Birmingham residents react to Gov. Ivey's focus on inner-city crime
She highlighted ways to fight crime in Alabama cities during her State of the State address Tuesday.
Lawmakers and Birmingham residents reacted to the governor's statements. They said they are encouraged by what they heard. Residents and lawmakers welcomed ways to fight crime and put an end to gun violence in Alabama cities.
George McCall is the president of the Ensley Neighborhood Association.
'I'm 85 years old. For all my life, I have lived in this area,' McCall said 'When I grew up, it was a fist fight. Now, it's no more fist fights. It's gun violence for revenge and stuff like that.'
Ivey addressed the gun violence McCall is speaking of in her Tuesday speech.
'We will crack down on inner-city violence by enhancing penalties for dangerous felons with guns,' Ivey said. 'We will expand Anaiah's law, boost our successful Metro Area Crime Suppression Unit, ban Glock switches, and we will enhance supervision of high-risk juveniles.'
Alabama lawmakers talk Medicaid expansion
According to state Rep. Juandalynn Givan (D-Birmingham), the governor's comments and the laws she is talking about are backed by bipartisan support.
'The governor's package will pass — there is no way — this is politics 101,' Givan said. 'It is going to pass.'
Givan said there will be additional legislation that helps to stop gun violence in urban areas.
'We can deal with the Glock situation, and we are going to deal with that,' Givan said. 'We also have to deal with the fact that these killers are purchasing and stealing guns that they are reselling in the black market to these young people who have no business with these guns in their hands.'
Givan said she is drafting new bills that will support ending gun violence, as her goal is making Birmingham and other Alabama cities as safe as possible.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Bipartisan effort launches to reintroduce welfare work requirements
(The Center Square) – Reinstating work requirements for some welfare recipients found support across the aisle on Wednesday. It's a notable change after the partisan nature of the debate in recent years: Republicans have long wanted waivers from the mandate, which have been used on and off for the last 20 years, to expire amid fears about prolonged government dependency and fraud. Democrats see the option as economically justified absent a stronger safety net. Without a waiver, able-bodied adults would have to work at least 20 hours a week or spend the equivalent amount of time in a workforce development program. Until the requirement is met, benefits would be limited to three months over a three-year period. Rep. Frank Burns, D-Johnstown, wants to see a return to the 'Welfare to Work' program implemented in 1996 under former President Bill Clinton, which he said incentivized recipients for seeking employment. 'This successful shift in welfare policy showed that improving welfare services can be achieved while lowering costs for taxpayers and increasing employment,' Burns said of his House Bill 1807. The bill, cosigned by Rep. Mark Gillen, a Republican representing a district in Reading, would require able-bodied adults to work or engage with their communities to qualify for Medicaid. 'The intention is to encourage physically and mentally able Medicaid enrollees to find employment, job training, or volunteer opportunities,' Burns said. 'Work and community engagement policies such as this have proven to be successful in several states, with reduced costs and decreases in unemployment.' Welfare expansion has outpaced population growth: Pennsylvania has only gained 700,000 residents since 2000. But the state budget is dominated by this spending that runs through the Department of Human Services. Medicaid spending has ballooned over the last 25 years. The state spent $10.7 billion on 1.3 million residents in 2000, but now, the commonwealth appropriates $47 billion to provide benefits to 3.3 million residents. Though human services eat up a significant chunk of all state budgets, the commonwealth stands out: Pennsylvania's Medicaid expenditures as a percentage of its budget is the highest in the nation, according to an analysis from the Foundation for Government Accountability. Sam Adolphsen, the foundation's policy director, has argued during past legislative hearings that almost half of the commonwealth's beneficiaries on Medicaid are able-bodied adults. During a 2024 legislative hearing, Adelson called it 'fraud by design' when recipients could get in the Medicaid program before the state verified eligibility. Meanwhile, 14,000 people with intellectual and physical disabilities remain on a waiting list for resources. 'That's how you get this robbery of this safety net,' he said. 'If you're stopping fraud and saving money, it's to protect these folks and taxpayers.' For critics of work requirements, it's not that simple. In an analysis from the Urban Institute, able-bodied adults are considered a 'challenging' group to serve. These beneficiaries are more likely to be homeless or live with a mental or physical condition that doesn't qualify as a disability, even though it makes working unrealistic. The research also showed that income decreases for residents who only receive benefits for three months, suggesting that time limits do not encourage employment. Farry has a second proposal, House Bill 1808, that wants to try extended limits for transitioning off benefits in a different program – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. The cash benefits would be reformed through a Clinton-inspired 'Welfare to Work' pilot program, in which recipients will increase employment hours as benefits taper off. The pilot would launch in counties with populations between 90,000 and 209,999, where recipients working 20 hours would receive full benefits for six months. After that, the employer will increase working hours to 30 per week, while the state reduces cash assistance to 70%. After a year, a beneficiary will be expected to work 40 hours a week and transition out of the program entirely. 'This program will encourage companies to hire individuals enrolled on the welfare rolls, helping families to transition to self-sufficiency by providing an incentive to work,' Burns said in the proposal's cosponsorship memo. 'In doing so, businesses will be able to tap into this potential pool of workers.' Democratic Reps. Manuel Guzman and Jim Haddock, as well as Republican Rep. Andrew Kuzma have co-sponsored the bill. Both await consideration in the House Human Services Committee. Anthony Hennen contributed to this report. Solve the daily Crossword
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
Trump just offered NY kids cash for schools — will Gov. Hochul turn it down to please unions?
New federal law offers scholarship grants for kids to use at private schools — if their state's governor opts to allow it. We can't recall Gov. Kathy Hochul or any of her predecessors ever turning down free, no-strings-attached cash — but giving the thumbs-up here would risk the ire of New York's powerful teachers unions. Will she dare? Advertisement The program has two steps. First, it lets taxpayers give up to $1,700 to a scholarship-granting nonprofit, trimming their federal tax liability dollar-for-dollar. Advertisement Then, it lets the charities offer grants to help kids pay for private-school tuition, books or other educational expenses — as long as the state's governor 'or other entities/individuals designated by state law' opts in. The aid can surely help New York kids to better futures — by letting them escape low-performing public schools. A whopping 40% of New York City kids in grades 3-8 failed this spring's state tests in math and English (though city schools spend $37,000 a year per student, while the average private-school tuition in the state is about $22,000). That's why 74% of New York school parents back vouchers. And why tens of thousands of kids are on waitlists for seats at public charter schools, which are privately run. Advertisement Alas, teachers unions, which control public schools, fear losing students to schools they don't control: It means fewer union members, reduced dues collection — and ever-shrinking teacher-union power. So the unions hate the scholarship program, even pushing transparent lies that is somehow steals money away from public schools. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters In truth, not one dime would come from New York public schools or any state tax revenue at all. Advertisement If Hochul turns down the cash, as schools expert Corey DeAngelis notes, she'll be shooting New York in the foot: letting New York taxpayers' donations go to help other states' kids, while local children get bupkis. On every other front, Hochul is devoted to maximizing federal grants to New York; along with practically every elected Democrat in the state, she's been furiously denouncing Medicaid 'cuts' that mainly amount to imposing work requirements on able-bodied beneficiaries. If the gov blocks Empire State children from getting these scholarships, it'll be undeniable proof that unions matter to her more than New York's kids.
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump order on homelessness will undo decades of progress, Kansas service providers warn
A man lies under shading on July 19, 2022, on North Topeka Avenue in Wichita. Service providers say an executive order by President Donald Trump could jeopardize their efforts to help those who are experiencing homelessness. (Lily O'Shea Becker/Kansas Reflector) TOPEKA — Christine English-Baird spends at least one day a week distributing basic supplies to homeless people in Wichita, home to one of Kansas' largest homeless populations. 'I do that because I can't even fathom anybody else going through what I did,' English-Baird said. 'Feeling invisible. Feeling alone.' But English-Baird, who was homeless in Colorado and housing insecure in Kansas, says the services that once helped her could be jeopardized by President Donald Trump's July 24 executive order, which encourages involuntary institutionalization for people in mental health crises and increased criminal pressure on people experiencing homelessness across the United States. The order makes hefty promises of 'fighting vagrancy,' 'ending support for 'housing first' policies' and 'encouraging civil commitment.' Trump followed the July order with another that deployed National Guard troops to police District of Columbia streets, targeting 'drugged-out maniacs and homeless people,' he said in an Aug. 11 news conference. The Trump administration's approach to homelessness has sparked concern among social service providers, experts and advocates, who say the July order is unspooling decades of progress. They are skeptical that the order's provisions will be within reach, especially as cuts to Medicaid and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development are imminent. Plus, institutionalization and criminalization are some of the most expensive and ineffective ways to address homelessness, said Steve Berg, chief policy officer with the National Alliance to End Homelessness. The threat of being taken into custody 'sets people against each other,' Berg said. 'I know one thing really is true about places that have made progress on homelessness is that people are working together,' he said. 'And if people are at each other's throats over things like this, then there's going to be more homelessness.' Kansas Senate President Ty Masterson, an Andover Republican who is seeking his party's nomination for governor, said Trump followed through 'on his promise to restore law and order in our Kansas communities.' 'State legislation should focus on mental health and addiction treatment, reducing encampments, and keeping Kansans safe,' he said in a statement. 'I'm committed to working with the White House in any way I can to deliver on the President's agenda.' English-Baird's life was a series of revolving doors, beginning with fleeing a violent partner in Denver. She slept in a domestic violence shelter, a transitional shelter, an apartment paid for by her ex, then a rental, a bus stop, sometimes a jail cell and then the streets for three-and-a-half years. At times, she nearly died, she said. She lost a lot along the way: apartments, her son, sometimes hope. But English-Baird connected with a friend in Kansas who put her up so she could recover from substance use, build savings and regain hope. With a lifetime restraining order against her ex and a new life with her husband and son, she now works to influence policies and practices for how homeless people are treated in Kansas through her role on a statewide board. 'Nobody wants to see anybody homeless, regardless of what that means,' English-Baird said. To her, it means providing people safe, affordable housing, support, a sense of belonging and purpose. To the Trump administration, it means something else entirely. During the first Trump administration, there wasn't much attention on homelessness, Berg said, until the end of Trump's term, when elected officials began promoting the idea of putting homeless people in camps. Since then, Berg said, 'there's been a desire to lock people up, I think. There's no polite way of saying it.' The executive order takes a four-pronged approach with the stated goal of 'protecting public safety.' It cites the most recent national data that estimates how many people were experiencing homelessness on a given night last year in the U.S. — nearly 771,500 people, 274,000 of whom were unsheltered. In Kansas, almost 2,800 people experienced homelessness, which is one of the lowest state totals in the country but is also considered by service providers to be an undercount. The order directs the U.S. Attorney General to broaden the criteria that governments use to involuntarily commit people, which currently is based on whether someone poses an imminent risk to themself or others. It also asks federal agencies to give funding preference to governments that 'enforce prohibitions on open illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and urban squatting, and track the location of sex offenders.' It directs funding to be allocated to 'ensure individuals camping on streets and causing public disorder and that are suffering from serious mental illness or addiction are moved into treatment centers, assisted outpatient treatment, or other facilities.' It also deprioritizes Housing First programs, which get people into safe, affordable housing, often in tandem with supportive services. Donald Whitehead Jr., executive director of the National Coalition for the Homeless, said in a July 24 statement that the executive orders take a punitive approach, which 'has consistently failed to resolve homelessness' while exacerbating the challenges faced by people experiencing homelessness, substance use disorders or mental health issues. 'Everyone deserves a safe place to live,' Whitehead said. 'These executive orders ignore decades of evidence-based housing and support services in practice.' The salient question, according to Randy Callstrom, the CEO of Wyandot Behavioral Health Network in Kansas City, Kansas, is where will people go? In Kansas, he said, there is no place for people to turn. 'Even if you move people from one part of a community, they will go somewhere else,' he said. He added: 'Unless those individuals are moving into housing, they're still going to be living in the community unhoused.' Much depends on how the executive order is actually carried out, he said. Regardless, he said, the order significantly modifies people's civil liberties. And he predicts homelessness will get worse. The order moves 'things back 35-40 years or longer,' Callstrom said, 'and that's concerning.' He worries that if the order is enforced, mental health will be stigmatized and local governments, service organizations, hospitals, jails and law enforcement will be strained. The order misses the mark when it comes to effectively serving people experiencing homelessness, Callstrom said. '(A) longtime misperception around people who are homeless is that it is a moral failure,' he said, 'that these are individuals who are less than, that we just want to push them out of line of sight and wish the problem will go away, when the reality is, you know, in many, many cases, the people who end up living unhoused have experienced many traumas in their life.' He leads a community mental health center, which he said doesn't have enough resources to fulfill the order's demands. At the only public psychiatric hospital in eastern Kansas, Osawatomie State Hospital, a waitlist of 30-50 people has remained constant for the past decade, he said. A publicly available report indicated the waitlist was at 37 people in early August. Kansas must build new facilities or convince current facilities to take on more people, Callstrom said. Kansas has budgeted for roughly 710 beds in public psychiatric facilities, said Cara Sloan-Ramos, a spokeswoman for the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services. More than 660 of them are occupied, according to data from the department. More than 2,500 adults and more than 1,500 children use services at private psychiatric institutions. According to a publicly available database containing regular updates of bed availability at public and private psychiatric facilities across the region, no beds were available at state hospitals. In the order, the White House argues federal and state governments 'have spent tens of billions of dollars on failed programs that address homelessness but not its root causes, leaving other citizens vulnerable to public safety threats.' Agencies at all levels of government across the United States have implemented Housing First policies. Once housed, supportive services address people's mental health, substance use, employment, familial connections and other reintegration efforts. The order mimics the anti-Housing First efforts of the Cicero Institute, a Texas-based conservative think tank, which has pushed states for years to ban homelessness. Kansas Republicans in 2023 entertained the group's proposal at a legislative hearing, where a Cicero Institute fellow was the only proponent. English-Baird said she is 'a firm believer' in Housing First. She has seen it work on both sides — as someone in need of housing and as someone offering aid and crafting policy on a board for the Kansas Statewide Homeless Coalition. When implemented correctly, she said, the approach gains people's trust. 'Without a stable environment, you can't address mental health. You can't address addiction,' she said. Eliminating funding for organizations, especially rural ones, 'literally takes away all the progress we're making,' English-Baird said. Forcing people to be institutionalized, as the order encourages, 'doesn't do anything to get people housed,' she said. Institutional beds are scarce, anyway, she added. The order also bars grant funding from being used for harm reduction efforts, such as safe injection sites. Harm reduction focuses on reducing the adverse outcomes of drug use, which can include distributing naloxone, sterile syringes and fentanyl test kits, along with first aid, treatment resources and educational materials on overdose prevention. Harm reduction offers people supplies to stay alive and as disease-free as possible, said English-Baird, who experienced substance use and addiction. She now offers mutual aid to people experiencing homelessness in the Wichita area. Harm reduction is key, she said, to expanding treatment options and connecting people to needed mental health services. 'But we can't do that if they're dead,' she said. In Kansas, illicit drug possession and distribution carry criminal penalties, as does use or possession of drug paraphernalia. Cities across the state have passed ordinances to restrict unauthorized camping on public or private land, including Lawrence, Leavenworth, Topeka and Wichita. Some also regulate panhandling and loitering. Berg, with the National Alliance to End Homelessness, said he also thinks the order will result in more people experiencing homelessness. If 'the states that want to do the cost-effective solutions to homelessness can't get the money to do it because they're not punitive enough, then that's going to mean more homelessness,' he said. Solve the daily Crossword
