WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HCR 32

COURTS: Continues and reestablishes the Judicial Security Task Force as established by House Concurrent Resolution No. 40 of the 2024 Regular Session

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Mike Bayham and 20 co-sponsors

Requests a University of Hawaii study on the viability, costs, safety, and utility of nuclear energy (including SMRs) for Hawaii, with findings due before 2027 session.

Taken by the Clerk of the House and presented to the Secretary of State in accordance with the Rules of the House.
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HCR 32

Summary — HCR 32 (concurrent resolution)

Important note: the provided file appears to contain multiple, unrelated texts and inconsistent metadata. The title at the top refers to a Judicial Security Task Force, while the body includes (a) a Delaware-style resolution designating May 2025 as Myositis Awareness Month and (b) a Hawaii concurrent resolution requesting a university study of nuclear energy. This summary covers the substantive provisions included in the text you provided and flags the discrepancy.

Purpose and intent

  • Designate May 2025 as Myositis Awareness Month (awareness/education/resolution).
  • Request the University of Hawaii to study the viability of nuclear energy development in Hawaii — specifically to assess small modular reactors (SMRs) and related cost, safety, and utility questions — and to report findings and recommendations to state and federal officials.

Key provisions

  1. Myositis Awareness

    • Declares May 2025 as Myositis Awareness Month in Delaware.
    • Encourages residents to learn about myositis, support affected individuals, and promote research, education, and community resources.
    • Notes prevalence estimates (approx. 50,000–75,000 people in the U.S.), diagnostic delays, forms of myositis (e.g., dermatomyositis, polymyositis, inclusion body myositis), and the role of advocacy groups (The Myositis Association).

  2. Hawaii nuclear-energy study

    • Requests the University of Hawaii to conduct a study on the viability of nuclear energy development in Hawaii, including evaluation of:
      • Cost, safety, and utility of nuclear energy (including SMRs up to 300 MW electric per unit).
      • Potential to provide affordable, reliable firm power to support communities and the economy.
    • Requires a report of findings and recommendations (including any proposed legislation) to be submitted to the Legislature and to a list of federal and state/local officials no later than 20 days before the Regular Session of 2027.
    • States that adoption of the concurrent resolution does not constitute constitutional approval to construct nuclear facilities or to dispose of radioactive material in the state (i.e., it is not authorization to build or dispose).

Who is affected

  • Individuals living with myositis and their families, patient advocacy and medical communities (awareness and support focus).
  • University of Hawaii (tasked with performing the study).
  • State and local officials, Hawaii counties and federal agencies who will receive the study.
  • Energy stakeholders and communities in Hawaii that would be impacted by any future nuclear development (though no construction authorization is included).

Procedural / timeline aspects

  • Introduced: November 18, 2024.
  • The document’s recorded actions show numerous steps in 2025 (readings, committee referrals, adoptions, enrollment, signatures) and transmission to the Secretary of State (taken by Clerk and presented to Secretary of State on 2025-06-11).
  • Study report due: no later than 20 days prior to the 2027 Regular Session (per the Hawaii resolution language).

Legal effect and limits

  • As a concurrent resolution, the measures are primarily declaratory and advisory:
    • The Myositis designation is ceremonial/awareness-promoting.
    • The Hawaii text requests a university study and a report; it does not appropriate funds, authorize construction of nuclear facilities, nor change regulatory authority over nuclear material. The resolution explicitly disclaims that it constitutes approval to construct or dispose of radioactive material.

Note on inconsistencies

  • The title, sponsors, and action history appear to mix materials from different jurisdictions and subjects. Readers should verify the authoritative version of HCR 32 from the applicable state legislature (and confirm whether multiple HCR 32 resolutions exist across states) to resolve these discrepancies.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.