KY House budget chair ‘begins the conversation' on state aid for flood victims
An aerial view of Bacon Creek in Hart County, Feb. 16, 2025. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Austin Anthony)
The chairman of the House budget committee has introduced what he said would 'begin the conversation' on millions of dollars in state aid for Kentuckians reeling from recent statewide floods.
Rep. Jason Petrie, R-Elkton, said the measure, which does not appropriate any money, would create a new SAFE fund, or State Aid for Emergencies, like Kentucky had after earlier Eastern Kentucky floods and Western Kentucky tornadoes.
He introduced it as a committee substitute for House Bill 544 in the House Appropriations and Revenue Committee Tuesday morning. Hours later, the House passed the bill with a vote of 99-0.
In February, floods washed over Kentucky and bitter winter weather followed. In total, 24 people were killed. Shortly thereafter, President Donald Trump approved an emergency declaration for the natural disaster.
The legislation would allow millions of dollars in aid to address the effects of the February floods, said Petrie, who is also the committee's chairman. In the last state budget, the General Assembly imposed a spending cap on emergency funding to respond to natural disasters, but Petrie said at least $23 million is left before the state reaches the cap. At the start of the new fiscal year on July 1, the cap will reset to free up an additional $50 million.
Petrie also said $48 million could be transferred from the previous SAFE funds to the new one created by the bill.
The latest version of the bill was not immediately available online Tuesday morning but added later that morning. Petrie repeatedly said the bill mirrored legislation for the previous SAFE funds. All committee members present voted in favor of the bill.
In response to questions from committee members, Petrie said information about damage estimates from the flood is continuing to evolve. If the legislation needs to change before the current legislative session ends, 'we still have sufficient time to' amend it.
'If we were to leave this session and whatever is done at the end of the session has been accomplished — if it is insufficient for this event or any other event, and there is always the mechanism of calling a special session, having an agreement beforehand and coming in and taking care of the issue,' Petrie said.
Under Kentucky law, the governor calls special sessions of the legislature. However, at the end of last month, Beshear had said there would likely be no need for a special session in the coming months. His administration was a part of conversations about the legislation with Republican lawmakers.
This story was updated Tuesday afternoon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump's Medicaid and SNAP red tape will devastate millions of Americans
Extending President Trump's 2017 tax cuts is a centerpiece of what the president calls his 'big, beautiful' spending bill that was passed late last month by House Republicans by a single vote. Now it is the Senate's turn to weigh in, but that chamber's narrow Republican majority needs to take a hard look at the facts before pressing the yay button. Trump's legislation may truly be enormous, but it is far from pretty — it stigmatizes the wrong people, slashes the wrong programs and will hurt far more Americans than it helps. For starters, those tax cuts will disproportionately go to the wealthy while adding trillions to the deficit. Meanwhile, the punitive work requirements and layers of paperwork for Medicaid and SNAP (formerly food stamps) recipients are still visible beneath the flimsy camouflage of reducing welfare fraud. Academic research, including my own, shows that the vast majority of Americans who are working, are disabled or are providing caregiving already meet these requirements for state and federal aid. Even the independent Congressional Budget Office reports that work requirements for Medicaid and SNAP do not accomplish their stated goal of increasing employment. Millions of Americans rely on Medicaid and SNAP, essential programs that have lasting benefits beyond health care and healthy eating. In 2023, nearly 83 million children and adults — 24 percent of Americans — relied on Medicaid. Medicaid supports care from the cradle to the grave: Medicaid pays for more than 4 in 10 births in the U.S., and is the largest funder of long-term care, supporting the long-term services and supports needed by almost 6 million Americans in 2021. In 2023, SNAP provided food assistance to an average of 42 million Americans each month. SNAP is important across the age spectrum, too: Nearly half of all children in the U.S. participate in SNAP before their 20th birthday, and more than 4 million seniors 60 or older receive SNAP. The CBO estimates that if the Senate passes the bill in its current form, nearly 15 million Americans will lose their health coverage by 2034 because of Medicaid work requirements and other cuts. The reconciliation bill includes the largest SNAP cut in history. It will eliminate food benefits for more than 3 million adults (about 1 million adults over 55) and roughly 1 million children each month. Still, that doesn't keep Republicans from continually trying to portray recipients as lazy cheaters who need to lace up their boots and get back to the factory. They've been making the same mistake for years. Arkansas in 2018 and Georgia in 2023 implemented Medicaid work requirements. Those moves merely caused thousands to lose insurance coverage, had no effect on employment and did not protect these states from fraud. In Arkansas, they were halted after one year. The punitive requirements in the House Republicans' bill will not only fail to force millions of people into low-paying jobs, but they will also increase Americans' medical debt, creating a further, unnecessary strain on our economy and health care system. If Republicans really think that work requirements and paperwork reduce fraud, they are wrong. Medicaid fraud, for example, is relatively rare and more often committed by health care providers, not beneficiaries. Further, these work requirements will bury Americans in mounds of paperwork and cost millions to administer. Instead, they should try to limit the sophisticated tax evasion strategies used by the top 1 percent, which are rarely detected but very expensive for the country. If Trump's complaisant members of Congress really wanted to increase employment, expansions in public preschool and child care would be much more effective and economical. It's somewhat ironic that an administration that supposedly is taking a chainsaw to the federal bureaucracy is moving to wrap ordinary Americans in red tape. But the reality is the Trump administration seeks to break down barriers for millionaires, while building them up around the rest of us. Taryn Morrissey is a professor and chair of American University's Department of Public Administration and Policy, and associate dean of research at the School of Public Affairs.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Controversial FIA statute changes voted through
Controversial changes to the statutes of Formula 1's governing body the FIA have been passed by members despite a warning the organisation is in a "dark period of democratic backsliding". Austria's national motoring club, the OAMTC, criticised the statute changes in a letter to the FIA World Council for Automobile Mobility and Tourism (WCAMT) sent on Wednesday before Thursday's vote at the FIA's General Assembly in Macau. The letter criticised FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem's leadership and urged members not to vote for changes proposed by Ben Sulayem - and revealed by BBC Sport last month - on the basis that they "risk further contributing to the erosion of the FIA's reputation for competent and transparent governance". However, members voted for the amendments by 83.35% to 16.65%. Amendments to the ethics code were voted through even more comprehensively, with an 88.83% majority. The result came despite support from the UK, Belgian, Portuguese and Swiss representatives for Austria's suggestion of a postponement so the FIA could conduct a "proper review and analysis" before making a decision on whether the changes were appropriate. An FIA spokesperson described the result as a "resounding majority" however it has not yet responded to a request for comment on the OAMTC letter. The OAMTC letter adds that recent actions of Ben Sulayem "are inviting comparisons with the excesses of political leaders intent on deconstructing the checks and balances that come with responsible governance". And it hints at the prospect of a legal challenge, on the basis that the changes were "endorsed by (FIA) world council meetings that were not properly constituted, having intentionally excluded elected members from participating and voting". David Richards, the MotorsportUK representative on the world council, was among those members barred from a meeting in March in a dispute with Ben Sulayem over refusing to sign a revised confidentially agreement. The OAMTC is led by Oliver Schmerold, who last year voiced his opposition to previous statute changes passed at the last General Assembly in December, describing them as "not good governance" and "not good in terms of checks and balances". The letter says of the proposed changes: Extending the deadline for potential candidates to declare "is intended to discourage opposition". Removing the rule requiring 21 of the 28 members of the world motorsport council to be different nationalities "is intended to stack the WMSC with supporters rather than encourage diversity of opinion" Aligning the terms of office of the audit, ethics and nominations committees with that of the president "would blatantly reduce the independence of oversight bodies" Removing the right to approve or dismiss up to four senate members from the senate and giving it to the president "self-evidently weakens the ability of the senate to perform its oversight functions, including and especially oversight of the president himself. Ben Sulayem's first term of office ends this December and he is so far the only candidate to have confirmed he is standing for election. Rally legend Carlos Sainz has said he is considering running but has not made a final decision. The letter accuses Ben Sulayem of reneging on his promises during his election campaign in 2021 to ensure "governance structures are compliant with best practices". And it says he has implemented none of the "critical changes" that were recommended by a review and audit of the FIA's governance structure commissioned from McKinsey in 2022. It highlights a series of changes that have eroded accountability at the FIA, including: Limiting the power of the ethics committee, saying "ethical enquiries can - in effect - be suppressed" because of the concentration of oversight into the hands of the FIA president and president of the senate. The eradication of the post of compliance office following the sacking of Paolo Basarri from that position last year Centralising decision-making power with the FIA president and president of the senate The imposition of contracts that require FIA personnel to pay a €50,000 fine if they breach confidentiality terms, and the power of the leadership on its own to determine whether this should be paid and why "without having a hearing, time frame, right of appeal or any definition of what confidentiality means".
Washington Post
2 hours ago
- Washington Post
Senate GOP plan would sell millions of acres of Western public land
Senate Republicans have proposed selling off up to 3.3 million acres of federally owned land in 11 Western states, according to a draft legislative text offered as part of their spending and tax cut bill, prompting an outcry from conservationists and Democratic lawmakers. According to a budget blueprint released Wednesday evening by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the federal government would be required to sell off between 2.2 and 3.3 million acres of land owned by the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service over the next five years. The proposal stipulates that the sold land will have to be used to develop housing or 'community development needs,' which it said could be defined by the secretaries of the Interior or Agriculture departments. The 11 states that would be affected by the proposal are Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said in a statement Wednesday that the draft legislative text would turn 'federal liabilities into taxpayer value, while making housing more affordable for hardworking American families.' Current law allows BLM to sell off land in some instances, such as in a specific ring around Las Vegas, at a discount if it's developed for affordable housing. But the push to scale up these land sales has spurred pushback from not just Democratic lawmakers and environmentalists but also some House Republicans, who managed to block a similar provision from being included last month in the House's tax and spending bill. Democrats and several conservation groups sharply criticized the Senate blueprint, warning that it could deprive future generations of public access to public land and suggesting much of the land sold might not be used for affordable housing. Sen. Martin Heinrich (New Mexico), the panel's top Democrat, accused Republicans of 'taking up a sledgehammer' in a 'fire sale' of public lands, in a statement Wednesday. 'We all lose access to public lands forever, jeopardizing our local economies and who we are as a nation.' In a statement, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership said it opposed the proposed forced sale, arguing that the budget reconciliation bill was not the right process for public-land sales of this scale. 'The Senate proposal sets an arbitrary acreage target and calls for the disposal of up to six times more land than was proposed in early versions of the House budget reconciliation bill,' said Joel Pedersen, the group's president and CEO. 'If passed, sportsmen and women would lose access to large tracts of public land.' If enacted into law, the draft text would require the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service to sell between 0.5 and 0.75 percent of the 438 million acres of land that they own collectively. It does not include the sale of land with existing grazing rights, along with federally protected lands such as national parks, monuments and wildlife refuges. The committee projected that the land sales would generate between $5 billion and $10 billion of income between fiscal years 2025 and 2034, citing an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office.
