Latest news with #HouseBill152
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
State sales tax on diapers, formula, feminine hygiene products ends Sept. 1
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (WHNT) — Governor Kay Ivey signed a new bill Friday that was well-timed for Mother's Day weekend. The measure ends state sales taxes on several items purchased by expectant and new mothers, and it ends the state's tax on feminine hygiene products. Cybersecurity event affecting some state systems in Alabama The 4% state sales tax cut will go into effect Sept. 1. That's the same day Alabama will cut the state sales tax on groceries by another cent, down to 2%. The measure does not address city and county sales taxes. Those cuts would have to take place on the local level. Products that will be exempt from state sales tax starting Sept. 1 include baby bottles, formula, breast pumps and related products. Also, diapers, baby wipes and maternity clothing will be exempt from state sales taxes. The tax cut will also apply to menstrual hygiene products. Ivey issued the following statement after signing the bill that was sponsored by Alabama Rep. Neil Rafferty, D-Birmingham. 'Alabama is proudly the most pro-life state in America, and we remain committed to doing all we can to support our moms. As we head into Mother's Day weekend, I am excited to sign HB152 for all of our Alabama moms,' Ivey said. Along with the grocery tax cut and the measure Ivey signed Friday, this year the Alabama Legislature also approved a family leave measure for teachers and updated the state's Medicaid law to ensure low-income pregnant women can see a doctor in the first trimester of their pregnancy. Rep. Dale Strong provides Washington Update at Athens State University Robyn Hyden is the executive director of Alabama Arise, a non-partisan coalition that advocates for low-income and working families in Alabama. Hyden said this year the legislature took a number of positive steps on behalf of women and low-income families.'Personally, I think this demonstrates when one party is in power and is governing, they do have to bring home real support for their voters,' she said. 'You can only do so much, you know, that gives away to your big donors or corporate interests, before voters start to ask, how is this any different? How is my life better? I think whoever is governing in our state or in D.C., they're going to have to make the case that they have meaningfully helped their voters.' You can read the bill Ivey signed Friday, House Bill 152, below. HB152-baby and feminine product taxDownload The state legislature will meet again on Wednesday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Wyoming Supreme Court hears oral arguments in appeal of high-profile abortion case
CHEYENNE — A small group of abortion rights protesters gathered outside the Wyoming State Supreme Court on Wednesday as the court prepared to hear oral arguments in the appeal of a high-profile abortion case. Justices heard arguments in Wyoming v. Johnson, a case in which the appellees claim the state's abortion bans violate state constitutional rights, including rights to equality, due process, freedom of religion and access to health care. The lawsuit was first filed in 2022 after state lawmakers passed a series of laws targeting abortion, including a 'trigger' ban on abortions across the state, with exceptions to protect the life of the mother and in cases of sexual assault or incest. It was brought by Wyoming reproductive-age women, OB-GYNs, Wellspring Health Access (the state's sole abortion clinic in Casper) and Chelsea's Fund, a nonprofit that financially helps pregnant people access an abortion. Teton County District Judge Melissa Owens temporarily blocked the anti-abortion laws in 2022 from going into effect while the case was being litigated. The Legislature passed two more anti-abortion laws in 2023, the Life is a Human Right Act in House Bill 152 and a ban on abortion pills in Senate File 109. These laws also were temporarily blocked by Owens under pending judicial review. In November, Owens ruled that the anti-abortion laws passed by the Legislature in both 2022 and 2023 violated Wyoming's Constitution, specifically Article 1, Section 38, which allows a competent adult to make their own health care decisions. The state appealed Owens' ruling, moving the case to the Wyoming Supreme Court, where oral arguments were heard Wednesday in Cheyenne. While justices won't issue their ruling in the case for weeks to come, the arguments garnered substantial community attention, with representatives from both sides of the issue packing the courtroom Wednesday. 'I showed up to support abortion rights, and mostly I showed up to protest so that people know that they're not alone in it,' Wyoming Equality deputy director Ammon Medina said. 'And I think it may be necessary to say, I did not show up to try to put pressure on the court.' Wyoming Equality, Wyoming United for Freedom and Pro-Choice Wyoming organized Wednesday's demonstration in front of the Supreme Court Building on Capitol Avenue to represent the Wyomingites who believe abortion is health care, according to a news release. 'I think we need to be vocal,' Pro-Choice Wyoming Executive Director Birdie Forsyth said. 'I think letters to the editor are fantastic, (and) kitchen table conversations with families and friends help them understand that abortion care is pivotal, not only for like individual women. It's pivotal for our state.' Forsyth noted that the court's decision could have major implications for the state. Wyoming has limited resources for pregnancy, nearly half of the state's counties lack a practicing OB-GYN, and states with strict anti-abortion laws typically struggle to recruit OB-GYNs. 'If OB-GYNs can't perform the standard of care in our state, they're going to leave,' Forsyth said. 'Abortion is health care, and if they are worried about a lawsuit, whether or not a woman is near death enough, they're not going to come here and practice.' Many of the protesters noted that their concern was with government overreach into personal decisions, a sentiment Wyoming Equality Executive Director Sara Burlingame included in a statement. 'Regardless of how the court decides this case, everyday Wyomingites are waking up to the fact that our rights are being stripped from us by an increasingly power-hungry state,' Burlingame said in the release. 'Now is the time to stand with your Wyoming neighbors and claim the independence promised us by the Wyoming Constitution. We are confident that the freedom-loving people of Wyoming will recognize that respect for the rule of law and the individual are worth fighting for.' Determining life Representing the state, Special Assistant Attorney General Jay A. Jerde argued abortion isn't health care, because the decision doesn't always maintain or restore the pregnant person's health. Jerde said language in Section 38(a) gives a person the ability to make their own health care decision, with emphasis on the word 'own.' When a pregnant woman decides to get an abortion, he said, it's not her own decision — she's deciding for two people. Justice John G. Fenn said this interpretation potentially 'opens a viability analysis' that could get complicated fast. Jerde said the concept that an unborn baby is a human being was 'widely accepted' before the federal Roe v. Wade case was decided. Justice Kari Jo Gray asked who decides that an unborn baby is a human being. 'Who gets to make that call?' Gray asked, adding there is no secular or religious consensus on when life begins. Jerde said the Legislature should be the one to decide, since lawmakers are elected by and answer directly to the people of the state. Part of the reality of regulating abortions is deciding when life begins, he said. Since legislators create the regulation, then the legislators should decide when life begins, he said. Justice Lynne Boomgaarden asked if there is a secular (non-religious) basis for determining when life begins. Jerde said it is found in Article 1, Section 2 of the Wyoming Constitution. This section states 'In their inherent right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, all members of the human race are equal.' Jerde argued that the broad definition of 'human race' implied that the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness extended to the fetus, as well. Gray also posed the question about who determines when life begins to attorney Peter Modlin, who spoke on behalf of the appellees. Modlin replied that the question was a religious one that had been debated for centuries, and that the state should not take a side. Gray disputed that, saying it's a philosophical question, since there isn't even agreement on the issue among religious groups. Again, she asked, 'If there is no agreement, who gets to decide?' Modlin said the state shouldn't decide which religious viewpoint is its viewpoint. He argued there is 'no non-religious basis for personhood.' He said that in Judaism, for example, a baby becomes a person once it breathes its first breath outside the mother's womb. 'The state has no role in this debate,' Modlin said. Fundamental rights Modlin furthered the appellant's argument by adding that the bans violated existing rights. He told the court that the question at hand is whether the Legislature may deprive women of fundamental constitutional rights for the duration of pregnancy. He argued the state's laws do exactly the opposite of what they claim to do, which is to protect women and unborn babies. One justice quickly pointed out this is not the premise of the case, saying it's a matter of balancing the rights of the unborn with the rights of women. Modlin responded that the state has maintained abortions harm women, and that its laws are meant to protect women and prenatal life. Marci Bramlet, a lawyer for the abortion clinic, doctors and women who sued to challenge the law, argued that the bans violate multiple fundamental rights. 'These bans force women to surrender their rights any time they are pregnant,' Bramlet said. 'And, in reality, every time they are pregnant, because these exceptions are unworkable, intentionally so.' Bramlet further argued the state's anti-abortion bans 'force women to surrender their rights' the moment they become pregnant. She went on to say there is no equivalent of this type of regulation on men's health care. The state of Wyoming has yet to regulate a man's right to a vasectomy, she noted. Jerde responded to the appellant's argument, saying that while the Wyoming Constitution clearly protects natural rights, that protection only applies to existing rights. 'There is no natural right to make health care decisions; I found no cases that talk about that,' Jerde said. 'There is no natural right to abortion. I found no cases that talk about that.' Jerde added that because men and women are not 'similarly situated,' equal protection does not apply, a point initially made by Gray. Bramlet did point out that previous courts have determined that differences in gender do not inherently qualify two groups as differently situated. Following the arguments, the court entered recess until further notice. The court has 90 days to deliver a written opinion based on the arguments presented Wednesday. Should they uphold the district court's ruling, the bans will not go into effect. However, should the court side with the state, the bans will go into effect immediately.
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
New Hampshire House defeats proposal to ban rodent glue traps
The bill would have made New Hampshire the first state in the nation to ban adhesive-based rodent traps. (Photo by Dave Cummings/New Hampshire Bulletin) The House voted to indefinitely postpone a bill that would've made New Hampshire the first state in the nation to ban adhesive-based rodent traps. Members voted, 190-140, to indefinitely postpone House Bill 152, which means the topic can't be raised again this year or next. The motion was made by Rep. Judy Aron, the South Acworth Republican who chairs the House Environment and Agriculture Committee, which had recommended, 9-5, that the chamber kill the bill. She argued that glue traps were a nonpoisonous, effective tool used in food storage facilities and in places where there are children and senior citizens, and that banning them would be problematic and easy to circumvent. Meanwhile, those in favor of the bill argued that the traps resulted in slow, painful deaths for rodents and other creatures that they catch unintentionally. Rep. Nicholas Germana, a Keene Democrat, argued that the traps were 'a very primitive form of pest control,' and that better options existed. He said the bill continuously came up because constituents want it. Last year, a similar measure was referred to interim study; a committee voted this fall not to recommend it for future legislation.
Yahoo
28-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Glue traps called '19th-century solution' as lawmakers push for NH to become first state to ban them
The bill, which would prohibit the sale and use of glue traps, is backed by five Democratic and two Republican sponsors. (Photo by) A proposal would make New Hampshire the first state in the nation to ban adhesive-based rodent traps. Proponents of House Bill 152 say the traps result in slow, immensely painful deaths caused by starving or dehydration, not just for rodents, but also for other creatures they unintentionally catch. Meanwhile, opponents say the ban would be difficult to enforce, and that the traps, when used appropriately, are important tools in preventing rodents from spreading disease. The bill, which would prohibit the sale and use of the traps, is backed by five Democratic and two Republican sponsors. A similar measure was raised last year and referred to interim study, where a committee voted in the fall, 8-5, not to recommend it for future legislation. Rep. Linda Haskins, an Exeter Democrat, told fellow lawmakers on the House Environment and Agriculture Committee in a hearing this month that the traps represent 'a 19th-century solution when 21st-century mitigations are available.' She said supporters of the bill believe it's 'inaccurate' that there are not viable alternatives. 'Today, we have evidence that rodents and other animals caught in glue traps face a slow, painful, and extremely drawn-out death until they die of starvation,' Haskins said. 'In a panic to escape, they often rip off patches of skin fur and even chew off body parts in a vain attempt to free themselves.' She pointed to major retailers — such as Target, Dollar General, Dollar Tree, Rite Aid, and Walgreens — that have stopped carrying the traps, and countries — including Ireland, England, Scotland, Iceland, and New Zealand — that have outlawed them. Haskins said the bill would not affect insect control. Several supporters of the bill — including concerned residents and a representative from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals — testified in Concord in favor of the ban, with 295 people logging their support online, compared to 10 in opposition. But the proposal faced blowback from those within the pest-control industry, the New Hampshire Farm Bureau Federation, and from the head of the state's Department of Agriculture, Markets, and Food. The agency's commissioner, Shawn Jasper, said the traps have been the only effective method in getting squirrels out of his home. 'I have tried virtually every method that has been talked about; they don't work on squirrels,' Jasper said. 'The biggest problem that we have in many of our buildings — my house, with four big, three big maples now — is squirrels. Generally, they spring the (other) traps without getting caught.' He said he would support a ban on using the traps outside — which is an off-label use — and argued that glue traps aren't the only traps that can lead to slow, painful deaths if not checked regularly. Jasper also said the bill would add language under the statute related to the department's authority on pesticide control — but 'this is not a pesticide,' he said. 'If you do nothing else, you need to take this out of (section) 430,' he said in reference to the statute. Tyler Hawkins, a board member of the New England Pest Management Association, said glue traps are important tools used in food facilities, grocery stores, and other places to prevent rodents from spreading disease. Rodents are often root causes in salmonella poisoning and vegetable recalls, he said. Hawkins argued a ban in New Hampshire would 'do us no good,' as the traps could still be purchased in neighboring states. Hawkins and others pointed, instead, to a need to educate people on how to use the traps properly, such as checking them regularly and not placing them outside. He also said there's a way to remove animals that have been unintentionally caught by the traps 'quite easily and effectively,' using vegetable oil, for example, to release the glue. Rob Johnson, the policy director for the New Hampshire Farm Bureau Federation, said the agriculture group opposed the legislation. He said those who use the traps have expressed that they are effective, economical, a better alternative to poison, and that other options don't work as well. Asked by a lawmaker whether he believed the bill would be detrimental to the agriculture community in the state, he said: 'We do.' Rep. Will Darby, a Nashua Democrat and one of the bill's sponsors, said that with an old home, he goes through more snap traps on a yearly basis than he'd like to admit. But he supports the measure because of his concerns about the impacts the traps have on non-target species, and a belief that the glue traps are inhumane. Better solutions exist, he said. Some proponents of banning glue traps said the focus should be on eliminating the route through which rodents are entering a building in the first place, and then capturing rodents within the building and releasing them elsewhere. Haskins provided a long list of alternatives, including innovations like fertility control and ultrasonic devices that sound off alarms that humans can't hear but that drive animals from buildings. 'I think that one of the reasons people buy these, opposed to snap traps, is because they believe that they're easier to use than snap traps are,' Darby said. 'But I think that's deceptive. If you just do a little bit of research, you'll find that, as it's been testified, people don't know what to do with the mice.' Those that use glue traps may find themselves with a live mouse and not know what to do, he said, leading to them getting bitten — possibly furthering the spread of disease — or having to 'smash' the mouse. 'I got no problem smashing a mouse, but most people that are trying to catch these … that's not really their forte,' Darby said. 'So they just walk away and leave them, you know, to ultimately, to starve and die due to lack of water.'
