Tennessee General Assembly passes Helene recovery bills
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WJHL) — The Tennessee General Assembly passed bills related to Hurricane Helene relief on Wednesday night.
The state House passed the bills after they were approved by the Senate earlier Wednesday. State representatives from across Northeast Tennessee stood by the podium as the bills were discussed and voted on.
Questions raised from Disaster Relief Committee members on why special session is just now happening
Representatives approved House Bill 6003, which would create two funds: the Hurricane Helene Interest Payment Fund and the Governor's Response and Recovery Fund. The first would be used to help cover local governments' interest costs on money borrowed for Hurricane Helene recovery.
The second fund would be used by TEMA for Helene relief such as agriculture recovery, unemployment assistance, and business recovery assistance. The funds would be disbursed through grants or loans to third parties.
'This is a tremendous first step,' said Rep. Timothy Hill, who chaired the Disaster Relief Committee during the special session. 'I believe we're going to see more bills and more funding come in the regular session, but this is where we need to start.'
The House also approved House Bill 6007, which would provide property owners whose property was destroyed or damaged with payments worth up to 130% of their total 2024 property tax levy.
Bill allows direct payments for NE TN Helene-hit homeowners
Representatives also approved House Bill 6002, which would allow suspending some eligibility requirements for unemployment benefits for people in major disaster areas. It would also authorize TEMA, the Tennessee Emergency Management Agency, to assist local governments and emergency management agencies with disasters and emergencies on public property upon request.
The bills will now go to the governor's desk.
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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.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
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cobb County schools is ‘not going to invest' in storage for cellphones, superintendent says
Georgia lawmakers passed legislation to ban student access to phones during the legislative session. Now, the Cobb County School District says it won't be investing its budget into storage for phones at its schools. Cobb County School Superintendent Chris Ragsdale gave the update to parents, the school board and other community members at a meeting on Thursday. [DOWNLOAD: Free WSB-TV News app for alerts as news breaks] 'We will continue to communicate with parents throughout the school year as how that implementation is going to look. I can say that we are not going to invest any money into storage solutions for cellphones. The law allows us to determine what that storage place is going to be. And the storage place is going to be in a student's backpack or purse or pocketbook,' Ragsdale said. RELATED STORIES: A ban on cell phones in Georgia Schools heads to the governor's desk A bill banning cell phones in school for kids in K-8 is one step closer to becoming law Georgia student phone, tablet ban passes House vote, heads to state Senate Ban on student phones in Georgia public schools back up for review in House Education Committee Schools participating in cellphone lock-up pilot program says discipline issues are down The law in question won't take effect until July 2026, giving districts time to come up with new policies and enact them. Policy decisions have a January 2026 deadline, with additional months for implementation. For Cobb County's schools, Ragsdale said the district is going to update the student code of conduct and ensure all students and parents know the new rules. 'We will be making updates to the student code of conduct so that all students will be aware, as will parents, what the punishment would be for that,' Ragsdale said. 'We are certainly going to adhere to the law and follow the law as we always do. But the bottom line is we're going to be focused on having school.' The phone ban passed the legislation as the 'Distraction-free Education Act,' which would block students in kindergarten through eighth grade from having phones out or accessible while in class. [SIGN UP: WSB-TV Daily Headlines Newsletter]
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Afternoon Briefing: Marines moved into Los Angeles amid protests
Good afternoon, Chicago. Former Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan arrived today at the federal courthouse in downtown Chicago for his historic sentencing in a long-running corruption case that shook the state's political world to the core. Madigan, 83, who for years was widely hailed as the most powerful politician in the state, gave a slight smile as he strode past a horde of television news cameras with his lawyers and family members without comment. Carrying a briefcase and umbrella, he then headed to the 12th-floor courtroom of U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey. The hearing is expected to last two hours or more. Check back at for updates. Here's what else is happening today. And remember, for the latest breaking news in Chicago, visit and sign up to get our alerts on all your devices. Subscribe to more newsletters | Asking Eric | Horoscopes | Puzzles & Games | Today in History A lot of attention has been given to the Sox since the fandom of Pope Leo XIV, born Robert Francis Prevost, for the South Side baseball team was revealed. But religious women from local orders have frequented Sox games for decades. Read more here. More top news stories: An immigrant in Wisconsin has been released on bond after false accusation he threatened Trump Crestwood fire officials suspect natural gas was cause of deadly house explosion President Donald Trump's administration this week provided deportation officials with personal data — including the immigration status — on millions of Medicaid enrollees, a move that could make it easier to locate people as part of his sweeping immigration crackdown. Read more here. More top business stories: Air India survivor Vishwaskumar Ramesh recalls harrowing moment the plane went down Massive Google Cloud outage disrupts popular internet services Andrew Vaughn, the No. 3 pick in the 2019 draft, had been a prominent component of the Sox lineup since arriving in the majors in 2021. But he got off to a slow start this season and the Sox optioned him to Triple-A Charlotte on May 23. Read more here. More top sports stories: As Chicago Bears separate for summer, Ben Johnson will stay dialed in — and connected with QB Caleb Williams NASCAR's first Cup Series race outside the US hits travel snags to Mexico City Juneteenth is more than just a holiday. It's a celebration of freedom, community and the rich tapestry of Black culture that continues to shape Chicago and the rest of the country. Read more here. More top Eat. Watch. Do. stories: John C. Reilly will bring his show 'Mister Romantic' to Steppenwolf this fall Amy Morton is back on stage in 'You Will Get Sick' at Steppenwolf Theatre. What took her so long? After a week of tense protests over the federal immigration raids, about 200 Marines have moved into Los Angeles and will protect federal property and personnel, a military commander said. Read more here. More top stories from around the world: Air raid sirens sound across Israel following an Iranian missile attack on the country Rapper Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, shows up for Sean 'Diddy' Combs' trial but can't get in
Forbes
32 minutes ago
- Forbes
How House And Senate Education Proposals Could Reshape Higher Education
Graduation mortar board cap on one hundred dollar bills concept for the cost of a college and ... More university education As Congress navigates the complex terrain of budget reconciliation, education policy has emerged as a major battleground between competing visions for America's higher education system. The House and Senate are advancing dramatically different approaches to federal education funding, with proposals that could fundamentally alter how millions of students access and pay for college. The House reconciliation bill targets higher education with what critics describe as unprecedented cuts, while the Senate is crafting its version that takes a different approach to similar goals. Both chambers face mounting pressure to address rising college costs and student debt, but their proposed solutions diverge sharply on fundamental questions about the federal government's role in education funding. The most significant differences between the House and Senate proposals center on Pell Grant eligibility, the cornerstone of federal student aid that serves nearly 7 million low-income students annually. The House version seeks to expand Pell Grant eligibility for short-term programs, a bipartisan initiative that would allow students to use federal aid for career training programs lasting as little as eight weeks. This expansion could benefit hundreds of thousands of students pursuing high-demand skills in healthcare, technology, and skilled trades. However, the House proposal also includes restrictions based on immigration status that would eliminate aid for specific student populations. The Senate takes a more restrictive approach to existing eligibility. Senate Republicans propose cutting off Pell Grant access for students who receive scholarships covering their full cost of attendance, including tuition, fees, living expenses, and course materials. This provision would primarily affect high-achieving students from low-income families who combine merit aid with need-based grants, potentially forcing them to choose between scholarship opportunities and federal aid eligibility. The impact of these competing approaches would be profound. The House expansion could democratize access to career training, potentially addressing workforce shortages in critical industries. However, the Senate's scholarship restriction could create perverse incentives, discouraging institutions from offering comprehensive aid packages to their neediest students. Both chambers propose significant changes to federal student lending but through different mechanisms. The House bill includes provisions for "risk-sharing" arrangements that would require colleges to assume financial responsibility for a portion of their students' loan defaults. This policy aims to incentivize institutions to improve outcomes and control costs by making them stakeholders in their graduates' financial success. The House approach represents a market-based solution that could drive down costs and improve program quality. Institutions would have strong incentives to ensure their programs lead to employment outcomes that enable loan repayment. However, critics argue this could push colleges to avoid serving higher-risk student populations or eliminate programs in fields with lower earning potential but high social value. Senate proposals focus more on tightening eligibility requirements and modifying repayment terms, though specific details remain under development as the chamber works toward its July 4 deadline for passage. The most controversial element of the House proposal involves new taxes on college and university endowments. The bill would expand existing endowment taxes and impose additional levies on institutions with substantial financial reserves. Supporters argue this addresses the disconnect between institutional wealth and student affordability, forcing well-endowed colleges to contribute more to the broader education system. The endowment tax provisions could generate significant revenue while pressuring wealthy institutions to increase student aid or reduce tuition. However, universities warn that such taxes could reduce their capacity for long-term investment in research, facilities, and student support services that benefit the broader academic mission. Small colleges, including Swarthmore, Pomona, and Grinnell, have banded together to oppose the tax because half or more of their operating income comes from the endowment revenue, and the tax would decimate their financial aid budgets. The Senate has not adopted endowment taxation to the same extent, instead focusing on spending reductions and eligibility restrictions to achieve fiscal goals. The House reconciliation bill extends beyond traditional education policy to affect healthcare access for students. Provisions related to Medicaid and other health programs could significantly impact the millions of college students who rely on these services. The bill's approach to social safety net programs would create additional barriers for students from low-income families who depend on multiple forms of federal assistance. This broader impact illustrates how education policy intersects with other aspects of social policy, making the stakes of reconciliation higher than traditional education legislation. The House takes Title I, II, III, and IV funds into state block grants based on the total student population (excluding the disabled and low-income populations) and allows students to use these funds for private schools. The Senate bill strengthens formulas to target the highest-poverty districts and schools better. The Senate bill generally rejects significant Title I portability beyond district public and charter options. The House bill eliminates federal mandates for state accountability systems (testing frequency, interventions). It proposes that states design their systems (standards, tests, improvement) with minimal federal approval. It maintains basic federal reporting (graduation, disaggregated data). The Senate bill takes the opposite approach, requiring a robust federal accountability system, annual testing in core grades, identification of low-performing schools, evidence-based interventions, public and transparent data, and disaggregated data. The federal requirements for teacher preparation and accountability would be transferred to the states under the House bill, with states setting their standards for certification, evaluation, and professional development. The Senate bill would maintain the federal role and would provide funds for evidence-based professional development in high-need districts. It also has provisions to require states to demonstrate that students have access to experienced and effective teachers. Charter school funding is increased in the House bill, as is access to vouchers to attend private schools. The Senate bill places restrictions on the use of vouchers or Educational Savings Accounts to fund private school tuition and places increasing accountability measures on these funds. The House bill similarly adds early childhood funds to state block grants. In contrast, the Senate bill provides significant new federal funding for universal, high-quality Pre-K programs with state quality standards. It may also expand childcare subsidies and improve quality. Evaluating these competing visions requires considering both immediate impacts and long-term consequences for educational access and quality. The House expansion of Pell Grants for short-term programs addresses a genuine need in the modern economy, where many high-paying careers require specialized training rather than traditional four-year degrees. This provision could significantly improve economic mobility for working-class Americans seeking career advancement through skills training. However, the House bill's overall approach prioritizes fiscal savings over educational access. The combination of aid restrictions, endowment taxes, and risk-sharing requirements could create a more constrained higher education environment where institutions focus primarily on financial metrics rather than educational missions. The Senate's more targeted approach to eligibility restrictions may preserve broader access while addressing specific concerns about the efficiency of aid. However, the scholarship restriction provision could undermine the very merit-aid programs that many institutions use to attract and retain talented students from diverse backgrounds. Both proposals face significant implementation challenges and political obstacles. The House bill's passage required narrow party-line votes, and similar dynamics are likely in the Senate. The fundamental tension between controlling costs and maintaining access will ultimately require compromise that neither chamber's current approach fully addresses. The most promising elements from both proposals involve targeted expansions of aid for career training and workforce development programs that directly address economic needs. However, the broader restructuring of federal education funding requires more careful consideration of unintended consequences. Effective education reform should expand opportunity while maintaining quality and access. The current reconciliation process, driven primarily by fiscal rather than educational considerations, may not provide the optimal framework for achieving these goals. A more comprehensive reauthorization of higher education policy, developed through bipartisan collaboration, would better serve both students and institutions. As both chambers work toward final passage, the ultimate measure of success should be whether these proposals genuinely improve educational outcomes and economic opportunity for American students rather than simply achieving short-term budgetary targets.
