• Allows public funds to support service environments shaped by religious ideology,
• Places the burden on parents or children to object after placement rather than preventing religious coercion upfront,
• Limits the State’s oversight authority once a faith-based provider is under contract,
• Risks privileging dominant religious institutions in a state that has already demonstrated religious preference in public policy.

• Church and state needs to remain separated.

 Yes, this bill says that the faith based organization(s) are to remain indifferent, but that would be very hard to prove that they are not trying to influence the children in any way, and vice versa*.

(c) If the legal parent or guardian of a child objects to the placement of a child at a faith-based organization, on the grounds of religious expression, then the department shall find an alternative placement for the child

• The above needs to be an OPT IN** option not an OPT OUT***. If the parent or legal guardian wants the child to be placed in a faith based organization then let it be. My reasoning for that is if a child is to go to a place of a different faith of them, it will cause great mental turmoil. They are often not allowed to practice their religion, or non religion within faith based organizations. They are often ostracized**** within said group because of this. This in turn is very bad for the child's mental health, and could lead to disastrous outcomes for the child, and/or lasting long term mental health issues.

*vice versa- with the order changed; with the relations reversed; the other way around

**opt in- to choose to participate

***opt out- to choose to not participate

****exclude; exile; refuse to include; to exclude from a group by common consent

I am writing in support of HB 4067, the Workforce Scholarship Act. Expanding access to workforce aligned education is one of the most practical and impactful investments we can make in our communities and our economy.

Many individuals want to pursue careers in certain fields but face financial barriers that prevent them from enrolling in training or completing certification programs. Workforce scholarships help bridge that gap, opening doors for students, working parents, and career changers.

By supporting HB 4067 it would help strengthen our ability to fill essential roles, and it promotes long term economic stability. It also reduces student debt burdens by focusing funding on credentials and programs that lead directly to employment opportunities and sustainable wages to encourage individuals to stay located within our great state.

HB 4067 is not just an education policy, it is an economic development strategy. Investing in people strengthens families, supports employers, and continues to have positive impact on communities

I respectfully urge lawmakers to pass HB 4067 and prioritize opportunities that empower individuals to succeed in our state.

Thank you for your consideration,

Tayler Dahler

• Variability in immune response after infection
• Waning immunity over time
• Differences in protection against severe illness versus infection
• The risks inherent in acquiring immunity through illness rather than prevention

From a public health standpoint, policies that implicitly incentivize infection undermine decades of evidence-based disease prevention.

Additionally, immunity status is not static. Scientific guidance evolves as pathogens mutate and new data emerge. Codifying a rigid legal definition of immunity removes necessary flexibility from public health decision-making and replaces evidence-based assessment with statutory mandate.

Public health law functions best when it allows medical professionals to respond to current data rather than requiring them to conform to fixed assumptions about complex biological systems. HB 4070 substitutes legal certainty for scientific nuance, which poses risks to individual and community health.

For these reasons, I urge the Legislature to reject HB 4070 and to rely instead on established public health expertise, peer-reviewed science, and disease-specific evidence when considering immunity and vaccination policy.

I can't put into words how stupid this is, but I'll try. How do we test if they have "immunity" from their exposure? Have you heard of Typhoid Mary, who was technically immune to Typhus but able to transfer it? Who is lobbying you to remove vaccine requirements? West Virginian lives are not for sale.

1. I would like to support the codification of religious and medical freedom to choose vaccination exemption for ALL children in our public education system. I, personally, know children who have been vaccine injured. Some effects of vaccines are much more obscure but there is much evidence that they could be linked to many lasting and pernicious conditions such as autoimmune disorders and cancers.
2. One reason for my belief is simply reading the list of ingredients in each of the vaccines. They are filled with ingredients that are classified as toxic and carcinogenic to humans.  In addition, human aborted fetal cells and even monkey cells have been used to create these vaccines. Specifically, the MMR vaccine was developed using aborted fetal cell line.
3. It is simply illogical to force people who have real and reasonable concerns to have a foreign substance injected into their body to protect those who have already been immunized and therefore are SAFE from exposure and harm from the unvaccinated.
4. Finally, I find that there is a major double standard in practice throughout our state that should cause MUCH liability to our State and county Boards of education who have ignored the exemption that was put in place by our Governor.  For schools to discriminate against our students and deny them a public education because they are unvaccinated but allow our sports teams to play out of state or private school whose students may be unvaccinated shows a blatant hypocrisy that is akin to bullying.

Something to think about.

Everyone was pro-vaccine until something horrible happened. Its impossible to get a doctor to say, yes, you're child's (issue) seizure, whatever happened, is because of the recent vaccine given.  Manufacturers aren't held accountable, (National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986).  If manufacturers would be held accountable by being sued, maybe we would get change.

I am writing to express strong opposition to HB 4079 and HB 4073. Both bills share a dangerous pattern: they prioritize ideology over evidence, and they put communities at risk.

HB 4079 seeks to control language in government communications, mandating specific terms while banning others. This is not about clarity or fairness—it is about government control for the sake of ideology. It overreaches into personal and professional expression and sets a precedent for further intrusion.

HB 4073 would create religious exemptions to West Virginia’s compulsory school vaccination laws. This is particularly alarming because we are seeing measles and other vaccine‑preventable diseases resurging nationwide. Opening exemptions now is not supported by scientific, peer‑reviewed research—it is rooted in belief, not evidence. Public health experts consistently show that high vaccination rates save lives; loosening requirements puts children, families, and communities at unnecessary risk.

Both bills prioritize political platforms and ideology over science and safety. This is not a matter of “liberty” when it endangers lives. I urge you to vote against HB 4079 and HB 4073 to protect freedom of expression, public health, and the well-being of West Virginia families.

Can we please stop with this nonsense. These vaccines keep everyone safe. Look at the current measles outbreaks around the country, why do you think that is happening? We have been leading the nation on thos for years, so let's not go backwards. Protect our kids by listening to actual experts.

Unlike other personal choices (like what you eat or wear), vaccination status affects others. A child who is not vaccinated against measles can transmit the virus before even showing symptoms. Parents retain the freedom to not vaccinate, but that choice comes with the consequence of having to use alternative education, such as homeschooling or certain private options that don't receive state funding. Children with cancer or organ transplants cannot be vaccinated. Their "freedom" to participate in public life depends entirely on their peers' vaccination status. By allowing religious exemptions, the state is essentially choosing the "religious freedom" of one group over the "freedom to live/physical safety" of another. On top of that, outbreaks are expensive. Managing a single measles case can cost public health departments tens of thousands of dollars in contact tracing, quarantine enforcement, and medical care. Religious exemptions often lead to geographic clusters of unvaccinated individuals. When a disease enters such a cluster, it can spread rapidly, potentially jumping to the wider community.

It's not a perfect bill because it requires notary and it doesn't include philosophical exemption. Vaccine mandates shouldn't even exist. Look to Florida for an example on how to handle these idiotic mandates.

1. Please pass this bill.
2. We need it coded into law

HB 4073 provides a clear, reasonable, and respectful path for families with sincerely held religious beliefs to access a religious exemption from compulsory school immunizations. Children should not have their education interrupted or denied because their parents are exercising deeply held religious convictions. This bill ensures that families are not forced to choose between faith and their child’s ability to attend school.

Importantly, HB 4073 maintains existing public health safeguards. Medical exemptions remain in place, vaccination requirements are unchanged, and schools continue to receive proper documentation. The bill simply adds a transparent, standardized religious exemption process that respects parental rights while preserving order and clarity for schools.

West Virginia families are diverse, and our laws should reflect respect for conscience, religious liberty, and uninterrupted access to education. HB 4073 strikes that balance thoughtfully and responsibly.

I respectfully urge House Delegates to vote in favor of HB 4073. Thank you for your time and consideration.

1. Please take up this bill ! We shouldn't even have a law that refuses the right of students to attend school. About 700 families have a religious exemption. And the legislators are ignoring every single one of them & more. Some families want one but haven't gotten one because of what the legislators are doing .. & the board.

1. I just want to respond to Cindy M comment,.. she says our state is low ranking in healthcare & we have one of the highest mortality rate.. for infants? Would those deaths include after theyve received their vaccinations ? Healthy babies dont just die. Vaccine side effects that can contribute to infant deaths.. include APNEA , BRADYCARDIA,  MIs, BRAIN SWELLING,  & uncontrollable SEIZURES. & more.
2. The apnea can happen at night or right in front of your eyes, after their well visit.
3. The ingredients in the vaccines can upset the heart, causing children to have heart attacks or drop a babies heart to where its crucial to get intervention.. meaning CPR. A lot of cases.. this happens at home,  where they are not trained on CPR & unfortunately the EMS is too, late. Resulting in death.
4. Please let the parents decide whether or not they want to vaccinate.

HB 4079 is not about “clarity” or “inclusion.” It is about control—the government telling citizens and state employees what words they must use. That is overreach, plain and simple.

Language is personal. It evolves. No law should dictate how people speak, write, or describe experiences. Mandating specific terms in official communications sets a dangerous precedent for government intrusion into everyday life.

I urge you to reject HB 4079. Protect freedom of expression. Stop the government from policing words.

I oppose HB 4079 which aims to ban so-called “woke words” from government communications. As a woman, I find this bill deeply misguided for several reasons.

First, implies that women’s worth depends on motherhood, which erases the many women who contribute to West Virginia’s communities in other ways. Real respect for women means seeing and valuing us all.

Second, our state ranks 45th nationally in education and struggles with some of the highest rates of chronic disease and cardiovascular illness in the nation. It is absurd to spend taxpayer money and waste legislative time on policing words when you have much more serious challenges to address. Legislators should be focused on boosting literacy, keeping schools and hospitals strong, and addressing preventable disease rather than dictating which medically accurate or inclusive terms are “acceptable.”

Finally, as a public health professional, I know that inclusive language costs nothing, helps everyone feel respected and seen, which leads to more health-seeking behaviors and better health outcomes.

Instead of wasting limited public resources on a culture-war bill, we should invest in improving education, health, and opportunity in West Virginia. Tackle real problems head-on; don't distract us with word bans.

While I agree that moral responsibility ultimately rests with the individual, family, and community, not the government or schools, I am concerned that this bill embeds ideological premises into the public education curriculum under the guise of “education.”

The bill’s own text affirms that parents, families, and communities bear the primary responsibility for moral and family life education. Yet it then mandates that public schools provide specific instruction tied to pregnancy options — including adoption — in health settings. This approach conflates personal beliefs about morality and family responsibility with state-mandated educational content.

Public education should inform, not indoctrinate, and parents should have the freedom to guide their children’s moral development without prescriptive instruction from the state. Requiring teachers and schools to deliver content framed in a particular ideological context risks alienating families whose beliefs differ and may chill open, evidence-based discussion in the classroom.

If West Virginia wants students and young adults to understand adoption, that information can be made voluntarily available through optional resources, counseling services, and partnership with community organizations — rather than through a requirement that inserts specific messaging into every local district’s sex-education program.

I urge you to reconsider HB 4105’s mandate and instead respect a parent-centered, choice-driven approach to moral and family life education. Public schools should support families, not substitute for them.

1. Please get this bill to the senate.  Wv finally deserves to send their children to school,  healthy & unvaccinated,  if they choose. Just like the schools in VA, Ohio & others ! Thank you

I am writing to urge your support for legislation that modernizes and improves provider credentialing processes with health insurance payors.

Inefficient and inconsistent credentialing creates unnecessary delays in patient access to care, administrative burden for providers, and higher system-wide costs. Providers often wait months to become credentialed or re-credentialed, even when their qualifications are unchanged, preventing patients from receiving timely services and discouraging participation in insurance networks.

Legislation that streamlines credentialing - such as standardizing credentialing requirements, setting enforceable timelines, and reducing administrative burdens - would improve access to care. These reforms would especially benefit underserved communities, where provider shortages are already acute.

I respectfully ask you to support policies that promote a more efficient, consistent, and provider-friendly credentialing system. Doing so will help ensure patients receive timely care and allow clinicians to focus on what matters most: delivering high-quality healthcare.

• Currently, non-relatives/non-kin to children are largely served and certified as foster parents by child placing agencies (CPA), with whom the state has contracts.  Child placing agencies are throughout the state and serve various geographies/footprints of the state given their business models.  When a family is certified as a non-relative, that family is visited and supported during a child's placement, by both department (BSS) workers and child placing agency (CPA) workers.
• Relatives/kin to children are largely served and certified as foster parents (if they choose to certify), by the homefinding department of BSS.  Homefinders at BSS and workers at the CPA's perform very similar duties in the process of certifying families to the foster care level.  Relatives/kin can be held to slightly different (reduced) standards due to the waivers available relating to the certification requirements.
• Regardless of whether a CPA worker or a BSS homefinding worker undertakes certifying a family, the time it takes depends not only on the worker but also, and greatly, on the family's responsiveness to requests for information or documentation.  Time to certification relates to a shared process.
• Relatives/kin can be supported, particularly early in the placement journey, by a service called Kinship Navigator.  Each family can be supported, for months or as needed, by a KN who is an employee of one of the state's key contractors, Mission West Virginia.  Kinship Navigators provide resources, advocacy, support, advice, products, etc. so that new relative/kin families can have support services, whether they are choosing to be certified or not.  KNs do not stay involved however, for the entire pendency of the case (which differs from CPA visiting workers, who do).  An ongoing issue has been that the referral process to ensure that ALL relative/kin families are referred to the Mission West Virginia KN service is not consistently performed (by responsible BSS personnel).  The reasons for that are beyond this message content.

• When a child comes to the attention of a CPS worker and needs placement, first  is attempted but if non are available or safe, the CPS worker makes a request to the CPA's to locate a certified, prepared foster home.
• When a child comes to the attention of a CPS worker, needs placement, and relatives/kin ARE available, the CPS worker conducts a safety screen and notifies the homefinding unit, so that additional vetting can occur as needed and certification processes can begin.

1. Synthetic dyes serve no functional purpose beyond aesthetics. These dyes, often derived from petroleum byproducts, offer no nutritional value. They are often used to make unhealthy foods look more appealing, so that consumers will want to buy them
2. Scientific research confirms their harm. The OEHHA report, which analyzed 27 clinical trials, found that synthetic dyes can cause or worsen hyperactivity, inattention, restlessness, irritability, sleeplessness, and aggression in some children. Additionally, consuming dyes can worsen or mimic ADHD symptoms.

Dear West Virginia House of Delegates Health Committee,

I am writing you to express my support for House Bill 4392, and would urge you to do the same. Among the many challenges that our great state faces, secretly poisoning our children should not be one of them. In this case, the destructive and unnecessary additives that I’m referring to are Synthetic Dyes. Synthetic Food Dyes have impacted our family in ways we would have never imagined. Over the past two years our eldest child has suffered from night terrors with episodes of sleepwalking, tremors while he sleeps, outbursts of aggression that are out of the ordinary for his personality, difficulty focusing on tasks, and potentially much worse.

Over two years ago we decided to consult with his doctors about these symptoms which were becoming life altering. His pediatrician at the time pushed for an ADHD diagnosis, which would have meant more synthetic drugs to attempt to treat his symptoms. Thankfully for us, the teachers at his Montessori School pushed back strongly at that notion. We continued to explore what environmental factors could be causing these issues. What we found was most all of his behavior and sleep-related symptoms stopped entirely after we cut synthetic dyes out of our diets. 

In the process of getting rid of synthetic dyes from our house, we’ve had doctors and pharmacists belittle our choices, because, believe it or not, this poison is in our children’s medicine! These unnecessary additives serve zero nutritional purpose other than to color the drugs and foods they’re present in. They do not add flavor, nor do they change the active ingredients to make the medicine work better. A year ago our son was diagnosed with a chronic illness. We were in and out of the hospital for weeks and in that time all of our efforts to avoid synthetic dyes were foiled. Hospitals didn’t have dye free options for medications and finding food options without dyes was close to impossible. Avoiding the consumption of synthetic dyes is truly an exhausting practice requiring massive amounts of time researching ingredients and finding brands and stores that have access to safer options. In addition, this means we have to drive to Jefferson Pharmacy in Ranson (an hour drive round trip) every time we need an antibiotic, steroid, or virtually any children-specific medicine.

Routinely, our son is prescribed new medications with his chronic illness. And as you’d expect, most of the medicine contains Red Dye 40. To make matters worse, under current FDA regulations, because the medicine is “widely available commercially” (all still tainted with synthetic dyes) the local compounding facility, which has saved us many times in the past, was barred from compounding the medicine dye free. They’re the ONLY compounding facility in our area with the capacity to make medicine without this unnecessary and harmful chemical, and even still they have unnecessary burdens placed on them.

Extensive research, including studies by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), a division of the California Environmental Protection Agency, has linked synthetic dyes to adverse neurobehavioral effects in children. Chronic exposure to these dyes can impair children’s ability to learn, succeed in school, and maintain healthy relationships with peers, potentially leading to serious long-term consequences. Moreover, Red 3, is a known carcinogen, while Yellow 5 and Yellow 6 may contain carcinogenic contaminants. Red 3 and Yellow 5 have also been identified as genotoxic.

According to the OEHHA report, reactions to synthetic dyes can mimic or exacerbate existing mental health conditions like ADHD. Neurobehavioral effects caused or worsened by these dyes in children include hyperactivity, inattentiveness, restlessness, sleeplessness, irritability, and aggression. Given the risks associated with consuming synthetic dyes, I believe it is crucial that we take action to protect our children. [fact sheet: https://bit.ly/4e4kIZ9]

New research now shows a direct link to an increased risk for inflammatory bowel disease, and synthetic dyes which are commonly found in our food and medicine. [https://www.uhhospitals.org/blog/articles/2023/02/can-red-food-dye-give-you-ibd#:~:text=New research raises concerns that,known as Red Dye 40.]

I hope you'll consider championing House Bill 4392 to ban synthetic dyes in pharmaceuticals on behalf of the citizens of West Virginia. Such a change is feasible and could significantly benefit thousands of lives, particularly the most vulnerable members of our population.

Thank you for your consideration and for the work you’re doing on our behalf.

Warm regards, Robby Blair

Martinsburg, WV

SUPPORT Response to HB 4393

Requiring the development and implementation of statewide prevention plan.

January 17, 2026

Greetings,

I am writing as a constituent, and most importantly, as a follower of Jesus Christ and an Episcopalian in the state of West Virginia.  Jesus drew near to the hurting and the addicted, and confronted the shame and stigma that so many people face. 

I urge you to oppose House Bill 4413, which would repeal West Virginia’s existing syringe services program statute and make syringe services programs unlawful.  Without syringe services, many high-risk individuals disengage entirely, increasing unsafe injection, needle litter,  and preventable disease transmission—costs that will ultimately be borne by taxpayers and the health care system.

There are few syringe exchange services in our state who already operate under very restrictive guidelines.  According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), syringe services are associated with a 50% reduction of HIV and Hepatitis C incidence.  They also note that those who access syringe services are five times more likely to seek recovery services than those who do not.  

West Virginia continues to face some of the highest rates of overdose, HIV, and hepatitis C in the nation. Syringe services programs are proven to reduce the spread of infectious disease, prevent overdose deaths, and serve as a primary point of contact connecting people to treatment, naloxone, and medical care.

Replacing regulation with prohibition and civil penalties will not eliminate syringe access.  It will push it underground, reduce oversight, and worsen public health outcomes. The 120-day transition period offered in the bill is also unworkable, as providers are barred from offering the very services patients rely on during that transition.

West Virginia should strengthen and improve oversight of syringe services programs—not ban them outright. I urge you to oppose this bill and support policies grounded in evidence, fiscal responsibility, and the health and safety of our communities.

You will be in my prayers through the legislative session.  

Sincerely,

The Rev. Scott F. Williams

Priest-in-Charge, Trinity Episcopal Church, Morgantown

Greetings,

I am writing as a constituent, and most importantly, as a follower of Jesus Christ and an Episcopalian in the state of West Virginia.  Jesus drew near to the hurting and the addicted, and confronted the shame and stigma that so many people face. 

I urge you to oppose House Bill 4413, which would repeal West Virginia’s existing syringe services program statute and make syringe services programs unlawful.  Without syringe services, many high-risk individuals disengage entirely, increasing unsafe injection, needle litter,  and preventable disease transmission—costs that will ultimately be borne by taxpayers and the health care system.

There are few syringe exchange services in our state who already operate under very restrictive guidelines.  According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), syringe services are associated with a 50% reduction of HIV and Hepatitis C incidence.  They also note that those who access syringe services are five times more likely to seek recovery services than those who do not.  

West Virginia continues to face some of the highest rates of overdose, HIV, and hepatitis C in the nation. Syringe services programs are proven to reduce the spread of infectious disease, prevent overdose deaths, and serve as a primary point of contact connecting people to treatment, naloxone, and medical care.

Replacing regulation with prohibition and civil penalties will not eliminate syringe access.  It will push it underground, reduce oversight, and worsen public health outcomes. The 120-day transition period offered in the bill is also unworkable, as providers are barred from offering the very services patients rely on during that transition.

West Virginia should strengthen and improve oversight of syringe services programs—not ban them outright. I urge you to oppose this bill and support policies grounded in evidence, fiscal responsibility, and the health and safety of our communities.

You will be in my prayers through the legislative session.  

Sincerely,

The Very Rev. Tommy Sheppard Rector, Trinity Episcopal Church Moundsville, WV

Greetings,

Sincerely,

Hello, I am deeply troubled by this bill.  Needle exchange and clean need/syringe programs are evidence based initiatives that reduce the spread of HIV and Hep C.  I beg you to step down from your moral high horse and think about the additional burden on our already overwhelmed healthcare system.  This will be another nail in the coffin of increased healthcare rates over time.  Cutting Medicaid and putting stipulations on it will already do enough damage.  I would be happy to provide evidence based research for you to refer to.  There are many, and this isn’t evidenced from a single random study.  You can not legislate morality, but you can help ease the burden of the healthcare system and ensure a drug addict remains as healthy as they can to potentially seek treatment and become a contributing member of society.  I am very afraid of the future and access of healthcare in this state.  Please don’t make it be a death by a thousand cuts.

Chairman, Senators, and Delegates

My name is Jennifer Brandt. I am a licensed pharmacist working in hospital medicine. In my daily practice, I manage medications in acute care settings, including patients experiencing withdrawal, toxicity, and polysubstance complications.

I am here in my professional capacity to respectfully support a full ban on kratom.

From a pharmacologic standpoint, kratom is not a neutral substance. Its primary alkaloid, mitragynine, acts at the opioid receptor. In humans, mitragynine is metabolized into 7-hydroxymitragynine, which has greater potency at that same receptor.

When a substance activates opioid receptors and produces a more potent metabolite in the body, we recognize that as a dependence-producing profile. That is not a moral judgment…it is receptor pharmacology.

You may hear discussion about limiting 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH) content to certain percentages. From a clinical perspective, that does not resolve the underlying issue. The metabolite 7-OH is derived from the plant itself. 7-OH is only synthesized from kratom. It is not an external contaminant that can simply be removed through manufacturing controls.

Historically, when plants produce or convert into compounds with abuse potential, we regulate the plant. Cocaine is derived from the coca plant. Heroin originates from the opium poppy. We do not rely solely on alkaloid percentage caps to determine whether those substances belong in gas stations or vape shops.

The practical question before you is whether a substance with opioid receptor activity, that can be chemically converted into a more potent substance and has dependence potential should be sold in gas stations and convenience stores.

West Virginia understands the impact of opioid-related harm. In my practice, Normalization precedes escalation. Substances that begin as widely available consumer products can become public health burdens once patterns of dependence take hold.

If dependence increases, the downstream effects are predictable: increased treatment utilization, strain on Medicaid budgets, pressure on child welfare systems, and greater law enforcement involvement. Those costs are ultimately borne by the state and its taxpayers.

There is also a regulatory consideration. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has stated publicly that products containing kratom are adulterated under federal law. That position appears on the agency’s website and in the New Dietary Ingredient rejection letter issued to Johnson Foods for its whole-leaf natural kratom product. These are not recognized lawful dietary supplements.

Louisiana reviewed this issue and placed kratom in Schedule I. The Ohio Board of Pharmacy conducted an Eight-Factor Analysis and similarly concluded by a unanimous decision that kratom meets criteria for Schedule I classification. Other states reviewing the same pharmacology are reaching similar conclusions.

From a pharmacy perspective, a substance that activates opioid receptors, produces a more potent metabolite in humans, and is considered adulterated under federal law does not fit within the framework of a benign over-the-counter consumer product.

West Virginia has already borne significant costs from underestimating opioid-acting substances. I share this information simply to assist you in evaluating whether continued retail sale aligns with what we know about receptor pharmacology, dependence patterns, and fiscal stewardship.

Thank you for your time and for your service to the people of West Virginia.

Dear Members of the Committee,

My name is Wendy Chamberlain. I am a mother, and I am here because my son, Joseph, is dead.

Joseph did not struggle with illegal drugs. He did not overdose on fentanyl or heroin. He used kratom—Whole leaf natural powder , specifically its primary alkaloids, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine—products that are sold openly, marketed as safe, and completely unregulated.

My son died from mitragynine toxicity. A product he used for energy. He was my only child , business owner and a dad to 3 amazing boys.. He simply sat down one evening to watch tv and fell asleep and never to wake up again.  This changed our lives forever.. He was so full of life and love.. And taken away at 38 yrs old on 8/30/2020.

After his death, I did what grieving parents do when the system fails them—I started asking questions. I learned that kratom products vary wildly in potency, that newer extracts are far stronger than what users believe they’re taking, and that there is no federal oversight, no dosing standards, and no warning labels that reflect real risk.

I now serve as the founder and chair of Kratom Danger Awareness,  nonprofit and I represent thousands of families across this country—parents who have buried children, spouses who have lost partners, and families living through addiction that began with a product sold as “natural” and “safe.”

This is not speculation. This is not anecdote.

In 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration formally accepted our citizen petition requesting the scheduling of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine. That acceptance means the federal government determined there is enough scientific and medical concern to warrant a full review under the Controlled Substances Act.

That matters.

Because it confirms what families like mine have been saying for years: these substances are not harmless supplements. They are psychoactive compounds with real risks—risks that communities like yours are now being forced to manage on the ground.

Local action matters when federal action lags. West Virginia 

has the opportunity to put public health first, to protect families, and to prevent more parents from standing where I stand today.

I am not here because I want to be.

I am here because my son cannot be.

Please act -before more families join ours.

Thank you

Wendy Chamberlain 

1. Randy became addicted to kratom, a substance that is often marketed as “natural” and “safe.” You can buy it at gas stations, smoke shops, and convenience stores, with little warning and no real oversight. Like many others, Randy was led to believe it wasn’t dangerous. That belief cost him his life.Kratom took hold of my son slowly. It changed him in ways that were painful to watch and impossible to stop. This was not a failure of character or willpower — it was addiction. And addiction does not care how kind, strong, or loved someone is. The only substance found in Randy’s system was kratom. Mitragynine toxicity ended his life. Saying that out loud still feels unreal, but it is the truth, and people need to hear it. I share Randy’s story because I don’t want another family to feel this kind of loss. I don’t want another mother to bury her child because something sold openly was treated as harmless when it was not. If speaking up can save even one life, then Randy’s life — and his death — will continue to matter. We miss him every single day. We love him always. And we will keep telling the truth about kratom, for Randy and for everyone who is still at risk.

My name is Tiffany Gale, and as a family child care provider in West Virginia, I strongly support House Bill 4517. This bill updates West Virginia’s existing child care tax credit for employers so that it better supports the development and continued operation of employer-provided or employer-sponsored child care — including facilities that are accessible to employees even if not located directly on the work site.

Families and employers both struggle when quality child care is hard to find. When employers are encouraged through tax policy to invest in child care — whether on site or nearby — it can help expand available seats, improve work-life balance for parents, and strengthen our overall child care infrastructure. For many of the parents I serve, access to reliable, affordable care affects their ability to work and support their families every day.

By maximizing the utility and accessibility of this tax credit, HB 4517 would create stronger incentives for employers to invest in child care options for their workforce, helping fill gaps in care and making it easier for employees to stay connected to the job while their children receive quality early learning. This is especially important in our rural areas where child care options are limited and families often struggle to find stable care.

I respectfully urge you to support HB 4517 and help strengthen child care supports that benefit families, employers, and communities across West Virginia.

Thank you for your consideration.

My name is Chris Gale, and I am a West Virginia resident who cares deeply about strengthening access to quality, affordable child care in our state. I am writing in support of House Bill 4517 — legislation to maximize the utility and accessibility of West Virginia’s child care tax credit for employers by expanding eligibility to employer-sponsored child care facilities accessible to the work site in addition to traditional on-site facilities.

Child care is a critical part of our economic infrastructure. When employers are encouraged through tax incentives to help meet the child care needs of their employees — whether by supporting a nearby facility or creating space that is easily accessible — this helps more working families find care, increases workforce participation, and supports economic stability.

By making the tax credit more useful and accessible, HB 4517 helps align state policy with the real needs of employers and working families. It makes West Virginia a more attractive place to live and work, and it helps ensure that parents aren’t forced to make impossible choices between earning a paycheck and caring for their children.

I respectfully urge you to support HB 4517 and help expand opportunities for child care investment in our communities.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Please support HB 4517 to strengthen West Virginia’s employer child care tax credit so more employers will actually use it to create real child care options for working families.

When my children were young, my household had two full-time working parents but almost no child care choices. In our county there was effectively one option, and the projected cost over the early childhood years was easily over tens of thousands of dollars. With no employer-supported options and no practical local care, we ended up moving an hour away from our jobs just so family could help watch the kids, which put enormous strain on our marriage and ultimately contributed to divorce and family separation.

HB 4517 would make it far more feasible for employers to provide or sponsor child care by increasing the tax credit for capital investments and operating costs and allowing unused credits to be carried forward for up to 20 years. It also makes clear that child care can be ‘employer-sponsored’ and located in places that are reasonably accessible to workers, not just on the employer’s physical premises. If more employers had practical, generous incentives like this in place years ago, families like mine might have had stable care closer to work and avoided the extreme choices we were forced to make.

Please pass HB 4517, along with HB 4067 and HB 5345, so that child care is treated as shared infrastructure between families, providers, and employers—and so other parents don’t lose their jobs, marriages, or relationships with their children because basic child care wasn’t available.

I support this bill!

For businesses like ours, access to reliable child care is not a side issue — it is a workforce issue. One of the biggest challenges we face in securing and retaining employees is the lack of available, affordable child care in our area. We have had potential workers turn down jobs or reduce their hours simply because they could not find dependable care for their children.

Agriculture and farm operations depend on a steady, reliable workforce. During planting, harvest, market season, and special events, we need employees who can consistently show up and work scheduled hours. When child care falls through, parents are forced to miss work, leave early, or decline employment altogether. That impacts productivity, revenue, and ultimately the sustainability of small family farms like ours.

HB 4517 is a practical solution. By expanding the employer child care tax credit to include employer-sponsored child care services — not just on-site facilities — this bill makes it possible for rural and small businesses to participate. Most small farms and businesses cannot build and operate their own child care center, but we could partner with or financially support existing licensed providers if the tax structure makes that investment feasible.

This bill recognizes that child care is essential infrastructure for our workforce. When businesses are empowered to support child care solutions in their communities, employees are more stable, businesses are stronger, and rural economies benefit.

For these reasons, I respectfully and strongly urge passage of HB 4517.

Regarding HB 4517:

Hello!

With the passage of this bill, where would the erosion of our civil liberties stop? What possible good does this database do for the people who are on it? At what point does it move from a voluntary action to a required one and are we going to be secure with the information these people are asked to provide? That doesnt even start to address the idea that these sponsors think its ok to ask another human being to put themselves onto a list to "help law enforcement". How dare you treat these people like this instead of addressing the root causes. Instead of wasting our time and tax payer money on a trash bill like this ,why cant we fund better services for people who need it throughout life and train our police to more quickly identify potential needs? I am not even onto the meat of the bill, I could sit here and write for HOURs on different sections. Yet again, another short term attempt for a broader issue our legislature is unwilling to address for ALL of us

I am writing to express my deep and unequivocal concern regarding the proposed legislation that would establish a registry of individuals with disabilities. While I understand that such measures are often presented under the guise of improving services or coordination, this proposal raises serious ethical, legal, and human rights concerns that cannot be overlooked.

Creating a registry of disabled individuals fundamentally undermines the principles of privacy, dignity, and autonomy that every person deserves. History has shown, repeatedly and painfully, that tracking or labeling people based on disability status can lead to stigmatization, discrimination, and even abuse. The very existence of such a registry could discourage individuals from seeking needed supports or disclosing disabilities for fear of being cataloged or targeted.

Moreover, the bill risks violating federal protections, including those under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, both of which were enacted to ensure equality and prevent systemic discrimination. This registry would move our state backward, reintroducing segregation-era thinking under a new label of “data collection.”

If the true goal is to improve access to services or streamline support, there are safer, more ethical pathways—ones that empower individuals with disabilities rather than surveil them. We should be investing in inclusive policy design, community partnerships, and consent-based data systems that respect individuals’ rights and voices.

I urge legislators to reject this bill outright and instead consult with the disability community to craft solutions that uplift rather than marginalize. Our society must never normalize the idea of tracking people for the simple fact of being disabled.

This bill a glaring civil rights violation. A person with disabilities should not be subject to any non-consensual identification regardless of their “competency,” and allowing law enforcement officers to make potential prejudgments of the people they are interacting with will promote a hostile atmosphere that will inevitably lead to more unnecessary violence. Regardless, this database would be ineffectual as it is based on the expectation that it will be used prior to interacting with individuals. This is unrealistic in any law enforcement scenario.

Law enforcement should be trained on identifying and interacting with people with disabilities on a need-to-know basis. The burden of appropriate communication and procedure should never be placed on ANY civilian, let alone civilians within a population that often have less legal autonomy than their non-disabled counterparts. Again, this violates a disabled person’s constitutional right to privacy, as well as the HIPAA protections they are afforded. Even with the “optional” language used in this bill, there truly is no option for the person actually being loaded onto this database. This bill is out of touch, lazy, and completely negligent to the issue at hand. I am begging the West Virginia Legislature, for once, to center people with disabilities in your decision making rather than using them as collateral.

As the Chief Human Resources Officer for one of West Virginia’s six Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics (CCBHCs), I can speak directly to the real and ongoing workforce challenges created by the current WV CARES process.

West Virginia rightly wants to encourage workforce participation while also protecting vulnerable populations. WV CARES can support both goals; however, the current timelines create significant barriers for both employers and qualified candidates. With up to 30 days for a candidate to submit a complete packet and up to 60 days for WV CARES to render a decision, the total process can take as long as 90 days. In today’s workforce environment, many candidates—and employers—simply cannot wait that long. As a result, we lose otherwise qualified staff before they ever have the opportunity to serve our communities.

Additionally, employers are often unable to absorb the financial burden of supervising provisional employees during this extended review period. Requiring two staff to perform the work of one—solely to meet supervision requirements—adds substantial cost and strain to already limited behavioral health resources. Reducing review timelines would immediately decrease supervision costs and prevent candidates from being lost due to delays outside of their control.

The portability provision included in this bill is one of its most promising and impactful components. Allowing WV CARES eligibility to be tied to the individual rather than the worksite would significantly reduce application time, administrative burden, and duplication of effort—benefiting providers, the state, and workers alike.

Equally important is the provision that would prevent long-standing employees from having to take a leave of absence or return to supervision while awaiting renewal variances related to historical charges. For many dedicated staff, this process forces them to repeatedly relive embarrassment and trauma every five years simply to continue serving in roles they have faithfully held for years. These are professionals who work tirelessly for West Virginians with the greatest needs, and this provision recognizes both their service and their dignity.

House Bill 4599 represents a meaningful opportunity to modernize WV CARES in a way that protects clients, supports the workforce, and strengthens access to behavioral health services across our state.

• Cancer caused 66 percent of the career firefighter line-of-duty deaths from 2002 to 2019, according to data from the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF).

• Firefighters have a 9 percent higher risk of being diagnosed with cancer and a 14 percent higher risk of dying from cancer than the general U.S. population, according to research by the CDC/National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety (NIOSH).

• Firefighters are two times as likely to contract mesothelioma, two times as likely to contract testicular cancer, 1.5x as likely to contract multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and are at an increased and elevated risk for numerous other specific cancers. (NIOSH)

I strongly support HB 4627, which provides preventive cancer screening for professional firefighters in accordance with International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) guidelines.

Firefighters are exposed throughout their careers to known carcinogens, and medical research consistently shows significantly higher cancer rates among firefighters than in the general population. The IAFF clearly demonstrates that early cancer detection saves lives and reduces long-term healthcare costs. Cancers identified at early stages require less invasive treatment, have higher survival rates, and avoid the substantial costs associated with advanced disease, extended disability, and long-term care.

Preventive screening is fiscally responsible. Studies show that investing in evidence-based cancer screening reduces overall healthcare spending by preventing late-stage diagnoses, lost work time, and workers’ compensation claims. Removing copays and deductibles ensures firefighters can access these screenings before symptoms appear, when treatment is most effective and least costly.

HB 4627 reflects nationally recognized best practices and appropriately treats cancer screening as an occupational health necessity for firefighters. I respectfully urge the Legislature to pass this bill.

I am a firefighter in Huntington WV and a member of IAFF Local 289.

Firefighters face significantly higher cancer risks due to repeated exposure to carcinogens in smoke, building materials, and toxic runoff. Routine cancer screening programs are a proven, proactive measure that save lives through early detection. From a financial standpoint, early diagnosis also results in substantial cost savings for insurance providers and state health systems by avoiding the far greater expenses associated with late-stage cancer treatment, long-term disability, and loss of workforce productivity. Investing in comprehensive cancer screening for firefighters is not only a moral obligation to those who risk their lives to protect our communities, but a fiscally responsible strategy that reduces long-term healthcare costs while preserving experienced, healthy first responders.

I am a West Virginian, and I am proud of my state and our values of independence, family, and community. I oppose this bill because it does not help anyone. It expands government power into private healthcare decisions, doing so with criminal penalties and lawsuits rather than real, tangible support.

This is government overreach, plain and simple. It will not solve the problems families are actually facing in West Virginia, such as access to health care led by health professionals (not legislators), transportation, childcare, and the cost of living. It will only add fear, confusion, and risk by pushing people into silence and delaying care.

West Virginians deserve practical solutions that strengthen families, not laws that punish people and invite more government control over personal medical decisions. I urge you to reject this bill.

HB 4674 defines "abortifacient" so broadly it could ensnare common contraceptives that prevent implantation, chilling access to basic reproductive health tools. It violates women's bodily autonomy and privacy rights enshrined in our state constitution and wastes taxpayer resources on intrusive enforcement. Those funds are much better spent on maternal health, prenatal care, or family support programs our rural communities desperately need. Private civil bounties of $10,000 per case will only fuel vigilante lawsuits, not protect anyone.

West Virginia should expand health care access and support women making deeply personal decisions with their doctors—not police them with felonies and penalties. Prioritize actual public health over ideological overreach and scrap this bill.

• Please support House bill 4715. Without going into the details of explaining the bill, my primary goal is to keep my children in West Virginia. My son is a PA. My daughter-in-law is a doctor of medicine, both practicing in West Virginia.  We are seeing more opportunities opening up in other states, eliminating  the administrative burdens, and want the same opportunity here in the mountain state.   Amending the bill to mandate minimum number of  hours of patient care before eliminating the administrative burden of signing a contract with an Md is recommended and acceptable. I see a nurse practitioner as my primary care and a physician assistant for my specialty doctors and know first hand of their abilities. I would like the ability to choose who I see for medical visits and alleviate the shortage of care providers in southern West Virginia where I live. This bill answers those needs.  Many thanks to the sponsors of this much needed legislation. Respectfully

• Access be limited to minimum necessary
• Use be restricted to clearly defined purposes
• Audit logs, safeguards, and accountability for misuse

• Explicit prohibitions on employment or retaliatory use
• Individual rights to know when their data is accessed
• Statutory penalties for misuse or re-disclosure

1. It expands access to a confidential health database without the privacy, audit, and misuse protections required to ensure HIPAA-compliant use.
2. It exacerbates existing harm to medical cannabis patients and people in recovery by enabling broader surveillance in a state that already relies on scientifically contested nanogram thresholds.

• Bodily autonomy and the right to refuse medical treatment
• Due process protections
• Equal protection, by disproportionately impacting already marginalized populations

• Guarantee reduced waitlists or improved access statewide
• Require service provision in rural or underserved counties
• Tie increased payments to measurable outcomes or equity standards
• Address the broader social and economic conditions impacting families raising children with disabilities

Good afternoon. My name is Noel and I am a resident of Berkeley County, West Virginia. I am here to express my strong support for House Bill 4947.

HB 4947 protects the fundamental right of West Virginians to live according to their sincerely held religious beliefs without being forced to choose between faith, education, or employment. Religious freedom is a cornerstone of both the United States Constitution and the West Virginia Constitution, and this bill reinforces that principle in a fair and reasonable way.

Children’s education should never be hindered or interrupted because they are unable to receive a vaccine due to prior injuries, adverse reactions, or their parents’ sincerely held religious beliefs. Children should not be punished for circumstances beyond their control. HB 4947 ensures that families are not forced out of schools, childcare settings, or educational environments simply for exercising medical caution or religious conviction.

This bill strikes an appropriate balance by preserving public health protections while respecting individual conscience and parental rights. It provides clarity, consistency, and protection against discrimination, ensuring that West Virginia families and workers are treated with dignity and fairness.

I respectfully urge House Delegates to vote in favor of HB 4947 and protect religious liberty, parental rights, and uninterrupted access to education for all West Virginians. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

1. Firefighters are 102% more likely to develop testicular cancer than the general population.*
2. Firefighters are 53% more likely to develop multiple myeloma than the general population. *
3. Firefighters are 62% more likely to develop cancer of the oesophagus than the general population.**
4. Firefighters are 21% more likely to develop intestinal cancer than the general population.**
5. Firefighters are 26% more likely to develop breast cancer than the general population**

• Family mapping and indirect surveillance
• Error-prone genetic matching that can implicate innocent relatives
• Future expansion of government use without renewed consent
• Permanent tracking potential that cannot be “opted out of”

• DNA was collected for health purposes
• Stored long-term without meaningful consent
• Later accessed or shared for secondary uses
• Applied to individuals before any crime could possibly exist

• Genetic data collected for non-law-enforcement purposes
• Retained and stored without strict deletion limits
• Later accessed by government actors
• Potentially used to investigate crimes that predate the individual

• Government access
• Law-enforcement searches
• Permanent inclusion in investigative databases

• Warrantless genetic surveillance
• Government creation of population-wide identity files
• Suspicionless searches using biometric data
• Ethical abuses that disproportionately affect future generations

• Require warrant-only access for all government use
• Prohibit bulk or suspicionless collection
• Ban secondary and pre-birth investigative use
• Impose strict retention and deletion limits
• Reject the normalization of genetic identity files

1. No public-health evidence supports restricting medical services based on nearby health care facilities. Health systems routinely colocate complementary services to improve continuity of care. Proximity alone is not a recognized risk factor for patient harm, diversion, or crime when facilities are properly licensed and regulated.
2. Local approval requirements function as indirect barriers to care. Allowing county commissions or municipalities to approve or deny medical facilities substitutes political judgment for medical and regulatory standards. This creates inconsistent access across counties and disproportionately affects rural and low-income patients.
3. The bill recreates de facto Certificate-of-Need style barriers. Even where formal CON laws have been reduced, HB 5035 imposes location and approval hurdles that restrict market entry, reduce competition, and limit patient choice—outcomes historically associated with higher costs and reduced access.
4. Restrictions conflict with accepted principles of addiction treatment. Separating MAT services from other health care providers disrupts integrated care, increases transportation burdens, and is associated with higher missed-appointment and relapse risk.
5. Public safety goals can be achieved through enforcement, not access denial. Existing licensure, inspection, and enforcement mechanisms already address improper practices. Limiting lawful facilities does not address misconduct; it only reduces availability of legitimate care.

• Measles requires ~95% vaccination coverage to prevent outbreaks (CDC).
• During recent U.S. measles outbreaks, the majority of cases occurred in unvaccinated or under-vaccinated populations, often linked to schools or universities.
• Mumps outbreaks on college campuses have occurred repeatedly in states that weakened vaccination compliance.

• 126 Primary Care Health Professional Shortage Areas (HPSAs)
• ~793,000 West Virginians live in designated primary-care shortage areas
• Only ~38% of primary-care need is currently met
• 43% of rural hospitals operate at negative margins

• emergency rooms,
• rural hospitals,
• immunocompromised communities,
• elderly populations,
• and childcare and K-12 school systems.

• offer tuition credits,
• provide housing priority,
• or use public-health promotion strategies that are widely accepted and legal in other states.

• outbreaks become foreseeable,
• harm becomes preventable,
• and liability exposure increases.

• class cancellations,
• housing disruptions,
• athletic shutdowns,
• and litigation from students or staff harmed during outbreaks they were legally barred from preventing.

• medical exemptions,
• informed consent,
• and individualized accommodation.

• one of the oldest populations in the country,
• persistent healthcare shortages,
• and fragile rural hospital systems.

• Men’s reproductive responsibility should be reduced primarily to sterilization,
• Gender equality is achieved by isolating procedures rather than addressing systemic bias,
• Biological sex determines appropriate roles or decisions in family planning.

• Address reproductive healthcare access across all genders, not isolate one procedure,
• Invest in education, counseling, and prevention, not only surgical outcomes,
• Avoid reinforcing gender stereotypes that already contribute to unequal treatment in workplaces, healthcare settings, and the legal system.

• saturation in already over-burdened neighborhoods,
• “LLC rebranding” to avoid scrutiny,
• patient brokering / incentive-driven referrals, and
• Medicaid/payer waste that ultimately hits taxpayers.

• requires registration of recovery residences (§16-59-4), and
• prohibits state entities (including WVDCR, parole board, probation offices, etc.) from referring parolees/probationers/patients to a recovery residence unless it holds a valid certificate of compliance (§16-59-3(a)), and
• restricts state-treasury and state-benefit funding to uncertified residences (§16-59-3(b)-(c)).  

• mandatory public reporting of ownership, staffing ratios, capacity, and outcomes;
• coordination requirements with local EMS/public safety;
• distance/compatibility standards tied to local zoning and safety planning (without discrimination);
• strict anti-fraud and anti-brokering enforcement aligned with WV’s patient-brokering prohibitions (see §16-62-2 in SB 475’s enacted framework).  

• does not require evidence-based treatment,
• does not track patient outcomes,
• does not ensure access to medication-assisted treatment,
• does not protect medically necessary patient transfers.

• inter-facility transfers,
• cross-county transfers,
• transfers due to medication incompatibility,
• transfers required for co-occurring medical or psychiatric conditions.

• Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §12132, which requires public programs and services to provide reasonable accommodations and avoid discriminatory exclusion based on disability, including substance-use disorder.
• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §794, which prohibits denial of benefits or services under federally funded programs due to disability.
• EMTALA, 42 U.S.C. §1395dd, which establishes obligations related to stabilization and appropriate transfers when medical necessity requires it.

• filled beds are treated as success,
• patient outcomes are irrelevant,
• relapse, deterioration, or forced program retention go unmeasured.

• Article III, §10 of the West Virginia Constitution (due process), and
• Article III, §17 (equal protection),

• Employment discipline or termination
• Housing instability
• Conflicts with probation, parole, or recovery housing
• Public stigma and selective enforcement

• Lawful certification
• Off-duty use
• No observable impairment

• Does not establish current impairment
• Can persist for days or weeks after lawful use
• Does not correlate reliably with cognitive or motor function

• Clear impairment-based standards
• Protection from nanogram-only punishment
• Clarification of patient rights in employment and public settings

• Their medication and their livelihood
• Their treatment and their housing
• Their health and their legal safety

I fully support 5260. As a medical card holder having the option for edibles would allow myself and other that do not like vaping or oils a better option. Not to mention the just keeping WV money in WV rather than individuals traveling to border states to buy edibles.

As a veteran, I strongly support House Bill 5260 and the inclusion of edible forms of medical cannabis in West Virginia’s medical program. Many veterans live with chronic pain, PTSD, anxiety, sleep disorders, and service-related injuries that make daily life difficult. Edibles provide a non-smokable, discreet, and longer-lasting option that can be especially helpful for managing symptoms overnight or when other forms are not appropriate.

I appreciate that this bill includes strict safeguards such as limits on THC per serving, clear labeling, child-resistant packaging, and oversight by the state. These regulations ensure that edibles remain a responsible medical option and not a risk to public safety.

Veterans should have access to the full range of medically appropriate cannabis products so we can choose what works best for our individual conditions. Allowing regulated edibles gives veterans another tool to reduce reliance on opioids and other medications that often come with serious side effects.

Please support House Bill 5260 and continue improving access to safe, effective medical cannabis options for West Virginia’s veterans.

As a nurse, I support House Bill 5260 and the inclusion of edible forms of medical cannabis in West Virginia’s medical cannabis program. In my clinical experience, patients have diverse medical needs and tolerances, and no single form of medication works for everyone. Edibles offer a non-inhaled option that can be more appropriate for patients with respiratory conditions, chronic pain, neurological disorders, or difficulty swallowing.

I appreciate that House Bill 5260 establishes clear safety measures, including limits on THC per serving, standardized labeling, child-resistant packaging, and state oversight of products. These safeguards align with responsible medication practices and help ensure patients receive consistent, predictable dosing.

From a healthcare standpoint, expanding access to regulated edible options allows providers and patients to make individualized treatment decisions and may help reduce reliance on higher-risk medications such as opioids or sedatives. This bill represents a patient-centered, safety-focused improvement to West Virginia’s medical cannabis program.

I encourage lawmakers to support House Bill 5260 in the interest of patient safety, access, and evidence-based care.

The state of WV was built on the backs of coal miners. As the mines close, the workers are still affected. They have immense chronic pain, and lung conditions that prevent them from consuming the cannabis plant. Not only for pain relief, but for ptsd management. Please allow the production of Edibles in this state, so that we may further help people who have sacrificed their bodies, for our state to grow. Another side of the coin, think about all of the cancer patients that can not consume cannabis easily. These patients have lung cancer, or throat cancer. If they were able to add an edible to their tea, or be able to drink a thc drink. The relief they could feel for a time, would be wonderful for them. It may give them enough encouragement to keep fighting these diseases. My grandma could have used it, she fought for 8 years with various cancers. She didn’t get to see the wonders of cannabis, because she died in 2008, after a doctor told her she was going to die and there was no saving her. It was a harsh reality, and she had no relief, just pills. These pills/chemo through all 8 years ate her alive, she was skin and bones, puking every night. I was in middle school and was with her every night for the last 4 years of her life. She was in agony, and all I could do was rub her back and lay with her on the couch, while she moaned and cried in pain. My grandma deserved relief from her daily torture, but no, the state waited too long to give her a more natural remedy; she died in agony. No one deserves that, no one should be forced to swallow 30 pills a day, just to become addict and overdose. You don’t overdose on cannabis, you consume it, and you eat, that’s a game changer for cancer patients who have lost their appetite. Edibles aren’t for kids or teens just trying to get high, they’re for your grandma with arthritis, your grandpa who just had a hip replacement, your uncle who has black lung from the coal mines, your dad who has a bad back from working construction, and your mom who nearly broke her back caring for you and your constituents.

I support HB5 260 Because medical edibles provide a safe regulated option For patients who cannot consume cannabis And deserved medically, appropriate alternatives.

Edibles would be a great way for me to medicate and get relief from the medical marijuana Industry

Would love to see the dispensary have edibles

I want gummy

I support this bill!!

This would be an amazing help for the people who have asthma or black lung and provide a healthier choice over vaping.

In a state that has one of the highest issues with lung problems you would think giving a non inhalant option wouldn’t need convincing. The full plant experience in edible forms is the most natural for pain relief when it comes to cannabis. Getting both the THC and terpenes to give you the full effect in your Endocannabinoid system is so beneficial for most patients. I have personally witness people go from walking with a cane to walking unassisted because of the ingestion forms. Let’s not keep being last in everything, help people find natural unaddictive ways to find relief.

• Allowing edibles in the state is a much healthier option for those that prefer not to smoke or vape. It would be a great benefit for a lot of cannabis users in the state.

I would love to have edibles

I would like to see medical marijuana edibles available in the state.

That would be great for people who can't vape

I'm a cancer patient and we would love to have the option of edibles. Some of us can't handle smoking the vape. Or the extracts. And the pills aren't strong enough. So edibles would be our only non smoking option.

1. Please pass this we need the gummies they help with so many different things and right now people are getting them illegally which can be so un safe so please allow safe medication in our government watched dispensary thank you

This is something that will help a lot of people, please pass a law to help fellow West Virginia's

I am proud to support this petition to legalize edible medical marijuana in West Virginia. Patients deserve safe, regulated options for managing chronic pain, PTSD, epilepsy, cancer-related symptoms, and other serious medical conditions. Not everyone can or wants to smoke or vape, and edible forms provide a longer-lasting, smoke-free alternative that can be easier on the lungs and more discreet.

Legalizing edibles would expand access for patients who are already legally approved for medical cannabis but need alternative delivery methods that better fit their health needs. With proper regulation, labeling, and dosing standards, edible medical marijuana can be provided safely and responsibly.

West Virginia families deserve compassionate healthcare options. This is about improving quality of life, respecting doctor–patient decisions, and giving patients access to the full range of medical treatments available in many other states. I urge lawmakers to support this important step forward.

You can go to the store and buy all the alcohol your heart desires but I can't eat Marijuana for it's medicinal properties This blows my mind along with tons of other Americans/West Virginians catch our state up with everybody else we're always the last to do something that's beneficial for our state. BAN ALCOHOL SAVE MILLIONS OF LIVES!!!

1. Please pass the hb5260
2. Edabile is the best way for me to take my medication
3. Smoking is very hard on my breathing abilities
4. I need this and am certainly not the only one.

1. Please pass the hb5260 for my wife and others like her in need of an easier way to take the medicine she needs

Allow edibles! Smoking sucks!

1. We would really like this bill to pass . Having edibles would really help le

Yes edibles should be allowed as well as pre rolls!

We need to pass this bill it would be convenient to the patient who are unable to do it themselves

Please consider the edible option for medical marijuana so that patient’s can reap the benefits of their pain management, without having to inhale smoke. Thank you.

Medical cannabis is a safe way to help those in pain cannabis gummies are safe

I support the gummies.

Most people I know that only use edible thc are some older folks but, I’m sure a few people don’t smoke do to personal reasons and it would be nice to have more options. Personally I don’t use it much because a 10mg dose isn’t enough for anyone with a tolerance and I’d rather eat a gummy that says 100mg than eating a drop of rso or another form of thc concentrate and hoping it’s the right dose for myself. It would also be cool to make snacks with a pretty small dose, small enough to keep it a fair price so people can just buy them in larger quantities if they don’t like the taste. I’d rather do that than take a capsule anyway. Personally really hope we get edibles might as well make it recreational while you’re at it if we’re being honest, and I promise I’ll still renew the medcard even if it does get recreational.

1. Enhance Patient Accessibility and Comfort Many patients suffer from respiratory conditions, compromised immune systems, or other medical issues that make inhalation unsuitable. Edibles provide a smoke-free and vapor-free option that aligns with broader public health objectives.
2. Provide Longer-Lasting Symptom Relief Edible cannabis products offer extended therapeutic effects compared to inhaled forms, which may benefit patients managing chronic pain, neurological disorders, cancer-related symptoms, and other qualifying conditions.
3. Promote Safe and Regulated Access Authorizing edibles within the state’s regulated dispensary system ensures product safety, standardized dosing, laboratory testing, child-resistant packaging, and clear labeling requirements. Regulation is preferable to forcing patients to seek alternatives outside the legal framework.
4. Align West Virginia with Other Medical Cannabis States A majority of medical cannabis programs nationwide permit edible products under strict regulatory oversight. Updating West Virginia’s policy would maintain consistency with evolving medical standards and patient-centered care practices.

• Strict THC concentration limits per serving and per package
• Mandatory child-resistant and tamper-evident packaging
• Clear labeling regarding dosage, delayed onset effects, and safety warnings
• Restrictions on marketing that could appeal to minors

My name is Tiffany Gale, and I am a licensed family child care provider in West Virginia. I strongly support House Bill 5345, which would shift child care subsidy payments to be based on monthly enrollment rather than daily attendance.

As a small business owner and early childhood professional, I invest my time, money, and heart into creating a safe, nurturing, and educational environment for children. Like any small business, I have fixed costs — food, supplies, utilities, insurance, and licensing requirements — that do not change when a child is absent. I still hold that child’s space and plan staffing based on enrollment.

The current attendance-based system creates unpredictable income for providers. Children get sick, families have emergencies, and weather or transportation issues happen. When that occurs, providers lose revenue even though we are still operating and reserving a spot for that child. This makes it very difficult to maintain stable budgets, keep quality materials in our programs, and remain financially sustainable.

Basing subsidy payments on enrollment would:

• Provide stability for small family child care businesses

• Help providers stay open and serve their communities

• Encourage more providers to enter the field

• Increase child care availability for working families

Reliable child care is essential for West Virginia’s workforce and economy. When child care is stable, parents can work and children receive consistent, quality care.

HB 5345 is a practical, common-sense step toward strengthening child care in our state. I respectfully urge you to support this bill for the benefit of providers, families, and children across West Virginia.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

My name is Chris Gale, and I am a West Virginia resident and strong supporter of quality child care in our state. I am writing to express my support for House Bill 5345, which would base child care subsidy payments on enrollment rather than daily attendance.

Families depend on stable, reliable child care so they can go to work and provide for their children. When child care programs struggle financially due to inconsistent subsidy payments, it affects availability for everyone. If providers cannot count on steady funding, many are forced to reduce enrollment or close altogether, making it even harder for working families to find care.

Paying based on enrollment simply reflects how child care actually works. Providers hold a space for a child whether that child is present that day or not. Just like a school or any other service, the spot is reserved and staffed. It makes sense for the payment structure to match that reality.

Strong child care supports working families, local businesses, and the broader economy. Policies that help stabilize child care programs are investments in West Virginia’s future workforce and in our children’s development.

I respectfully ask you to support HB 5345 and help strengthen the child care system for families and providers across our state.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

This is so vital to help childcare centers stay open and be able to budget to provide high quality services.

As a full-time working parent in a two-parent household where both adults worked full time, child care was a nightmare. In the county where we lived, there was only one real option, and the projected cost for both of our children, before they would have aged out, was well over tens of thousands of dollars. The lack of options and the financial pressure forced us to move an hour away from our jobs just so family could help watch the kids, which put enormous strain on our marriage and ultimately contributed to our divorce and family separation.

These bills address two sides of the same crisis. HB 4067 helps child care workers afford care for their own children based on their hours worked, which will help retain staff and keep centers open for families like mine. HB 5345 would require subsidy payments to be based on enrollment rather than daily attendance, giving providers predictable income instead of penalizing them when children are absent due to illness or family schedules. Without that stability, centers close or stop taking subsidized children, and families in rural counties can be left with no realistic options at all.

West Virginia already knows that enrollment-based payments and stronger child care support are key solutions to our workforce and family stability problems. Passing HB 4067 and HB 5345 would be a concrete step toward making sure other families do not have to make the kinds of impossible choices that mine did just to keep working and keep their children safe.”

• WV has 231 fewer childcare programs today than in February 2024.
• Programs are closing even with enrollment-based payments because margins are already razor thin.
• Reverting to attendance-based payments would cause hundreds more closures.

• Parents lose childcare and leave the workforce.
• Businesses lose employees and productivity.
• Communities lose economic growth opportunities.

• Daily attendance records required
• Regular licensing inspections
• Random audits required twice a year (monthly since September) for centers and monthly for other providers
• Documentation verification requirements
• Payment recovery when records are inaccurate

• Keep classrooms open
• Maintain staff
• Serve working families

• Parents cannot work.
• Employers cannot grow.
• West Virginia cannot compete economically.

This is so important for the children and families that I serve as a center director. We need this funding to keep our quality programs!

I am both a mother and an executive director with 14 employees. Without good childcare, my employees have difficulty working full time. I support any funding to help with childcare which I consider an important part of our infrastructure.

• Please vote yes on HB 5345

As a former child care provider, I strongly urge support of West Virginia House Bill 5345.

I made the difficult decision to stop providing child care because the pay was inconsistent and unpredictable. Under the current system, providers are only reimbursed based on daily attendance. If a child missed days due to illness, vacation, medical appointments, weather, or other unavoidable reasons, my pay was reduced. Yet my expenses — staffing, food, utilities, supplies, insurance, and maintaining a safe learning environment — did not decrease when a child was absent.

This system places the financial burden on providers for circumstances completely outside of our control. No worker should have to experience unpredictable income because someone else is sick or on vacation. That level of income instability is not sustainable and drives qualified, caring professionals out of the child care field.

HB 5345 would correct this by basing subsidy payments on monthly enrollment rather than daily attendance. This commonsense change would provide stability for providers, encourage more individuals to remain in or return to the profession, and strengthen West Virginia’s child care system for working families.

Reliable child care is essential for our workforce and our economy. If we want providers to stay in business and families to have dependable care options, we must create a payment structure that reflects how child care actually operates.

For these reasons, I respectfully and strongly urge the Legislature to pass HB 5345.

I feel like this is a very important bill that needs passed. The childcare systems should be put in the front of the line just like school. They're the backbone for our working families and children. The childcare system needs more funding and should get paid for not just  the 1 or 2 days a week that some only show up for  they should get paid based on enrollment to ensure funds are being met for the centers.

I am writing in support of HB 5345, bipartisan legislation requiring enrollment-based childcare subsidy payments.

Childcare providers operate with fixed costs that do not change hour by hour. Staffing ratios must be maintained, employees must be paid, and facilities must remain open and operational whether a child attends two hours or a full day. The current attendance-based reimbursement structure relies on an outdated hourly conversion model that does not reflect the true cost of delivering care.

Enrollment-based payments provide stability and predictability, allowing providers to budget responsibly, retain qualified staff, and continue serving working families. Codifying this structure in state law also protects providers and families in the event federal policy changes in the future.

A sustainable childcare system is essential to supporting West Virginia’s workforce and economic growth. HB 5345 is a practical and necessary step toward strengthening childcare access and provider stability across our state.

My name is Karleigh Hale, and I serve as Vice President of Youth Development for the YMCA of Kanawha Valley, overseeing early learning, Pre-K, and school-age programs serving working families in our community.

I strongly support HB 5345, which would require child care subsidy payments to be based on monthly enrollment rather than daily attendance.

Child care programs operate with fixed costs. Staffing ratios must be maintained regardless of whether a child attends two hours, a full day, or is absent due to illness or other unforeseen circumstances. Employees must be paid. Facilities must remain open and operational. These costs do not fluctuate based on daily attendance.

Private-pay families are charged based on enrollment, not attendance. When a child is enrolled, that space is reserved and staffed accordingly. Subsidy reimbursement should follow the same enrollment-based structure to ensure fairness, equity, and operational consistency across all families.

Attendance-based reimbursement models create financial instability and unpredictability for providers. They make responsible budgeting nearly impossible and undermine our ability to retain qualified staff and maintain consistent, high-quality care for children across West Virginia.

Enrollment-based reimbursement provides stability for providers, protects access for families, and strengthens the overall sustainability of West Virginia’s child care system.

A sustainable child care system is essential to supporting West Virginia’s workforce and economic growth. HB 5345 is a practical and necessary step toward strengthening child care access and provider stability across our state.

I am writing in support of HB 5345, bipartisan legislation requiring enrollment-based childcare subsidy payments.

Childcare providers operate with fixed costs that do not change hour by hour. Staffing ratios must be maintained, employees must be paid, and facilities must remain open and operational whether a child attends two hours or a full day. The current attendance-based reimbursement structure relies on an outdated hourly conversion model that does not reflect the true cost of delivering care.

Enrollment-based payments provide stability and predictability, allowing providers to budget responsibly, retain qualified staff, and continue serving working families. Codifying this structure in state law also protects providers and families in the event federal policy changes in the future.

A sustainable childcare system is essential to supporting West Virginia’s workforce and economic growth. HB 5345 is a practical and necessary step toward strengthening childcare access and provider stability across our state.

This would be amazing for staff. We could hire more mothers and then get reliable staff due to their childcare needs being met.

I am writing in support of HB 5345. This bill would provide more predictable payments to childcare providers, help keep childcare programs financially stable, and protect enrollment-based payments in state law in case federal policies change in the future.

I am writing in strong support of HB 5345, bipartisan legislation requiring enrollment-based childcare subsidy payments.

In my role in the healthcare and Mediciad sector, I work closely with members, communities, and families every day. I see firsthand that childcare is not a “nice-to-have”—it is foundational to employment stability and economic mobility. Time and time again, families identify the same barrier to entering or staying in the workforce: they cannot work if they cannot secure reliable childcare.

HB 5345 addresses a key structural problem that is undermining childcare access across West Virginia. Childcare providers operate with fixed costs that do not change hour by hour. Staffing ratios must be met, staff must be paid, and facilities must remain open and compliant—regardless of whether a child attends for part of the day or is absent. The current attendance-based reimbursement approach relies on an outdated hourly conversion model that does not reflect the true cost of delivering care, creating instability for providers and uncertainty for families.

Enrollment-based payments provide the stability and predictability providers need to budget responsibly, retain qualified staff, and keep classrooms open. When providers can sustain operations, families have more consistent access to care—supporting parents and caregivers in maintaining employment, pursuing education, and meeting basic needs.

Codifying this structure in state law is also a prudent step to protect providers and families in the event federal policy shifts in the future. A sustainable childcare system is essential to supporting West Virginia’s workforce and economic growth.

HB 5345 is a practical, necessary step toward strengthening childcare access and provider stability across our state. I urge lawmakers to vote YES on HB 5345.

• W. Va. Code § 27-5-7(c) presently requires evaluation of dangerousness by a mental hygiene commissioner before involuntary treatment orders; HB 5370 removes this procedural safeguard by permitting a mandatory hold prior to any formal evaluation.
• Involuntary confinement absent individualized findings of imminent risk of harm raises serious due-process concerns analogous to standards enunciated in Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418 (1979), requiring clear and convincing evidence before civil commitment.

• There is no requirement that an impartial decision-maker determine that the individual poses a present danger to self or others before confinement.
• Neither W. Va. Code § 27-5-8 (emergency admission criteria) nor subsequent sections provide a judicial review mechanism prior to or during the mandatory hold.

• W. Va. Code §§ 27-5-1 et seq. establish explicit criteria for involuntary admission — including “danger to self or others” — which are absent from the proposed 24-hour hold.
• Rewriting these standards through emergency holds without clearly defined thresholds undermines the legislative framework and creates parallel detention authority not contemplated by existing law.

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and SAMHSA explicitly recognize that stigma is a barrier to treatment and recovery. When law itself treats individuals with SUD as categorically dangerous, it reinforces prejudicial attitudes that deter help-seeking.
• Empirical studies show that involuntary treatment models are less effective than voluntary, evidence-based models in achieving long-term recovery outcomes.

• Individuals at risk or in need of care may avoid disclosing symptoms or risk factors to professionals for fear of involuntary confinement.
• This undermines the success of preventative and collaborative interventions embodied in West Virginia’s broader behavioral health policies.

1. Reject HB 5370 in its current form; OR
2. Amend it to include:
   • Objective statutory criteria requiring clear evidence of imminent danger before hold is authorized;
   • Prompt judicial review prior to or within 24 hours of detention;
   • Explicit protections for voluntary care pathways;
   • Language that avoids presuming dangerousness solely based on health conditions.

Dear Members of the West Virginia House Health & Human Resources Committee,

As the CEO of the Southern Association of Wholesale Distributors, I unequivocally support House Bill 5437,

Creating E-cigarette and E-cigarette Liquid Directory, currently under consideration. This legislation

represents a vital step towards ensuring the safety and integrity of the vapor product industry, and we

believe it is imperative for the well-being of our communities.

The Southern is an over 100-year-old association whose members face common challenges in the

southeast. Many members of the SAWD are family-owned multigenerational businesses that have served

their communities for decades.

By establishing a centralized database of vapor products sold in West Virginia, this legislation will enable

authorities to identify and track bad actors who seek to profit from the sale of illegal and potentially

harmful products. The state of West Virginia must hold retailers and vape shops accountable and ensure

they are selling legal, regulated products.

The supply of illegal Chinese-flavored disposable vapes flooding the market poses a significant threat to

public health and safety. These unregulated products often contain undisclosed ingredients and target our

youth with their enticing flavors and colorful packaging. House Bill 5437 will empower law enforcement

agencies to identify and remove these illegal products from circulation, protecting consumers from

potential harm.

House Bill 5437 represents a critical opportunity to address the pressing public health concerns associated

with youth vaping and the proliferation of illegal vaping products. As responsible stakeholders in the vapor

product industry, the Southern Association of Wholesale Distributors urges policymakers to prioritize the

passage and implementation of this important legislation. Together, we can protect our communities and

safeguard the health and well-being of our citizens.

Sincerely,

VJ Mayor, CAE

vjmayor@asginfo.net

CEO, Southern Association of Wholesale Distributors  

• Congenital adrenal hyperplasia
• Androgen insensitivity syndrome
• Gonadal dysgenesis

• Hormone therapy
• Endocrine stabilization
• Corrective or reconstructive genital surgery
• Ongoing metabolic monitoring

• Physician shortages
• Limited specialty care access
• Long travel distances for endocrinology and surgical services

• 14th Amendment – Equal Protection Clause
• 14th Amendment – Due Process Clause
• Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. §18116) prohibiting discrimination in federally funded healthcare programs

• Referral requirements
• Continuity of care
• Non-abandonment protections
• Emergency stabilization clarity beyond federal minimums

• Beneficence (acting in the patient’s best interest)
• Nonmaleficence (do no harm)
• Justice (fair access to care)
• Respect for patient autonomy

• Documentation standards
• Notice requirements
• Timely referral
• Assurance that another provider is reasonably accessible

• Equal protection under the law
• Access to medically necessary treatment
• The state’s obligation to ensure nondiscriminatory healthcare access

I am a resident of Lincoln County, WV, and I support HB 5563. Timely transplant referrals and accountability save lives. Please advance this bill.

I am a resident of Kanawha County, West Virginia, and I support HB 5563. Timely transplant referrals and accountability save lives. Please advance this bill.

• Improves Access — FPA creates greater access to care, especially in underserved urban and rural areas. States with FPA are more likely to have NPs working in rural and underserved areas and NP practices than states with more restrictive licensure models.
• Streamlines Care and Makes Care Delivery More Efficient — FPA provides patients with full and direct access to NPs' services at the point of care. FPA removes delays in care that are created when dated regulations require an NP be part of an unnecessary regulatory-mandated contract with a physician as a condition of practicing their profession.
• Decreases Costs — FPA avoids duplication of services and billing costs associated with outdated physician oversight of NP practice. FPA reduces unnecessary repetition of orders, office visits and care services.
• Protects Patient Choice — FPA allows patients to see the health care provider of their choice. FPA removes anti-competitive licensing restrictions that interfere with patient-centered health care

In an emergency, patients can’t choose an ambulance service from a provider directory when calling 911.

Similarly, EMS must provide care without knowing the patient’s insurance status.

Nearly 60% of ambulance transports are out-of-network, according to data from Fair Health.

EMS agencies face significant challenges due to insurers reimbursing out-of-network ambulance services at rates that are unreasonably low, directly paying patients, or excessively delaying payments.

These practices are used to coerce EMS providers into unfavorable contracts jeopardizing their ability to deliver essential services.

When insurance companies fail to treat EMS agencies fairly, the financial shortfall must be made up by taxpayers or results in a reduction of vital services.

Therefore, implementing fair insurance practices is crucial for ensuring continued access to emergency medical care and minimizing the burden on taxpayers.

SB 645 would make a meaningful difference for EMS and Patients by:

• Prohibiting patients from being balance billed for ambulance services.
• Requiring EMS be paid a fair minimum rate by insurance for services.
• Requiring insurance companies to send payments directly to EMS agencies and ensuring payment for clean claims within 30 days.

This bill will help stabilize EMS funding, strengthen emergency care, and support the communities served by these first responders.

Why 400%?

The most frequently asked question about SB 645 has a straightforward answer: 400% of Medicare is based on cost reporting data collected through the Medicare Ground Ambulance Data Collection System. According to data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the average cost per ambulance transport is $2,673, and the median is $1,340. In contrast, Medicare pays an average of only $328.89. Even at four times the average Medicare payment, insurance companies are still reimbursing less than the actual median and mean costs of care.

The two leading insurance industry opponents of this bill have a history of reimbursing EMS providers at rates lower than Medicare, which makes the situation worse. They might argue that health insurance shouldn't be required to fund EMS, but as shown by the cost data, all we are asking is for them to come closer to covering cost of the care they promise to their policyholders.

EMS services need funding to remain available; without proper payment, the availability of 911 response could decline. The payment provisions in this bill present a policy decision: should insurance companies covering ambulance services contribute a greater amount toward the cost of care, or should the financial burden shift to all taxpayers?