Latest news with #HouseBill191
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Bill requiring AEDs at schools and school sporting events passes Pa. House committee
The exterior of the Pennsylvania state Capitol. (Photo by Amanda Mustard for the Pennsylvania Capital-Star). A bill that would require automated external defibrillators (AEDs) to be present at school and school sporting events passed the House Education Committee with bipartisan support Wednesday. State Rep. Tim Brennan (D-Bucks), who sponsored House Bill 191, said the legislature owes it to our kids 'to be prepared to save their lives when something happens on their playing fields.' 'This serves a purpose,' Brennan said. 'This is a valuable life saving tool that we should have in our schools.' Brennan said that over 20 states already have similar laws in place and said statistics prove the effectiveness of AEDs in the event of a cardiac arrest. He said 90% of cardiac arrests are fatal when they occur outside of a hospital, but if an AED is used within a minute, survival rate can jump up to 90%. This proposal amending the school code also requires one individual certified in CPR present, as well. Brennan also referenced the cardiac arrest of then-24 year old Damar Hamlin, an Allegheny County native and player for the Buffalo Bills, in 2023 who was saved by CPR and the use of an AED on the field during an NFL game on Monday Night Football. State Rep. Tarah Probst (D-Monroe), cited the death of Greg Moyer, a high school student who died in 2000 from sudden cardiac arrest at the age of 15, during a basketball game at East Stroudsburg North High School. She said it can take a long time for an ambulance to arrive in rural areas. Moyer's family has been advocating for AEDs in schools and school sporting events. AEDs were also at the center of another bill earlier this week. House Bill 193, which will require AEDs in every state building, passed the full House on Monday. Cursive mandate passes unanimously The committee also unanimously voted to advance a proposal to require cursive handwriting to be taught in schools, at the appropriate grade level. 'In our digital world, cursive has fallen by the wayside, but there are many reasons for students to, at least, get the basic grasp of cursive writing,' State Rep. Dane Watro (R-Schuylkill), sponsor of House Bill 17 said Wednesday. 'In addition, students need cursive to read historical documents. A growing cursive illiteracy poses a threat to accessing and comprehending key historical sources, such as the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.' A co-sponsorship memo mentions that at least 24 states have laws on the books requiring cursive to be taught. Both chairs of the committee also offered words of support before the vote was held. 'Obviously there are both cognitive and developmental skills I think that are learned through cursive but more importantly, I think it's important that we understand the foundations of our historical and our founding documents, which this bill would obviously do,' House Education Minority Chairperson Bryan Cutler (R-Lancaster) said. State Rep. Peter Schweyer (D-Lehigh), who is the chairperson of the committee, referenced knowing cursive from his 12 years of Catholic school education and said he looked at it from a slightly different perspective, while detailing a personal experience before voting to approve the bill. 'I have an 18-year-old who, a couple years ago, got her first bank account, and watching her try to endorse her first paycheck was quite the interesting experience on a human level,' Schweyer said. 'I just think that a part of education is actually teaching human skills, not knowledge for the sake of knowledge, but actually preparing people for real life. And this is perfectly reasonable and a smart way to go about it.'
Yahoo
15-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NM Gov vetoes bill creating wildfire suppression and post-wildfire fund, perplexing sponsor
Smoke from the South Fork and Salt fires blots out the sun Tuesday along NM Highway 70 outside of Tilley, NM. (Photo by Danielle Prokop / Source NM) Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham's veto of a bill creating state funds for post-fire recovery and current wildfire suppression 'deeply disappointed' House Bill 191 sponsor Rep. Nathan Small (D-Las Cruces), who is also one of the state budget's main architects. Lujan Grisham said the $12 million the bill authorized didn't provide enough money to even 'put a dent' in post-wildfire recovery. Recovery from South Fork and Salt fires and ensuing floods last year in Ruidoso, for example, will cost more than $200 million, the governor noted in her veto message. Lujan Grisham also wrote that another new fund the bill created, designed to pay for the state's wildfire suppression efforts, had no money in it at all and instead would have relied on federal reimbursements, 'which have only gotten slower in recent months.' Lawmakers approved the HB191 amid concerns about the federal government's capacity to suppress wildfires in New Mexico and elsewhere, thanks to federal funding cuts, and as the state beefs up its own crews of full-time and volunteer wildland firefighters. Also, most of New Mexico is experiencing above-average wildfire potential this month and through the rest of the summer, according to the latest forecasts. 'It's bad': How drought, lack of snowpack and federal cuts could spell wildfire disaster in NM Small, who chairs the House Appropriations and Finance Committee, told Source New Mexico in a statement Monday that the governor's veto was not just disappointing but also surprising given that the governor's office was involved in crafting the legislation. As for her specific objections, Small said the $12 million was a 'starting point' that nonetheless would have 'made a significant difference to New Mexicans who will face the devastating impacts of the next wildfires in our state.' He also noted that while the governor vetoed the bill, she left its accompanying $12 million appropriation intact in the budget. As a result, money will 'now sit unused' instead of helping communities respond and recover from wildfires, he said. 'Unfortunately, New Mexicans will pay the price for the lack of action this year, but my colleagues and I will continue to fight to protect our communities from the catastrophic wildfires that continue to threaten our people, businesses, and lands.' Source has a pending request to the governor's office to respond to Small's comments and will update this story as necessary. State Forester Laura McCarthy, whose agency would have received the post-fire funds defended the concept behind HB191 as a way to budget for wildfire suppression, taking climate change into account and also preserving the governor's ability to issue executive orders to pay for wildfire suppression on a case-by-case basis. But she also agreed with the governor's criticism of the way HB191 created a fire suppression fund without putting any money in it. 'The Governor's veto message made clear that without funding for HB191, creating a wildfire suppression fund that relies on federal reimbursements or payments for state crews when they are on out-of-state assignments, does not set the program up for success,' she said in an emailed statement. NM wildfire outlook above normal for most of state Without the legislation, the state will have to pay for any costs to suppress wildfires this year through the use of executive orders, McCarthy said. The Forestry Division has said that is the wrong way for the state to proactively anticipate and budget for the 'volatile but predictable expense' of wildfire suppression. Executive orders are handled on a case-by-case basis and capped at $750,000 at a time, often requiring multiple orders for the same natural disaster. McCarthy also said recruitment of state wildland firefighters is 'going well,' and the state is anticipating full staffing ahead of increased wildfire activity expected in May and June. Despite the veto, Lujan Grisham noted that she signed Senate Bill 33, which creates guidelines and criteria for a new Wildfire Prepared Program, including grants and certifications for property owners to make structures less prone to wildfire damage. The governor said that bill achieves 'similar objectives' to HB 191. 'I fully support a revamped process to fund both pre- and post-wildfire maintenance,' she said. 'I hope the Legislature will provide a meaningful way to accomplish that goal during the 2026 legislative session.'
Yahoo
27-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
NH House votes to criminalize helping minors receive abortions — but avoids the word abortion
An earlier version of the bill specified that this was — at least originally — about abortions. (Getty Images) New Hampshire Republican lawmakers are working to make it illegal to help a minor travel to receive an abortion without parental permission, and they got one step closer to making that happen on Wednesday. The New Hampshire House of Representatives voted, 180-164, to pass House Bill 191, which would make it a crime in the state to knowingly transport an unemancipated minor to receive a 'surgical procedure' without a parent's notarized permission. It also opens people up to civil lawsuits if they do so. Under the bill, a first offense would be a misdemeanor and a third offense would be a felony. However, an earlier version of the bill specified that this was — at least originally — about abortions. The original text of the bill made it illegal to help a minor receive an 'abortion' without their parents' permission. The criteria for what constitutes a violation under the proposed law was also broader in the original text. The bill originally made it illegal to hide the fact that a minor is receiving an abortion or help them obtain an abortion, whether surgical or through drugs, without parental permission. However, before the House voted on the bill, it was amended to limit the scope and to change 'abortion' to 'surgical procedure.' On the House floor, Rep. Alissandra Murray, a Manchester Democrat, argued the amendment 'attempts to conceal the real motives of obstructing abortion access.' She also said the amendment created 'unnecessary confusion' and means the bill would require 'notarized consent to drive a teen to get their tonsils removed or face criminalizing grandma.' Republicans supporting the bill didn't buy that argument. 'I cannot imagine any world where anybody in this room can come up with a scenario where it's OK for somebody else to take their child for a scheduled medical procedure and them not have to know about it,' Rep. Jennifer Rhodes, a Winchester Republican, said. 'I wonder what that could be. Doesn't make any sense to me.' The bill will need approval from the Senate and the governor before it can become law. Prior to Wednesday's vote, the bill was approved by the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee in a 9-7 vote. Abortion has been legal up to 24 weeks of pregnancy in New Hampshire since 2021. The law has exceptions for medical emergencies and fetal abnormalities, but not for rape or incest. There was an unsuccessful effort to further restrict that this year though. House Bill 476, sponsored by Wolfeboro Republican Rep. Katy Peternel, sought to ban abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy with exceptions for medical emergencies and fetal abnormalities. However, the House withdrew the bill in February after Peternel and her cosponsors no longer stood behind it. This comes after Gov. Kelly Ayotte, a Republican, promised on multiple occasions, including during her inaugural address, that she would not approve legislation restricting abortion beyond the 24-week limitation already in place. House and Senate Republican leaders made similar promises during election season last year.
