ILLINOIS Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) signs SB 1, legislation that will raise the statewide minimum wage to $15 by 2025. The Prairie State joins CALIFORNIA, NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY and MASSACHUSETTS in adopting proposals to gradually raise the statewide minimum wage to $15 (CHICAGO TRIBUNE).
NEW JERSEY Gov. Phil Murphy (D) signs AB 3975, which allows Garden State workers to take 12 weeks of paid time off after childbirth or to care for a sick family member, doubling the current limit of six weeks. The new law takes effect in July 2020 (NORTHJERSEY.COM).
The WEST VIRGINIA House tables a bill that would have, among other things, created the state’s first charter schools and legalized education savings accounts for parents to pay for private school. The proposal prompted teachers to immediately vow to implement another statewide strike (PBS NEWSHOUR).
ARKANSAS Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R) signs HB 1145, which will raise the minimum salary for Razorback State teachers by $1,000 per year for each of the next four years (ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT & GAZETTE [LITTLE ROCK]).
The OKLAHOMA Senate unanimously approves SB 85, which would allow school nurses and other school officials to administer the anti-overdose drug naloxone to students suffering an opioid overdose. It moves to the House (SHAWNEE NEWS-STAR).
The IDAHO House endorses legislation that would make the state Wolf Depredation Control Board a permanent government agency. It is now with Gov. Brad Little (R) for consideration (POST-REGISTER [IDAHO FALLS]).
The U.S. Supreme Court rejects an appeal by MARYLAND to review a ruling by a lower court that invalidated an Old Line State law which barred drug makers from imposing large price increases without first justifying those hikes to the state attorney general’s office. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the law unconstitutional in April 2018 (BALTIMORE SUN).
ARKANSAS Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R) signs SB 149, so-called “trigger legislation” that would ban abortion in the state if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns its landmark 1973 ruling legalizing the procedure nationwide (ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT & GAZETTE [LITTLE ROCK]).
NEVADA Gov. Steve Sisolak (D) signs SB 143, a bill that expands state background checks to private gun sales and transfers (JURIST).
The MARYLAND Senate approves SB 196, which would allow driver’s license applicants in the Old Line State the option to identify as male, female or unspecified. It moves to the House (BALTIMORE SUN).
The VERMONT House approves HB 57, which would codify the right to abortion should the Supreme Court of the United States strike down Roe v. Wade. It heads to the Senate (VERMONT DIGGER).
The NEW YORK CITY Commission on Human Rights bars discrimination against individuals on the basis of the way they wear their hair, specifically defending “natural hair, treated or untreated hairstyles such as locs, cornrows, twists, braids, Bantu knots, fades, Afros, and/or the right to keep hair in an uncut or untrimmed state.” Companies that violate the statute face fines up to $250,000 (NEW YORK DAILY NEWS).
The Supreme Court of the United States rules that the 8th Amendment’s ban on “excessive fines” applies to states and local agencies, not just the federal government. The ruling came in the case of an INDIANA man who had a $42,000 vehicle confiscated by law enforcement after conviction for selling about $300 worth of illegal drugs (LOS ANGELES TIMES).
California Gov. Gavin Newsom has a way with words. He also loves the sound of his own voice so much that he often keeps talking when he ought to shut up. Or at least talk out of only one side of his mouth. Such was definitely the case during his recent State of the State address, when he told the world he was backing off of the Golden State’s ambitious high speed rail program. But then when news outlets shockingly reported what he said, he got all bent and accused us of getting it all wrong. Sigh. Worse, as the Los Angeles Times reports, his words activated the Bloviator in Chief, who instantly said he was pulling all federal money from the plan and demanding the state return even more cash it had already received. They also earned him an unflattering nickname from the Sacramento Bee editorial board: Governor Gaslight.
Speaking of fast times in California’s sprawling Central Valley, how’s a Golden State Autobahn grab you? As the Los Angeles Times reports, state Sen. John Moorlach has introduced a bill that would authorize building new lanes with no speed limits on the state’s two main north-south highways, the 5 and the 99. Funds to pay for it would come out of the state’s cap-and-trade revenues and would certainly cost much less than building out the floundering high speed rail system. And, as Moorlach says, folks are pretty much already ignoring the speed limit anyway. As someone who has spent countless hours on both those roads, I’ll attest to that! Wait…did I just admit to something? Never mind. Forget I said anything.
If a game show host and failed developer can become president, why not an alleged comedian? That seems to be the thought in New Jersey, where Fox News reports that former Saturday Night Live cast member and current radio talk blatherer Joe Piscopo is again pondering a run at the governor’s office. The unfunny man, who threatened a run in 2017, told Fox Nation’s “Liberty File” that “somebody’s gotta save the state” from taxes and over-regulation. Yes, just like he saved SNL in the early 80s, widely considered to be the show’s lowest point.
One of the first items on New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s agenda was removing the state’s National Guard troops from the border with Mexico. That caused so much posterior pain for state Rep. Zach Cook that he started an online petition calling for the gov’s impeachment, accusing her of treason. As the Santa Fe New Mexican reports, as of last week it had gathered over 44,000 unverified signatures. Emphasis on “unverified,” since nobody has ascertained how many of those folks might be actual New Mexicans. It’s also worth noting that neither Cook nor any of his colleagues have introduced actual articles of impeachment, which would require some proof the gov had committed an actual offense worthy of that. Because no matter how much pain was inflicted upon Rep. Cook’s backside, that actually isn’t an impeachable offense.
-- By RICH EHISEN
If you’ve been on social media since the beginning of the new year, you’ve likely seen iterations of the 10-year challenge. For those who missed it, it’s a recent trend for users to share photos that span a decade to demonstrate how their appearance may have changed. For those in their twenties, it’s a chance to brag about a #glowup—a play on the phrase “grow up,” where a once-awkward *** now “glows” with beauty and confidence. For others, it’s an opportunity to light-heartedly poke fun at decades-expired hairstyles or fashions.
Beyond the entertainment value, there are lessons to be learned from the challenge (and we’re not talking about the conspiracy theory that it’s a secretive attempt by social networks to fine-tune facial recognition algorithms). From an organizational perspective, taking a step back to analyze how things have changed over a decade—both internally and among competitors—can be a valuable. While social networks and search engines are going to favor the here and now, using deeper research tools to take a broad look at movement over decades can help to identify how organizations respond to changing consumer habits and shifts in markets.
To illustrate this point, we’ve used Nexis® to do our own version of the “10-year challenge” on outside organizations and ourselves. What we found may surprise you.
The ten-year challenge originated on Facebook, so it’s fitting that no company has done more in the past decade to alter the corporate landscape. From marketing to messaging, customer service to employee engagement, Facebook has been a catalyst of changes to the very nature of how consumers and corporations interact with one another. And while Facebook has enacted massive change on others, they’ve seen quite a bit of it themselves. Now about 15 years old, the social media brand’s formative years look a lot different than the tech giant we see today.
In the past decade, Facebook (2009, above, and today, below) has changed visually, marking the shift from a widescreen desktop-first platform, to the vertical, mobile-optimized display of today.
In 2009, Myspace was still considered a Facebook competitor by some tech industry publications. Companies were just beginning to beta launch integrations with the Facebook platform, and the sharing of data between advertisers and Facebook was in its infancy. Illustrating just how much times have changed, a 2009 SEC filing for Blockbuster, Inc. (talk about a flashback) discloses ongoing litigation brought against the “Be Kind, Please Rewind” company for allegedly sharing video rental data with the social network.
Financially, Facebook has gone from Series D venture capital funding round in May 2009, to being a key player in publicly traded stock in 2019. At the end of 2018, Facebook reported $41.11 billion in total cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities in exhibit 99 SEC filings. Pretty impressive given that a decade ago analysts were deeply divided on the then-private company’s valuation—with reports anywhere between $3.7 billion to $15 million.
The lesson: the new kid on the block today can easily be the big man on campus tomorrow.
Royal Dutch Shell, or just “Shell” as the gas giant is more widely known, is the largest company in Europe, according to the Fortune Global 500. And it takes just one look at a side-by-side comparison of its website to see how drastically things have shifted for them in the past decade.
Today (below), Shell has a long legacy of being seen as an oil and gas magnate, although it’s making clear strides toward being seen as a next-gen energy provider of the future. A decade ago (above), Shell’s homepage was less future-focused, and powered by a Flash interface now blacklisted by many devices and browsers.
In 2009, the idea of a widespread, affordable and commercially successful electric vehicle—a clear disruptor to oil and gas giants—was just gaining viability. In fact, the prototype for Tesla’s first sedan was launched in March of that year. At this time, the Deep Horizon Oil Spill that would lead to tightened public scrutiny of all oil and gas companies hadn’t yet happened, and the financial uncertainty caused by Brexit was still years away.
Ten years later, the impact of these events is clearly visibly in Shell’s current positioning. The company’s website underlines a hyper-focus on an expanded portfolio of next-generation energy resources. And while in 2009 Shell was receiving criticism for its decision to withdraw support from the UK’s then-flagship offshore wind power project, today it’s making headlines for merging smart and renewable energy companies into its portfolio of subsidiaries.
If researching the history of companies in this sector tells us one thing, it’s that change is constant—and failing to adapt leads to falling behind the competition and, for some, outright bankruptcy.
While we’re looking at change, we can’t deny the impact the past decade has had on ourselves. The way Nexis® research tools operates, and how it looks, is radically different from 2009.
As consumer research habits and expectations have changed, Nexis® has kept pace. Once wholly powered by Boolean logic and an interface built for research experts (2009, above), today’s Nexis® (below) begins to integrate natural-language search and intuitive filters.
For our part, we’re keeping up to help consumers keep track of information in innovative ways. A decade ago, machine learning was a term only heard in the most technical of circles. Today it’s relatively common, and an especially powerful tool behind our most innovative products.
Learn more about how to take a deep dive into your research.
Buzzwords such as “AI”, “machine learning” and “Big Data” have without doubt become a major topic in today’s tech scene and they are here to stay. But the innovation force behind Artificial Intelligence and its related aspects has also found its way to the center stage of our society. Can Artificial Intelligence be used for the greater good of society? And what role should corporations play in it?
While AI is not a silver bullet, it can help tackle many of our society's most challenging problems on a social, economic and environmental level.Tech giants such as Microsoft and Google have already started applying their knowledge and financial resources to build platforms made for young developers and innovators, who are eager to use AI for the better of our society.
A recent discussion paper created by McKinsey demonstrated how potential applications of AI for social good can also contribute to the implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, a global blueprint to achieve a more sustainable future for all. According to McKinsey’s analysis, AI initiatives are underway that can have a positive impact on SDGs, including:• 29 for good health and well-being• 24 for peace, justice and strong institutions• 13 for quality education• 10 for life on land• 10 for ending poverty• 9 for industry, innovation and infrastructure• 7 for reducing inequality• 6 for climate action• 5 for decent work and economic growth• 4 for zero hunger• 3 each for gender equality; sustainable cities and communities; and responsible consumption and production• 2 each for clean water and sanitation and affordable and clean energy• 1 for life below water
To further promote and encourage the use of AI for social good, the United Nations introduced the AI for Good Foundation in 2016. Its aim is to champion activities to maximize the beneficial side of Artificial Intelligence technologies and innovations through the lens of global sustainable development.
Asked about the likely benefits of Artificial Intelligence on society during its latest Global Summit Frederic Werner, a member of the steering and outreach committee of AI for Good said that “Developing countries potentially have the most to gain from AI, if it's done correctly, but also potentially the most to lose.“
2018 saw an unprecedented surge in natural disasters and global weather anomalies. Increasing numbers of wildfires and an annually intensifying hurricane season are only two of numerous challenges communities worldwide are facing due to climate change. Experts of the European Commission argue that an increased severity and frequency of urban flooding due to intense rainfall will be another major threat for millions of people in the future.
The safety of communities worldwide can be enhanced by using predictive analytics toidentify flood risk zones and vulnerabilities worldwide. According to a recent article published by the Earth Institute at Columbia University, AI could also be used to promote energy efficiency on a city scale to forecast the energy demand. Additionally AI-based simulations can help urban developers minimize the harmful effect of natural disasters.
Fueled with the right data, machine learning can steadily improve its positive impact on our daily lives.AI—along with relatively new tech innovations such as blockchain—are undeniably increasing our ability to solve some of the world’s most urgent challenges.
Transparency International’s just-published annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) reveals the world’s most corrupt countries in 2018. Introduced in 1995, the CPI currently ranks 180 countries and territories worldwide by their perceived levels of public sector corruption with the support of expert assessments, corporate professionals and opinion surveys. The 2018 CPI displays an alarming link between the crisis of democracies and the increase of corruption. Delia Ferreira Rubio, Transparency International’s Chair, states:
"Corruption is much more likely to flourish where democratic foundations are weak and, as we have seen in many countries, where undemocratic and populist politicians can use it to their advantage."
No surprises at top and bottom
This year the Index, which ranges from 0 (very corrupt) to 100 (very clean), saw more than two-thirds of countries and territories scoring below 50, while the average score remained unchanged at 43. According to previous data provided by the CPI, only 20 countries have managed to significantly improve their scores in the past 7 years including Senegal and Estonia.
At the same time 16 countries have seen a substantial deterioration, including Hungary and Turkey. The latter two countries highlight a correlation between the increase of corruption, demonstrated by their decreasing CPI scores over the last six years and the outcome of the recently published Freedom in the World study, annually put forth by Freedom House, in which Turkey was downgraded from the status of “partly free” to “not free”. At the same time Hungary obtained its lowest score for political rights and civil liberties since the fall of communism in 1989.
While countries such as Denmark and New Zealand yet again lead the Index with 88 and 87 points, conflict-torn countries such as Somalia, South Sudan, and Syria once more make up the bottom of the index, with 10, 13 and 13 points. This clearly echos accusations of widespread human rights abuses, a nonexistent rule of law and instability from hostile conflicts.
For governments, the lesson is that demonstrating trustworthiness and integrity can attract investment and business partnerships to the country. However, a risky political climate is only one type of risk that companies should consider when conducting due diligence and risk monitoring. For compliance professionals it is therefore essential to take a closer look at the CPI’s outcome and to identify what makes a country's score increase and decrease, respectively.
Any business operating on a global scale should strengthen their efforts to have comprehensive risk monitoring and due diligence in place, especially considering the global extent of corruption displayed by Transparency International’s CPI. Having in mind that over 80 percent of global economic growth originates from emerging markets and developing economies, this correlates with the fact that today’s global organizations must manage to balance opportunities for growth against risk exposure.
Anti-corruption efforts are stagnating
One revelation this years Corruption Perceptions Index has brought, was the setback anti-corruption policies have to endure in the United States. With a score of 71, the United States not only lost four points since last year, but also dropped out of the top 20 countries in the CPI for the first time in 8 years. According to Transparency International, this is connected to the current threats to its system of checks and balances as well as a deterioration of ethical norms at the highest levels of power.
While the newly elected Brazilian President’s promise to end corruption could support Brazil in moving up the Index from their score of 35, the lowest CPI score since 2012, concerns are being raised that his policies could be a threat to the numerous democratic milestones achieved in the past.
The flawless top?
Besides stagnating results, violations of the rule of law and the discreditation of public scrutiny by populist leaders, high achieving countries are not protected from corruption. Experts from Transparency International suggest that all the CPI’s top seven often fail to investigate and punish domestic companies when they are involved in corruption scandals overseas.
Recent tax and financial scandals such as the Paradise Papers and the Panama Papers have shed light on an often underrepresented correlation between corruption and financial secrecy. Estimates show that up to a trillion dollars of illicit financial flows are leaving developing countries and find their way into tax havens and to the Index’ high achievers.
High-risk regions
As in previous years, the 2018 Corruption Perceptions Index reveals that, with average scores ranging between 32 and 36, the regions of the world most at risk of corruption are Sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia. This means that enhanced due diligence is crucial for any business when dealing with business partners in these regions, because of the increased risk of corruption.
Explore More:
Artificial intelligence promises to revolutionize the way we live and work, as well as drive economic growth for at least the next decade. At the same time, it threatens to disrupt the job market, increase inequality, diminish privacy, and, as some see it, end human beings’ existence. Still, there’s been relatively little government regulation targeting AI specifically. But that could change as it continues to develop.
The revolutionary changes to our everyday lives from AI have already begun. Among many other things, AI powers the personal assistants like Amazon’s Alexa that are increasingly finding their way into our homes, the smartphone apps we use to find the quickest way from point A to point B and the movie recommendations we get from Netflix based on our previous viewing habits.
There are also numerous, less consumer-facing use cases for AI. A report last year from the McKinsey Global Institute analyzed more than 400 across 19 industries. They included the monitoring of factory assembly lines to determine when maintenance was needed; the optimization of delivery traffic routing to improve fuel efficiency and shorten delivery times; and the aggregation of customer demographic, transaction and social media usage data to generate personalized next purchase recommendations.
“We often think about [AI] as something that is hypothetical, that it is out there in the future, and that one day around the corner it will suddenly show up and revolutionize our lives,” said Michael Hayes, senior manager of government affairs for the Consumer Technology Association (CTA), at a summit on AI hosted by the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) last year. “That is happening. We are living it right now.”
The ongoing deployment of AI technologies could give a big boost to the economy. According to a simulation by McKinsey & Company, productivity gains and innovation brought by AI could raise global GDP by $13 trillion over the next decade, an increase of about 1.2 percent a year, four times the increase from the steam engine and double that from the rise of information technology.
AI also promises innumerable societal benefits, including safer highways and more accurate medical diagnoses.
But AI also raises significant concerns. Among the biggest is its potential impact on the job market. AI will create many new jobs but also cause significant disruption in the labor market, according to a report last month from the Brookings Institution.
Brookings projects that in the coming decades about 25 percent of U.S. jobs - roughly 36 million - will experience “high exposure to automation,” meaning over 70 percent of their component tasks might be automated. Another 36 percent, or about 52 million jobs, will face “medium exposure to automation,” potentially impacting 30-70 percent of their associated tasks.
Consequently, “most workers will need to continually learn and adapt on the job” and “seek new positions,” while millions of workers in jobs highly exposed to automation “will face substantial work crises, dislocation, and stints of unemployment,” the report said.
Another major concern about AI is that it might worsen existing societal inequities. As Brookings indicated, automation will impact occupations like administrative support, food service and production that pay “wages of only 50 to 75 percent of the national average” more than occupations in business, engineering and finance paying “more than 150 percent of the average wage.”
There’s also potential for AI to introduce or perpetuate racial biases. For instance, due to the racial makeup of their development teams and test populations, the facial-recognition systems law enforcement began using in the early 2000s have been “more likely either to misidentify or fail to identify African Americans than other races, errors that could result in innocent citizens being marked as suspects in crimes,” as the Atlantic reported.
Privacy is yet another major area of concern, with the current generation of AI relying heavily on data supplied by users of AI technologies.
“It’s every single one of you, in your use of artificial intelligence, your use of Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, every single device you use, every single commercial entity you use,” Osunde Osoba, an engineer at the Rand Corporation, said at NCSL’s AI summit.
As AI advances, that data will be accessed and stored in more and more locations, placing it at increasing risk of misuse or cyberattack.
AI is also making video surveillance equipment more powerful, which, in turn, could make it more prevalent, including in the workplace.
The advancement of AI has elicited dire warnings from some leaders in the scientific community. In 2014 the late theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking told the BBC: “The development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.” Tesla co-founder and CEO Elon Musk, likewise, has called AI an “existential threat” that should be regulated “at the national and international level, just to make sure that we don’t do something very foolish.”
Others, including Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, view AI more optimistically. They say a future in which robots capable of doing anything humans can do decide there’s no reason to keep humans around is neither imminent nor unavoidable, and heavy regulation will only stifle innovation, giving other countries a competitive advantage.
AI is currently subject to regulation in the United States but largely through “existing and sometimes longstanding privacy, cybersecurity, unfair and deceptive trade acts and practices, due process, and health and safety rules” that “aren’t particular to AI at all,” as two members of the privacy and cybersecurity group at the legal firm of Sidley Austin wrote in an op-ed in the Hill last year.
One notable exception to that regulatory framework is autonomous vehicle technology. Thirty states have passed laws dealing specifically with self-driving cars, and governors in 11 others have issued executive orders pertaining to them, according to NCSL.
Prompted by the lack of enforceable federal safety standards for autonomous vehicles, with the Department of Transportation having issued only voluntary guidelines for them, most of the state actions provide for the testing and operation of such vehicles on public roads under certain conditions.
There’s plenty of room for more state action along both the AI-specific and non-specific lines. Hayes said states are uniquely positioned to help educational institutions prepare for the coming changes to the job market, such as by promoting STEM skills development at all education levels and fostering lifelong learning.
Osoba said a safety net may be needed for those whose jobs are impacted by AI, which might not come at the federal level. He also said tougher data privacy protections, like those provided by the General Data Protection Regulation that took effect in the European Union last year, might be necessary in the United States at some point. California actually approved such protections last year.
Osoba also mentioned an idea proposed by New York University’s AI Now Institute: requiring an “algorithmic impact assessment” of the potential societal effects of a new algorithm before it is deployed.
Legislation referring specifically to “artificial intelligence” is currently pending in at least 13 states, according to LexisNexis State Net’s legislative tracking system. Several of the bills provide for the creation of AI study commissions or task forces, while a few deal with education or education funding.
Only four states are considering bills addressing facial recognition camera technology, including Washington, which is considering measures (HB 1654 and SB 5528) concerning the use of such technology by government entities. But at least 27 states are considering bills dealing with the subject of data collection or “data privacy” specifically.
And although there isn’t any pending legislation referencing an “algorithmic impact assessment,” there are bills in 17 states that mention “algorithm.” They include measures dealing with the use of algorithms to censure offensive, political or religious speech on social media (Arkansas HB 1028, Iowa HB 317, Kansas H 2322, and Oklahoma SB 533); calculate insurance scores (Michigan SB 88, Missouri HB 647, Oregon HB 2703 and Virginia HB 2230); and gauge the risk of coronary heart disease (South Carolina HB 3598 and SB 368).
There will undoubtedly be more legislation impacting AI directly or indirectly as it continues to develop. And Hayes noted, “As it becomes more and more ubiquitous in our daily lives, able to take on more complex tasks, AI is going to raise more complex questions.”
Those questions might include: How do you minimize bias in AI systems? What’s the appropriate balance between increased security and reduced privacy in relation to video surveillance? What happens when automation renders a skill that people have spent much of their lives developing, like radiology, less valuable? And how do you reap the benefits of AI, while ensuring the welfare of humans?
It may be left up to the states to answer them.Health care will be a major issue in statehouses this year, from the stability of the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid to state single-payer and prescription drug price proposals. Join us on March 5 as SNCJ Managing Editor Rich Ehisen welcomes two of California’s most respected health care voices - former California Health and Human Services Secretary Diana Dooley and Dr. Micah Weinberg, President of the Bay Area Council Economic Institute - for a discussion of these issues and more during our 2019 Hot Topic Webinar Series: Health Care. Register here to reserve your spot.
At least 18 states have introduced bills this year mentioning the word “algorithm.” They include measures dealing with the use of algorithms to censure offensive, political or religious speech on social media (Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Virginia); automate government decision making (Washington); apportion electoral districts (New Hampshire and Virginia); calculate insurance scores (Michigan, Missouri, Oregon and Virginia); determine nurse staffing levels (New Mexico); and gauge the risk of coronary heart disease (South Carolina). Algorithm bills haven’t been passed by any state so far this year, but they’ve failed in Mississippi and Virginia.
Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R) has proposed a plan to provide $300 million a year in funding for the state’s roads and highways - which would make it the largest road plan in the state’s history - and about $114 million a year for city and county roads.
The largest portion of that money, about $205 million a year for state roads and $88 million for city and county roads, would come from a permanent extension of the half-percent state sales tax for highways approved by voters in 2012. That change would require a constitutional amendment, which Hutchinson wants to put before voters in next year’s general election.
Another $58 million for the state and $26 million for cities and counties would come from a new wholesale sales tax of 3 cents per gallon on gas and 6 cents per gallon on diesel fuel, which would be indexed so they couldn’t grow by more than a tenth of a cent per year. That change would require only a simple majority vote of the House and Senate.
The other $37 million for state roads would come from casino tax revenues, restricted reserves or other general revenues and an increase in registration fees for electric and hybrid vehicles.
The proposal “is the top dollar amount that in my judgment the people of Arkansas can afford,” the governor said, also mentioning that the impact of the motor fuels taxes on low- and middle-income residents would be more than offset by the $150 million a year in income tax cuts the state enacted in 2015 and 2017, and a $60 million reduction in the grocery tax going into effect this year.
“This plan achieves the right balance. It is affordable. It is prudent for our budget and it is reasonable,” he said.
But Ryan Norris, state director for Americans for Prosperity, opposes the idea of “increasing a tax that will hit the poorest drivers the hardest.”
“It...doesn't make sense to negate the welcomed income tax relief to hard-working taxpayers,” he said. “Gov. Hutchinson and legislators deserve credit for cutting taxes but they shouldn’t turn around and take Arkansans’ new-found money every time they put their car in drive.” (ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE, PINE BLUFF COMMERCIAL)
For the first time in 25 years, teachers in the Denver Public Schools system have gone on strike. Over 2,500 walked off the job last Monday when an 11th hour effort to hammer out a new contract with better pay fell apart after 15 months of negotiations.
“We felt like we had to use the last tool in our tool chest to get them to listen,” said Rob Gould, lead negotiator for the Denver Classroom Teachers Association. “We think it’s important that DPS sees and knows and understands what it’s like not to have teachers in the classroom.”
The district said all of its schools would remain open, but student attendance appeared to be down by about 50 percent.
The Denver strike comes less than a month after a teacher walkout in the Los Angeles Unified School District on Jan. 17. (DENVER POST, NEW YORK TIMES)
Jack Marchbanks, head of OHIO’s Department of Transportation, told the state House Finance Committee last week that the department is facing a revenue shortfall of $1 billion a year over the next decade. He said plugging that hole would take a gas tax increase of roughly 24 cents per gallon. (COLUMBUS DISPATCH)
CONNECTICUT Gov. Ned Lamont (D) has pledged to scale back the state’s annual bond authorization to under $1 billion. That would be a 39 percent reduction from the eight years under former Gov. Dannel Malloy (D), during which the state averaged about $1.59 billion in annual borrowing. (HARTFORD COURANT, LEXISNEXIS STATE NET)
ALASKA Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R) has proposed a budget calling for sweeping budget cuts to education, Medicaid and the state’s ferry system to address a projected shortfall for the coming fiscal year of $1.6 billion. “This budget is going to impact all Alaskans,” he said. (ASSOCIATED PRESS)
Last year, Medicaid enrollment dropped by 7 percent in Missouri and by 9 percent in Tennessee, considerably more than the national average decline of 1.5 percent. Health officials in the two states attributed the drops to economic improvement, but advocates for the poor say the states’ stepped up efforts to identify residents who are improperly enrolled in the program and difficulty reenrolling has forced many off the rolls. (ST LOUIS TODAY)
-- Compiled by KOREY CLARK
tah Senate Majority Leader Evan Vickers (R) has introduced a resolution (SJR 9) calling for a convention of the states, under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, to propose amendments to that document “that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for its officials and for members of Congress.”
According to the measure, the federal government “has created a crushing national debt through improper and imprudent spending,” “invaded the legitimate roles of the states through the manipulative process of federal mandates” and “ceased to live under a proper interpretation of the Constitution of the United States.”
Two-thirds, or 34, of the states must issue such calls to convene a constitutional convention. Twelve states have done so.
“I think that the time is right for Utah to join in and to call for that,” said Vickers.
Bliss Tew, regional field director for the John Birch Society, said the country does have an “outlaw federal government” but enforcing the existing Constitution would be a better way of addressing that problem than amending the Constitution.
“[Article V] isn’t to rein in the federal government,” he said. “It’s to correct errors in the Constitution.”
And Gayle Ruzicka, president of the Utah Eagle Forum, said convening a constitutional convention would also open the door for all kinds of constitutional changes.
But Sen. Daniel Thatcher (R), chairman of the Senate Government Operations and Public Subdivisions Committee, which voted 5-2 last week to send SJR 9 to the full chamber, said the way things are now isn’t working “and we need to try something different.” (SALT LAKE TRIBUNE, LEXISNEXIS STATE NET)
With their state facing a $1.6 billion budget deficit for the coming fiscal year, Alaska lawmakers need to make some tough decisions about what spending to cut. But the state’s House has been at a standstill for almost a month because members haven’t been able to choose a House speaker.
Republicans hold 23 of the chamber’s 40 seats, but three of them, along with one independent, have voted against GOP candidates for the job, narrowly denying them the 21 votes they needed to secure the position.
Until a speaker is chosen, the House won’t be able to form committees, vote on bills or carry out most other legislative functions.
“I think Alaskans pride themselves on our politics being unusual,” said John-Henry Heckendorn, an Anchorage-based political strategist. (HILL)
Midway through South Dakota’s legislative session, 10 percent of the bills under consideration are so-called “vehicle bills,” measures with no meaningful text that can still be acted upon and have text added at any point in the legislative process through an amendment. In the previous six sessions, the number of vehicle bills has ranged between 1.7 percent and 5.7 percent, according to the state’s Legislative Research Council. House Majority Leader Lee Qualm (R) said the surge in such bills this year was the result of a “perfect storm” of factors, including lawmakers not getting information they needed from state agencies and other organizations by the state’s Jan. 30 filing deadline. (ARGUS LEADER [SIOUX FALLS])
NORTH DAKOTA Gov. Roy Cooper (D) has appointed state Supreme Court Justice Cheri Beasley to replace retiring Chief Justice Mark Martin. Beasley will be the first black woman to serve as the state’s top judge. (NEW & OBSERVER [RALEIGH])
Leaders of 19 liberal organizations, including Moveon, NARAL and Our Revolution, the group that grew out of the 2016 presidential campaign of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), are calling for NEW YORK to keep its “fusion voting” system, allowing a candidate to appear on a ballot multiple times under different major and minor party designations. Some Democratic Party leaders in the state have called for the Legislature to end fusion voting this year, saying it gives minor parties too much influence. (TIMES UNION [ALBANY])
Last November, 53 percent of Utah voted endorsed a ballot measure to expand eligibility for the state’s Medicaid program. Last week, Gov. Gary Herbert (R) signed legislation to do that, but the bills he signed will provide coverage for far fewer people than the voter-approved proposition called for, and at a much higher cost to the state.
Proposition 3 called for expanding Medicaid eligibility to folks living at 138 percent of the federal poverty line. That would have ensured health coverage for tens of thousands of people in the Beehive State currently making less than $17,000 a year. But the measure Herbert signed last week (SB 196) sets eligibility at 100 percent of the federal poverty line, or about $12,000 a year. While the ballot measure would have extended coverage to about 150,000 people, SB 196 cuts that figure to approximately 80,000. The remaining 70,000 will now either have to buy subsidized coverage through the federal health benefits exchange, or go without.
The new law also adds a spending cap and work requirements not contained in the ballot measure.
It also depends on obtaining a first-of-its kind waiver from the Trump administration. Until now, the 36 states and District of Columbia that have expanded Medicaid did so at the 138 percent level as a condition of receiving the full amount of available federal funding. Although Utah is not implementing a full expansion, it is seeking to obtain the full funding. The Trump administration – and the Obama administration before it – has previously rejected similar requests to expand at less than the full 138 percent. Utah has already been denied one such request.
The legislation has drawn significant opposition from consumer and health advocates, who say lawmakers are subverting the will of the voters. Herbert denied the claim.
“I do not accept the characterization that SB 96 ignores the will of the people. I see this as a thoughtful effort to implement the will of the people to care for the poor with quality health care with the added benefit that it can be sustained over the long term with no reduction in other important social services,” he said.
Medicaid expansion is likely to not be the last voter-endorsed measure to face a drastic overhaul. Lawmakers have already made major changes to Prop 2, which authorized medicinal marijuana use, and have set their eyes on Prop 4, which changes the state’s redistricting process. (SALT LAKE TRIBUNE, WASHINGTON POST, NEW YORK TIMES, ASSOCIATED PRESS)
Former California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) was famous for his “paddle to the left, paddle to the right” philosophy of governance. But in his State of the State address last Tuesday, new Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) made clear he is paddling his own way now, and likely altering a few of Brown’s signature programs in the process.
Speaking to a packed Assembly chamber, Newsom called for scaling back a multi-billion dollar Brown proposal to insert two massive tunnels in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to transfer water from Northern California to Southern California. Newsom instead said he would support a single tunnel project.
He also took aim at another signature Brown project: high speed rail. Saying it “would cost too much and, respectfully, take too long” to complete a planned HSR line from San Diego to San Francisco, Newsom said his administration would focus on completing the initial Central Valley segment between Bakersfield and Merced. Any future building would depend on heretofore nonexistent federal funding.
He pushed back, however, on claims by news outlets, Republican politicos and even President Trump that he was fully pulling the plug on the system, saying to do so would be a waste of the billions of dollars already spent on the project. He dismissed out of hand as “fake news” a tweet by President Trump lauding the end of California’s “green disaster” and calling for the state to return $3.5 billion in federal funding for the program. (SNCJ)
Embattled VIRGINIA Gov, Ralph Northam (D) said in a statement released last week that 10,992 Old Dominion residents with felony convictions have had their voting rights restored since he took office last year. Northam is facing calls to resign after acknowledging he had worn blackface at an event in college. (HILL [D.C.], VIRGINIA GOVERNOR’S OFFICE)
WISCONSIN Gov. Tony Evers (D) said he is signing the Badger State up with the U.S. Climate Alliance, a group of mostly Democratic governors that says it is “committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the goals of the Paris Agreement.” At least 20 governors belong to the group, including fellow Great Lakes Democratic Govs. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, Tim Walz of Minnesota and J.B. Pritzker of Illinois. Republican Govs. Larry Hogan of Maryland and Charlie Baker of Massachusetts are also members. (MILWAUKEE JOURNAL-SENTINEL, WISCONSIN PUBLIC RADIO)
IOWA Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) said she will soon file legislation to allow Hawkeye State women to obtain birth control without first acquiring a prescription. Under her pending proposal, pharmacists would have a standing order allowing them to sell birth control pills and other forms of contraception without the patient having a doctor’s prescription. (DES MOINES REGISTER, WATERLOO CEDAR FALLS COURIER)
Citing the frustration of parents, FLORIDA Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) called for a grand jury investigation into whether Sunshine State Schools are following laws enacted in the wake of the attack that left 17 dead at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland. His request must be approved by the Florida Supreme Court. (ASSOCIATED PRESS, ORLANDO SUN-SENTINEL)
-- Compiled by RICH EHISEN