Latest news with #SenateBill126
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
VT House passes healthcare ‘redesign', now goes to Senate
MONTPELIER, Vt. (ABC22/FOX44) – An act that aims to rein in commercial health care costs passed one of the Vermont legislature's two chambers Wednesday – but it still has a ways to go before becoming law. Senate Bill 126 (S. 126) moves towards reference-based pricing for commercial health plans. 'Reference-based' means that employers would have the chance to set prices for specific health care services, instead of needing to negotiate with insurance companies. However, if a provider is unhappy with the price set by an employer, they would bill the patient for the remainder. Hassan, Noem lock horns over habeas corpus The bill was passed 99-38 with the support of nearly all Democrats and Progressive legislators and a minority of Republicans. While it passed the Vermont Senate in a previous form in March, it will be reconsidered with new amendments added by the House before having an opportunity to go to the governor's desk. Read the full text of the bill hereDownload The bill requires all hospitals in Vermont to submit to the Board 'the number of employees of the hospital whose duties are primarily administrative in nature', as concerns have been raised about how much of hospital budgets goes towards paying people other than physicians, nurses, and others who directly provide medical care. Champlain Place emergency shelter celebrates renovation One other provision of the bill requires a hospital to provide 90 days notice before it eliminates any existing services for budget-related reasons. The bill adds many new reporting requirements with an eye towards keeping down costs, though independent state representative Laura Sibilia said she's keeping an eye on 'especially their potential impact on rural and critical access hospitals like Grace Cottage'. She nevertheless supported the bill in its vote Wednesday. Speaker of the Vermont House Jill Krowinski said about the motivation for the bill, 'Patients and health care providers are counting on a plan that outlines a path to stability, greater access to care, and at a cost that Vermonters can afford.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Annexation compromise likely dead after Tuesday committee
Sen. Jim Buck, R-Kokomo, rejected an annexation compromise amended into his bill in committee on March 25, 2025. (Whitney Downard/Indiana Capital Chronicle) An attempt to bridge the differences between House and Senate lawmakers in an annexation compromise is likely dead after the author criticized the process and rebuked committee members on Tuesday. Sen. Jim Buck, R-Kokomo, has repeatedly authored legislation to rein in what he describes as an 'abusive' form of annexation that's 'tilted in favor of the municipalities.' 'As time goes on, this hunger on the part of the municipality has not lessened for annexation. In fact, it's growing to the point that we're finding ourselves in areas where there's non-contiguous annexation,' said Buck. But Buck criticized an attempt to meld two bills into an annexation compromise, saying he had only been alerted of the effort the previous night. The introduced amendment, which the committee adopted by consent, was a 'strip and insert,' a process that replaces all of the bill's language with a new proposal. '… is it the ruling of the House that you can strip a Senate bill without the author's consent? Somebody needs to make that ruling, because you just did that in committee,' said Buck, who served in the House prior to his tenure in the Senate. '… I dare say, if I did that to one of your bills, you'd be hot. I think it's a very, very poor precedent.' Rep. Dave Hall, R-Norman, called it a mistake not to involve Buck earlier, saying 'I didn't know that it was going to be a strip-and-insert amendment until (the Legislative Services Agency) told me.' 'I would imagine it's probably dead at this point,' Hall said about Senate Bill 126. 'I really want to work with Sen. Buck and the other stakeholders, because I think we made some compromise. I think there's a middle ground. Hopefully, we can still find it.' The heart of the issue hits close to home for Hall, whose district encompasses much of Monroe County. A recent effort to incorporate county landowners into the City of Bloomington has erupted into a contentious legal fight potentially headed for the Indiana Supreme Court. Under the current process, 65% of the proposed annexed area's landowners must sign off on a remonstrance to oppose it. Buck's version would flip the burden by requiring cities to have the support of 51% of the area's property owners before initiating, elminating so-called 'involuntary annexation.' Alternatively, a municipality getting approval from property owners controlling 75% of the assessed value of the area would also meet the threshold under Buck's proposal. Monroe County commissioners appeared to support Buck's underlying bill but took issue with the annexation compromise authored by Hall. One such local leader, Lee Jones, said the city pressured county residents to accept annexation in return for providing sewage services. Homes have been built by developers outside of Bloomington limits with sewage hookups, leaving buyers with no other choice than to join the municipality. Leading House Republican introduces his own property tax plan 'The property owner doesn't really want to be annexed. They're being forced to sign a voluntary annexation agreement so they can flush their toilets,' said Jones. Commissioner Julie Thomas said the amendment 'muddies the waters,' saying that 'Monroe County residents have suffered under the proposed Bloomington annexation' because the 65% bar meant residents had to shoulder legal costs. 'The other thing to keep in mind is any changes to property tax revenues,' said Thomas. 'One of my concerns is that (current property tax proposals are) going to make cities even more eager to annex because they'll get that income tax.' Others shared concerns that a municipality could 'leapfrog' its borders by using one non-contiguous area to incorporate another non-contiguous area. Both versions would end involuntary annexation and eliminate remonstrance waivers, but Hall introduced the ability for cities to add non-contiguous land to their rolls so long as they had the full support of various parties and the property was less than two miles from city boundaries. 'I was trying to find a compromise to where, when you take something away from a city like involuntary annexation — which I wholeheartedly disagree with — you want to offer something in return,' said Hall. A dozen different municipalities have approached the General Assembly seeking exceptions to annexation laws so far, with a 13th — Alexandria — asking for its own exception later that same committee. 'Personally, I don't think we need to really be involved in every single one of those if we have commissioner agreement, landowner agreement and municipality agreement,' Hall said. But Buck panned the annexation compromise, saying 'it's going to be worse than what we currently have when you talk about non-contiguous annexation.' 'Non-continguous annexation is a dream of (Accelerating Indiana Municipalities) because it allows them to go out with new construction and new development without having to pay attention to their inner city,' said Buck. 'You're going to end up with a little daisy chain form of annexation.' AIM, acknowledged their work on the amendment in committee but said 'we don't get everything we want' while testifying as 'neutral' on the annexation compromise. 'It's a workable compromise, in our opinion, with respect to the language on the non-contiguous annexations. It's for both commercial and residential so this can be a great economic development tool,' said Campbell Ricci, the policy and financial resources director for the organization. CONTACT US 'Obviously, we've been coming up here and testifying against the end of municipal annexation for many, many years and want to come to the table and try to find some sort of solution to make this workable.' The 2024 municipal officials handbook from AIM describes annexation as a way to extend city boundaries — and, by extension, public services like sewage and law enforcement — in response to population changes, suburban sprawl or the location of new developments. Annexation can be 'involuntary,' meaning it is initiated by the city, or through a voluntary petition filed by resident property owners. Exceptions to contiguity requirements can include municipally owned or operated property like an airport, a wastewater treatment facility, landfill, golf course, hospital, police station or solar electric generating facility. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
08-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Should Michigan stick with daylight saving time? One lawmaker wants voters to decide
After months of Michigan's often brutal winters, longer lasting sunlight during the day is a sure sign spring is near. And come Sunday, when daylight saving time begins and the clocks spring forward at 2 a.m., the sun will shine even later. It has been a yearly tradition in Michigan since 1973, when the state first began observing daylight saving time. Each year, the clocks move forward an hour in March and fall back an hour in November. One lawmaker in Michigan, however, wants voters to decide whether the state should stick with the practice. Senate Bill 126, introduced by state Sen. Thomas Albert, R-Lowell, would place a question on the November 2026 ballot in Michigan asking voters to decide whether the state should continue to observe daylight saving time. 'Is switching to daylight saving time worth the headaches? Does it have any valid reason for continuing in this day and age? I personally would say 'no,' but obviously opinions differ. We should let the people of Michigan decide once and for all,' Albert said in a statement. SB 126 has 11 bipartisan co-sponsors. In the U.S., daylight saving time traces back to World War I, when Congress passed the Standard Time Act in March 1918. At the time, proponents argued workers would have more sunlight time for recreation. There are stories of daylight saving time originally being intended to give farmers more hours of sunlight to work their fields, but farmers actually made up some of the strongest voices against the Standard Time Act in 1918, according to a 2016 New York Times article. Daylight saving time: Love it or leave it? Tell us in a letter to the editor at It's not the first time a lawmaker in Michigan has opened debate over the value of observing daylight saving time — legislators have introduced bills to stop the practice in recent sessions, although the measures haven't advanced. In order for voters to get a say, SB 126 would need to pass each chamber of the Legislature and be signed into law. Michigan voters have decided on daylight saving twice before. First, in 1968, a measure to observe daylight saving time was narrowly rejected by voters — falling short by 490 votes out of 2.8 million cast, according to a 1972 Ann Arbor Times article. In 1972, voters opted to observe the practice, adding Michigan to the list of states participating in daylight saving time. Currently, Hawaii and Arizona (with the exception of the Navajo Nation) are the only states in the U.S. that don't observe daylight saving time. From Nov. 2022: We're setting our clocks back again, so look to the western U.P. for inspiration Contact Arpan Lobo: alobo@ This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Michigan lawmaker wants voters to decide on daylight saving time
CBS News
07-03-2025
- Health
- CBS News
Michigan voters could decide future of daylight saving time on ballot
This Sunday, March 9, we turn our clocks one hour ahead for daylight saving time. But is the time change something we should continue or get rid of? Michigan state Sen. Thomas Albert has introduced a bill that, if passed, would allow voters to decide. "Time change is the worst," said Senator Albert. To spring forward or fall back. What do you, Metro Detroiters, prefer? "Let it stay light later (laughs) and let us enjoy the sun," said Thelma Oliver. "Personally, I like to fall back. Get that extra hour of sleep," said Stephen Turner. "I like more light because I'm getting older, and I can't see at night (laughs)," said Reshod Sanders. Daylight saving time is approaching, and Albert is pushing for Michigan voters to decide its future. "It's inconvenient; it's not healthy; there's no conclusive evidence that it provides any energy savings, which is the whole reason why this pretext of why we change the clocks twice a year," Albert said. On Thursday, Albert introduced Senate Bill 126. If passed, it would put the question of whether we continue daylight saving time on the November ballot, leaving the time change in the hands of Michigan voters. "What can we do? Well, federal law gives us two options. We can either stay on daylight saving time and flip the clock back and forth twice a year, or we can opt out and stay on standard time. Voters deserve a chance to decide on this issue," said Albert. Corewell Health Sleep Center Medical Director Dr. Nader Mina says the time change hinders our sleep, which is essential to our health. "Recommend adopting a standard time throughout the year rather than just going back and forth. Aligning the solar clock with our biological internal clock, or what we call a circadian clock, has a lot of health advantages for us," said Dr. Mina. It is possible to adjust to daylight saving time. Dr. Mina says it takes about one week. He says to go to bed and wake up ten to fifteen minutes earlier each day, limit caffeine and screen time, and be sure to get enough rest. "You can actually overcome negative effects that could happen. Bad quality of sleep can impair our immune system, so it makes us more susceptible to infections, makes our body weaker to fight viruses, elevated blood pressure, increased risk of heart disease, strokes," Dr. Mina stated. "All adults should get somewhere between 7 to 8 hours of sleep with some variations. But this is actually different by age. So, if you're talking about teenagers, this should be between 8 to 10 hours of sleep. If you're talking toddlers, that's about 11 to 14 hours." Senate Bill 126 still needs to be approved by the legislature before it can be put on the ballot.
CBS News
07-03-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Michigan lawmaker seeks to place daylight saving time observance on the ballot
Michigan residents have voted twice on whether to observe daylight saving time – once to revoke it in 1968, then once to reinstate it in 1972. State Sen. Thomas Albert, R-Lowell, thinks it is time to bring the matter back to the ballot. Lowell introduced Senate Bill 126 on Thursday, calling for the elimination of DST in Michigan, should voters approve that step in the November 2026 election. It has been referred to the Senate Committee on Government Operations. Basically: if the bill is passed by the Michigan Legislature, the matter will go on the ballot. Senate Bill 126 appears to have significant support already with 11 co-sponsors, for a total of 12 among the 38 Michigan senators who have signed onto the bill. The co-sponsors include Republican Aric Nesbitt, who has announced his candidacy for the Michigan governor's race. "Is switching to daylight saving time worth the headaches? Does it have any valid reason for continuing in this day and age?" Albert said in his announcement. "I personally would say 'no,' but obviously opinions differ. We should let the people of Michigan decide once and for all." Daylight saving time doesn't extend the actual day, it just shifts the clocks so that sunrise and sunset happen one hour later. Therefore: daylight lasts longer in the evening. Since 2005, the U.S. has called for the time to change on the second Sunday of March and revert on the first Sunday in November. Michigan currently observes the federal schedule for daylight saving time. But that was not always the case, and the state has had a contentious history with timekeeping and time zones. Numerous attempts have also been made at the federal and regional levels to end the twice-yearly time changes or to fiddle with the effective dates in place of them. One of the efforts that got huge attention was the 2022 Sunshine Protection Act, which the U.S. Senate passed but it stalled in the House. The result would have ended the time changes, and observed daylight saving time year-round. Michigan's history with daylight saving time The implementation of DST itself goes back to the World War I era, when it was promoted as an electricity-saving step during wartime. Albert's announcement makes reference to the upheaval that resulted in Michigan after the federal Uniform Time Act of 1966 invoked daylight saving time — unless a state specifically opted out. Michigan voters rejected DST effective in 1968. Voters then permitted its return in a 1972 election. Both votes were quite close. The federal "year-round daylight saving time" experiment of 1974 invoked the time change from Jan. 6, 1974 to Oct. 27, 1974. Then in 1975, Michigan refused to change its clocks until several weeks after the federal time change. For all practical purposes, that decision placed most of Michigan one hour behind other Eastern time zone states from late February until late April in 1975. Eastern time vs. Central time Michigan's clock discussions are further complicated by the fact that the state straddles the Eastern-Central time zone lines. After World War I, the entire state of Michigan was placed in the Central time zone. Detroit fought that, with the city staking its claim on Eastern time starting in 1915. All of the Lower Peninsula was granted permission in the 1930s to shift into the Eastern time zone. These days: most of the state is in the Eastern time zone; a few counties in the Upper Peninsula are in the Central time zone.
