Health care advocates are speaking out against proposed cuts to a California program that provides in-home care aides to low-income seniors and people with disabilities who are undocumented immigrants. Governor Gavin Newsom's May budget revision would cut about 2,600 people from the In-Home Support Services program, to save an estimated $94 million.

Dania Perea Alonso, undocumented immigrant from Fresno who receives these services is hearing- and vision-impaired and said the program makes it possible for her sister to provide care.

"My personal thoughts on the program being taken away, it makes me scared, angry, and anxious. Undocumented or not, we are all human beings who deserve health care," she explained.

Advocates want lawmakers to find a way to avoid these cuts. California faces a projected budget deficit of more than $27 billion for the next fiscal year. The Legislature has until June 15th to pass a balanced budget.

Ron Coleman Baeza, managing policy director with the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, said it would be cruel to cut the IHSS program, which he says allows people to live at home with dignity.

"It is a poor fiscal decision. Without IHSS, these individuals will need costly and preventable hospital and/or nursing home care, and family caregivers will go without pay," he said.

Christine Smith, policy and legislative advocate with the nonprofit Health Access California, said the state should not go back on its progress toward 'health care for all.'

"Everyone deserves access to the care that they need, no matter where they were born. When everyone is covered, everyone benefits, creating a stronger health system for all Californians," she explained.

Today is the last day for Pennsylvanians to submit feedback to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative about a Biden administration proposal to increase tariffs on $18 billion worth of imports from China.

Pennsylvania manufacturers account for nearly 13% of the state's total output and employ almost 10% of the workforce.

Arthur Stamoulis, executive director of the Trade Justice Education Fund, said the tariff plan would safeguard better-paying manufacturing jobs in Pennsylvania and nationwide from unfair import competition.

"The type of imports that are being targeted are all too often made with sweatshop labor and even forced labor," Stamoulis explained. "The tariffs are needed for U.S. manufacturers to be able to compete on a level playing field. So, this is going to be good for jobs in Pennsylvania, and well beyond Pennsylvania."

Stamoulis noted the Biden administration's proposal to increase tariffs on the semiconductor, renewable energy and automotive sectors has garnered more than 2,500 comments. He added the tariffs aim to boost the number of producers and prevent monopolies, particularly in industries dominated by China. However, critics warned they could provoke retaliatory measures and harm international trade relations.

Stamoulis pointed out the combination of tariffs and investments from the CHIPS Act and the Inflation Reduction Act has significantly reshaped America's manufacturing landscape and has led to a manufacturing boom in Pennsylvania and around the country.

"There were more new factories built in the U.S. in 2023 than at any point in the last three decades and these tariffs are going to help protect that investment," Stamoulis contended. "They're designed to prevent unfair imports overseas from undercutting the production of goods made under fair conditions here at home."

Stamoulis added the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative will review the comments and make a final decision about whether, when and how to impose the new tariffs. His group hopes the administration's plan moves forward.

Signatures are expected to be submitted today for a potential fall ballot question which would largely do away with property taxes in North Dakota.

The Secretary of State will review the signatures sent in by petition organizers, who said property owners are in big need of tax relief. A coalition opposing the idea is intensifying efforts to lay out the consequences.

Chad Oban, executive director of the teacher's union North Dakota United, echoed what other skeptics pointed out: The plan does not explain how the lost revenue would be replaced. In addition to key services funded by local property taxes, such as schools and emergency response, Oban warned of other harm.

"People who have money are buying up property all over the country and turning it into rental property or Airbnbs and that kind of thing," Oban pointed out. "That's going to happen here. I mean, if you're an investor, why not buy property in a place where you're not going to pay property taxes?"

He added it could unfold as North Dakota grapples with an affordable housing shortage. An independent analysis by the Legislative Council estimated a statewide revenue loss of $1.3 billion if the proposal becomes reality. Supporters contended North Dakota government consistently overspends and the Legislature should have no problem covering the losses.

Oban emphasized communities would essentially lose local control in setting their budgets. As for asking the state to help out, he argued smaller communities would have a tougher time seeking funds to buy equipment, like a fire truck.

"You're in a rural area and you can't levy property taxes, so you have to go to Bismarck and ask the Legislature to pay for that fire truck," Oban stressed. "Well, Fargo might be asking for a fire truck, too."

He added Fargo has plenty of representatives to request those funds, while smaller communities do not.

Jason Bohrer, president of the coal industry's Lignite Energy Council, which is among the other 60-plus groups to join the opposition campaign, worries about the loss of school funding, saying it would make it harder to attract workers. He warned of another workforce side effect.

"Not only do you not get potentially the person working at the power plant, you also don't that person's spouse working at the local gym or as a teacher in the local school," Bohrer cautioned.

Sen. Michele Reynolds, R-Canal Winchester and Rep. Mark Johnson, R-Chillicothe, recently announced a significant legislative initiative to address Ohio's childcare crisis.

The bill proposes establishing a "Child Care Cred" program, a cost-sharing model to make child care more affordable and accessible for families, employers and child care providers. Reynolds noted the average annual cost of child care for an infant and a 4-year-old exceeds the average annual rent in Ohio.

The lack of childcare access has far-reaching economic and social implications, affecting child development, workforce retention and overall economic growth, she said.

"It has become clear that urgent legislative action is needed to address the affordability and availability of child care in Ohio." Reynolds continued.

She said the high cost of child care has become an overwhelming burden and financial strain for countless families and has forced many parents, especially mothers, to reduce their working hours or leave their jobs entirely. The bill allocates $10 million to kickstart the program.

Johnson echoed Reynolds' sentiments, emphasizing the need to invest in childcare programs to continue to recruit businesses to Ohio. He noted the challenges faced by employers in attracting workers due to a lack of affordable child care, which impacts both the current and future workforce.

"If we want Ohio to continue to be considered a business-friendly state and environment, we need to invest in our child care programs," Johnson said.

He also highlighted the need to create a workable care system that can retain employees and sustain economic growth.