SUPPORT: HB 37 PN 3191 would allow counties to begin pre-canvassing mail ballots up to seven days before Election Day, helping election officials process ballots more efficiently and deliver faster unofficial results while preserving existing safeguards that prohibit the release of vote totals before polls close.

OPPOSE: Under current law, penalties for harassment are determined by the alleged actions of the defendant. However, HB 102 would depart from this legal framework by enhancing the penalty from a summary offense to a third-degree misdemeanor based on who the victim is, instead of punishing people based on the extent, content, duration, or severity of harassment, regardless of the target.

SUPPORT: HB 150 would allow incarcerated people to petition for medical release when they have a substantially diminished ability to function in a correctional facility due to a terminal illness, a chronic and debilitating physical or medical condition or disease, a serious functional or cognitive impairment or deteriorating physical or mental health due to the aging process.

SUPPORT: HB 458 would allow incarcerated veterans diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury (TBI) after imprisonment to apply to the court for post-conviction relief, enabling them to present their diagnosis of a mental health disability sustained during or as a result of active duty or training for active duty as a mitigating factor in the crime for which they were charged.

SUPPORT: Currently, PA state law protects journalists from having to reveal the identity of any confidential sources, but there are other pieces of information that journalists use in their jobs that deserve such protections. HB 490 would extend Pennsylvania’s media shield law to cover all records, information, and documents created or acquired by journalists in their professional duties.

SUPPORT: HB 1042 would establish the Earned Vocational Training and Education Credit to allow people incarcerated in state facilities to earn vocational and educational credits against their minimum sentence. These credits would count towards reducing their sentence—10-180 days, depending on the program—making them eligible for parole or short sentence parole earlier than they would otherwise be.

SUPPORT: HB 1492 would prohibit landlords from considering drug distribution convictions older than seven years and to require individualized assessments that consider the unique circumstances of such convictions. By taking a more nuanced approach to drug distribution convictions, landlords will still be able to maintain the safety of their tenants while giving individuals with less severe drug distribution convictions a chance to have safe and stable housing.

OPPOSE: The intent behind HB 1616 PN 3333 is to protect victims of child trafficking. However, it does so by increasing penalties for an existing statute that was originally designed as a narrow backstop against informal adoptions, not trafficking. Expanding this narrow statute to a first-degree felony risks over-penalizing non-trafficking conduct without a clear connection to improved safety or better outcomes for children.

SUPPORT: HB 1800 would update the definition of "marriage" to reflect the ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges that recognized the right of same-sex couples to marry. Specifically, the bill removes gendered references to man and woman in the definition of "marriage" in PA statute.

OPPOSE: HB 1909 would replace nuanced, individualized sentencing with a one-size-fits-all penalty enhancement. It introduces mandatory minimum-style consequences under the guise of grading enhancements and would disrupt established sentencing conventions, threaten to swell the incarcerated population, place added strain on the public defense system, and inject constitutional and practical problems where none currently exist.

OPPOSE: HB 1934 would actually make it harder for people to obtain information in lawsuits against the Commonwealth. The proposed changes would create confusion, inconsistency, and more red tape. Each agency would have to develop its own procedures for handling discovery, leading to delays and inefficiencies that make it harder for Pennsylvanians to hold the government accountable.

OPPOSE: HB 1935 would create a sentencing enhancement for individuals convicted of making terroristic threats against a school or institution of higher education. Current law already classifies such conduct as a felony of the third degree when it causes an evacuation, lockdown, or disruption from normal operations. This bill is unnecessary and counterproductive. Adding a new sentencing enhancement will only increase incarceration rates without adding deterrent value or improving public safety.

SUPPORT: HB 1944 would amend PA's underage drinking medical amnesty policy to prohibit a person from being charged or prosecuted for recklessly endangering another person so long as they call for help, believe someone is in need of immediate medical attention, comply and cooperate with first responders, and stay with the person in crisis until first responders arrive.

SUPPORT: HB 1957 is a proposed PA constitutional amendment that would affirm and protect every Pennsylvanian’s right to privacy with respect to personal, sexual, and reproductive healthcare decisions, including the right to choose or refuse an abortion, the right to choose or refuse contraceptives, and the right to choose or refuse fertility care, all without discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or relationship status.

SUPPORT: HB 2146 clarifies Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Act by limiting when public agencies can add items to meeting agendas without 24-hour notice, ensuring that last-minute changes are only allowed under narrow, defined exceptions. It restores the intent of the law by preventing agencies from broadly bypassing transparency requirements and ensuring the public has a meaningful opportunity to stay informed.

OPPOSE: HB 2299 PN 3019 would allow probation officers to wear body cameras, including when meeting with children as young as 10 years old. The supervisory relationship between probation officers and their adult or juvenile clients are, by definition, interpersonal, and more often than not, occur in private settings—treatment centers, home visits, and work visits. As such, the use of body cameras in those settings raises significant privacy concerns for clients and third-parties alike.