Latest news with #Bill394
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bill banning foreign farmland ownership passes NC Senate hurdle
(USDA Photo by Lance Cheung) The North Carolina Senate Judiciary Committee voted Tuesday to advance a bill that would ban certain foreign groups from purchasing farmland in the state. Senate Bill 394, 'Prohibit Foreign Ownership of NC Land,' passed without discussion after the panel approved a technical amendment. The legislation now moves to the Senate Rules Committee. The bill comes at the same time that tensions between the U.S. a several other nations have been on the rise as the result of the Trump administration's economic tariffs and other foreign policy shifts. Sens. Bob Brinson (R-Beaufort, Craven, Lenoir), Bobby Hanig (R-Bertie, Camden, Currituck, Dare, Gates, Hertford, Northampton, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrrell), and Timothy Moffitt (R-Henderson, Polk, Rutherford) serve as the primary sponsors for SB 394. The bill would prohibit the 'adversarial' nations of China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia from making claims to land that is agricultural, situated within a 25-mile radius of a military installation, or underneath special use airspace as designated by the Federal Aviation Administration. Lawmakers on the same committee reviewed SB 394 during a meeting on April 16, prior to taking a one-week recess. During that session, legislators discussed the bill but did not vote. 'This bill essentially acknowledges that food security is national security and it's a state effort to protect our military bases,' Brinson said during that meeting. Entities falling under the bill's stipulations who own the land prior to the legislation becoming law, if it happens, would need to register with the secretary of state and attorney general. Twelve states have already enacted similar measures, according to Brinson. Sen. Sophia Chitlik (D-Durham) asked if the bill would apply to dual citizens and prohibit them from owning farmland in North Carolina. Legislative staff responded that individuals holding U.S. citizenship, permanent residence, or other forms of lawful presence would not be subject to the measure. Chitlik also asked if the bill would pose challenges to the Fair Housing Act, which makes it illegal to discriminate in the sale or rental of housing due to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, or disability. Brinson said the legislation was modeled after language in Florida, where it did not run into issues. 'It doesn't mention nationality, it mentions citizenship,' Brinson said. 'There is a distinction and a difference.' A similar bill in the lower chamber, House Bill 133 — 'NC Farmland and Military Protection Act,' wqas approved 111-0 on April 16 and currently resides in the Senate Rules Committee.
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bills to ban foreign purchase of farmland, social media for minors move forward in NC House
The North Carolina Legislative Building (Photo: Clayton Henkel) On a busy day at the North Carolina General Assembly, the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee approved pair of bills that have received a good deal of public attention. House Bill 133, 'NC Farmland and Military Protection Act,' sponsored by Reps. Jennifer Balkcom (R-Henderson), Neal Jackson (R-Moore, Randolph), Jeff Zenger (R-Forsyth), and John Bell (R-Goldsboro), would ban 'adversarial' foreign governments from purchasing, acquiring, or leasing agricultural land in North Carolina. The restrictions would also apply to land situated within a 75-mile radius of a military installation — a number influenced by national defense recommendations, Balkcom said — such as Fort Bragg near Fayetteville. A complete list of applicable installations is outlined in the bill text. The measure comes at the same time that international tensions have been on the rise amidst the Trump administration's tariffs on foreign trade partners. HB 133 defines 'adversarial' foreign governments as the ones subject to the U.S. State Department's International Traffic in Arms Regulations, according to the bill text, but does not explicitly outline the nations. Its counterpart in the upper chamber, Senate Bill 394, 'Prohibit Foreign Ownership of NC Land,' passed the Senate Agriculture, Energy, and Environment Committee last week and specifies the 'adversarial' governments as China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. Rep. Phil Sheperd (R-Onslow) asked if the bill had anything to do with legislation in previous years aimed towards reimbursing farmers for the purchase of their land. Balkcom responded that the bill is more of a preventative measure. Instead of incentivizing farmers to sell their land, it targets foreign groups and bars them from purchasing the property. 'This is basically protecting it from being able to sell, those who do were not given any incentive to do it,' she said. Rep. Jay Adams (R-Catawba) brought up the legality and constitutionality of preventing a landowner from selling their property to a ready, willing buyer. 'Private property rights are crucial here, but so is national security,' Balkcom said. 'The way we look at this bill doesn't impact private buyers or U.S. companies. It applies only to entities controlled by foreign governments designated an adversary from our own federal agency.' The bill now heads to the House Rules Committee. The committee also approved House Bill 301, 'Social Media Protections for Minors Under 16.' According to a legislative staff summary, the bill would — among other things: Prohibit social media platforms from allowing minors under the age of 14 to create an account. Prohibit social media platforms from allowing 14- and 15-year-olds to create an account without parental consent. Require social media platforms to use age verification to verify the age of account holders. Authorize the Department of Justice to bring an action for unfair and deceptive trade practices against a social medial platform that violates these provisions and collect a civil penalty of up to $50,000 per violation. Authorize a civil action on behalf of a minor account holder and an award of up to $10,000 in damages. HB 301 moves to the House Rules Committee for further discussion.
Yahoo
08-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bills banning foreign ownership of NC farmland advance
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service photo by Brandon O'Connor. Two committees in the North Carolina General Assembly voted Tuesday morning to approve legislation banning certain foreign entities from acquiring farmland in the state. The House Homeland Security and Military and Veterans Affairs Committee took up House Bill 133, 'NC Farmland and Military Protection Act.' About an hour later, the Senate Agriculture, Energy, and Environment Committee approved the upper chamber's counterpart, Senate Bill 394, 'Prohibit Foreign Ownership of NC Land.' Both measures now head to subsequent panels — House Commerce and Economic Development and Senate Judiciary, respectively. At a time of rocky international relations due to the Trump administration's tariffs, the legislation could signify a move toward increased tension with foreign countries. HB 133, sponsored by Reps. Jennifer Balkcom (R-Henderson), Neal Jackson (R-Moore, Randolph), Jeff Zenger (R-Forsyth), and John Bell (R-Goldsboro), would prohibit 'adversarial' foreign governments from purchasing, acquiring, or leasing agricultural land in North Carolina, according to the bill text. The restrictions would also apply to land situated within a 75-mile radius of a military installation — a number influenced by national defense recommendations, Balkcom said — such as Fort Bragg near Fayetteville. A complete list of applicable installations is outlined in the bill text. 'If it was up to me, I'd do the entire state,' Balkcom said. 'But this doesn't infringe on private property rights. You can sell it to anybody but a foreign national that's an adversary against the United States.' Rep. Celeste Cairns (R-Carteret, Craven) asked for clarification on the bill's parameters. She asked if people would be able to sell property to individual citizens of the 'adversarial' countries without connection to their government. Balkcom responded in the affirmative. In response to a question from Rep. Wyatt Gable (R-Onslow) about how the 'adversarial' governments are defined, she said there's guidance from the U.S. Department of Defense. Although the bill doesn't list specific countries, it refers to governments subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. Over in the upper chamber, Sens. Bob Brinson (R-Beaufort, Craven, Lenoir), Bobby Hanig (R-Bertie, Camden, Currituck, Dare, Gates, Hertford, Northampton, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Tyrrell), and Timothy Moffitt (R-Henderson, Polk, Rutherford) serve as the primary sponsors for SB 394. The measure explicitly refers to the 'adversarial' nations by name: China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. Brinson described the legislation as a state effort to protect national security, because 'food security is national security.' 'The key purpose of this bill is to both safeguard our agricultural integrity and to protect our national security,' he said. 'This bill ensures that North Carolina farmland does not come under international adversarial control, and also prevents adversarial nations from acquiring land near sensitive military installations.' SB 394 is more restrictive than its House counterpart. The proposal bars the prohibited foreign parties from making claims to land situated within a 25-mile radius of a military installation or land underneath special use airspace as designated by the Federal Aviation Administration. Sen. Lisa Grafstein (D-Wake) pointed out there is a growing population of Chinese immigrants and Chinese Americans in the state. She asked if the bill would ban someone from purchasing land if they are a legal resident of the U.S. with Chinese citizenship. 'If they're a resident alien of the U.S., they have the same right to acquire or hold land as a citizen, as long as they're a resident in the state,' Brinson said. 'As long as they are a legal resident alien, they should have the same land ownership rights as a citizen.'
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Post-traumatic stress disorder bill draws significant debate in Senate
Senate Bill 394 would allow first responders to receive workers compensation benefits if they are diagnosed with PTSD. A proposal to expand Montana workers' compensation to include post-traumatic stress disorder drew significant debate in the Senate before ultimately passing a second reading, 29-20 to move on to the House. Senate Bill 394, brought by Sen. Cora Neumann, D-Bozeman, would allow first responders to receive workers compensation benefits if they are diagnosed with PTSD. Much of the debate around the bill focused on its fiscal note and the potential for insurance companies to increase their rates. 'When we pick up that phone and call 911, we expect these people to put their lives and their bodies and their families in harm's way to keep us safe,' Neumann said. 'This is the least we can do.' The American Psychiatric Association defines PTSD as 'a disorder that may result when an individual lives through or witnesses an event in which they believe that there is a threat to life or physical integrity and safety and experiences fear, terror, or helplessness.' Neumann said Montana is one of a handful of states that do not have PTSD as part of its worker compensation legislation. Several members of the Senate shared personal stories about either themselves or family members dealing with traumatic events. Sen. Sue Vinton, R-Billings, told a story about her brother, who in 2012 was a volunteer firefighter in New York. A man set fire to a house on Christmas Eve that year and when firefighters responded, he shot and killed two of them and injured two others. Her brother was called to the scene that day. 'Trust me when I tell you that my brother has PTSD,' Vinton said. 'He cannot participate in family festivities on Christmas Eve anymore. He hasn't been able to ever since then. It's just a sad day. It's a difficult day. And so I have seen this first hand.' Opponents pointed to the fiscal note. The Montana State Fund did an analysis, which was included in the bill. The state fund estimates the change would add an additional $897,795 to the cost of the plan, though some of that would come from insurance carriers. It was estimated by looking at other states that have passed similar legislation. A technical concern was raised in the fiscal note as well, noting constitutional equal protection concerns as first responders would be in their own class. 'All other individuals are prohibited from such benefits for the same diagnosis,' the fiscal note read. 'This would be true even if the non-first responder was diagnosed with PTSD based on events in the course and scope of employment.' Opponents also questioned whether it was the state's responsibility to provide help in this situation. 'I would remind the body that that's not the government's role to take care of everybody,' Majority Leader Tom McGillvray, R-Billings said. 'I mean, government is not your mama, government is not your daddy.' Sen. Barry Usher, R-Billings, who worked with Neumann on an amendment to the bill, mentioned the class issue. He supported the bill and the amendment removed correctional officers from workers compensation claims, which lowered the fiscal note. 'Somebody mentioned that, why should we do this for a special class of people,' Usher said. 'I can tell you it takes a special class of person to actually go, like the last Senator said, and go back to fighting fires. But I can also tell you that it's embedded in these people's hearts to run towards danger, jump between you and danger.'
Yahoo
27-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Iowa bill to protect pesticide companies from lawsuits moves forward
An Iowa bill to protect pesticide companies from lawsuits has advanced. Senate Bill 394 would protect the companies from civil liability if their warning labels are registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and consistent with carcinogen classification from federal agencies. Some consider it a big win for Bayer, the company makes the pesticide Roundup. Bayer paid about $10 billion in settlements regarding claims Roundup causes cancer. The Iowa Farmers Union opposes the legislation. Union president Aaron Lehman argues farmers need to have the right to defend their health when chemical companies' products cause damage. The bill now heads to the House. For more information, click here. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
