Minority leader says he will vote no on amendment today, seeks clarifications; colleagues stress right to counsel and public proceedings

Minority Leader Representative Silber said he would vote against an amendment being considered today but pledged to follow up with proponents to understand their reasons and possibly change his position after receiving more information. "So I will respectfully be a no today, but, you have my commitment that I'll... work, and get some clarification on if this amendment brings them, to a better place and get their reasonings for the amending position," Silber said.

An unidentified representative who spoke after Silber framed the broader debate in constitutional terms, recalling that the chamber considered a related bill last year. The representative emphasized foundational protections for people who face a loss of liberty, saying, "And we expect that if you're gonna be facing having your liberty denied, that you have an attorney, be there with you, or at least the possibility of an attorney, that the courtroom and the proceedings be public, that it not be done in private, or done in such a way that you wouldn't be able to access that record." The speaker said those principles have guided the country since its founding.

The exchange recorded no formal vote tally in the transcript and did not identify the amendment by bill number or title. Silber's statement was a declared vote intention rather than a formal roll-call result; he indicated staff-level or member-to-member follow-up to clarify how the amendment would change the measure and to consider changing his vote. The unidentified representative's comments served as a restatement of the debate's primary stakes—access to counsel and public access to proceedings and records—rather than a description of specific statutory language.

Next steps were not specified in the transcript: no motion text, amendment language, or formal vote totals were provided, and proponents' explanations referenced by Silber were not included.