Here are the restrictions on transgender people that are moving forward in U.S. states
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has highlighted efforts by Republican governors and statehouses across the country to embrace proposals limiting the rights of transgender people, signing new restrictions as he moves closer to a presidential bid. The restrictions are spreading quickly despite criticism from medical groups and advocates who say they’re further marginalizing transgender youth and threatening their health. Here’s what’s happening: FLORIDA’S RESTRICTIONS DeSantis on Wednesday signed bills that ban gender-affirming care for minors, restrict pronoun use in schools, and force people to use the bathroom corresponding with their sex assigned at birth in some cases. DeSantis also signed new restrictions on drag shows that would allow the state to revoke the food and beverage licenses of businesses that admit children to adult performances. The DeSantis administration has moved to pull the liquor licenses of businesses that held drag shows, alleging children were present during lewd displays. The rules on gender-affirming care also ban the use of state money for the care and place new restrictions on adults seeking treatment. They take effect immediately, along with the drag show restrictions. The bathroom and pronoun restrictions take effect July 1. DeSantis has been an outspoken advocate for such restrictions and championed a Florida law that restricts the teaching of sexual orientation and gender identity in public schools. Florida has expanded that prohibition, which critics have dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” law, to all grades. WHERE BANS STAND NATIONALLY Hundreds of bills have been proposed this year restricting the rights of transgender people, and LGBTQ+ advocates say they’ve seen a record number of such measures in statehouses. At least 17 states have now enacted laws restricting or banning gender-affirming care for minors: Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, South Dakota, and West Virginia. Federal judges have blocked enforcement of laws in Alabama and Arkansas, and several other states are considering bills this year to restrict or ban care. Proposed bans are also pending before Texas and Missouri’s governors. These bans have spread quickly, with only three states enacting such laws before this year. Before DeSantis signed the latest ban, Florida was one of two states that had restricted care via regulations or administrative action. Texas’s governor has ordered child welfare officials to investigate reports of children receiving such care as child abuse, though a judge has blocked those investigations. Three transgender youth and their parents who are suing to block Florida’s earlier ban on the care for minors expanded their challenge on Wednesday to include the prohibition DeSantis signed into law. Every major medical organization, including the American Medical Association, has opposed the bans and supported the medical care for youth when administered appropriately. Lawsuits have been filed in several of the states where the bans have been enacted this year. STATES POISED TO ACT A proposed ban on gender-affirming care for minors is awaiting action before Republican Gov. Mike Parson in Missouri. The state’s Republican attorney general, Andrew Bailey, this week withdrew a rule he had proposed that would have gone further by also restricting access to care for adults. Bailey cited the bill pending before Parson as a reason for eliminating the rule, which had been blocked by a state judge. Nebraska Republicans on Tuesday folded a 12-week abortion ban into a bill that would ban gender-affirming care for minors, potentially clearing the way for a final vote on the combined measure as early as this week. Not all states are adopting restrictions, and some Democrat-led states are enacting measures aimed at protecting the rights of LGBTQ+ youth. Michigan Democrats plan to introduce legislation Thursday that would ban conversion therapy for minors, a discredited practice of trying to “convert” people to heterosexuality. The legislation is expected to move quickly with Democrats in control of all levels of state government. Democratic state Rep. Jason Hoskins, a sponsor of the bill, told The Associated Press that he hopes the legislation passes by the end of June, which is Pride Month. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Republican governors ask Biden administration to rescind Title IX guidance
Twenty-five of the nation’s 26 Republican governors have asked the Biden administration to shelve its intent to expand Title IX protections to transgender athletes. The letter, led by the signature of Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves, says the U.S. Department of Education’s proposed regulation should be withdrawn pending litigation that could be addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court. “The Department’s proposed regulation would attempt to coerce compliance with an uncertain, fluid, and completely subjective standard that is based on a highly politicized gender ideology,” the letter reads. The letter comes as the public comment period ends Monday on a proposed revision to Title IX that would ban state and local governments from prohibiting transgender students from participating on sports teams aligned with their gender identity. Title IX was created to increase opportunities for female athletes. Federal funds can be withheld from those found to be in violation. The law, which was passed in 1972, prohibits discrimination based on sex for school districts, universities, museums, and other educational institutions that receive federal funds. “Compelling a subjective, athlete-by-athlete analysis controlled by a student’s self-identified ‘gender identity’ enforced under threat of Department retribution affords no clarity,” the letter reads. “It does the opposite. This ‘fluid’ subjective standard ensures chaos and confusion in schools and will no doubt result in protracted and disruptive litigation.” Twenty-one states prohibit transgender students from participating on sports teams that do not align with their biological sex at birth, according to the Movement Advancement Project that tracks state policies. The letter was signed by Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Sanders, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Idaho Gov. Brad Little, Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte, Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen, Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice, and Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon. The signature of Vermont Republican Gov. Phil Scott is not on the letter. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
25 GOP governors ask Biden administration to hit pause on broader clean water rule
Twenty-five Republican governors oppose a revised federal rule regulating U.S. waterways, citing uncertainty from an undecided U.S. Supreme Court case related to the rule. The governors sent a letter to the Biden administration on Monday asking it to delay the implementation of the revised Waters of the United States rule since the U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering Sackett v. EPA. The revised WOTUS rule, released on Dec. 30, reinstates pre-2015 water protections under the federal Clean Water Act. The rule was scaled back under the Trump administration, which triggered lawsuits from environmental groups. “The substance of the rule hinders State governments as we seek to give clarity and consistency to businesses, farms, and individuals regarding the regulatory framework for water,” the 25 GOP governors wrote. “The broad definitions used in the 514- page document only add to the confusing and complicated history of WOTUS. In fact, it appears that the EPA is seeking to regulate private ponds, ditches, and other small water features.” The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said in December the revised rule applies to “traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas, interstate waters, as well as upstream water resources that significantly affect those waters.” “When Congress passed the Clean Water Act 50 years ago, it recognized that protecting our waters is essential to ensuring healthy communities and a thriving economy,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said in a statement. “Following extensive stakeholder engagement, and building on what we’ve learned from previous rules, EPA is working to deliver a durable definition of WOTUS that safeguards our nation’s waters, strengthens economic opportunity, and protects people’s health while providing greater certainty for farmers, ranchers, and landowners.” The governors also questioned the timing of the new rule, given ongoing inflation. “Another burdensome and overbroad regulation from the federal government could not come at a worse time for America,” they wrote. “Having already squandered much of America’s energy independence, you should not increase costs for consumers by tying up energy production with even more red tape.” Environmental groups praised the Biden administration’s revised WOTUS rule. “This comes at a time when we’re seeing unprecedented attacks on federal clean water protections by polluters and their allies,” Jon Devine, director of federal water policy for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement last month. “While the nation still has significant work to do to fully protect important waters, it’s encouraging to see the country taking a step in the right direction to protect the waters we need for everyone’s health and the environment.” The letter was signed by Idaho Gov. Brad Little, Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Sanders, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves, Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte, Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen, Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice, and Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Justin Bogie: Excuses are easy — Meaningful policy change takes bold leadership
As summer turns to fall, the drumbeat for the Alabama Legislature to enact meaningful tax reform legislation has picked up its pace. But there is still no action — only discussion of temporary relief and the same old excuses as to why long-term reforms will be challenging to pursue. While major policy reforms are rarely easy, it should not be this hard. The state is likely to begin 2023 with a more than $2 billion revenue surplus, building on last year’s then-record $1.5 billion surplus. When Alabama’s government has more revenues than at any point in history, providing long-term relief to citizens should be a no-brainer. But despite having a Republican super-majority legislature and Republicans elected to all state-wide offices, Alabama continues to fall further behind other states when it comes to tax reform. Citizens are paying the price. Part of the problem is a lack of strong leadership. In August, Governor Kay Ivey’s spokeswoman, Gina Maiola said, “Right now, Alabamians and Americans alike are feeling the pinch, though, and Gov. Ivey wants to be able to help Alabamians in whatever ways we can.” I am glad that Gov. Ivey recognizes that Alabamians are feeling the pinch of inflation, but where is the action? She alone has the power to call legislators to Montgomery for a special session. Ivey could do that within days, but it seems apparent that there is unlikely to be any real movement on tax reform until at least next March, when the 2023 regular session begins. Meanwhile, 32 other states have enacted tax relief legislation this year. Missouri is currently in the midst of a special session, called by Gov. Mike Parson, aimed at passing $700 million in permanent tax cuts. That is what we need in Alabama. Instead, we are getting more excuses. Just last week, General Fund budget committee chairman State Sen. Greg Albritton (R-Atmore) said, “While y’all are focusing on how flush it appears that we are, I’m looking at what the problems are and how we’re going to resolve them.” First, the state does not appear flush with cash. It is flush with cash. In the past two years, it has collected more taxes from Alabamians than ever before. Instead of using that cash to take less money from citizens in the coming years, Albritton suggested that the best way “to help people in the long run in perpetuity is to take that money and put it into a trust account much like the Alabama Trust Fund (ATF),” and then use that fund for education. Alabama already has numerous trust funds and budget savings accounts that are intended to ease the impacts of an economic downturn. The state could draw more than $850 million from the ATF alone in 2023, if necessary. The state has not touched the account, which has a total balance of more than $3.35 billion, since 2012. Even during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the reserve funds remained untapped. It was a rainy day for many Alabamians, but not for the government. The state does not need another savings account. The idea of establishing one shows how out of touch lawmakers are with Alabamians. When a recession hits, the government should not be protected at the expense of citizens. It should at the least be sharing in the pain. Another argument made against tax reform is that Alabama’s current stretch of strong economic growth will not last, and the record high surpluses are because of conservative budgeting. Legislative fiscal officer Kirk Fulford recently said, “You were conservative in both of those budgets, and because of that, and because of the enhanced federal money that came into the states, you are going to wind up with ending balances in both budgets that are far and above greater than any you’ve had in quite a while.” I am sorry, but would most Alabamians describe increasing spending at a faster pace than California or New York as remotely conservative? I do not think so. In April, Gov. Ivey praised the Legislature for sending her the “sixth consecutive balanced budget” she has signed as governor. It is easy to balance a budget when you are taxing citizens more than ever. A balanced budget in and of itself is not a sign of conservatism or fiscal responsibility. In Alabama’s recent history it represents the historic expansion of government. More taxes from you have kept the budget balanced. There is also the argument that inflationary pressures may prevent the state from being able to afford to provide long-term tax relief. In August, Representative Steve Clouse (R-Ozark) said, “We want to see if maybe the budget we passed and goes into October is adequate enough on the inflationary pressures hitting right now.” Again, shouldn’t the pain being felt by Alabamians outweigh any hardships felt by the state government? Moreover, the inflation argument makes little sense. Inflation was 8.3 percent when the two state budgets were enacted in April. At the end of August, it was still 8.3 percent. If the Legislature really did pass conservative budgets just five months ago, inflation should already be accounted for. The bottom line remains that Alabama’s state government has more of your taxpayer dollars flowing into it than ever. Instead of looking for excuses to not provide relief to citizens, it is time for bold leadership and action. Justin Bogie is the Senior Director of Fiscal Policy for the Alabama Policy Institute.
GOP governors to Joe Biden: Student loan plan will be costly for American taxpayers
President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan will be costly for American taxpayers, a coalition of GOP governors said in a letter sent Monday to the White House. The letter, signed by 22 GOP governors, tells Biden to “withdraw” the plan, citing cost estimates of up to $600 billion, or $2,000 per American taxpayer. “As governors, we support making higher education more affordable and accessible for students in our states, but we fundamentally oppose your plan to force American taxpayers to pay off the student loan debt of an elite few,” the coalition wrote. The coalition includes Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Idaho Gov. Brad Little, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte, Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, and Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon. “At a time when inflation is sky high due to your unprecedented tax-and-spend agenda, your plan will encourage more student borrowing, incentivize higher tuition rates, and drive-up inflation even further, negatively impacting every American,” the governors added. Biden announced the plan last month during an address from the White House. “Many people – many people can’t qualify for a mortgage or buy a home because the debt they continue to carry,” Biden said. “A lot of folks are even putting off starting families because of the cost, and the dream of starting or owning your business is just way off in the distance with a debt that’s – that so many are saddled with.” The plan forgives $10,000 in federal student loan debt for those who make less than $125,000 annually, while federal Pell Grant recipients will be forgiven $20,000. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has estimated that the plan’s total cost would be $440 to $600 billion. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Republican governors call Democrat spending bill “reckless”
Twenty-one Republican governors called the Inflation Reduction Act “another reckless tax and spending spree” in a joint statement released Thursday. The legislation, dubbed the “Democrats spending bill” by Republicans, would reduce the federal deficit, Senate Democrats said in a summary. But the $740 billion bill would hurt all Americans, the Republican governors said. “While denying recession, Democrats want to raise taxes on businesses and manufacturers, which will force higher costs onto consumers, worsen inflation, and aggravate shortages,” they said in the letter. “With sky-high prices at the pump, the last thing Americans need is for Democrats to punish energy producers, which will ultimately hurt working families struggling to pay for gas, goods, food, and utilities.” Democrats maintain the measure would reduce inflation by investing taxpayer dollars into domestic energy production and manufacturing and lowering carbon emissions by 40% by 2030. Republicans have maintained that Biden’s policies hindered energy production in the oil and gas industry, leading to record high gas prices this summer, which in part contributed to 40-year high inflation. They point to the president’s executive orders ending new leases for oil production on federal lands, ending the Keystone Pipeline construction, and other restrictions on the industry. Democrats say their bill also would allow Medicaid to negotiate prescription drug prices, something critics say will discourage investment in new treatments. The Affordable Care Act also would be extended for three years under Democrats’ plans. The bill also includes up to $7,500 in tax credits on the purchase of an electric or fuel cell vehicle made in America. Large corporations would be required to pay a minimum 15% tax, and the measure would not raise taxes on Americans making less than $400,000 a year, according to remarks by President Joe Biden. The joint statement opposing the Inflation Reduction Act was made by South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Idaho Gov. Brad Little, Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves, Missouri Gov Mike Parson, Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte, Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, Virginia Gov. Glenn Younkin, and Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Governors pan SEC climate disclosure proposal as unprecedented federal overreach
Sixteen Republican governors are asking the Biden administration to withdraw a proposed rule by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that would require companies to disclose some climate-related investment information in annual reports and registration. The governors called the move an “unprecedented level of federal overreach” in a letter sent Tuesday to President Joe Biden and SEC Commissioner Gary Gensler. “The proposed rule will harm businesses and investors in our states by increasing compliance costs and by larding disclosure statements with uncertain and immaterial information that the federal government – let alone the SEC – is not equipped to judge,” the governors said in their letter. The governors said it’s OK for companies to disclose the information voluntarily. “However, since climate change models vary dramatically, the notion of evaluating investment risk based on such uncertain variables is inherently subjective and unreliable,” they wrote. “Moreover, such disclosures would serve to confuse investors as to how to judge true financial risk, significantly reducing market efficiency. It is precisely the type of question where government should not impose its own judgments of what constitutes material risk in place of managers.” The rule “appears part of an ongoing effort across the federal government to penalize companies involved in traditional energy development,” the governors said. “Until recently, the Biden administration explicitly refused to issue new oil and gas leases on federal lands and is now considering only a fraction of the lands that should be available,” they wrote. “In addition, the Council on Environmental Quality is rolling back reforms to the environmental review process, the President has denied key pipeline and other permitting applications, and officials throughout the Biden Administration are rhetorically discouraging investment in oil and gas development.” SEC officials said companies are interested in climate-related information. “The results of multiple recent surveys indicate that climate risks are among the most important priorities for a broad set of large asset managers,” the SEC said in its 140-page report. “PWC reported in their Annual Global CEO Survey that in 2016, only 39% of asset and wealth management CEOs reported that they were concerned about the threats posed by physical risks brought about by climate change, whereas this figure increased to 70% in 2021.” The SEC extended the comment period on the proposed rule from May 20 to June 17. The commission is accepting electronic comments. The letter is signed by Kay Ivey of Alabama, Mike Dunleavy of Alaska, Doug Ducey of Arizona, Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, Brad Little of Idaho, Kim Reynolds of Iowa, Tate Reeves of Mississippi, Mike Parson of Missouri, Greg Gianforte of Montana, Pete Ricketts of Nebraska, Doug Burgum of North Dakota, Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma, Kristi Noem of South Dakota, Greg Abbott of Texas, Spencer Cox of Utah and Mark Gordon of Wyoming. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Kay Ivey signs on to joint U.S.-Canada letter in support of protesting truck drivers
Governor Kay Ivey, along with 15 other governors, has signed on to a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and President Joe Biden asking them to immediately reinstate the vaccine and quarantine exemptions available to cross border truck drivers. Since late January, Canadian truckers have blocked some of the busiest border crossings between Canada and the U.S. The demonstrations initially focused on Canada’s vaccine requirement for truckers entering the country but quickly became a broad attack on COVID-19 precautions and Trudeau himself. Demonstrations and blockades have shut down border crossings into the U.S. and inflicted economic damage on both countries. Ivey stated on Twitter, “The truck drivers we’ve seen peacefully protesting in Canada simply want common sense reinstated & freedoms protected. I support them and am joining my fellow governors in calling Prime Minister Trudeau & @POTUS to immediately allow exemptions for cross border truck drivers. These types of unnecessary mandates would continue to exacerbate supply chain and economic issues.” The letter emphasizes the need for the border to remain open because of COVID-19 supply chain issues. The letter states, “The timing of your decision to terminate the vaccine and quarantine exemptions could not have been worse, as North America already faces grave supply chain constraints. These constraints, combined with increasing inflation, place significant burdens on the residents of Canada and the United States. Furthermore, transportation associations have informed us that the lack of exemptions will force thousands of drivers out of the trucking industry, which is already facing a significant workforce shortage. The removal of these exemptions is ultimately unnecessary, and we cannot afford to lose any more truck drivers who transport food and other vital supplies across the border.” Last week, the White House stated, “The two leaders agreed that the actions of the individuals who are obstructing travel and commerce between our two countries are having significant direct impacts on citizens’ lives and livelihoods.” Other governors who signed the letter include Greg Gianforte (MT), Mike Dunleavy (AK), Asa Hutchinson (AR), Brian Kemp (GA), Brad Little (ID), Kim Reynolds (IA), Tate Reeves (MS), Mike Parson (MO), Pete Ricketts (NE), Doug Burgum (ND), Henry McMaster (SC), Kristi Noem (SD), Bill Lee (TN), Spencer Cox (UT), and Mark Gordon (WY).
States and cities slow to spend federal pandemic money
As Congress considered a massive COVID-19 relief package earlier this year, hundreds of mayors from across the U.S. pleaded for “immediate action” on billions of dollars targeted to shore up their finances and revive their communities. Now that they’ve received it, local officials are taking their time before actually spending the windfall. As of this summer, a majority of large cities and states hadn’t spent a penny from the American Rescue Plan championed by Democrats and President Joe Biden, according to an Associated Press review of the first financial reports due under the law. States had spent just 2.5% of their initial allotment while large cities spent 8.5%, according to the AP analysis. Many state and local governments reported they were still working on plans for their share of the $350 billion, which can be spent on a wide array of programs. Though Biden signed the law in March, the Treasury Department didn’t release the money and spending guidelines until May. By then, some state legislatures already had wrapped up their budget work for the next year, leaving governors with no authority to spend the new money. Some states waited several more months to ask the federal government for their share. Cities sometimes delayed decisions while soliciting suggestions from the public. And some government officials — still trying to figure out how to spend previous rounds of federal pandemic aid — simply didn’t see an urgent need for the additional cash. “It’s a lot of money that’s been put out there. I think it’s a good sign that it hasn’t been frivolously spent,” Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer said. He was president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors when more than 400 mayors signed a letter urging Congress to quickly pass Biden’s plan. The law gives states until the end of 2024 to make spending commitments and the end of 2026 to spend the money. Any money not obligated or spent by those dates must be returned to the federal government. The Biden administration said it isn’t concerned about the early pace of the initiative. The aid to governments is intended both “to address any crisis needs” and to provide “longer-term firepower to ensure a durable and equitable recovery,” said Gene Sperling, White House American Rescue Plan coordinator. “The fact that you can spread your spending out is a feature, not a bug, of the program. It is by design,” Sperling told the AP. The Treasury Department set an aggressive reporting schedule to try to prod local planning. It required states, counties, and cities with estimated populations of at least 250,000 to file reports by Aug. 31 detailing their spending as of the previous month as well as future plans. More than half the states and nearly two-thirds of the roughly 90 largest cities reported no initial spending. The governments reported future plans for about 40% of their total funds. The AP did not gather reports from counties because of the large number of them. To promote transparency, the Treasury Department also required governments to post the reports on a “prominent public-facing website,” such as their home page or a general coronavirus response site. But the AP found that many governments ignored that directive, instead tucking the documents behind numerous navigational steps. Idaho and Nebraska had not posted their reports online when contacted by the AP. Neither had some cities. Officials in Jersey City, New Jersey, required the AP to file a formal open-records request to get its report, though that shouldn’t have been necessary. City employees in Laredo, Texas, and Sacramento, California, also initially directed the AP to file open-records requests. Laredo later told the AP it had spent nothing. Sacramento relented and eventually provided a short report stating it had spent nothing but might put its entire $112 million allocation toward replacing lost revenue and providing government services. Among states, the largest share of initial spending went toward shoring up unemployment insurance trust funds that were depleted during the pandemic. Arizona reported pouring nearly $759 million into its unemployment account, New Mexico nearly $657 million, and Kentucky almost $506 million. For large cities, the most common use of the money was to replenish their diminished revenue and fund government services. San Francisco reported using its entire initial allotment of $312 million for that purpose. Those reporting no initial spending included Pittsburgh, whose mayor joined with several other Pennsylvania mayors in February on a column urging Congress to pass “crucial” aid for state and local governments. “Congress must act, and they must act soon. Our communities cannot wait another day,” the Pennsylvania mayors wrote. Pittsburgh ultimately ended up waiting to spend the money until the Treasury guidelines were released, community members had a chance to comment and the City Council could sign off on the spending plans. In the future, the city plans to use part of its federal windfall to buy 78 electric vehicles, build technology labs at recreation centers and launch a pilot project paying 100 low-income Black women $500 a month for two years to test the merits of a guaranteed income program. The federal money also will help pay the salaries of more than 600 city employees “Even though the money hadn’t technically been expended” by the Treasury Department’s reporting timeline, “the receipt of the money was enough for us to hold off on major layoffs,” said Dan Gilman, chief of staff to Pittsburgh Mayor William Peduto. Some officials are intentionally taking their time. Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, a Republican, opted not to call a special session to appropriate money from the latest federal pandemic relief act. So far, he’s publicly outlined just one proposal — $400 million for broadband. Parson’s budget director said the administration will present more ideas to lawmakers when they convene for their regular session in January. Until then, the state should have enough money left from a previous federal relief law to cover the costs of fighting the virus, budget director Dan Haug said. “We want to try to find
Jim Zeigler asks Kay Ivey to ban door-to-door vaccine squads in Alabama
Alabama State Auditor Jim Zeigler has asked Gov. Kay Ivey to ban door-to-door squads in Alabama for the COVID vaccine. Citizens on Zeigler’s social media pages are e-mailing Ivey asking for the ban. On Sunday, Zeigler asked Ivey to “use the strongest steps to clearly direct federal agents and their recruits that their entry onto home properties in Alabama could legally be considered trespassing.” Zeigler’s request followed an announcement by President Joe Biden Tuesday that workers would be recruited to go to targeted households or the general public checking vaccine compliance and promoting vaccination. Biden stated, “Now, we need to go to community-by-community, neighborhood-by-neighborhood, and oftentimes, door-to-door — literally knocking on doors — to get help to the remaining people protected from the virus.” Two state governors quickly objected to the door-to-door canvass in their states. South Carolina Gov. William Masters stated, “A South Carolinian’s decision to get vaccinated is a personal one for them to make and not the government’s.” McMaster wrote in a letter to health board chairman Mark Elam, “Enticing, coercing, intimidating, mandating, or pressuring anyone to take the vaccine is a bad policy which will deteriorate the public’s trust and confidence in the State’s vaccination efforts. The prospect of government vaccination teams showing up unannounced or unrequested at the door of ‘targeted’ homeowners or on their property will further deteriorate the public’s trust and could lead to potentially disastrous public safety consequences.” Missouri Gov. Mike Parson stated, “I have directed our health department to let the federal government know that sending government employees or agents door-to-door to compel vaccination would NOT be an effective OR a welcome strategy in Missouri!” While Ivey has not made a statement yet, her press secretary made what Zeigler called a “weak press statement with no action.” Gina Maiola, Ivey press secretary, stated Friday, “We are all for educating people on the COVID-19 vaccine, but from the little we know about this program, it does not seem like the answer. Governor Ivey has no plans to put in a request for government workers to knock on people’s doors here in Alabama.” Zeigler said, “Gov. Ivey should go much farther and clearly ban home intrusions by vaccine squads in Alabama.” The White House later clarified that the door-to-door workers could be community people recruited for the task. Zeigler’s requested to the governor, “I ask that you immediately take the strongest steps to clearly direct federal agents and their recruits that their entry onto home properties in Alabama could legally be considered trespassing. The Biden plan to have door-to-door visits by agents of the government or even local recruits is wrong on several levels. The decision to take or not take the COVID vaccine is each individual’s decision. A federal intrusion onto the home properties of Alabama citizens would be a troubling infringement of the Fourth and Tenth Amendments.” Zeigler says some door-to-door vaccine visits were already made in Jefferson County, Alabama’s largest county.
Kay Ivey wants Joe Biden to prioritize getting states 2020 Census data
Gov. Kay Ivey and fourteen other governors wrote a joint letter to Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo urging a swift release of the census redistricting information. The letter addresses the main issue: the delay in releasing the data has made state legislatures unable to redraw district lines before the 2022 election cycle. The letter stated, “While we recognize the difficulties associated with completing a decennial census amid a pandemic, the ongoing delay in the release of 2020 Census redistricting data places our states in a nearly impossible situation to redraw lines prior to the 2022 election cycle. Consequently, we urge you to release redistricting data this month or as soon as possible prior to the delayed release date of September 30, 2021, and the release of the “legacy format” data on August 16, 2021.” The 2020 Census became a challenge to complete during the pandemic. In July 2020, Ivey warned the state’s current participation rate was 59.8%, or two percentage points behind the national average. At the time, Alabama was in danger of losing House seats because of a lack of participation. On Twitter, Ivey commented, “The stakes were high for Alabama in the #2020Census, and because of our efforts on the local and state levels, we succeeded. I’m proud to join fellow governors in urging the Biden Administration to not further delay the release of the redistricting data.” The stakes were high for Alabama in the #2020Census, and because of our efforts on the local and state levels, we succeeded. I’m proud to join fellow governors in urging the Biden Administration to not further delay the release of the redistricting data. #alpolitics @SecRaimondo pic.twitter.com/oMxsIodsoK — Governor Kay Ivey (@GovernorKayIvey) June 22, 2021 The letter continued, “Districts for the U.S. House of Representatives cannot be drawn until the data has been released. Districts for state legislatures also cannot be drawn until this data has been released. Districts for county, parish, township and municipal governing bodies cannot be drawn until states have had the opportunity to draw congressional and state legislative districts. Lastly, districts for school district seats cannot be drawn until county, parish, township, and municipal governing bodies have had the opportunity to draw their own respective districts. As a result of such negative impacts to our constitutional responsibilities, we seek the release of redistricting data as soon as possible—and in line with traditional timelines—so that states may begin to perform important redistricting tasks on behalf of our constituents.” Other governors signing the letter were Asa Hutchinson (AR), Brian Kemp (GA), Ron DeSantis (FL), Doug Ducey (AZ), Kim Reynolds (IA), Mike Parson (MO), Pete Ricketts (NE), Greg Gianforte (MT), Mike DeWine (OH), Henry McMaster (SC), Bill Lee (TN), Greg Abbott (TX), and Mark Gordon (WY), Doug Burgum (ND).
Kay Ivey joins 19 other governors urging action at the U.S. border
Today Gov. Kay Ivey joined 19 other governors in a call for Joe Biden to take action and reverse their policies regarding the U.S. border. The group wrote a letter to President Biden and Vice-President Kamala Harris describing worsening conditions at the border. In April, Arizona’s governor Doug Ducey declared a state of emergency at the southern border and deployed the Arizona National Guard to support law enforcement agencies in border regions. In May, the Associated Press reported that the State Emergency Council voted to allocate approximately $2.5 million to help pay for the deployment of 250 National Guard personnel to free up law enforcement officers in border towns along the Arizona-Mexico border. Part of the letter states, “This Administration has enticed a rush of migrants to our border and incentivized an influx of illegalcrossings by using irresponsible rhetoric and reversing a slew of policies—from halting border wall construction to eliminating asylum agreements to refusing to enforce immigration laws.” The letter concluded, stating, “At a time when our country is trying to recover from a once-in-a-generation pandemic, the last thing weneed is a self-created crisis that exploits families, undermines public safety, and threatens our national security. We urge you to take action to end the humanitarian crisis and secure our southern border immediately.” Gov. Ivey stated on Twitter, “I’m proud to sign on to this letter with fellow governors urging @POTUS & @VP to take immediate action on the crisis happening at America’s southern border. The crisis is too big to ignore & is now spilling over the border of all of our states.” I’m proud to sign on to this letter with fellow governors urging @POTUS & @VP to take immediate action on the crisis happening at America’s southern border. The crisis is too big to ignore & is now spilling over the border of all of our states. #alpolitics @WhiteHouse pic.twitter.com/lyX6AQsyaE — Governor Kay Ivey (@GovernorKayIvey) May 11, 2021 Other governors who signed the letter are Governors Bill Lee, Tennessee; Doug Ducey, Arizona; Asa Hutchinson, Arkansas; Brian Kemp, Georgia; Brad Little, Idaho; Eric Holcomb, Indiana; Kim Reynolds, Iowa; Tate Reeves, Mississippi; Mike Parson, Missouri; Greg Gianforte, Montana; Pete Ricketts, Nebraska; Chris Sununu, New Hampshire; Doug Burgum, North Dakota; Kevin Stitt, Oklahoma; Henry McMaster, South Carolina; Kristi Noem, South Dakota; Greg Abbott, Texas; Spencer Cox, Utah; and Mark Gordon, Wyoming.
