I am only the person that was born deaf in the family tree. I felt like the black sheep of the family. Captions has helped me a lot with learning English when I was growing up via TV and Movies. My family called it a distraction, but I call it a needed necessity in my life. It helps me read what words are deciphered from the lips when the people speak for me to understand. Now is the time for the current generation and onwards to the future generations to have the increased access to experiences that we shall take for granted.

On behalf of the Virginia Young Democrats Disability Caucus, we express our full support for HB 602. This legislation requires movie theaters to provide closed captioning for films produced with captioning and to offer open-caption showtimes for qualifying films shown longer than one week when such captioning is available. By expanding access to movie theaters for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, HB 602 takes an important step toward making Virginia more accessible and inclusive.

When I was six years old, my family took me to a drive-in movie theater. It was fun being in my pajamas in the car. What was NOT fun was not being able to understand the movie – a Disney animated movie - as a deaf kid. While the rest of the family enjoyed the movie, my six-year-old self was seething with frustration. I grew up, unable to really experience a movie in a theater. (This cost me at least a few dates as a teenager when boys who could hear, did not want to take me to the movies because I would fall asleep.) So I missed out on a lot of movies that are today considered classics. Then, closed captioning devices became available! At first, I was excited about the opportunity. Until I used the devices. It was so frustrating trying to use the devices that I wanted to break them. The last type of closed caption device we tried was the closed captioning glasses. That was the worst experience ever as it made our noses hurt badly. We then stopped going to movie theaters, until DC theaters started offering open captions around 2015. Two years later, in 2017, tired of having to go into DC to see movies, I started persuading Northern Virginia theaters to offer open caption screenings. I became a volunteer open caption organizer, doing the hard work of regular communication with theater managers, and promoting the few open caption screenings we were given. After a few years of doing this hard, voluntary, tiring work week-after-week, I saw that Hawaii was getting a law for open captions. Plus, I knew that some movie theaters would offer open captions but then quit offering open captions. No legal protection. For example, I know of a Northern Virginia theater that had offered open captions for a few years then stopped for the next few years. That theater recently quietly started offering open captions again. Virginia needs a law for open captions to lift the burden from the shoulders of volunteer open caption organizers throughout the state. Virginia needs a law to protect the open captions we already have, and to expand access statewide for those who don’t have access to open caption screenings. Furthermore, we should not have to live in fear of losing access and being unable to see the next blockbuster movie opening soon. Last but not least, the next generation of deaf six-year-old girls deserves to be able to go to the movies with their families and watch in total, equal comfort without having to use a closed caption device.

I am a retired former Henrico school employee. I support Bill HB602. Captioning is vital to so many of our students! I also support captioning for members of my family who are hard-of-hearing. There are so many entertainment and learning options we could not partake of without them! I strongly support Bill HB602 .

I am a retired former Henrico school employee. I support Bill HB602. Captioning is vital to so many of our students! I also support captioning for members of my family who are hard-of-hearing. There are so many entertainment and learning options we could not partake of without them! I strongly support Bill HB602 .

I am from a generationally late-deafened family. What does that mean? Every generation my family who was previously hearing, becomes hard of hearing. They go from hearing their first language, English, to needing assistance to decipher it. One way to do that is captions. A month ago, I was diagnosed hard of hearing (late-deafened), like my family. I’m also currently pregnant. It is my hope that my generation and beyond (likely including my child), my family will have increased access to experiences that so many take for granted. The time for that is now.

Dear General Assembly, Access Virginia, a charity nonprofit, established to provide accessibility services for persons who are Deaf or hard of hearing; real-time captioning as well as open captioning at live performing arts theaters in multiple venues in Hampton Roads and Chesterfield, VA. I know first-hand the need and importance of having captions available for persons with hearing loss to be able to participate in any setting; movie theaters in particular, otherwise being subject to exclusion. Access Virginia strongly supports Bill HB602 100%. Thank you, Lois Boyle, Founder & Executive Director

My name is Rachel Anderegg. I am 24 years old and live in Woodbridge, Virginia. I wish I was able to attend in person for this hearing, but I was already booked. I work as a freelance ASL Interpreter, and I’m also a mom to a very busy toddler. I am hearing, but captions have always been a main way I enjoy watching television. Growing up, my dad always required closed captioning to be on- not because of any disabilities, but because he believed captions would help my siblings and I learn to read. As an adult, I use captions in my daily life when I’m watching a video in public and don’t want to use headphones. I also use captions when I watch television shows in Spanish to try to pick up the language. They don’t bother me and I have never thought of them as distracting. In my work, I see the accessibility barriers deaf and disabled individuals face on a day to day basis. This bill would give access in a simple and equal way. This bill isn’t asking movie theaters to pay for some kind of new technology, or to embed an ASL interpreter on screen. It’s simply asking for some showings to have captions. That’s it. Those that don’t like captions are free to attend other showings. If we as a community can make a simple choice that allows others to be included, why not take it? Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, Rachel Anderegg (Attachment is the exact same letter).

I am opposed to HB 983 as a physician who sees patients with hepatitis B from time to time. American travel overseas to frequent prostitutes or pregnant women who use IV drugs and contract Hepatitis B or health care workers contract hepatitis B from patients who have not been effectively immunized or Americans marry partners from overseas where Hepatitis B in endemic. Legislators are supposed to protect our citizens. This bill does not protect our citizens but does the opposite. Since 1991, the CDC has recommended screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in pregnancy and universal hepatitis B vaccination of all medically stable infants at birth, serving as a core strategy to prevent perinatal and postnatal infection and eliminate HBV transmission nationwide. On December 5, 2025, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted (1) among women who screen negative in pregnancy, parents decide, in consultation with providers, when or if to vaccinate their child for hepatitis B, and if not at birth, then no earlier than 2 months of age, and (2) consider collection of infant immune titers to guide decision-making for completing the vaccine series. We conducted a comprehensive review of the evidence of the safety, immunogenicity, efficacy, and effectiveness of the birth dose and a delayed first dose, and of the potential role of serology for clinical decision making. We analyzed studies of the epidemiology of HBV infection, clinical trials, systematic reviews, vaccine safety from surveillance and clinical studies, and potential impact of revised guidelines on individual and public health. We synthesized the history of ACIP recommendations and resulting trends in HBV incidence. The review found strong evidence for the safety and effectiveness of the birth dose, and no improved safety or effectiveness with a delayed first dose. We found no evidence to support use of post-vaccination serology. Infant vaccination has resulted in a 99% reduction in pediatric HBV infections; we found no evidence to support a change in vaccine recommendations but identified potential health consequences.

We respectfully ask that HB 1115 be carried over and worked on through a stakeholder work group including ambulance and medical transport providers, hospitals, and consumer representatives before any further action is taken. As drafted, the bill raises patient-safety and system-performance concerns that would benefit from collaborative clarification and practical guardrails. American Medical Response (AMR) employs over 500 EMTs and paramedics and has a strong statewide presence in Virginia, working with major health systems including Bon Secours/Mercy Health, HCA Healthcare, VCU Health, VHC Health, Inova, and Riverside Health. AMR is part of Global Medical Response, the nation’s largest air and ground emergency medical services provider. At a high level, HB 1115 conflates clinical dispatch and medical necessity with retail-style price disclosure. Medical transport is not a retail transaction. The appropriate level of service, clinical interventions, equipment, mileage, and medical necessity are often determined only after patient contact. Requiring pre-service disclosure of “all fees and charges” would force providers to offer estimates that are inherently uncertain and highly dependent on individual insurance coverage, leading to confusion and disputes without meaningfully improving transparency. More concerning, forcing price discussions at the point of care introduces friction between providers and patients. Ambulance crews could be placed in the position of discussing fees at the bedside or on scene, potentially leading some patients to refuse medically appropriate transport and creating avoidable risk when care is delayed or foregone. HB 1115 also risks pulling EMTs and paramedics into financial conversations that do not belong at the bedside. These clinicians are trained to assess, stabilize, and make time-sensitive medical decisions—not to estimate charges or interpret insurance benefits. These concerns are magnified for patients experiencing behavioral health crises or those with cognitive impairment or legal incapacity, where point-of-care financial disclosures are impractical and destabilizing. The bill also introduces new administrative steps that increase on-scene and pre-departure time. In a system where staffed ambulances are scarce, added administrative burdens reduce 911 and interfacility transfer availability and degrade system performance. For interfacility transfers, delays can jeopardize accepted beds at receiving facilities and prolong hospital boarding. Finally, HB 1115 does not align with how insurance coverage and reimbursement actually work. Many transports are covered by Medicare, Medicaid, or contracted commercial plans, with patient responsibility determined only after claims adjudication. Mandating pre-service disclosure of final amounts risks misleading patients about their true financial obligation. We support a workable, patient-centered approach to consumer protection that improves clarity and fairness without reducing access to medically necessary transport or diverting scarce clinical resources from patient care. For these reasons, we respectfully request that HB 1115 be carried over and refined through a stakeholder work group before further legislative action is taken.