Alabama Senate takes a stand for life, approves nation’s strongest pro-life law
On Tuesday, the Alabama State Senate approved the strongest pro-life law in the nation, by a 25-6 vote, with one abstention. House Bill 314, sponsored by Decatur-Republican, State Rep. Terri Collins, establishes the personhood of the baby in the womb and criminalizes surgical abortions as soon as a pregnancy can be medically determined, in almost all cases except if a doctor determines that the pregnancy poses a serious health risk to the mother. “Roe v. Wade has ended the lives of millions of children. While we cannot undo the damage that decades of legal precedence under Roe has caused, this bill has the opportunity to save the lives of millions of unborn children,” said Pratville-Republican, State Sen. Clyde Chambliss, who sponsored HB314 in the Senate. “Life and liberty are not man given; they are given by our Creator. Today, Alabama made clear that we will protect our rights and the rights of our unborn children.” “In 1973, unelected judges on the Supreme Court cut short the vigorous national debate over abortion, and imposed a top-down, abortion-on-demand agenda on the entire country. Advances in science since 1973, particularly in ultrasound technology, shows what we know intuitively – a baby in the womb is a person,” Chambliss continued. Unless there is a serious health risk to the mother, the bill would make it a Class A felony for a doctor to perform an abortion, punishable by life or 10 to 99 years in prison, and a Class C felony for attempting to perform an abortion, punishable by one to 10 years in prison. “In November, the voters of Alabama overwhelmingly approved Amendment Two to declare Alabama a pro-life state, and the State Legislature is now carrying out the express will of the people, which is to protect the sanctity of life,” Jasper-Republican, Senate Majority Leader Greg Reed added. “HB314 simply recognizes that an unborn baby is a child who deserves protection — and despite the best efforts of abortion proponents, this bill will become law because Alabamians stand firmly on the side of life.” House Bill 314 was approved 74-3 by the Alabama House of Representatives back on April 30. Representative Collins praised the State Senate for approving HB314. “This bill is about challenging Roe v. Wade and protecting the lives of the unborn, because an unborn baby is a person who deserves love and protection,” Collins said. What happens next The bill now moves to Gov. Kay Ivey for her signature. Should she sign the bill it is all but guaranteed that it will be challenged in court.
Kim McCutcheon: Alabama franchise owners oppose SB 129
As an Alabama franchise owner, I’m very concerned about what SB 129, the “Protect Alabama Small Business Act,” could do to my small business. I don’t feel that I need “protection,” and I certainly don’t think that the Alabama legislature adding new regulations onto my business will help it grow. I own and operate the Home Helpers Senior Care franchise in Jacksonville, Alabama. The Home Helpers name is one of the most trusted names in home care worldwide. At my business, our goal is to enable seniors in Jacksonville to experience the best quality of life possible by aging in place at home. I’m proud of my business, and my clients come to me because they know the high-quality care that they’ll receive from a Home Helpers location. That trust in a brand name is the basis of franchising – you know what you’ll get when you go to a franchise location, whether it’s a McDonald’s, a Hilton, or a Home Helpers. Franchise owners know we have to work to maintain that trust, or we all suffer. That’s clear in the private business contracts we all sign. When I chose to become a Home Helpers franchisee, I read and understood the agreement I was signing. I know what the terms and conditions are, and I understand my obligations as a franchisee as well as the obligations of the Home Helpers brand. I also know that if my location isn’t living up to those standards, that hurts other Home Helpers franchisees, whether they’re down the road in Dothan or across the country in Delaware. It’s the same if it goes the other way, too – like other chains, we’re only as strong as our weakest link. That’s why it’s so important for business owners like me and brands to work together to make sure we’re as strong as we can be. Unfortunately, this bill protects those who don’t live up to their end of the bargain. With this bill, the Alabama legislature is stepping in to make it harder for businesses to maintain the standards of quality, safety, and consistency that consumers expect. And they are doing it without regard to the type of business we operate. I should not have restaurant-type regulations imposed on my senior care business. It makes me believe there is another purpose for these regulations. Helping me in my business is not one of them. It’s shocking to me that a pro-business state like Alabama would consider passing a bill like this. These kinds of bills have thankfully failed in other states before – policymakers from California to Florida have seen the damage that they can do to a state’s economy and small business growth. In fact, one analysis predicts that this bill will cost Alabama around a billion dollars in the coming years – and result in 12,000 fewer Alabama jobs. No wonder, then, that Alabama businesses have been so opposed to this bill. I hope our lawmakers listen, and vote against SB 129. Kim McCutcheon is the owner of Home Helpers Senior Care in Jacksonville, Alabama.
Alabama property owners among those owed millions from eminent domain
Much to Gary Erb’s chagrin, a natural gas pipeline now cuts across his 72-acre homestead in Conestoga Township, Pennsylvania. To his even greater chagrin, he remains unpaid for the 6 acres (2.4 hectares) of land that were taken from him under eminent domain to build the pipeline. With the help of a Virginia-based legal group, he is petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to end what he and his lawyers say has become a common practice in the pipeline industry: taking the land first, and paying later. “They’re making millions in profit, and we still haven’t gotten a dime,” Erb said in a phone interview. “They’re exploiting a broken system.” There have been more than 200 instances of courts granting pipeline companies immediate possession of land, while at the same time deferring the issue of how much the property owners will be paid for it, said Robert McNamara, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, a libertarian public interest law firm based in Arlington that is representing Erb and others in similar situations. Those cases have occurred in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Montana, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia, McNamara said. The pipeline affecting Erb was built by Tulsa, Oklahoma-based energy company Williams, which constructed the Atlantic Sunrise project to expand its pipeline network and carry gas fracked from the Marcellus shale formation in northeastern Pennsylvania to the Mid-Atlantic region and beyond. Similar projects have sprung up across the country as fracking technology has allowed natural gas to be extracted in an economically efficient manner. McNamara acknowledged that federal law gives energy companies the ability to invoke eminent domain to build pipelines. But the Natural Gas Act, the law that governs the land seizures, provides no mechanism for companies to take possession of the land without first negotiating a price with the landowner. Pipeline companies have gotten around this by obtaining preliminary injunctions from judges, allowing the companies to take the land immediately and pay later. McNamara said this amounts to what is known as a “quick take” provision under the law, which he said is allowed in some types of eminent domain cases, but not pipeline cases. When judges defer the decision on payment, it deprives landowners of any leverage they might have in negotiations, not to mention delaying the payment, sometimes for years, McNamara said. In court papers, Williams’ lawyers said that because pipeline construction is complex, delays associated with negotiating price can knock projects off schedule. The company also argued that because the land seizures, known as condemnations, are essentially a foregone conclusion, there is no real harm to the landowners in delaying the payments, as long as the pipeline company puts up an appropriate bond to ensure the payment will occur. An appeals court has ruled in favor of the company. The court noted that Williams had set aside a sizable amount of money in escrow to be used for condemnation payments. It also ruled that using a preliminary injunction to take land immediately does not amount to an illegal “quick take.” But McNamara said state courts in the past decade have strengthened property owners’ rights in eminent domain cases. It remains to be seen if federal courts will join the trend. Though the Supreme Court turns down most of the petitions it receives, McNamara is hopeful it will take this case. In Virginia, pipeline companies building the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley pipelines have similarly been able to take land needed for construction before paying for property, said Chris Johns, a Texas-based lawyer who represents some of the affected landowners. Erb bought his land in Pennsylvania in 2008 and built his dream home. The woods provided a prime spot for deer hunting, and he hoped that as his children had families of their own, they would build their own homes on the land. When he received notice from the Williams company in 2015 that his land had been selected for a pipeline route, he hoped to negotiate with them to have the route track an existing transmission line. He said they refused, and also would not agree to preserve a tree where he had built a hunting stand. The underground pipeline was completed in October. In the process, the bedding site used by deer disappeared, along with acres of trees. Erb declined to say how much the company offered for his land, but he said it was inflexible on the price and insinuated that it would not be in his interest to pursue it in court. Now he’s looking to sell the property. The company declined to discuss the specifics of its negotiations with Erb, but issued a statement saying that “access to inexpensive, domestic natural gas is a huge benefit to all people, especially the economically disadvantaged.” As for the price, the company said in its statement that its goal is to ensure landowners are “promptly compensated for the pipeline easement.” “We do our best to reach an agreement through negotiation. Entering into a valuation process through the courts is always a last resort,” the statement said. Republished with permission of the Associated Press
U.S. News and World Report ranks AL 47th in nation for higher education
It’s no secret that Alabama has had its share of poor rankings when it comes to our education system. This week, U.S. News and World Report added an updated failing grade to that list. We currently rank 47th in the nation for higher education according to their unique criteria. The only states worse than Alabama are Pennsylvania, Louisiana and Rhode Island. This study shows how far the state has to go in improvement. It follows another recent one that says Alabama’s K-12 school system is the 8th worst in the nation. More on the top colleges in the state can be found here. Here’s our rankings based on the following criteria via their website. Ranked: 33rd in the nation 2-Year College Graduation Rate This measure tracks the share of students attending public institutions who complete a two-year degree program within three years, or 150 percent of the normal time. Degrees can include certificate programs or the equivalent, and data is collected from the National Center for Education Statistics for the 2013 cohort. Ranked: 31st in the nation 4-Year College Graduation Rate This measure tracks the share of undergraduate students at public institutions who receive a bachelor’s degree or equivalent four-year college degree within six years, or 150 percent of the normal time of study. The national average was about 60%.The data on timely completion comes from the National Center for Education Statistics for the 2011 cohort. Ranked: 42nd in the nation Low Debt at Graduation The debt that college graduates carry with them is a measure of how much financial support, both public and private, is available for students pursuing higher education. In this case, the lesser the debt that graduates of four-year colleges carry, the higher the state ranks. Data is based on average debt for students from the class of 2017, according to the Institute for College Access and Success. Ranked: 43rd in the nation Educational Attainment The achievement of college degrees in any state is a measure of how well the educational system has prepared its citizenry for advanced study beyond high school and enabled students to succeed. This metric, from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2017 American Community Survey, measures the share of people 25 and older in a state who have an associate degree or higher. Ranked: 32nd in the nation Tuition and Fees This is a measure of the average college tuition and fees required of in-state students at public four-year institutions according to U.S. Department of Education Statistics from the 2016-2017 school year. The lower the cost of a state-sponsored college education, the higher the state ranks.
Phil Kerpen: Let electric vehicle subsidies die on schedule
With the $7500 tax credit for electric car buyers already in the phase out period for the two biggest manufacturers – Tesla and GM – it’s no surprise that many Democrats in Congress are clamoring to lift the cap and keep the subsidies flowing. Unfortunately, several Republicans are joining the effort, creating unfortunate bipartisan support for a piecemeal version of the crackpot Green New Deal they have been rightly mocking and ridiculing. The so-called Drive America Forward Act would triple the existing cap on subsidies of 200,000 per manufacturer – massively expanding a program that was always supposed to be temporary and was originally premised on the national security rationale that it would lessen dependence on foreign oil – a now comically anachronistic concern when the United States has become a leading oil exporter. Moreover, while the Green New Deal is a socialist income leveling exercise in the guise of environmental policy, electric vehicle subsidies use environmental delusion as a cover for a wealth transfer from poor and middle income Americans to the rich who buy electric hobby cars as their third or fourth vehicle. Voters agree – with a recent poll showing 67 percent do not think their taxes dollars should help pay for electric vehicle subsidies. The Pacific Research Institute looked at IRS data and found that more than half of the electric car buyers claiming the credit make more than $200,000 per year and nearly 80 percent make more than $100,000. Just 1 percent make $50,000 or less. There is also a geographic dimension to the wealth redistribution. The most recent industry data shows that nearly half of all electric vehicles sold in the United States are sold in California, which has its own lavish subsidies at the state level. A September 2018 NERA Economic Consulting study looked at the economic impact of eliminating the cap and found that the costs outweigh the benefits. The study finds total household income falling as a consequence of lifting the cap by $7 billion in 2020 and $12 billion in 2035, which is about $50 to $70 per household in lost income every year. That’s a cost of over $50 every year to middle-income Americans to pay for subsidies for rich people in California. Orrin Hatch, the original sponsor of the bill, explained the logic behind the cap in 2007: “I want to emphasize that like the tax credits available under current law for hybrid electric vehicles, the tax incentives in the FREEDOM Act are temporary. They are needed in order to help these products over the initial stage of production, when they are quite a bit more expensive than older technology vehicles, to the mass production stage, where economies of scale will drive costs down and the credits will no longer be necessary.” At the time, big subsidies for electric vehicles were justified based on the theory that they were needed to lessen American dependence on foreign oil. A decade later, America is the largest oil and gas producer in the world and electric vehicles are a mature enough technology that they should be left to succeed or fail on the preference of consumers, not politicians. Ironically, it is now electric vehicles that are vulnerable to strategic supply disruptions because they require rare earth minerals for their motors and batteries –the production of which is overwhelmingly controlled by China. Such resources also present moral issues, with the cobalt used for batteries sourced in part from Congo mines worked by children in hazardous conditions. Meanwhile, gasoline vehicles have become vastly more environmentally friendly and fuel efficient. In fact, a study last year from the Manhattan Institute found that widespread deployment of electric vehicles would only reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1 percent – and would increaseemissions of SO2, NOx, and particulate matter. The bottom line: efforts to raise the cap are a cash grab that will force taxpayers to subsidize wealthy Californians for no presently valid reason. Congress should let the subsidy phase out as scheduled. Phil Kerpen a leading free-market policy analyst and advocate in Washington. Prior to joining American Commitment, Kerpen was the principal policy and legislative strategist at Americans for Prosperity for over five years. Kerpen is also a nationally syndicated columnist, chairman of the Internet Freedom Coalition, and author of the 2011 book Democracy Denied.
