June 30, 2026 · 12,618 words · 2 speakers · 39 segments
The Chair thanks Senator Farry. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by those assembled.) Senator GEBHARD, from the Committee on Banking and Insurance, reported the following bills: SB 738 (Pr. No. 1867) (Amended) An Act amending the act of November 6, 1987 (P.L.381, No.79), known as the Older Adults Protective Services Act, providing for prevention of financial exploitation. HB 1123 (Pr. No. 3726) (Amended) An Act amending the act of May 17, 1921 (P.L.682, No.284), known as The Insurance Company Law of 1921, in casualty insurance, further providing for coverage for colorectal cancer screening. Senator BAKER, from the Committee on Judiciary, reported the following bill: HB 2299 (Pr. No. 3019) An Act amending Titles 18 (Crimes and Offenses) and 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in wiretapping and electronic surveillance, further providing for definitions; and, in recordings by law enforcement officers, further providing for definitions. The PRESIDENT (Lieutenant Governor Austin A. Davis) in the Chair.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I request temporary Capitol leaves for Senator Brooks and Senator Keefer, and legislative leaves for Senator Argall and Senator Laughlin.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Costa. Senator COSTA. Mr. President, I request temporary Capitol leaves for Senator Muth and Senator Pisciottano, and legislative leaves for Senator Cappelletti and Senator Comitta.
Senator Pittman requests temporary Capitol leaves for Senator Brooks and Senator Keefer, and legislative leaves for Senator Argall and Senator Laughlin. Senator Costa requests temporary Capitol leaves for Senator Muth and Senator Pisciottano, and legislative leaves for Senator Cappelletti and Senator Comitta. Without objection, the leaves will be granted. HB 1102 CALLED UP OUT OF ORDER HB 1102 (Pr. No. 3678) -- Without objection, the bill was called up out of order, from page 3 of the Third Consideration Calendar, by Senator PITTMAN, as a Special Order of Business. HB 1102 (Pr. No. 3678) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act amending Title 51 (Military Affairs) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in military educational programs relating to medical officer or health officer incentive program, further providing for definitions, for establishment of program, for program stipend, for additional incentives, for recoupment of incentive payments, for adjustment of stipend amounts and for eligibility; and making editorial changes. Will the Senate agree to the bill on third consideration?
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I move that House Bill No. 1102 be rereferred to the Committee on Appropriations. Will the Senate agree to the motion? The yeas and nays were required by Senator PITTMAN and were as follows, viz: YEA-50 Argall Baker Bartolotta Boscola Brooks Brown Cappelletti Coleman Collett Comitta Costa Culver Dush Farry Flynn Fontana Gebhard Haywood Hughes Hutchinson Kane Kearney Keefer Kim Langerholc Laughlin Malone Martin Mastriano Miller Muth Pennycuick Phillips-Hill Picozzi Pisciottano Pittman Robinson Rothman Santarsiero Saval Schwank Stefano Street Tartaglione Vogel Ward, Judy Ward, Kim Williams, Anthony H. Williams, Lindsey Yaw JUNE 30, Government, which will be held immediately in the Rules room. At the conclusion of that committee meeting, Senate Republicans will caucus in the Majority Caucus Room.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Costa. Senator COSTA. Mr. President, at the conclusion of the meeting just referenced, Senate Democrats will meet in the rear of the Chamber for a caucus.
For purposes of a meeting of the Committee on State Government to be held off the floor in the Rules room immediately, followed by Republican and Democratic caucuses to be held in their respective caucus rooms, without objection, the Senate stands in recess.
The time of recess having expired, the Senate will come to order.
Senator Brooks, Senator Keefer, and Senator Pisciottano have returned, and their temporary Capitol leaves are cancelled.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I request temporary Capitol leaves for Senator Coleman and Senator Kim Ward.
Senator Pittman requests temporary Capitol leaves for Senator Coleman and Senator Kim Ward. Without objection, the leaves will be granted.
Senator Muth has returned, and her temporary Capitol leave is cancelled. SB 49 -- Without objection, the bill was passed over in its order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. NAY-0 A majority of the Senators having voted "aye," the question was determined in the affirmative.
The bill is rereferred to the Committee on Appropriations.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I request a recess of the Senate for the purpose of a meeting of the Committee on State HB 78 -- Without objection, the bill was passed over in its order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. HB 96 (Pr. No. 1627) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act amending the act of July 7, 1947 (P.L.1368, No.542), known as the Real Estate Tax Sale Law, in sale of property, providing for delinquent real estate tax notification to designated individual; and imposing duties on the Department of Community and Economic Development. Upon motion of Senator PITTMAN, and agreed to by voice vote, the bill was laid on the table. HB 96 TAKEN FROM THE TABLE Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I move that House Bill No. 96, Printer's No. 1627, be taken from the table and placed on the Calendar. The motion was agreed to by voice vote.
The bill will be placed on the Calendar. SB 127, SB 535 and SB 536 -- Without objection, the bills were passed over in their order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. SB 743 (Pr. No. 793) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act amending the act of December 5, 1936 (2nd Sp.Sess., 1937 P.L.2897, No.1), known as the Unemployment Compensation Law, in administration of act, further providing for State Unemployment Compensation Advisory Counsel. Without objection, the bill was passed over in its order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. Pursuant to Senate Rule 9, the bill was laid on the table. HB 852, HB 853 and SB 890 -- Without objection, the bills were passed over in their order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. SB 911 (Pr. No. 1841) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act amending Title 44 (Law and Justice) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, providing for miscellaneous provisions and for violent incident clearance and technological investigative methods; establishing the Violent Incident Clearance and Technological Investigative Methods Program; and imposing duties on the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency. Upon motion of Senator PITTMAN, and agreed to by voice vote, the bill was rereferred to the Committee on Appropriations. SB 923 and SB 1061 -- Without objection, the bills were passed over in their order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. SB 1182 (Pr. No. 1866) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act amending the act of December 22, 1983 (P.L.306, No.84), known as the Board of Vehicles Act, further providing for title of act; in preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions; and, in vehicles, further providing for license to engage in business, for reimbursement for all parts and service required by the manufacturer or distributor and reimbursement audits, for unlawful acts by manufacturers or distributors and for manufacturer or distributor repurchase of inventory and equipment and providing for consumer data protection. Considered the third time and agreed to, And the amendments made thereto having been printed as required by the Constitution,
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Northampton, Senator Boscola. Senator BOSCOLA. Mr. President, I want to thank this Chamber for taking up this bill and Senator Yaw for his leadership and for partnering with me on this important issue to update the Board of Vehicles Act. The vehicle marketplace has changed significantly since this law was last updated nearly a decade ago. Today, vehicles are tied to software, subscriptions, over-the-air updates, connected data systems, and new service requirements. These are not the Ford Pintos we learned to drive stick on centuries ago. Our law needs to keep pace with that reality. Senate Bill No. 1182 makes several updates, including manufacturers, distributors, and dealers. It addresses warranty reimbursement, dealer and consumer data protections, loaner vehicles, vendor choice, and software-based vehicle features. Local dealerships are often the first place consumers turn to when they buy a vehicle, need warranty work, need service, need a loaner, or need help resolving an issue. These businesses are also local employers and important parts of our communities. They are the ones who are asking us to respond to today's marketplace, and that is exactly what this bill does. I do want to acknowledge that concerns were raised by manufacturers and other stakeholders. Those concerns are being taken very seriously. Yesterday, we amended this bill to address several of those issues, including those centered around data access, warranty reimbursement language, intellectual property protections, reporting requirements, and concerns brought forward by recreational power sports dealers. And that is how this process should work; we listen, make progress, and we move forward. For an update as important as this is for our dealerships, I expect those conversations will continue as this bill moves to the House, and I look forward to working with our House counterparts, dealers, manufacturers, and all stakeholders to get this right. Senate Bill Vehicles Act for today's vehicle marketplace and for Pennsylvania consumers, and I respectfully ask for an affirmative vote. Thank you, Mr. President. And the question recurring, The yeas and nays were taken agreeably to the provisions of the Constitution and were as follows, viz: YEA-50 Argall Baker Bartolotta Boscola Brooks Brown Cappelletti Coleman Collett Comitta Costa Culver Dush Farry Flynn Fontana Gebhard Haywood Hughes Hutchinson Kane Kearney Keefer Kim Langerholc Laughlin Malone Martin Mastriano Miller Muth Pennycuick Phillips-Hill Picozzi Pisciottano Pittman Robinson Rothman Santarsiero Saval Schwank Stefano Street Tartaglione Vogel Ward, Judy Ward, Kim Williams, Anthony H. Williams, Lindsey Yaw NAY-0 A constitutional majority of all the Senators having voted "aye," the question was determined in the affirmative. Ordered, That the Secretary of the Senate present said bill to the House of Representatives for concurrence. SB 1262 and HB 1286 -- Without objection, the bills were passed over in their order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. SB 1334 (Pr. No. 1811) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act amending the act of December 20, 1985 (P.L.457, No.112), known as the Medical Practice Act of 1985, further providing for definitions, for respiratory therapists, for perfusionist, for genetic counselor and for prosthetists, orthotists, pedorthists and orthotic fitters; providing for medical imaging professionals, radiation therapists, radiologist assistants and trainees; further providing for licenses and certificates and general qualification; repealing provisions relating to radiologic procedures and education and training required; and making a repeal. Will the Senate agree to the bill on third consideration? BROOKS AMENDMENT A4049 DEFEATED Senator BROOKS offered the following amendment No. A4049: (11) An individual who is credentialed by Cardiovascular Credentialing International to assist with Cardiac Electrophysiology technology or Cardiovascular Invasive technology, provided that: (i) The individual does not independently operate or energize radiation emitting equipment. (ii) The individual assists in procedures involving fluoroscopy only under the direct supervision of a licensed physician who is physically present in the room during the procedure. (iii) The individual has completed at least 40 hours of radiation safety training and documented clinical experience under real time physician supervision. JUNE 30, (iv) The health care facility maintains documentation of the individual's training and credentialing and ensures compliance with this subsection through internal policy and oversight mechanisms. (v) The individual has proved, to the satisfaction of the board, that the individual is of good moral character and is not unfit or unable to assist in Cardiac Electrophysiology technology or Cardiovascular Invasive technology by reason of physical or mental impairment. In assessing the moral character of an applicant with a criminal conviction, the board shall conduct an individualized assessment in accordance with 63 Pa.C.S. § 3113 (relating to consideration of criminal convictions). Will the Senate agree to the amendment?
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Mercer, Senator Brooks. Senator BROOKS. Mr. President, this amendment will exempt cardiology technicians from the licensing requirements set forth in Senate Bill No. 1334 as long as the individual [Reading:] …is credentialed by Cardiovascular Credentialing International to assist with Cardiac Electrophysiology technology or Cardiovascular Invasive technology, provided that: they do [the individual does] not independently operate or energize radiation emitting equipment, they assist [the individual assists] in procedures involving fluoroscopy only under the direct supervision of a licensed physician who is physically present in the room…, they have [the individual has] completed at least 40 hours of radiation safety training and documented clinical experience under real time physician supervision. Mr. President, the American College of Cardiologists [Cardiology] oppose Senate Bill No. 1334. The current credentialing process is effective. Pennsylvania ACC is not aware of any circumstances in Pennsylvania where a CV technologist mishandled imaging or radiation equipment or caused patient harm. It is important to note that, in the cardiovascular space, cardiologists administer radiation during the procedures. The technologists do not administer radiation; they assist with the procedures and are always supervised. This comes from a letter from the American College of Cardiologists [Cardiology], and this is why I offer amendment No. A4049 and ask for an affirmative vote. Thank you, Mr. President.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Northumberland, Senator Culver. Senator CULVER. Mr. President, I cannot support this amendment to exempt cardiac techs from the Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy Health and Safety Act as offered by my colleague from Mercer County. Senate Bill No. No. 1334 is about patient safety and professional accountability. The careful operation of imaging equipment, the protection of patients from unnecessary exposure, the training and credentialing that competent practice requires apply to cardiac cath lab procedures just as it does to any other medical imaging procedure. Patients undergoing a cardiac procedure deserve the same assurance of qualified, accountable professionals that they receive in other imaging settings. Currently, there is no State oversight of medical imaging professionals, including cardiac techs. Facilities must verify technologist training on their own, and, quite frankly, we do not know if that is always happening because there is no oversight. Furthermore, I received support letters from cardiac techs themselves, the universities that educate them, and the associations that support them who want to be licensed under Senate Bill and ensures any and all individuals administering ionizing radiation possess the proper training to do so safely. For these reasons, Mr. President, I cannot support this amendment. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Pisciottano. Senator PISCIOTTANO. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the amendment. As my colleague who spoke before me so eloquently put, this is an important bill to ensure that these technologists have the right credentials in an ever-expanding and growing technological field that keeps folks safe, and I ask the Members to vote "no" against this amendment. Thank you. And the question recurring, Will the Senate agree to the amendment? Farry NAY-5 Brooks Dush Hutchinson Keefer Mastriano A constitutional majority of all the Senators having voted "aye," the question was determined in the affirmative. Ordered, That the Secretary of the Senate present said bill to the House of Representatives for concurrence. SB 1368 -- Without objection, the bill was passed over in its order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. The yeas and nays were required by Senator BROOKS and were as follows, viz: YEA-8 SB 1372 (Pr. No. 1865) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: Brooks Dush Hutchinson Keefer Mastriano Pittman Robinson Rothman NAY-42 Argall Baker Bartolotta Boscola Brown Cappelletti Coleman Collett Comitta Costa Culver Farry Flynn Fontana Gebhard Haywood Hughes Kane Kearney Kim Langerholc Laughlin Malone Martin Miller Muth Pennycuick Phillips-Hill Picozzi Pisciottano Santarsiero Saval Schwank Stefano Street Tartaglione Vogel Ward, Judy Ward, Kim Williams, Anthony H. Williams, Lindsey Yaw Less than a majority of the Senators having voted "aye," the question was determined in the negative. And the question recurring, Will the Senate agree to the bill on third consideration? It was agreed to. And the amendments made thereto having been printed as required by the Constitution, The yeas and nays were taken agreeably to the provisions of the Constitution and were as follows, viz: YEA-45 Argall Baker Bartolotta Boscola Brown Cappelletti Coleman Collett Comitta Costa Culver Flynn Fontana Gebhard Haywood Hughes Kane Kearney Kim Langerholc Laughlin Malone Martin Miller Muth Pennycuick Phillips-Hill Picozzi Pisciottano Pittman Robinson Rothman Santarsiero Saval Schwank Stefano Street Tartaglione Vogel Ward, Judy Ward, Kim Williams, Anthony H. Williams, Lindsey Yaw An Act amending the act of June 13, 1967 (P.L.31, No.21), known as the Human Services Code, in general powers and duties of the Department of Human Services, providing for annual report of children facilities and payments; in children and youth, providing for carbon monoxide alarm standards in child care facilities; and, in departmental powers and duties as to licensing, further providing for right to enter and inspect. Considered the third time and agreed to, And the amendments made thereto having been printed as required by the Constitution,
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Mercer, Senator Brooks. Senator BROOKS. Mr. President, I would like to submit comments for the record, please.
Pursuant to Senate Rule 10(e), the remarks will be submitted. (Pursuant to Senate Rule 10(e), the following prepared remarks were made part of the record at the request of the gentlewoman from Mercer, Senator BROOKS:) Mr. President, I rise in support of Senate Bill No. 1372. This legislation is a straightforward transparency measure requiring the Department of Human Services to report annually on oversight and enforcement actions for childcare centers. This includes inspections, investigations, and enforcement actions. The department used to provide this information but discontinued these reports 4 years ago. This bill also requires reporting to the General Assembly on payment integrity and error rates. Recent federally required reports on payments and errors showed troubling results for Pennsylvania's subsidized childcare program. In the most recent review cycle, nearly 1 in 4 reviewed cases contained an error. The improper payment rate was nearly 11 percent, well above the Federal target and more than twice the prior review cycle. The projected amount of improper payments was approximately $7.27 million, more than three times the prior cycle. None of these are recovered by the department. Mr. President, Pennsylvania spends a combined total of more than $1 billion in public childcare funding. When public dollars are being spent at that scale, and when Federal reviews are showing error rates and improper payment rates of this magnitude, we must ensure transparency and oversight, which this bill achieves. The report does not create new mandates for childcare providers or change the standards they must meet; it simply requires the department to report its payment error rates and inspection actions to lawmakers and the public. For every dollar stolen from programs helping fund childcare, it is a dollar that cannot be used to help working families access safe, reliable childcare. This bill gives the General Assembly another tool to monitor taxpayer-subsidized childcare spending to make sure the program is being administered properly. Thank you, Mr. President. And the question recurring, YEA-50 Farry Flynn Fontana Gebhard Haywood Hughes Hutchinson Kane Kearney Keefer Kim Langerholc Laughlin Malone Martin Mastriano Miller Muth Pennycuick Phillips-Hill Picozzi Pisciottano Pittman Robinson Rothman SB 142 (Pr. No. 87) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act prohibiting enforcement of covenants not to compete in broadcast employment agreements. Without objection, the bill was passed over in its order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. Pursuant to Senate Rule 9, the bill was laid on the table. The yeas and nays were taken agreeably to the provisions of the Constitution and were as follows, viz: Argall Baker Bartolotta Boscola Brooks Brown Cappelletti Coleman Collett Comitta Costa Culver Dush JUNE 30, SB 406 -- Without objection, the bill was passed over in its order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. Santarsiero Saval Schwank Stefano Street Tartaglione Vogel Ward, Judy Ward, Kim Williams, Anthony H. Williams, Lindsey Yaw NAY-0 A constitutional majority of all the Senators having voted "aye," the question was determined in the affirmative. Ordered, That the Secretary of the Senate present said bill to the House of Representatives for concurrence. HB 1442, HB 1646, HB 1830, HB 1860 and HB 2017 -Without objection, the bills were passed over in their order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. HB 2400 (Pr. No. 3725) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act to provide appropriations from the General Fund for the expenses of certain agencies of the Executive Department for the fiscal year July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2027, and for the payment of bills incurred and remaining unpaid at the close of the fiscal year ending June 30, 2026. Considered the second time and agreed to, Ordered, To be printed on the Calendar for third consideration. Upon motion of Senator PITTMAN, and agreed to by voice vote, the bill just considered was recommitted to the Committee on Appropriations. SB 599 (Pr. No. 605) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act amending the act of June 3, 1937 (P.L.1333, No.320), known as the Pennsylvania Election Code, in county boards of elections, further providing for expenses of county boards and of primaries and elections to be paid by county, expenses of special elections and boards to be provided with offices; in voting by qualified absentee electors, further providing for date of application for absentee ballot and for voting by absentee electors; and, in voting by qualified mail-in electors, further providing for voting by mail-in electors. Upon motion of Senator PITTMAN, and agreed to by voice vote, the bill was laid on the table. SB 599 TAKEN FROM THE TABLE Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I move that Senate Bill No. 599, Printer's No. 605, be taken from the table and placed on the Calendar. The motion was agreed to by voice vote.
The bill will be placed on the Calendar. SB 720 -- Without objection, the bill was passed over in its order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. SB 746 (Pr. No. 1793) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act amending the act of November 24, 1976 (P.L.1176, No.261), known as the Manufactured Home Community Rights Act, providing for residents' right to purchase manufactured home community; and further providing for remedies. Considered the second time and agreed to, Ordered, To be printed on the Calendar for third consideration. Upon motion of Senator PITTMAN, and agreed to by voice vote, the bill just considered was rereferred to the Committee on Appropriations. SB 857 (Pr. No. 958) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled:
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, point of order. The motion before us is a Special Order of Business. I do not believe that is debatable.
The Chair recognizes the Senator's point that the underlying motion is on a discharge petition. That is not debatable. You have to stick to what the discharge petition is.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Costa. Senator COSTA. Mr. President, if I could ask for an affirmative vote on the discharge petition motion that I put forward--or, I am sorry--Special Order of Business motion. Thank you.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I request a negative vote on the Special Order of Business.
Senator Costa moves that Discharge Resolution No. 3 on today's Calendar be considered as a Special Order of Business at this time. For the information of the Members, debate on this motion is very limited. Debate is not on the merits of the resolution or the underlying bill, rather debate is limited to whether to take up the Discharge Resolution. An Act amending the act of April 9, 1929 (P.L.177, No.175), known as The Administrative Code of 1929, in powers and duties in general, providing for real property acquisition limitations. Without objection, the bill was passed over in its order at the request of Senator PITTMAN. Pursuant to Senate Rule 9, the bill was laid on the table. SB 1215, SB 1321, HB 1460, HB 1541 and HB 1600 -- Without objection, the bills were passed over in their order at the request of Senator PITTMAN.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Costa. Senator COSTA. Mr. President, may we be at ease for a moment?
The Senate will briefly be at ease. [The Senate was at ease.] HB 2426 (Pr. No. 3281) -- The Senate proceeded to consideration of the bill, entitled: An Act amending the act of March 29, 1803 (P.L.542, No.156), entitled "An act to establish a Board of Wardens for the port of Philadelphia, and for the regulation of pilots and pilotages, and for other purposes therein mentioned," further providing for pilots in the Delaware Bay and River. Considered the second time and agreed to, Ordered, To be printed on the Calendar for third consideration. Upon motion of Senator PITTMAN, and agreed to by voice vote, the bill just considered was rereferred to the Committee on Appropriations. RESOLUTION No. 3, DEFEATED
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Costa. Senator COSTA. Mr. President, I move to proceed to a Special Order of Business to call up Discharge Resolution No. 3, which deals with House Bill No. 2189, from Representative Dawkins' bill, that incrementally would increase Pennsylvania's minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2029. I ask my colleagues to join me in making sure that we have the opportunity to support this measure. Mr. President, it is 20 years since the last time that we have raised the minimum wage here in Pennsylvania. Earlier today, we had a press event-- Will the Senate agree to the motion?
Senator Kim Ward has returned, and her temporary Capitol leave is cancelled. And the question recurring, Will the Senate agree to the motion?
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Philadelphia, Senator Anthony Williams. Senator A.H. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, information--this is not about the issue at hand. When someone says the issue is not debatable, I understand that anyone following the conversation may be limited, but is it not appropriate to define what is being voted upon? As I understood, what was occurring was the gentleman was providing an understanding of what we were going to vote upon, not advocating, not debating, not persuading, but providing a perspective. How does that fall into the rules of nondebatable points of order?
The debate on the motion is limited, very limited. The debate is not on the merits of the resolution or the underlying bill, rather the debate is limited to whether to take up the discharge resolution. Senator A.H. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, so you can only--so, this is a question, which is very unusual for us to do this--but the point I am making, is it not permissible, when discussing the issue, to explain the issue, not debate the issue? And I understand it is very--"debate" is a very specific term and word and used historically for the back and forth. Actually starting out the process by explaining what it is that we are going to vote upon would seem to be different than the issue of being one who is debating.
It is limited to the discharge resolution only. Senator A.H. WILLIAMS. Thank you, Mr. President.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Costa. Senator COSTA. Mr. President, I want to speak to your comments about the ability of us to bring up the reasons why we should support this Special Order of Business motion. Based upon your ruling, it is my understanding that I can speak as to the reasons why we should be able to speak about that. And I would like to be able to talk about that, how important that is to the people of Pennsylvania, that they have the opportunity to have a chance to having us-POINT OF ORDER And the question recurring, Will the Senate agree to the motion? YEA-23 Schwank Street Tartaglione Williams, Anthony H. Williams, Lindsey NAY-27 Argall Baker Bartolotta Brooks Brown Coleman Culver Dush Farry Gebhard Hutchinson Keefer Langerholc Laughlin Martin Mastriano Pennycuick Phillips-Hill Picozzi Pittman Robinson An Act amending the act of July 31, 1968 (P.L.805, No.247), known as the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, in zoning, providing for optional moratorium on filing or consideration of new applications for high impact data centers. HB 2496 (Pr. No. 3727) (Amended) An Act amending the act of July 31, 1968 (P.L.805, No.247), known as the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, in general provisions, providing for pause on data center proposals. Senator DUSH, from the Committee on State Government, reported the following bills: An Act designating rye whiskey as the official State spirit of the SB 1410 (Pr. No. 1864) An Act prohibiting certain terms in procurement contracts entered into by Commonwealth parties. HB 36 (Pr. No. 15) An Act amending the act of April 9, 1929 (P.L.177, No.175), known as The Administrative Code of 1929, in Office of State Inspector General, further providing for definitions and for powers, purpose and duties. HB 513 (Pr. No. 3733) (Amended) The yeas and nays were required by Senator COSTA and were as follows, viz: Malone Miller Muth Pisciottano Santarsiero Saval Senator KEEFER, from the Committee on Local Government, reported the following bills: SB 1248 (Pr. No. 1546) Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, point of order.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, the motion at hand is a Special Order of Business. It is not a discharge resolution. The motion at hand is a Special Order of Business request. I am asking for a negative vote.
The debate is limited to the merits of making it a Special Order of Business, not to debate on the underlying bill or the resolution. Fontana Haywood Hughes Kane Kearney Kim SB 1345 (Pr. No. 1766) And the question recurring, Will the Senate agree to the motion? Boscola Cappelletti Collett Comitta Costa Flynn JUNE 30, Rothman Stefano Vogel Ward, Judy Ward, Kim Yaw Less than a majority of the Senators having voted "aye," the question was determined in the negative. An Act Amending Title 76 (Weights, Measures and Standards) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, providing for Pennsylvania State Coordinate System, for notation requirements and for duties of State Geospatial Coordinating Board; and making a repeal. HB 2559 (Pr. No. 3734) (Amended) An Act authorizing the Department of General Services, with the approval of the Governor, to grant and convey to Student Lodging, Inc., a Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation, certain land situate in Millersville Borough, Lancaster County; authorizing the Department of General Services, with the approval of the Governor, to grant and convey to the Philadelphia Housing Authority certain lands situate in the City of Philadelphia, Philadelphia County; authorizing the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, with the approval of the Governor, to grant and convey to Friends of Peace Church, a Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation, certain lands and improvements known as Peace Church situate in Hampden Township, Cumberland County; authorizing the Department of General Services, with the approval of the Governor, to grant and convey to the Borough of Danville certain lands situate in Danville Borough, Montour County; authorizing the Department of General Services, with the approval of the Governor, to grant and convey to Gaudenzia Foundation, Inc., certain lands situate in the City of Philadelphia, Philadelphia County; authorizing the Department of General Services, with the approval of the Governor, to grant and convey to the City of Hermitage, certain lands situate in the City of Hermitage, formerly known as Hickory Township, Mercer County; authorizing the Department of General Services, with the approval of the Governor, to grant and convey certain lands situate in the City of Nanticoke, Luzerne County; authorizing the Department of General Services, with the consent and approval of the Governor, to grant and convey certain lands situate in the City of Philadelphia, Philadelphia County; authorizing the release of Project 70 restrictions on certain lands owned by the Pennsylvania Game Commission in exchange for the imposition of Project 70 restrictions on other land in Sandy Creek Township, Mercer County; and authorizing the Department of General Services, with the approval of the Governor, to grant and convey to Penn Township Municipal Authority certain lands situate in Penn Township, Snyder County. Senator LANGERHOLC. Mr. President, I move that the Senate do now proceed to consideration of all bills reported from committees for the first time at today's Session. The motion was agreed to by voice vote. The bills were as follows: SB 738, SB 1248, SB 1345, SB 1410, HB 36, HB 513, HB 1123, HB 2299, HB 2496 and HB 2559. And said bills having been considered for the first time, Ordered, To be printed on the Calendar for second consideration. SB 1345 (Pr. No. 1766) -- Upon motion of Senator PITTMAN, and agreed to by voice vote, the bill was rereferred to the Committee on Rules and Executive Nominations. HB 2496 (Pr. No. 3727) -- Upon motion of Senator PITTMAN, and agreed to by voice vote, the bill was rereferred to the Committee on Rules and Executive Nominations. The following announcements were read by the Secretary of the Senate: FRIDAY, JULY 10, 2026 Off the Floor APPROPRIATIONS (to consider House Bills 2024, 2401, 2412, 2413 and 2426) Rules Committee Conference Room Off the Floor JUDICIARY (to consider House Bill No. 1042) Rules Committee Conference Room WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12, 2026 10:00 A.M. AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AFFAIRS (S) Red Barn Annex and AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AFFAIRS Ag Progress (H) (joint public hearing titled "Cultivating 250 Days Site 2710 Years: Pennsylvania Agriculture Past, Present W. Pine Grove Rd. Pennsylvania and Future") Furnace
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Philadelphia, Senator Tartaglione. Senator TARTAGLIONE. Mr. President, I rise today because it has been 7,297 days since this legislature last passed the minimum wage. Mr. President, everything has gone up: rent, food, childcare, and we come, day after day, and we will not pass the minimum wage. What about the single mom working three jobs just so she can sort of make ends meet? We talked today about the 250th anniversary of our country. You know, America is supposed to be the land where, if you do everything right, you work hard, you do your job, you are supposed to have a living wage and be able to raise your children, get a pension, and retire with medical coverage. That is not happening for over a million people--over a million people. No matter what is or is not included in this final budget, if we leave here without raising the minimum wage, that is a failure of this General Assembly. It has now been 20 years, 20 years since Pennsylvania last raised the minimum wage, 20 years since this body last acted to ensure that a full-time job could support a basic dignity. Mr. President, I stood right over here by that door and negotiated that bill in 2006 with Joe Scarnati, and he said to me, we could not put the CPI on it; that would kill the bill. And I said, Joe, I hope I am not back here in 10 years asking for a minimum wage. Now it is 20 years, and it is $7.25. It has not gone anywhere--anywhere. We often say the budget is a reflection of values; if that is true, then a budget that leaves behind minimum-wage workers is a statement that their work does not count at the same level as everyone else's. I do not accept that. I do not believe that the people of Pennsylvania accept that either. So, I will simply say it plainly: if we pass another budget without raising the minimum wage, we are simply delaying action. We are choosing inaction, and working families will feel that choice every single day. We can and we should do better than that. I hope you can live with your consciences if we leave here without doing a minimum wage. Thank you, Mr. President.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Philadelphia, Senator Hughes. Senator HUGHES. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Tartaglione for her steadfastness over all of these years of raising this issue about Pennsylvania's lack of raising the minimum wage. We stood together, along with our entire Senate Democratic Caucus, 20 years ago--over 20 years ago--and waged the fight relentlessly on this floor to increase Pennsylvania's minimum wage. We did that, we were successful with that, we got it done, and, at one point, it needs to be reminded--because I think many have forgotten--at one point, Pennsylvania had a higher minimum wage than every State around it. Our minimum wage was higher than New York's; our minimum wage was higher than New Jersey's minimum wage; our minimum wage was higher than Delaware's minimum wage; our minimum wage was higher than Maryland's minimum wage. Our minimum wage in Pennsylvania years ago was higher than West Virginia's and Ohio's minimum wage, Mr. President. We were a leader as a place that we were at that time proud of. We passed that bill on June 30, 2006. We signed it into law on Sunday, July 9, with Governor Rendell at Sharon Baptist Church, to be specific, in the Wynnefield section of Philadelphia after service. It was a proud moment for all of us--all of us--to have done that and to, in fact, have led the nation. We, in fact, led the country. It was the United States of America that federally passed a minimum wage increase 3 years later in July of 2009. Theirs took effect. But since that day, since those days, over 20 years--over 20 years--we have not had an increase here in Pennsylvania structurally enacted by the State of Pennsylvania, by the Senate, by the House, signed by a Governor. It has not happened. In recent years, the House has sent us minimum wage increases, and they have fallen short. The Senate Majority chooses not to bring those up for consideration. We must never forget about, not just the politics of the conversation, but about the people who we are fighting for. We are fighting for people who make the minimum wage and who are at or near the minimum wage. We are fighting for people, in many respects, have no one else to fight for, no one else to fight for them except us. They say the issue of affordability is the number one issue that we all should be talking about. Well, the simplest, easiest way, quickest way to address the issue of affordability is to put more money back in people's pockets. To do that, raise the minimum wage. We should be doing that right now as we enter the last day and a half, if you will, of this budget conversation, or the prescribed days to get the State budget done. That is something that we can do, get done, and, in fact, improve the economic outlook for many communities across Pennsylvania and improve the economic condition of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania because the research indicates that we accrue about $80 million to our State budget by raising the minimum wage. We can do that. These folks who are making minimum wage deserve--deserve--an increase and deserve someone to fight for them, and we are the ones responsible for fighting for them. They are not a political force. They are not at the fundraisers. They are not making major donations. They are not doing that kind of stuff, but they are the lifeblood of so many communities across the State and, in fact, across the country. They make those communities work. They do the work that, more than likely, many of us in this room would not want to do--your day workers, Mr. President, your childcare workers. Mr. President, they do healthcare work. They do some of that real hard healthcare work, that healthcare work that a lot of us need and begged to have someone to get it done for them. They wipe down the bodies of the sick. They clean out their commodes. They do that kind of work, Mr. President. They serve, but, for some reason, we do not see them and their dignity and their reality and respond to them in a way that pays them a wage higher than the Federal poverty level. I find myself making the same arguments that I made 20 years ago. We are prescribing folks--prescribing folks--to work below the Federal poverty level, and that is supposed to be okay. We are supposed to be an enlightened State, supposed to be living and operating in an enlightened country, but still, for some reason, we see individuals who do hard work, very hard work, taking care of the things that most of us would not have the inkling of wanting to take care of, the intestinal fortitude to want to do, but they do it. And their work should be responded to with a wage that is far higher than the $7.25 an hour that they are making. It has been 20 years. You know, I mean the last time 20 years ago--I say this to my friend, Senator Costa--I do not mean to joke about it, but the Steelers won the Super Bowl 20 years ago. That is who the Super Bowl winners were then, all right? The Cardinals won the World Series. It was a world very, very different then. CEO income has soared--soared. We now have the world's first trillionaire-the world's first trillionaire--with a whole bunch of other folks galloping, trying to get into that same lane. Billionaires burgeoning JUNE 30, all over the place, but the people who do the hard work, you are still prescribed to live a life below the Federal poverty level. There is a moral question to this in addition to the economic one. There is a moral question to this. Who are we? Who are we? Are these our values? Are these truly what we believe in as a people? That it is okay--you know, they say--there is a message or saying that says rising tide lifts all boats, but that is not actually true. Some folks are stuck in the harbor with this anvil, this anchor of insensitivity ascribed to it, this anvil, this anchor of not seeing other people's dignity by paying them appropriately. Some people are stuck with this anchor of uncaring because this body, and, in this case, this Majority that runs the Calendar, will not provide for a minimum wage increase. It has passed the House. The Governor has said, get me a bill; I will sign it. We have 23 Democratic Senators ready to stand and sign off on a minimum wage increase, but we need to recognize these people. We need to see them and who they are. Some folks want to cast them as folks not from these shores. I see them as citizens, as human beings who deserve a real wage that can lift them out of the poverty that they are in because they are stuck in a wage that pays them below the Federal poverty level. We see them; it is time to respond to their humanity. They deserve better than what they are getting. Every State around Pennsylvania has a higher minimum wage than Pennsylvania, and that was not the case 20 years ago. Let us raise the wage. They deserve it; we deserve it. As a State, we deserve to have all of our citizens making a salary above the Federal poverty level. We deserve that. We deserve the economic influx that will happen in this State if we pay these folks what they are worth. We deserve it, as a State. Let us recognize their dignity; let us recognize what they provide for us and for their families and for the communities that they reside in. Individuals who work at the lower income of the economic ladder do not take their salaries and invest them in offshore accounts. They spend them in their own neighborhood. They spend those dollars in their own neighborhood, which is an economic shot in the arm for those local communities. Let us do the right thing. Let us raise the wage. We did it 20 years ago. We did it 20 years ago. We can do it again today. We can do it again today. Thank you, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Senator Greg Rothman) in the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Mercer, Senator Brooks. Senator BROOKS. Mr. President, I rise today in support of Senate Resolution No. 346, honoring the 10th anniversary of the Mid-Atlantic Mothers' Milk Bank located in Pittsburgh. For the past 10 years, the Mothers' Milk Bank has supported new mothers who want to breastfeed their babies but are unable to due to circumstances beyond their control. The milk bank helps these mothers and babies by providing them with safe, pasteurized donor breast milk during the earliest and most critical days of life. The vital work done by the Mothers' Milk Bank to provide this milk has not only given comfort to new mothers, but has also helped improve health outcomes, shorten hospital stays, and support babies both in neonatal intensive care units and at home. For these reasons, I sponsored Senate Bill No. 500, which was signed into law to expand medical assistance coverage for medically necessary donor breast milk. I also want to thank the mothers who choose to donate their milk, as their generosity allows the MidAtlantic Mothers' Milk Bank to serve thousands of infants each year. To become a donor, please visit midatlanticmilkbank.org-again, midatlanticmilkbank.org--to get started and become part of this truly rewarding process. The milk bank's dedicated team of employees process and distribute nearly 40,000 ounces of donor milk a month to outpatients and more than 82 hospitals, a 700-percent increase since they opened in 2016. I want to congratulate the Mid-Atlantic Milk Bank on 10 years of helping give vulnerable babies the healthy start in life that they deserve and wish them continued success in their important mission. Thank you, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Fontana. Senator FONTANA. Mr. President, I, too, rise to support Senate Resolution No. 346 and to acknowledge the 10th anniversary of the Mid-Atlantic Mothers' Milk Bank, which is located in my Pittsburgh Senate district. It was established in January 2016. The milk bank is a regional milk bank that carefully screens donors, pasteurizes the milk to ensure its safety, and then distributes it statewide, providing essential health benefits for medically vulnerable infants when a mother's own milk is unavailable. It is a known fact, Mr. President, donor milk provides nutrition and immunity protection for outpatient infants with debilitating health conditions, thus decreasing mortality rates along with shortening hospital stays. The milk bank has a dedicated team of 14 employees who process and distributes nearly 40,000 ounces of donor milk a month to more than 82 hospital units and dozens of outpatients across Pennsylvania and the neighboring region. Since its opening 10 years ago, the milk bank has had a 700-percent increase in production, which is a significant accomplishment. The expanding utilization of donor milk has necessitated the need for the Mothers' Milk Bank to have a larger, upgraded facility--which we here in the General Assembly have all supported--and I am pleased to say those renovations have commenced. Additionally, the milk bank serves as a vital medical infrastructure while also promoting life sciences and research innovation. I am proud to sponsor Senate Resolution No. 346 along with Senator Brooks and ask the Senate to share in the outstanding success of the MidAtlantic Mothers' Milk Bank and honor its many contributions to babies across the Commonwealth. Thank you, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Philadelphia, Senator Picozzi. Senator PICOZZI. Mr. President, I rise today as the prime sponsor of Senate Bill No. 780, legislation that gives communities a tool to address unauthorized encampments that challenge public safety and neighborhood quality of life. These encampments often bring trash accumulation, drug paraphernalia, crime, fire hazards, and other unsafe conditions to our neighborhoods. When municipalities fail to act, residents are too often left without options. This legislation provides communities with a legal pathway to seek relief and encourage action when dangerous conditions persist. I want to recognize that this legislation alone is not the complete answer. We must continue working with local governments, service providers, and community partners to connect those in need with support, services, and shelter they deserve to create long-term paths to stability while keeping everyone safe. Community empowerment to find long-term solutions for the betterment of all is the goal. I urge the House Committee on Local Government to take up this legislation so we can give communities the tools they need to address these growing concerns. As Roy T. Bennett said, "Always have a willing hand to help someone, you might be the only one that does." Thank you, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I request a legislative leave for Senator Farry. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senator Pittman requests a legislative leave for Senator Farry. Without objection, the leave will be granted. (Continued) The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Jefferson, Senator Dush. Senator DUSH. Mr. President, there has been a decades-long effort to remove the divine hand of Providence, that is to say, Almighty God, from his role in the founding of the United States of America. A part of that effort is to call Founders, like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Ben Franklin, deists. You know, there is something unique about deists; although they may believe there is some power that created the universe, they believe that power simply created it and chose not to have direct interest in the affairs of men. As a result, there is no need to pray in that belief system to that power because that entity is uninterested in individuals and would not respond to things like prayer, praise, or worship. In order to perpetuate that lie, those engaged in removing God from the affairs of men and government create all sorts of books, articles, videos, et cetera, that put forth an author's interpretation of who those men were and their intent. They hide the documents written in the very hands of those Founders that speak directly to God's involvement. Here on the floor, I have read through some of those Founders' writings: Ben Franklin, Benjamin Rush, John Adams, and, today, I will read some directives from General George Washington, which he gave to his military officers in his very first order. Let me repeat: that is his very first order to his officers in the field. General Washington writes, [Reading:] The Commander-in-Chief directs that divine Service be performed every Sunday at 11 o'clock in those brigades to which there are chaplains; those that [which] have none to attend [the] places of worship nearest [to] them. It is expected that officers of all ranks will by their attendance set an example for [to] their men. While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. This is a very important part of that. To the distinguished character of patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian. "To the distinguished character of patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian." General Washington held the character of Christian higher than that of patriot. General Washington then went on to address some of the characteristics that his men and characteristics they could not afford to do, such as curse, get drunk, nor take any action that would offend God. These men were, in fact, a bunch of farmers, shopkeepers, preachers, hunters and trappers, blacksmiths, and the like going up against the largest--the strongest--military in the world at the time. Washington knew, as did the Founders and those who stood against Britain, that it would only be possible to obtain ultimate victory if, as Washington referred to Him, the divine hand of Providence, was with them. Again, professors, teachers, authors, movie creators, and the like have all been telling us for decades that Washington was a deist. Deists do not pray. Deists do not attend worship services. Deists do not believe they can offend their creator because, in the deists' mind, that creator does not care. Washington is telling his officers that Almighty God cares about the affairs of every single man, that God pays attention to what men do. Washington had a deep conviction, a conviction he felt important enough to convey to his men in his first general order that spelled out the character that he expected of the Continental Army. He spelled out that the hand of Providence would be withheld from our efforts if we neglected that. Again, Washington stated, "to the distinguished character of patriot, it should be the [our] highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian." By making this his first command, Washington imparted to all his men the importance of being men of God as more important than that of being called patriot. Those who have purposely been lying to us need to be called out. Those who have been speaking and teaching without understanding, yet believing they were imparting truth, need to seek out the honest truth that can be found in the collections of our Founders. Those writings have been preserved. They are available to be seen. We need, as a nation, to seek them out. As we depart for the celebration of Independence Day, I encourage every Pennsylvanian, every American--and from what we have seen on social media over the last few weeks--I encourage every person around the world to read the Declaration of Independence and take time to sit and reflect on those grievances that were listed and reflect and learn about the men who helped create the longest lasting covenant under which government operates in the world. Thank you, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Costa. Senator COSTA. Mr. President, I rise for two purposes this afternoon. First is to introduce my remarks that I made earlier today that reflect our position, my position, with regard to the minimum wage and, as I mentioned earlier today, attempted to have our Discharge Petition No. 3 brought out of the committee and to the floor for a vote, given that we have just celebrated--I should not use the word "celebrated"--we recognize or acknowledge that it has been 20 years since we have done that last. And before I introduce these remarks, the only thing I would say--and Senator Hughes touched upon this earlier--is that how we value folks we work with on a regular basis and folks we interact with on a daily basis. As we go back home tomorrow, it looks like, when you may be at the coffee shop looking to get that cup of coffee at the local coffee shop, think about the person on the other side of that counter who is serving you. That person is likely making [$]7.25, $8, $9 an hour, and what we are saying to them is that we do not value them; we do not value the fact that we want and we JUNE 30, appreciate their kindness and their coffee, but we do not value them enough to increase the minimum wage. Similarly, with respect to the folks at our hotel, the last couple of days or back when we come back here, whenever that might be, when they make our rooms up, they clean our rooms, making those type of wages that I referenced, we do not value the work that they do. We like that they are nice to us and they do a nice job, but not increasing the minimum wage demonstrates a lack of value for the work that they do and who they are. And that is what this whole conversation is about. Similarly, with our folks who work in our classrooms every day, like the janitors who clean the various classrooms our kids--create an appropriate environment for them to learn in. We are saying to them, we appreciate your cleanliness, but we do not value you enough to give you a good wage, a livable wage, or at least a pathway, a pathway as House Bill No. 2189 would give them, towards a minimum wage. When we think about all those folks who are working in our healthcare facilities who are making $9.50 or $10 an hour, this legislation, House Bill No. 2189, would set them on a pathway, would immediately provide them with a $2,000 increase in wages, which would help them with affordability, but put them on a pathway to [$]15 if we were successful in passing that legislation. These are the things that we have to think about and talk about. So, the next time we are interacting with our barista or with our healthcare worker or with the person who is treating and taking care of us in our hotels when we are here in Harrisburg collecting our per diems, let us think about what we mean to them and what we are doing by not passing the minimum wage. We believe we should be addressing the value that goes towards that, and we are going to continue to pursue that. That being said, Mr. President, I would like to submit the rest of my remarks for the record. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to Senate Rule 10(e), the remarks will be submitted. (Pursuant to Senate Rule 10(e), the following prepared remarks were made part of the record at the request of the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator COSTA:) Mr. President, on June 10, I filed a discharge petition for House Bill Pennsylvania's minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2029. The House passed this bill along bipartisan lines in March 2026, and it has languished in committee since then. Pennsylvania's minimum wage is a disgrace, having not budged since 2009, when the Federal government pushed it up to $7.25 an hour. It has been 20 years since the Pennsylvania government raised the minimum wage, and we should all hang our heads in shame. For 20 years, the Republican-controlled Senate has not taken action on the minimum wage, while an affordability crisis has slammed working Pennsylvanians. According to a study yesterday from Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody's Analytics, Trump's unnecessary war in Iran has cost Americans roughly $1,000 per household in higher fuel, food, and other expenses. Our pitiful minimum wage makes us an outlier among all our neighboring States: New York, $16.50 an hour; New Jersey, $15.49 an hour; Delaware, $15.00 an hour; Maryland, $15.00 an hour; Virginia, $12.41 an hour; Ohio, $10.70 an hour; West Virginia, $8.75 an hour. According to a 2025 report from the Department of Labor and Industry, roughly 50,000 working Pennsylvanians were earning minimum wage or less, and approximately a quarter million working Pennsylvanians were earning near the minimum wage, ranging from $7.26 to $12.00 per hour. That is 300,000 Pennsylvanians barely making ends meet. Per the same report, Pennsylvania workers earning at or below the minimum wage in 2024 were most likely to be employed in the following industries: food services and drinking places, retail trade, or accommodation. Think about all the people we interact with on a daily basis whose work is invaluable, but who make less than $15 an hour: the hotel staff who makes our beds and launders our linens, the baristas who make our morning coffee, the cashiers at the store when we buy snacks or supplies, the childcare workers who care for our children while we are here, the home health aides who ensure our loved ones are safe, the Amazon drivers who deliver our packages at all hours. If we want to be serious about attracting and retaining working families in Pennsylvania, we have to step up our game and pay our workers a dignified wage. According to a 2025 Keystone Research Center report, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour would directly benefit 865,600 Pennsylvania workers from diverse demographic backgrounds. Raising the minimum wage is the smart thing to do, the right thing to do, and the popular thing to do. According to a February 2026 Quinnipiac poll, 66 percent of Pennsylvanians support raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Let us get this done and deliver real results to Pennsylvania's working families. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Allegheny, Senator Costa, for a second time. Senator COSTA. Mr. President, I rise again to talk a little bit about what I anticipate will be coming momentarily as it relates to the work scheduled for the Senate Chamber here today. It is my understanding that we will momentarily be receiving a motion to recess to the call of the President pro tem. Mr. President, I rise, and we rise, to object to that opportunity to be able to do that. We strongly believe that we need to continue to be here for the next several days to be able to continue to hammer out a General Fund budget. In the meantime, as that is happening, there are other things that we can be doing here, addressing policy across this Commonwealth. We do know that our House colleagues are here today, will be here tomorrow, and will be here Thursday as well. We think it is imperative that we continue to stay here and not adjourn this Session to the call of the pro tem. We do not know when that might be; we are led to believe that it could be Monday we come back. We think that is inappropriate. We have an obligation to be able to work here to get our work done. There are very few things that are more important in terms of our job responsibilities as it relates to what the people elect us to do, and one of those major things is in passing a general appropriation bill. By leaving here today, we are missing the opportunity to do so, and we need to continue to work towards that end. We know our House Democratic colleagues stand ready to work with us to advance a bill, if we can advance a bill over to them to get things moving. And, Mr. President, while some may characterize the conversations and the talks that are taking place as hopeful or that seem to be coming together, based on my just recent conversations within the last half an hour, that does not appear to be the case from the perspective of the Democrats in the House and the Senate. There is a lot more work that needs to be done, and we are not going down a path, in our view, that is going to lead us to a position where we are going to be able to take a few days off and then come back next week to wrap things up. We need to continue to talk. We need to continue to have these five-party meetings, which we have not had for quite a while, which we tried to schedule this week and did not occur. We need to have these conversations to get us across the finish line to ensure that we are doing the work for the people of Pennsylvania. As we go home and celebrate the 250th anniversary of our country, one of the things that we talked about was a democracy that is going to allow us the opportunity to collaborate and work together to be able to get things done, and that is what we need to be able to do here. So, we strenuously object to any motion that is going to be looking to recess us to the call of the Chair to an unknown date and time, but what we believe to be Monday, going forward. We know that this motion is not debatable, and that is why I am taking steps right now during petitions to raise this issue and ask my colleagues to join us in saying, heck no, we are not going home; we are going to stay here and continue to work at least for the rest of this week. Thank you, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Philadelphia, Senator Hughes. Senator HUGHES. Mr. President, I just wanted to follow up on Senator Costa's comments. If the decision is what we anticipate it will be, which is a motion to adjourn to the call of the Chair without completing the State's budget, we need to make sure that we understand the environment that we are in right now. It is June 30; the House will be in Session. It is scheduled to be in Session, I believe, all the way until Thursday, July 1, July 2. The Governor is in place here in the Capitol; 23 Democratic Senators are ready to continue the work to get it done. So, logistically, we are in a good position to push through and make some significant advances, and those advances would be consistent with the needs of the people of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And we have this opportunity to do something significant for the people of the Mr. President, we sit on, as was said before by a number of others, including myself, we sit on a budget surplus of Rainy Day Fund of well over $8 billion--$8 billion sitting in the Rainy Day Fund. Mr. President, as we wind up this fiscal year on June 30, today, we will be over $1 billion, or $1 billion over--I believe $1.1 billion over--the estimate of what we were going to have available to us, and that is a sign of a good Pennsylvania economy, structurally, a good Pennsylvania economy. And, in fact, individually, Pennsylvania's unemployment rate is lower than the national unemployment rate--in a good position structurally, and, in terms of employment, we are in a good position with respect to our unemployment rate. We are beating the national economy in terms of the unemployment rate, which is a very good barometer, but with inflation being as it is, with the tariffs, the unending tariffs still being in place, with this off and on, and off and on, and on and more on and more on then off with this war, prices are high, exorbitantly high. And we need to be in a position to respond to that, and we are here in position to respond to that. We have the capacity to respond to that for Pennsylvania citizens. We have done that over the years. We have reduced taxes for Pennsylvania citizens seven times. We can keep that going, and we can even do more than that again by raising the minimum wage to add into that, but it seems that we are denied this opportunity because we are going to leave here at the dictates of the Majority. We are going to leave here--the House will be in Session, the Governor is in place to wrap all of this up, and we can get some major issues addressed here in Pennsylvania. We can continue the economic investment. We can continue reducing taxes on Pennsylvania citizens. We can continue strengthening our education system. We can continue economic development and revitalization. We can take care of the least of these who need us to stand in the breach for them, but we are walking out the door while the House is in Session for the next 2 days and while the Governor is in place here to work with us to get this done. We need to understand this is not our decision. We are not asking for this; the Senate Democrats are not asking for this. The Majority is asking for this or is demanding this. Senate Democrats are ready to stay to work this out; the Majority is not. Senate Democrats are 23 strong to raise the minimum wage; we are not having that on the Senate Republican side, the Majority. Leaving now is not our choice. The Majority in this Chamber is making it the decision. The House is in Session for the next 2 days. The Governor is in position, and the Majority in this Chamber is walking away, walking away from its responsibility. This is not the choice that we would make. This is not the option that we should take. We should work this out. We are in a strong position as a State. We should work this out and work through the moment. Thank you, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I appreciate the dialogue that has occurred here on the floor, and I am reminded of Diamond Rio: "Meet in the Middle." Meet in the middle--often think about the issue of minimum wage, and it has been no secret that, in my time serving as Leader, I have made it very clear publicly and privately that we are prepared to talk about meeting in the middle on minimum wage. And I often wonder, if we had met in the middle 4 years ago, what the minimum wage would be today. What I do know is the minimum wage today is, in fact, [$]7.25 an hour. What I also know is that some, particularly on the other side of the building, act as though the minimum wage already is $15 an hour and any number below that is considered a concession. I actually think there is an opportunity to meet in the middle on that issue, and the reality is, Mr. President, that this Commonwealth is very diverse. Cost of living changes from region to region. Labor costs change from region to region. I can tell you that I have heard, particularly from nonprofits in the district I represent, the challenges that a $15-an-hour minimum wage would pose. I have heard from county governments that employ individuals at a starting wage less than $15 an hour and what that would mean to their need to raise property taxes, and I recognize and appreciate that what I experience in my region is not what everybody experiences in their respective regions, which is why the 50 of us come here to meet in the middle. And, so, that conversation has been available. I surmise that the reason that there is not a desire to meet in the middle is because there are some talking points that my friends on the other side of the building would prefer not to give up. As it relates to the budget, I will again use Diamond Rio and meet in the middle. I actually think we are in a very good position, based on the conversations and the understandings that I have had over the last several hours, where we well may be going with a budgetary process. We all know, we all know that we will meet in the middle on this process and that we will, in fact, need our teams, our staff, members of leadership teams to have conversations over the next several days. But I am highly confident, highly confident that we are well on track to deliver a responsible budget that will, in fact, recognize our unique status as a divided government, deliver a responsible product to the people of Pennsylvania JUNE 30, with no negative impacts, and there is no reason that we cannot conclude our work early next week. I think that we have a very good trajectory in front of us. There has been a lot of clarity provided in this process to us over the last 24 hours, and we have some work to do yet to figure out the details of that, but I am quite confident and optimistic that we will do that over the next several days. I am interested and appreciate the comments about the quality of our economy. I often have heard that we are the only State in the northeast that has a growing economy. We are also the only State in the northeast that has a Republican-controlled State Senate. Perhaps some of the national economic policies of the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue are working because our revenues are growing, and that growth in revenues will give us an opportunity to responsibly balance this budget. There will be difficult choices, there will be pain, there will be discomfort at all levels, but we will meet in the middle. We will conclude this process, I believe, in the next several days with a responsible product, and, for that reason, I move we recess to the call of the President pro tempore. Thank you, Mr. President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. It has been moved by Senator Pittman that the Senate do now recess to the call of the President pro tempore. Senator COSTA. Mr. President, prior to that, exercising the vote on that motion, we have a Member who would like to speak on minimum wage and asked to be given the opportunity to do so prior to voting on the gentleman's measure. The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is a recess motion, and the recess motion takes precedent over speaker. Will the Senate agree to the motion to recess? Senator COSTA. Ease for one moment, please, so I can discuss with my Member? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be at ease. [The Senate was at ease] Senator COSTA. The gentleman understands that the motion takes precedent. He is not able to speak on petitions on minimum wage. We respect that ruling. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion to recess is not subject to debate. Senator COSTA. I do not intend to debate the motion, but I am asking my colleagues to vote "no" on this recess motion. We believe we should stay here and continue the work that needs to be done. Thank you. And the question recurring, Will the Senate agree to the motion to recess? The yeas and nays were required by Senator PITTMAN and were as follows, viz: YEA-27 Argall Baker Bartolotta Brooks Brown Dush Farry Gebhard Hutchinson Keefer Martin Mastriano Pennycuick Phillips-Hill Picozzi Rothman Stefano Vogel Ward, Judy Ward, Kim Coleman Culver Langerholc Laughlin Pittman Robinson Yaw NAY-23 Boscola Cappelletti Collett Comitta Costa Flynn Fontana Haywood Hughes Kane Kearney Kim Malone Miller Muth Pisciottano Santarsiero Saval Schwank Street Tartaglione Williams, Anthony H. Williams, Lindsey A majority of the Senators having voted "aye," the question was determined in the affirmative. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate stands in recess to the call of the President pro tempore. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Senator Elder A. Vogel, Jr.) in the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of recess having expired, the Senate will come to order. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Senator Pittman. Senator PITTMAN. Mr. President, I move that the Senate do now recess until Friday, July 10, 2026, at 8:02 p.m., Eastern Daylight Saving Time, unless sooner recalled by the President pro tempore. The motion was agreed to by voice vote. The Senate recessed at 10:59 p.m., Eastern Daylight Saving Time.