Karlee Provenza

The speaker opposes the bill because adding criminal penalties increases government overreach and attacks public employees' freedom of choice regarding paycheck deductions.

The lawmaker opposes the amendment because rural hospitals are already struggling with affordability and lack of options, so punishing them further does not help constituents.

The lawmaker supports the amendment to ensure the bill remains constitutional and avoids future litigation, which she views as a necessary legacy for the state.

The lawmaker supports the amendment because they view it as a pro-freedom measure that gives parents and students choices regarding their time, particularly for seminary attendance.

The lawmaker opposes the amendment because she believes it is unjustified to cut funding to communities when investment income is at record levels, viewing the move as an ideological attempt to slash government.

The lawmaker opposes the amendment because they believe it is a false narrative designed to justify an unpopular political idea rather than addressing actual university issues.

The lawmaker supports the bill because she disagrees with the argument that it teaches dependency, citing her own childhood experience on food stamps as a time of learning rules rather than losing freedom.

The lawmaker supports the amendment as an insurance policy to ensure maternity health deserts are funded if the rural transformation program fails or federal funding is not upheld.

The speaker supports the amendment because without state funding, individuals lacking insurance cannot afford the required psychological reviews for bar exam accommodations, hindering their ability to become attorneys.

The lawmaker supports the amendment to ensure that where a woman lives does not determine her ability to safely give birth, highlighting the dangers of long travel distances during labor.

The lawmaker argues against moving the bill by stating that committee membership is not required for a sponsor to present and answer questions in any committee.

The lawmaker opposes the bill because they believe it will create a chilling effect that discourages people from intervening in cases of child abuse.

The lawmaker finds it illogical to mandate a video on human development when conversations about sex and how babies are made have been banned in schools.

The lawmaker opposes the bill because she believes it is unnecessary for legislators to mandate curriculum when an elected official overseeing education should handle this responsibility.