the circumstances,' Hansen said.
A former House speaker, Republican Rep. Spencer Gosch, said it is 'appalling' that a legislative committee would ever have to subpoena someone. 'I hate that we even have to do this,' he said.
Republican Rep. Karla Lems, the House speaker pro tem, described Auch's bill as 'the final tool' needed. 'It's giving us that extra piece to do the job,' Lems said.
The one 'no' vote came from Republican Rep. Tim Reisch, who served on GOAC the past two years. 'The executive branch was very forthright,' Reisch said, defending Revenue for not openly discussing the case because the people accused were presumed innocent until found guilty.
Reisch argued that the Executive Board acts on behalf of the Legislature during the nine months that lawmakers aren't in session and said he doesn't want the Legislature to surrender that authority by allowing GOAC to issue subpoenas on its own.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Over half of Americans say ‘big, beautiful bill' going to raise health care costs: Poll
More than half of Americans — 57 percent — said in a new survey that they think the GOP's sweeping package extending tax cuts and slashing welfare services will increase their health-care costs. Thirteen percent in the CBS/YouGov poll released Sunday said that the 'big, beautiful bill' will lower their health-care costs and 33 percent said there will be no impact. While the Congressional Budget Office has not yet released a final estimate for the measure as enacted, it projected that 16 million people would lose their health insurance by 2034 under an earlier House-passed version of the bill. This analysis has been the basis for many Democrats' messaging around health care, and health-care advocates have still warned that the final version could be devastating to communities relying on Medicaid. The sprawling package permanently extends many of the temporary tax cuts passed by Republicans during President Trump's first term, alongside making deep spending reductions to Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and other welfare programs. The measure would primarily benefit wealthy Americans, an analysis by the Yale Budget Lab found last month. Democrats have assailed the legislation as a historic transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich and are looking to message around its cuts to health care for the 2026 midterms — even if some of the package's most significant changes don't kick in until 2028. Overall, six in 10 questioned in the CBS/YouGov survey disapprove of the GOP megabill. A similar percentage said that it will help wealthy people and hurt poor people. A separate AP-NORC poll released Saturday found that nearly two-thirds of Americans think the legislation will do more to help wealthy people. In the CBS/YouGov poll, 40 percent of respondents said they thought the measure will increase their taxes. Another 32 percent said they thought their taxes will not be impacted either way. A majority — 56 percent — said that they tied issues regarding the megabill significantly to how they evaluate President Trump's second term. A plurality of Americans, 44 percent, said they had a 'general sense' of the content of the legislation alongside some specifics. Meanwhile, roughly two in 10 — 22 percent — said they had a general idea of it but lacked specifics. The CBS/YouGov poll was conducted between July 16 and July 18, with a sample of 2,343 and a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points.
San Francisco Chronicle
11 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
New Hampshire's new law protecting gunmakers faces first test in court over Sig Sauer lawsuit
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — A new state law in New Hampshire that makes it harder to take gunmaker Sig Sauer to court is getting its first test before a judge on Monday. The 2-month-old law was created by the Republican-led Legislature in response to mounting lawsuits faced by the Newington-based manufacturer over its popular P320 pistol. The lawsuits say that the gun can go off without the trigger being pulled, an allegation Sig Sauer denies. Sig Sauer, which employs over 2,000 people in New Hampshire, said the gun is safe and the problem is user error. Several large, multi-plaintiff cases filed since 2022 in New Hampshire's federal court representing nearly 80 people accuse Sig Sauer of defective product design, marketing, and negligence, in addition to lawsuits filed in other states. Many of the plaintiffs are current and former law enforcement officers who say they were wounded by the gun. They say the P320 design requires an external mechanical safety, a feature that is optional. The most recent New Hampshire case, representing 22 plaintiffs in 16 states, was filed in March. It's the focus of Monday's hearing. The new law on product liability claims against Sig Sauer and other gun manufacturers covers the 'absence or presence' of the external safety and several other optional features. Claims can still be filed over manufacturing defects. Attorneys for Sig Sauer argue it should apply to the March case, even though the law didn't exist at the time. 'New Hampshire has a clearly articulated position against such claims being cognizable in this state,' they argue in court documents for breaking up the cases and transferring them to court districts where the plaintiffs live. Lawyers from a Philadelphia-based firm representing the plaintiffs, disagree, saying the law 'has zero implication' on the case and only applies to future lawsuits. New Hampshire was the chosen location because federal rules allow lawsuits against a company in its home state, the plaintiff's attorneys say. Those lawsuits have been assigned to one federal judge in Concord. Sig Sauer is trying to decentralize the case, they say. Sig Sauer has prevailed in some cases. It has appealed two recent multimillion-dollar verdicts against it, in Pennsylvania and Georgia. A judge recently allowed the Pennsylvania verdict to stand, but vacated $10 million in punitive damages awarded to the plaintiff.
Los Angeles Times
11 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: Meaningful immigration reform must come from both sides of the aisle
To the editor: If we are to have meaningful immigration reform, which hasn't happened for nearly 40 years, both sides of the aisle must participate ('Democrats, playing defense on immigration, see a flicker of hope in new polls,' July 17). Republican Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar of Florida has introduced a bill called the Dignity Act of 2025, which provides legal status to undocumented migrants who meet certain requirements, have no serious criminal record, pay restitution and give 1% of their earnings to the U.S. government. As Washington bureau chief Michael Wilner notes, Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona is also working on immigration reform. He is a centrist Democrat and has a proposal titled 'Securing the Border and Fueling Economic Prosperity.' His plan calls for significant border security enhancements as well as an increase in visa and green card opportunities and pathways to citizenship. Americans from both parties could support immigration reform that is humane and economically sensible. We now have two lawmakers from different political ideologies who have the opportunity to work together and get their colleagues on board on the way to making America a better place to live, and to create a more hopeful future for our children. Anastacio Vigil, Santa Monica
