Latest news with #Bill477
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Montana governor vetoes bill that would phase out styrofoam use in food industry
Top view of a stack of polystyrene containers (number 6 plastic). Gov. Greg Gianforte went beyond the regular duties of his office — sending a letter to lawmakers informing them of the reasons he vetoed a bill — and shared a video on social media explaining why he didn't sign a measure that would have phased out the use of styrofoam in the food industry. 'This bill would create a new government program costing $300,000,' said Republican Gianforte in the video on May 5, the day he vetoed the bill. 'The state banning styrofoam is costly government overreach, and like many Montanans, I enjoy hot coffee in a styrofoam cup, because it keeps it hot. And this bill is a hot mess.' But the sponsor of House Bill 477, Rep. Marilyn Marler, D-Missoula, said she didn't think the governor understood what the law actually intended — protecting human health and the environment. 'What he said was wrong. He was trying to be bombastic,' Marler told the Daily Montanan. 'He put more effort into his silly video than in trying to understand the bill.' House Bill 477 would have created a five-year phaseout of expanded polystyrene foam — commonly called 'styrofoam' — containers used in serving or packaging food from restaurants and food establishments. The phase out, which would have applied to roughly 7,500 establishments in Montana, would have included coffee cups, plates, trays and other food and drink containers. It would not have applied to other industries, such as packaging and shipping products, which the bill sponsor and other proponents said was intended to address some of the direct harms of styrofoam. Studies have shown that hot, fatty and acidic conditions — for example a takeout container of pork carnitas — can cause styrofoam to leach chemicals into food, increasing the amount ingested and contributing to the growing number of microplastics found throughout human bodies. Styrene and other chemicals found in food packaging have been linked to cancer, hormone disruption and other chronic health conditions, a fact that created a diverse coalition of supporters for HB 477. Sen. Daniel Zolnikov, R-Billings, carried the bill through the Senate and described himself as a 'Make America Healthy Again Republican.' 'I don't think people realize the fact that it leaches into food,' he told the Daily Montanan. 'Change is hard, but children have these chemicals leaching into their food, and we just know more about that than we used to. It seemed like a logical thing since we've realized how unhealthy it is.' Zolnikov said it was worth getting the bill through the Legislature, but that the governor's veto was 'probably to be expected.' House lawmakers passed the bill 56-44 in March, and the Senate passed the bill 26-24 in April. All Democrats and a total 26 Republicans voted for the bill, and Marler said many businesses had supported the bill. But Gianforte, in his veto letter, said that styrofoam bans and 'hyper-regulation' are features found in progressive blue states — such as Oregon, Washington California and New York — and don't belong in Montana. Calling it 'textbook government overreach,' Gianforte said banning styrofoam would increase costs for restaurants and consumers and create a new government program at the Department of Environmental Quality. 'I'd prefer to keep government limited, not grow it unnecessarily,' he wrote. Marler also said Gianforte misrepresented the cost of the bill, which would not have come from taxpayer funds. Instead, it would have come from an existing Solid Waste Management Account funded by fees paid by businesses seeking exemption from the phase-out, or by fines levied by DEQ. Roughly $75,000 a year would have paid for a part-time employee to oversee parts of the program. Gianforte's veto letter also questioned why the legislation was aimed at only the food industry, which 'seems inconsistent with the purported purpose of House BIll 477.' Marler said she tried to set up a meeting with the Governor to help talk about the bill after it passed the Legislature, but never heard anything back. 'I just feel that if he had looked at the vote count and seen the variety of people who voted for it and asked just one question, he would have heard that people were really concerned about the health effects,' Marler said. In addition to House Bill 477, Gianforte has vetoed one other bill as of Tuesday afternoon, House Bill 607, sponsored by Democrat Paul Tuss, to expand insurance coverage for hearing loss. OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
Yahoo
14-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The Texas Legislature is having big battles over gender and sexuality. Track them here.
Editor's note: This article will be updated through the legislative session. Check back for the latest news on these proposals. As fundamental questions of gender and sexuality dominate Republican priorities at the state and federal level, the Texas Legislature is considering a record number of anti-trans bills this session. While there haven't yet been the big fireworks of last session, lawmakers are quietly pushing proposals to further restrict the lives of trans people — what bathrooms they can use, what government documents they can obtain and what services public schools and mental health providers can offer to young people. Whether these proposals will survive the legislative process remains to be seen. In a busy session focused on private school vouchers, property tax cuts, immigration enforcement and a THC ban, these bills may fall down the priority list. But with federal and state executive actions, as well as recent lawsuits and opinions from the attorney general, many of these measures are already impacting the lives of trans Texans — whether the Legislature ever takes a vote on them. Like all legislation, these proposals must win approval from a majority of lawmakers in both the Texas House and Senate. Part of that process includes committee hearings, where a small group of lawmakers in each chamber vet the bill at a public meeting. Sometimes those committees make changes to the proposal based on testimony from the public. Here's how some of the biggest battles are shaping up so far. Perhaps the greatest concern for LGBTQ+ advocates this session are the so-called 'sex definition' bills that seek to define male and female as two separate, unchanging sets of physical characteristics assigned at birth. These bills would restrict whether trans people can have their gender changed on government documents, like birth certificates and driver's licenses. The executive branch has already moved on this front, with Gov. Greg Abbott asserting there are only two sexes and directing state agencies to not honor court rulings directing them to change someone's sex on government documents. These bills would codify those executive actions in state law. The Senate passed Senate Bill 406, filed by state Sen. Mayes Middleton, a Galveston Republican, on a 20-11 party-line vote. The legislation would require birth certificates to list someone's biological sex and prohibit that marker from being changed for minors. The bill will now go to the House, which has its own version of this bill, House Bill 477. A group of 15 senators have also signed on to Senate Bill 1696, which goes further by prohibiting anyone from changing the sex listed on their birth certificate. The bill is before the State Affairs Committee. Johnathan Gooch, communications director for Equality Texas, said trans people often change their birth certificate to align with the gender identity that they live as and to allow them to update their driver's license, passport and other government documents. 'When there starts to be discrepancies between government documents, that just makes trans people's lives so much more difficult,' he said. 'If they can't update their driver's license, then they might be forced to out themselves when they are pulled over at a traffic stop, which makes them vulnerable to violence, which we know trans people experience at higher rates.' House Bill 3817, filed by Rep. Tom Oliverson, R-Cypress, would create a criminal offense for 'gender identity fraud,' making it a state jail felony for someone to represent their gender as 'opposite of the biological sex assigned to the person at birth.' This bill, which has not been heard by a committee, has been widely criticized by LGBTQ+ advocates. 'Bills like these are dangerous and misleading,' Gooch said. In 2017, conservative Texas legislators tried to pass a 'bathroom bill' requiring that people use a facility that aligned with the sex they were assigned at birth. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick pushed lawmakers into a special session over the issue, but business interests killed it at the last minute. There have been similar bathroom bills filed each session since, but the issue may get more attention this session after national battles over bathroom privacy have reared their head under the pink dome. More than 80 legislators have signed on to co-author House Bill 239, called the 'Texas Women's Privacy Act,' mandates that family violence shelters, prisons and state and county buildings, including public schools and universities, segregate private facilities, like bathrooms, by sex. Those private spaces could only be used by people whose sex on their 'original birth certificate' matches the assignment of the facility. The bill is before the State Affairs committee but has not been scheduled for a hearing. Its Senate companion has also not yet been heard by a committee. There are other similar bills aiming to restrict what facilities people can use. House Bill 2704, filed by Rep. Joanne Shofner, a Nacogdoches Republican, lays out similar limits as the other bills, but the enforcement is through private lawsuits, rather than state action. That bill is also awaiting a hearing before State Affairs. Rep. Valoree Swanson, a Spring Republican, has filed two bills that would require state prisons and jails to place people in facilities based on the sex they were assigned at birth. House Bill 403 addresses adult and juvenile inmates, and is awaiting a hearing, while House Bill 437 specifically addresses juvenile offenders and was heard by the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence and left pending in late March. There have been a slew of bills filed addressing what role schools can play in supporting a student's gender transition. Texas has outlawed a wide range of transition-related medical services for minors, but some trans young people still choose to socially transition, meaning changing their names, pronouns and how they present themselves. Under House bills 3411 and 3616, both filed by Rep. Nate Schatzline, a Fort Worth Republican, schools and teachers would be prohibited from supporting a student's social transition. Teachers could lose their job and have their license suspended if they support a student in using different pronouns or names or changing how they dress, or if they provide a student with information about LGBTQ+ resources. Schools could lose state funding if they facilitate this. Neither bill has been heard by a committee. Several bills would prevent schools from teaching about sexual orientation or gender identity, while others would require that schools get parental consent before they offer any mental health treatment. Senate Bill 400, filed by Rep. Lois Kolkhorst, R-Brenham, would require schools to get parental consent before performing a psychological or psychiatric examination on a student. After an amendment that clarified that this would not stop school employees from asking about a student's general well-being, the measure passed the Senate 28-2 and is now before a House committee. While this bill does not explicitly address LGBTQ youth, Gooch said it raises concerns about where students who don't feel safe sharing with their parents can access safe resources. 'We obviously trust parents to know what's best for their kids but occasionally, for whatever reason, young people might not feel safe or might worry they might not be accepted if they talk to their parents about something,' he said. 'If young people don't have reliable, knowledgeable adults to talk to, their next source of information is the internet, which is much less reliable and could put them in a vulnerable position.' Last session, Texas passed a law prohibiting drag performers from dancing suggestively or wearing certain items in front of children. Just a few weeks after the law went into effect, a federal judge struck it down, saying it was unconstitutional. Some lawmakers are trying again this year. Reps. Toth and John McQueeney, a Republican from Fort Worth, have authored a bill that would allow drag performers and those who promote their work to be sued for performing in front of minors. This private lawsuit mechanism, first tested in a 2021 abortion ban, has been successful at circumventing legal challenges. The bill is before the State Affairs Committee. Disclosure: Equality Texas has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. Tickets are on sale now for the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Get tickets before May 1 and save big! TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Yahoo
28-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Alabama bills aim to allow ALFA to offer health plans to farmers
ALABAMA (WHNT) — Two Alabama bills aim to allow farmers the ability to get their health insurance directly through nonprofit agricultural organizations like ALFA. Alabama lawmakers are considering Senate Bill 84 and House Bill 477. If passed, they would expand health insurance options for farmers across the state. Sink or save? Group starts petition to fight against SS United States from becoming artificial reef State Sen. Arthur Orr (R-Decatur) said he introduced SB84 in February. Many farmers like Marshall County's Hunter Tolleson have voiced their support for the bill on social media. Tolleson runs Grown by Grace Farms and said since he and his wife both work on the farm, her having to get another job for insurance puts a strain on labor. 'My wife does a lot more on the farm than you would imagine, being that it's just me and her, I do a lot of the manual labor but hey she can keep right up with me but like I said she works off the farm, saves our tail though,' Tolleson said. If the couple were able to get insurance through the farm, Tolleson said it would change their dynamics. 'At first she would still need to work a little bit, just for you know saving up money for farm improvements,' Tolleson said. 'But, in the future, she could possibly come home but without that kind of health insurance you know it wouldn't be an option at all.' Both bills have a ways to go on their respective sides of the Alabama legislature before they could head to Governor Ivey's desk to be signed into law. Tolleson said if this bill were to pass, it could change the future of farms in Alabama. 'You're going to have a lot more farms, a lot more local farms especially expanding, have the ability to expand honestly,' Tolleson said. 'Right now, it's just not possible and if you want to eat you know farmers are your ticket to eat.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Los Angeles Times
04-03-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
California lawmaker seeks to expand protections for temporary migrant workers
California lawmakers will consider a bill intended to expand protections for migrant workers who come to California through temporary work visa programs for jobs in agriculture, nursing, domestic care and other industries. The legislation, Assembly Bill 1362, would require that all contracted foreign labor recruiters register with the state and follow rules aimed at preventing them from exploiting migrant workers. It would prohibit them, for example, from charging workers recruitment fees and create legal remedies for labor violations. The bill, also called the 'Human Trafficking Prevention and Protection Act for Temporary Immigrant Workers,' was recently introduced by Assemblymember Ash Kalra (D-San José). 'For too long, the vast majority of temporary foreign workers have remained unprotected and subject to the documented abuses of unscrupulous foreign labor recruiters. Businesses also risk falling prey to exploitative [recruiters] who use predatory recruitment processes,' Kalra said Monday in a statement about the bill. Anti-human trafficking advocates say that due to a lack of federal oversight, temporary visa programs are frequently exploited, with workers subject to human trafficking because of false promises and illegal schemes by third-party labor recruiters. To remedy these issues, California passed legislation in 2014, Senate Bill 477, requiring foreign labor recruiters to register with the state and abide by certain worker protections. It also mandates that workers receive fair and clear contractual terms, as well as that recruiters pay bonds to cover funds for any potential violations and prohibits retaliation against workers exercising their labor rights. However, only a sliver of foreign labor recruiters who bring in those migrant workers are subject to these rules, said Stephanie Richard, director at the Sunita Jain Anti-Trafficking Initiative, an organization at Loyola Law School that is backing the newly introduced legislation. During the regulatory process to hash out how SB 477 would be enforced, the law was narrowly interpreted to apply only to H-2B visas, she said. Out of the roughly 350,000 migrant workers who come to California employed through temporary work visa programs, only about 5,000 are brought through H-2B visas, according to Kalra's office. AB 1362 would extend existing protections to foreign labor contractors recruiting for all other temporary work visa programs, with two exceptions: recruiters for J-1 exchange visitor visas — typically used by researchers and students — and talent agency recruiters. Richard said she believes its crucial that lawmakers pass these protections, given the looming threat of immigration enforcement actions by the Trump administration. 'We know that business will demand more temporary workers if some of our workforce is deported, and that there will be less oversight from the federal government that will lead to more exploitation,' she said. Previous efforts to amend language to expand protections to other workers on temporary work visas have been opposed by the Western Growers Assn. The business group, which represents farmers growing produce in California, Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico, generally opposes changes that it has said could slow down the process or increase the cost of bringing migrant agricultural workers to California through the H-2A visa program. The president of the Western Growers Assn., Dave Puglia, has said in recent weeks that crucial aspects of America's food production are increasingly strained by a lack of workers. In a recent opinion piece for a trade publication, he wrote that the foreign visa program that helps bring workers here should be expanded to better fill the needs of farmers, and that any obstacles — whether they be threats of workplace immigration enforcement raids or bureaucratic bottlenecks — should be removed as much as possible. The Western Growers Assn. did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the new bill.
