Latest news with #HB13


Time of India
28-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Is Library access for students becoming a legal minefield in the US?
In the first half of 2025, US lawmakers introduced more than 200 bills impacting libraries, some intended to protect student access to information and others proposing new limitations. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now A recent report by EveryLibrary , a national advocacy organisation, outlines how the legal landscape surrounding student library access is becoming more complex, with notable variations across different states. According to the report, 133 bills introduced across 33 states were categorised as potentially harmful to libraries, librarians, or readers. These include laws that expand definitions of 'harmful to minors' and propose transferring decision-making authority from library professionals to politically appointed boards or parent-led councils. Fourteen of these bills have been enacted as of July 2025. A shift in legal accountability One of the more significant changes noted in the report involves adjustments to legal protections for educators and school librarians. In Texas, for example, SB412 removes previous legal defences under state obscenity laws. This means educators may no longer cite a 'bona fide educational purpose' as protection when assigning or distributing materials that could be deemed controversial under the new statutes. New Hampshire passed a similar law, HB324, which permits parents and the state attorney general to pursue civil actions against school employees over content concerns. Civil penalties in such cases may begin at $1,000 per violation. A comparable bill in North Dakota did not pass into law but progressed through both chambers, indicating growing legislative interest in this area. These laws are changing how educators and librarians approach material selection and policy compliance, with legal risk now playing a more central role in day-to-day decision-making. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Evolving monitoring measures In Nebraska, LE390 requires that parents receive real-time alerts when their child checks out a library book, including the title, author, and return date. While some argue this strengthens parental involvement, others have raised concerns about student privacy, particularly in relation to sensitive or personal topics. In addition, new laws in South Dakota and Idaho mandate that schools and libraries install internet filtering systems to block access to content labelled 'harmful,' with state funding tied to these compliance measures. In Texas, HB13 and SB13 grant parent-majority advisory councils a greater role in determining which books may be added to school library collections. Such measures are shaping new administrative processes around book selection and access, with a growing emphasis on content oversight. Legislative responses from Northeastern states In contrast, the report highlights states like New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, which have enacted 'freedom to read' laws. These measures affirm the constitutional rights of students and formalise protections against censorship. Under these laws, books under review are expected to remain accessible, and librarians are granted legal protection when acting in good faith. Connecticut also introduced a pioneering digital licensing law, SB1234, which regulates how libraries manage e-book access. The legislation requires libraries to decline licensing agreements that place restrictions on checkouts or preservation, aiming to support equitable access in digital learning environments. Implications for students For students, especially in K–12 schools, the report suggests that access to educational resources and a broad range of perspectives may vary significantly by state. A book used in a classroom in Massachusetts, for instance, might be restricted under legislation in Texas. Similarly, access to library materials may differ between districts, depending on local oversight policies and filtering requirements. These differences have potential implications for students pursuing careers in research-intensive fields such as journalism, healthcare, and law. The report raises the possibility that such legal variations could contribute to disparities in how educational content is delivered and accessed across regions. A changing governance model Beyond individual bills, the report notes an emerging trend in how libraries are governed. In several states, lawmakers have introduced legislation to restructure local library boards, adjust professional qualifications for librarians, or alter long-standing processes of book selection and review. These changes suggest a broader shift in how library services are administered at the state and local levels. As these policies continue to evolve, access to library resources in the United States may increasingly reflect state-level legislative priorities. The EveryLibrary report concludes with a question that now sits at the centre of the conversation: What are students allowed to read, and who makes that decision? TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us .
LeMonde
08-07-2025
- Politics
- LeMonde
Deadly floods in Texas put Republicans on the defensive: 'It was an act of God, not the administration'
If only he had known... Three days after catastrophic floods devastated his county, Republican Representative Wes Virdell publicly admitted he regretted voting against a natural disaster response bill introduced in early March in the Texas legislature. The bill, called "HB 13," would have implemented an action plan across all 254 counties in the state. It aimed to improve warning systems where they existed and offered grants to other counties to purchase emergency communications equipment and build radio towers. These precautions were sorely lacking for residents of Kerr County, Virdell's district, when the Guadalupe River overflowed in the middle of the night after torrential rains, sweeping away trailers and people in a torrent of mud. The county had no emergency siren. More than 100 people died, including 28 children spending July at Camp Mystic, a Christian summer camp established a century ago on the riverbank. More than 10 people are still missing as of Tuesday, July 8. In this staunchly Republican state that prides itself on not charging a state income tax – residents pay only federal tax – the bill, with an estimated cost of $500 million over 10 years, was deemed too expensive for Texas taxpayers. "I can tell you in hindsight, watching what it takes to deal with a disaster like this, my vote would probably be different now," Virdell told the Texas Tribune, while noting that, even if adopted, the warning system would not have been in place before early September.
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Governor vetoes hearing aid bill
Hearing aids can cost patients thousands out of their own pockets. (Photo courtesy of Sony Electronics) Insurance companies doing business in Montana won't have to provide coverage for hearing aids after Gov. Greg Gianforte vetoed House Bill 607 earlier this month. State law currently requires insurance companies to cover hearing aids for individuals 18 years and younger. HB 607, brought by Rep. Paul Tuss, D-Havre, would have extended that to all ages. According to a fiscal note attached to a bill, the state estimates the average hearing aid to cost $5,000. In the same note, it said the average number of ears requiring hearing aids is 1.37, meaning a fair number of people require two. 'Typically, insurance will cover the diagnoses for hearing loss. But after that, you're on your own,' Tuss said in a Monday press release. 'By age 75, nearly half of Americans experience hearing loss. The cost of treatment can be a major burden on people's finances— especially those living on fixed incomes. It causes people to put off getting hearing aids and try to get by with reduced hearing.' In his veto letter, Gov. Greg Gianforte called the bill an 'unfunded insurance mandate' that would cost Montana taxpayers $3.5 million. He added that it would need 'increased contributions' from the state's roughly 30,000 public employees. 'Our administration is proud of our work with the Legislature to lower healthcare costs and expand access for Montanans through conservative, free-market principles, not government mandates,' Gianforte wrote in the letter, dated May 2. 'Our conservative, free-market approach stands in stark contrast to the approach of states that embrace costly government rules, regulations, and mandates that distort markets, limit consumer choice, and inflate health care costs.' The day before the veto, Gianforte received a letter from Misty Ann Giles, the director of the state Department of Administration, urging him to veto the bill. In the letter, Giles said the legislation would cost the state between $500,000 to $600,000 annually, which is in line with the bill's fiscal note. 'During negotiations with employees, there was no indication that hearing aid coverage was a needed benefit, and no funding was included in the state's budget or HB 13 to pay for providing that additional benefit,' Giles wrote in the letter. 'Although the additional cost of the expanded hearing aid mandate was noted in the fiscal note for HB 607, no appropriation was included to offset the expense.' Insurance legislation was a priority for Democrats during the session, including laws looking to regulate where the tech industry and medical insurance industry collide. Democratic leadership slammed the veto. 'Under the Hearing Aid Coverage Act, thousands of Montanans would have finally been able to afford to get their hearing back,' House Minority leader Katie Sullivan, D-Missoula said in a release. 'But today, the Governor chose insurance companies over Montanans. Our multi-millionaire Governor does not know what it's like to choose between getting healthcare and putting food on the table or filling up your tank with gas.' https-api-legmt-gov-docs-v1-documents-shortPdfUrl-documentId-320119-bill-id-HB-607


Axios
10-03-2025
- Politics
- Axios
Ban on developing in state parks among Florida bills with early momentum
Florida lawmakers pushed forward bills to rein in animal abandonment, driving under the influence, and development at state parks during the first week of this year's legislative session. Why it matters: The legislative session moves fast — lawmakers have only two months each year to better the lives of Floridians. Here are a few bills that have moved: Stiffer penalties for DUIs: Legislation that would up penalties for driving under the influence and criminalize refusal to submit to a Breathalyzer test advanced last week and has one more committee stop. State Parks Preservation: A bill that would, among other things, ban the construction of golf courses, hotels and pickleball courts in state parks drew bipartisan support in the state House and the state Senate. The House version passed its first committee stop last week. Gulf of America: The Committee on Community Affairs will discuss a bill state Sen. Nick DiCeglie (R-Indian Rocks Beach) filed to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America in state statutes on Tuesday. Meanwhile, state Sen. Joe Gruters (R-Sarasota) withdrew his bill to rename the Tamiami Trail to the "Gulf of America Trail" due to backlash from his constituents. On the insurance front: A bipartisan bill (HB 13) that would have required Citizens Property Insurance Corp. to make windstorm coverage available to all homeowners statewide has been withdrawn. Animal abandonment crackdown: Legislation to make it a third-degree felony to restrain an animal and leave it outside during a natural disaster advanced; the House and Senate versions of the bill each have one more stop. " Trooper's law" is named for a bull terrier found tied to a pole on the side of Interstate 75 near Bruce B. Downs Boulevard in Tampa while Floridians evacuated ahead of Hurricane Milton last year. How to watch: Looking to keep up with the Legislature? You can watch the House, Senate and committee hearings online at the Florida Channel. Plus, you can visit to track bills and receive email alerts.

Yahoo
09-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Grid modernization, cost concerns clash in debate on energy overhaul
Amid a larger energy transition that promises a move away from fossil fuels alongside sharp increases in demand for electricity, Democratic lawmakers have zeroed in on the changes they say are needed for New Mexico's aging grid to handle increased capacity and changing technologies for generating and deploying electricity. House Bill 13 — or the Power Up New Mexico Act — passed the House on Saturday afternoon after a long debate by a mostly party-line vote of 36-23. Democrats argue it's an important step to bring the state's energy grid into the future, while Republicans pushed back on the potential costs for customers of the state's three privately owned utilities. Bill sponsor Rep. Dayan Hochman-Vigil, D-Albuquerque, called it 'the single most important issue I have ever worked on' in a recent committee hearing, arguing the state's grid is among 'the worst in the nation.' She pointed to the need for grid upgrades in Bernalillo County to accommodate fast chargers for increasing numbers of electric vehicles — including, potentially, electric semi-trucks — and even the need for attention to grids in the Permian Basin to support oil and gas operations. A host of environmental and clean energy advocacy groups were involved in the creation of HB 13 and strongly support the bill, including the Natural Resources Defense Council, Western Resource Advocates and the Sierra Club. Hochman-Vigil pointed to dozens of other 'stakeholders' who were involved, such as unions, automobile manufacturers and more. The bill will require the state's three investor-owned utilities to submit plans every three years to state regulators spelling out planned upgrades to their electric distribution systems, aiming to direct focus on building a better grid to handle more demand and to more efficiently connect new businesses and small-scale solar power systems, which put energy into the grid as well. A similar bill passed last year in Colorado, also with strong support from the Natural Resources Defense Council. GOP questions costs Republicans have pushed back on the bill, objecting to possible rate hikes for electricity customers after increases and added charges have already bloated utility bills in recent years. A request currently pending before regulators would increase average monthly bills for residential Public Service Company of New Mexico customers by about $10 a month. HB 13 provides for utilities to recover the spending associated with their plans through rate increases or tariff riders, which increase the costs of electric bills with supplemental charges. Such added costs must be approved by the state Public Regulation Commission before they can be implemented. Rep. Rod Montoya, R-Farmington, said at a recent committee hearing he had spoken with leaders of the utilities and heard 'a lot of concerns' about the bill, which he argued would pile more requirements and costs onto the companies and their customers in the years after the 2019 Energy Transition Act mandated a shift away from fossil fuels in New Mexico. 'Their concern is this is another set of separate expenses that will be passed onto their ratepayers,' Montoya said. 'Current ratepayers are not necessarily the target with this — folks who will benefit the most will be economic development ... but current ratepayers would bear the cost.' El Paso Electric and Southwestern Public Service Company both expressed support for HB 13 during hearings on the bill. PNM was neutral on it, a spokesperson said, declining to comment. On the House floor Saturday, Montoya urged all Republicans to vote against the bill, calling it 'an outrageous mandate to utility companies to increase beyond the current need of current customers, and the current customers will have to pay for it.' All the Republicans who were present voted against the bill, and all of the Democrats — with the exception of Joanne Ferrary, D-Las Cruces — voted for it. 'Forward-thinking' bill Advocates of HB 13 have said it won't necessarily raise rates but rather that it will ensure utilities make timely, necessary changes to the grid to comply with laws and regulations already in place. They've argued the incentives to move to more efficient appliances and spur economic development could result in lower energy costs. 'Most of this bill is about refining PRC processes and taking away roadblocks that have stopped us from refining our grid,' Hochman-Vigil said. 'Power Up New Mexico is about removing regulatory barriers to do this faster, better and more efficiently.' Jim Desjardins, executive director of the Renewable Energy Industries Association, said the bill is a 'forward-thinking' measure that will prepare the state for inevitable shifts that are already underway. 'People don't think twice when we talk about investing in our roads,' Desjardins said. 'When was the last time we had an argument about that? People don't like the inconvenience, but it's kind of a similar thing — one moves cars and one moves electricity.' Part of building a 'modern electric grid' is ensuring energy can efficiently move both ways on distribution lines. Desjardins pointed to roadblocks and delays in recent years in connecting PNM customers' rooftop solar systems — including in some neighborhoods in the Santa Fe area — saying recent new regulatory approaches have required the utility to retool interconnection processes to allow for more rooftop solar systems on some distribution lines. The larger project of 'grid modernization' includes many other investments, including 'smart meters,' needed to prepare the grid for changing realities of energy use and generation. 'As we look to the future, we've got to be real and look at integrating these technologies and building a better system,' Desjardins said. Former Public Regulation Commissioner Steve Fischmann expressed support for the bill, comparing the new requirement for distribution plans to the annual integrated resource plans utilities are already required to submit every year, which detail their plans for years to come for new generation resources including solar, wind and battery storage to cover increasing demand. Fischmann said he sees regulators coming to focus more closely on the bigger picture of distribution investments, which he said have been 'virtually unregulated in the past.' 'They're starting to look at it seriously,' he said. 'And more importantly, they're looking at it holistically. They're trying to put all the pieces together, and there are going to be huge investments in distribution and grid modernization going forward.' Gas stoves Some questioned the bill's requirement for 'beneficial electrification' plans from utilities every six years, with approval from the PRC. The plans concern utilities' programs for providing incentives for converting from 'a non-electric fuel source to a high-efficiency electric source' as well as 'avoiding the use of non-electric fuel sources in new construction or industrial applications.' New Mexico Gas Co. staunchly opposes the provision. A lobbyist for the state's largest natural gas utility argued in a hearing that encouraging customers to move away from gas-powered appliances would hurt their remaining customers, who he said would 'as a result, pay more for that system to be maintained.' 'Are you going to take my gas stove or my water heater?' Rep. Jonathan Henry, R-Artesia, asked during a committee hearing. Hochman-Vigil said any switches from gas to electric appliances would be 'entirely voluntary.' She said the provision does not pass any new standards or lower the emissions goals already in place in the state, but rather requires the utilities to draft plans that state 'how we are going to get there.'