Las Vegas, NV - Republican leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives have delayed the repeal vote on the health care reform law, in light of the tragic shootings this weekend in Arizona. But they have pledged to repeal the new law, calling it a budget-buster.

Nevadans may feel justifiably confused after listening to the pro and con arguments. Some say repeal will save money; others insist it will cost billions. According to Michael Ginsburg, Southern Nevada director of the group Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada (PLAN), when Nevada factors in the state's high population of senior citizens, plus those who are unemployed and children without health insurance, repeal could be expensive for the Silver State.

"For us, if we were to repeal the Affordable Care Act, would translate into hundreds of millions of dollars in uncompensated care for our hospitals - which are struggling as it is, across the state."

Joanne Grossi, regional director of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources, points out that the new law will save at least $230 billion over the next 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

"Anyone who believes that repealing this will save the government money, they're wrong. We really have true, nonpartisan estimates that health care reform is actually going to save us money - and make people healthier."

Nevada seniors stand to lose both preventive care and new improvements to Medicaid prescription drug coverage if the plan is repealed, adds Ginsburg.

"Changing that for those seniors is really, really catastrophic; I mean, you could be adding thousands and thousands of dollars onto each one of Nevada's seniors every year, which is absolutely ridiculous."

Nevada's congressional delegation is split along party lines on the issue. Republicans Dean Heller and Joe Heck have campaigned against the Affordable Care Act, while Democrat Shelley Berkley has been a major supporter.



get more stories like this via email

A plan to use public money to fund vouchers for students to attend private schools is drawing pushback from Louisiana teachers, who say the plan could devastate the public school system.

The program making its way through the Louisiana Legislature would be first available to low-income students and by the 2027-2028 school year, it would be available to all students.

Larry Carter, president of the Louisiana Federation of Teachers, predicts the plan could cause significant budget cuts for public schools.

"These universal voucher bills are a step in the wrong direction," Carter argued. "We've seen in other states around the country, like Arizona and Ohio, where these bills have been passed, they're now facing a budget crisis, and we're hoping that we cannot go down that same road."

Carter pointed out the education savings account program known by the acronym LA GATOR would allow as much as $7,500 per student from families below 250% of the Federal Poverty Line, and $5,000 for those who make more.

The plan, House Bill 745 and companion Senate Bill 313, has been approved by the state House. The Senate is expected to vote on it by Friday or Monday.

Carter explained teachers are concerned classroom standards currently mandated for public schools would not be upheld in private or parochial schools.

"We want to make sure it has some accountability," Carter emphasized. "We think that's at least giving all education stakeholders and parents an opportunity to talk about whether this program is successful or not. And through accountability practices, we think that will help."

There is concern the plan would force public schools to eliminate many positions and needed programs. Carter fears the loss of funds could deprive students of the benefits of a public school education.

"If we're cutting that funding stream, Louisiana students will have fewer nurses and counselors, less options for after school program, and certainly limited access to field trips and AP courses that help prepare them for their next step in life," Carter outlined.

New York City advocates are excited yet concerned about the 2025 budget.

In recent weeks, funding was restored to certain education programs such as shelter-based community coordinators. They helped more than 40,000 city students living in temporary housing. Funding for school psychologists and social workers was also restored.

Randi Levine, policy director at Advocates for Children of New York, said other programs need to be saved.

"Funding is running out for the Mental Health Continuum, which is a program that provides students in 50 schools with access to expedited mental health care, and is very important especially when we have a youth mental health crisis," Levine asserted.

Other programs facing cuts include restorative-justice practices which help schools reduce suspension. The budget's feedback has been mixed considering many programs will stay, although some could still be cut. Although the programs began using short-term funding, Levine feels their lasting effects in a post-pandemic world make them a permanent necessity.

Immigrant education programs are on the chopping block too. Promise NYC provides child care for kids regardless of their immigration status, and the immigrant family communication and outreach initiative helps parents who do not speak English learn about their kids' school.

Murad Awawdeh, president and CEO of the New York Immigration Coalition, said it would be a mistake to cut funds for things such as the language access program.

"That program, which would expand language access across the city of New York, which would build an interpreter bank as well as build translation cooperatives across the city and could save the city millions of dollars, was defunded and not restored," Awawdeh pointed out.

He added the recently passed state budget does give New York City enough funding to restore certain initiatives, but not enough to bolster others. Awawdeh argued with housing unaffordability continuing and people struggling to make ends meet, the city has to step up to aid everyday New Yorkers.


get more stories like this via email

It might not be surprising that North Dakota ranks low for electric vehicle adoption, but existing owners say they are frustrated elected officials here resist the movement, making it hard for this consumer activity to flourish in a rural state.

Gov. Doug Burgum and the state's two U.S. senators have recently spoken out against regional and federal efforts to aid in the transition to EVs.

Shannon Mohn, a member of the North Dakota EV Owners group and automotive instructor at Minnesota State Community and Technical College, said there is too much politics surrounding the issue, leaving states such as his behind in adding fast charging stations. He wants officials to know there are people in the region not worried about being left in the cold by EVs.

"I don't worry about driving anywhere with my electric car, I really don't," Mohn emphasized. "I can make it there and back without a problem."

He noted a big factor is that he can charge it at home and park it in his garage on cold nights. Mohn acknowledged it takes additional planning to cross North Dakota, given the current infrastructure landscape. North Dakota is using federal money awarded to states to enhance its charging network, but Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., has contended incentives are a waste, arguing there is not a strong market.

Mohn pointed out while EVs might see their range affected by the cold, gas-powered cars are less efficient in the winter, too. He feels dotting the state with more charging stations will naturally attract more EV owners. He also contended there is an economic benefit for rural areas because tourists are likely to make a pit stop in smaller towns if they can charge up.

"I won't go and visit a town that doesn't have a charger if I'm traveling," Mohn explained. "I will bypass their towns and go to a town that does have a charger."

The Bureau of Labor Statistics said even with political forces and other factors at play, many forecasts still expect a strong acceleration in EV adoption. Mohn is glad the Biden administration has been aggressive in gaining momentum but feels some mandates invite opponents to ramp up attacks deemed political. He recommends more outreach for the public to learn about the cars as the industry monitors growth trends.


get more stories like this via email