Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the HB142 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to clarify partisan interim bills, raise partisan-bill limit to five
Summary
Representative Lucas Schubert told the House Legislative Administration Committee HB142 would clarify that partisan interim bills belong to the majority party and raise the partisan-bill limit from four to five, arguing the change prevents advancing bills on losing votes. Members asked questions but took no final vote.
Representative Lucas Schubert opened the hearing on House Bill 142, saying the bill would clarify that partisan bills advanced by interim committees belong to the majority party and would increase the limit on partisan bills from four to five.
Schubert, who said he carries the measure at the request of the House majority leader, told the committee the first change is a minor wording clarification to make explicit that partisan bills “belong to the majority party.” He said the second change—raising the partisan-bill cap to five—came after discussions with leadership who felt the existing four-bill limit could be constraining.
Sponsor Lucas Schubert: “This bill simply clarifies that the partisan bills belong to the majority party and that a minority party cannot pass bills on… losing votes.”
Representative Steve Fitzpatrick, speaking as a proponent, gave historical context from the recent economic affairs interim committee, saying minority members attempted to advance partisan drafts in a prior interim committee and describing the four-bill limit as intended to preserve the interim committees’ educational, bipartisan purpose. Fitzpatrick said increasing the cap to five would remain consistent with that goal.
Committee members pressed the sponsor on definitions and fairness. Representative Tuss asked why the minority party should be precluded from proposing partisan drafts through interim committees; Representative Carlin asked whether the bill could instead require a “majority of the committee” rather than explicitly naming the majority party. Schubert said he was open to reviewing precise amendment language but emphasized the broader point that bills are not advanced on losing votes in the regular legislative process.
No opponents appeared either in the room or online. The sponsor closed the hearing; the committee did not take a recorded vote on HB142 during the session.
The committee will report the hearing record; further action, including amendment proposals or a committee vote, would occur at a later date as determined by the committee leadership.
