I have major support for the temperature regulation. I have been to several facilities during summer months in which the heat was so stifling that it melted the glue holding things together in my cell. With extreme heat there is no real remedy. There aren’t but so many articles of clothing you can take off, ice in most facilities is limited, and the cold water from the cell sink is tepid at best.

Virginia does not need a legal pathway for human experimentation. This bill creates a vague carve-out that allows health tech and AI companies to bypass safety and consumer protections, with no clear beneficiaries and no demonstrated need. If you can’t explain who it helps or what it does, it shouldn’t become law. Please do not vote for this bill.

The Health Care Learning Lab and Regulatory Improvement Plan is a fast track for allowing unscrupulous companies unregulated access to Virginian's health. In a time where we are seeing an increase in both the inefficiencies and structural failures created by artificial intelligence integration it is deeply concerning to see this bill (that has been struck down 5 times before) once again before the house of delegates. Virginia has a dark legacy of unethical human experimentation and the performance of scientific study/procedure without the consent of patients. As a leader in the US eugenicist movement, Virginia forcibly sterilized thousands between 1924 and 1979 only slowing in 1988 after procedures were put in place requiring informed consent in most cases. In 2001 the Virginia General Assembly passed a joint resolution expressing regret for VA's aggressive eugenics practices as a misuse of "a respectable scientific veneer to cover [unethical] activities." No Virginian Health Technology Company has spoken in favor of this bill. With our hospitals and medical research facilities leading the US in neurological disorders, cardiovascular medicine, type 1 diabetes, and oncology it is alarming that no state-based company has come out in support of this deregulation. "Innovation in health" is a vague description that opens the door for practices that have ambiguous or unsubstantiated benefits at best and are downright dangerous at worse. If we cannot clearly identify the benefits of deregulation then the regulation is not the innovation stopper it claims to be. OpenAI and Neuralink's aggressive lobbying around the country looking for footholds into established health institutions or disenfranchised communities for microchip development or other human experimentation is cause for immediate concern. It is not hard to draw the conclusion that those companies and other ai "innovation first, people last" projects seek to expand their influence over VA politics beyond the construction of power-grid sapping data centers. Thirty eight years ago the Virginia General Assembly came together to recognize that in order to protect and preserve the safety of Virginians across the state, regulation was critical as was recognizing the dangers of nonconsenting medical procedures. Twenty five years ago the Virginia General Assembly recognized that a blind eye and lack of oversight had lead to the cruel and unethical treatment of our most vulnerable populations. Virginia must continue to move forward with its protection of its population and not backslide into permitting unethical treatment and experimentation. This bill has failed to pass for five years and may this be the last time it fails, never to be introduced again.

There is no need to create a legal pathway for human experimentation in Virginia. In summary, this bill seeks to allow "health tech companies" who seek to utilize AI in health care in some form, to have "restrictive" regulations lifted for them in order to gain market access so that they may "prove" to the Commonwealth if the regulations were necessary in the first place. Either intentionally or unintentionally, this bill will create a carve out for companies like Neuralink or similar companies to skirt pass safety regulations, consumer protections, and/or emerging & existing regulations about artificial intelligence in VA. Health innovation is regulated almost exclusively by the federal government. Products that have completed clinical trials and processed through the FDA, do not have additional health state regulations to overcome. There could be regulations that indirectly impact health innovation such as: - Consumer Protections - Charity care requirements - Human Research - Human Cloning Advocates have failed to give a compelling reason for this bill, despite this being the 5th year the bill has been filed. In all 5 years, not a single Virginian health tech company has spoken in favor of the bill or indicated willingness to participate in the program. When asked about potential beneficiaries or targeted regulations, advocates failed to mention specifics and only offered generalized statements about existing products. If you don't know what a bill will do, don't vote for it. There is not a multiple of legitimate health tech companies residing in Virginia that are seeking to utilize "life-saving products" if only VA regulations "weren't standing in their way". There is a risk though, of creating a backdoor for a sketchy companies with influence to take gain market access. The Commonwealth does not need to create a carve out for “Snake-AI-L solutions”, "The Tuskegee Experiment Reimagined", or “Mark of the Beast Incorporated” to make a quick buck at the expense of Virginians health. Given the history of human experimentation in the US, the inclusion of language that health tech companies must have targeted engagement of diverse communities or populations less than 300% FPL is EXTREMELY concerning. Considering both Neuralink and OpenAI publicly stated they intend to expand operations in 2026, if a health tech company was putting microchips in the brains of vulnerable populations around the Commonwealth, wouldn't it be important that existing regulations were still in place? There is a right way to do things and a wrong way. Virginians deserve real solutions, not flawed, ambiguous, and far reaching proposals such as this. Health care innovation is STRONG in the Commonwealth and it so without this bill. If any health tech company exists that would genuinely like to see this proposal, they should speak with their representative and submit specific legislation to addressing that need specifically. Again, THERE IS NO NEED FOR A LEGAL PATHWAY FOR HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION IN VIRGINIA. DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS BILL

These should be basic right standards. These cause less trauma, less injuries, deaths, and for a better society

Dear Madam or Sir, I urge you to support the removal of fluoride in the public water systems in Virginia. While we have all ingested fluoride for decades in public water, we now know that fluoride is a neurotoxin. As a cancer survivor, I am especially attuned to chemicals and toxins in our environment and am concerned that I do not have an option to use tap water without fluoridation. I am concerned that prior acceptable levels of fluoride do not recognize the current concerns about fluoride and our public water systems are not taking those factors into account. Water filtration systems are expensive and out of reach for most Virginians. I urge you to take all necessary steps to remove fluoride from our public water by passing HB 537. Thank you.

Delta Dental supports the current guidelines on fluoride and its use as a necessary way to prevent tooth decay and promote oral health. Community water fluoridation is a critical public health measure, including in underserved areas where access to proper oral health care is more limited and rates of tooth decay are higher.

I write in opposition to HB 537 and ask that it be defeated. Hundreds of peer reviewed reports dmonstrate the value of water fluoridation, especially in low income communities that typically lack access to dental services and dental insurance. It is well documented that the cities with the worst dental health outcomes do not fluordate their water. I have 37 years running water systems and believe this is one of the best public health services communities can provide. Please defeat HB537.

As a public health professional, I oppose this bill. Decades of research show that adding fluoride to community water is safe, effective, and helps prevent tooth decay. Fluoride strengthens tooth enamel and protects oral health for people of all ages. Some comments compare Virginia to other countries that do not add fluoride to their water. These comparisons are not accurate. Many of those countries have stronger dental care systems and other supports that reduce the need for fluoride. Virginia and the United States do not have the same conditions. The cost of adding fluoride to water is small compared to the high cost of treating tooth decay and oral disease. Fluoride helps prevent problems before they start, which lowers the need for expensive dental and emergency care. About 750,000 Virginians do not have dental insurance. Removing fluoride would hit these individuals and families the hardest. Poor oral health is also linked to other serious health problems, including diabetes. Taking away a proven prevention tool would increase health problems and costs for both families and the health care system. For these reasons, I urge lawmakers to oppose this bill and continue supporting community water fluoridation as a simple and effective way to protect public health.

The number one disease in children under the age of 14 is carious lesions (dental cavities). The increase in cases if fluoridation is taken out of the water supply will be catastrophic within 3 years. The act of introducing fluoride into the water was largely done to help prevent the amount of cases of rampant decay among those in lower socioeconomic areas. You will be doing a disservice to the children you are representing. Your actions will cause pain to young children in the long run, please don't do that. Marlene Rhodes RDH, BSDH, CDA President Elect Virginia Dental Hygienist Association, Faculty Reynolds Community College

My name is Peggy Forbes and I have been a fully employed dental hygienist since 1979. I am unique in that I have been employed at the same dental practice for the entire time of my career. The dentist’s have died or retired, but I have stayed. I feel I bring a unique point of view because I have seen families grow up and see what things work in their dental health. Fluoride works. I work in McLean Virginia. It’s now an area of affluence but it was not always that way. I have had the privilege of treating foreign patients from the World Bank and embassies, as well as citizens of Northern Virginia, DC and Maryland. The foreign patients’ teeth had a lot more tooth decay. Unless patients were receiving an oral fluoride medication when they were a young child, their teeth would be softer and not as resistant to acids in the mouth caused by carbohydrates. Fluoride in the water supply came about because in our country there was naturally occurring fluoride in some people’s well water. Their teeth were very hard, brownish and grayish in color. I had a dental patient raised in Arizona who had dental fluorosis. Her teeth were not pretty but they were hard as rocks. Industry took note and investigated why? A very small amount of fluoride was determined to provide benefits to the developing tooth enamel. Prior to fluoride being placed in the water supply, there was a tremendous amount of tooth decay. I would refer to those people as metal mouths because of all the amalgam/silver fillings and metal crowns that patients including my older family members had. The fluoride makes the matrix of the teeth more acid resistant. If that is not given to a child their teeth will be softer and as an adolescent and as an adult they will develop a lot of tooth decay which will be very, very expensive. Not just fillings but crowns an root canals. Fluoride is one of the cheapest public health measures that has been instituted with huge benefits to our citizens. If you take it out of the public water supply their will be dire consequences in poor dental health which will cost citizens thousands and thousands of dollars for their lifetimes. The fluoride in the water supply is controlled locally and if citizens feel that it does not provide value than it can be taken out of the water supply. I had one older dental patient who became allergic to fluoride. She started to notice a sensitivity in her gums and teeth not pain after she had her teeth cleaned professionally by me and then she noticed after she brushed her teeth at home. She had an ELISA allergy test done and it was determined that she had become allergic to fluoride. So she brushed her teeth with baking soda and I used a nonfluoride paste when I polished her teeth. She did not have any problems after that. Fluoride in the water supply has a huge benefit to public health. If it is removed dire consequences will occur that will involve a lot more costly visits to dentists and a tremendous amount of money being paid for dental services. Citizens have more to gain in fluoridation in the water supply. I would ask where are we purchasing the fluoride to put in the water supply? Is the source or type different than before? If you are looking into reasons for health problems I would suggest you look at the dosages of the vaccinations that children are receiving. I talked to an expert in multiple births and she felt that the DOSAGES of vaccines need to be spread out to absorb the medicine properly.

As a social worker in Virginia, I work with many individuals who lack access to dental care. Fluoride is naturally occurring and safe at optimal levels. Fluoridation of public water keeps the naturally occurring level at a safe level providing health benefits to all members of a community and especially for children in preventing dental decay.

As a health advocate and lifelong resident of Virginia, I oppose HB 537. Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral in fresh drinking water that has been shown to be safe and beneficial to oral health through decades of peer-reviewed research. Virginia leads the country in optimal community water fluoridation rates with nearly 100% of public water systems offering this health benefit. When water fluoridation is introduced, communities see a 25% increase in the number of individuals living cavity-free. Virginia currently saves an estimated $214 million each year in avoidable dental treatment costs—about $32 per person—thanks to fluoridated water. Dental disease is the most common chronic condition among Virginia’s children, affecting their ability to learn, grow, and thrive. When Calgary, Canada, ceased its program, it saw a 78% increase in urgent dental treatments for children. In Israel, the cavity rate nearly doubled after ending fluoridation, even with the addition of a national free dental care program. I urge you to continue supporting evidence-based policies that protect children, families, and those most at risk. Reject HB 537 and continue protecting the oral health of all Virginians.

As a water paying customer and active consumer, I support this bill to prohibit fluoride in our drinking water. Fluoride is a neurotoxin. The Fluoride in the dentist office is not the same as the fluoride that is put in our waters. Additionally, the fluoride is spit out and not ingested like our water. The claim that children who don’t get dental care will get protection from the flouride in the water is absurd. Why are kids still getting cavities if they have fluoride in the water?? Flouride is in many tooth paste and also in our foods. This is overloading our bodies of unnecessary treatment. This is also not informed consent and consumers have to pay extra in order to remove it with expensive filters. Some of us can not even afford to do that much. Keep our water as pure and natural as possible and save tax payer money by not adding fluoride. Let the individual and their families decide on their own how much fluoride they really need. Please vote yes in supporting this bill to prohibit fluoride in our waters.

I oppose House Bill 537, which seeks to ban community water fluoridation, because it would undermine a proven and essential public health measure that helps prevent dental caries (cavities) across the lifespan. Community water fluoridation is a safe, effective, and equitable strategy that reduces the risk of cavities by strengthening tooth enamel and promoting remineralization, particularly for individuals and communities at higher risk for developing cavities. Fluoridated water plays a critical role in protecting populations who may have limited access to routine dental care, oral hygiene education, or preventive services. It is especially impactful in reducing childhood caries, which remains one of the most common chronic diseases among children, while also benefiting adults by lowering the incidence of decay and associated complications. Removing this preventive measure would disproportionately affect vulnerable populations and widen existing oral health disparities. As a future graduate of Virginia Commonwealth University’s Dental Hygiene Program, I am trained in evidence-based dentistry and public health principles. My education has provided me with a strong understanding of the science behind fluoridation and its role in preventing disease at the community level. Based on this knowledge, banning community water fluoridation would be a step backward in addressing the significant dental public health needs of both children and adults. Protecting and maintaining community water fluoridation is vital to improving oral health outcomes and supporting overall public health.

Adjusting Fluoride levels in community water supplies is a safe, cost effective and proven public health intervention that reduces tooth decay. Taking it completely out of community water supplies disproportionately affects lower socioeconomic and more vulnerable population groups since they can’t afford to seek private dental care. I personally experienced dental decay when I was only 2 years old and was extremely fortunate that my mother valued professional dental care. She took me to her dentist who provided excellent care for me AND he urged her to take me to community fluoride application events at local public schools. I fear for the young children who might not have a mother who is able to obtain proper dental care for her children. How will they be able to pay attention in school if they are in pain from untreated dental decay? How will they be able to thrive?

I support HB537 to remove fluoride from the water supply for the following reasons: 1. Fluoride in the water supply is being used as a drug in an effort to prevent tooth decay. This is a violation the basic tenet of informed consent. You do not have a choice as to whether or not you receive fluoride. Further, this disproportionately affects the poor who have limited resources to purchase filters to remove fluoride from their water. 2. The fluoride in the water is not the fluoride of the dentist office. The dentist uses sodium fluoride in small quantities and ask you to spit or suctions up the paste. Fluorosilicic acid, hydrofluorosilicic acid or sodium silicofluoride are the by-products of chemical production. 3. Fluoride is a known neurotoxin. 4. The CDC does not know the safe limit. .7ppm is a guess. They have no data to support safety at this level. 5. The CDC does not recommend fluoride ingestion for pregnant women knowing neurological harm to the fetus. 6. The CDC does not recommend fluoride for newborns up to 6 months of age knowing neurological harm. 7. Because of known, admitted neurological harm at 1.5ppm, the EPA suggests a 10x safety threshold BELOW that number putting fluoride at a maximum of .15ppm. Adding additional fluoride is unnecessary and unsafe. The safety level for most Virginia localities is 0.7 ppm. 8. This is no dose control measure for fluoride, placing infants, children and those with kidney and thyroid disease at higher risk. 9. The substances used in the water supply are not licensed by the FDA for ingestion. 10. Eliminating fluoride from the water supply will cut the release of fluoride into waste water and the ecosystem. 11. Eliminating fluoride from the water supply will provide cost savings to the each community because it no longer needs to be purchase or store these hazardous chemicals and reduces handling risks for those involved in adding it to the water supply.

Dear Committee, As a licensed Registered Dental Hygienist and active leader within the Virginia Dental Hygienists' Association, I strongly oppose this bill and the removal of fluoride from public water supply. For those of you who are not healthcare providers or dental practitioners like me or my colleagues, I suspect most of you have not seen the effects that cavities have on the general population and do not understand the long term effects on overall health. This affects all age groups, populations and communities. For those that are privileged to have had access to dental care and are fortunate to say they have never had a toothache or dental infection good for you, but for those that are not that fortunate, public health measures like this reduce those risks from childhood forward. They reduce children ending up in the ER due to dental infection, or missing school due to toothaches. Provinces in Canada attempted to do this, and failed as the uptick in hospitalized children due to dental infections increased significantly. I plead as someone who sees patients regularly, don't take away this preventive effort to maintain public health. If you are believing rhetoric from people who don't study the real science and research, don't actually see patients as dental care providers, and don't have a vested interest in yours or your communities dental care, I urge you to change your mind and listen those who do actually care of yours and the publics dental health.

Comments Document

I have a 16 year old son. Today he drank five 8 oz glasses of water, 1.5 cups pasta cooked in water, 1.5 cups rice cooked in water. We live in Chesapeake, VA. What dose of fluoride did he receive today? At what point did I consent to the State of Virginia dosing my son with a known neurotoxin? If I give him a vitamin I know exactly the dose he is receiving of vitamin C, D, etc... I first started researching water fluoridation when I noticed white spots on my son's teeth. They are due to an OVERDOSE of fluoride called dental fluorosis and those spots are permanent damage to his teeth. When we lived in NY, I received the attached product information sheet for the Fluorosilicic Acid (fluoride) being added to our water- please note that they were ADDING ARSENIC and LEAD to our water. The EPA’s limit for adding arsenic to water is ZERO. I have no idea how they have gotten away with adding this toxic chemical to our water! You can’t control the dose, you can’t control the poison! Please stop water fluoridation immediately!

I am opposing this bill. Fluoridation of the public water source is still the greatest public health initiative in the United States. Adding 0.5 parts of fluoride out of 1 million reduced the risk of tooth decay immensely. I conducted research in my Master's of Public Health on how tooth loss affects underserved populations and increases the risk of medical comorbidities. Dental decay contributes to untreated dental disease, infections, and tooth loss. Water fluoridation alleviates and reduces the incidence of these. The research shows that caries are reduced with fluoridated water. The public can choose to filter water or drink bottled water if they do not wish to consume tap water. However, fluoride is in food such as tea, coffee, seafood, potatoes, raisins, spinach, grapes, and nuts!!! So you would have to remove foods that have fluoride, too. This is counterintuitive. I am writing in opposition and hope you will consider carefully how much this will affect the public.

"As a dentist/dental hygienist/oral health professional/health advocate/resident of Virginia/etc, I oppose HB 537. Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral in fresh drinking water that has been shown to be safe and beneficial to oral health through decades of peer-reviewed research. Virginia leads the country in optimal community water fluoridation rates with nearly 100% of public water systems offering this health benefit. When water fluoridation is introduced, communities see a 25% increase in the number of individuals living cavity-free. Virginia currently saves an estimated $214 million each year in avoidable dental treatment costs—about $32 per person—thanks to fluoridated water. Dental disease is the most common chronic condition among Virginia’s children, affecting their ability to learn, grow, and thrive. When Calgary, Canada, ceased its program, it saw a 78% increase in urgent dental treatments for children. In Israel, the cavity rate nearly doubled after ending fluoridation, even with the addition of a national free dental care program. I urge you to continue supporting evidence-based policies that protect children, families, and those most at risk. Reject HB 537 and continue protecting the oral health of all Virginians. Additionally, the citizens of the Commonwealth depend on you making decisions based on facts and science and not the influence of others.

Comments Document

I oppose HB 537. Community Water Fluoridation was included in the CDC's top 10 public health achievements of the 20th century. Virginia leads the nation in CWF rates with nearly all public water systems providing the optimal fluoride levels of 0.7 milligrams per liter. Fluoride, a naturally occurring mineral in fresh drinking water, prevents at least 25% of tooth decay and strengthens teeth. Virginia currently saves an estimated $214 million each year in avoidable dental treatment costs thanks to fluoridated water. Maintaining ideal fluoride levels protects the oral health of all Virginians with access to public water, even when they lack access to other forms of oral health care. We could quickly see these benefits reverse should this natural mineral be banned as seen in Calgary, Canada and Israel when they stopped CWF. Calgary saw a 78% increase in urgent dental treatments for children Israel's cavity rate nearly doubled after ending fluoridation, even with the addition of a national free dental care program. Just like any other substance, dose matters. Decades of rigorous, peer-reviewed research has demonstrated the safety and health benefits of fluoride at the US recommended levels. A one pager is attached with information and references on CWF. Vote NO on HB 537 to continue supporting evidence-based policies that protect children, families, and those most at risk.

As a concerned resident of Virginia, I fully support HB537 calling for the removal of fluoride in public water. Its risks far outweigh any (perceived) benefits and it is harmful to our health. Please vote in favor of this bill to stop poisoning the citizens of Virginia. Thank you.

There is no consent to "medicate" the population with fluoride. It has been proven (but hidden) that fluoride is a toxin as stated in the MSDS sheet (Sigma Aldrich): H301 Toxic if swallowed. H315 Causes skin irritation. H319 Causes serious eye irritation. The above statements were taken from the Materials Safety Data Sheet. If you vote to flouridate water, show us by example that it is safe by using fluoridated water it on your own family members before experimenting on our families.

I have spent a lot of time and money attempting to remove this neurotoxin from my water supply. It is problematic for everyone, but especially for the developing brains of children. In addition, fluoride is toxic for the thyroid gland and is a serious problem especially for women in that regard. Fluoridated water is practically unknown in Europe, to no ill effect. This bill will help improve health while saving money.

Please support the cessation of fluoride in our water. Fluoride is toxic, causes brain fog, dumbs you down, and calcifies your pineal gland...which is exactly why the government pushes it. Putting it in the tap water has never stopped anyone is the city from still getting cavities. So why is the government dosing us with a fatally toxic industrial waste you have to call poison control on, if your kid accidentally swallows a little bit of it? You have to go out of your way to find toothpaste without fluoride in it these days....so why does it need to be in the water we drink, bathe, and cook with?

HB537: America is one of 30 countries who hasn’t banned fluoride in the water out of over 150 countries. Japan, China, Norway, are countries who have banned it. Why? Fluoride, with all of the health risks, I try to avoid it, but it's impossible because I drink it, shower in it, cook with it... It's not the same fluoride that the dentists use. For those that want fluoride, they can get it in toothpaste, mouthwash, even toothpaste tablets - who knew? If i want to use fluoride "for my teeth" then that should be my choice. I shouldn't have to be concerned about showering in it and what the health effects may be. I should have informed consent.

HB531: If a child is born alive, then he / she is protected under the Constitution and is entitled to "health" care to save his or her life. The mother may give up her rights to the child, but the child is entitled to equal protection under the law. HB537: America is one of 30 countries who hasn’t banned fluoride in the water out of over 150 countries. Japan, China, Norway, are countries who have banned it. Why? Fluoride, with all of the health risks, I try to avoid it, but it's impossible because I drink it, shower in it, cook with it... It's not the same fluoride that the dentists use. For those that want fluoride, they can get it in toothpaste, mouthwash, even toothpaste tablets - who knew? If i want to use fluoride "for my teeth" then that should be my choice. I shouldn't have to be concerned about showering in it and what the health effects may be. I should have informed consent.

I support the removal of flouride from public water. Please remove this toxic chemical.

Comments Document

Fluoride is an neurotoxic chemical that is added to our water supply under the guise of providing protection to teeth. However, the fluoride added to our water supply is not the fluoride that a patient chooses to receive or not receive in a dental office. The fluoride in our water supply is a chemical created from the after products of fertilizer development. A federal court ruling in September 2024 determined that water fluoridation poses an unreasonable risk to human health, particularly for children and other vulnerable populations. While the science continues to evolve, and increasingly supports halting fluoridation, the core issue transcends the scientific debate: adding fluoride to public water is a form of mass medication administered without individual consent. Regardless of differing views on efficacy, every person deserves the right to choose what substances enter their body, especially through something as essential and unavoidable as drinking water. The Fluoride in our water supply is not natural fluoride: Pro-water fluoridation groups claim fluoride is naturally occurring, which is true; however, the fluoride added to water is not naturally occurring. Failure to mention this distinction is an egregious omission. Fluoride added to our water supply is a byproduct of industry: The chemicals used for water fluoridation are chemical compounds that are byproducts of industry (specifically Fluorosilicic, Hydrofluorosilicic, or Hexafluorosilicic acid) and are classified by the EPA as hazardous waste. These chemicals are identified on Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) as toxic substances. Fluoride Safety Levels According to the EPA: Dr. Joseph Ladapo explained in public testimony that when the EPA establishes a chemical as "unsafe" at a certain level (e.g., fluoride at 1.5 ppm), their recommendation for a safe threshold is often 10x to 100x lower than the unsafe level. Potential Legal Liability: Local governments could face legal challenges if they continue to fluoridate the water despite growing concerns over its health risks without fully addressing those risks and providing ways for residents to opt-out.

Writing in support of HB606 which simplifys annual reporting required of Certificate of Public Need (COPN) holders to the VA Department of Health. The proposed change will enable certificate holders to complete a more straightforward data set. This additionally allows VDH staff to analyze and verify in a timely manner that COPN charity care requirements have been met by certificate holders. Ultimately this bill strengthens the health care safety net by improving participation and efficiency resulting in services rendered to more citizens in need. James G. Beckner, Executive Director, Richmond Academy of Medicine and Access Now, Central Virginia's Free Clinic for Specialty Care.

804HealthNET supports HB 606. 804HealthNET is a backbone organization that brings together health care safety-net providers across Greater Richmond and surrounding counties. Our network includes free and charitable clinics, federally qualified health centers, hospital systems, public health agencies, and philanthropic partners, all working to improve access to care for people with limited or no insurance. HB 606 reduces unnecessary administrative burden for medical care facilities. We support simplifying the reporting requirements for charitable care under the Certificate of Public Need process. The updated language in this bill removes barriers that make reporting difficult and time-consuming. By streamlining these requirements, HB 606 will encourage greater participation and compliance from medical care facilities, allowing them to focus more time and resources on providing care to patients rather than on paperwork.

It is disturbing and disheartening to read that a VCU nurse thinks it’s okay to hurt people like law enforcement officers like because they are abiding by the laws and/or have different political views. President Obama was a big supporter of ICE.