Latest news with #StateoftheState
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Gilchrist joins Democratic lieutenant governors denouncing use of National Guard and Marines in LA
Lt. Garlin Gilchrist at the State of the State speech, Jan. 24, 2024 | Anna Liz Nichols Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist, a candidate to try and become Michigan's next governor, has joined with 20 other Democratic lieutenant governors in condemning President Donald Trump's move to deploy the California National Guard and United States Marines against protestors speaking out against immigration raids in Los Angeles. As of Wednesday, 4,100 California National Guardsmen and 700 U.S. Marines were present in the greater Los Angeles area, ABC reports, with orders to defend federal buildings and law enforcement. About 500 of the National Guard troops deployed to the city have been trained to accompany agents on immigration raids, the Associated Press reports. Since Saturday, the Los Angeles Police Department has made nearly 400 arrests and detentions, with the vast majority stemming from protestors refusing to disperse at law enforcement's request. Two men have been charged with possessing molotov cocktails while the Los Angeles district attorney announced charges against more than a dozen people Wednesday for crimes including assaulting peace officers, grand theft and vandalism. In a statement, members of the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association said they were 'deeply disturbed by the chaos unfolding in Los Angeles caused by President Trump's reckless abuse of power.' They accused the President of using communities as a political battleground for retribution and to project force and fear. 'Deploying federal troops and threatening military action in our neighborhoods is not only unconstitutional, it's profoundly dangerous,' they said. With California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis opposing the president's decision to deploy the National Guard and U.S. Marines within the city, the Association offered its solidarity with their fellow Democratic executives. 'The streets of Los Angeles – or any of our communities – should not be a stage for Trump's political posturing. We stand united against this manufactured crisis, and we will defend the rights to peaceful protest and organize, without federal interference or intimidation,' they said. On Sunday, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and 21 other Democratic Governors issued a statement condemning the president's action as an overreach of his authority. Newsom filed a suit on Monday, arguing the federal government had overstepped, bypassing his approval as the commander-in-chief of the California National Guard in a situation where federal intervention was not needed. A hearing is set for Thursday afternoon. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Michigan House republicans propose ways to cut red tape
LANSING, Mich. (WLNS) — Michigan House republicans are releasing a report they say shows how to confront 'the problem of excessive state regulations, which create barriers and increase costs for skilled workers, small businesses, health care providers, and homebuilders.' In a news release, they claim, 'There is bipartisan agreement that Michigan should cut this unnecessary red tape. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer called for streamlining licensing and permitting during her State of the State Address in February.' On Thursday, a group of republican lawmakers with the House Rules Committee is releasing their Red Tape Reduction Initiative to 'lay out a plan for restoring common sense to Michigan`s state government.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Time of India
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Arizona governor blocks antisemitism curriculum ban, Defends classroom freedom
FILE - Arizona Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, center, applauds for those affected by the Los Angeles area wildfires as she gives the State of the State address in the House of Representatives at the state Capitol with Speaker of the House Rep. Steve Montenegro, R-Litchfield Park, left, and Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, flanking the governor on Jan. 13, 2025, in Phoenix. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin, File) An explosive political clash has reignited in Arizona, where education, free speech, and civil liberties have collided in the form of a vetoed bill that sought to outlaw the teaching or promotion of antisemitism in public schools and universities. At the heart of the storm is Governor Katie Hobbs' decision to strike down a proposal that would have imposed sweeping legal and professional penalties on educators, stirring fierce reactions from both proponents and critics of the legislation. What appeared on paper as a firm stance against antisemitism was, according to Hobbs and many education advocates, a veiled threat to the very core of academic freedom. By introducing punitive measures that held teachers personally liable for how classroom content might be interpreted, the bill threatened to turn lesson plans into legal minefields. The governor's veto has now opened up a broader national debate: Can efforts to combat hatred go too far, to the point of silencing those they claim to protect? A proposal rooted in legal penalties and content restrictions The bill, passed narrowly in the Arizona House with a 33-20 vote and modest Democratic support, proposed a sweeping prohibition on teaching or promoting antisemitic content within public K-12 schools, community colleges, and universities. It extended to any teaching that could create a "hostile environment," including calling for genocide or compelling students to defend antisemitic viewpoints. The legislation mandated that educators found in violation of these rules could face direct legal action. Teachers would not only risk professional discipline but could be held personally responsible for covering financial damages awarded in lawsuits, with no state immunity or financial backing. Governor Hobbs pushes back Governor Hobbs, a Democrat, swiftly denounced the bill, calling it a legislative attack on the state's educators rather than a genuine attempt to fight antisemitism. 'It puts an unacceptable level of personal liability in place for our public school, community college, and university educators and staff, opening them up to threats of personally costly lawsuits,' she stated. 'Additionally, it sets a dangerous precedent that unfairly targets public school teachers while shielding private school staff. ' While affirming that antisemitism remains a serious issue in the United States, Hobbs emphasised the importance of utilizing existing mechanisms like the Arizona State Board of Education to address complaints, rather than imposing punitive legislative overreach on teachers. Critics warn of chilling effects on education Opposition to the bill came not only from political quarters but also from scholars and educational advocates. Many argued that the vague language of the proposal risked misinterpretation and overreach, potentially criminalizing legitimate classroom discussions—especially those relating to the Holocaust, Middle Eastern history, or current geopolitical conflicts. Layers of enforcement and escalating penalties The bill laid out a tiered enforcement structure for violators. In K-12 settings, educators would receive a reprimand for a first offense, a certificate suspension for a second, and certificate revocation upon a third. For college and university staff, the repercussions included a reprimand, suspension without pay, and eventual termination. Moreover, the bill would have required institutions of higher learning to treat antisemitism violations as a negative factor in employment and tenure decisions. Student organizations, too, would fall under scrutiny; any group hosting a speaker who incited antisemitism or called for genocide could be denied official recognition. Lawsuit provision draws intense scrutiny One of the most contentious elements of the bill was the lawsuit provision. Students over 18 and parents of minors would be empowered to sue educators over perceived violations. Teachers found liable would have to pay damages out-of-pocket, with the state explicitly barred from covering such costs. Democrats attempted to amend the bill to replace references to "antisemitism" with 'unlawful discrimination' to align the measure with broader civil rights language and reduce ambiguity, but the proposal was rejected. Political fallout and national context The bill's sponsor, Republican Representative Michael Way of Queen Creek, condemned the veto as a betrayal of Jewish communities and educational integrity. Taking to social media, he labeled the decision as 'disgraceful,' arguing the bill was intended to protect classrooms from 'egregious and blatant antisemitic content.' Supporters of the bill viewed it as part of a growing national effort to counter antisemitism. Parallel initiatives are emerging in other states. In Louisiana, legislators are urging universities to adopt policies to monitor and address antisemitic incidents. Michigan lawmakers are moving to enshrine a formal definition of antisemitism into the state's civil rights law. A precedent with broad implications Governor Hobbs' veto may mark a pivotal moment in the evolving landscape of education policy, particularly at the intersection of free speech, academic integrity, and civil rights. It highlights the thin line policymakers must walk in addressing hate speech without infringing upon pedagogical freedom. At the heart of the matter lies a profound question: How can educational institutions confront antisemitism without undermining educators' ability to teach complex, and often uncomfortable, truths? For now, Arizona's public educators can breathe a sigh of relief, shielded from immediate legal vulnerability. But as similar bills emerge in other states, the national conversation around classroom speech, antisemitism, and educator liability is far from over. Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
In major reversal, Kotek seeks return of fugitive suspected of targeting Asian Oregonians
Gov. Tina Kotek delivers her State of the State address on Monday, Jan. 13, 2025. She recently ordered the extradition of a suspected member of a multi-state burglary ring from Texas to Oregon. (Laura Tesler/Oregon Capital Chronicle/pool) Gov. Tina Kotek on Friday said she has ordered the extradition of a suspected member of a multi-state burglary ring from Texas to Oregon who allegedly targeted Asian households throughout the Eugene area, averting some of the blowback she faced for rejecting the extradition earlier this week. The reversal marks the second time in the past two weeks that Kotek has changed course in an extradition decision in the wake of public pressure. The governor made a more explicit reversal in May regarding the transfer of a woman accused of embezzling from Eugene Weekly, a move the locally-beloved newspaper has called 'an about-face.' This time, the decision to extradite came 'after further communication with the Lane County DA's office and review of the information provided,' Roxy Mayer, a Kotek press secretary, said in an email. The governor is 'still not moving forward' with the extradition of another member of the burglary ring who fled Oregon and who is being held in Texas with an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement hold. 'We were notified two days ago that the Governor's Office has changed their position on funding in [a] case where our Asian residents were targeted,' Lane County District Attorney Christopher Parosa said in a statement. 'I am grateful for that. It will go a long way to allowing us to make that community feel welcomed and protected in Lane County.' Parosa told The Register-Guard on Tuesday that Kotek's denial was out of the ordinary and 'seems to be an attempt by the governor's office to put that financial obligation on the local communities, who, of course, have never had that responsibility in the past.' He declined to elaborate on the state's extradition efforts to the Capital Chronicle but shared a statement in an email. 'It is my hope that further dialogue regarding extradition funding requests will occur between the Governor's Office and the Lane County District Attorney in the near future,' he said. Jennifer Jonak, a board member at the Eugene-based Asian American Council of Oregon, said in a statement that the group is 'grateful that the Governor's office has heard and taken into account the impact on our Asian American community.' Jonak said the council is still reviewing further details regarding the suspect still on ICE hold in Texas. 'We deeply appreciate the hard work of local law enforcement agencies and the Lane County DA's office who have worked so hard to obtain justice for the victims of these race-targeted offenses,' she said. The Oregon governor has the discretion to make decisions on extraditions in light of the sometimes high costs, a factor Kotek's office has highlighted when explaining its recent rejections of extradition requests. Costs of retrieving alleged criminals from other states have significantly increased since 2020, according to data shared by Kotek's office. The average cost of extraditions from 'non-shuttle states' – those are states that don't participate in cost-sharing and inter-state coordination with fugitive return – has risen about 30% since the 2019-2021 biennium. Police in Eugene described the burglaries as part of a 'multi-state crime ring targeting wealthy individuals of Asian descent, to include business owners, doctors, and others,' according to one February news release, including states such as Washington and Idaho. The suspects surveilled and targeted homeowners who they believed were likely to store valuables at home, police say. Authorities estimated similar crimes continued throughout summer and fall of 2024. While some suspects have been arrested and charged, many warrants remain standing nationwide as several alleged perpetrators are believed to have fled the country. Officials have not named or released a country of origin for the suspect. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
While Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker scored wins during legislative session, cellphone ban, other initiatives fell short
CHICAGO — Entering a legislative session amid questions about whether he'd run for a third term, Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker outlined an ambitious agenda that ended with mixed results. In a State of the State and budget address in February that will be remembered mainly for Pritzker invoking Nazi Germany to describe the new presidential administration, there was also a litany of policy initiatives — some of which passed and will now have a tangible impact on Illinoisans and others that went nowhere in the spring legislative session that just wrapped up. 'You don't get everything done in one year. I think the Senate president can back me up on that, and lots of people in the General Assembly,' Pritzker said Sunday at his end-of-session news conference in Springfield, flanked by Senate President Don Harmon of Oak Park. 'Sometimes they spend two years, four years, six years trying to get something big done. I think we've been hyper-successful about getting things done in a shorter period of time than expected.' But Pritzker's mixed scorecard also revealed tensions between his agenda and those in the Legislative Black Caucus. More than once, Black caucus members balked at Pritzker's plans as they didn't see their wants and needs fully addressed during a legislative session that focused heavily on fiscal issues and a tight budget. Indeed, while the governor's backing puts political capital behind any policy proposal, that didn't mean it was guaranteed to pass through the sometimes splintered Democratic supermajorities in the state House and Senate. Here are some examples of where the governor accomplished what he set out to do — and a few places where he came up short. What Pritzker said: 'This session, I'll move forward with legislation requiring all school districts in Illinois to adopt a cellphone policy that bans the use of phones during classroom instruction. More focus on learning will bring even greater success for kids across our state.' Status: Did not pass. A coalition of Illinois House lawmakers blocked the measure when it came to the House late in the session over concerns about unequal disciplinary impacts, according to bill sponsor, Democratic state Rep. Michelle Mussman of Schaumburg. Concerns about enforcement disproportionately affecting Black and brown students became more pronounced as lawmakers reviewed the phone restriction alongside another bill limiting police from ticketing students for minor misbehavior, according to Mussman. Legislators were hesitant to pass a statewide school mandate while also debating a measure meant to scale back school discipline practices, she said. Rep. Curtis Tarver, a Chicago Democrat and a member of the Black caucus, told the Tribune in February he worried about the 'unintended consequences' of a phone ban, including inequitable enforcement. The legislation against ticketing and fines passed both chambers and now heads to Pritzker's desk for his signature. A Chicago Tribune and ProPublica investigation found school districts used local law enforcement to fine students, and Black students were twice as likely to be ticketed at school as their white peers, a pattern lawmakers aimed to end. Pritzker's cellphone policy will have to wait for another session when there's more time to work out the enforcement aspect, Mussman said. The measure would have required school districts to adopt guidelines prohibiting students from using wireless devices, such as cellphones and smartwatches, during instructional time, while providing secure and accessible storage for the devices, before the 2026-2027 school year. The legislation also included a few exceptions, such as permitting students to use phones in emergencies. In the end, negotiations around the measure came down to a 'dance' between ensuring local school boards had control over their own policies while also protecting students from 'inequitably applied' policies, Mussman said. Moreover, representatives were unsure how to implement guidance on 'how a phone might be returned if it was confiscated, or what to do if anything was lost or broken,' she added. Also not quite making the mark: Pritzker's push to expand so-called evidence-based funding for K-12 schools by $350 million. The final plan would boost funding by $307 million, cutting $43 million that usually would go to a grant program designed to help school districts with high property tax rates and low real estate values. What Pritzker said: 'I'm proposing that we allow community colleges to offer four-year baccalaureate degrees for in-demand career paths — like nursing, advanced manufacturing, early childhood education, and beyond.' And: 'I propose we pass the Public University Direct Admission Program Act introduced by Majority Leader Kimberly Lightford last year. It would allow students to know before they apply whether they qualify for admission to any or all of our state's public universities.' Status: One for two. The Pritzker-led initiative to let community colleges offer four-year degrees didn't make it to the finish line even after the sponsor, Democratic Rep. Tracy Katz Muhl of Northbrook, filed a significant amendment following months of negotiations. The bill was intended to create more paths for students to get affordable, accessible bachelor's degrees in areas that need more workers. However, it initially faced opposition from existing four-year schools that warned it could duplicate degree offerings. Toward the end of the session, Tarver told a Senate committee that the Black caucus had 'significant issues with the bill,' including how it would affect four-year institutions serving a high proportion of Black and minority students, such as Chicago State University. A proposal on direct university admissions, however, passed, meaning high school students and eligible community college students starting in the 2027-2028 school year will automatically be offered admission to public universities if they meet specific GPA standards. What Pritzker said: 'We're going to stop insurance companies from blocking access to mental health. We can do that by banning prior authorization for all behavioral health care. And for rural Illinois families and those who live far away from certain medical care, we'll require insurance reimbursement for reasonable travel costs associated with medical appointments' for some distances. Status: Passed. Building on sweeping health care legislation last year, the General Assembly this session voted on a bill to expand a ban on prior authorization for outpatient behavioral health care, meaning patients will no longer need permission from insurance companies before receiving mental health treatment in many more cases. The same legislation also puts insurers on the hook for travel costs in some instances where closer options aren't adequate. What Pritzker said: 'I'm introducing the Prescription Drug Affordability Act to rein in the unfair practices of PBMs.' Status: Passed. Critics often blame large so-called pharmacy benefit managers, such as CVS Caremark and UnitedHealth Group-owned Optum Rx, for inflating prescription drug costs while pushing independent pharmacies out of business, and Pritzker was largely successful this session in barring these practices, as a bill carrying language to restrict PBM costs passed the legislature with broad bipartisan support. The bill now heading to Pritzker's desk would prohibit PBMs from charging insurance companies more for drugs than they are paid by pharmacies and pocketing the difference; prohibit them from giving better reimbursement rates to pharmacies that the same company owns; and require them to pass along rebates negotiated with drugmakers to health plans and patients. Pritzker indicated Saturday that he would sign the measure, which would also require PBMs to submit annual reports on pricing and other practices to the Illinois Department of Insurance. The measure would charge PBMs an annual $15-per-patient fee, with the first $25 million collected going to a grant fund to support local pharmacies. Supporters of PBMs during the session argued Pritzker's plan was flawed, as they see PBMs as saving patients and employers money partly by negotiating with drugmakers. What Pritzker proposed: As part of the package of policies he announced in February, Pritzker said he'd push several other initiatives, including funding to remediate dilapidated state sites and an easier path for voters to reduce or eliminate local township governments. Status: State site funding passed; township idea stalled. Pritzker received his requested $500 million in state capital funds for two key programs on state sites, including $300 million to remake five or more largely abandoned properties, which would help develop properties 'sitting idle' in areas that are 'ripe' for economic growth, according to his budget proposals. The state's previous investments in site readiness have generated over $1.5 billion in private investment and the now-passed initiatives could attract more than $4.7 billion in investment, the governor's office said in February. Yet an effort to consolidate smaller townships across the state did not gain much traction as neither bill in the House nor the Senate made it out of committee. Pritzker's office said in February that many of the more than 1,400 townships operating across the state — which levy over $750 million in property taxes — provide services that are duplicative or could be managed more efficiently by municipalities or counties. Townships often provide maintenance and services for rural areas, such as road maintenance and transportation for seniors. Still, several Illinois townships have been tangled with corruption, such as the recent federal investigation of Dolton Mayor and Thornton Township Supervisor Tiffany Henyard over improper spending of taxpayer dollars. The idea of consolidating townships has faltered for a century, partly due to opposition from politicians seeking to preserve their power, as well as concerns that downstate rural areas could lose their civic identity. ____
