Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Windsor, Majority Leader)]: Didn't morally say the word.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Sure. Sure.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Will senate please come to order? We'll observe a moment of silence in lieu of a devotional. Thank you. By way of announcement, I would, just like to announce something that I wanted to speak about yesterday. And because the session was so long, I decided not to. But yesterday was equal payday, which falls on yesterday, March 26 this year, which symbolizes how far into the year women have to work to earn what men did the previous year. And despite slow progress, it appears that we've moved backwards in the last few years, and women are now making about 81 to 83¢ for every dollar paid to men, and the gap is wider for women of color. On a on a positive note, I would like to say that the resolution that we passed through the senate dealing with gender equity in women's sports is on the agenda for the National Lieutenant Governors Association, where I am a member of the executive committee for the upcoming meeting, and my office has sent it out to them in hopes that this gets picked up by lieutenant governors around the country to further gender equity. And on a second quick note, if I look a little frazzled this morning, I am because I spent the night sleeping out in Burlington with Spectrum Youth Services. And if any of you don't know what Spectrum Youth Services does, you need to. They're an absolutely incredible organization helping young people get their feet under and offering treatment of every kind and getting them set up for success with careers. They're an example of what we should be doing in every district of the state. So I may not have gotten much sleep and I may have had a shower in the sink in the Marble Palace this morning. But I did that to show my support, and I would hope we could all continue to show our support. Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: Thanks, mister president. So senators will remember yesterday we had a complicated floor session, especially as regards s three twenty five and many amendments that came forward. It got moments a bit confusing. Unsurprisingly, when the senate secretary went through our actions from yesterday, he realized that in moving the Mattos amendment, we had inadvertently deleted the Benson amendment. Okay. And so the morning has been spent working out a solution to this, and that solution, just so you know, has been reached with not only the senate secretary, but myself, the minority leader, the chair of the committee of jurisdiction, and others. So what will happen is when I sit down, senator Mattos will rise and ask to reconsider his vote on his own amendment. If we vote for him to do that, that will take us back in procedure to that moment. If you've never been through this process, it's as though you go back in time to that moment, and we give permission for that to happen by our our vote. And then senator Mattos will will move an amendment that the senate secretary has drafted that will replace senator Benson's material. And then we will vote on that. And then we will vote again on third reading of the bill and pass it and then I will finish by messaging it to the house so that we won't lose a legislative day in the process. So, just be assured that your, leadership teams on both sides of the aisle have ascended to this as has the committee chair and the Senate secretary. So with that, Mr. President I'll I'll leave it to the senator.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are there any announcements? Senator from Chittenden North.

[Senator Christopher Mattos (Chittenden North)]: Thank you Mr. President. Assuring the senate I voted in the majority yesterday, I asked to reconsider my amendment to s three twenty five as passed.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The senator from Chittenden North has moved that the senate reconsider its actions taken on the vote taken on his amendment to s three twenty five. Are you ready for the question? Senator from Washington.

[Senator Anne Watson (Washington)]: Just have a point of inquiry on what the vote, requirement is on reconsideration.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Yes. A simple majority.

[Senator Anne Watson (Washington)]: Thank you.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. The ayes have it, and we will reconsider our vote on the amendment to s three twenty five. Recognize the senator from Chittenden North.

[Senator Christopher Mattos (Chittenden North)]: Thank you, mister president. Now that we are back to my original amendment that was presented yesterday on the four floor, I would like to withdraw that amendment and offer a new amendment that the senate, secretary may pass out momentarily.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Without objection, we will pass out that amendment. Oh, it's withdrawn without objection, and we will pass out the new amendment.

[Senator Christopher Mattos (Chittenden North)]: Thank you, mister president. We we're getting passed out right now this new amendment that I'm offering. First, I wanna take a minute just to apologize to the senate for my amendment yesterday after the the good work that was done. And we will have this amendment here that will have both sections that were passed to include the tier one b areas in the interim exemptions to striking the 10 acre rule for parcels. So that will be shown here. It will be on the second page. Thank you. Second page at the top, you'll see the words construction constructed or maintained on a tractor tracks of land 10 acres or less and that is struck from the interim exemption, so until 2030. And then down below you will see that, number four is added in And as discussed yesterday, that is for the priority housing projects. 50 units are fewer fewer, at least 20% of the units, income based, and that is my full amendment. And I appreciate the Senate support on this amendment. Thank you.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator Mattos moves to amend the bill as he just offered and as distributed. The question is senator from Addison.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Thank you, mister president. I just wanna clarify for people who were following closely yesterday because I had this question that the the amendment now before us is a combination of the amendment from the senator from Chittenden North, Senator Mattos, and the substitute amendment from the senator from Chittenden South, Senator Ram Hinsdale. And Ram Hinsdale's amendment was a substitute amendment to Senator Benson, the senator from Orange. So just in case because I was confused to make sure that we were getting the two the combination correct, because I was following this closely, obviously. And for those of you who were I wanted to make sure everyone else was clear. Thank you, Mr. President.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Addison, you get a gold star.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison) [time-bound override]]: Thank you. I love gold stars.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? So all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. Ayes have it. And the motion carries. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: S three twenty five, an act relating to studying the creation of model bylaws.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Question is, shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. The ayes have it and we have passed s three twenty five. Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: Thank you, mister president. If we might move to third readings.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Chittenden, we're not in the orders of the day yet.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: My mistake.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: But if you would like to message our actions

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: Yes.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now would be an appropriate time.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: Thank you, mister president. I would move that the senate suspend its rules in order to message the actions just taken on s three twenty one to the other body for it.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The senator from Chittenden Central has moved that the senate suspend its rules in order to message our actions on s three twenty five to the house forthwith. Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. Ayes have it and the motion carries. We have house bills for reference h two eleven. An act relating to data, broker, and personal information. Please, yes, please listen to the first reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: S two eleven, an act relating to data brokers and personal information.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now you've heard the first reading of the bill, it's referred to the committee on economic development. Age five seventy seven, an act relating to establishing the Vermont prescription drug discount card program introduced on January 6, introduced by representative Black and passing the house on 03/25/2026. Listen to the first reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: Age five seventy seven, an act relating to establishing the Vermont prescription drug discount card program.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now you've heard the first reading of the bill, it's referred to the Committee on Health and Welfare. We have s seven eighteen, an act relating to building energy efficiency introduced by representative Campbell. It passed the house on 03/25/2026. Listen to the first reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H seven eighteen, an act relating to building energy efficiency.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now you've heard the first reading of the bill, it's referred to the committee on natural resources and energy. H seven forty, an act relating to the greenhouse inventory and registry introduced by representative James. It passed the house on 03/25/2026. Listen to the first reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H seven forty, an act relating to the greenhouse gas inventory and registry.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now you've heard the first reading of the bill. It's referred to the committee on natural resources and energy. H seven seventy eight, an act relating to dam safety. Introduced by representative Chapin. It passed the house on 03/25/2026. Listen to the first reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H seven seventy eight, an act relating to dam safety.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now you've heard the first reading of the bill, it's referred to the committee on natural resources and energy. H eight sixty one, an act relating to establishing an Americans with Disabilities Act coordinator introduced by representative Baruth. It passed the house on 03/25/2026. Listen to the first reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H eight sixty one, an act relating to establishing an Americans with Disabilities Act coordinator.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now you've heard the first reading of the bill, it's referred to the committee on government operations. H nine fifteen, an act relating to establishing an extended producer responsibility program for beverage containers introduced by the committee on environment. It passed the house on 03/25/2026. Listen to the first reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H nine fifteen, an act relating to establishing an extended producer responsibility program for beverage containers.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now you've heard the first reading of the bill, and it's referred to the committee on natural resources in energy. H nine thirty one, an act relating to miscellaneous changes in education law. Introduced by the Committee on Education, it passed the house on 03/25/2026. Listen to the first reading.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H nine thirty one, an act relating to miscellaneous changes to education law.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now you've heard the first reading of the bill. It's referred to the committee on education. Orders of the day. Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: I was hoping that we might, go to third reading, then come back to s one forty two and go down the calendar.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: We have third reading of s 64, an act relating to amendments to the scope of practice of optometrist. Are there any amendments prior to third reading? Seeing none, listen to seeing senator from Orleans.

[Senator Thomas Chittenden (Chittenden)]: I don't I don't have

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: any questions, mister president, on

[Senator John Morley III (Orleans)]: or amendment. I just wanna clarify and answer a question for the senator from

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: You have the floor, senator. Thank you. Oh, we're supposed to wait till after the third reading. Sorry. Listen to the third reading.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: S 64, an act relating to amendments to the scope of practice for optometrist.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Now you have the floor, senator from Orleans.

[Senator John Morley III (Orleans)]: Mister president, yesterday, I believe the senator from Washington asked, about where we're getting some of the data points on safety on some of these advanced scope practices. And so, with that, spoke with OPR, and they worked both the optometrist and ophthalmologist in conducting its work, and we're we're not provided with any data demonstrating the optometrist performing advanced procedures had higher regulatory complaint or discipline rates or higher malpractice rates in the states where those pre procedures are being currently performed. Also, OPR conducted research to find reports of regulatory complaint data or disciplinary data regarding optometrists performing advanced procedures and did not find any. So I just wanted to make sure you I answered your question.

[Senator Anne Watson (Washington)]: Thank you, mister president.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? The question is, shall the bill pass? All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. Nay. Nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and we have passed s 64.

[Senator Thomas Chittenden (Chittenden)]: Okay. Okay.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: We're now on s two seventy eight. Are there any amendments prior to third reading? Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Thomas Chittenden (Chittenden)]: Yes, mister president. I do have an amendment, but it's not the one in the calendar. I'd like to withdraw the one from the calendar, and instead, you should be receiving one that is very similar to the one in the calendar, but with one small change. So if you look at the amendment in the calendar, it's effectively that, but one wording change at the end. But, again, not offering the one in the calendar. Take a look at the one in front of you being passed out now. Mister Press, a year ago, this legislature asked the cannabis control board to review the fees we charge outdoor and indoor cultivators in marijuana in light of the maturing regulated marketplace here in Vermont. The result of that report highlighted a few key points inspiring this amendment. While our current fee structure acknowledges a difference between indoor and outdoor cultivation, it does not reflect the reality of productive capacity. An indoor license allows for perpetual harvest yielding four to six times the product of a single Vermont summer. And that's all outdoor cultivators get, one season, one shot each year for their crop yield. To truly align the cost of a license with the opportunity it provides, the outdoor fee would best be adjusted to a one to four ratio relative to indoor costs. This amendment does just that, informed by a thorough report from the Cannabis Control Board. Cutting the outdoor fees in half would ensure that our outdoor farmers are not paying a seasonal penalty for working with the sun instead of high voltage lights. Vermont has a proud history of working in harmony with the land, by reducing outdoor fees by 50%, the state would be reiterating that we value working lands and sun grown agriculture. Farmers in Vermont have a really rough go at it. From tilling Virginia's clay to late frost, from finding flat stretches of land to devastating floods, it is hard to grow outdoors in Vermont. Aligning the license costs with the actual yield potential isn't just a math correction, it's a necessary step to prevent our small outdoor cultivators from giving up on their fields. Now we don't charge any fees like this to grow other crops and I get it, it's pot, so we wanna regulate it. But in these discussions, multiple senators suggested we should be charging these fees on beets and brussels sprouts since nobody likes those crops. Alas, that's a likely a discussion for another day, and I encourage our senate agricultural committee to consider that, especially brussels sprouts. Mister president, this amendment in various forms, was presented to the committees of jurisdiction, but yesterday, based on feedback from the appropriations and finance chairs, the last section was added which conditionally enacts these lower fees if if money is appropriated this budgetary cycle to and this is where the changes and what's passed out if it's actually appropriated to the cannabis regulation Since that was added after our long floor session yesterday, I did not have time to to present this newest version to all the committees of jurisdiction, but I hope this aligns enough with what they had seen either to be supportive of this or to at least not be blindsided by it. I did actually ask the committee a policy committee of jurisdiction, senate economic development, housing, and general affairs, for their opinion on this this morning, and that was a five o support straw poll vote in support of it. Thank you, mister president. I'm happy to answer any questions.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The junior senator from Washington, I think, was up first, so we will start there.

[Senator Anne Watson (Washington)]: I think the presenter of the amendment was not blindsided by this amendment at all. But since our committee hasn't had a chance to talk about it, I would

[Senator John Morley III (Orleans)]: like to talk to five minute reasons.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Think if we have a brief recess, both chairs can meet with their committees in whatever corner they choose. We'll take a brief recess.

[Senator John Benson (Orange)]: I gotta be back.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Will the senate please come to order? Senator from Washington.

[Senator Ann Cummings (Washington)]: Thank you, mister president. Assuming that the senator from Chittenden would favor his own amendment, the straw poll in finance are seven zero in favor.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Washington.

[Senator Anne Watson (Washington)]: Thank you, mister president. It is from appropriations with this change that we appreciate the presented amendment in making plus seven zero zero.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Chittenden Central)]: Thank you, mister president. As someone of Eastern European descent, a culture where beets and cabbages are a staple component of my diet, I take objection to the assertion that nobody likes beets for brussels

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Ginny Lyons. My sincerest apologies. Senator from Essex.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: I'm president. I hate brussels sprouts.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Alright. Senator from Windsor.

[Senator Rebecca 'Becca' White (Windsor)]: Thank you, mister president. And, I appreciate the amendment, although I have some, concerns, and I just wanna understand with asking a question of the presenter, the amendment.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The presenter is interrogated.

[Senator Rebecca 'Becca' White (Windsor)]: So in your amendment, have section 10 a, the way bottom of your printout, and it says that provided that honor before the general assembly has appropriated or transferred the amount. And maybe this is a question for appropriations, but since they voted in favor of it, I'm wondering if we could get a description of this section and the reality of its coming to fruition.

[Senator Thomas Chittenden (Chittenden)]: Thank you, mister president. I'll give a swing at that question, and then I'd I'd certainly welcome the the anybody from appropriations to correct anything I say. This was important contingency language in order for us to be more comfortable to members of the appropriations committee that I spoke to. This effectively is, from what I'm told, is common language used in the budgetary process to put things on the list, so to speak. So in the broader negotiations, as we look at pros and cons of all the things that need money throughout the entire big bill discussion, this is language that makes it easy for this to just be one other consideration that's not lost in the shuffle, so to speak, and that as the final big bill budget comes together, this will certainly be part of the considerations, but does not tie the hands and it also makes that process easier. That's my understanding.

[Senator Rebecca 'Becca' White (Windsor)]: Yeah, I thank the presenter of the amendment. Ultimately, will be voting no on this amendment. I do appreciate the logic of the outdoor grow season being shorter, but I don't think that this is a fair reduction comparison to indoor growers with their fees. And while I understand it was a recommendation of the Cannabis Control Board I also think that the tightness of our budgets at this point to alleviate the fees for this specific industry at this time would not be in our financial best interest. So I will be voting no on this amendment although I appreciate the introduction of it.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Thank you.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for question? Question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the senator from Chittenden? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. No. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it, and we have amended s two seventy eight. Are there any further amendments? Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Chittenden Central)]: Thank you, mister president. I do have a small amendment. I would argue it is an equity amendment to offer to this bill. What my amendment that is being passed out would do would give renters a place where they are can legally use cannabis. Presently, there is no public use of cannabis allowed and landlords can prohibit renters from using cannabis in their home. So what this amendment proposes to do is disallow the prohibition of cannabis consumption within the four walls of a rental property with the exception of lighted cannabis. So it can still be prohibited for one to smoke cannabis in their home. But presently, we have a legal market to which renters can be completely shut out from legal use and this amendment proposes to alleviate that and I hope the body will support it. Thank you.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Chittenden South)]: Thank you, Mr. President. Both our transfer of cannabis to an illicit substance to a regulated market, as well as landlord tenant law often fall through the cracks between the two committees of jurisdiction, judiciary and economic development. So we greatly appreciate this warm handoff of a member of the judiciary committee presenting us with an amendment that we probably wouldn't have been able to bring forward ourselves under our jurisdiction and, the straw poll was five zero on this amendment.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? Senator from Caledonia. The presenter is interrogated.

[Senator Scott Beck (Caledonia)]: My question is largely around the federal the federal structure here and that in many of our housing units in the state, they are federally subsidized in one way or another. What would by making illegal for somebody to use what is a tier one product in one of those spaces what could be the potential unintended consequences of allowing that?

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Chittenden Central)]: Thank you Mr. President. I would like to ask for a short recess to confer with counsel.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: We'll take a short recess. Senate please come to order. Senator Beck and Senator Vyhovsky have the floor.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Chittenden Central)]: Thank you, mister president, and I thank the senator. This is an important question, and the attorney that will help us answer it and potentially solve it if it is a problem, needs some time. So we will get back to you with an answer.

[Senator Scott Beck (Caledonia)]: Okay. Thank you, mister president.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: Thank you, mister president. As my colleague just said, we need a few moments at least for the drafting and of an amendment. So I would ask that we, pass over S278 for the moment and go back to the top of today's calendar, which is S142 and act relating to the pathway to licensure.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: We have on the calendar for action s one forty two introduced on 04/03/2025. It was referred to the committee on health and welfare, which reports it is considered the bill and recommends that the bill be amended as set forth in the calendar of today on page eleven twenty, and that when so amended, the bill ought to pass. Affecting the revenue of the state, the bill was then referred to the committee on finance, which reports it is considered the bill and that the bill ought to pass when amended as recommended by the committee on health and welfare. Affecting the appropriations of the state, the bill was then referred to the committee on appropriations, which reports it is considered the bill and recommends that the bill ought to pass when amended as recommended by the committee on health and welfare. Listen to the second reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: S one forty two, an act relating to a pathway for license to licensure for internationally trained physicians and medical graduates.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: I recognize the senator from Orange, senator Benson, for the Committee on Health and Welfare.

[Senator John Benson (Orange)]: Thank you, mister president. For those who wish to follow along, the bill is presented on page twelve twenty two of today's journal. This bill does exactly what its title says. It provides a pathway for individuals who are from other countries who have been trained as physicians to

[Senator Thomas Chittenden (Chittenden)]: have

[Senator John Benson (Orange)]: a pathway to actually practice here in the state of Vermont. So if we go down through it section one and and before I do that I would just say there are other states that do have a program to allow individuals who come from other countries to get licensed and practiced as physicians in their states. And we through testimony heard that there are several individuals here in the state of Vermont who actually were licensed physician in their country of origin, but cannot practice to their potential here in the state. So they're doing functions far below their capacity in our health care system. So this would give those individuals and also hopefully to attract new physicians to come to our state and follow this pathway and actually help to alleviate our shortage of doctors in our communities. So if we look at section one talks about qualifications for medical licensure. This section amends 20 VSA thirteen thirty one which established qualifications for medical licensure to allow the board of medical practice to issue licenses to practice medicine to an internationally trained physician or medical graduate who completes the pathway to licensure established in this bill. Section two, this section adds a new subject or two the chapter on the board of medical practice in licensure for physicians. The new sub chapter creates a pathway to medical licensure for in Vermont for an individual who has received a medical degree and has been licensed to practice medicine in a country other than The United States. The pathway to licensure would require the individual to meet certain education and examination requirements, complete a two year supervised employment with a participating healthcare facility approved by the Board of Medical Practice. Not to have previously had a medical license revoked or restricted, the Board will issue a provisional license to for a two year period of supervised practice at a participating healthcare facility. After the two years of provisional license, the individual can apply for a two year limited license, which requires successful completion of an assessment and evaluation program at the participating healthcare facility and offer a full time employment from the same or a different Vermont health care facility, achieve a passing score on step three of The US medical licensing exam. After the two years of practice with a limited license, the individual can apply for a full unrestricted license for for

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: a

[Senator John Benson (Orange)]: practice medicine in Vermont. The Board of Medical Practice will collect and report annually on implementation and success of the pathway to license program, including information on the number of applicants and their countries of origin and training, number of provisional and limited license granted and refused, and the reason for refusal. Rule making under section three, this section would require the board of medical practice to adopt rules to implement the pathway to licensure program, including determining which country's licensure to practice medicine would be acceptable to the board and the criteria for participating healthcare facilities to use in assessing the and evaluating an internationally trained physician's readiness to practice medicine in Vermont. Now when we heard from the board of medical practice, they were in favor of moving forward with this bill, but they also had some questions on just how they would implement this. And after discussion, we added this section four, which is the alternate pathway to licensure for individual trained physicians and medical graduates. And what this section does is it directs the Department of Health in collaboration with the Board of Medical Practices to report by 01/15/2027 on the pathway to licensure for internationally trained physicians or medical, graduates as an alternative to the pathway established by this bill. The report would include a summary of other states procedures for licensing internationally trained physicians and data on their outcomes. A description of the external resources needed to evaluate the education experience and examinations of the internationally trained physicians and the availability of those resources, a provisional, proposal for licensing in internationally trained physicians and medical graduates in Vermont, including the qualifications, and supervision requirements, resources and statutory authority needed and an implementation plan and timeline. So this basically gives the board the opportunity to come back to us with amendments to that pathway if they believe that it's either insufficient or should be changed in any way to make sure that the individuals who license here in Vermont can perform the job that that we intend them to do. Section five lays out the effective date. Section one and two establishing the pathway to licensure would take effect in 07/01/2028. Section three rulemaking would take effect on 07/01/2027. And section four, as I indicated, would require them to come back and report by 01/15/2027. Thank you, Mr. President.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: I recognize the Senator from Chittenden, Senator Gulick for the report of the Committee on Finance.

[Senator Martine Larocque Gulick (Chittenden)]: Thank you, mister president. The committee on finance looked at this bill and did not see any fees. It certainly contemplates the possibility of future fees, and we found that very agreeable, and we recommend that the body, that the senate support this, bill and that the bill ought to pass when amended by our committee and the vote was six zero one. Thank you, mister president.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: I'd now like to recognize the senator from Chittenden, senator Lyons, for the report of the committee on appropriations.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Thank you, mister president. There are actually no, appropriations included in the bill for '27, the budgetary year '27. There will be potentially, for the next, fiscal year '28 as the program is implemented. So Budget Committee on Appropriations voted favorably, seven zero zero, to move this bill forward. Thank you.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: So the question is, shall the senate amend the bill as recommended by the committee on health and welfare? Are you ready for the question? Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Martine Larocque Gulick (Chittenden)]: Thank you, mister president. I just wanted to share my thanks with the senator from Windham who brought this bill forward. Many of our constituents we have many constituents who are highly trained, highly skilled physicians who have not been able to practice in the state of Vermont. And one other data point that we received in our committee is that internationally trained physicians will often work in rural areas. That has been shown to be the case in other states. So we're really excited about this and look forward to a future where our highly trained physicians can practice in our state. Thank you, Mr. President.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator Essex. Thank you, Mr.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: President. I was originally gonna ask to interrogate the report of the bill, but the report was so thorough that I answered all my questions. And the reason I was going to interrogate was a story that I have to tell of some folks that I met that immigrated from China. The husband was a surgeon and the wife was a nurse, an RN. And she immediately found work in Boston and not only found work but headed up an apartment. And the husband as a very busy surgeon in China couldn't get a medical license at all. So I was just wanting to make sure that the protections were in place. And so that that same occurrence would be able to be discovered in Vermont. And, again, I'm very satisfied with what I heard during the report. So thank you, mister president.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? The question is, shall the senate amend the bill as recommended by the committee on health and welfare? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it, and we have amended the bill as recommended by the Committee on Health and Welfare. Question now is, shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. Ayes have it, and you've ordered third reading of s one forty two. We have on the calendar for action S one ninety, an act relating to the Green Mountain Care Board reference based pricing and hospital outsourcing of clinical care. It passed the Senate on 01/06/2026. Yeah. I mean, it was introduced on 01/06/2026. It was referred to the Committee on Health and Welfare, which reports it is considered the bill and recommends that the bill be amended as set forth in today's calendar starting on page eleven twenty two, and that when so amended, the bill ought to pass. The bill was then referred to the committee on appropriations, which reports that it has considered the bill and recommends that the amendment proposed by the committee on health and welfare be amended as set forth in today's calendar, and that when so amended, the bill ought to pass. Listen to the second reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: S one ninety, an act relating to the Green Mountain Care Board reference based pricing and hospital outsourcing of clinical care.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Recognize the senator from Chittenden, senator Lyons, for the report of the committee on health and welfare.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Thank you, mister president. I believe I have a handout, for, for the bill that I would like to begin with before diving into the sections of the bill. Just a a couple comments, mister president. As we go through our bills in here from Senate Health and Welfare that relate to transformation, health reform, health care savings, cost benefits, and so on. It's complicated, and there's no question that it's complicated. And also, there was a question on the, in in the Senate on s one ninety regarding what are the benefits that we what are the outcomes that we're getting from the work that we're doing? So I thought what I would begin with today was kind of a quick, very short, summary of some of the results that we're seeing from the work that we've been doing, in this chamber and in this building. So, obviously, we understand some of the problems. We know that the hospital's high costs are exceptional. They're higher than, other whole country. We know that administrative charges are high. We know that our hospitals charge three to five times, the Medicare amount. We but we also know that our hospitals have some many of our hospitals have reached the level of financial, insustainability, unsustainability. And so that's one set of problems. And we also know that there are high costs as a result of patients that premiums our premiums in this state are three to five times higher than Maine. We're the highest in The US. Our prescription drug costs have been extremely high as well. That's that's kind of uniform across the country. So, we've we've been looking at and these are just some of the issues that we face in our committee as we take up our discussion on various bills. I've, so if you look at the problems that are listed there, and then the second column are some of the act some of the actions. This is an incomplete list by any means, but begin this only goes back to 2022. So there's we've been working on this for so long that, you know, people are leaving the chamber and no longer here who remember all this. But act one sixty seven that we are familiar with is the beginning of a large transformation process that put in place what's known as global budgeting for that allows for the Green Mountain Care Board to provide for global budgeting for hospitals that and that is to set a comprehensive amount that a budge that hospitals can achieve or have within their budget each year. We also passed, last year, act 68, which reaffirms our strategic plan health care plan and improved transformation, hospital transformation to lower costs. And then, we also know that in addition to our actions through our relationship and work with the board, the board has passed budget orders for this year, fiscal year twenty six, that have, lowered costs. The results of just those few things, and, and I would like to say, when you see that word transformation, that's the responsibility that our hospitals have for transforming themselves from a very high cost organization to an organization that is more affordable for folks in our state. The amount of money that's been saved through the work that hospitals have done independently and then collaboratively, some of our hospitals are working together, particularly, some of our smaller hospitals, our critical access hospitals working together to save money. We're seeing the benefit. We're seeing that they've saved a $100,000,000. We're seeing a total reduction of $230,000,000 within the budget process. We're seeing that some of our hospitals who have been economically fragile now have more cash on hand, more cash, days cash on hand, which is a measurement of their financial sustainability. I understand the questions I get about what are we doing, what's the outcome. I'm hoping this will help you answer some of those questions. Then we look at what's going on on with patients. And the question is, all of the all of this reduction in spending, how is it how is it affecting us and our premiums? And how does it help the small businesses or the individuals in the insurance market? Well and that's part of what's in s one ninety. We're trying to move the some of those savings into the pockets of Vermonters so that the cost of care and the cost of premiums will be less intrusive into their lives. So if we look at the patient high cost and then we look again, we're looking at just a couple of bills here, act one sixty seven, act 68. We've had payment changes, for, '27. We we asked the board to please put in place some reference based pricing criteria for fiscal year twenty seven. That's the one coming up. S one ninety reaffirms that and actually put some conditions in place that will help us move forward to lower the charges that we all face when we go into the hospital environment. So that's the reference based pricing piece that we will be talking about in s one ninety. But beyond that, we've also had, we have passed, at least one law. We've passed a lot of laws on prescription drugs, but the one that we passed last year that put the 120% cap on more expensive, fusion cancer drugs and so on has demonstrated savings, and that's the savings that you see there, that $12,000,000 that you see there, that is only for educators and education staff. So that's just one little chunk of premium savings. So that's $12,000,000 that we saved in our school system for those, health care premiums. Then we also know that, the insurance companies have recent recently, removed GLP one drugs for a number of folks, not everyone. There are some are still covered, but taken that out of insurance. That is the $16,000,000 that's been saved. And, again, that's only for education. So I'm trying to demonstrate to you what we've all been concerned about is the effect of health care costs on our education, property taxes. Taxes. So So you you look at the bottom, and then you'll see the education premiums with a reduction of between three to 10%. In my own district, that savings is about 3%. So it it will it will change over time. But that's good news for us because our constituents want to know that what we're doing in here translates into support for their for their work. So, mister president, that I hope that is somewhat helpful to you. I will say that as we look at the actions that have taken place under act 68, for example, we know that insurers, providers, and others have been very much involved in, this process in addition to hospitals and regulators. It's been everyone together working on this, and I hope that we will continue with that process. So I won't dwell on this, but I will say if you need more specific data numbers on how much our premiums are and what how we relate to the rest of the country, I'm glad to do that. I just will say that we do have the highest premiums in the country. The average premium cost for patients in this state is about $10,000, and I know people are paying a whole lot more than that. I've heard from a lot of people. I I talked with a a young man, probably not young, middle aged because he has two adults, like, two young daughters who are now in college and high school, and he was saying, can't send them to college because I'm paying for health care. I can't afford their their health care at the same time that we're trying to save for college. So people are in those dire situations. They really are.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Windsor, Majority Leader)]: Thank you very much.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Anyway, so, mister president, I'm going to move into the bill very briefly, and then we'll flip the page over. You can flip your page over, and we'll get to reference based pricing in just a minute. I would like to say that, one of the one of the problems that we have and and that the Green Mountain Care Board has in solving this whole problem is its complexity and how how to work with very large organizations, our hospitals, to have change take place quickly and effectively. The it's not an easy process. I know you all hear from your hospitals, and the hospitals say, we can't do this. We can't do that. At the same time, the board is saying, you have to do this. You have to do that. It's that constant tension and pressure. We feel that in our committee every single day. And we've we've we've gotten to a place, I think, with this bill that I think is gonna help move us all forward and, ultimately, is going to save save Vermonter's cost, money. So really briefly, as you recall, because we've talked about reference based pricing in here before, this is a a standard or a benchmark for health care services. They it's pretty much based on Medicare, based payment. And that we have a goal. If we have a goal in this state of between 20250% of Medicare based payment. Why do we have that? That's kind of the national average. But we're trying to get even with what's going on in other states where the, where the where premiums are lower and hospital costs are lower. So the push down from where we are, some of them some of them way up high, the push down will take time. Hospitals have to adjust their their charges and what they receive and and their budget process. So, we feel that I I won't go through all the reasons why this is an important number, but it's a reasonable ceiling based on experience. It also allows for the some decision making that is not year to year, but then there's decision making consistently. You'll always know that's your goal. Right? So so you don't have to just fuss around about it. Not easy. There is built into all of this. There's a whole lot built into what the reference price is. There's the condition of the patients that go into the hospital. There's the there's inflationary issues like Medicare economic index that we had talked about in another bill earlier this week. Like, there was it this week. I remember. This week's a long week. So s one ninety adds the 250 percent of Medicare for hospital payments, but only for qualified health plans. So it's qualified health plans are for those folks, individuals, small businesses. So setting that target that that no.

[Senator Scott Beck (Caledonia)]: It's it's

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: actually putting it in place. We're implementing 250% of Medicare for qualified health plans for payments to hospitals. That's a big deal. It's significant. There will be savings. That's huge. It's in the 2027 budget. Hospital budgets are approved or looked at in October. Right now, hospitals are looking at what the Green Mountain Care Board guidance is, then they'll put their budgets together, pass budgets, and hopefully, the benefit will be realized in premium reduction. It should it will be. Okay. So then within the bill itself, there's another little piece. Okay? So what we find out is that some hospital services, as you can see on that second page, some hospital services are high. That's a 300%, 500%. Some as high as thousand percent of Medicare. That's very high. And so how do you take that charge and push it down? How do you push it down to $2.50? That takes time. So there's a section of the bill, first section of the bill, that allows for some time for that pushing of down pushing down. That all that isn't all gonna happen in '27. That takes a bit. Now one of the things that we do have in the bill is if if any hospital has a charge over 500%, I call it a little cap thing, any any hospital that has a charge of over 500%, then you're gonna have to bring those down first. Those are the first things you look at. If you have something that is at $2.55, that's probably less important. Okay? So start bringing those costs down. Start looking at those costs and bring them down. Now when you talk about, reference based pricing, everyone thinks it's the panacea. But once you've got 250% of of, short of 50% of Medicare, you're all golden. Right? All done. Right? No. That's not the case. So look at the 2018, the numbers down there. Hospitals set their own rates. So hospitals are setting the rates, their little, reference based prices. In 2018, for example, one example is 276% of Medicare. In 2022, same hospital, same charge, 316% of Medicare regardless of what other conditions are. '23, it went up even higher. In '26, that number is 500% of Medicare. So even with when you start talking about having a benchmark, if you if you don't have some downward pressure on it or you don't have some regulation that keeps it in place, it's gonna go up. So charges will go up. So the point here that I'm trying to make is we need to also have this structure, this financial payment structure be with done within the context of budgeting oversight. So that's where the sort of what we we call the global budget or that's what we call the budget order from the Green Mountain Care Board. That's where that comes into play. So, so, mister president, you have an inkling of an idea here now about what we've done, what our savings are, and what our goal is in terms of encouraging additional savings within hospitals. That's gonna take some time, first, for hospitals to do it. And then secondly, move but but really to move forward with alacrity, in '27 to save money for our qualified health plans, about 88,000 people in Vermont, small business individuals to hold the line on those costs. That's what's in s one ninety. It is an important piece of our affordability within the the health care system. So I you have that pretty little graph. Part part. Now here's what I'd like you to do. You're gonna have to ignore something and look. So where it says base, that's the third set of bars. K? That would be the Medicare base payment. Okay? If you look over where it says current, that first little bar, that set of bar graph, current, that's what the hospital's current base payments are. Okay? Got it. Now if we add 250% to the base, that's what the reimbursement rate will be for our critical access for our hospitals. Okay? If you and we would if

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Chittenden Central)]: we could

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: take something like a 225%, which was in in in the amendment that I'm gonna withdraw. I want this is just for, example. And you put that 225% onto the current hospital charges, look at what happens to the cost compared to 250% on the Medicare base. I hope I'm not confusing. The cost is higher. So our goal here within our bill is to make sure uniformity across hospitals for a payment base and that we have time for hospitals to implement that payment base. And at the same time, we have an opportunity to look at premium savings within our quality health plans qualified health plans. So, mister president, if we can go to the bill briefly. So overall, I'd like to say that your senate health and welfare committee is very positive about the work that we're doing in this, with this bill. I'm bringing it to you with the next step in adding in results. We're adding in some, really cost containment, putting money back into folks' pockets for the premiums, and seeing some results that will have an effect. So just going to the bill, and I think it's on 12/24. Hope so. And section one of the bill, this is a this is a little reference based pricing, section requiring hospitals and insurers to begin expressing to begin expressing rates as a percentage of Medicare for items and services in their provider contracts. So they have contracts with insurance companies and with, they have contracts with individual providers, insurance within individual providers. So as of 10/01/2026 Requires hospitals to provide their publicly recorded prices both as a percentage of Medicare rates and in dollars and cents. That's transparency and clarity. And it has to be disaggregated by insurance plan and payer. It's complicated to do that, to sort that out. It will take time. The Green Mountain Care Board has volunteered that they will be working on this when we look at the next section on February. Each hospital, it allows each hospital to express its rates as a percentage of Medicare based on the actual reimbursement rates that hospitals receive from Medicare until the Green Mountain Care Board adopts a reference based pricing rule that establishes the methodology for determining Medicare rates. There's a period of time within which hospitals will be doing their work. They'll have there'll be variability in the reference based price for individual hospitals, and then the Green Mountain Care Board will find resolution and offer a specific number. And that will be variable by hospital and variable by type of patient, the risk pool within the hospital. So there's a lot that goes on behind the scenes with this. It's not just something boom, you do it. Okay. A lot of work on here. It also requires the hospitals to identify themselves, so it's a national provider identifier. It's that follows the hospital, whether it's in in hospital work or whether it's outside, outside of the main campus, and that will be by October 27. So we'll begin using that identifier by October 27. Section two. This is the qualified health plan benefit plans. They this section limits the amounts that the amounts that health insurers can pay hospitals for services provided to enrollees and qualified health plans, QHPs, or they're also known as exchange plans. So it'll be up to up to 250% of Medicare rates. This projection for this is about $5,050,000,000 dollars in savings. Good good good thing to hear. This section also requires a Green Mountain Care Board to ensure this is the part I like. This is one that has continuously bothered me that we don't have, but the section requires the view out and care board to ensure during their rate review that the hospital reimbursement caps are appropriately reflected in premiums for qualified health plans. So when we have savings, they go back to the people who need those savings, us. Section three, this section has a definition of Medicare adjusted base rate for hospital budgets and budget review. That's the base rate standard that we're talking about. And then this the the section also directs hospitals to implement any commercial reimbursement rate reductions ordered by the board first through the caps on reimbursement for qualified health plans, and then by reducing the hospital's commercial reimbursement rates that are more than 500% of Medicare. That that's the section there where we're looking at the very high charges and trying to move them down, to 500 and below. And then it allows for the hospital to propose to the Green Mountain Care Board, allows hospitals to propose an adjustment to commercial rates for certain service lines if the reimbursement caps are negatively affected and affecting, access quality or sustainability. What all all this says is that if the provisions that are we're putting in place for the 250%, is going to put the hospital under financially, that the hospital has an opportunity to demonstrate that and make changes in the budget process. Then there is a section four. We were approached by, Vermont Education Health Initiative, EHI, our our school folks and, state employees who are very interested in establishing a public, reference based pricing project, and looking at how those how plans and opportunities for reference based pricing would help in our state. So by January 27, the board will report to the general assembly with findings and recommendations on the scope, timing, and financial impacts of implementing reference based pricing for the state employees' health benefit plan and for VHI plans. And this is a voluntary action on the part of these two organizations. We see we there are projected savings for this one as well. There's a section five on hospital outsourcing. There were concerns, initial concerns expressed about how hospitals are outsourcing some of their services. Now there's an a whole emergency room that's outsourced in one one of our hospitals. The concern was that the earnings from those, outsourced services would not support what we have as a provider tax. As we investigated it further, we found out that outsourcing is a tradition, and it has there was some confusion about how it would affect hospitals and patients. So we've asked for some information about the outsourcing and how it may or may not affect provider tax taxes, and we'll get that information back in January '27. There's a an old section of law, health care provider bargaining groups, and this really just is technical correction and takes out, the old health care authority bargaining unit budget and bargaining unit that says that these one bargaining unit left in the state will not, have use rep bargain for or consider reference based pricing. Section seven, this is a section on appeals and the Green Mountain Care Board. Green Mountain Care Care Board analogy to the Public Utility Commission, the PUC. PUC has appeals going directly to the Supreme Court. This puts that in line. Now the board Green Mountain Care Board will also have that appeals process from the board to the Supreme Court. Then there is a sections eight and nine, the data collection and maintenance of public a public interactive tool showing information on health system performance, quality, access, and affordability. This will be at the at the board, and they will be working on that. It will be contingent on their finding funds to do it. That is in the, in in the bill. Section 10, this is the public employee health benefit authority study committee. Now I'm looking for a better name for that, and I have suggestions. The public employee health benefit authority. So Oregon has a public health authority in place. Massachusetts has a primary care program, but this is a this is an analysis by 11 public employee health benefits members to figure out how can we pool all the all these people who work in the public sector into a a health care pool and build a public sector authority, or oversight, a program. This is this could be exciting. And so we put together, you know, VLCT educators, and VSEA, maybe, see how it would go, and figure out how to have a less expensive insurance pool. There is a $50,000 amount in there that appropriations, amendment will strike. Then, that then there's an effective date on passage, and that that's the bill. I think, for us of course, it's complicated. It's always more complicated than that. And I I I will, mister president, have an amendment in a little bit.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Oh, I should share. Okay. I can recognize you.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Say the vote was five zero zero. I should also say that we have a long list of witnesses, and I'm happy to share those with you, when I find it. But we're all set, I think. Thank you, mister president.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Thank you, senator, and no rest for the weary. I recognize the senator for from Chittenden District, senator Lyons, for the report of the committee on appropriations.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Thank you, mister president. There was a there is a 50,000, appropriations in the underlying bill. We have taken that out, and, hopefully, the treasurer will identify some money to use to complete the study on the public authority. Thank you, mister president. Vote in, appropriations was seven zero zero.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The question is, shall the recommendation of amendment of the committee on health and welfare be amended as proposed by the committee on appropriations? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it, and you have amended the recommendation of amendment of the committee on health and welfare as recommended by the committee on appropriations. The senator from Chittenden, senator Lyons, has an amendment to offer at this time.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Mister president, I'd like to withdraw the proposed amendment, in the calendar and offer a different amendment.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: You don't you don't have to withdraw it if you don't offer. It's considered not offered.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Thank you, mister president. Mister president, originally, Ed put and others have put in a proposed amendment that would have changed the reference based price based on the Medicaid standard, would change it to allow for a 225% of what is currently done by hospitals. When we looked at that, as you can see on the bar graph I handed out, it would have really increased prices. So we went back to the drawing board, worked with our hospitals and others, and decided to stick I decided to stick with the 250%. There were also language in the amendment as offered that we would like to keep. So in the first proposal amendment, we the the language is similar to what's in the underlying bill, but it is better language. The reimbursement limits set forth in this section will stay in effect, so that's the 250% until the for the qualified health plans until, the board establishes an alternative. The second proposal was also in that first amendment that I, that I just I'm not offering. So it it's language improvement. It relates to allow for some flexibility in the budget process for our critical access hospitals, when, for our hospitals when they're trying to get down to that 500% and what effect it might have on their financial status. We did add I did add a new section. The third proposal amendment is due. It's a little bit complicated, but it's a working group that the Green Mountain Care Board will assemble to look at a very archaic Medicare provision that, is separate, totally separate from every anything else that's in the bill. And it's separate from, the reference based pricing, and it's separate separate from all the other stuff. But it is a it is a provision that the federal government requires of hospitals, critical access hospitals, requires of critical access hospitals to pay federal government money. And so we looked at this in our committee. We said this is an important thing for the working group to look at because we'd like our hospitals to get out from under this horrible provision that forces smaller hospitals to pay money to the federal government. Nationally, it's $30,000,000,000. In our state, it's 30,000,000. It's a lot of money. So, but it's not related to the underlying part of the bill. It was an issue that came up. The reason we put it in have this working group in here is that there were concerns expressed by the critical access hospital that if they had to compensate for the money that was that some patients were paying that goes to the federal government, the hospital had to compensate for that within this budget year, would be, difficult, administratively difficult, and it might also be financially concerning. So we put language in here that, disallows the use of that, consideration of that solution in the budget. One solution for the federal law provision would be put it in the budget. And so we said, don't do it in the budget in '20 for '27, have the working group come up with a solution, and, that could be implemented outside of the legislative process, or it might be something we have to look at. So that's what's in this, proposal, and I would ask for a support on this. It it is an important this is an important amendment because it allows for us to go forward with a 250% of reference based price for our qualified health plans, our QHPs, and it will help keep money in, pockets for Vermonters. So thank you, mister president.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The question is, shall the recommendation of the committee on health and welfare as amended be further amended as recommended by senator Lyons. Senator from Washington.

[Senator Ann Cummings (Washington)]: Thank you, mister president. If you're as confused as I was by that last section, I'm not sure if it's punishment for being the student that raised your hand first or if it's a cognitive test to see if I can remember what I learned three hours ago now. There is for critical access hospitals, which isn't UVMC, it's all your small rural hospitals. There is a federal requirement. Normally, you go to the hospital. Medicare pays its rate. Then if you have supplemental insurance, it pays its rate. Sometimes that's everything else. Sometimes it isn't. And then you pay what's left, or you pay a co pay. But it starts with the Medicare paying and works out. In these critical access hospitals for outpatient services, Medicare requires there is, I believe it's 20% co pay or payment by the patient. Now the hospital sets a charge, and I'm not going to try and do math on the floor. But if that 20% of that high charge is equal to or greater than the charge, then Medicare doesn't pay anything. And so the the cost is solely on usually, it's an elderly or it's a disabled person. Usually, it's in a rural community. And they and the advocates feel this is money that is it's keeping Medicare from paying. It's which it's putting the cost onto the individual patient first. It's been there forever, but it has become a burden for people. And but, again, if this is Sandra from Chittenden, whichever, Central, Southeast, said, we're we're walking this fine line between trying to get costs down and not put our hospitals under. So this would set up a study group. If we just said, nope, you can't do that anymore, that could be enough to put them under. The study group will look at a way to perhaps we can't change federal law, but perhaps to be able to save what are really some of our most vulnerable patients the cost and get them the coverage they really should have. Are

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: you ready for the questions? Senator from Orange.

[Senator John Benson (Orange)]: Mister president, I stand in support of this amendment, And people may ask why do we have this provision of, tying the hands of the Green Mountain Care Board for a year. And the reason for that is if you look at what the senator from Chittenden has presented, we have put a lot on our hospitals, in the last several years. They've cut their staff. They're trying to deal as best they can to deal with all these different changes and so what we didn't want to do is put more burden on them in this year when they're trying to figure out their budgets with all these changes that we are putting on them give the study group an opportunity to

[Senator Thomas Chittenden (Chittenden)]: look

[Senator John Benson (Orange)]: at this particular issue come back with a recommendation and then in the next budget year as you as you heard from the presenter of the bill, this provision was only for one year and then they would have a much better handle on exactly how to handle this and how to account for it in the next year's budget.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: Thank you.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Addison.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Thank you, mister president. First, just a comment. I appreciate the senator from Orange's comment. I hope that the members in the chamber will remember those comments when we're talking about education policy. It sounds very similar to the situation with our schools. And one of the highest costs for affordability crisis right now in the state is actually health insurance rates for for our constituents. And we are arguing to give hospitals more time to adjust to these. I hope that the same will hold true for giving our schools some time to adjust to some of the things we may or may not be doing to them. But with that being said, president, may I inquire of the reporter of the amendment?

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The reporter's interrogated.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Thank you, mister president. I first have a question on sections it's second instance of amendment paragraph c. The amendment specifically calls out such as primary care, and I'm wondering, why it's worded as such as primary care instead of just saying for service for primary care service lines. Is the intent to allow primary care to, have more, you know, more cost or more, higher reimbursement rates for primary care or is it for all service lines?

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Well, it is it is such as so, you know, you raise a good point when we were talking about this in committee, we said, well, we don't want it to go to any service line. We don't, you know, necessarily. Well, we don't want it to go to maybe some equipment that is less important. We wanted to go to direct care services for patients and we didn't want to spell it all out and we so we said such as primary care.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Okay. Because the way I read it, this could go to any service line. Yep. Primary care is just an example. If we want to make sure that we're directing any increased reimbursements to primary care, I think we need to be more, directive of that because the way I read it right now is that it could go to equipment service lines. But I think given our focus on wanting to, really, really, increase, support for primary care, I'm wondering if, the committee considered just saying for one or more of its service, for primary care or one or more, making the wording be more explicit that primary care is what we want to focus on.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Well, so that, you know, that's part of the conversation that we had in committee. And it's a good point to be raised. There may be cases where it's a different service line other than primary care. And it might be something that is really fundamental to holding patients up, but not direct patient care. So we didn't want to be too explicit. So we leave it open for the hospitals, and the decision making going forward. So I remember each hospital is so different. Each service need is different, and we couldn't predict. So that was the decision making there.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Okay. I I guess I would prefer to have it be more explicit that primary care is where we wanna focus. But the second, part, I'm still trying to wrap my head around this cost sharing situation and I appreciated the senator from Washington's ex explanation that did help. But is it is it that this working group is would be trying to figure out how to prevent patients from having to pay the full cost of a service because Medicare will not reimburse more than 80% or because the 20% yeah. I'm just not I just am not I still am not clear about what the what this problem is that this working group is trying to fix and why we would not let the Green Mountain Care Board address some of this in the budget?

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: So good questions. Both good questions. Remember, it's a Medicare provision, and it's the I'll read you what it is.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Okay.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: And I so that'll help, I hope. Because it's it is confusing. There's no question about it. And it came up at the last minute. Well, not at the last minute. It came up because if hospitals are required to pay the money for the patient and so I'll read it, then I'll explain

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: it. Okay.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Regarding regarding the Medicare beneficiary cost sharing issue mentioned in the amendment, the issue is that Medicare requires beneficiaries, patients, to pay a coinsurance amount, so that thought out of pocket, of 20% of hospital charges. The hospital list prices. Patient has to pay 20% of that right up front for outpatient hospital services with no cap. So regardless of what the charge is, the patient has to pay 20% rather than the 20% of the Medicare payment rate. So anything above the Medicare rate, the hospital charges, the patient has to pay 20 on the whole thing. So so it's rather than the 20% of the Medicare payment rate that Medicare requires beneficiaries to pay as coinsurance at prospective payment, hospitals. So they're the larger hospitals, which is subject to a cap. So our larger hospitals have a cap. Okay. Patients don't have to pay that much at larger hospitals. To smaller hospitals, they can pay right up to the highest charge. This makes a Medicare patient's out of pocket exposure at critical access hospitals significantly higher than in other hospital settings, which can be a particular problem for Medicare beneficiaries without a supplemental insurance plan. So that's that's kind of the bottom line. What's happening is a critical access hospital charges for patients or Medicare patients, they have to pay this out of pocket upfront first. And then there are other considerations. Now if if if it's not paid for or the money doesn't come in, the hospital's stuck with that. Yeah. So then the question is about the charges and how is the charges regulated? That's a question for the board to look at. Okay, Mr. President.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: May I stop the reporter just I want to say back to you what I want to say back to the reporter what the reporter said to make sure I'm understanding because I think that that explanation helps. So if I'm a patient and I'm on Medicare and I go to UVMMC, which is not a critical care hospital, and I get some outpatient service from UVMMC because it's just for outpatient services, correct? Okay. So I get an outpatient service there and it costs you know, dollars 1,200. But the cap for the non critical access hospitals is actually $1,000 Medicare can say, Nope, you can't charge $1,200 you have to charge $1,000 So then my cost, my patient share there would be $200

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Right.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Correct? Because that's, they cap it at $1,000 and then I have to pay 20% of that. So that's $200 correct?

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Right, you pay 20% of the $1,000

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Correct, yes because

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: The hospital it's will charge whatever it wants.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Right, it's capped because it's not a critical care hospital. So then if I go to a critical care hospital like Gifford Hospital and I get the same service and it costs there it's not capped so it could be the same service and maybe they're charging $2,000 for it because it's not capped. It's the same service. I'm the same patient. I have the same insurance but it costs $2,000 at Gifford because there's no cap there. And instead of the 20% would then mean I would have to pay $400 for that same service because of the way that Medicare federal laws are applying to critical care hospitals versus non critical care hospitals. Is that correct, Mr. Exactly right. Okay. Okay. Thank you. No, that's really helpful because I was trying to figure out what is the problem we're trying to solve. And I do remember hearing about this, but getting an amendment on the floor trying to address it makes it hard to understand. So I am sympathetic to those I'm sympathetic to the critical care hospitals because they are all smaller hospitals and having to adjust. And as it is right now, patients in many of our districts are paying more, in some cases twice or more than twice just by the example that I just gave. You know, you could be twice as much if you went if you live in Chittenden County and go to UVMMC versus if you live in Rochester in my district and go to Gifford Hospital and that is absolutely not fair. So I think there's an urgency at at trying to solve this problem. I really wish we could do it without tying the hands of the Green Mountain Care Board, mister president. But I think given all the circumstances, we do need to give our smaller hospitals time to adjust. But again, I just want to remind everybody that this adjustment that we're allowing our small rural hospitals to make, we need to give the same grace to our small rural schools because this is exactly the kind of issue that they are all facing. And I hear my colleagues standing up and asking for time for hospitals and I appreciate that and we also need to give time for our schools to adjust to changes that we're making for them as well. So I thank the presenter of the amendment and thank you Mr. President.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Martine Larocque Gulick (Chittenden)]: Mr. President, you might notice that I did not sign on to the amendment. I just want to very briefly speak to respectfully didn't sign on, I must say, because the work of this amendment is fantastic and I know it was hard fought and all the players were involved and so I really appreciate the work. But my reservation is in the third instance of amendment section three to be. As I said last year, the Green Mountain Care Board is a construct that came about in the legislature and we have tasked them with regulating our hospitals and hospital budgets. So I was reluctant to not allow them to take part in this in next year's hospital budget, critical access hospital budget process. And particularly we did hear that these Medicaid charges, Medicare charges in the budget are part of the problem and dealing with them could actually save the hospitals money. So I was reluctant there. We talk a lot about trust in our committee and the importance of trust with all of the players. And so I want to provide my trust with the Green Mountain Care Board. I'm also a little worried about the precedent that this might set, although I was told

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Chittenden Central)]: that we

[Senator Martine Larocque Gulick (Chittenden)]: have told the Green Mountain Care Board what to do. We have directed them in the past. And I also just wanna say that the chair of our committee did, passionately state that this is a one year provision and that it will not continue beyond 2027. Thank you, mister president.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? The question is shall the recommendation of the committee on health and welfare as amended be further amended as recommended by Senator Lyons. Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. The ayes have it and the motion carries. Question now is shall the bill be amended as recommended by the committee on health and welfare as amended? Are you ready for the question? Senator from Addison.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Thank you, mister president. I I was surprised that this bill did not actually go through the finance committee. I know that the chair of the finance committee is on the health and welfare committee, but so much of this bill is dealing with health insurance, which I believe is the jurisdiction of the finance committee. Could I I inquire of the reporter of the bill?

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The reporter's interrogated.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Thank you, mister president. I'm just looking at sections four and five of the in particular,

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: of the bill of the

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: health and welfare report. These are reports out which I know are part of so many health healthcare bills, but these two reports in particular are dealing with one fine tax, the hospital provider tax in one report and the other is dealing with the health insurance for public employees and reference based pricing and also has an impact on potentially on the education fund if it's if the high is involved. So I'm wondering if I know this is a small thing, I'm wondering if you would, if the committee would be amenable to just a tiny little change that would, require that these reports also go to the finance committee and to the, ways and means committees because these deal directly with their jurisdiction.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Mister President, if the finance committee wishes to have that report those reports, it's perfectly fine with, Senate Health and Welfare.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: I think that these that these reports should go to the the money committees because they are dealing directly with with the finance part and I know that reports just go to the legislature and everybody can find them but if they go specifically to the committee then it's clear that that's the committee's jurisdiction. Maybe on third reading, we could just add that, into the bill.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Thank you, mister. Thank you, mister president. Certainly, the comment in the reporting section by January 27 includes financial impacts influencing reference based pricing, so that would be our our committee would needs to look at that and, as we continue to look at hospital pricing.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Yeah. Sure. Mister President.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: Underlying that are the financial impacts overall, so that would certainly be something that, finance, ways and means, and others would be interested in.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Yeah. I'm not suggesting we would take health and welfare out of the, report. It's just that these are definitely finance issues so, I thank the reporter. Thank you Mr. President.

[Senator Anne Watson (Washington)]: Senator from Essex. Thank you Mr. President.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: The part of the bill, spoke about how expensive health care is in Vermont. In fact, 19.8% of Vermonters, paycheck goes to paying their premiums, while New Hampshire is at 4.8 and nationally at 7.9. So Vermont is, absorbently, expensive compared to our neighboring states and the national average. And in that time of rising costs, there's been two players, the Green Mountain Care Board and the legislature. So, I just, I don't know what's going on as far as the cost of Vermont compared to the rest of the nation and even our our neighboring states. And as far as the trust of the Green Mountain Care Board last time they were in our neighborhood, they're trying to change our close our hospital. And and that took a lot of time and efforts from all of our communities to make sure that everybody understood that it was just a recommendation, but yet it was still very harmful to our area and we spent a lot of effort in there to calm the people down to let them know that our hospital wasn't leaving. In the meantime, we had a lot of people leaving, our hospital and going down to the next hospital. So that wasn't helpful at all. The trust that I have with the Green Mountain Care Board, in making decisions isn't very well. In fact, I think I'd rather stand between a pack of wolves and a wounded buffalo and take my chances. I would like to inquire of the reporter of the bill please.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The reporter is interrogated.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: How can we be sure that s $1.90 is going to do as the reporter has indicated and reduce costs for Vermonters import as it was said, more money back in the pockets of Vermonters?

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: That's a direct direction to the Green Mountain Care Board in section two requiring the board to ensure during the rate review that the hospital reimbursement caps are appropriately reflected in premiums for qualified health plans, and that's for 27. So it's those that those qualified health plans that cover about $8,588,000 from honors relief, and that that money that we're saving through the reference based pricing based on Medicare of 250% will be directly correlated with reduced rates for premiums for Vermont. It's in the bill, and that is something that we will follow-up with next year.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: Mister president, where has this been where has this done before? Is there a record? Is there a track record of where a a plan like this has worked?

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: I'm not sure what the question is. The answer is that, yes, reference based pricing and having a cap on expenditures has worked. Okay. And just just as for example, you look at the handout that I gave you with the budget orders, in in act 68, there was a direction to lower the budget by 2.5%. That's happened. The budget orders to hold budget stationary. That's happened, and that's resulted in $230,000,000 reduction. What hasn't been in legislation previously is the return of some or all of those monies into premium reduction. So we'll see how this works.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: So, mister president, if I understand this correctly, this has been this has happened in other states or other other areas, other hospital groups to where, one could point to that and say that this plan does work?

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: The only way I can answer that is I don't know about the regulatory system in other states. I know a few states, but not many. I I do know that the, the reimbursement rate of 250% of Medicare base rate is used in other states, and it has resulted in what you have identified, mister president, as lower costs in other states. So Maine, New Hampshire, other state all the other states.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: I take the reporter. Thank you, mister president.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? Senator from Rutland.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: Thank you, mister president. May I interrogate the presenter of the

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The reporter's interrogated.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: Thank you, mister president. I'm just curious if, JFO was brought in for an independent analysis of this bill to validate that it has any of the desired effects while avoiding unintended consequences.

[Senator Virginia 'Ginny' Lyons (Chittenden)]: No, mister president. We did not. This is that not something that JFO does on a regular basis. We did hear from Green Mountain Care Board and others who are directly involved in the cost reduction, hospitals, our education folks, Green Mountain Care Board, insurers. So that's how we get our data.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: Thank you, miss President. I thank the reporter of the bill. While I do respect the professionalism of the health and welfare, some health and welfare committee, and of course, our professional health care providers, but given the fact that Vermont is currently experiencing the highest health care costs in the nation and without any type of JFO analysis to reference, I have zero confidence that we have figured out the cause and remedies for our state's health care costs. And for that, I'll no vote on this bill. Thank you, mister president. Are

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: you ready for the question? The question is, shall the bill be amended as recommended by the committee on health and welfare as amended? Are you ready for the question? So all in favor, aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it. And you have amended the bill as recommended by the committee on health and welfare as amended. Now the question is, shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. No. No. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it, and you've ordered third reading of s one ninety. I understand we will go back to the cannabis bill to finish third reading as the amendment is now ready. Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Chittenden Central)]: Thank you. To answer the question that was asked, generally speaking, state law does not over supersede federal law or HUD policy. In fact, there's already many instances in nine BSA chapter one forty seven, which governs landlord tenant law in Vermont where these inconsistencies exist with federal law or of policy. In these instances, federal law supersedes. So it is likely that this will not impact leases for federal

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator, excuse me. If I could interrupt you before you offer this one, you need to withdraw the first one.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Chittenden Central)]: I will, but I wanted to answer the question before.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Okay. Sorry to interrupt then. Thank you.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Chittenden Central)]: Anyways, where was I? Okay, so generally federal law, like I said, it would already supersede and it is likely that this policy that we're putting forward would in fact be superseded by federal law. However, due to the fact that we my understanding was we wanted a definitive answer today, and the HUD policies are eleven sixty three pages long, which made difficult to do the thorough legal analysis that would definitively say this does not apply. And so to that end, I will be withdrawing this amendment and offering a substitute to this amendment that explicitly says that this policy does not apply to leases governed by federal law or policy. Again, it is likely that this is not necessary, but due to wanting to move it forward definitively, we will be withdrawing the amendment that was not in the calendar and replacing it with another amendment that is not in the calendar will be passed out now.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: We will consider the amendment withdrawn without objection, And we will now be passing out the new amendment. Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Chittenden South)]: Thank you, mister president. Perhaps while that's being passed out, will just quickly say that we our economic development committee had an opportunity to look at the change and understand the change and by a straw poll is supportive of this change unanimously. The only thing I'd I'd add, mister president, is that not only do we have a lot of housing policy governed by federal law, and we do often put these kinds of statements in, but there is potential when cannabis becomes descheduled or differently scheduled, that certain housing policies don't follow that right away. There is a congressional bill on, the consumption of cannabis in Section eight housing or someone's federally subsidized housing. That is not likely to make it anywhere anytime soon, but we certainly see both the inquiry of the Senator from Caledonia and the accepted change from the senator from Chittenden Central as a friendly one.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? Senator from Caledonia.

[Senator Scott Beck (Caledonia)]: Thank you, mister president. I do appreciate the the language change. I think it alleviates what my potential concern might have been, and I'll be voting for the amendment.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? Question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the senator from Chittenden Central? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. Ayes have it, and we have amended the bill as offered by the senator from Chittenden. Are there any amendments prior to third reading? Listen to the third reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer, Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: S two seventy eight, an act relating to cannabis.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Question is, shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. Nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it, and you have passed s two seventy eight. Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: Thank you, mister president. I I applaud the good work this morning. It's gone a little slower and more methodically than I had thought. But before we end today, I would like to do one piece of business that is time sensitive and that involves the Taiwan resolution that you will see on the notice calendar. We will have a delegation from Taiwan here on Tuesday. So with that said Mr. President as our last order of business today I would like to bring up the Taiwan resolution by a suspension of the rules. So with that, I will move that our rules be suspended in order to allow us to take up for immediate action as our '24.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Could we take a brief recess while I confer with the president pro tem?

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Windsor, Majority Leader)]: So we'll be over in the corner. Okay.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: So the senate please come to order. Senator Perchlik.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: You Mr. President. I would like to alter my motion. This resolution will need a bit more work so I would like to ask that the rules be suspended in order to allow for a motion to recommit to the committee of jurisdiction.

[Senator Anne Watson (Washington)]: So

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: senator, I believe what you've asked for is a motion to suspend the rules so that the resolution can be returned to the committee of jurisdiction. Motion. All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. The ayes have it, and we have suspended the rules. It just dealt with. Yeah. Yeah. So to to explain the confusion, because we're in the orders of the day, we needed a motion to allow recommittal of a bill which we just passed. And now we will have the senator from Windsor make a motion.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Windsor, Majority Leader)]: Thank you, mister president. I would like to move that the resolution on Taiwan be recommitted to the senate economic development housing and general affairs committee.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: The senator from Windsor is moved that the resolution on Taiwan be recommitted to the committee on economic development. Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. The ayes have it and the motion carries. Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Philip Baruth (Chittenden Central, President Pro Tempore)]: Thank you, mister president. Pending announcements, I would move that the senate stand in adjournment until 09:30AM, Tuesday, 03/31/2026.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are there any announcements? Senator from Addison.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Thank you, mister president. Yesterday, on the floor, we did an amendment about a housing report for farm workers. And last night, I found out that this is farm worker awareness week and actually the governor did an executive proclamation noting that the week is farm worker awareness week and I will not read the whole thing but I just wanted to note it and that there are 2,600,000 farm workers in The United States. They provide all Americans with access to safe, healthy, and affordable food, and they're essential to their contributions. The foods we purchase and often go unseen, and they continue to work and meet and exceed the challenges of mother nature and perform extreme pressure under extreme pressure during the pandemic and other global challenges. So I just wanted to there's more to the resolution, but I wanted to give out a shout out to all the farm workers, and I appreciate that the governor did this official proclamation and thought it was timely given what we did yesterday. So thank you, mister president.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are there any further announcements? Senator from Washington.

[Senator Ann Cummings (Washington)]: Thank you, mister president. Senate finance will meet at 02:10. Get your lunch and come to committee.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Windsor.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Windsor, Majority Leader)]: Thank you, mister president. First, I'd like to celebrate an equal pay body and chamber. The general the general assembly is one of the few places where all of us are paid equally. No matter. What I'll leave it at that. And the second announcement is Senate Economic Development let's please meet immediately after the fall of the gavel in this corner.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Washington. Thank you,

[Senator Anne Watson (Washington)]: mister president. Senator appropriation will meet at 02:00.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Rutland.

[Senator John Morley III (Orleans)]: Government operations will meet immediately at the fall to go.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Windham.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Senate institutions will meet at two.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Senator from Bennington.

[Senator Brian Campion (Bennington) [time-bound override]]: Mister president, the senate education committee will meet at 02:15.

[Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman (President of the Senate)]: Are there any further announcements? Seeing none, the senator from Chittenden Central has moved that the senate stand on adjournment until 09:30AM, Tuesday, 03/31/2026. Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it. We'll stand in adjournment till 09:30AM, Tuesday, 03/31/2026.