Limited Time Offer. Become a Founder Member Now!

Conference committee discusses raising credit to $1,000, removing 'skin in the game' language in House Bill 1168

May 01, 2025 | House of Representatives, Legislative, North Dakota


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Conference committee discusses raising credit to $1,000, removing 'skin in the game' language in House Bill 1168
A conference committee on House Bill 1168 met to review proposed house changes that would raise a payment or credit amount to $1,000 and remove a "skin in the game" provision, and to discuss the effect those changes would have on the bill's appropriation.

Committee leadership said the house's proposed edits would sharply lower the appropriation tied to the bill. "With that reduction in the credit amount, that would lower the appropriation found in section 29, from $3.98 down to $295,000,000," the chairman said, noting the figure was what committee staff had estimated.

The discussion centered on two substantive edits the house sent back to the conference committee: adjusting the amount identified in the bill (described in the meeting transcript as changing the amount from "$16.50 to $1,000") and removing a provision described in the transcript as "skin in the game." The chairman said committee staff had not yet produced a formal amendment and recommended the panel reconvene when that draft is available.

The chairman described the staff estimate the panel used to compute appropriation effects: "I think he's using 145,000 first year, 150 the second," a figure the chairman said legislative counsel provided and the committee multiplied by the $1,000 amount to reach the appropriation estimate.

Senator Beckettall told the chair the senate side was prepared to describe the changes if the committee wished to hear them. Representative Doctor warned about adding an income tax provision, saying in the meeting, "If we don't want this to come out of the house, we maybe shouldn't put the income tax," and another member observed adding an income tax could raise questions about single-subject compliance.

No formal motion or vote was taken during this session. The committee agreed to adjourn and set a follow-up meeting after the house amendment is finalized so the panel can take formal action.

The session included members and staff identified in the transcript, and participants emphasized that the numbers discussed were preliminary estimates tied to the not-yet-completed amendment.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep North Dakota articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI