Whoa, plead Democrats, as GOP supermajority pushes through bill makeovers in session's final days
Rep. Lindsey Burke, D-Lexington, lays out concerns the minority of House Democrats have about bills being changed and then fast-tracked through the legislature. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Liam Niemeyer)
FRANKFORT — With few days left for Kentucky Republicans to veto proof their bills, Democrats say the supermajority is railroading through changes to legislation without giving lawmakers or the public time to consider the issues or consequences.
'It's unfortunately become a common theme, but it's become much worse this session,' said Rep. Lindsey, Burke, D-Lexington. 'We want Kentuckians to know that we reject this approach to governance, and we're fighting for your right to simply know what your government is doing and to be able to voice your support or your concern.'
Burke spoke at a press conference called by House Democrats before the chambers convened Wednesday afternoon.
She pointed to HB 775 — a 'shell bill' that in a day's time ballooned from four to 107 pages proposing sweeping changes to state tax laws — as an example of 'an appalling lack of transparency.'
Republicans rebuked the Democratic criticisms.
'We are in session for 30 days. This is day 26. The time is ticking,' said House Majority Floor Leader Steven Rudy, R-Paducah, speaking on the House floor.
'I hear people complain about the process. 'Oh, it's being rushed,'' Rudy said. 'That's usually though when they just don't like the results of what it is we're doing. Time and time again, I've seen this body suspend the rules because, the process, we have to.'
On both ends of the Capitol Tuesday and Wednesday, Democrats sought to table bills, saying a pause would provide more time for study and consideration of what the bills would do.
In the Senate, Democratic Caucus Chair Reggie Thomas, of Lexington, attempted to get support for motions to table two Republican bills updated in Senate Committees hours earlier — House Bill 2, which would allow Kentuckians to sue the governor over taxes paid on gold and silver bullion, and House Bill 606, which deals with reporting requirements for some revenue bonds. But his motions failed in the GOP-controlled chamber.
Thomas argued the House bills could be heard on the floor Thursday, allowing time for stakeholders to review the new legislation.
Thomas renewed his party's criticism of the Republicans' rules packages adopted at the start of the session in January. At the time, Democrats in both chambers argued the rules would stifle debate and limit their constituents' voices.
'I have said from the beginning of the session that I think your system is flawed,' Thomas said.
Sen. Karen Berg, D-Louisville, also chided Republicans for pushing the bills through quickly. She said before voting on HB 606, she 'did not get a chance to' review the changes before coming to the floor. The Senate committee substitute for HB 606 added various appropriations, including for development projects across the state.
Sen. Chris McDaniel, R-Ryland Heights, staunchly defended the Senate addition to House Bill 2, which was made in his Senate Appropriations and Revenue Committee Wednesday morning to add a delay in state income tax filings for Kentuckians and businesses affected by recent statewide floods.
'Now I'm not sure today why we are so obsessed with money that those who are most disadvantaged currently in our commonwealth enjoy the scorn of the minority party in this chamber,' McDaniel said. 'But here we are.'
Meanwhile, in the House Democrats tried to get Republicans to table HB 775, what initially began as a shell bill and was replaced with a 107-page committee substitute that includes changes to the state's tax laws to make it easier for lawmakers to incrementally lower the state's income tax rate in the future.
Several times as hastily approved committee substitutes to bills were being debated on the House floor, Democrats brought up complaints about the process which they said failed to provide enough time to understand the bills and the lack of public notice.
During the debate on a bill to regulate hemp-derived beverages — which was changed Wednesday morning for the second time within the last 10 days via a committee substitute — Rep. Anne Donworth, D-Lexington, questioned the timeframe for unveiling a committee substitute Tuesday evening and then voting on it in committee Wednesday morning.
'We had a nine o'clock committee meeting. That bill sub still was not available online at the time of the vote' in the House Licensing and Occupations and Administrative Regulations Committee, Donworth said. 'So people were still not able to see what it is that we were considering.'
Laura Leigh Goins, a spokesperson for the House GOP caucus, in a statement said the body has 'made great strides to ensure transparency and operates within the rules of the chamber and the legislative process.'
'Claims to the contrary are nothing short of political grandstanding and always seem to accompany votes on issues the minority opposes,' Goins said.
House Majority Whip Rep. Jason Nemes, R-Louisville, during a panel discussion Tuesday evening in Frankfort hosted by the Bluegrass Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists, said the legislature is operating transparently. But he voiced support for publicly posting committee substitutes for bills at the time they're provided to lawmakers, usually the day before being heard in committee.
Minority Floor Leader Rep. Pamela Stevenson during the Wednesday press conference that she and Rudy had agreed to meet after the end of this year's session to discuss how to make a 'more transparent' process for moving bills.
Minority Caucus Chair Rep. Al Gentry, D-Louisville, said Democrats are raising concerns to try to ensure that stakeholders and the public understand how fast-moving bills are changing. That way, he said, the need to 'clean up bills' passed in succeeding sessions could be averted.
Without input from Kentuckians who stand to be harmed by legislation, Gentry said, 'there's no way to fix a bill.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cynthia Lummis Proposes Artificial Intelligence Bill, Requiring AI Firms to Disclose Technicals
Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) has introduced the Responsible Innovation and Safe Expertise (RISE) Act of 2025, a legislative proposal designed to clarify liability frameworks for artificial intelligence (AI) used by professionals. The bill could bring transparency from AI developers – stoping short of requiring models to be open source. In a press release, Lummis said the RISE Act would mean that professionals, such as physicians, attorneys, engineers, and financial advisors, remain legally responsible for the advice they provide, even when it is informed by AI systems. At the time, AI developers who create the systems can only shield themselves from civil liability when things go awry if they publicly release model cards. The proposed bill defines model cards as detailed technical documents that disclose an AI system's training data sources, intended use cases, performance metrics, known limitations, and potential failure modes. All this is intended to help help professionals assess whether the tool is appropriate for their work. "Wyoming values both innovation and accountability; the RISE Act creates predictable standards that encourage safer AI development while preserving professional autonomy,' Lummis said in a press release. 'This legislation doesn't create blanket immunity for AI," Lummis continued. However, the immunity granted under this Act has clear boundaries. The legislation excludes protection for developers in instances of recklessness, willful misconduct, fraud, knowing misrepresentation, or when actions fall outside the defined scope of professional usage. Additionally, developers face a duty of ongoing accountability under the RISE Act. AI documentation and specifications must be updated within 30 days of deploying new versions or discovering significant failure modes, reinforcing continuous transparency obligations. The RISE Act, as it's written now, stops short of mandating that AI models become fully open source. Developers can withhold proprietary information, but only if the redacted material isn't related to safety, and each omission is accompanied by a written justification explaining the trade secret exemption. In a prior interview with CoinDesk, Simon Kim, the CEO of Hashed, one of Korea's leading VC funds, spoke about the danger of centralized, closed-source AI that's effectively a black box. "OpenAI is not open, and it is controlled by very few people, so it's quite dangerous. Making this type of [closed source] foundational model is similar to making a 'god', but we don't know how it works," Kim said at the time.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Chart: Hundreds of gigawatts of clean energy at risk with GOP bill
See more from Canary Media's "Chart of the week' column. Amid rising power bills and surging energy demand, Republicans in Congress are set to undermine the country's primary source of new electricity — clean energy. The 'Big Beautiful Bill' passed in May by House Republicans and now being considered by the Senate would rapidly phase out key clean-energy tax credits, casting uncertainty over more than 600 gigawatts' worth of solar, battery, and wind projects slated to come online in 2028 or later, according to new analysis from research firm Cleanview. To be fair, the 600-GW figure is based on what's currently in the interconnection queue, and a good number of those projects won't get built regardless of the fate of the tax credits. (Projects often drop out of the queue for all kinds of reasons.) But if the bill kneecaps even a fraction of what's anticipated, it will have serious consequences for the U.S. energy system. For context, the entirety of the U.S. had a generating capacity of around 1,200 gigawatts at the end of 2023. The current version of the legislation would rapidly phase out federal tax credits that encourage clean energy development. As it stands, developers would be eligible for the tax credit only if their projects begin construction within 60 days of the bill's passage and if they come online before the end of 2028. That puts the 318 GW worth of projects planned to be completed in 2029 and later at explicit risk of losing their tax-credit eligibility. It also jeopardizes 2028 projects that either can't break ground with just two months' notice or which might hit snags that push their completion into 2029. That doesn't necessarily mean those projects would be cancelled, but it would scramble their economics, which were calculated under an entirely different set of policy assumptions. It's near certain that some would fall through. Many more would be delayed as developers hash out new financial terms — read: higher power prices that will be passed onto consumers. A slowdown in clean energy construction is the exact opposite of what the moment demands. These days, when a new energy project is built in the U.S., more than nine times out of 10 it is a solar, battery, or wind installation. That's not an exaggeration. In 2024, solar, batteries, and wind made up 93% of new energy resources. The year before that, it was 94%. Meanwhile, construction of new large-scale fossil-gas power plants is constrained by turbine shortages that are unlikely to ease in the near term. At the same time, electricity demand is surging and expected to climb even higher in coming years as the development of AI sets off a race to construct power-hungry data centers. If congressional Republicans pass a bill that stifles solar, batteries, and wind, study after study predicts the same outcome: higher energy bills — and more planet-warming emissions.


USA Today
42 minutes ago
- USA Today
Why these college students are wary of the GOP megabill
Why these college students are wary of the GOP megabill Congressional Republicans are proposing big changes to college financial aid programs. One vocal group of students is pushing back. Show Caption Hide Caption Senators grill Education Secretary Linda McMahon over proposed cuts Education Secretary Linda McMahon testified to Congress over proposed budget cuts. WASHINGTON – Emi Glass had one thing on her mind when she was applying to college: cost. Footing the bill for a degree was never a foregone conclusion for her, growing up in a single-parent household in Kettering, Ohio. In between shifts at the local Dairy Queen, she poured hundreds of hours into applications for a wide range of schools and scholarships. She worried about where she would go, and more importantly, if she'd be able to pay for it. Those worries vanished when she was accepted to Yale University. The Ivy League school in Connecticut offers some of the most generous financial aid in the country to lower-income students. Between federal grants, outside scholarships and financial aid directly from Yale, going to college suddenly seemed affordable. 'I'm living out a dream that once felt unattainable for me,' said Glass, now 21, standing outside the U.S. Capitol on June 12. She came to Washington with a group of other college students, many from similar financial circumstances, to bring attention to the financial aid implications of President Donald Trump's so-called 'Big, Beautiful Bill' for low-income students. 'For students like me, financial aid isn't just helpful,' said another student, Jackson Howe, 21, a rising senior at West Virginia University. 'It's essential.' The students were in the nation's capital to lobby congressional Republicans to oppose new taxes on university endowments and changes to federal student loan programs. As part of the GOP's efforts to get Trump's major domestic policy bill across the finish line this summer, lawmakers are considering a slew of reforms to funding for higher education. One aggressive legislative package, which already passed the U.S. House of Representatives, would significantly curb eligibility for Pell Grants (federal subsidies that help low-income people pay for college) and fine schools for leaving students with debt. Read more about the House bill: Republicans propose massive overhaul of student loans, Pell Grants The other package, which was published by a U.S. Senate committee on June 10, takes a more measured approach. Still, it would make big changes, including cutting the number of student debt repayment plans to just two (which the House bill also suggests) and imposing new caps on borrowing. Read more about the Senate bill: Major student loan changes just came one step closer to becoming law Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, chair of the Senate committee overseeing education, said his chamber's bill would save taxpayers at least $300 billion and make higher education more affordable. 'We need to fix our broken higher education system,' he said in a statement. 'While Biden and Democrats unfairly attempted to shift student debt onto taxpayers that chose not to go to college, Republicans are taking on the root causes of the student debt crisis to lower the cost of tuition and improve Americans' access to opportunities that set them up for success.' The Senate package includes several provisions with bipartisan support. One measure, which would yank financial aid funding from certain college programs that provide a poor return on investment, has been pushed for years by a former high-ranking official in the Obama administration. Some Democrats also agree with a provision that would expand Pell Grants to weekslong training programs in fields like welding and cosmetology, even though consumer protection advocates warn that doing so without the right guardrails could lead to fraud. Endowment taxlooms Among the chief concerns for the students rallying outside the Capitol on June 12 were new taxes on university endowments. Those penalties, which would primarily hurt some of the richest schools in the country, could force institutions like Yale to pay upwards of $700 million a year to the government. Read more: With a war on Harvard raging, religious colleges get big tax break in Trump spending bill Republicans such as Missouri Rep. Jason Smith, who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, say the provision would hold 'woke, elite universities that operate more like major corporations and other tax-exempt entities accountable, ensuring they can no longer abuse generous benefits provided through the tax code.' Cayla Waddington, 18, a rising sophomore at Yale, worries the tax could force schools like hers to pull back on their financial aid commitments, which can be supported in part by endowment funds. 'I pay next to nothing for my Yale education, thanks to their endowment,' she said. 'There are thousands of us across the country who share the same story.' Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @