Latest news with #HB380
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Human cloning ban moves toward vote in Alabama Senate
Rep. Phillip Rigsby, R-Huntsville, speaks to colleagues on the floor of the Alabama House of Representatives on Feb. 11, 2025 at the Alabama Statehouse in Montgomery, Alabama. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill he is sponsoring that makes it a crime to clone human beings. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector) A bill banning human cloning in Alabama is in position to be voted on in the Alabama Senate. The Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday unanimously approved HB 380, sponsored by Rep. Phillip Rigsby, R-Huntsville. The bill would make it a Class C felony, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, to clone or attempt to clone a human being. 'This is another one of those bills that is going to be a protection of what can come,' Rigsby said to the committee during the meeting. 'A little bit of research, a couple of little Google searches, will tell you that the research behind reproductive human cloning is on the horizon, and so this bill will help to put up some guardrails to help protect that.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The legislation excludes in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments from its cloning definition and allows scientific research on cloning techniques producing 'tissues, organs, plants, or animals other than humans.' The Alabama House of Representatives approved the measure on April 9. The person may also be convicted of the crime if the individual merely participates in the process or is involved in the shipment or transfer of embryos or materials. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
American Press
23-04-2025
- Business
- American Press
Louisiana lawmakers seek to rein in carbon capture projects Trump supports
(Special to the American Press) By Nolan McKendry | The Center Square President Donald Trump has formally endorsed carbon capture and sequestration, a potentially unfriendly move for Louisiana citizens and lawmakers. Currently, Louisiana legislators have proposed a slate of bills aimed at slowing or even halting carbon capture in the state. Trump's latest energy pitch includes reversing the Biden-era pause on liquefied natural gas export approvals and expanding carbon capture projects to reduce global emissions and create jobs. 'America is producing the cleanest energy in the world,' the White House said in a recent statement, arguing CCS and other innovations will ensure U.S. leadership in both energy production and environmental performance. But in Louisiana, where oil and gas are deeply entrenched in the state's economy, carbon capture has become a point of controversy – particularly in rural areas where landowners say they're being sidelined in favor of industry interests. Several bills now before the Louisiana Legislature seek to sharply restrict carbon capture development. House Bill 396 by Rep. Danny McCormick, R-Caddo, would criminalize carbon sequestration entirely. Another measure, HB380 by Rep. Rodney Schamerhorn, R-Beauregard, would strip carbon projects of eminent domain powers and remove their designation as a public good. 'We've already had almost 200,000 acres taken by eminent domain in Vernon Parish alone,' Schamerhorn said in an interview with The Center Square. 'People still remember what it did to their families.' Schamerhorn, who represents a largely rural district, said opposition has intensified as carbon capture projects move forward near homes, schools, and aquifers — often without enough public engagement. A survey he conducted of more than 1,000 constituents found that 85% opposed carbon capture in his district, and 82% didn't want it anywhere in the state. Other lawmakers have focused on limiting industry authority more broadly. HB601 by Rep. Brett Geymann, R-Beauregard, would require pipeline developers to get consent from 95% of affected landowners before seeking state permits. It would also bar foreign-owned companies from expropriating land, strengthen notice requirements and boost compensation for mineral rights owners. 'People want to know they're safe,' Geymann told The Center Square. 'They want to know the groundwater won't be contaminated, and that if there's a leak, it's not too close to a school.' The bills reflect growing grassroots opposition to carbon storage projects, especially in parts of Louisiana that have historically hosted heavy industry without seeing corresponding economic benefits. But industry leaders warn that Louisiana risks losing its competitive edge if the legislature clamps down. 'This is a business opportunity,' said Tommy Faucheux, president of the Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association. 'If we lose that, the investments — and the jobs — will go elsewhere.' Elsewhere includes Texas — a state Gov. Jeff Landry often cites as an example of what Louisiana could become, and one that Faucheux says is 'catching up' to Louisiana's carbon capture potential. In August 2023, the Texas General Land Office took a major step toward developing offshore carbon storage by approving six new leases. A year later, Texas announced plans to offer 1.13 million acres of state waters and bays along the Gulf of Mexico for bidding, aiming to attract interest from parties pursuing carbon capture and sequestration projects, according to the Carbon Herald. Faucheux argues carbon capture is not a threat to the oil and gas sector but a natural extension of it. Louisiana's pipeline infrastructure, emissions base, and industrial know-how give the state an edge in capturing carbon at the source and marketing low-carbon products — from steel to chemicals — to global buyers demanding cleaner supply chains. Companies like Exxon and Chevron, Faucheux said, are already capturing emissions and storing them underground, allowing U.S. manufacturers to advertise 'low-carbon' steel, fertilizer and other goods. One such project in Ascension Parish, between CF Industries and Mitsui, aims to produce low-carbon ammonia for export. 'These CCS projects and the associated development could transform communities in ways they've never seen,' Faucheux said. 'We're talking about economic development in parts of Louisiana that haven't traditionally benefited from the oil and gas footprint.' He acknowledged concerns around eminent domain and transparency but said companies are making an effort to engage with residents and avoid forced land acquisitions. 'The industry has been spending a lot of time engaging with communities, with land owners,' Faucheux said. 'The companies want to work and come to agreements with all the landowners. They want to have conversations about pipeline routes, for instance.'
Yahoo
14-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Alabama House votes to make human cloning a felony
Rep. Phillip Rigsby, R-Huntsville, speaks to colleagues on the floor of the Alabama House of Representatives on Feb. 11, 2025 at the Alabama Statehouse in Montgomery, Alabama. The House passed Rigsby's bill to criminalize human cloning on April 9, 2025. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector) The Alabama House of Representatives passed a bill Wednesday criminalizing human cloning 71-4, with 22 abstentions. HB 380, sponsored by Rep. Phillip Rigsby, R-Huntsville, makes it a Class C felony, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, to engage in human cloning. Rigsby said during a brief debate on Wednesday that he is not aware of any human cloning happening in Alabama or the United States, but he said that is the direction science is going. 'We stand at a crossroads in science ethics and human dignity. The prospect of human cloning, once confined to science-fiction, now challenges us to make a firm moral and legal stand,' Rigsby said. 'While technological advances have provided humanity with remarkable medical breakthroughs, not all scientific possibilities align with what is ethical, just and safe.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The legislation defines human cloning as 'asexual reproduction.' Rep. Ernie Yarbrough, R-Trinity, expressed concern on how the legislation would affect in vitro fertilization (IVF). 'In theory, it could happen accidentally,' Yarbrough said. 'This is saying you can't be intentionally trying to do so?' Rigsby said the legislation includes a provision exempting IVF from the definition of asexual reproduction. 'They just wanted to make sure that their practices did not fall under what they do as cloning,' Rigsby said. The crime includes those cloning humans, and anybody that participates in human cloning, including transportation of a cloned cell, according to the bill. House Democrats criticized the legislation for being unnecessary. Rep. Juandalynn Givan, D-Birmingham, questioned if other states have similar laws. 'I just didn't know if mass cloning was going on,' she said. 'I don't know of anything or anybody that I've ever seen come through Alabama that I'd want to clone.' Rep. A.J. McCampbell, D-Demopolis, echoed Givan. 'This sounds like science-fiction, cloning people,' he said. Rigsby said his bill is modeled after a 2003 law in Arkansas. Rigsby proposed a floor amendment to exclude university research on human organs. It passed 79-1. 'We have some universities that are doing some research on organs and they were a little concerned about line 38, 'generate all or most of the body tissues of a living organism,'' Rigsby said. The bill now goes to the Alabama Senate. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
03-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Idaho expands death penalty to child predators
The state of Idaho recently passed a bill that was signed into law that would expand the death penalty to pedophiles. It also became the first state in the union to make a firing squad its preferred method of execution in modern times. The bill, HB380, now grants a judge or jury the ability to factor in the death penalty when crimes involving lewd conduct to a child under the age of 12 are proven in a trial. State law initially only allowed the death penalty in first-degree murder cases with aggravating circumstances. A mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years imprisonment, with a possible maximum term of life, may be imposed if the defendant is found guilty of kidnapping the victim or participating in human trafficking 'during the commission of or to accomplish the lewd conduct,' according to the bill's language, strengthening punishments for other convictions where obscene behavior against a minor — aged 16 and younger — was confirmed but didn't meet death penalty eligibility. The Idaho Legislature nearly passed the bill unanimously. Only five senators opposed it during its bill cycle. Cosponsored by Rep. Bruce Skaug, R-Nampa, and House Assistant Majority Leader Josh Tanner, R-Eagle, in the bill's statement of purpose, the lawmakers stated that Idaho is too lenient in terms of penalizing convicted child molesters. Skaug said in a House Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee meeting that HB380 'establishes a strong deterrent, making it clear Idaho will not tolerate these offenses.' Idaho Gov. Brad Little agreed. After signing the bill into law last week, Little issued a detailed statement on Tuesday regarding his reasons for approving HB380. 'Just like capital murder destroys lives, aggravated sexual abuse of a young child devastates victims and families for generations. The sexual abuse of children is sickening and evil, and perpetrators convicted of these crimes deserve the ultimate punishment,' he said, expressing gratitude to the Legislature 'for strengthening Idaho's already powerful 'tough on crime' reputation among the states.' In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled out the death sentence for child rape in a 5-4 decision. The justices concluded that it was 'not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child' and that it violated the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment, as former Justice Anthony Kennedy stated, according to The New York Times. The decision stemmed from the case Kennedy v. Louisiana, where a Louisiana court found Patrick Kennedy guilty of raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter. The state Supreme Court upheld the district court decision to pursue the death penalty, ultimately leading Kennedy to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, where its decision was made. In the past two years, both Tennessee and Florida have passed death penalty laws involving child rape cases. Rep. Skaug told lawmakers during a committee meeting that he believes the U.S. Supreme Court would rule differently today if the constitutionality of HB380 was brought before them, per Idaho Capital Sun. 'You can say, 'Well, that's unconstitutional, Bruce. Why would you bring that?' Well, it was — according to a 5-4 decision in 2008. I don't think that would be the case today,' Skaug said. 'That's my professional opinion. That's the opinion of many other attorneys.' There are currently eight men and one woman on death row in Idaho, and only three executions have taken place in the state since 1977. Idaho, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Mississippi and Utah are the only states that authorize firing squads as a form of capital punishment. Idaho's recent change in laws to establish a firing squad as its primary execution method occurred less than a week after three volunteer prison employees in South Carolina executed Brad Sigmon, 67, for the 2001 murders of his girlfriend's parents — marking the first use of a firing squad in 15 years. Until Sigmon's death, Utah was the last to perform capital punishment by gunfire in 2010 — Ronnie Lee Gardner was executed for shooting and killing an attorney while trying to escape from a Salt Lake City courthouse. He became the third death by firing squad in the state since a nationwide moratorium on the death penalty was lifted in 1976. Death by shooting as a form of capital punishment has been the fate of more than 140 inmates since 1608, though it's unclear how many were firing squads, according to The New York Times. Of those, 40 occurred in Utah, more than any other state.
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Paging Miracle Max: A look at the ‘mostly dead' bills with three weeks left
An empty State House lobby in this file photo. The halls are much busier this week as lawmakers power into the last three weeks of the session, but some bills have already passed by the wayside. (File photo by Bruce DePuyt/Maryland Matters) Anybody who knows Annapolis knows very few things are ever really dead before Sine Die. And anybody who's watched 'The Princess Bride' know that there's such a thing as 'mostly dead.' With three weeks left in the session, we present the Miracle Max Report, a list of those mostly dead initiatives we don't have to worry about so much now. Some could still come back — it's not quite time to go through their pockets, looking for loose change — but odds are slim. Some didn't make Monday's 'crossover' date, the deadline by which a bill has to move out of one chamber if it's to be guaranteed a hearing in the other. Some were pulled by their sponsors or have been frowned on by legislative leaders, committee chairs or the governor. Most bills on crossover day are dead by inaction, usually by a committee opting to not bring the bill to a vote or simply not getting around to it before the crucial deadline. That was not the case with House Bill 380, which went through days of contentious debate in the House, only to be killed on the spot when it arrived in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, which took all of 10 seconds to vote it down down on the spot on Feb. 28. HB 380 would have removed a criminal penalty on those who sell or offer contraceptives from a vending machine at a kindergarten, nursery school, or elementary or secondary school. Del. Nicole Williams (D-Prince George's) said it was an effort to decriminalize access to contraception, but Republicans had a field day promoting the narrative that the bill would have exposed 5-year-olds and younger to a host of lewd products and scenarios. The House spent days in floor debate before passing the bill 89-41, sending to the Senate, which assigned it to Judicial Proceedings. It didn't last long. 'We all know what this bill does. There is a motion for an unfavorable – is everyone comfortable being recorded in the unfavorable?' Judicial Proceedings Chair Will Smith (D-Montgomery) asked in the opening seconds of the committee voting session. He quickly got a second. 'All right. We have disposed of House Bill 380 unanimously,' Smith said, before moving on to the rest of the voting list. HB380 did not even get a hearing before the committee killed it. With no Senate version of the bill, the legislation was dead long before crossover. Supporters of the For Our Kids Act said it would provide $500 million in a tight budget to fund school lunches, child care scholarships and the state's general fund, all while improving public health by 2-cents-per-ounce tax on sugary drinks, syrups and powders. Opponents saw that as just so much sugar-coating on a tax on soft drinks. House Bill 1469, sponsored by Dels. Emily Shetty (D-Montgomery) and Joseline Peña-Melnyk (D-Prince George's and Anne Arundel), was modeled on a 2017 Philadephia law that raised more than $400 million in fiscal 2022. Similar laws have been adopted in Seattle, Boulder, Colorado, and Berkeley, California. Maryland would have been the first state to adopt such a law if the bill passed. The bill would have taxed distributors of sweetened drinks by the ounce; sweetening powders and syrups would have been taxed based on the ounces of drink each container could produce. The bill included language to increase the tax rate annually, based on inflation. But it ran into fierce opposition from business owners, who packed a March 7 hearing to complain about the bill that they said would hurt retailers and cost people jobs. It probably didn't help that some skeptical lawmakers were enjoying a soft drink during the hearing. If there were any doubts about the bill's future, Gov. Wes Moore (D) put them to rest Monday during remarks about ongoing budget negotiations. 'There are a few things that will not be included inside of that final budget,' Moore said. 'We've got to bring down the cost of what people are seeing inside of the grocery stores in the markets, and that's why things like the soda tax will not happen in the state of Maryland, and the soda tax will not be included in the final budget.' The governor's comments also affected another bill's odds, though this one didn't turn out quite the way he liked. For years, lawmakers have tried unsuccessfully to expand beer and wine sales in the state to other retailers, like grocery stores. Maryland is one of only a handful of states that do not allow those sales. Supporters of expansion thought this would be their year, after Moore in December said the he supported the proposal, something he said voters across the state have been asking for. While he did not make it part of his legislative package, he said he expected a bill 'on my desk at the end of the session.' That buoyed the bill's backers, but left many legislators unmoved. Supporters cited polls that show the concept is widely popular among consumers in the state. Besides providing choice for consumers, they said the change would create jobs and could ease the problem of food deserts by giving groceries the margins they need to move into underserved neighborhoods. But critic said expanding alcohol availability would burden communities that already suffer from a disproportionate number of liquor stores. They also said it would be a death sentence for mom-and-pop liquor stores that would not be able to compete with prices big retailers and grocery chains were likely to offer. Senate Bill 824 was up for a vote in the Senate Finance Committee on March 5 when it was pulled back at the last second by its sponsor, Sen. Cory McCray (D-Baltimore City), when it became clear there were not enough votes on committee to pass the bill. He withdrew the bill entirely five days later. A similar bill in the House, House Bill 1379, got a committee hearing on. Feb. 17, but has not moved since. Contested races for circuit court judge in Maryland will continue, at least for the foreseeable future. Senate Judicial Proceedings Chair William C. Smith Jr. (D-Montgomery) said last week that there were not enough votes on the committee to pass Senate Bill 630, which would have asked voters next year if they wanted to amend the state Constitution to eliminate contested judicial elections. A companion bill, House Bill 778, never got a vote in the House Judiciary Committee. District court judges in Maryland serve 10 year terms, while appellate judges serve 10 years and then run for reelection base on their records, but do not face challengers. Circuit judges, however, have to stand for reelection every 15 years, but can be challenged by other candidates. The Maryland Judicial Conference requested legislation to ask voters next year whether they want to change the current system for circuit judges stand for reelection. Critics say the current system puts circuit judges in the potentially unethical position of having to raise funds and curry favor with people whose cases they may be called on to judge. But supporters say that by opening elections up to challengers, the current system allows for a more diverse, and representative, bench than might occur in uncontested elections. Dozens of bills to make the change have been introduced and have failed since the 1980s. This year's attempt is apparently no different. Supporters, such as Montgomery County Circuit Judge Kathleen Dumais, a former legislator, said they plan to keep the discussion going. The Judicial Proceedings Committee is still at an 'impasse' about a bill that would usher in Good Cause evictions for participating counties, meaning its chance of moving out of committee this year is nearing zero. Committee Chair William C. Smith Jr. (D-Montgomery) indicated last week the bill was struggling to get enough support from committee members and said the committee was 'running out of time' to push it through by crossover. The outlook had not changed over the weekend, Smith noted Monday, meaning the bill would need significant interventions to pick up momentum at this juncture. Senate Bill 651 would let jurisdictions to adopt 'good cause eviction' policies, which require a landlord to cite a specific reason to not renew a lease with a current tenant. Last week, advocates learned that the committee was considering an amendment to limit counties to either Good Cause evictions or rent-stabilization efforts in their local renters' policies — they could not have both — which some advocates considered to be a 'poison pill' amendment to the legislation. Similar legislation passed the House last year, but died in Smith's committee. The House is unlikely to move House Bill 709 knowing the bill would likely get stuck on the Senate side. The Judicial Proceedings Committee will also be the hurdle for medical aid-in-dying legislation, as the chair gave a quick signal that the End-of-Life Options Act would be short on votes in his committee this year, as in previuoe=e too. 'The votes aren't there. Not in committee and not on the floor,' Senate Judicial Proceedings Chairman William C. Smith Jr. (D-Montgomery) said March 4. His comments came just hours after a joint hearing by the House Judiciary and the Government and Operations committees on House Bill 1328, the End-of-Life Option Act, which would let certain terminally ill patients request medical aid in dying with the help of a physician. Senate Bill 926 never even received a bill hearing in Judicial Proceedings, despite Smith sponsoring the legislation. That's how certain its outlooks is this year. For the past couple years, Maryland lawmakers have been adding 'shield laws' for physicians who provide certain medical procedures that may be outlawed in other states. So far, abortion and gender-affirming care are considered 'legally protected health care' under Maryland law, meaning that the state will protect information on out-of-state patients who receive that care in Maryland, as well as the physicians who provide that care. SB1 was poised to continue the streak to include in vitro fertilization under those shield laws, amid fears that some IVF treatments would be restricted in other states. But it never received a bill hearing. The bill was initially scheduled for a hearing on Jan. 23, which was canceled and never got put back on the calendar. That was on purpose, said bill sponsor Sen. Jeff Waldstreicher (D- Montgomery). 'I asked that this bill not move forward this year,' Waldstreicher said in a recent text message. 'Protecting IVF is deeply personal for me, but the shifting attacks on reproductive freedom by the Trump Administration makes drafting difficult. We will return next year with more clarity and tighter language.' The bill does not have a House version, so without Waldstreicher leading the effort on the legislation this year, it's not going anywhere. Some routine traffic stops by police officers will remain a go. Senate Bill 292 sponsored by Sen. Charles Sydnor III (D-Baltimore County) sought to reclassify some primary traffic offenses as secondary, reducing the ability of police to pull a driver over. Some of those primary offenses include excessive noise, failure to illuminate a license plate and driving without a functioning headlight, brake light or taillight. A House version is sponsored by Del. N. Scott Phillips (D-Baltimore County). Law enforcement officials said at a Jan. 28 hearing before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee that the measure would make their jobs harder and decrease public safety. Sydnor, Public Defender Natasha Dartigue, Attorney General Anthony Brown (D) and other supporters said the measure would increase public safety for motorists and police officers. The also pointed data from the Governor's Office of Crime Prevention and Policy that showed Blacks accounted for 32% of the population, but 43% of the nearly 428,300 vehicle traffic stops in the state in 2023. White motorists, by comparison, made up 57% of the state population that year but accounted for 39% of all traffic stops. 'The data is there. It's there for everyone to see,' Sydnor said. 'The problem hasn't gone away just because the bill doesn't pass. I suspect that me and Del. N. Scott Phillips will look and see what's the best ways to go forward.'
