Latest news with #SB268
Miami Herald
10-04-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
‘Someone paid $47K to have me killed.' Should Florida lawmakers' addresses be secret?
State lawmakers are preparing to make the addresses and phone numbers of elected officials secret in what would be a sweeping change to the state's broad public records laws. Members of Congress, school board members, state legislators and other state and local officials — and their families — would have the option to have their personal information redacted from county and state records. The bill, SB 268, passed the Senate Wednesday with two Democrats voting against it. Its bill sponsor, Sen. Shevrin Jones, D-Miami, said he expects it to pass the House, as well. Lawmakers have pointed to the need for more protection amid a toxic political environment. Senators recounted in committees their experiences with death threats and instances of round-the-clock police protection at their homes. But open government advocates say the bill could make it easier for local and state officials to live outside their districts — or redraw districts to favor one politician over another. If the bill passes, elected officials would be granted rights approaching those of police, judges and prosecutors. Once elected to office, mayors, property appraisers, city and county commissioners and other elected officials could have their primary house number and street name redacted from records. So could their spouses and adult children. The names, addresses, phone numbers, dates of birth of their minor children and where they go to school would also be exempt from public records. The exemption would expire when the elected official leaves office. 'No one needs to know where you and your family live,' Jones told senators Wednesday. 'It has nothing to do with government, nothing,' he added. 'All you need to know is where you can come to my office to see my staff, to see me.' Jones said he received death threats following his impassioned 2022 speech against the Parental Rights in Education bill, also known as 'don't say gay.' Other senators on both sides of the aisle recounted their own stories. Former Sen. Randy Fine, R-Melbourne Beach, who was elected to Congress last week, said two people have been arrested and imprisoned for threatening him and his family. 'We had to have law enforcement pull up to our house with sirens blaring and everything else,' Fine said last month. 'I got the joy of understanding what it's like to be important for a few days, as I couldn't go anywhere without a ton of security with me.' Sen. Jason Pizzo, D-Hollywood, said state police in 2020 pulled him out of a committee to alert him to the fact that 'someone had paid $47,000 to have me killed.' Sen. Corey Simon, R-Tallahassee, said a man recently came to his home asking for him. 'It scared the heck out of my wife,' he said. Sen. Barbara Sharief, D-Miramar, said her home address was placed on a Ku Klux Klan-affiliated website. 'I was on three months' worth of security protection,' she said. Some of the heated political rhetoric was evident in Gov. Ron DeSantis' dispute with Republican legislative leaders over a special legislative session on immigration earlier this year. The state's agriculture commissioner, Wilton Simpson, who was on the other side of DeSantis, received death threats. Opponents of the bill have noted that lawmakers haven't produced any data about the number of threats they've received or whether that number is going up. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement, which can pursue charges against people who threaten legislators, did not respond to a request for data on lawmaker threats. Critics of the bill also note that there are numerous instances of politicians getting caught living outside their districts, making them ineligible to hold office. 'It undermines accountability in the sense that no longer would anyone be able to be sure that their legal representatives live in their districts,' said Bobby Block, executive director of the First Amendment Foundation. The organization advocates for open government. Abdelilah Skhir, a senior strategist with the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, said the organization feared that records custodians would interpret the statute to redact more information than allowed. The organization asked senators to amend the bill to explicitly state that certain information in Florida's voter file, such as their precinct locations and the congressional districts they live in, must be public. If that information were redacted, it would be impossible to determine whether state and local officials were redrawing districts to favor one politician over another, Skhir said. 'Totally understand where they're coming from with wanting privacy and security,' Skhir said. 'But there's a balance they have to walk.'
Yahoo
10-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Florida could make elected officials' addresses and phone numbers secret
TALLAHASSEE — State lawmakers are preparing to make the addresses and phone numbers of elected officials secret in what would be a sweeping change to the state's broad public records laws. Members of Congress, school board members, state legislators and other state and local officials — and their families — would have the option to have their personal information redacted from county and state records. The bill, SB 268, passed the Senate Wednesday with two Democrats voting against it. Its bill sponsor, Sen. Shevrin Jones, D-Miami, said he expects it to pass the House, as well. Lawmakers have pointed to the need for more protection amid a toxic political environment. Senators recounted in committees their experiences with death threats and instances of round-the-clock police protection at their homes. But open government advocates say the bill could make it easier for local and state officials to live outside their districts — or redraw districts to favor one politician over another. If the bill passes, elected officials would be granted rights approaching those of police, judges and prosecutors. Once elected to office, mayors, property appraisers, city and county commissioners and other elected officials could have their primary house number and street name redacted from records. So could their spouses and adult children. The names, addresses, phone numbers, dates of birth of their minor children and where they go to school would also be exempt from public records. The exemption would expire when the elected official leaves office. 'No one needs to know where you and your family live,' Jones told senators Wednesday. 'It has nothing to do with government, nothing,' he added. 'All you need to know is where you can come to my office to see my staff, to see me.' Jones said he received death threats following his impassioned 2022 speech against the Parental Rights in Education bill, also known as Don't Say Gay. Other senators on both sides of the aisle recounted their own stories. Former Sen. Randy Fine, R-Melbourne Beach, who was elected to Congress last week, said two people have been arrested and imprisoned for threatening him and his family. 'We had to have law enforcement pull up to our house with sirens blaring and everything else,' Fine said last month. 'I got the joy of understanding what it's like to be important for a few days, as I couldn't go anywhere without a ton of security with me.' Sen. Jason Pizzo, D-Hollywood, said state police in 2020 pulled him out of a committee to alert him to the fact that 'someone had paid $47,000 to have me killed.' Sen. Corey Simon, R-Tallahassee, said a man recently came to his home asking for him. 'It scared the heck out of my wife,' he said. Sen. Barbara Sharief, D-Miramar, said her home address was placed on a Ku Klux Klan-affiliated website. 'I was on three months' worth of security protection,' she said. Some of the heated political rhetoric was evident in Gov. Ron DeSantis's dispute with Republican legislative leaders over a special legislative session on immigration earlier this year. The state's agriculture commissioner, Wilton Simpson, who was on the other side of DeSantis, received death threats. Opponents of the bill have noted that lawmakers haven't produced any data about the number of threats they've received or whether that number is going up. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement, which can pursue charges against people who threaten legislators, did not respond to a request for data on lawmaker threats. Critics of the bill also note that there are numerous instances of politicians getting caught living outside their districts, making them ineligible to hold office. 'It undermines accountability in the sense that no longer would anyone be able to be sure that their legal representatives live in their districts,' said Bobby Block, executive director of the First Amendment Foundation. The organization advocates for open government. Abdelilah Skhir, a senior strategist with the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, said the organization feared that records custodians would interpret the statute to redact more information than allowed. The organization asked senators to amend the bill to explicitly state that certain information in Florida's voter file, such as their precinct locations and the congressional districts they live in, must be public. If that information were redacted, it would be impossible to determine whether state and local officials were redrawing districts to favor one politician over another, Skhir said. 'Totally understand where they're coming from with wanting privacy and security,' Skhir said. 'But there's a balance they have to walk.'
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Kentucky legislator wants to kill bill protecting controversial virtual school
A bill intended to address lost instructional time from school closures has been amended to keep a virtual school from closing — prompting the bill's sponsor to say he'd "try my best to kill it." House Bill 241, sponsored by Republican Rep. Timmy Truett, would let the state's education commissioner grant up to five "disaster relief" days during which schools could provide alternative instruction when a district closes "for health or safety reasons." It would also let districts extend student attendance days to meet the legally required minimum instruction hours. At a Senate Education Committee meeting Thursday, Truett, an elementary school principal, said his bill "started off as a really good bill" and attaching the virtual school legislation would "harm public education. It's going to harm my students." HB 241 passed out of the House last month with a 82-7 vote. It was assigned to the Senate Education Committee, which initially voted in favor of the bill. However, the bill was returned to the committee on Wednesday, where it was combined with a Senate measure aimed at protecting the Kentucky Virtual Academy. Senate Bill 268 proposed prohibiting a cap on enrollment for all virtual programs for the next three years. It was filed in response to the Kentucky Department of Education's efforts to limit enrollment at the Kentucky Virtual Academy, which has repeatedly failed to meet staff and testing requirements. The school, which opened in 2023 through a partnership with Cloverport Independent Schools and Stride, Inc., has experienced rapid growth in its enrollment, drawing thousands of students from across the state. The Senate Education Committee met a day after The Courier Journal published an article on the school, stating the company running the program has been accused of mismanaging funds and failing students in various ways over the past 15 years. SB 268 had passed unanimously out of the Senate Education Committee but had yet to be considered for a full floor vote. Republican Sen. Steve West, chairman of the committee, told The Courier Journal there were concerns the bill wouldn't get "as nice of a reception in the House once it went over," and Truett's bill as written didn't have enough support to succeed on its own. He added it's common for bills to blend together so they can pass both chambers before a veto period begins. "The reason for that is it's a negotiation process," West said. "It's a compromise process between the House and the Senate. They want what they want. We want what we want, and ... negotiating is what makes it across the finish line." Truett took issue with the decision to combine the bills, saying he would speak against his own legislation. HB 241, on its own, "helps just about every district in the state of Kentucky, especially those districts in Eastern Kentucky that are struggling with the extreme weather and the flooding and all of that," Truett told The Courier Journal. "So it's a great bill. But the way politics works, sometimes you get surprised, and there was a amendment thrown on the bill that goes against some of the things that I believe in and that I disagree with." Truett clarified that while he isn't against the Kentucky Virtual Academy, he is concerned the Senate measure wouldn't allow "any restrictions" to be put in place on the school until 2028. "The thing about it is I'm afraid that growing at the rate that they're growing and struggling like they are, (along) with the extra students enrolling, I'm afraid (the bill) be more harmful than helpful," Truett said. "So if we could put some guard rails up, I would support that." Truett added while he respects West and the education committee, no one reached out to him to ask whether it was OK to attach the Senate measure to his bill. West, meanwhile, said he did not "personally talk to Truett," but Truett knew that "this was happening." He also pointed out that the virtual academy has only been operating for about one year, and a group of lawmakers want to give it more time instead of shutting it down. "We understand there are issues there, and we understand those issues will need to be addressed and should be addressed, but our policy consideration was that they needed a little bit more time," West said during the committee meeting. "This is an innovative thing. With any experiment or innovative thing, you're going to make mistakes, and sometimes you don't get it right the first time, so it does take a little time." HB 241, with the committee substitute, passed out of the committee on an 8-2-1 vote. Republican Sen. Lindsey Tichenor said she voted no because the bill covers "two very different things." Democratic Sen. Reggie Thomas, who represented the other "no" vote, called the added Senate measure "a poison pill" and cited statistics on the company's performance from The Courier Journal article. "We should wipe off this amendment. This school should never be allowed to operate here in Kentucky," Thomas said. If the Senate passes the bill as amended, it will get sent back to the House for concurrence. The House can either vote to accept the Senate's changes and send the bill to Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear's desk, or it could vote not to concur and send the bill to a conference committee made up of members of both chambers. Reach reporter Hannah Pinski at hpinski@ or follow her on X, formerly known as Twitter, at @hannahpinski. This article originally appeared on Louisville Courier Journal: Legislator wants to kill bill protecting Kentucky Virtual Academy
Yahoo
02-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawmakers introduce controversial bills to regulate harmful chemicals leaked by factories: 'Taxpayers .. will largely shoulder the burden'
Two Oklahoma bills aim to protect people and farmland from dangerous chemicals that have been polluting our water and soil for decades. According to Oklahoma Voice, these bills target PFAS, synthetic chemicals that don't break down in nature. Manufacturers first created them 80 years ago, and despite knowing about potential health risks by 1961, they kept making them anyway. Scientists now link PFAS to health problems like cancer, liver damage, and reduced fertility. Oklahoma plans to tackle this through Senate Bills 268 and 271. SB 268 would stop farmers from using sewage-based fertilizer on cropland, a common practice that spreads PFAS into our food supply — over 80% of Oklahoma's wastewater ends up on farm fields. Meanwhile, SB 271 would protect farmers who unknowingly used contaminated fertilizer from getting sued. Do you worry about having toxic forever chemicals in your home? Majorly Sometimes Not really I don't know enough about them Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. The proposed laws could save money and protect health. Clean drinking water helps prevent medical issues, while protecting farmland preserves food safety. However, cleaning up PFAS costs money — the EPA has estimated that $1.5 billion is needed yearly just to improve water systems. Some worry these bills don't address the root cause: industrial facilities releasing PFAS into waterways. Others point out potential gaps in farmer support. It's not clear if farmers will receive income replacement if their production drops or if there will be funding to monitor affected farms and families. Water bills might rise as local governments pay for cleanup. This would hit low-income households hardest through higher costs and increased exposure to contaminated water. "States and taxpayers didn't cause the contamination, but they will largely shoulder the burden of testing and monitoring, delivering clean water to communities, cleaning up contaminated sites, and covering health care costs," noted the Oklahoma Voice's Mike Altshuler. But action beats inaction. Oklahoma joins 11 other states that passed PFAS restrictions in 2024, showing growing momentum to protect Americans' health and resources. These bills could help create cleaner water and safer food for Oklahoma families with proper funding and implementation. The effects of PFAS might be invisible now, but communities can't afford to wait. By supporting smart regulations today, we're investing in healthier soil, cleaner water, and better health for future generations. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Chicago Tribune
19-02-2025
- Automotive
- Chicago Tribune
Lynne McChristian: Don't import California's shortsighted insurance regulation policies
A recent Tribune editorial accurately points out that California stands in stark contrast to Illinois as a cautionary tale on how to destroy a healthy insurance market. California's insurance regulators have used their regulatory authority to keep premiums artificially low. As a result, many California insurers pulled back from the marketplace, leaving many Californians unable to find coverage in the private market. And yet, new legislative proposals in Illinois are attempting to import California's shortsighted regulatory policies. Our state lawmakers should recognize how supporting measures to underprice risk will ultimately hurt Illinois policyholders. Illinois owns bragging rights as a competitive auto and property insurance market. Compared with consumers in other states, Illinois is a buyer's market, and consumers have many choices when selecting an insurance company that best fits their needs. Yes, there have been recent premium increases, driven by the rising costs of materials used to repair damaged cars and property (automotive parts, lumber, roofing materials), higher labor costs and more events that bring insurance claims, such as natural disasters and risky driving behaviors. Yet the cost of insurance in Illinois remains below the national average. Beware of proposed legislation that may sound good in talking points and framed as 'consumer protections' but ignores adverse impacts on the affordability and availability of auto and home insurance. There is a legislative proposal, SB 268, that seeks to implement California-style rate regulation in Illinois. It is something that 'sounds good,' but its California counterpart has already proved to have had devastating consequences on the Golden State's insurance marketplace. This part is missing from the proposed legislation's talking points, and Illinois need not follow in the footsteps of a failed system. Consumers want transparency in insurance, and they also should demand transparency in proposed legislation. Among the details in the bill is a ban on the use of credit in insurance pricing. Extensive research has proved the use of credit is actually beneficial to consumers. It saves consumers 30% to 59% on their car insurance. Banning the use of insurance credit scores in pricing insurance in other states has resulted in a major increase for policyholders. Case in point: When the use of credit was banned in Washington in 2021, more than 60% of Washington drivers saw an increase in their premiums. Should legislation pass that banned credit, Illinois could likely see a similar increase, with women and seniors most adversely affected. The Tribune editorial also calls for more transparency in insurance pricing, and there is proposed legislation calling for so-called 'rate transparency.' Much of the necessary information to understand rising insurance costs already exists. Check the Consumer Price Index. Look at the claims trends on industry websites, such as Insurance costs reflect reality. Individual insurance premiums are affected by factors that affect all consumers, as well as far-reaching conditions such as inflation and supply chain disruptions, plus factors unique to each person, such as number of miles driven, type of vehicle being driven and accident history. Transparency requirements should focus on providing consumers with concise, actionable information. This is the type of transparency that proactively engages people in taking steps to lower their insurance costs. It is critical to remember that the best way to keep insurance rates affordable is to maintain Illinois' competitive insurance marketplace. Enacting legislation that has ushered in unintended consequences in other states will hurt our residents financially — at a time when they can least afford it. Transparency works both ways, and it means being clear about what the stakes may be when a marketplace that is working well is manipulated needlessly. Lynne McChristian is director of the Office of Risk Management & Insurance Research at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
