Public Comments

2026 Regular Session HB4171 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:55

I oppose HB 4171 because it forces a rigid binary sex marker into state records and creates barriers that will predictably harm real West Virginians—especially intersex people and others with medically documented variations in sex traits. HB 4171 mandates that birth certificates list sex only as “male” or “female” and forbids “non-binary,” with no clear accommodation for infants born with medically recognized atypical/ambiguous sex characteristics. Intersex prevalence statistics vary depending on definitions, but credible medical sources confirm these conditions exist (including cases of ambiguous genitalia at birth). A state record system should be accurate and medically realistic—not ideologically simplified. The bill also blocks changing the “sex at birth” on the original birth certificate due to surgery, and it requires both proof of gender reassignment surgery and a court order just to update the sex marker on driver’s licenses/IDs. That is an extreme standard that invites privacy invasion, unequal treatment, and unnecessary litigation risk. Government IDs exist to identify people—not to force residents to disclose sensitive medical history or undergo unwanted procedures to make documents match their lived reality. West Virginia has more urgent public health and administrative priorities than policing identity documents. I urge lawmakers to reject HB 4171 and instead pursue policies that respect medical reality, privacy, and equal treatment under the law.

2026 Regular Session HB4167 (Government Administration)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:53

I oppose HB 4167 as written because, despite its stated intent, it risks enabling structural gerrymandering and de facto redlining under the appearance of neutrality. While the bill claims to establish an “independent” redistricting commission, the selection and strike process still allows political gatekeeping, concentrated influence, and indirect partisan control. Independence is not achieved merely by removing sitting legislators if the process itself permits strategic exclusions and lacks enforceable safeguards against demographic manipulation. Of particular concern is how “communities of interest” are defined and applied. Historically, this language has been used to fragment marginalized, rural, Indigenous, and low-income communities, diluting their voting strength while maintaining plausible deniability. Without explicit protections, this invites outcomes that resemble racial and economic redlining, even if not labeled as such. Additionally, the bill does not provide sufficient, enforceable standards to prevent:

Packing or cracking of minority and dissenting voters
Maps that preserve political power while appearing statistically compliant
Disproportionate harm to communities with limited political or financial means

True redistricting reform must include strong civil-rights protections, transparent demographic impact analysis, meaningful public consent, and judicially enforceable anti-discrimination standards — not just procedural reshuffling. West Virginians deserve fair representation, not a process that shifts gerrymandering from elected officials to an insulated body with limited accountability. Until these concerns are addressed, HB 4167 should not advance.

2026 Regular Session HB4165 (Local Governments)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:50

I oppose HB 4165 because it shortens the term of county commissioners without addressing pay, benefits, or long-term taxpayer cost. This bill creates a system where individuals can hold public office for a shorter period of service while remaining fully compensated under structures designed for longer terms. Reducing the length of service without reducing compensation, benefits, or long-term financial obligations shifts the burden onto taxpayers while insulating officeholders from accountability. It incentivizes short-term political occupancy rather than long-term public service and institutional responsibility. West Virginians are already struggling with rising costs of living, reduced public services, and increased tax pressure. At the same time, this bill moves in the opposite direction — allowing public officials to spend less time doing the work while remaining enshrined in state systems funded by taxpayers who must live, work, and retire here without comparable guarantees. If the Legislature believes a four-year term is appropriate, then compensation, benefits, and retirement structures must be transparently reviewed and adjusted accordingly. Passing a term-reduction bill without any fiscal analysis or benefit recalibration undermines public trust and reinforces the perception that public office is becoming a protected status rather than a public duty. Public service should mean accountability, proportional compensation, and long-term commitment to the communities served — not shorter terms with unchanged taxpayer obligations. For these reasons, I oppose HB 4165.

2026 Regular Session HB4164 (Judiciary)

Comment by: jayli flynn on January 23, 2026 16:48

oppose HB 4164 because, while framed as an “election integrity” measure, it functions in practice as a voter suppression and voter-burden law that disproportionately impacts law-abiding, tax-paying citizens, particularly those in working-class, rural, elderly, disabled, and under-resourced communities. West Virginia already uses certified voting systems with audit trails, canvassing procedures, recount mechanisms, and post-election verification under existing law. HB 4164 does not identify a demonstrated failure in current systems that would justify imposing mandatory manual precinct-level hand counts in every election, regardless of risk, margin, or evidence of error. What this bill does instead is create administrative bottlenecks and increased opportunities for voter disenfranchisement, including: • Delays in tabulation that disproportionately affect voters who rely on timely certification for employment verification, benefits, housing, or legal status • Increased poll-worker burden and error risk in small or understaffed precincts • Greater likelihood of ballot challenges, disqualification, or procedural disputes after voters have lawfully cast ballots • Uneven implementation across counties, leading to unequal treatment of voters based on geography History and data consistently show that “integrity” laws relying on manual counts, heightened scrutiny, or added procedural steps do not affect all voters equally. They disproportionately harm: • Low-income and working voters who cannot stay late, return multiple times, or navigate disputes • Elderly and disabled voters whose ballots are more likely to be questioned or mishandled • Rural voters in counties already struggling with staffing and resources • Minority and marginalized voters who historically bear the brunt of election challenges These are tax-paying citizens whose right to vote should not be conditioned on whether their county can absorb additional administrative strain or scrutiny. Further, election security must be evidence-based, not speculative. Courts have repeatedly held that states may not burden the right to vote based on hypothetical concerns while ignoring real, documented disparate impacts. A law that increases the risk of disenfranchisement without a compelling, narrowly tailored justification violates both equal protection principles and the fundamental right to vote. If the Legislature’s goal is transparency, there are already risk-limiting audits, recount statutes, and canvassing requirements that address that interest without imposing blanket burdens on every voter in every election. HB 4164 does not strengthen democracy. It weakens public trust by suggesting failure where none has been shown, while shifting the cost and risk onto voters themselves. For these reasons, I urge lawmakers to reject HB 4164 and focus instead on measures that expand access, protect voters, and address real—not hypothetical—election administration issues.

2026 Regular Session HB4163 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:46

I submit this comment in opposition to HB 4163 as currently written. While the stated goal of protecting FOIA requester privacy may appear reasonable on its face, this bill creates serious transparency and accountability concerns when applied in practice — particularly for individuals who have repeatedly engaged counsel and formally communicated with the State regarding documented legal, constitutional, and civil rights issues. I have submitted multiple FOIA requests, oversight communications, and legal notices to state agencies, often through or in coordination with my attorney. These communications are part of an established record documenting potential statutory violations, constitutional concerns, and agency noncompliance. By mandating broad confidentiality of requester identities and allowing discretionary redaction decisions by custodians or the Secretary of State, HB 4163 risks obscuring patterns of agency conduct, retaliation, delay, or selective enforcement that are only visible when requests are viewed in context. FOIA exists to ensure public accountability — not merely record access in isolation. When requester identities, timelines, and outcomes are systematically hidden from public view, it becomes more difficult to demonstrate bad-faith denials, chronic nonresponse, or agency resistance to lawful oversight, even when those issues are already documented and legally asserted. Additionally, the bill’s “public interest outweighs privacy” exception is vague and discretionary, creating uncertainty for individuals who have already placed their communications into the public and legal record through counsel. Transparency should not depend on subjective determinations made after the fact, especially where legal disputes or ongoing oversight efforts exist. I support privacy protections for private citizens acting in good faith. However, HB 4163, as drafted, shifts the balance too far away from transparency and risks shielding government behavior rather than protecting the public. I urge the Legislature to reject HB 4163 as written or substantially amend it to ensure that: • documented legal communications and counsel-submitted FOIA requests are not used to obscure agency conduct, • transparency and accountability remain the primary purpose of FOIA, and • public oversight is not weakened under the guise of privacy.

2026 Regular Session HB4797 (Government Administration)

Comment by: Laura Thomas on January 23, 2026 16:42

What did Charlie ever do for West Virginia or West Virginians? We should be celebrating accomplished people from our own state, but instead our representatives would waste time and taxpayer dollars virtue signaling. Our government has lost touch with its citizens.

2026 Regular Session HB4158 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:41

I oppose HB 4158 because, while it is framed as a “random drug testing” measure, its practical effect is to create a mechanism for invalidating, discrediting, or forcing out elected officials rather than addressing any legitimate public safety concern. Legislators are elected representatives, not safety-sensitive employees. They do not operate machinery or perform duties that justify suspicionless drug testing. The only functional purpose of this bill is reputational harm and political leverage, particularly through its public disclosure provisions. Of serious concern is how this bill would disproportionately affect individuals who lawfully use medical cannabis under West Virginia law. Drug tests do not distinguish between impairment and lawful medical use, nor do they account for prescriptions or disabilities. Because cannabis remains federally illegal, a legislator who is fully compliant with state medical cannabis law could still be labeled as having used an “illegal drug,” triggering public disclosure. Refusing a test on constitutional, medical, or privacy grounds would result in the same outcome. This creates a coercive system where compliance and refusal both carry punitive consequences. In effect, the bill functions as an indirect qualification for office, discouraging people with disabilities, chronic illness, or lawful medical treatment from serving or running at all. That is not neutrality — it is exclusion. HB 4158 also raises serious constitutional concerns, including equal protection, due process, privacy, and voter disenfranchisement. The Legislature cannot add new functional qualifications for office through statute, especially when those qualifications disproportionately impact protected classes and lawful medical patients. Transparency and accountability do not require public shaming or bodily surveillance of elected officials. This bill does not improve governance or public trust — it undermines representative democracy by narrowing who can realistically serve. For these reasons, HB 4158 should not advance.

2026 Regular Session HB4013 (Finance)

Comment by: Michael Jones on January 23, 2026 16:38

I am opposed to this bill. I believe that we should not be providing tax credits to out-of-state and big corporations. These tax credits simply do not work to attract jobs (Business Incentives are Ineffective and Wasteful - Bloomberg report: A New Panel Database on Business Incentives for Economic Development Offered by State and Local Governments in the United States). Moreover we should not be giving away our tax dollars to out-of-state companies for extractive data centers and other projects that do not create jobs when we cannot afford schools, clean drinking water, medical care, and other essentials. I encourage you to vote NO on this bill; and work for solutions to real problems that West Virginians face. Best, Mike Jones

2026 Regular Session HB4149 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:37

I strongly oppose HB 4149 because it violates multiple constitutional amendments and civil rights protections, while expanding government surveillance authority and weakening judicial oversight under the guise of “property protection.” Fourth Amendment – Unreasonable Search & Surveillance HB 4149 authorizes and normalizes warrantless surveillance and entry near or on private property, including the placement and use of surveillance cameras. This undermines the Fourth Amendment’s core requirement that searches be reasonable, particularized, and judicially authorized. Allowing law enforcement to surveil posted land without a warrant creates a backdoor to monitoring individuals, families, and visitors without probable cause or judicial review. First Amendment – Chilling Effect on Speech & Association When the state is permitted to conduct surveillance on or near private land without clear limits, it chills lawful speech, assembly, and association. People cannot freely gather, speak, organize, or practice religion if they are subject to unconsented monitoring simply because of where they live or meet. Surveillance itself is a form of restraint. Fourteenth Amendment – Due Process & Equal Protection HB 4149 lacks clear standards, limits, and remedies. Vague enforcement authority invites selective enforcement, especially in rural, Indigenous, low-income, and marginalized communities. Laws that are unclear or discretionary violate due process and create unequal application under the law. Private Property Rights & Judicial Oversight True respect for private property requires stronger warrant requirements, not weaker ones. Property rights do not exist only for the state to override them administratively. Judicial oversight is the safeguard that protects both landowners and the public from abuse of power. Civil Liberties & Precedent History shows that expanded surveillance powers are rarely rolled back and are often misused beyond their original intent. This bill sets a dangerous precedent by normalizing surveillance without individualized suspicion, oversight, or transparency. Conclusion HB 4149 does not protect rights — it erodes constitutional protections, expands warrantless surveillance, and weakens due process. Public safety is not improved by bypassing the Constitution. I urge lawmakers to reject this bill and uphold the Fourth, First, and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as the civil liberties of all West Virginians.

2026 Regular Session HB4148 (Government Administration)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:35

I strongly oppose HB 4148, which requires proof of U.S. citizenship to obtain a real estate salesperson license. This bill creates prejudice among American residents and lawful workers, undermines equal protection principles, and imposes a citizenship test where none is legally or practically required. First, citizenship is not a lawful prerequisite for work. Under federal law, lawful permanent residents and other lawfully authorized non-citizens are permitted to work in the United States. States may regulate professional licensing, but they may not impose citizenship requirements that conflict with federal immigration authority or discriminate against lawful workers. Courts have repeatedly held that blanket citizenship requirements for occupational licenses are constitutionally suspect under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Second, HB 4148 replaces competency standards with identity-based barriers. Real estate licensing already requires education, examinations, background checks, and regulatory oversight. Citizenship status has no connection to consumer protection, ethical conduct, or professional competence. This bill shifts licensing away from merit and toward exclusion based on status rather than ability or conduct. Third, the bill creates discriminatory outcomes even among taxpayers and long-term residents. Many lawful residents pay state and local taxes, contribute to the economy, and comply with all professional requirements. HB 4148 denies them access to a licensed profession solely based on citizenship, creating unequal treatment among people who are otherwise similarly situated under the law. Fourth, the bill invites legal liability and administrative burden. Imposing citizenship documentation requirements exposes the state to litigation risks, enforcement inconsistencies, and constitutional challenges. It also burdens licensing agencies with immigration-related determinations they are not equipped or authorized to adjudicate. Finally, this policy promotes prejudice rather than public safety. There is no evidence that citizenship requirements improve consumer protection in real estate transactions. What this bill does accomplish is the normalization of “papers-based” exclusion in civilian life, setting a precedent that erodes equal access to lawful employment. For these reasons, HB 4148 is unnecessary, discriminatory, and constitutionally vulnerable. Professional licensing should be based on qualifications, ethics, and accountability—not citizenship status. I urge the Legislature to reject this bill.

2026 Regular Session HB4144 (Finance)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:34

I oppose HB 4144. While this bill is framed as a fiscal policy providing a conditional year-end bonus to state employees, its designation as a “Christmas bonus” is not neutral in the context of the 2026 legislative session. When viewed alongside multiple other bills advancing explicitly Christian symbols, texts, and observances within public institutions, this bill contributes to a pattern of government preference for one religious tradition over others and over non-religion. State compensation policies should be religiously neutral, especially in a pluralistic state where taxpayers and public employees include Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Indigenous practitioners, atheists, and others. A year-end or surplus-based bonus can be structured without tying the benefit to a specific religious holiday. The deliberate choice to label this benefit a “Christmas bonus” is unnecessary and exclusionary. This concern is not isolated. During this same session, the Legislature has advanced or considered:

Bills mandating or privileging Christian religious texts in public schools
Bills requiring Christian religious displays in classrooms
Official recognition and observance proposals centered on Christian doctrine

Taken together, these actions signal a systemic shift away from religious neutrality, raising serious Establishment Clause concerns under the First Amendment and corresponding provisions of the West Virginia Constitution. Additionally, this bill raises equity issues unrelated to religion:

It conditions compensation on surplus revenue while many state workers continue to struggle with rising housing, food, healthcare, and utility costs.
It excludes non-state workers — including taxpayers funding state operations — from relief during the same surplus conditions.
It provides no mechanism to ensure the bonus addresses workforce retention, wage compression, or cost-of-living disparities.

Public funds and employment benefits must be administered without religious framing or favoritism. If the Legislature wishes to provide a surplus-based bonus, it should do so in a secular, inclusive, and neutral manner, such as a “year-end bonus” or “surplus dividend,” applicable without religious labeling. For these reasons, I respectfully urge lawmakers to reject HB 4144 as written or amend it to remove religious terminology and ensure compliance with constitutional neutrality principles.

2026 Regular Session HB4143 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:31

I oppose HB 4143 because it legislates an inflexible, binary definition of sex into state policy while only offering vague “accommodations” language for people born with differences in sex development (intersex/DSD). In real life, this creates predictable harms in health care access, civil rights enforcement, and constitutional protections for West Virginians—especially children. 1) Intersex West Virginians are not rare—this bill erases them anyway Intersex prevalence depends on definition. A widely cited medical/academic estimate places intersex traits at ~1.7% of the population, while a narrower definition yields ~0.018%. Either way, intersex people exist in every community. Using West Virginia’s 2024 population estimate of 1,769,979, that equals approximately:

~30,090 West Virginians if using 1.7%, or
~319 West Virginians if using 0.018%.

A civil-rights framework should not be built to exclude hundreds to tens of thousands of constituents depending on which medical definition lawmakers choose to adopt. 2) HB 4143 creates barriers to primary care and medically necessary treatment HB 4143 pushes a legal rule that state data collection and public policy should treat sex as only “male” or “female,” and it aims to substitute “sex” for “gender” across law. That kind of rigid legal categorization is exactly how people get blocked out of routine care—because health systems, insurers, intake forms, and referrals often rely on sex markers to authorize:

endocrine care (hormone management for congenital conditions),
appropriate screening (e.g., anatomy-based cancer screening),
specialist referrals and coding.

This isn’t theoretical. National research shows intersex people report extremely high rates of health-care discrimination and avoidance of care due to mistreatment. When people avoid care or are denied care, health outcomes worsen—especially in primary care settings. 3) It pressures harmful medical decision-making for intersex children Intersex pediatric care often requires individualized, clinically guided decisions over time—not a state-imposed binary label that encourages “normalizing” interventions or limits hormone care that doesn’t fit a legal definition. This invites situations where a child’s medically appropriate care is questioned or delayed because it conflicts with a statutory category. That is incompatible with basic medical ethics (nonmaleficence / “do no harm”) and with the patient’s right to evidence-based care—especially when the law provides no meaningful enforcement mechanism for “accommodations.” 4) Conflicts with federal nondiscrimination protections in health care Federal law already recognizes that discrimination in health programs can include discrimination related to sex characteristics, including intersex traits, under ACA Section 1557. HB 4143 invites agency practices that can collide with federally funded health-care obligations—creating legal risk and confusion for providers, schools, and state programs. 5) Constitutional and civil-rights concerns (federal + state) HB 4143 raises serious constitutional problems because it enables state action that can deprive people of liberty and equal treatment in healthcare and public services:

U.S. Constitution — 14th Amendment (Due Process & Equal Protection): when a law burdens a class of people (including those with congenital sex traits) and interferes with personal medical decision-making, it triggers major equal protection and liberty concerns.
West Virginia Constitution — Article III (Due Process / inherent rights): West Virginia’s Bill of Rights includes protections for liberty and due process that courts treat as containing equal-protection principles.

In plain terms: the state should not create a legal structure that predictably results in denial of equal access to medically necessary care or forces people into classifications that contradict their bodies and medical reality. Bottom line HB 4143 is not “clarity.” It is a statutory mandate that erases intersex constituents, encourages barriers to primary care, and creates civil-rights and constitutional conflicts—while offering only a vague, non-enforceable promise of “accommodation.” West Virginia should protect women’s rights without sacrificing the health and equality of intersex children and adults.

2026 Regular Session HB4131 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:26

I oppose HB 4131. This bill creates a statewide “Law-Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights,” establishing a separate statutory rights framework that applies only to police officers and preempts conflicting state, county, and municipal policies. In doing so, HB 4131 elevates law-enforcement officers into a protected legal subclass rather than holding them to the same—or higher—standards expected of all public servants entrusted with extraordinary authority. HB 4131 adds procedural barriers that make accountability more difficult. It imposes a sworn-complaint requirement and a strict filing deadline for certain misconduct complaints, discouraging reporting by civilians who may fear retaliation or lack immediate legal assistance. The bill also allows for expungement of complaint records after a set period when allegations are deemed unfounded or not sustained, and it restricts the future admissibility of those records. These provisions reduce transparency and limit the ability of agencies, courts, and the public to identify patterns of misconduct. The bill further grants officers a private right of action to seek court intervention if these new statutory rights are allegedly violated. This expands legal protections for officers without establishing corresponding, enforceable statewide standards for discipline, transparency, or independent oversight. Law enforcement already operates with significant legal and institutional protections, including broad discretion, taxpayer-funded legal defense, and existing immunity doctrines. Public confidence is not strengthened by layering additional protections while unresolved issues of misconduct, inconsistent discipline, civil-rights violations, and taxpayer-funded settlements persist. Equal protection under the law requires that government power be constrained and accountable. If the Legislature believes current systems are failing, the solution is to improve training, oversight, data transparency, and independent review—not to create special statutory privileges for one class of government actors. For these reasons, HB 4131 should be rejected.

2026 Regular Session HB4691 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Eric Engle on January 23, 2026 16:24

Voting should be one of the easiest things anyone can do. We should have at least two weeks of early voting, plentiful and accessible voting locations, absentee balloting available for any and all who want to cast an absentee vote, and Election Day should be a federal holiday observed by all states and territories of the United States, for starters. This attempt to restrict absentee ballot access is yet another blatant voter suppression tactic. Coupled with discriminatory ID requirements, limits on the availability and staffing of polling places, lack of same-day registration opportunities, and deliberately overzealous and error-prone voter roll purges, legislation like this is about keeping traditionally Democratic-leaning and leftist constituencies from casting valid votes or to keep those votes from counting. Republicans hold a supermajority in the legislature and every statewide and federal office, but they know that stranglehold is not going to last unless they can suppress turnout. This bill must go nowhere. Anti-democratic measures like this are unAmerican and drown out the voice of the people.

2026 Regular Session HB4120 (Energy and Manufacturing)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:22

I oppose HB 4120 because it continues a long pattern of prioritizing corporate relief for the coal and energy industries while failing to protect workers, communities, and people struggling to meet basic needs in West Virginia. This bill allows mining companies to receive regulatory waivers and bond releases for reclaimed mine sites when those lands are transferred for new energy projects. In practice, this functions as another form of industry buyout—reducing corporate financial responsibility—at a time when many West Virginians cannot afford housing, land, or basic necessities. This concern is especially troubling given recent history. Federal policies under the Trump administration provided significant bailouts and regulatory rollbacks for the coal industry while mine inspection offices and safety enforcement capacity were reduced. During that same period, injuries, deaths, and serious occupational diseases such as black lung continued to rise in mining regions. Weakening oversight while expanding industry relief places workers at risk and shifts long-term costs onto the public. HB 4120 offers no guarantees for: • Worker safety or strengthened inspections • Community reinvestment or housing stability • Environmental health protections beyond minimum compliance • Accountability for past harm or future risk Instead, it accelerates the release of corporate obligations while West Virginia residents face homelessness, unsafe working conditions, contaminated land, and underfunded public services. If reclaimed mine land is to be repurposed, it should be done with enforceable safeguards, transparent oversight, and direct public benefit—not through blanket waivers that reward the same industries already subsidized at the expense of workers and taxpayers. Economic transition should not mean deregulation without responsibility. West Virginians deserve policies that protect people first—not ones that continue to socialize risk while privatizing profit. For these reasons, I urge lawmakers to reject HB 4120 or substantially amend it to prioritize worker safety, public health, and community benefit over corporate relief.

2026 Regular Session HB4114 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:19

I oppose HB 4114 due to serious transparency, accountability, and governance concerns. This bill terminates an existing oversight committee and replaces it with a select legislative committee whose meetings, records, and work are explicitly confidential and exempt from public disclosure. This structure directly conflicts with West Virginia’s established legal principle that government oversight exists to ensure transparency, not to shield state operations from public review. Eliminating an existing oversight body while creating a closed, FOIA-exempt committee raises the concern that transparency is being intentionally reduced under the guise of reform. Oversight that the public cannot see, access, or evaluate is not meaningful oversight. The bill further concentrates power by allowing legislative leadership to hand-select committee members without any neutral or independent selection mechanism. Recent experience in West Virginia demonstrates that such selection processes are not politically neutral. This creates a risk that oversight becomes partisan, insular, or protective of the very agency it is meant to review. HB 4114 also requires committee members to hold security clearances to access classified and sensitive materials, while simultaneously excluding the public from any visibility into that oversight. Elected lawmakers should be subject to greater transparency obligations than the public, not fewer. Granting lawmakers exclusive access to information while removing public accountability undermines democratic governance. If the goal is genuine oversight, then transparency, independence, and public accountability must be strengthened — not terminated, centralized, and sealed from public view. For these reasons, I urge the Legislature to reject HB 4114 or substantially amend it to preserve public oversight, FOIA applicability, and neutral committee selection.

2026 Regular Session HB4110 (Energy and Public Works)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:15

I oppose HB 4110 as written. This bill represents another step toward state-mandated ideology and centralized control over education and civic life, rather than a genuine investment in critical thinking, constitutional literacy, or equal access to opportunity. While framed as a neutral or positive reform, HB 4110 raises serious concerns about equity, viewpoint neutrality, and the proper role of government. First, the bill risks ideological capture of public institutions by elevating certain political, cultural, or moral frameworks while marginalizing others. The State of West Virginia has a constitutional obligation to remain neutral—not to favor particular belief systems, narratives, or interpretations of history under the guise of “civics” or public values. Public education should teach how to think, not what to think. Second, HB 4110 creates or expands unfunded or under-funded mandates at a time when West Virginia has already cut or hollowed out essential services—including education, public health, environmental oversight, and infrastructure. If the state claims it lacks resources for clean water, food security, or classroom support, it should not be redirecting attention and funding toward symbolic or ideological programs that do not materially improve outcomes for students or communities. Third, the bill raises equal-protection concerns. Policies that appear neutral on paper often have disproportionate impacts on low-income families, rural communities, religious minorities, and those who already face barriers to participation. West Virginians who pay taxes but lack political influence should not be further excluded by programs that privilege access, conformity, or alignment with state-approved viewpoints. Finally, this bill continues a broader pattern in which the Legislature asserts control over speech, education, and civic identity while avoiding accountability for measurable failures—unsafe water, workforce instability, declining public trust, and weakened transparency. Civic engagement is not strengthened by coercion or rebranding; it is strengthened by honesty, investment, and respect for constitutional limits. For these reasons, I urge lawmakers to reject HB 4110 and instead focus on policies that genuinely improve education quality, protect constitutional rights, ensure transparency, and meet the real, material needs of West Virginians.

2026 Regular Session HB4797 (Government Administration)

Comment by: Bethany Clark on January 23, 2026 16:14

This is absolutely ridiculous. There are people in the comments on the announcement about this bill who loved Charlie Kirk but are saying this is a complete waste of time. I am not one of those people; I do not think he deserves to be memorialized this way (although I condemn the violence by which he died and the violent rhetoric he espoused when he was alive), especially not in West Virginia, a state which he was not from and toward which he has contributed nothing. There are far more pressing issues in our state, such as making sure public schools have adequate funding for everything they need and improving infrastructure and increasing jobs. Stop wasting time on issues like this.

2026 Regular Session HB4104 (Education)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:12

I oppose HB 4104 due to the way it could be used to narrow, sanitize, or selectively frame history under the guise of neutrality and curriculum review. History education should be regularly updated for accuracy, but it must never be filtered through politically defined standards that allow omission or reframing of documented historical events. The United States has already experienced the damage caused by historical revisionism, most notably through the “Lost Cause” narrative following the Civil War, where omission and selective emphasis were used to justify injustice and suppress accountability. That precedent is relevant here. Across the country, major historical events are already widely unknown—not because they are disputed, but because they were excluded from state-level education frameworks. Many Americans are never taught about the Los Angeles student walkouts that helped launch the Chicano Movement and shaped immigration and education policy. Japanese American internment during World War II is often minimized or omitted unless federal requirements compel its inclusion. The California mission system was long taught as cultural heritage while the realities of Indigenous displacement, forced labor, and mass death were ignored. These gaps exist because state-controlled narratives prioritized comfort over truth. HB 4104 raises concern by creating curriculum review mechanisms and vague standards such as “controversial issues,” “suitability,” and “balanced viewpoints” without explicit protections against omission or ideological pressure. Not all historical claims are equally supported by evidence, and factual accuracy should never be subordinated to political balance. Teaching history requires scholarly standards, primary sources, and historical consensus—not equal deference to viewpoints that minimize documented harm. History should be taught as it happened, including its failures, conflicts, and constitutional violations, not softened or selectively emphasized to avoid discomfort. Without clear guardrails, HB 4104 risks reinforcing long-standing patterns of exclusion that already leave students unprepared to understand modern civil rights, immigration policy, and constitutional protections. For these reasons, I urge lawmakers to reject or substantially amend HB 4104 to explicitly protect comprehensive, evidence-based history education and to ensure it cannot be used—intentionally or unintentionally—to repeat the harms of historical omission and revision.

2026 Regular Session HB4041 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Rachel Burd on January 23, 2026 16:10

I oppose house bill 4041. A 25 year sentence is way too long, and it should not be mandatory. I have had bad experiences with law enforcement officers while dealing with a psychiatric emergency and they are not trained well for real world situations. And while they deserve some protection, I think that this bill is excessive and will be over used. As another comment has said, mandatory sentencing leaves no room for discernment between malicious intent or a psych/medical emergency.

2026 Regular Session HB4103 (Education)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:08

I am a West Virginia citizen and taxpayer writing to strongly oppose HB 4103. HB 4103 mandates government-sponsored religious messaging in every public-school classroom. The bill would require each public elementary and secondary school to display, in a “conspicuous place” in each classroom, a “durable poster or framed copy” of the Ten Commandments meeting specific formatting requirements, beginning in the 2026–2027 school year. The bill also authorizes schools to replace noncompliant posters “using public funds” (or private donations) and directs how surplus posters may be donated. 1) This is unconstitutional under controlling U.S. Supreme Court precedent The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in public-school classrooms violates the Establishment Clause. In Stone v. Graham (1980), the Court struck down a Kentucky law requiring Ten Commandments postings in classrooms because the mandate had no secular legislative purpose and was “plainly religious in nature.” HB 4103 is the same kind of statewide, compulsory classroom posting requirement that Stone found unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has also held that Ten Commandments displays are unconstitutional when the government’s purpose and context show a religious objective—such as in McCreary County v. ACLU (2005), where the Court found the display’s purpose was religious and therefore violated the Establishment Clause. Supporters sometimes cite Van Orden v. Perry (2005), but that case involved a long-standing monument on capitol grounds in a specific historical setting—not a mandatory K–12 classroom posting aimed at students in a captive daily environment. 2) It also conflicts with West Virginia’s own Constitution West Virginia’s Constitution guarantees religious freedom and prohibits the Legislature from conferring “peculiar privileges or advantages on any sect or denomination,” and from authorizing taxes to support religious worship, churches, or ministry. A statute requiring a specific religious text to be posted in every classroom—paired with explicit authorization to spend public funds to comply—runs directly into the protections of W. Va. Const. art. III, §15. 3) This is not “anti-indoctrination”—it is state-directed indoctrination HB 4103 places the state in the role of selecting and mandating a religious text to be displayed continuously in every classroom. That is government-directed ideological messaging in a compulsory public setting for children. If lawmakers claim to oppose “indoctrination,” the state should not impose religious doctrine through statute. 4) HB 4103 exposes taxpayers to predictable lawsuits and costs—other states are already losing Similar classroom-mandate laws have been blocked by federal courts in other states, demonstrating that this approach triggers immediate litigation and injunctions. For example, a federal judge blocked Louisiana’s classroom Ten Commandments display law as unconstitutional, and a federal judge blocked enforcement in major Arkansas school districts for likely violating the constitutional separation of church and state; Texas has also faced court orders temporarily blocking classroom posting requirements in certain districts. West Virginia should not copy a policy that is already being enjoined elsewhere—especially when HB 4103 explicitly allows compliance using public funds. Requested action For constitutional, educational, and fiscal reasons, I urge the Legislature to reject HB 4103. Public schools should remain neutral toward religion—protecting the rights of all students and families—while keeping scarce education dollars focused on instruction, safety, and student needs rather than mandated religious displays and avoidable litigation.

2026 Regular Session HB4101 (Finance)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:03

House Bill 4101 creates a full West Virginia personal income tax exemption for taxpayers who (1) file as a married individual or surviving spouse and (2) claim a fourth dependent child (federal “qualifying child”). While helping families with children is a legitimate policy goal, HB 4101 is not equal under the law in effect because it conditions major tax relief on marital filing status, not financial need, and not simply the presence of children. As written, HB 4101 excludes large families who pay taxes but do not meet the bill’s marital-status condition—such as single parents, unmarried parents, and other guardians—even when their costs and needs are equal or greater. The bill’s own findings explicitly justify the exemption using marriage-based claims and then restrict eligibility to those filing as married or surviving spouse. A family-support policy should not be structured so that similarly situated children are treated differently because of their parents’ filing status. This approach also raises basic fairness and budget-priority concerns. West Virginia continues to face widespread hardship: credible statewide data show 15.7% food insecurity (2023)—about 1 in 6 residents facing hunger. When hunger and essential-need insecurity are this high, broad tax exemptions should be carefully targeted, transparent in fiscal impact, and designed to reduce hardship for the families who need it most. Recommended amendments instead of a marriage-conditioned exemption:

Replace the full exemption with a refundable, income-tested child/family credit that applies regardless of marital status (with a clear phaseout by income).
If the Legislature wants to help larger households, base it on number of dependents + income/poverty level, not on whether the taxpayer files as “married.”
Require a public fiscal note showing who benefits by income bracket and county, and what services may be reduced to offset lost revenue.

Until HB 4101 is rewritten to provide equal access to relief for taxpayers with the same child-rearing burdens—and to prioritize families facing basic-need insecurity—I urge the Legislature to reject HB 4101 as introduced. If you want, paste what you’re submitting this to (WV Legislature comment portal vs. email vs. a delegate’s post) and I’ll format it to fit character limits and your usual “no line breaks” style.

2026 Regular Session HB4099 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 16:00

I respectfully oppose HB 4099 because it creates constitutionally risky, impractical, and discriminatory outcomes without improving public safety. HB 4099 proposes to deny recognition of valid out-of-state driver’s licenses based on immigration status. Driver’s license recognition between states is traditionally governed by reciprocity and public-safety standards—not federal immigration determinations. This bill inserts state-level immigration enforcement into routine traffic and travel, an area where states lack clear authority and where civil-rights violations predictably follow. Fourth Amendment concerns: The bill invites pretextual stops and status-based questioning. Because immigration status is not visible, enforcement necessarily relies on profiling—accent, race, name, or perceived nationality—raising serious Fourth Amendment concerns regarding unreasonable searches and seizures. The bill provides no clear enforcement standards to prevent arbitrary or discriminatory application. Equal protection and “freedom papers” risk: By conditioning the ability to legally drive on proof beyond a valid license, HB 4099 moves West Virginia toward a system where people must affirmatively prove their status during everyday activity. History shows these systems evolve into “freedom papers” frameworks that disproportionately harm mixed-status families, citizens, lawful residents, and visitors who may not carry additional documentation. Impact on lawful travelers and residents: This bill would also harm people who are lawfully present but traveling or residing temporarily in West Virginia—including students, workers, military families, and U.S. citizens returning from abroad who may hold non-WV licenses. A valid license should remain sufficient proof of driving eligibility absent a traffic or safety violation. No public-safety justification: There is no evidence that refusing to recognize out-of-state licenses improves road safety. In fact, it may do the opposite by discouraging insured, licensed drivers from compliance and cooperation with law enforcement. Federal overreach and liability risk: Immigration status is a federal matter. By tying state driving privileges to immigration enforcement, HB 4099 exposes West Virginia to costly constitutional litigation while shifting limited law-enforcement resources away from actual safety concerns. For these reasons, I urge the Legislature to reject HB 4099 and uphold constitutional protections, interstate reciprocity, and equal application of the law. Public safety is best served by clear standards, not by laws that invite profiling, confusion, and civil-rights violations.

2026 Regular Session HB4554 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Finn on January 23, 2026 15:58

A registry for disability is an insulting and terrible idea. Absolutely not. Train your cops to better handle those with disabilities. You do not need a list.

2026 Regular Session HB4093 (Education)

Comment by: Jayli flynn on January 23, 2026 15:58

I oppose HB 4093 because it undermines the long-standing purpose of West Virginia’s school safety laws and erodes the legally recognized concept of “sensitive places.” West Virginia Code §61-7-11a exists to keep firearms out of primary and secondary school environments because children are legally required to attend school and cannot meaningfully consent to increased risk. Schools are not ordinary property or public venues; they are compulsory settings where the state and local boards assume a heightened duty of care for minors. Allowing concealed firearms on school grounds does not eliminate risk. Concealment does not prevent accidental discharge, theft, escalation during conflicts, or misidentification during emergencies. Expanding lawful carry into school environments shifts risk onto students, educators, and staff who have no ability to opt out. HB 4093 also weakens local control by limiting the authority of school boards and administrators to set safety policies appropriate for their campuses, despite their legal responsibility for student welfare. This is a significant intrusion into institutional safety governance. Support for constitutional rights does not require eliminating all boundaries. Courts have consistently recognized that firearm regulations in sensitive places — including schools — are lawful and appropriate. Removing schools from that category contradicts both public safety principles and established legal doctrine. For these reasons, HB 4093 moves West Virginia away from protecting children and toward normalizing firearms in environments where the risk-to-benefit balance is neither necessary nor justified. I urge lawmakers to reject this bill.

2026 Regular Session HB4092 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 15:55

HB 4092 creates legal exposure for the State of West Virginia by conditioning future law-enforcement certification on proof of U.S. citizenship rather than lawful work authorization. As written, the bill unlawfully excludes individuals who are legally authorized to live and work in the United States under federal law, including nationals from the Freely Associated States under the Compacts of Free Association (COFA). Immigration status, nationality, and treaty-based employment rights are governed exclusively by federal law and international agreements, not by states. Conditioning public employment on citizenship instead of lawful authorization conflicts with federal treaty obligations and raises Supremacy Clause and federal preemption concerns. Courts have repeatedly held that states may not narrow federally recognized immigration or nationality classifications through occupational licensing requirements. This bill also raises equal-protection concerns by excluding a federally recognized class of lawful workers without a narrowly tailored public-safety justification. Law-enforcement standards can be met through background checks, training, and certification without imposing citizenship-only barriers that invite constitutional and civil-rights litigation. For these reasons, HB 4092 should be amended to recognize lawful work authorization under federal law, or it should not advance in its current form.

2026 Regular Session HB4091 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 15:53

I oppose HB 4091 because it undermines constitutional governance, separation of powers, and due process protections guaranteed under both the West Virginia Constitution and the United States Constitution. West Virginia already has constitutionally recognized and statutorily defined mechanisms for the removal of elected officials, including impeachment, executive removal authority, and electoral accountability. HB 4091 creates a parallel judicial removal process triggered by petition that is not grounded in constitutional amendment and risks conflicting with existing constitutional structures. The Legislature cannot bypass or dilute constitutionally established safeguards through statute alone. HB 4091 improperly expands judicial authority into a fundamentally political function. Allowing courts to remove elected officials based on vague and subjective standards such as “neglect of duty,” “misuse of office,” or “incompetence,” initiated by petition rather than proven misconduct through established constitutional procedures, blurs the separation of powers and invites politicized litigation in place of democratic accountability. The bill also raises serious due process concerns. Removal from elected office is a deprivation of a protected interest. HB 4091 fails to clearly define evidentiary standards, procedural protections, burden of proof, and safeguards against abuse, creating a risk of arbitrary or retaliatory use. This implicates due process protections under Article III of the West Virginia Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Elections are the primary mechanism by which the public holds officials accountable. Expanding removal through judicial petition risks weaponizing the courts, destabilizing representative government, and chilling lawful decision-making by elected officials who may fear removal for unpopular but lawful actions. For these reasons, HB 4091 is constitutionally unsound, unnecessary, and dangerous to democratic governance. I respectfully urge the Legislature to reject this bill.

2026 Regular Session HB4090 (Public Education)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 15:51

I support the protection of students’ well-being and the desire to provide support resources in our schools. However, I have serious concerns with HB 4090 as drafted because of how similar chaplain programs have been implemented elsewhere — particularly in Florida, where political leaders publicly declared that Satanists and other non-Christian faiths would be excluded from participation, despite the legal requirement that the government remain neutral toward religion. Under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the government may not favor one religion over another or exclude people from programs on the basis of their religious belief or non-belief. Public schools in particular must remain neutral in matters of religion so that all students — Christians, adherents of minority religions, and non-religious students — feel respected and safe. In other states, similar proposals to allow chaplains in public schools have been criticized by civil-liberties and interfaith groups for potentially violating students’ religious freedom and creating unequal treatment. Local school boards in Florida even voted against allowing chaplains due to these concerns. Therefore, if HB 4090 moves forward, I urge the Legislature to amend it to include clear, enforceable language that: 1.Prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion or non-religion in program participation. 2.Requires religious neutrality, meaning any chaplain or volunteer must not promote one religion over another or engage in proselytizing. 3.Affirms equal access for people of all faiths and beliefs consistent with constitutional requirements. Students of all backgrounds deserve equal respect and protection of their religious freedoms. Public policy — especially in our public schools — should reflect that constitutional commitment to fairness and neutrality.

2026 Regular Session HB4017 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 15:47

I oppose HB 4017 because, in the current context of West Virginia policy and public actions, it creates an unacceptable risk of state-endorsed religious bias in child welfare services funded by public money. While HB 4017 claims neutrality by allowing both secular and faith-based providers, the bill explicitly shields faith-based organizations from standard neutrality requirements, including limits on religious expression and governance, while operating under state contracts. This creates unequal treatment between providers and weakens the State’s ability to ensure constitutionally neutral services. My objection is not hypothetical. West Virginia has recently engaged in state-sponsored religious symbolism and events, including Bible-centered observances and legislative proposals elevating Christianity’s role in public life. In that context, granting statutory protections to faith-based contractors—without parallel safeguards for families, children, and non-Christian beliefs—cannot be treated as neutral in practice. HB 4017:

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.

Child welfare services must prioritize the best interests of the child, evidence-based standards, and constitutional neutrality, not religious accommodation at the expense of equal protection. The State has a duty to avoid even the appearance of endorsing or advancing religion through public programs. For these reasons, I oppose HB 4017 and urge lawmakers to reject or substantially revise any bill that weakens church–state separation or embeds religious preference into state-funded services.

2026 Regular Session HB4769 (Government Organization)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 15:44

I have serious concerns about House Bill 4769. While the bill frames itself as crisis preparedness, its inclusion of threats such as “invasion of the state,” “insurrection,” and “major cyberattack” is unusual at the state level and raises questions about the bill’s true function. These threats are already addressed through existing federal constitutional authority, emergency management frameworks, and intergovernmental coordination. HB 4769 does not establish enforceable infrastructure standards, technical safeguards, funding mechanisms, or accountability requirements. Instead, it focuses on the creation of plans and briefings, which function primarily as documentation rather than substantive protection. This is especially concerning given that the Legislature has recently advanced or passed bills that deregulate or weaken oversight in water systems, environmental infrastructure, education, health, and medical services. If the state genuinely views cyber disruption, grid failure, or large-scale emergencies as credible threats, then weakening the regulatory and oversight structures that would be essential during such crises directly contradicts that claim. Preparedness requires resilient systems, enforceable protections, and maintained regulatory capacity — not post-hoc planning documents that may later be used to assert “due diligence” while responsibility is shifted away from policymakers. Without restoring and strengthening the very safeguards that protect public health, safety, and infrastructure, this bill risks serving as a liability shield rather than a meaningful preparedness measure. For these reasons, I oppose HB 4769 in its current form.

2026 Regular Session HB4797 (Government Organization)

Comment by: Rance Berry on January 23, 2026 15:40

there are far more important things in this state to worry about than commemorating Charlie Kirk. We literally have residents in the southern part of the state whose drinking water is brown. Our education system is a mess. We need to focus on issues that truly impact our state

2026 Regular Session HB4034 (Education)

Comment by: Rachel Burd on January 23, 2026 15:40

I am very against and disturbed by this. I believe there should be a separation between church and state. Education is important and really has nothing to do with how a person worships their god. Also, there are other religions, and I think it is unfair to require that classrooms have the ten commandments but no other religions' principles or commandments.

2026 Regular Session HB4771 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 15:40

My two concerns with this bill I am submitting public comment on HB 4771, amending W. Va. Code §60A-9-5, regarding expanded access to the Controlled Substances Monitoring Program (CSMP) database. I have two specific objections to this bill as written. 1. HIPAA and privacy risk created by expanding access to a non-FOIA, non-transparent database HB 4771 expands and clarifies categories of individuals who may access the CSMP database, while the statute continues to make the database confidential and exempt from public disclosure under W. Va. Code §29B-1-1 et seq. While prescription monitoring databases are permitted under federal law, HIPAA (45 C.F.R. §§164.502, 164.514, 164.312) requires:

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

HB 4771 adds access roles without adding statutory guardrails, such as:

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

Expanding access to a non-FOIA, non-auditable database without enforceable limits creates a structural HIPAA-compliance risk, even if the database itself is lawful. This exposes patients—especially those in treatment—to misuse with little recourse. 2. Compounding harm to medical cannabis patients and people in recovery through “nanogram-based” consequences West Virginia already applies strict nanogram thresholds for THC under W. Va. Code §16A-5-10, which prohibit certain activities at more than three nanograms of active THC per milliliter of blood serum, regardless of demonstrated impairment. Scientific and policy reviews have repeatedly shown that THC nanograms do not reliably correlate with impairment, especially for lawful medical cannabis patients. Residual presence can persist long after effects have ended. At the same time, W. Va. Code §16A-15-4 nominally protects medical cannabis patients from employment discrimination based solely on status — but allows discipline based on claims of “impairment,” a standard that nanogram thresholds effectively undermine. By expanding access to controlled-substance data without prohibiting employment screening or indirect retaliation, HB 4771 reinforces a system where people in medical treatment or recovery are functionally unemployable, despite statutory protections. Conclusion These are my two issues with HB 4771:

It expands access to a confidential health database without the privacy, audit, and misuse protections required to ensure HIPAA-compliant use.
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.

For these reasons, I oppose HB 4771 unless amended to include enforceable privacy limits and explicit prohibitions on employment and retaliatory use of CSMP data.

2026 Regular Session HB4773 (Finance)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 15:33

I oppose HB 4773 as written because it prioritizes enhanced cost-of-living benefits for retirees while failing to address the economic strain placed on the current workforce and even minors. At the same time this Legislature advances policies encouraging individuals under 18 to enter the workforce earlier and work longer hours, working West Virginians are being told to absorb inflation through multiple jobs, higher consumer costs, and stagnant wages. This creates a contradictory system in which economic security is guaranteed only after workforce participation ends, while those actively contributing labor and paying taxes receive no comparable protections. Working families are effectively paying twice — once through labor and taxation, and again through policies that exclude them from inflation relief. If inflation justifies pension adjustments, it also justifies living-wage protections, workforce stability measures, and safeguards for young workers. Protecting income only after people exit the workforce shifts economic risk downward and delays stability until exhaustion. That is a policy choice, not an inevitability, and it warrants reconsideration.

2026 Regular Session HB4787 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 15:25

I submit this public comment in opposition to House Bill 4787 due to its broad, vague, and constitutionally dangerous redefinition of “terrorism,” which risks criminalizing protected political speech, online expression, association, protest activity, and humanitarian advocacy. HB 4787 does not merely target acts of violence. It lowers the threshold for terrorism-related criminal liability to include alleged intent, fear, disruption, association, and speech. Under this bill, an individual may face mandatory felony penalties without committing violence, causing injury, or using real weapons. This is a profound departure from established constitutional standards. First Amendment Violations The First Amendment protects political speech, online speech, protest, advocacy, dissent, and the right to petition the government — even when that speech is controversial, unpopular, emotional, or later determined to be incorrect. HB 4787 undermines these protections by allowing speech to be reclassified as terrorism when it is deemed to cause fear, disruption, or influence government or public behavior. The bill’s provisions concerning threats, false information, hoaxes, and material support lack clear exemptions for protected political speech. This creates a chilling effect where citizens must fear felony prosecution for speaking forcefully, organizing protests, sharing warnings, engaging in civil disobedience, or advocating for peace or humanitarian causes. Political rhetoric that is tolerated or protected when expressed by those in power could be punished as terrorism when expressed by ordinary citizens. This constitutes viewpoint discrimination, which is prohibited under the First Amendment. Material Support and Association Concerns HB 4787’s definition of “material support” is extraordinarily broad and not limited to violent activity. It potentially encompasses financial donations, services, communications, or assistance related to organizations or causes that may later be designated as disfavored. This raises serious concerns for individuals engaging in humanitarian aid, religious charity, peace advocacy, or international solidarity efforts. Criminal liability based on association or support — without proof of intent to further violence — violates long-standing constitutional protections for freedom of association and due process. Vagueness and Due Process The bill relies on subjective and undefined terms such as “intent,” “fear,” “disruption,” and “influence.” Vague criminal statutes violate due process because they fail to provide fair notice of what conduct is prohibited and invite arbitrary and selective enforcement. HB 4787 grants excessive discretion to law enforcement and prosecutors to infer intent from speech or association, rather than requiring proof of concrete criminal conduct. This undermines Fifth and Sixth Amendment protections and invites abuse. Selective Enforcement and Equal Protection In practice, laws like HB 4787 are not enforced evenly. Threats, harassment, and intimidation are often dismissed as protected speech when directed at marginalized individuals, while those same individuals face police intervention, arrest, or escalation for raising their voices, protesting, or causing disruption. By expanding terrorism statutes to include non-violent conduct and speech, HB 4787 risks exacerbating existing disparities in enforcement, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Excessive Punishment The bill mandates severe penalties, including mandatory prison sentences, enhanced restitution, and restrictions on judicial discretion, even where no physical harm occurs. This raises serious concerns under the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on excessive punishment and the West Virginia Constitution’s proportionality requirements. State Constitutional Conflicts The West Virginia Constitution provides strong protections for speech, due process, and proportional punishment under Article III, including Sections 7, 10, 16, and 17. HB 4787 conflicts with these protections by criminalizing expressive conduct and association rather than narrowly targeting violent criminal acts. Conclusion Public safety is not strengthened by weakening constitutional rights. Terrorism statutes must be narrowly tailored to address real acts of violence, not expanded to encompass speech, protest, political dissent, or humanitarian activity. HB 4787 risks transforming disagreement, activism, and advocacy into criminal exposure based on perception rather than conduct. For these reasons, I respectfully urge lawmakers to reject HB 4787 or substantially amend it to protect constitutional rights, prevent selective enforcement, and ensure that terrorism laws remain focused on actual violence — not speech or association.

2026 Regular Session HB4797 (Government Organization)

Comment by: Jayli Flynn on January 23, 2026 15:15

I am submitting this public comment in opposition to HB 4797, which proposes an official state day recognizing Charlie Kirk. While I unequivocally condemn political violence and acknowledge the tragedy of Mr. Kirk’s death, creating an official state day of recognition for him is inappropriate, divisive, and inconsistent with the purpose of state-sanctioned honors. First, even “symbolic” state recognitions are not cost-free. Official days carry administrative, staffing, and operational costs and may involve paid state time or resources. At a time when West Virginia faces budget constraints affecting education, infrastructure, healthcare access, and public safety, public funds and official attention should not be diverted to commemorations that lack broad public benefit or bipartisan consensus. Second, this proposal is inherently partisan. Mr. Kirk was not a public servant, civil rights leader, or unifying historical figure. He was a contemporary political activist and commentator, best known as the founder of Turning Point USA, and as a prominent partisan figure aligned with a specific political movement. Official state recognition of a modern political operative creates the appearance that the State of West Virginia is endorsing a particular ideology or faction. State honors should unite residents across differences, not elevate figures whose careers were defined by ideological confrontation. Third, Mr. Kirk’s public record is deeply controversial and polarizing. He repeatedly made inflammatory statements about racial, religious, and LGBTQ+ communities and promoted rhetoric that many West Virginians find offensive and exclusionary. He was also publicly involved in efforts surrounding the January 6, 2021 events, including organizing transportation for protestors to Washington, D.C. While condemning violence is essential, that does not require elevating a figure whose conduct and rhetoric contributed to national division and democratic instability. State-recognized days should reflect shared civic values and historical contributions that strengthen public trust. Honoring a divisive contemporary political activist undermines that goal and sets a troubling precedent for future partisan canonization through government action. For these reasons, I respectfully urge legislators to reject HB 4797. West Virginia can and should oppose political violence without using public authority or resources to commemorate a polarizing figure. Official recognitions must remain nonpartisan, fiscally responsible, and inclusive of the full public we are meant to serve.

2026 Regular Session HB4797 (Government Organization)

Comment by: Ann on January 23, 2026 15:04

This is an inappropriate proposal for a bill, not only was he not a resident of the state, contributor to the state, or even an advocate to the state. He was extremely controversial. Though his death was clearly tragic, it has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with our history, heritage, or culture. I am highly offended by this bill and do not support it. I do hope you take much consideration when evaluating this bill.

2026 Regular Session HB4797 (Government Organization)

Comment by: Andrea on January 23, 2026 15:03

As a Christian, I believe deeply in the dignity of every person and the importance of truth, humility, and good stewardship in public life. I also believe that government must be careful not to confuse its role with that of the Church, nor elevate any one individual or ideology in a way that compromises its responsibility to serve all people.

While I affirm the importance of the First Amendment and the value of free speech, I am concerned that HB 4797 ties a core constitutional principle to a single contemporary political activist. Doing so risks turning what should be a shared civic value into a partisan symbol. Scripture repeatedly warns against elevating individuals, aligning faith too closely with political power, or using authority to advance one faction over others.

Christian faith calls us to humility, peacemaking, and love of neighbor — including those with whom we disagree. A state holiday named for a modern political figure associated with division does not reflect those values, nor does it foster unity among the diverse people of West Virginia.

I am also concerned about the bill’s implications for public education. Our schools should teach civic principles in a way that is fair, balanced, and inclusive, not tied to the legacy of any one political movement or personality.

If the Legislature wishes to honor the First Amendment, it should do so in a way that reflects shared values, historical depth, and respect for all citizens — not by elevating one individual or ideology through state power. For these reasons, I respectfully oppose HB 4797 and urge lawmakers to reconsider.

2026 Regular Session HB4797 (Government Organization)

Comment by: Melissa Tharp on January 23, 2026 14:07

I do not think that the legislature needs to take up a bill and waste the taxpayers money and time on this subject. This person's death was a tragedy, but no more so than anyone else who has been murdered. I don't see this legislature taking up a bill to have a holiday for the approximately 3,000 people that died on 9/11. I don't see a holiday for the miner that recently died while saving his crew. Please spend WV taxpayer money on the citizens of WV and the needs of WV. People in this State have no clean water to drink. I think that is a more pressig issue than naming a holiday after a quasi-politician.

2026 Regular Session HB4715 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Sarah Dooley on January 23, 2026 14:01

HB 4715 is critical for improving patient access to care in West Virginia. Physician assistants are rigorously trained, nationally certified, and already providing essential care across our state. Removing unnecessary supervisory barriers will help patients receive timely, high-quality care—especially in rural areas.

2026 Regular Session HB4794 (Education)

Comment by: Matthew Thomas on January 23, 2026 13:44

This bill is an excellent idea. As a teacher, I see too many kids who know little to nothing about our Constitution. This bill will improve civic literacy in our state and better prepare students to be contributing members of society.

2026 Regular Session HB4554 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Nancy on January 23, 2026 13:44

Nope. We do not need a registry for disabled people. You sure don't need to know people's personal medical information. Train your police officers better. Or better yet, don't make police the default responders to all problems that require help.

2026 Regular Session HB4413 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Paige Reiring on January 23, 2026 13:41

This will result in more deaths. That is not an exaggeration. Needle exchange programs have been IMMENSELY helpful in lowering deaths and helping people get opportunities to get help. This is one of the only good things going for people experiencing addiction. Eliminating this program only harms those who are already the worst off. If you're going to eliminate it, what you are going to do to replace it? What "real solution" do you have proposed or ready to go to take the place of this life-saving program?

Because right now, the opioid crisis money isn't actually going to any real solutions. It is going to jails.

2026 Regular Session HB4383 (Education)

Comment by: Paige Reiring on January 23, 2026 13:25

There is a mural in the Charleston city clerk's building about the history of a water crisis that raged through the city and county for years, and the sickness and pollution it spread. I find it reprehensible that our elected public servants have so brazenly chosen to put bill on the backburner, which could provide our state's most vulnerable and ignored counties who have lacked clean drinking water for years. It is a moral failure of the legislature to allow this to go on any longer. Pass this bill NOW. Every moment wasted is another day that land is poisoned and children are made sick.

2026 Regular Session HB4715 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: William Buch on January 23, 2026 13:03

Support this bill for Physician Assistants. I don't understand why NPs with less education and clinical experience already the ability to practice without physicians and PAs do not. If you take the time to actually review the educational and clinical requirements, it is easy to see why this bill needs to be passed.

2026 Regular Session HB4715 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Joan Ratliff on January 23, 2026 12:59

Please support HB4715 for PAs to practice without physician supervision. As an 85-year-old senior citizen, I want the ability to choose the APP I feel is best for my needs. As is, Nurse Practitioners already have the ability to practice without supervision and often are the only ones hired due to legislative rules. If you want to provide better options and opportunities for West Virginians, you will support and help promote this bill.

I am a retired teacher with double masters and know the value of education. The educational differences between PA and NP are significant. PAs require 115-120 grad hours, and 2000 clinical. NPs require ~48 grad hours and ~600 clinical. Please note, It is no longer a requirement and most new NPs have little to no RN experience. They can go direct entry never working as RN, causing shortage of nurses. If you do not, why would you not want to support PAs in this bill?

Sincerely,

Mrs. Ratliff

2026 Regular Session HB4372 (Education)

Comment by: Jordyn Williams on January 23, 2026 12:47

I disagree with this bill because allowing teachers to carry firearms in schools, filled with children and other educators, could go wrong in many different ways. What if a teacher that is eligible to carry a firearm in school has a bad “break through” due to a situation outside of school and is now putting students and other educators in danger? What if a student somehow gains possession of the firearm? These are things that we need to think about before saying that it’s a good idea.

2026 Regular Session HB4509 (Energy and Public Works)

Comment by: Sarah Deacon on January 23, 2026 12:39

Local governments are closest to the people affected by these projects and are best positioned to weigh land use, infrastructure capacity, environmental impacts, emergency services, and long-term community needs. A one-size-fits-all, state-level approach ignores local conditions and undermines local democracy. Economic development should not come at the expense of local control, and communities should retain the right to decide what types of large-scale industrial and energy facilities are appropriate for their area.

2026 Regular Session HB4175 (Government Organization)

Comment by: Maria Brown on January 23, 2026 12:33

I am a co-owner of an auto repair center in West Virginia. I would like to request the opportunity to speak to any of the supporting delegates about the current House Bills 4175 and 4639. We are concerned about both bills which propose to eliminate or change the WV State Inspection program. We would like to know the reasons for eliminating or changing this program. We would also like to know what research was done to support the elimination of the program. Please give me the opportunity to discuss with you the proposed changes and why we oppose changing the program. I have many sound reasons to support the program; first and foremost the regulation of safe vehicles on the highways of West Virginia. As an automotive repair station that boarders Maryland, I have compiled data showing numerous unsafe vehicles due to no regulations. We have our fair share of unsafe vehicles in West Virginia, but the inspection program allows the opportunity to inform car owners of needed repairs before they become more costly. Inspection stations monitor registrations and insurance throughout the year that keeps people in compliance. Uninsured vehicles add an extra burden on West Virginia residents by causing increased auto insurance premiums. I have many more examples which I will discuss if given the opportunity to speak with the delegates and senators supporting these bills. It would be irresponsible as an elected official to proceed without providing sound data to support your stance and allowing the general public and your constituents the opportunity to discuss the effects of the bill. You may contact me at the phone number and email provided in the contact information.

Thank you for your attention to this request and I look forward to hearing from you soon.

2026 Regular Session HB4185 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Ashley Hilliard on January 23, 2026 12:12

I do not agree with this bill. No one needs to go hunting with a machine gun let alone walk the streets with one. What a waste of time.

2026 Regular Session HB4739 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Ashley Hilliard on January 23, 2026 12:08

I agree with this bill. The predator behavior of many websites and companies needs to stop.

2026 Regular Session HB4103 (Education)

Comment by: Ashley N Hilliard on January 23, 2026 12:00

I do not argue with this bill. Church and State are to be separated. Religion should be chosen by the parents, not the school/state.

2026 Regular Session HB4103 (Education)

Comment by: Brinlee Midkiff on January 23, 2026 11:26

I disagree with this bill, religion should be separate from schools. It also excludes children from other religions, or those who do not practice any religion.

2026 Regular Session HB4724 (Finance)

Comment by: Brinlee Midkiff on January 23, 2026 11:15

I fully agree with this bill, charging someone who is terminally ill and may not make it is cruel. It adds extra stress and guilt to both the patient and their family.

2026 Regular Session HB4697 (Education)

Comment by: Matthew Thomas on January 23, 2026 11:02

This bill is frivolous, this is already a regular practice in schools and does not need to be included in state code.

2026 Regular Session HB4654 (Education)

Comment by: Matthew Thomas on January 23, 2026 10:55

I feel that this bill should be amended to include physical education and all fine/performing arts teachers who are excluded in the bill's original text. I believe that this will attract more qualified educators in those fields to teach these crucial classes.

2026 Regular Session HB4185 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Brinlee Midkiff on January 23, 2026 10:54

Theres no reason for a citizen to have a fully automatic weapon like a machine gun. Allowing people to possess machine guns will only allow for more shootings on a much more violent scale.

2026 Regular Session HB4034 (Education)

Comment by: Stacey Miller on January 23, 2026 09:46

This is not needed in public schools first being separation of church and state second school is for learning useful knowledge not to be judged. If my child needs to learn and understand the 10 commandments, he can do so in church the proper place to learn about them. If I think my child needs a religious learning environment, I will send him to a private Christian school that now my tax dollars help fund through the hope scholarship program.

2026 Regular Session HB4017 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Stacey Miller on January 23, 2026 09:37

The state shouldn't have to make contracts with faith-based organizations for child welfare programs if the faith organization actually did the lords work and helped the community in which they prey upon for their tithing. Faith based organizations should be helping keep children out of the welfare system by helping those in need before the state steps in. This blows my mind Churches and other faith organizations finally care because the state will pay them to care.

2026 Regular Session HB4794 (Education)

Comment by: Daniel Farmer on January 23, 2026 09:18

What for? Most of you in Charleston don’t know about it….or just choose not to follow it.

2026 Regular Session HB4093 (Education)

Comment by: malakai I pruitt on January 23, 2026 08:24

I believe even with a concealed carry license nobody other then law enforcement should be in a school with a firearm it puts everyone at risk including that person. law enforcement could see the firearm and might not even know that person has a license for it.

2026 Regular Session HB4071 (Public Education)

Comment by: malakai I pruitt on January 23, 2026 08:17

I don't think school report cards should be put on the internet where people can see it should for parental eyes only. I should be able to look up someones personal grades and schooling information online.

2026 Regular Session HB4044 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Deana Lucion on January 23, 2026 06:57

To whom it may concern, Honorable Delegates: I write this with a urgency on the behalf of the children of our great state. Time and time again the welfare system has got it wrong. More wrong than right. I am not saying that they aren't beneficial but with all the fraud that is being found in our country I would urge for everyone to pass this bill. I know several situations where the children were placed back into the horrible conditions they escaped. Examine your hearts and know this is the right thing to do to help prevent future abuse. It's a very hard topic I understand but I pray that the Lord gives you conviction to do the right thing.

2026 Regular Session HB4753 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Toki on January 23, 2026 02:49

I am 1000% for this. I'm honestly even surprised they were/are even allowed to do this in the first place.

2026 Regular Session HB4745 (Energy and Public Works)

Comment by: Toki on January 23, 2026 02:35

HB4745 is a needed one. WV is already impoverished enough.We dont need to be paying increased rates to export our power.

2026 Regular Session HB4727 (Education)

Comment by: Toki on January 23, 2026 02:17

We definitely need this. WV teachers are not paid nearly enough. Honestly looking at this chart they're paid even worse than I thought previously. Obviously the chart is the minimum teachers pay, but for a job that requires a degree? It is horrendous.

2026 Regular Session HB4724 (Finance)

Comment by: toki on January 23, 2026 01:42

Honestly this would be great. It would reduce the amount of stress the terminally ill patient and possibly their family member(s) who are helping them go through their medical bills. I remember when a close friend of the family was terminal. The whole family was stressed to the absolute limit because of medical bills and trying to make the terminally ill as comfortable as possible. Its quite a hard feat to do while trying to get all the final documents and expenses lined up; while also trying to be there mentally and physically for the terminally ill, and trying to keep yourself together on top of that.

2026 Regular Session HB4352 (Judiciary)

Comment by: toki on January 23, 2026 00:24

honestly this is a good one, kids deserve their own privacy.

2026 Regular Session HB4169 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Toki on January 23, 2026 00:03

(3) A verified certificate of mental health examination by a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist physician, psychologist, licensed professional counselor practicing in compliance with §30-31-1 et seq. of this code, licensed independent clinical social worker practicing in compliance with the provisions of §30-30-1 et seq. of this code, an advanced nurse practitioner with psychiatric certification practicing in compliance with §30-7-1 et seq. of this code, or a physician assistant practicing in compliance with §30-3E-1 et seq. of this code

Ooooh boy this is a no bueno. For starters I would not trust a physician, physicians assistant, social worker, nor psychiatric certification for this. I am 50/50 on the counselor. It depends on how long they've been in the field and how long they've been seeing the patient (counselor wise). As for the others; I dont care if they had a piece of paper saying they had experience in the mental health field previously. If they are not actively practicing and specializing in the mental health field they should not be conducting mental health examinations. You would not go to a dentist for a broken toe because they used to be a podiatrist* would you? yes, they had experience as a podiatrist, but they are not actively practicing, nor currently specializing in podiatry. They are a dentist now, practicing and specializing in dentistry.

*foot doctor (typically)

I would only trust an actively practicing psychologist or psychiatrist to preform mental examinations, as they specialize in mental health as a primary part of their job. Whereas the others listed do not specialize in mental health. Psychiatric certification practicing is a nurse practitioner and although similar to a psychiatrist I would not trust their judgement when it comes to whether or not someone would be a danger to themselves or others. My reasoning is because a psychiatrist has completed their residency and proven themselves competent, whereas a psychiatric nurse practitioner has yet to complete their schooling. Now I would be fine If both the psychiatric nurse practitioner and the supervising psychiatrist both signed off on it. As for the Counselor portion of it. I would be fine if there was a few restrictions for counselors only. One would be that they must have been seeing the patient monthly-bi monthly or more for a year or longer, and with the same counselor. If say the counselor moved practices, but the patient followed, it would not reset the counter. This so the counselor would have an appropriate amount of time to properly assess the patients mental health status and public safety risk as it pertains to firearms.

2026 Regular Session HB4103 (Education)

Comment by: Kylie Helmick on January 22, 2026 22:31

I oppose HB 4034 and HB 4103. Public schools serve students of many different faiths and beliefs, and mandating the display of the Ten Commandments in every classroom crosses the line on separation of church and state. Forcing schools to hang religious texts could create division, make students from other faiths feel excluded, and expose the state to costly legal challenges. Schools should focus on teaching core subjects, critical thinking, and respect for all students, not on promoting a single religious tradition. This bill is unnecessary, unconstitutional, and would distract from the real educational needs of West Virginia students.

2026 Regular Session HB4034 (Education)

Comment by: Kylie Helmick on January 22, 2026 22:30

2026 Regular Session HB4715 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Janice Buch on January 22, 2026 22:26

Please support this bill for PAs to practice without physician supervision. NPs, who often hold same positions, have had less restrictions since 2016 and their programs are less than half the education and clinical experience. Supporting this bill promotes equal opportunity for work and more options for patients.

2026 Regular Session HB4715 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Janice Buch on January 22, 2026 22:21

Please support and pass HB4715 for physician Assistants. They are the only profession in WV not allowed to own a business. Their current degree requirements, average 120 graduate hours and 2000 clinical after obtaining BS degree are greater than any other Master level medically related profession and equal to several and greater than some doctorate level medical related professions.

2026 Regular Session HB4671 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Kylie Helmick on January 22, 2026 22:15

I strongly oppose HB 4671. This bill would require West Virginia to incarcerate individuals for 3 to 5 years in a state penitentiary before deportation, shifting a significant financial burden onto taxpayers. At a time when our correctional system is already strained, this would divert limited law enforcement, court, and prison resources away from addressing violent crime, addiction, and other serious public safety concerns that directly impact West Virginia families. Immigration enforcement is already governed by federal law, and creating a separate state felony tied to immigration status does not make our communities safer. Instead, it risks inconsistent enforcement and unnecessary duplication while separating families and destabilizing communities. HB 4671 prioritizes punishment over public safety, fiscal responsibility, and the well-being of West Virginia communities, and it should not advance.

2026 Regular Session HB4414 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Brittany Moore on January 22, 2026 21:36

This is a step in the right direction. Let’s hold individuals accountable.

2026 Regular Session HB4103 (Education)

Comment by: Ashley Beard on January 22, 2026 21:11

Public schools are not religious spaces. Displaying religion in any form has no place in public school. Spending money pursuing the display of religious “beliefs” in public school is wasteful. Invest in our children learning not displaying the belief of some.

2026 Regular Session HB4433 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Barbara LaRue on January 22, 2026 20:49

Vote No on HB 4433

2026 Regular Session HB4509 (Energy and Public Works)

Comment by: Carolyn Culver on January 22, 2026 20:07

It is imperative that local jurisdictions have a voice in their communities, so that we can protect the economic diversity of West Virginia. Areas like Tucker County already have lucrative tourism based economies that will be irrevocably damaged if not protected. We can all work together to bring prosperity to West Virginia while protecting our Wild and Wonderful heritage and vital local economies for future generations.

2026 Regular Session HB4433 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Laura on January 22, 2026 19:35

Everyone should be able to seek justice for abuse, documented or not. Please fix that. People are human and valuable regardless of status.

2026 Regular Session HB4737 (Government Organization)

Comment by: Edsel Smith on January 22, 2026 19:05

As a member of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and Secretary of the NFPA Architect, Engineers, and Building Officials committee I have numerous opinions. I also am a member of Building Fire Safety Systems Section of NFPA as well as the Health Care Section, and Fire Service Section. NFPA has been discussing single exiting for apartments but no consensus standards have been developed at this time. There are many references from the International Building Code but I only observe the reference to comply with NFPA 13 for sprinkler protection. In many occassions the WV State Fire Code takes precedence over the WV Building Code. I fear the consequences of a single exit in a 6 story building that should require a fire alarm system in compliance with NFPA 72 and a Stair Presurization System in compliance with NFPA 92B. I fear the consequences if someone with evil intent sets a fire in the stairwell that would overwhelm the sprinkler protection and provide no escape for those on the floors above. There is reference the Internation Building Code for rescue and escape in section 12. The WV Fire Code also references rescue and escape windows but they must have fire department access and no more than 20 feet from the ground level. Most fire departments would not be able to render aid to anyone above the 2nd. floor level and multiple rescues would most generally be fruitless. I have 45 years experience in the fire service and I have performed a rescue on the second floor level and this is a difficult task. I have 30 years experience in fire protection and safety. For a fire department to be burdened with multiple rescues would be a disservice by the adoption of this bill. Furthermore a fire department without a multi-million dollar Ladder apparatus would not even have a chance for rescue for those from 3rd to 6th floor. If a single story exit stair is compromised by fire or collapse my concern is there are going to be multiple fire deaths. There are many large cities with paid career firefighters that do not permit Single Exit Stairs. I believe we need to leave this to professionals in the field of fire safety and protection, and health, safety and welfare to develop the code standards before the adoption of this bill and protect multiple people from fire death.

2026 Regular Session HB4034 (Education)

Comment by: Royce A Lyden on January 22, 2026 18:57

This legislation is unnecessary. We cannot legislate morality and the ten commandants only offer one religious perspective. Separation of Church and State must be maintained

2026 Regular Session HB4459 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: julie jones on January 22, 2026 18:38

this is a horrible idea. many adult citizens use pure leaf kratom for pain management to lead a functional life. it poses no threat to the community. should it be regulated? yes, but it’s no more dangerous than alcohol, in fact it’s much safer. get rid of the fake stuff that’s giving pure leaf kratom a bad rap.

2026 Regular Session HB4433 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Ginny Aultman Moore on January 22, 2026 17:29

I urge legislators to oppose this bill because it criminalizes what Christians call “the corporal works of mercy” by prohibiting providing basic assistance to people in need.

2026 Regular Session HB4750 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Philip Kaso, Executive Director WVRSOL on January 22, 2026 17:05

OPPOSITION Response to HB 4750 Prohibiting sex offenders from living within 1000 feet of any school, park, or playground. West Virginians for Rational Sexual Offence Laws (WVRSOL) is a West Virginia non-profit association and an affiliate of the National Association for Rational Sexual Offence Laws (NARSOL), which advocates for society’s segment that is adversely affected by the sex offender registry. We strive to assist families affected by the registry, explore ways to enhance and maintain public safety, recommend prudent use of state funding in this area, and work to ensure that proposed legislation is constitutional. WVRSOL opposes HB 4750 because it is NOT supported by the “Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006” (Sensenbrenner, 2006) and is entirely unnecessary. Moreover, it is unconstitutional on several grounds, e.g., Ex post facto, void for vagueness, void for overbreadth, etc.

HB 4750 is NOT supported by the “Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006” (Sensenbrenner, 2006), and is entirely unnecessary.
- There is also no empirical evidence that the presence or distance restrictions make anyone safer. In fact, they do the opposite.
  - In its decision, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals not only agreed but went on to declare that adding geographic exclusionary zones, among others, made Michigan’s SORNA, post its 2006 and 2011 amendments, punishment and therefore could not be applied retroactively (Does #1-5 v. Snyder, 834 F.3d 696, 704 (6th Cir. 2016))
  - Moreover, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals found that geographic exclusionary zones and in-person reporting requirements constitute onerous restrictions unsupported by evolving research and best practices on recidivism, rehabilitation, and community safety. (Does #1-5 v. Snyder, 834 F.3d 696, 704 (6th Cir. 2016))
  - Additionally, Human Services professionals and nationally recognized experts on sexual abuse and sex offender legislation agree that distance restrictions are counterproductive. According to Gina Puls (Puls, 2016), residency restrictions, which prevent sex offenders from living within an established distance of various places where children gather, have created enormous hardship for released sex offenders as they attempt to reintegrate into society, and the effectiveness of these laws has increasingly been rejected.

- Establishing presence or distance restrictions expands the use and impact of registry law in West Virginia. It invites litigation if passed, as it shifts the WV registry from a “civil regulatory schema” to a “criminal punishment schema,” which violates the Ex post facto clauses of the West Virginia and U.S. Constitutions.
  - Article III, Section 4 of the West Virginia Constitution prohibits “No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of a contract, shall be passed.” (West Virginia Constitution, n.d.) There is little doubt that this bill could be anything other than a retroactive increase in punishment, ex post facto, because it seeks to place retroactive restrictions and punishment on registrants who have completed their court-ordered sentences.
  - WV §15-12-2 (a) makes the WV registry retroactively and prospectively adding a presence or distance restriction to the code, coupled with the above clause, would make the presence or distance restriction retroactive, and, as already established above would therefore transition the WV registry schema from a “civil regulatory schema” into a “criminal punishment schema,” which violates the Ex post facto clauses of the West Virginia and U.S. Constitutions.
    - Under ex post facto principles of the United States and West Virginia Constitutions, a law passed after the commission of an offense which increases the punishment, lengthens the sentence or operates to the detriment of the accused, cannot be applied to him. (Hensler v. Cross - West Virginia - Case Law - VLEX 895334483, n.d.)
- Other jurisdictions have attempted to impose similar restrictions, only to have them struck down on constitutional grounds – most recently in Does v. Snyder, where the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that Michigan’s SORNA constitutes punishment and may not be applied retroactively. (Does #1-5 v. Snyder, 834 F.3d 696, 704 (6th Cir. 2016))
HB 4750 violates the Void for Vagueness Doctrine.
- It would be difficult for registrants to know with certainty how to comply with this language. It would not likely survive a “void for vagueness” challenge. The “void-for-vagueness doctrine” requires first that a statute must be clear enough for those subject to it to understand what conduct would render them liable to its penalties. The standard for determining whether a statute provides fair notice is “whether persons of common intelligence must necessarily guess at [the statute’s] meaning.” (Galloway v. State, 781 A.2d 851)
- With the current language, “… prohibited from residing within 3,000 feet of the real property comprising a public or nonpublic elementary or secondary school, a childcare facility, a residential child-caring agency, a children’s group care home or any playground, ballpark or other recreational facility” registrants would have to guess at what constitutes “reside”; does this include periods of time visiting friends or family, for how many days, is this a permanent residency or temporary, and does it matter, etc? How to measure 3,000 feet; is that door-to-door, property line to property line, etc? What constitutes a “playground, ballpark, or other recreational facility”? Is the GoMart ballpark in Charleston, WV, a restricted park? Does their neighbor’s backyard swingset and monkey bars constitute a playground, etc?
- With the current language, each jurisdiction would have to unilaterally decide what constitutes “reside,” “3,000 feet”, and “playground, ballpark, or other recreational facility.” This interpretation violates the second criterion that criminal statutes provide “legally fixed standards and adequate guidelines for police, judicial officers, triers of fact and others whose obligation it is to enforce, apply and administer the penal laws.” (Bowers v. State, 389 A.2d 341)
- With the current language, there are no provisions addressing pre-existing residences, no provisions for the financial implications of forcing registrants and their families from their privately-owned property should it fall into the 3,000-foot restriction, and no provisions for what should happen if there is a pre-existing residence and a new restricted facility is open/built thereafter.
HB 4750 violates the Void for Overbroad Doctrine.
- A law is considered “overbroad” when it is “not sufficiently restricted to a specific subject or purpose.” (FindLaw Legal Dictionary)
- HB 4750 applies to “All registrants,” not just those whose offense involved a minor or who are on parole, probation, or supervised release.

WVRSOL is committed to legislation that measurably reduces sexual offenses, protects families, and enhances public safety. HB 4750 does none of these things. Consequently, WVRSOL opposes HB 4750, and we respectfully urge the House Judiciary Committee and the House to vote ‘No’ on HB 4750.

Works Cited

Does v. Snyder. No. 15-1536. United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. August 25, 2016. https://casetext.com/case/doe-v-snyder-2 Galloway v. State, 781 A.2d 851 (Court of Appeals of Maryland 2001), 365 Md. 599. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1494306/galloway-v-state/ Puls, G. (2016). No Place to Call Home: Rethinking Residency Restrictions for Sex Offenders. Boston College Journal of Law and Social Justice, 36, 319. Sensenbrenner, F. J. (2006, July 27). H.R.4472 - 109th Congress (2005-2006): Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (2005-12-08) [Legislation]. https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/4472 Void for Vagueness and the Due Process Clause: Doctrine and Practice. (n.d.). LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved January 19, 2026, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-5/void-for-vagueness-and-the-due-process-clause-doctrine-and-practice West Virginia Constitution. (n.d.). Retrieved January 19, 2026, from https://www.wvlegislature.gov/wvcode/wv_con.cfm?lv=true#articleIII Bowers v. State, 389 A.2d 341. No. No. 150, September Term, 1977. Court of Appeals of Maryland. 13 July 1978. 27 February 2017. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2073422/bowers-v-state/ FindLaw Legal Dictionary. 1996. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law. 27 February 2017. http://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/overbroad.html Hensler v. Cross, 558 S.E.2d 330, 210 W.Va. 530 (W. Va. 2001)https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/hensler-v-cross-no-895334483

2026 Regular Session HB4195 (Energy and Public Works)

Comment by: Frederick and Joyce Perlove on January 22, 2026 15:57

Please consider this bill by Delegate Hansen to cap rates for the citizens of West Virginia. This would provide relief to West Virginia residents and businesses from the rapidly rising utility rates by placing a temporary cap on electrical utility rates. Sincerely, Fred and Joyce Perlove 302 Echols Ln Lewisburg WV 24901

2026 Regular Session HB4433 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Lori Mathieu on January 22, 2026 15:37

Today, I am urging all members to vote NO on HB4433. To be very clear: human trafficking (especially involving children) is real and must be addressed. Most of us can agree on that. But HB4433 does not focus on stopping traffickers. It redefines 'human trafficking' so broadly that ordinary West Virginians could face felony charges for everyday acts of service: giving someone a ride, offering a place to sleep, or assisting a neighbor...based solely on immigration status. It doesn’t strengthen public safety; rather, it puts people helping their neighbors at legal risk. Harmful laws are often introduced as “law and order.” - If this were Nazi Germany, HB4433 would be the kind of law used to punish people who hid Anne Frank. - If this were the era of slavery, HB4433 would be used to prosecute those who helped people escape bondage through the Underground Railroad. HB4433 forces people of faith to choose between following their conscience and complying with the state. Scripture does not say, “Help the stranger only if they have the right paperwork.” It says “I was a stranger, and you took me in.” — Matthew 25:35 & “Do not oppress the foreigner among you.” — Exodus 23:9 This bill should concern anyone who values civil liberties and the right to privacy. It expands state authority, blurs the meaning of criminal intent, and allows seizure of vehicles or property from people whose only action may have been helping someone in need. West Virginia should stand for laws supporting justice, dignity, and personal responsibility; not ones that erode our shared sense of humanity. VOTE NO ON HB4433

2026 Regular Session HB4104 (Education)

Comment by: Brayden Elkins on January 22, 2026 15:15

i disagree with this, students should not have to rely on a test about the united states of america , in order to get a diploma, and gradute high school, or to get through the 8th grade. this makes the fact that we have to go through 12 years of school , and then having to take a citizenship test at the end, basically making those 12 years nothing.

2026 Regular Session HB4653 (Energy and Public Works)

Comment by: Jacquelyn Milliron on January 22, 2026 14:31

Dear Legislators, Please vote yes on HB 4653. Ratepayers across WV can no longer tolerate having some of the highest water and sewer rates in the nation while still being at the bottom economically. It is time that WV Government start regulating monopolies because let's face it, monopolies aren't subject to competition and West Virginians are being smothered in corporate public health schemes. This bill clearly advocates for ratepayers to NOT be required to buy themselves back over and over again through utility equity acquisition schemes which drive up rates for people who, statutorily, have nowhere else to go for potable drinking water and sanitation. This Bill is a great start to leveling the field advantage that some utilities have had for some time now. Please vote yes on this Bill! Thank you for your consideration of my comment. Sincerely, Jacquelyn Milliron (Jefferson)

2026 Regular Session HB4371 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Rebecca Martin on January 22, 2026 13:55

I support this Bill. I am 63 andv have used Medical Cannabis for 3 years for my Fibromyalgia and Neuropathy. I am on disability. The yearly cost of obtaining a medical card is difficult for me. Also my diseases are chronic and will not go away, but I still have to go through this process. I am happily off 3 pharmaceuticals because of using legal cannabis capsules. It has been life changing for me. In 3 years I have lost 50lbs due to stopping the 3 Pharmaceuticals. I have been able to live a much better, healthier life.

2026 Regular Session HB4034 (Education)

Comment by: Jordyn Williams on January 22, 2026 13:09

As a Christian teenager, I have to say that I disagree with this bill. I say this because you cannot make someone want to do something if you force them. Putting the Ten Commandments up in schools are going to make unreligious students feel as if we are pushing our religion in their faces, which is going to push them farther away from God rather than pulling them closer. Also, there are many different students that practice different religions and I feel as if putting the Ten Commandments up in schools will make them feel somewhat less than.

2026 Regular Session HB4030 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Carl on January 22, 2026 13:04

I would just advise that HB4030, while aiming for clarity, could actually work against your constituents. Standardizing leases may make them easier to read, but it may also limit landowners’ ability to negotiate custom clauses or terms that protect their interests or provide additional financial benefits on issues important to their specific land. West Virginia has one of the most complex land ownership histories in the United States, shaped by centuries of fragmented inheritance, coal and mineral rights, and a patchwork of private, corporate, and state holdings. This unique complexity makes it especially important that landowners retain the ability to negotiate leases and protect their interests, rather than being constrained by one-size-fits-all standardized contracts. Additionally, if the standardized terms favor industry defaults, this could benefit developers more than landowners and disadvantage property owners. I would not support this.

2026 Regular Session HB4587 (Education)

Comment by: Josh Roark on January 22, 2026 12:56

Education and social work are two of the lowest paying job options in our state, but are also two of the most needed. Why are people trying to limit funding for these programs? This is too vague and issuing blanket bans on funding for education is a poor choice, especially for WV. We should be working on increasing wages and benefits for these fields, not cutting off future generations. We already have teachers and CPS workers with completely unrelated degrees, this makes no sense. It's also unrealistic, as most "high-wage" jobs require graduate or professional degrees, such as MD or JD, yet you have to first get a four-year degree to apply to these programs. A BS in Biology is not going to offer many "high-wage" jobs, but is a good base for a future doctor. This sounds good to people who don't think too much about it, like it will save money, but would ultimately hurt our state, especially children, the ones who benefit the most from these "low-wage" jobs.

2026 Regular Session HB4038 (Energy and Public Works)

Comment by: Carl on January 22, 2026 12:53

I strongly support House Bill 4038 because it provides a necessary check on unchecked wind development and addresses real-world reliability challenges. Wind energy is intermittent and weather-dependent, often producing little or no electricity during calm periods, making it difficult to rely on as a primary power source without extensive backup. Wind facilities frequently operate at much lower capacity than firm sources like coal, requiring far more installed capacity to match reliable output.

Practical experience from other regions highlights these challenges: turbines in Europe, the U.S., and Australia have suffered mechanical failures, including blade and bearing issues, forcing them offline for extended periods. Projects like these experienced catastrophic blade failures, and extreme weather can dramatically reduce output when meeting demand is most critical.

Equally concerning is the type of companies that bring these projects to West Virginia. These corporations are focused on short-term profit rather than investing in our future and long-term energy independence. When profit-driven developers dominate wind infrastructure, local taxpayers and landowners bear the risks, while financial benefits flow elsewhere.

West Virginia is rich in natural resources, which is already a foundation for a strong energy future. Responsible development of these existing capabilities supports high-paying local jobs, strengthens rural economies, and generates critical tax revenue for schools, infrastructure, and public services. By carefully limiting wind expansion while investing in these proven energy resources, the state can ensure a reliable, resilient, and economically balanced energy future for all West Virginians.

HB4038 allows West Virginia to retain control over our energy resources, protect rural communities, and ensure reliable integration with the grid before committing to wind projects. I urge Delegates to support this bill to promote a balanced and resilient energy future for our state. Thank you!

2026 Regular Session HB4073 (Health and Human Resources)

Comment by: Tim Reinard on January 22, 2026 12:47

WE are not suffering throough out breaks like other states because we don't allow exemptions. And letts remember that federal funding for rural hospitals may be in jeoprady with the BBB on a fedeeral level. And forgive me for asking but aren't the tax payers of WV going to end up getting stuck with the bill if unvacinated kids and adults go to the hospital and can't pay for all the treatments that are required to get the patient helathy.

2026 Regular Session HB4071 (Public Education)

Comment by: Tim Reinard on January 22, 2026 12:43

All that Data is available at https://wveis.k12.wv.us/essa/choose_district_sum.html?selected_district=029&year=2025. Think the legislature should spend more time on rules for Charter schools as to what level of score they must obtain to stay in business and who checks finances for those schools. They need controls also.

2026 Regular Session HB4553 (Education)

Comment by: Josh Roark on January 22, 2026 12:42

Why are we proposing tuition reimbursement for correctional officers? I'll admit, I don't have a large knowledge base related to corrections, but if they already work in the field, why do they need a four-year degree? And why is this proposed at the same time as HB 4587, intending to limit/ban funding for "low-wage degrees"?

2026 Regular Session HB4502 (Energy and Public Works)

Comment by: Josh Roark on January 22, 2026 12:38

What is the purpose of this bill? After the failed attempt to create an Autism registry, I am highly skeptical of the motives behind this proposal. As a father of two children with ASD, I am uncomfortable with this proposal. It feels exclusionary and exploitative, as well as insulting, as the only other specialty plates currently available on the WV DMV website, related to "medical or health conditions", are for cancer awareness. If the true purpose is raising awareness, I apologize, but with everything else that has happened over the last year regarding ASD, I am strongly opposed to anything that may further aggravate the already existing stereotypes and misconceptions.

2026 Regular Session HB4371 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Caressa B Stoller on January 22, 2026 12:37

Legalization of Recreational Cannabis will give West Virginia the excess tax money needed to thrive. West Virginia has failed to thrive for many years. This is a simple bill that can change all that. Many studies have shown that cannabis is nowhere near as bad as alcohol and alcohol is legal and acceptable almost everywhere. Please do your part and vote yes to legalize Recreational Cannabis in West Virginia. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Caressa Stoller Monongalia County Voter

2026 Regular Session HB4052 (Judiciary)

Comment by: Tim Reinard on January 22, 2026 12:35

It seems to me that this bill sets a 14 foot zone where no one can be as who decides what is harrassment. If someone is quietly filming from 6 foot and someone decides that is too close and constitues harassment then a law abiding citizen is denied their constitutional rights. May want to look at this again before the lawsuits begin

2026 Regular Session HB4090 (Public Education)

Comment by: Josh Roark on January 22, 2026 12:22

In what capacity are chaplains intended to be utilized by the schools? In what way are they qualified? And what is considered "willful malice"? I accept there are religious persons with genuine and sincere desire to help others, even in some cases without invoking their particular branch of beliefs. Without any standards or policies in place, however, this is simply too vague to be acceptable. IF this were to be allowed, it would need to have strict protocols in place limiting the scope of practice allowed as well as offering options for parents to deny access to their children by said persons. Also, what prohibits a given board from discriminating against certain beliefs? Is this solely for Christian practitioners? Is there any recourse if a Buddhist, Muslim, Scientologist, etc is denied this position while a Methodist or Baptist isn't?

Public Comments

*foot doctor (typically)

Works Cited

Senate

House

Legislation

Follow