Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

The Policy Tracker: March 2016

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Public Policy-Main-Masthead.png

The Public Policy Project on Ballotpedia produces a weekly Policy Tracker to report on major national and state policy news, covering budgets, civil liberties, education, elections, energy and the environment, healthcare, and pensions. This page contains national and state policy stories from March 2016.

March 28, 2016

United States Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Zubik v. Burwell

Click to learn more about lawsuits challenging the Affordable Care Act.

On March 23, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Zubik v. Burwell, a challenge against an "accommodation the Obama administration has provided for religiously-affiliated employers" who have a moral objection to providing birth control to female employees. The accommodation allows religious nonprofit organizations to opt out of providing insurance coverage for contraception, but it requires them to notify the government of their objection and their insurer; the government can then arrange for contraception to be covered separately. The plaintiffs in the case argued that they were "complicit in sin" in communicating that information to the government because the information was then used to provide women with birth control coverage.[1]

During oral arguments, one of the lawyers for the plaintiffs accused the government of wanting to "hijack" health plans in order to provide contraceptive coverage. The charge was repeated by several of the justices, who asked the government's counsel why it was "necessary to hijack the plans" and why the government doesn't see it as hijacking.[2] Counsel for the federal government argued that the accommodation established a "sensible balance" between religious liberty and the government's interest in providing women with access to contraception at no cost. Additionally, other workarounds or accommodations would defeat the purpose of the contraception mandate, which is for women to be able to seamlessly access birth control.[3][4]

The Supreme Court agreed to take up the case after eight federal appeals courts ruled in favor of the mandate and one court ruled against it. After oral arguments, it seemed apparent from the justices' questioning that a 4-4 split decision is very possible. A split would set no precedent and, according to Lyle Denniston of SCOTUSblog, "would not resolve the existing conflict among appeals courts on the validity of the mandate." The rulings of the appeals courts would stand and "religious groups in different parts of the country would have conflicting obligations if they object to covering contraception." This is the second time in three years the Supreme Court has heard a case challenging the Affordable Care Act's requirement that health insurance plans cover contraception at no cost to enrollees.[5][2]

Sen. Mitch McConnell asks states to stop efforts to comply with Obama climate plan

Click to learn more about the Clean Power Plan and climate change.

On March 21, 2016, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) sent a letter to 50 state governors urging them to stop their efforts to comply with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Clean Power Plan, the Obama administration’s signature climate change initiative. McConnell said that the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent stay of the plan’s implementation validated his comments last year that the Clean Power Plan was an unlawful exercise of the EPA’s authority under the Clean Air Act.[6]

Twenty-nine states and state agencies were victorious in February 2016 when the Supreme Court temporarily halted the plan in order to allow legal challenges to move forward; meanwhile, 18 states have been supportive of the plan. If implemented, the Clean Power Plan will require states to establish plans cutting greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. While supporters have argued that the plan is necessary to mitigate climate change, opponents have argued that the plan will increase electricity costs with little to no environmental benefit.[6]

Pennsylvania budget to become law after lengthy impasse

Click to learn more about Pennsylvania state budget and finances.

After nearly nine months of budget discussion, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf (D) declined to sign or veto a budget bill passed by the state’s General Assembly on March 23, which effectively allows the budget to become law on April 3. The budget does not include any new taxes, but it does include a 5 percent increase in state appropriations to some state universities. The budget also includes an increase of $200 million for state K-12 schools, instead of the $400 million that Wolf had proposed last year. While state Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman (R) expressed gratitude that the budget impasse was over, Governor Wolf argued that this year’s budget only solves short-term problems and creates a larger deficit to address for the next fiscal year.[7][8]

March 21, 2016

Obama administration withdraws plan for drilling off the Atlantic coast

Click to learn more about fracking in the United States.

The Obama administration withdrew a plan to allow crude oil and natural gas extraction off the southeastern Atlantic Coast. If the proposal had moved forward, it would have been the first time that drilling would have been authorized off the coasts of Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell announced the decision on Twitter, saying, “Next 5-year offshore proposed plan protects the Atlantic for future generations.”[9] The department’s press release on the decision cited “current market dynamics, strong local opposition and conflicts with competing commercial and military ocean uses” as reasons for not considering the originally proposed offshore drilling leases.[10]

According to The New York Times, the proposal was dividing coastal and landlocked residents, with the former group opposed to drilling for environmental and viewshed reasons, while the latter group supported the economic growth and energy independence drilling could bring. To some degree, this division fell along regional and not political lines, with 106 coastal towns, 80 legislators, and 1,000 businesses expressing opposition to the drilling plan. According to the U.S. Department of the Interior, which wrote the plan, as much as 3.3 billion barrels of oil and 31.3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas could be recovered from this area.[11]

Oregon governor signs bill removing gray wolf from state's list of endangered species

Click to learn more about endangered species in Oregon.

On March 15, 2016, Oregon Governor Kate Brown (D) signed legislation affirming the state government’s November 2015 decision to remove gray wolves from Oregon’s list of endangered species. House Bill 4040, which was passed by the Democratic legislature, would all but prevent environmental groups from succeeding in a lawsuit challenging the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission’s decision on scientific grounds.[12]

The bill was supported by the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association, which argued that the legislation would prevent unnecessary litigation and aid wolf management. The association's president said the bill "allows us to go forward with wolf management on the ground and hopefully not get bogged down in litigation" and praised Gov. Brown for her "bipartisan spirit" in signing the bill.[12]

Oregon Wild, an environmental group, argued that the bill prevents the state government from being held accountable through judicial review and would ultimately harm wolves. "HB 4040, legislation written to shield the ODFW [Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife] from judicial review and public accountability, directly undermines the Governor’s pledge of good governance," the group said in a statement.[12]

The gray wolf remains a federally protected species in Oregon, meaning it is illegal to kill a wolf except in rare circumstances.

Oklahoma general fund revenue 18 percent lower than estimates

Click to learn more about Oklahoma state budget and finances.

According to a recent report on Oklahoma’s state finances, the state’s general revenue fund was 18 percent below its estimate for February 2016, which was the greatest gap between the estimate and actual revenue so far during this fiscal year. The general fund supplies funding for all of the state’s major operations. As a result of this shortfall, state officials implemented a 7 percent cut across the board to all state agencies. The Oklahoma Senate passed legislation that would use $79 million from the state’s rainy day fund to offset these cuts for public education and corrections. Overall, total general fund collections for the state have been nearly 9 percent lower than estimations for the first eight months of fiscal year 2016. Oklahoma Senate President Pro Tempore Brian Bingman (R) announced the plan to appropriate the state’s rainy day funds. He praised the state’s Senate for quickly addressing the shortfall with this legislation, and he also stated that the legislature had previously avoided making deep education cuts. With regard to future efforts to reduce similar budget shortfalls, Oklahoma’s state finance secretary, Preston Doerflinger, expressed a desire for the state to add “stable, recurring revenues to the next budget,” which is scheduled to begin on July 1, 2017.[13][14][15]

March 14, 2016

Florida votes for renewable energy measure on August ballot

Click to learn more about energy in Florida.

The Florida Legislature unanimously voted to put a renewable energy amendment on the August 30, 2016, primary ballot rather than the November 8, 2016, general ballot. If approved by at least 60 percent of voters, the amendment would require legislators to exempt renewable energy devices such as solar panels from individual property taxes.[16]

According to one of the amendment’s sponsors, state Sen. Jeff Brandes (R), the amendment “opens the door for significant expansion of solar and renewable energy production in Florida."[16]

Its placement on the August ballot is seen as a way to avoid confusion with Amendment 1, a measure on the November ballot that would allow Florida residents to own or lease solar energy equipment for personal use.[16]

Renewable energy groups oppose the November amendment, arguing it would indirectly help state utilities at the expense of energy competitors. Utility groups such as Consumers for Smart Solar argue that the August amendment would make non-solar equipment owners subsidize the costs of electric grid access to those who do own solar equipment.[16]

Federal court to re-hear Texas voter ID case

Click to learn more about voting in Texas.

On March 9, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit agreed to re-hear a challenge of Texas' voter identification law. The entire 15-member court will hear the case, a process referred to as "en banc review." According to The Atlantic, en banc reviews occur rarely. Of the 15 members of the Fifth Circuit, 10 were appointed by Republican presidents. No date has yet been set for oral arguments.[17][18]

Texas' voter identification law has been the subject of ongoing controversy. In 2012, the law was denied preclearance by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. At the time, Texas and other jurisdictions were required by federal law to clear changes in their election laws with federal authorities, a process referred to as preclearance. In June 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued its ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, which effectively rescinded the preclearance requirement. As a result, Texas' voter ID requirement took immediate effect. The law was subsequently challenged, with plaintiffs arguing that the law discriminated against minority groups. On October 9, 2014, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas struck down the law, ruling that it had been enacted "with unconstitutional discriminatory purpose." The United States Supreme Court intervened, ruling that the state could still enforce the law during the 2014 general election. On August 5, 2015, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit appeals court affirmed in part the district court's decision. State officials then requested that the case be reviewed by the entire Fifth Circuit bench.[19][20][21][22][23]

As of March 2016, Texas is one of 19 states that require voters to present photo identification at the polls. Fourteen other states require some voters to present another form of identification. To learn more about voter identification requirements in the United States, see this article.

Utah Legislature approves small expansion of Medicaid

Click to learn more about Medicaid spending in Utah.

On March 8, the Utah Senate passed a bill, H.B. 437, that provides for a small expansion of the state's Medicaid program. Under the bill, eligibility for the program would increase from those with annual incomes up to 40 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) to those earning up to 55 percent of the FPL. About 16,000 Utahns would be newly eligible for the program. The expansion would cost the state $30 million while costing the federal government $70 million. Hospitals in the state said that they would pay $13.5 million of the state's costs.[24]

Senate Democrats criticized the legislation for being far below what is provided for by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which allows states to expand Medicaid to cover individuals with incomes up to 138 percent of the FPL. Republicans praised the bill as a good compromise between the two parties. Democratic lawmakers had simultaneously pushed for a separate bill that would have expanded Medicaid to the fullest extent allowed under the ACA; that bill died the following day.[24][25]

H.B. 437 had passed the House the previous week, and the bill now heads to Governor Gary Herbert's (R) desk. Herbert said he will sign the bill; the state will then need to obtain federal approval for its plan.[24][26]

March 7, 2016

U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear New Jersey pension case

Click to learn more about public pensions in New Jersey.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene in a billion dollar pension dispute between New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) and New Jersey state government worker unions in early March 2016. In 2011, a pension law was passed in the state that was designed to reform the state’s government worker pension system, which is currently about $55 billion short of projections for future benefits. The unions filed a lawsuit, Burgos v. State of New Jersey, against Christie and the state of New Jersey in 2015 after Christie’s proposed budgets for 2014 and 2015 did not adequately address the lack of money in the pension fund in accordance with the 2011 law. The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendants, meaning that Christie and the state government were not required to make additional scheduled payments outside of what was already in place prior to the 2011 law. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to decline reviewing this case leaves the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision intact.[27][28]

Early voting begins in North Carolina; photo ID required for first time in a primary

Click to learn more about voting in North Carolina.

On March 3, 2016, the early voting period for North Carolina's March 15 primary began. This marks the first time the state's voter identification requirement is being enforced during a primary election. Parts of the law first took effect during the 2014 general election.[29]

North Carolina was the first state to approve a voter identification law after the United States Supreme Court struck down portions of the federal Voting Rights Act in June 2013. On July 25, 2013, the General Assembly of North Carolina passed the bill, which was signed into law by Governor Pat McCrory (R) on August 12, 2013. After McCrory signed the bill into law, two lawsuits were filed, alleging that the photo ID requirement discriminated against minority groups. On September 20, 2013, the United States Department of Justice sued the state over the requirements, likewise charging that the law discriminated against minorities and thus violated the Voting Rights Act. On June 18, 2015, state lawmakers voted to relax the photo identification requirement. As a result, a voter who does not possess a valid form of identification may cast a ballot by providing poll workers with his or her birthdate, the last four digits of his or her Social Security number, and an affidavit stating that he or she is unable to present a valid photo ID.[30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]

Voter identification laws have the source of significant controversy nationwide. Proponents argue that such requirements are necessary in order to prevent voter fraud and maintain the integrity of the electoral process. Critics, meanwhile, contend that voter fraud is rare and that identification requirements constitute an undue burden on voters, particularly minority voters and the elderly. As of March 2016, 33 states enforced voter identification requirements. A total of 19 states required photo ID, while the remaining 14 accepted some other form of identification.[38][39]

Oregon Senate votes to eliminate coal use by January 2030

Click to learn more about energy policy in Oregon.

On March 2, 2016, the Oregon State Senate passed a bill (SB 1547) with the goal of eliminating coal from the state's energy supply by January 1, 2030. The bill also requires the state to have half of its electricity coming from renewable sources by 2040. This bill, similar to the state's Renewable Portfolio Standard, excludes hydroelectricity from counting toward the state's renewable energy goal. Senate Democrats cited the bill as a top priority for the 2016 legislative session. Senator Lee Beyer claimed the legislation "strikes a good balance between phasing in clean energy sources for all of Oregon’s electricity supply while taking into account the needs of utilities and rate-payers."[40]

Republicans in the state legislature opposed the bill and tried to prevent it from passing. Senate Republican Minority Leader Ted Ferrioli raised concerns that the bill would not really impact carbon dioxide emissions. Ferrioli said, "Oregonians are being sold a bill of goods with claims that this new mandate will reduce carbon emissions, when in reality we will see no improvement in pollution from emissions." Governor Kate Brown (D) indicated she would sign the measure.[41]

In December 2014, 9.2 percent of the electricity generated in the state came from coal, the 14th-lowest amount of the 50 states. Renewable energy accounted for 11.3 percent of the state's electricity generation in December 2014, while hydroelectricity accounted for 47.7 percent.[42]

See also

Public policy in the 50 states

Click your state for an overview of policy information in your state.
http://ballotpedia.org/Public policy in STATE


Footnotes

  1. ↑ Kaiser Health News, "Supreme Court Takes Up Birth Control Access — Again," March 23, 2016
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 The New York Times, "Justices Seem Split in Case on Birth Control Mandate," March 23, 2016
  3. ↑ U.S. News & World Report, "Religious Objections to Birth Control Brought Before Supreme Court," March 23, 2016
  4. ↑ Vox, "Zubik v. Burwell, the newest Supreme Court birth control challenge, explained," March 24, 2016
  5. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Argument analysis: On new health care case, a single word may tell it all," March 23, 2016
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 The Hill, "McConnell tells states to stop planning for EPA climate rule," March 21, 2016
  7. ↑ Statecollege.com, "Pennsylvania budget impasse ends," accessed March 28, 2016
  8. ↑ The Morning Call, "PA Gov. Tom Wolf letting budget lapse into law," accessed March 28, 2016
  9. ↑ Twitter, "Secretary Jewell," March 15, 2016
  10. ↑ The Department of the Interior, "Interior Department Announces Next Step in Offshore Oil and Gas Leasing Planning Process for 2017-2022," March 15, 2016
  11. ↑ The New York Times, "Divide Grows in Southeast Over Offshore Drilling Plan," March 3, 2016
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 Statesman Journal, "Gov. Brown signs bill affirming state's wolf delisting," March 15, 2016
  13. ↑ Oklahoma state government website, "February 2016 Financial Report data," accessed March 21, 2016
  14. ↑ NewsOK, "Oklahoma finance report worst yet," accessed March 21, 2016
  15. ↑ GovDelivery.com, "February GRF receipts miss estimate by 18%," accessed March 21, 2016
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 16.2 16.3 Tampa Bay Times, "New solar energy amendment headed to Florida primary ballot," March 9, 2016
  17. ↑ The Atlantic, "A Voter-ID Battle in Texas," March 10, 2016
  18. ↑ Politico, "5th Circuit to revisit Texas voter ID law," March 9, 2016
  19. ↑ Governing, "Divided U.S. Supreme Court Lets Texas Enforce Voter ID," October 20, 2014
  20. ↑ The New York Times, "Courts Strike Down Voter ID Laws in Wisconsin and Texas," October 9, 2014
  21. ↑ The Washington Post Politics, "Justice Department sues Texas over voter ID law," August 22, 2013
  22. ↑ Texas Public Radio, "Federal Judge Denies Abbott’s Request To Move Voter ID Trial To After 2014 Election," December 2, 2013
  23. ↑ Brennan Center for Justice, "Texas Photo ID Trial," accessed September 16, 2014
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 24.2 The Salt Lake Tribune, "Long fight over: Small-scale Medicaid expansion wins final approval," March 8, 2016
  25. ↑ Deseret News, "Utah Democrats upset over Medicaid, vow to continue to push for full expansion," March 9, 2016
  26. ↑ Deseret News, "Utah lawmakers extend Medicaid to state's poorest, stymie medical marijuana plan," March 10, 2016
  27. ↑ NJ.com, "U.S. Supreme Court declines review in N.J. pension fight," accessed March 3, 2016
  28. ↑ Justia.com, "Burgos v. New Jersey," accessed March 3, 2016
  29. ↑ News 13, WLOS, "Early voting underway in NC, new voter ID law now in place," March 3, 2016
  30. ↑ Politic 365, "Strict North Carolina voter ID law passes, DOJ could review law," July 28, 2013
  31. ↑ The Huffington Post, "North Carolina Voter ID Opponents React To Bill's Passage, Vow To Continue To Fight," April 25, 2013
  32. ↑ The Washington Post, "Gov. McCrory quietly signs Republican-backed bill making sweeping changes to NC voting," August 12, 2013
  33. ↑ The Washington Post, "The next round of the battle over voting rights has begun," August 14, 2013
  34. ↑ CBS News, "N.C. sued soon after voter ID bill signed into law," August 13, 2013
  35. ↑ Politico, "Justice Department challenges North Carolina voter ID law," September 30, 2013
  36. ↑ WSOCTV.com, "NC to offer no-fee voter ID cards starting Thursday," January 2, 2014
  37. ↑ NewsObserver.com, "Judge to take several weeks to rule on NC voter ID challenge," January 30, 2015
  38. ↑ Election Law Blog, "Big News: Changes Made to North Carolina Voter ID Law," June 18, 2015
  39. ↑ Ballot Access News, "In a Surprise Move, North Carolina Legislature Substantially Relaxes Photo ID Requirement for Voters at the Polls," June 18, 2015
  40. ↑ Oregon Legislature, "SB 1547 Senate votes to move Oregon toward clean energy," March 2, 2016
  41. ↑ The Washington Post, "Oregon lawmakers approve pioneering pro-climate coal bill," March 3, 2016
  42. ↑ U.S. Energy Information Administration, "Oregon State Energy Profile," August 21, 2014
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=The_Policy_Tracker:_March_2016&oldid=8576866"