Latest news with #HouseBill161
Yahoo
18-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill seeks to cover fewer workers with paid sick leave recently approved by Alaska voters
Joelle Hall, president of the Alaska AFL-CIO, and other advocates carry boxes of signed petitions for a pro-labor initiative for delivery to the Alaska Division of Elections on Jan. 9, 2024. Voters passed the initative in November. To go into effect on July 1, it increases workers' minimum pay, mandates paid sick leave and ensures that workers are not required to hear employers' political, religious or anti-union messages. Hall said she and others who campaigned successfully for the intiative will fight efforts to change the provisions for paid sick leave. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon) Alaska's voter-approved mandate for paid sick leave has not yet gone into effect, but some lawmakers are already trying to reduce the number of workers who would benefit from it. A bill pending in the Alaska Legislature, House Bill 161, would exempt businesses with fewer than 50 employees, a change from the 15-employee threshold in the labor-rights initiative that voters approved in November. The bill would also drop seasonal workers from the mandate for accrued paid sick bill was introduced on March 28 by Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna, with Rep. Julie Coulombe, R-Anchorage, as a co-sponsor. Both are members of the House minority. It has the support of a key majority member; House Majority Leader Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage, signed on as a co-sponsor on April 14. It addresses Ballot Measure 1, a three-part citizen initiative that will raise Alaska's minimum wage and protect workers against any employer-imposed political or religious meetings, as well as mandate paid sick leave, based on time accrued over work periods. Voters approved Ballot Measure 1 by a 58-42 percent margin. The new law is set to go into effect on July 1. Ruffridge and Coulombe, during the bill's first hearing on Wednesday, described the proposed changes as modifications that fit within the state constitution's limits. While the constitution forbids sweeping changes within two years to any voter-passed initiatives, the bill 'in no way seeks to repeal or change some of the key provisions of Ballot Measure 1,' chiefly the minimum-wage hike that was probably the most popular element, Ruffridge told the House Labor and Commerce Committee. Coulombe said the changes amounted to a 'few tweaks' that are necessary to help small businesses. 'What will happen if we don't try to amend this a little bit, make the language a little cleaner and make it more adaptable to small businesses, we have small businesses that might actually just go out of business,' she told the committee. The bill has the enthusiastic backing of the Alaska Chamber, a business group that campaigned against the ballot measure. In testimony at Wednesday's hearing of the House Labor and Commerce Committee, Kati Capozzi, the chamber's president, called it a 'vital correction' to a pending mandate that burdens small businesses, especially in the tourism and hospitality sectors. 'Maybe well-intentioned or maybe not, Ballot Measure 1 introduced a one-size-fits-all mandate that failed to account for Alaska's unique economic landscape,' she said. Echoing earlier comments by Ruffridge and Coulombe, Capozzi said voters were less aware of Ballot Measure 1's sick-leave provisions than they were of the wage hike. 'It's become clear that many voters did not understand the true and full implications of the ballot measure,' she said. One of the leaders of the Ballot Measure 1 campaign vowed to work against House Bill 161. 'For me, it's really important that the voters will be respected here,' Joelle Hall, president of the Alaska AFL-CIO, said Thursday. 'The voters have made this choice. The voters have said, 'We would like this to happen.' And whether or not the business groups can use a smaller group of people, the Alaska Legislature, to try to undo their will — that is something we will fight.' Hall disputed the bill sponsors' characterization of the changes as minor. 'This, in my mind, is a substantial change. It is repealing the benefit that the voters voted for,' she said. She also disputed the contention that voters had not paid attention to the sick-leave provisions in the initiative. 'That is just silliness, because we were very clear that it was earned sick leave,' she said. 'Almost all of our advertising was about that, so almost every single ad we put out was about somebody's earned sick-leave benefit.' She said she was expecting some pushback on the bill's provisions, but not this soon. 'It's a little bit shocking to me that it's such an aggressive overreach of what the voters passed,' she said. 'I'm not surprised that they're going to fight us on this tooth and nail every single session, to try to claw it back. I'm a little surprised they're starting before it's even a law.' Alaska was not the only state where voters in November approved a mandate for paid sick leave. Similar initiatives passed in Missouri and Nebraska. Several other states already required paid sick leave prior to last year's election. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
21-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Which bills have been signed by the governor so far?
SANTA FE, N.M. (KRQE) – As the 2025 New Mexico Legislative Session winds down, House and Senate Bills have already made it to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham's desk to sign. Below are bills that have been signed into law so far. House Bill 1 moved quickly through the legislature and was signed by the governor on January 23. Its purpose is to outline appropriations for the expenses of the legislative session and where the funds will be coming from. House Bill 8 was signed by the governor about halfway through the session on February 27. Its focus is on criminal competency, looking to improve the court system and make sure that individuals who may be having a mental health crisis when they commit a crime have access to the treatment they need so they are able to stand trial. House Bill 47 was signed into law on March 20, 2025, and implements a constitutional amendment to increase property tax exemptions for veterans from $4,000 to $10,000. There is also a proportional tax exemption for disabled vets to match their federal disability rating. House Bill 161 was also signed on March 20 and also aims to benefit veterans in the state. HB 161 gives veterans free access to state parks, including unlimited day-use and camping passes. The Forest & Watershed Buffer Project bill was signed on March 19 by the governor and deals with making projects to create or maintain buffers in and around wildland or urban interaces eligible for funding form the forest land protection revolving fund. Signed by the governor on February 27, the Behavioral Health Trust Fund bill will create a behavioral health trust fund for the state similar to the state's trust funds for higher education and early childhood care. Similar to SB 1, the Behavioral Health Reform & Investment Act was signed on February 17 and would allow the Administrative Office of the Courts to map out behavioral health regions based on counties or judicial districts. The Game Commission Reform Bill was signed on March 20 and aims to reform the Game Commission by introducing new qualifications for commissioners to create a more functional board. It would also update hunting and fishing license fees to increase by approximately $15 annually and officer discounts for seniors, youth, veterans, and people with disabilities. Signed by the governor on March 20, SB 75 makes changes to the Educational REtirement Act, clarifying restrictions on receiving gifts, providing for unclaimed member contributions to be deposited into the Educational Retirement Fund, and also allows for a member on disability status who is over 60 years old and who receives an annuity adjustment to continue receiving the adjustment. Signed on March 20, this bill would protect Indigenous students' rights to wear tribal regalia at graduation ceremonies or public school events. The bill unanimously cleared the Senate and House and will take effect immediately. Senate Bill 199 was signed by the governor on March 20 and pertains to increasing the amount of the Local DWI Grant Fund to administer the grant program. The governor signed this bill on March 20 and requires CYFD to determine federal benefits eligibility for children in its custody, apply for federal benefits, and either act as the child's representative payee or decide an appropriate alternative. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NM officials tout support for veterans
Veterans protested at the New Mexico Roundhouse on March 14, 2025 New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez on Thursday announced the state has joined 50 other attorneys general in an amicus brief before the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in support of U.S. Army veteran Lieutenant Colonel Paul Yoon and U.S. Air Force veteran Colonel Toby Doran, both of whom the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs denied G.I. Bill education benefits. New Mexico stands with our veterans — not just in gratitude, but in action,' Torrez said in a statement. 'These brave men and women have earned every bit of their education benefits through sacrifice and service. The VA's restrictive interpretation is not only unjust, but unlawful, and we're committed to fighting for the full support our veterans and their families deserve.' The brief argues that the VA's interpretation of the G.I. bills contradicts a recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court and the precedent it set. 'Despite the clear precedent, the VA has continued to limit benefits based on an erroneous reading of the ruling, depriving veterans and their families of critical educational opportunities,' a news release from the AG's office said. In other veterans news, U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) this week cosponsored the Major Richard Star Act—bipartisan legislation backers say is intended to provide combat-injured veteran retirees their full benefits. 'The men and women who risked their lives for our country and were injured in combat deserve the full benefits they have earned. Too many veterans have been left behind, and it's far past time we correct this grave injustice,' Luján said in a statement. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham on Thursday signed two bills aimed at veterans: House Bill 47, which implements constitutional amendments voters approved in the 2024 general election that will raise veteran property tax exemption from $4,000 to $10,000 starting this year, with adjustments for inflation in subsequent years, among other tax relief; and House Bill 161, which provides veterans residing in New Mexico free access to state parks, including unlimited day-use passes and camping passes. 'These new laws represent our state's deep appreciation for the service of our veterans,' Secretary Jamison Herrera, brigadier general (retired), of the Department of Veterans Services said in a statement. 'The property tax relief will provide meaningful financial support to veterans and their families, while access to our state parks offers opportunities for recreation and healing in New Mexico's beautiful outdoor spaces.' New Mexico officials' actions come amid concerns from veterans about proposed cuts to the VA, including in New Mexico where veterans rallied at the Roundhouse earlier in March. In a video posted on social media March 5, VA Secretary Doug Collins said the administration's target to cut 15% of the VA's workforce will be done without decreasing benefits and health care to veterans and other beneficiaries. Vets worry Trump cuts to VA workforce will interrupt benefits
Yahoo
15-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Delegates share vulnerable, personal stories during debate on health education bill
House Ways and Means Chair Vanessa Atterbeary (D-Howard), in red, embraces House Judiciary Vice Chair Del. J. Sandy Bartlett (D-Anne Arundel) after Bartlett spoke openly about the sexual abuse she endured as a child growing up in North Carolina. (Photo by Bryan P. Sears/Maryland Matters) As she rose to address the House on Friday, Del. J. Sandy Bartlett (D-Anne Arundel) first took a deep breath to steady herself. 'I am able to say this now, after 52 years, that I am a sexual assault survivor,' said Bartlett, who went on to tell the story of how she was molested as a child. It was just one of the personal, and sometimes emotional, stories delegates on both sides of the aisle shared Friday as the House debated House Bill 161, which would require that state health and education officials create an age-appropriate health education framework that includes sexual orientation and gender identity, family, nutrition, and safe social media use. The bill also covers mental health, substance abuse prevention, and safety and violence prevention. Bartlett started by saying she could not understand why debate on the bill earlier this week was triggering for her, until she realized that had it been around when she was a child it might have saved her. 'I bet you, if someone had told me, when I was 9 years old … that what was happening to me was wrong, it would have made all the difference in my life. It also would have empowered me to say 'no' to the individual,' Bartlett said. Democrats said the bill is about much more than sex and gender identity, and that it would teach the youngest students about respecting other people's differences and treating them with kindness. Parents would be able to opt their children out of curriculum involving sex education, they said. But Republicans focused on the parts of the bill requiring components on sexual orientation and gender identity, arguing that certain ages are too young to learn about those subjects, and that parents should be able to decide if their children take part in those discussions. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE House Minority Leader Jason Buckel (R-Allegany) drew on his experience as a father to argue that parents should be trusted make decisions on how their children learn about sensitive topics. 'I have a little 8-year-old boy … I love that little boy the way each and every one of you in this room love your children,' Buckel said. 'It would be beyond disappointing to me – it would be crushing to me — if he mistreated someone or judged someone or hurt someone based upon their identity, based upon who they were, based upon who their family were.' Buckel said he is fine with a curriculum that teaches kindness and respect, but that he's heard from families who are concerned that the lessons for young students would go beyond those concepts. 'All they [parents] want is a chance to see in real time – this is what the lesson plan is going to be, this is what the curriculum is going to be, these are what the words are going to be,' he said. 'If they're good, if they're something I'm comfortable with as a parent, if they're teaching kindness, if they're teaching respect, if they're teaching that people are different and that's OK.' But Buckel said that it's the specifics of the lessons that could make some parents uncomfortable and that 'if it doesn't work for me, as a family and as a parent, I'd like to … be able to say 'I'd like my child out of that particular portion of the curriculum,'' he said. Democrats stressed that families would be able to opt out of the Family Life and Human Sexuality section, but the bill is to ensure that school districts are complying with state health education standards, which include curriculum on LGBTQ+ issues. Bartlett said later that she has shared her story previously, but decided to go into more detail on the floor in service of supporting the legislation as a whole, not just the parts that she said could have helped her as a child experiencing sexual assault. She talked about her mother, a single mom of six, spending weekdays in Washington, D.C., to earn enough to support her family in North Carolina, where she spent weekends. 'One thing that was on there [in the bill] was health. Nutrition is on there,' she said. 'These are things that, with my mom being a single mom, we didn't always get … You can't make an assumption that everyone is coming from a home where there's communication – you just can't. And sometimes schools are the safe places.' Bartlett wasn't the only delegate who shared sensitive aspects of her childhood in support of the legislation. Del. Deni Taveras (D-Prince George's), said the health education in the bill would have helped her understand her first menstrual cycle and her struggles with mental health. 'As a child, I was an orphan by the time I was 9. I didn't know what a period was — I thought I got cut,' she said. 'To me, as a child of a mother who committed suicide by the time I was 4, this means that I didn't understand why I had chronic depression into my 30s. So, this is a life-and-death matter to me.' The bill passed 95-39, mostly along party lines. Del. Sheree Sample-Hughes (D-Dorchester and Wicomico) voted no, and Del. Julian Ivey (D-Prince George's) did not vote on the legislation. This is the third time the House has passed the bill, which was first filed in 2023 in response to the Carroll County school board deciding to remove certain curriculum related to LGBTQ+ issues. The bill has died in the Senate in each of the last two years. Del. Vanessa E. Atterbeary (D-Howard), one of the sponsors of the bill, concedes that it could face challenges in the Senate again, but said she has talked with Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore City) who promised to see what he could do with it this year. Bartlett said that the bill could help children 'who may not come from a two-parent household, or who may not come from a household where the parent has the ability, the wherewithal, or the knowledge to see the signs.' She added that the bill is 'for those children, and myself, who didn't have a parent who could explain what was right, what was wrong, what I should be proud of, how I should protect myself — that's what this bill means to me.'
Yahoo
13-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Republicans, Democrats debate right age to teach gender, sexual orientation in schools
BALTIMORE — State Republican lawmakers pushed Wednesday to give parents a bigger say in sex education curriculum in their children's schools, but their efforts were defeated along party lines. At the heart of the conflict are questions: what is the right age to teach students about gender and sexual orientation, and do parents have a right to restrict their kids from that curriculum? 'Overall, honoring what parents would like to do, I think, is extremely important,' Del. April Rose, a Republican representing Carroll and Frederick counties, said. Republicans want to remove a measure from a bill that would require public schools to teach age-appropriate gender and sexual orientation health education without the ability for parents to opt out. Rose offered an amendment to allow parents to opt out of gender and sexual orientation courses, saying it would offer local and parental control over their children's education. Her amendment was defeated along party lines. The lone Democrat to vote in its favor was Del. Sheree Sample-Hughes. She is the only member of the majority party that represents the Eastern Shore. The legislation will likely be passed out of the House chamber in the next few days. It will then be debated in the Senate. Sponsored by House Ways and Means Committee Chair Vanessa Atterbeary of Howard County and Del. Kris Fair of Frederick County, both Democrats, House Bill 161 would require each of Maryland's 24 local school boards to create age-appropriate health education curriculum that meets the standards set by Maryland's education and health departments, including lessons on gender and sexual orientation. Curricula must also include sections on how to live a healthy lifestyle, mental and emotional health, substance abuse prevention, family life, violence prevention, safe social media and internet usage, healthy eating, disease prevention and human sexuality. Parents would maintain the ability to opt their child out of the family life and human sexuality courses. Under the bill, sections on gender and sexual orientation would be mandatory. Each school board would be required to establish committees of health and education experts and members of the community to develop the curriculum. Currently, all local jurisdictions are required to teach public school children about the majority of these topics based on standards set by Maryland's education and health departments in December 2019, including age-appropriate courses on family life and human sexuality for children in pre-kindergarten through eighth grade. 'The purpose of that framework is to make sure that all of our children feel included when they attend school. To make sure that they feel represented,' Atterbeary said of the existing standards. 'Quite frankly, everyone's doing a good job except … Carroll County.' The family life and human sexuality curriculum in Carroll County excludes gender identity, even though educators are supposed to teach it under the existing health education framework. Instead, the county offers options for students to either learn the state curriculum, study the curriculum passed by the county's Family Life Advisory Board, or completely opt out of the family life curriculum. Atterbeary said on the floor Tuesday that 35% of Carroll County elementary school parents opted for the statewide curriculum, 42% chose the county framework, 8% did not have their children learn the curriculum and 15% did not respond. Rose said that, because of the number of those who responded that they chose the state curriculum — and the unknown number of those who may have opted for it but did not say — she found it difficult to believe that the problem is so large that Carroll County should not be allowed to continue offering the curriculum that its Family Life Advisory Board approves. Republican Del. Joshua Stonko, who is also a Carroll County representative, said that not having the option to opt out will likely lead to parents keeping their children home from school on days those lessons are taught, which could leave students missing other core classes like math. Del. Latoya Nkongolo, an Anne Arundel County Republican, said that not allowing the ability to opt out of the gender and sexual orientation classes would dismiss the religious and cultural beliefs of parents not just in Carroll County but around the state. 'Parents should always have the autonomy to opt out of any and every lesson — especially that's in this comprehensive framework,' she said. According to Del. Anne Kaiser, an openly gay Democrat from Montgomery County, 57% of LGBTQ+ children experience parental rejection, and nearly half feel unsafe at school. She said that the amendment ignores the lived experience of those students and expresses the notion that they will be 'merely tolerated.' 'I'd like to … just say to the LGBTQ kids in the state of Maryland — and, specifically, in Carroll County — that the amendment that's being offered today to erase, ignore and tolerate you will fail,' Kaiser said. 'And that is because the majority of this House of Delegates value you. We don't merely tolerate you. We love you.' In her request for her colleagues to reject Rose's amendment, Atterbeary said that the inability to opt out of gender and sexual orientation classes is about making sure that children are learning scientifically and medically proper material. 'This is in the health education article because this is how we keep kids safe,' she said. 'We keep kids safe by teaching them what is medically and scientifically correct, what is appropriate. We don't want our kids learning these things on social media, on Snapchat, or whatever else.' Fair, the bill's cosponsor, is also openly gay. He told his colleagues on the House floor that he did not come out when he was younger because he watched an openly gay peer in high school suffer from bullying to the point he attempted suicide. Fair said that both closeted and openly gay children also deserve to have safe and accurate information about things they're experiencing. 'By splitting out this information and not offering the opt-out provision, we acknowledge that different sexual orientations and identities exist in our school system, and if somebody still wants to opt out of the entire family life and human sexuality curriculum, they can,' he said. 'What school systems can't do is erase — erase — people like me. They do not get to act like we don't exist.' --------
