March 17, 2026 · Government Oversight Committee · 4,212 words · 15 speakers · 91 segments
Committee to order. Clerk, will you please call the roll.
Chair Hall? Here.
Vice Chair Ferguson? Here.
Ranking Member Humphrey? Here.
Representative Claggett? Here.
Representative Gross? Here.
Representative King?
Representative Lear? Here.
Representative Pizzulli? Representative Rader? Here.
Representative Simms? Here.
Representative Stevens? Here.
Representative Troy?
Representative Workman? Here.
We have a quorum present. Some members are still making their way over from the Rife with some elevator issues. First thing, members, please, on your iPads, check out the meeting minutes from previous meetings. Is there any objections to the minutes of previous meetings? Without objection, the meeting minutes are approved. Today we have four pieces of legislation with one possible vote on House Bill 176. I wanted to wait for a representative, give Representative King the opportunity to weigh in on House Bill 176. So we'll start, we'll kind of go out of order a little bit, so I apologize to members of the audience and members of the committee. We'll first call up House Concurrent Resolution No. 14 for its third hearing. Our office did not receive any testimony for House Concurrent Resolution No. 14. Is there anyone here that wishes to testify on House Account Resolution No. 14? Seeing none, that will conclude the third hearing. Next, we will call up House Bill 395 for a second hearing. Again, our office did not receive any in-person testimony. We did receive written testimony that is on your iPads. I encourage all members to check that out. Is there anyone here that wishes to testify in person for House Bill 395? Seeing none, that will conclude the second hearing for House Bill 395.
Oh, I'm so sorry. Yeah, I was called down here by Jack. I believe it was.
Okay, would you like to come up to the?
Yeah.
Sorry, we will reopen that back up. Sorry about that.
I lost my agenda.
You are fine. You were fine. We'll have a fill out a form when you're done, if that's okay.
That way we get all your information, and then we'll go from there. Okay.
And you get five minutes to testify, and then members will have the opportunity to ask you questions, if that's okay.
Yeah. My name is Ryan Harrell. I run a local landscaping business up in Delaware, Ohio, an employee where from 10 to 20 employees. And one of the biggest issues that we have is finding good team members. And through that, we engaged with Brian Lorenz to kind of bring some of that or talk to him about some of the issues that not just myself but other contractors and really probably just across the entire labor force with how the employment process works and job applications. The number of potential employees that we have actually apply for positions that don't even show up, no show, no calls, set up the appointments, don't even show up at all. If I understand correctly, part of that is the unemployment process that they have to basically fill out applications, set up interviews, and there's no way for the employers to track that and or at the state level tracking that backwards in any way to log that. I am aware of other states that do have similar processes that basically track that process, and that's essentially why it is an issue for us, and that is something that is across the board with that.
Well, thank you for coming in today.
Absolutely.
We'll get some information from you after, just your name and address and everything. Representative Gross has a question for you.
Thank you, Chair Hall. Thank you so much. I'm the joint sponsor on this bill, so I really appreciate you being in here. Could you just describe what it's like right now to be a small business owner, to try to keep your business going, knowing that we have people on unemployment and knowing that you have jobs to offer? How does that make you feel as a business owner who's trying to make a living and really provide for your community and benefits to your community?
Defeated a lot. The amount of money that we spend on posting jobs, the time that it takes. My wife is actually waiting on an interview right now, and I don't even think the individual showed up. And this is ongoing. I mean, right now we've got 10 open positions at our company, and that, you know, yes, we can, you know, it would be great to fill them so that we can, you know, these are relatively good-paying jobs, $20 plus an hour jobs, full benefits, health care, the whole nine yards of that. I get it. The landscaping industry is, you know, it is physical work, but at the end of the day, it's very rewarding at the end of the day when we build projects and see them come to fruition when we're done with that.
So just to clarify, not only do they not show up, but it costs you money to advertise, and so you're putting out of your earnings the money to recruit, and then people don't show up. So not only are people not showing up so you can make money, but it's costing you and you go into a deficit mode.
Yes.
Thank you so much. Thank you. I appreciate you.
Representative Sims has a question.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you so much for your testimony today. Just out of curiosity, do we have a comparative in terms of who's receiving unemployment benefits who are not showing up versus just a general population?
I could not find anything that links those two together. So some of that would be speculation on that But I couldn find any information that was actually linking like if we have a team member or a potential employee show up and they on unemployment I am aware of several landscape companies that just lay their team members off in the wintertime, and of course everybody saw the snow removal, all the snow that we had this winter, they all were fully staffed in the middle of the winter after laying off a lot of team members, so not throwing anybody under the bus, but there's plenty of companies out there that do do that. And we've had a repeat team members. Like we had, I think I had two just this week that no show no called us. They did the same last week. Like we literally are just building a database of people that are doing this over and over again. So I'm not even sure I'm legally allowed to ask if they're on unemployment if they show up. So it's kind of an assumption at that point.
Any other questions from members of the committee? Seeing none, thank you for coming in today. And like I said, we'll go with you and after committee and get some information from you.
Thank you.
Anyone else here to testify as a proponent to House Bill 395? Seeing none, that will conclude the second hearing of House Bill 395. Due to member schedules, we're going to go ahead and just call up House Bill 542 for its first hearing. We have Representative Williams and Representative Uppertur both with us. Gentlemen, welcome to committee.
Thank you very much. Did you find that jacket in the back of your closet?
I did, I did.
Speaking of jacket, that's a bad jacket you got on, brother.
All right.
Okay, Chair Hall, Vice Chair Ferguson, Ranking Member Humphrey, and Distinguished Members of the House Oversight Committee, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to provide testimony for House Bill 542. This bill will require that pregnancy outcomes be reported to the Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections. The goal of this legislation is to understand the severity of adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as stillbirths. In 2023, there were 700 pregnancies reported in prisons across the nation, and 6% of those pregnancies ended in miscarriages. This bill is a pivotal first step to addressing the lack of adequate health care in our state's prison system. The DRC currently requires deaths in Ohio prisons to be reported, and this bill will ensure that pregnancy outcomes are included in this requirement, so that we may understand if we are failing to provide adequate prenatal care to Ohio's incarcerated population. This data will need to be submitted from state, county, and municipal correction facilities to the DRC before the end of each year. In January of 2024, a stillbirth occurred inside Cuyahoga County Correctional Facility, which is in my district. The incarcerated individual was 17 weeks pregnant at the time. She had spent hours pleading for help, screaming in pain, and demanding medical attention. The nurse on duty neglected to provide proper medical care, and it took the facility several hours to declare a medical emergency. At that point, it was too late and her pregnancy could not be saved. The stillbirth occurred due to preventable infection. We believe that there were many other cases of adverse pregnancy outcomes in Ohio's prisons because of inadequate health care. We need prisons to report this data so that stillbirths are not overlooked or ignored. It is our ethical responsibility to ensure that the healthy babies are born in Ohio, regardless of the mother's incarcerated status. I urge you to support this bill, and I'm going to turn it over to my colleague, Representative Josh Williams. Thank you.
Chair Hall, Vice Chair Ferguson, and Ranking Member Humphrey, members of the House Government Oversight Committee, thank you for the opportunity to provide sponsored testimony on House Bill 542 today. I would also like to thank my joint sponsor, Representative Upchurch, for helping to advance his bipartisan legislation and bringing adequate health care to the ladies who are currently incarcerated and facing pregnancy. As of now, we do not have a clear understanding of what happens to pregnant inmates in Ohio jails. That's where House Bill 542 comes in. The bill would require every municipal, county, and state correctional facility to report the outcome of each pregnancy for incarcerated individuals to ODRC every year. While the bill is extraordinarily simple in what it does, the data it gives us empowers us as legislators to protect the lives of unborn children, being born under the purview and care of the state of Ohio. Unborn lives are just as valuable inside our prison systems as they are outside. With House Bill 542, we can begin to understand what kind of care Ohio correction facilities are providing to pregnant inmates and what's the kind of outcomes those facilities are producing with that care. The data gathered from this bill will be an important first step in ensuring that all of Ohio's unborn children have a chance at a healthy, safe birth. Thank you again, Chair Hall, Vice Chair Ferguson, and Ranking Member Humphrey, and members of the Ohio House Government Oversight Committee. I really appreciate the opportunity to testify in support of this meaningful legislation, and we welcome any and all questions the committee may have.
Thank you both again for being with us today and providing sponsored testimony. Ranking Member Humphrey has a question.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you both for this important piece of legislation, Representative Upchurch. I do definitely remember when you called me about the situation in your district. I guess my question is, because it's about the bill, but it's also about your testimony, Representative. You talked about the constituent. She was in the facility. She was crying, screaming out in pain, and all of that. I guess my question for you is if the goal, and I'm in support of the bill, I just have questions, but if the goal is better outcomes don you think it would also be important to add into the bill investments in care Because to me and in my experience it is important to track the data but it also important to make sure that nurses and COs and all the things are also doing their jobs and then also to think about how women who are incarcerated who are pregnant you know how they're being taken care of so that's really really my question for you. Through the
Chair to Representative Humphrey, thank you for the question. And no, you're absolutely right. I agree that I think that we should be making investments as a state to also ensure that we have healthy outcomes. But let me just be clear, as I mentioned in my testimony, I think that this bill is just a first step toward getting those healthy outcomes. You know, it's, you know, my hope that we can, you know, revisit the matter after we move this bill and talk about investments down the road. But right now, you know, what we're trying to do is make that first step, so making sure that these outcomes don't happen. Through the chair to the ranking member, the first step is being able to collect data. You know, it's absurd to me that we don't already have to collect that data and have to report that information. So even if we seek out the data now, it's not complete, and we don't know how widespread of an issue it is. But what we do know is that there are preventable terminations of pregnancies as a result of the health care that is being provided or the lack thereof inside of our jails and our prisons and our correctional facilities. And that's abhorrent. I've met with ODRC previously. I've toured facilities. I've talked to them about the health care rates that they get and how long and whether or not they get Medicaid rates and how long is it on their dime when a person gets put in a hospital and things of that nature because I am concerned with the health care that people are receiving while they're incarcerated because they're no less of an Ohioan. They're no less of an American. They're no less of a human being just because they made a mistake and resulted in incarceration. And many of them may even be in the pretrial stages where they have not been convicted. That's right. And they are not getting adequate care. And that's why we have bills to consider, you know, whether or not somebody is a primary caregiver as a defendant at the time of sentencing and bail. That's a bill the ranking member and I are champion because we think that should be a factor, especially if you're actively pregnant. I think that should be a factor the courts consider. So the very first step is just let us get the data so we can see how widespread the issue is. Then we can have conversations about funding. There's a lot of ideas that I have on that. I mean, these jails are, they got menus of all kind of commissary. They're selling at high prices to the inmates, and they are allowed to collect that money, and there's even a bill being offered to allow them to spend that money on anything that they want. Maybe that part of that commissary could go towards better health care. There's a lot of conversations we could have about getting the resources to the jail.
Thank you, Rankin. Remember Representative Sims and then Representative Gross.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you so much for your testimony today. I, too, appreciate the care taken to make sure that people have care, whether they're in or outside of the prison. I guess my question is back to the unadjudicated people who are awaiting trial. How are we finding out that data? First of all, if they're pregnant, is that a prerequisite? They have to take a pregnancy test? So how do you find out if they're pregnant to begin with? And do they need to divulge that information? Through the chair to the member, there's no requirement in our bill for every woman that gets incarcerated to take a pregnancy test. I think it's when it becomes readily apparent to the jails and the prisons that an individual is pregnant. Nine times out of ten, what happens is it is reported by the inmate. typically they are, I don't want to say segregated as in punishment, but they are given better conditions to make sure that there's nothing adverse. You know, you don't want a woman that's pregnant on a high bunk where she can fall onto her belly and cause, you know, a termination of the pregnancy. So there's some care that's taken at least to the conditions that they continue to be in. Moving forward, we want to know at least the outcomes of what those pregnancies are. So if there is a termination of a pregnancy, we know that some medical care had to happen. In this case, the reports that I read was a nurse came and simply tried to give her female sanitary products and Tylenol. And, I mean, I remember legislation that was bipartisan in this house that had to provide free female hygiene products to inmates because prisons were trying to charge for it. So I think it's reasonable just to say, look, we know what the outcome of pregnancies are because if it results in bleeding, it results in stillbirths, There needs to be some declaration that happens there, and the prisons need to keep track of that. Because I know we can disagree in our caucuses about other political subjects, but for me, you know, any time that there's a termination of a pregnancy, that's a loss of a life. And I want to make sure that it's recorded here in the state of Ohio so we can prevent it moving forward. Those are adverse health effects, health outcomes that may be prevented. In this instance, we're talking about an infection, a simple infection that could have been treated. That's something that could have been prevented. And now we don't even know what the long-term health outcomes are for that young lady that went through that. You know, she may have infertility issues for the rest of her life because of the lack of treatment that she got inside of one of our jails. As elected members, these are the people that are in our care that we have a requirement under the law to provide for them. So that's something that we can be sued over for not providing adequate care. So I think at the very least we should get data. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Representative Sims. Representative Gross.
Thank you, Chair. Thank you, gentlemen, for bringing this bill. I think ultimately I like where you are with this. We do know that a certain percentage of pregnancies do end in miscarriage, whether it's infection or whatever. So I would ask that you make sure that, you know, your numbers are not over broad in that case. But I think that in order to know that we have a problem, we should know where we are. So that if the general miscarriage rate within our prison system is about the same understanding that perhaps an inmate may be coming from a drug addiction Those things do play a role when it comes to a miscarriage So those things will need to be addressed in your tracking information. If a woman is drug addicted or has been an alcoholic and is going through rehab and then we find out she's pregnant, those numbers are not all equal to the incarcerated woman. But I do appreciate understanding that you don't know you have a problem until you know what the numbers are. So I really appreciate your effort in this matter. So thank you.
May I respond?
Yes.
Through the chair to the member. Thank you very much. I don't want to get overinflated data. I don't. Nothing in the bill stops ODRC from collecting their own data. They could collect data that's known to the inmate that has the adverse health effect that this person was in this treatment or we're facing these type of charges, they can collect. We're saying at the bare minimum, at least collect the outcome data, and then we can see if it's artificially inflated compared to the rest of the state. Because as you said, there are things that happen. There's normal miscarriages that happen in our society. If it's equal to the rest of society, maybe there isn't an issue. If it's artificially inflated, maybe it is an issue. But, I mean, in our prisons right now, if you walk into the door and you have a cavity, we have a requirement to get you dentistry. But if you walk in with a pregnancy, they have no requirement to give you prenatal care because there isn't a complication yet. So we want to make sure that we're at least given the minimum requirements that our doctors and nurses would say are the minimal things to produce a healthy baby. That child did not have any role in being incarcerated. None. that child, no matter if the mother's serving life in prison, there are opportunities for that child to have a healthy life, a quality life with parents that love them in the state of Ohio. We have programs in place. We have adoption. We have foster care programs. We have next of kin. There's plenty of opportunities. So we need to make sure that we give them the same quality of care they would get if they were outside of that prison system, out on pretrial release, out on bond, out on probation, post-release control in a treatment facility, whatever they could get outside of our prisons, they should be able to get it inside of the prisons as well.
Any other questions? Seeing none, thank you both for being with us today. This will conclude the first hearing on House Bill 542. Last but certainly not least, thank you committee members for being patient today. We will call up House Bill 176 for its fourth hearing. I will recognize the vice Chair for an amendment for the sub-bill.
I move to amend with L1362964.
Briefly, can you explain the changes in this?
The substitute bill makes the following changes. One, clarifies that an applicant cannot demonstrate an offering more than once, but may apply for the program again with a different offering. Number two changes the term of the demonstration period from an initial five years with up to three one-year renewals to an initial 24 months with up to five one-year renewals.
And committee, before we take any action and or votes on anything, I did want to highlight Representative Rader, Representative Sims, as they had worked in conjunction with the joint sponsors and both policy staffs from both parties on this. So Representative Rader, Representative Sims, do you have any other comments towards the sub-bill that's being presented today?
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Regarding the amendment to change the period of time initially from five years to 24 months, we just felt this was, and this came out of a conversation during testimony with some of the proponents of the bill, and they find it amenable, as did the sponsors, to simply just swap that around. So we have a 24-month period in the beginning so that once a product in the sandbox has been there for a shorter period of time, that there's a check-in, and they can then apply for additional years. It does not change the overall length of the sandbox. So a product could be in that sandbox for eight years still. It just kind of flips it so that there's a check-in earlier on rather than giving them five full years before there's a check-up, essentially, on progress. So that kind of sums up that portion of it.
Representative Sims, anything to add to that?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Not really. I think the amendment is pretty self-explanatory. It just makes sure that these are not repeat products inside the sandbox. Eight years, good. Certainly, if you have another product you want to introduce to the sandbox, they're good to do that. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you both. Is there any objection to the acceptance of? All right, no objection. What is the pleasure of the committee? I recognize Vice Chair Ferguson for motion.
I move to favorably report, substitute House Bill 176 to rules in reference.
Clerk, will you please call the roll?
Chair Hall?
Yes.
Vice Chair Ferguson?
Yes.
Ranking Member Humphrey?
Yes.
Representative Claggett?
Yes.
Representative Gross.
Yes.
Representative King.
Yes.
Representative Lear.
Yes.
Representative Pizzouli.
Yes.
Representative Rader.
Yes.
Representative Sims.
Yes.
Representative Stevens.
Yes.
Representative Troy.
Yes.
Representative Workman.
Yes.
With a vote of 13 to nothing, the bill is favorably reported. Members, please, before you leave, be sure to sign the sheet to make sure that that is documented. And that concludes the fourth hearing on that particular piece of legislation. Seeing no items on the House Government Oversight Committee, the committee stands adjourned.