Mediaboss Marketing

TOPEKA As the dust settles on the legislative maneuvering of the chaotic 2024 session, disability rights advocates applaud a budget provision meant to shorten wait times for disabled Kansans who need services.

Lawmakers overrode Gov. Laura Kellys veto to implement a provision that puts caps on the wait times for Kansans who want to receive state-funded disability services. Included in the state budget, the provision would forbid the waiting lists from exceeding 6,800 people during the fiscal year that begins in July.

Rocky Nichols, executive director of the Disability Rights Center of Kansas, said the change is incredibly positive.

It tells me the Legislature takes a waiting list seriously, Nichols said. This is going to have a huge impact. Hats off and I really want to commend the Legislature for coming up with these provisos, because its a very innovative way to ensure that youre actually going to reduce the waiting list. You set a cap.

The latest data shows 7,698 Kansans currently waiting for services, with 5,342 people on the intellectual and developmental disabilities waitlist and 2,356 people on the physical disability waitlist.

The Legislature set aside $45.8 million, available for fiscal year 2025, to fund services for 1,000 Kansans who are currently on the states waiting lists, divided evenly between people with intellectual and physical disabilities and those who have physical disabilities.

If enrollment trends continue along the same lines as last year, when 561 new people enrolled in the intellectual disability waitlist, the proposed new funding would not be enough to lessen the waitlist on its own.

During the veto override debate Monday, Sen. Rick Billinger, a Goodland Republican, said lawmakers couldnt continue to kick this down the road.

Folks, we put $38 million into a soccer tournament, Billinger said. If we cant put dollars in here for the IDD and the PD, we better refocus. And I believe that this is a step to try to get us to do better, because we must do better. Were failing this community.

The law requires KDADS by January to provide the Legislature with an estimate on the costs of keeping this cap in place. The Legislature will have to pass a supplemental funding bill to cover the costs of keeping the lists below the caps of 4,800 for the IDD waitlist and 2,000 for the PD waitlist.

The waitlists have been a long-intensifying problem. Kansans with intellectual or developmental disabilities are eligible for Medicaid-funded support waivers that cover a variety of needed services. People who want to receive this assistance are placed on a waiting list supervised by KDADS.

But wait times can last more than 10 years, and more and more Kansans have been added to the slow-moving lists. Kansas Reflector examined this issue last year in the series On the List.

The veto override works to ensure 500 new Kansans with intellectual and developmental disabilities are eliminated from our historic, record-high IDD waitlist, and will start receiving essential HCBS waiver services, said Sara Hart Weir, executive director of the Kansas Council on Developmental Disabilities. Moreover, this veto override caps the IDD waitlist in Kansas at 4,800, which is another long-term step toward eliminating our IDD waitlist in the Sunflower State.

Kelly said she supported finding a solution to the wait times. But she vetoed the caps because of concerns about capacity if they were implemented.

By instituting a cap on the number on the waitlists, the agency will be unable to maintain reserve capacity intended for specialty populations such as children coming into DCF custody, Home and Community Based Service, Kelly said in a veto explanation. In addition, continually adding slots to these waivers haphazardly or thoughtlessly capping the waitlist number will not be sufficient or sustainable unless provider capacity is also addressed.

The Senate voted 28-12 and the House 116-9 to override the governors veto.

Im not concerned about creating new problems. The problems continue to be there, said Sen. Molly Baumgardner, R-Louisburg. And they continue to be ignored by the agency. I support this veto override effort. And I urge the governor to have her secretary get the work done that needs to be done so that we as a legislature can clearly address the needs of the kids that are on the waitlist.

See the original post here:
'Incredibly positive': Disability advocates commend Kansas Republicans' effort on waitlists Kansas Reflector - Kansas Reflector

A 160-year-old abortion ban written before Arizona became a state that punishes doctors with prison time is now one step away from being repealed after a pair of Republicans in the state Senate on Wednesday crossed party lines to join Democrats in voting it down.

On April 9, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a near-total ban from 1864, which forbids all abortions except to save a womans life, trumps one passed in 2022 that strictly limits procedures performed after 15 weeks of gestation. That decision roiled the states political landscape, and a movement to repeal the law, supported mostly by Democratic lawmakers, emerged in the Arizona legislature.

Last week, following multiple blocked attempts, the state House of Representatives successfully voted to repeal the law, and on Wednesday the state Senate finalized that effort.

After Republican Sens. Shawnna Bolick and T.J. Shope broke away from their party to side with Democrats, House Bill 2677, which seeks to repeal the 1864 law, was approved by a vote of 16-14. The measure is now on Gov. Katie Hobbs desk, and the Democrat has vowed to sign it. A spokesman for her office said that she will do so on Thursday.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

In the Senate, the bills passage followed nearly three hours of heated debate, during which anti-abortion supporters in the gallery and Republican lawmakers on the floor excoriated Bolick and Shope for their votes.

Sen. Anthony Kern, R-Glendale, said it was insanity that the duo claim to be pro-life while voting in a way that violates the core values of the Republican party and allows abortions to continue in Arizona. Repealing the 1864 law means that the 15-week law, which permits elective abortions up to its gestational deadline, will take effect instead.

The craziest thing Ive seen and heard is, Im pro-life, yet Im going to vote to repeal the abortion ban. Its insanity to me, Kern said.

Sen. Jake Hoffman, who heads up the far-right Arizona Freedom Caucus, said the near-total abortion ban is one of the best, strongest, pro-life measures in the country, and that the law is representative of and reflective of our founding fathers intent.

That two Republicans crossed party lines to end that ban, Hoffman said, is unconscionable.

It is disgusting that this is the state of the Republican Party today, he said.

And Sen. David Farnsworth, R-Mesa, called on voters to take note of Shope and Bolick bucking their party.

Voters need to be aware when this happens - when we lose our conservative unity and Senators join the other side, he said.

Bolick, who is the wife of Clint Bolick, one of the four Supreme Court Justices who reinstated the 1864 law, defended her decision to repeal it by describing her history with pregnancy. One of her pregnancies, she explained, was unviable and ended in a D&C, a surgical procedure used in about half of abortions.

She said she was unconvinced that the 1864 law would allow women facing similar health issues to get the care they need. The laws exception is strictly reserved for immediately life-threatening emergencies, but outlaws abortions aimed at preventing injury to a woman.

Many women dont have textbook pregnancies, Bolick said.

Shope, meanwhile, did not explain his vote and refused to answer questions from reporters afterwards.

David Gowan, a Republican from Sierra Vista, compared Wednesdays vote to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Today feels like 9/11, he said.

At stake was literally life and death for Arizonans, said Farnsworth.

Have we become so evil? he said. God is watching.

Despite the action from the state legislature, the 1864 law is likely to remain in place for some time. Bills passed by lawmakers dont go into effect until 90 days after the legislative session ends.

But, with budget negotiations still in the beginning stages, that isnt expected to occur for several more weeks, pushing the repeals effectiveness date into August at the earliest months after the law is actually set to be revived.

In its ruling, the Arizona Supreme Court justices delayed the enforcement of the 1864 law by two weeks. Coupled with a separate court order staying the high courts decision for 45 days, and a motion from Attorney General Kris Mayes that failed to convince the justices to reconsider their ruling but did succeed in buying a few more days of time, the Civil War-era law wont be fully enforceable until June 27. Until then, women can obtain an abortion until 15 weeks of gestation, after which only life-threatening circumstances or a danger of permanent injury are sufficient to receive a procedure.

The only way the Arizona legislatures repeal could have made an impact before the 1864 law is reimplemented would have been via an emergency clause, which would have made the bill effective immediately upon the governors signature. But adding such a clause to a bill requires a supermajority vote in each legislative chamber a political impossibility as only five Republicans total supported the bid from Democrats to repeal the law and 16 would have been needed to add an emergency clause.

Instead, reproductive rights advocates are looking to use legal maneuvers to delay the high courts ruling as much as possible before voters have a chance to weigh in on the legality of abortion in November. The Arizona Abortion Access Act, which would enshrine the procedure as a right in the state Constitution, is headed for the ballot, having exceeded its signature requirement. The act preserves a womans right to an abortion up to the point of fetal viability, widely regarded as 24 weeks of gestation, and includes ample exceptions after that time if a doctor deems an abortion is necessary to safeguard the patients life, physical or mental health.

Earlier this week, Mayes filed a motion requesting that the Arizona Supreme Court delay enforcement of the 1864 law for 90 more days while her office considers whether to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. And on Wednesday, shortly after the state Senate voted to strike down the 1864 law, Planned Parenthood Arizona filed a motion with the high court requesting that it stay its ruling until the repeal can be implemented.

We see reproductive freedom champions at the executive level, with Governor Hobbs and Attorney General Mayes, who are working overtime to go back to the courts and continue to argue that this law should not go into effect, said Athena Salman, director of the Arizona campaigns for pro-abortion organization Reproductive Freedom for All during a news conference held after the Senate vote.

We already see that the effective date has been pushed back to June 27, she added. That is where the fight stands now.

And, despite the looming threat of the Civil War-era ban on the horizon, an executive order issued last year by Hobbs makes it unlikely that the law will ever be used against a doctor. The order centralizes prosecutorial authority for abortion law violations in the state attorney generals office, and Mayes has vowed never to take any doctor to court. Several county attorneys criticized the order and warned that they would launch a lawsuit against it for infringing on their right to take on cases as elected officials, but no such lawsuit has materialized.

Abortion rights supporters celebrated the successful repeal, but tempered their applause with acknowledgements that the vote doesnt constitute immediate relief from the near-total ban.

Pima County Attorney Laura Conover, who joined Planned Parenthood Arizona in court against the 1864 law, said in a written statement that she hopes the vote can give providers across the state some peace of mind. But, she said, her office will continue working on challenging the law before it can take effect in June.

Todays vote comes as partial relief: common sense can prevail. We dont live in 1864, and neither should our laws, she said. In the meantime, without an emergency clause, my team will continue to work with nationwide subject matter experts on what will be our next move in the courts.

Mayes, too, promised to keep fighting against the law, echoing Conovers disappointment that no emergency clause was added to the repeal bill.

Todays vote by the Arizona Senate to repeal the draconian 1864 abortion ban is a win for freedom in our state, she said, in a written statement. However, without an emergency clause that would allow the repeal to take effect immediately, the people of Arizona may still be subjected to the near-total abortion ban for a period of time this year. Rest assured, my office is exploring every option available to prevent this outrageous 160-year-old law from ever taking effect.

Vice President Kamala Harris placed the blame for the 1864 law, and the 15-week ban that remains in place in the interim, squarely on the shoulders of former President Donald Trump. As President Joe Biden seeks a second term, his reelection campaign has sought to highlight Trumps connections to abortion bans across the country. The Republican appointed three justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, reshaping the bench into a conservative majority that later struck down Roe v. Wade, and has himself bragged about being responsible for the end of the constitutional right to abortion.

Donald Trump is the architect of this health care crisis in Arizona and across the country hes said so himself, Harris said, in a written statement. And hes ready to go even further by banning abortion nationwide with or without the help of Congress. We cannot allow these attacks on reproductive freedom to stand.

A national ban would nullify any abortion protections approved by voters in November, if Arizonans vote to pass the Arizona Abortion Access Act.

Heather Williams, the president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, added that the November election will be critical for the preservation of abortion rights beyond the Arizona Abortion Access Act. Awarding Democrats a legislative majority, she said, is the only way to block future attacks from Republican lawmakers most of whom opposed the repeal and many of whom have backed restrictive legislation in the past.

Make no mistake: Democrats fierce persistence against weeks of Republican obstruction is the only reason the 1864 ban was repealed and this shows a clear contrast in leadership. As Republicans regroup to defend their 15-week ban and work to undermine the upcoming abortion ballot measure in Arizona, we are focused on flipping the two seats in each chamber that will deliver Democratic majorities in Arizonas legislature, Williams said, in a written statement. The only way to protect and expand reproductive freedoms in Arizona is to elect Democrats to the state legislature.

The GOP majority in the legislature has signaled an interest in sending competing abortion-related proposals to the ballot in November as a way to detract support from the Abortion Access Initiative.

And Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, an anti-abortion organization that is behind most of the states restrictive laws, said on Wednesday that the focus should now turn to defeating the pro-abortion initiative. CAP is a backer of the It Goes Too Far Campaign, which seeks to convince voters that the Arizona Abortion Access Act is too extreme.

Today, the Arizona Senate has voted to repeal the pre-Roe law that once protected both the lives of unborn children and the well-being of mothers, Herrod said in a post on social media site X, formerly Twitter. I acknowledge and commend the courage of those lawmakers who stood resolutely with the unborn and their mothers. Now, in Arizona, our focus is to expose and defeat the extreme abortion amendment likely to be on the November ballot.

Jake Warner, an attorney for Alliance Defending Freedom who argued in court to reinstate the 1864 law, lamented the Senates vote but said the effort to keep the law in place isnt over.

We commend those who stood their ground to protect the lives of our most vulnerable Arizonans, and we will continue to do everything we can to advocate for real support and real healthcare for women, families, and unborn children here and across the country, he said.

***UPDATE: This story has been updated with additional reporting.

See the original post:
The AZ Senate has repealed the 1864 abortion ban, after 2 Republicans join Dems - Arizona Mirror

Voters take to the polls in the early hours of the morning on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2022, during the 2022 Midterm Elections at Ladue City Hall in Ladue, Mo. Brian Munoz/St. Louis Public Radio hide caption

Voters take to the polls in the early hours of the morning on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2022, during the 2022 Midterm Elections at Ladue City Hall in Ladue, Mo.

ST. LOUIS Missouri may soon be a barometer for how abortion-related ballot initiatives can affect elections in Republican-led states.

If advocates and volunteers turn in enough signatures by May 5, Missourians will vote on an abortion-rights initiative in November.

Some Democrats in the state hope it energizes voters enough to help candidates running for key statewide and state legislative posts, but in some respects, having the ability to pick and choose policies through a robust initiative petition process could be a double-edged sword.

Voters in Missouri could show that abortion rights initiatives are not a down-ballot Democratic dream everywhere, especially if GOP voters who dislike their party's views on abortion rights still like candidates on most other issues.

Desiree White, a Missouri resident, says the state has the opportunity to break from widespread assumptions about its politics and voting habits.

White is a volunteer for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, a group trying to repeal the state's ban on most abortions. As she helped gather the signatures needed to appear on the ballot, White says there's ample evidence that Missouri is not some "throwaway state" when it comes to abortion rights just because it tends to back GOP candidates.

"We're not too red," White says. "We long for our freedoms here in all aspects."

Public opinion may show the same. "We know from polling, and from results in other states, that there are a fair number of Republican voters who will vote Republican in other elections, but they don't agree with their party on abortion rights," says Kyle Kondik, who is with the University of Virginia-based Sabato's Crystal Ball. "They can place themselves on a spectrum of supporting abortion rights and say: 'Hey, maybe I even think that this ballot issue is too permissive. However, it's closer to my position than this current law in Missouri, which is among the most draconian in the country.' "

Bryan Pyle poses for a portrait in his home on Thursday, April 25, 2024, in Kirkwood, Mo. Pyle is conservative in his political views, but is against a ban on abortion. Eric Lee/St. Louis Public Radio hide caption

Bryan Pyle poses for a portrait in his home on Thursday, April 25, 2024, in Kirkwood, Mo. Pyle is conservative in his political views, but is against a ban on abortion.

St. Louis County resident Bryan Pyle may be a great example of the type of voter Kondik is talking about.

Pyle signed the Missourians for Constitutional Freedom ballot initiative, which would allow abortion up to what's known as fetal viability. That's defined in the initiative as a point when a medical professional determines a fetus could survive outside of the womb without extraordinary medical intervention.

"We don't need to have people take the rights from other people because they don't like it," Pyle says. "And we should all have the right to make our own decisions."

But Pyle, who voted for Republican candidates in 2016 and 2020, expects to vote for the GOP in 2024. That corresponds with recent polling from Saint Louis University and YouGov showing that 24% of Republican respondents would vote for the Missourians for Constitutional Freedom initiative. That same survey shows a Republican winning the governor's race without too much trouble.

"The best bet that Republicans have in the state is that they get the voters to put their 'red jerseys' on and look at the abortion rights issue as a kind of partisan issue," Kondik says. "But again, my guess is there'll be a significant number of voters who don't do that. And you can imagine it passing even in the midst of an otherwise Republican environment."

Split ticket voting behavior is common in Missouri, where Republicans control all statewide offices and both U.S. Senate seats but thanks to an initiative petition process allowing groups to circumvent the legislature, Missourians have enacted fairly left-of-center policies expanding Medicaid and raising the minimum wage. They also legalized marijuana for adult use and instituted campaign donations.

Some of those results stem from underfunded opposition campaigns. Still, others say it's part of a broader trend allowing voters to back policies that may depart from their chosen candidates' political orthodoxy.

"You're asking voters a single question," says pollster Christine Matthews, who runs Virginia-based Bellwether Research and Consulting. "And they're only considering the abortion issue. When you're looking at a candidate, you're looking at them with a whole lot of different positions and needs and frames in mind."

For their part, GOP candidates in Missouri aren't too worried about abortion rights upending their bids for office in 2024.

U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, for instance, says he welcomes Missourians deciding for themselves whether to legalize abortion or keep the ban in place. Hawley opposes abortion rights except in cases of rape, incest or the life of the mother. That's out of step with Missouri's law, which doesn't have exceptions for rape or incest.

Democratic Missouri state Representative Ashley Aune, poses for a portrait on Thursday, Jan. 25, 2024, at the state Capitol in Jefferson City. Eric Lee/St. Louis Public Radio hide caption

Democratic Missouri state Representative Ashley Aune, poses for a portrait on Thursday, Jan. 25, 2024, at the state Capitol in Jefferson City.

"My whole adult life I said Roe is wrong because the Constitution gives us the choice of the people," Hawley said earlier this year. "My view is, you gotta let the people decide. So if the people want to vote on this, we should vote on it. We can vote on it every year if they want to."

The three major Republican candidates seeking to succeed Missouri Gov. Mike Parson aren't worried they'll suffer electoral blowback either even if the abortion initiative goes before voters in November.

Lt. Gov. Mike Kehoe says it's possible that the initiative could motivate socially conservative voters especially in rural counties and conservative suburbs where the GOP gained ground in the past decade.

"Even if there's Missourians who say there might be some medical exceptions or exceptions for rape or incest, I think if they knew how far it allows it to go it would give them pause," Kehoe says.

Still, recent history shows that abortion rights can impact down-ballot elections. Back in 2012, then-U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill won a resounding reelection victory over GOP opponent former U.S. Rep. Todd Akin. Akin set off a national firestorm after he said on a local television program, "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."

Even current GOP candidates, such as gubernatorial hopeful Jay Ashcroft, Missouri's secretary of state, say they don't think the effect of an abortion rights initiative will be nonexistent on other contests. He says it's possible that it could affect state legislative contests, especially in suburban districts where the two parties are more evenly divided.

"Maybe there's certain suburban districts, those kind of 50/50 House districts, or one or two state Senate districts, where maybe that changes the electorate enough to change who gets elected," says Ashcroft.

And Democrats like Lucas Kunce, one of the Democrats running against Sen. Hawley, say the reason to get the abortion rights ballot item up to Missouri voters has less to do with the political impact and more about overturning what he sees as a cruel and overreaching ban.

"The importance of that is not my race, it's the importance of giving women access to the health care that they need," Kunce says. "It is about taking care of everyday Missourians and taking away the weird control that our politicians want to have over women and giving them the ability to make their own decisions."

Missouri state Senator Bill Eigel, a Republican, gestures as he debates with Republican Missouri Senate Floor Leader Cindy O'Laughlin, not pictured, during session on Thursday, Jan. 25, 2024, in Jefferson City. Eric Lee/St. Louis Public Radio hide caption

Missouri state Senator Bill Eigel, a Republican, gestures as he debates with Republican Missouri Senate Floor Leader Cindy O'Laughlin, not pictured, during session on Thursday, Jan. 25, 2024, in Jefferson City.

Unlike other states such as Wisconsin, Missouri's robust initiative petition process makes legalizing abortion possible, but that may change.

Missouri lawmakers have been trying to place another ballot item, presumably on the August ballot, that would raise the threshold to amend the state's constitution. Some lawmakers also want to place other items into the initiative, such as a measure barring noncitizens from voting.

"Folks are rightfully looking for Republicans in the legislature to lead on this issue and protect the constitution," says Missouri Sen. Bill Eigel, who like Kehoe and Ashcroft, is running for governor.

Democrats have decried the other items in the initiative petition overhaul as "ballot candy" meant to confuse voters from the real purpose: making it nearly impossible for organizations to place ballot items up for a vote.

"The voters are not going to be fooled by this effort," says Democratic state Rep. Ashley Aune, noting a similar effort fell flat in Ohio. "What they're trying to do is essentially to end majority rule."

Sen. John Rizzo, the Democratic leader of the Missouri Senate, says he's tried to warn his Republican colleagues that a successful effort to gut the initiative petition process could backfire on the GOP.

He says giving people the right to pick policies different from the candidates they ultimately vote for may help Republicans in the long run.

"That's the thing that allows them to go around the legislature," Rizzo says. "And if they can't do that, and they can't go around the legislature, they're gonna start changing the legislature."

Karlie Kloss, right, speaks to a volunteer for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, a group attempting to legalize abortion in the state, on Monday, April 1, 2024, at Congregation Shaare Emeth in Creve Coeur, Mo. Brian Munoz/St. Louis Public Radio hide caption

Karlie Kloss, right, speaks to a volunteer for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, a group attempting to legalize abortion in the state, on Monday, April 1, 2024, at Congregation Shaare Emeth in Creve Coeur, Mo.

Missourians for Constitutional Freedom are slated to turn in their signatures by May 5. In addition to getting thousands of volunteer signature gatherers and millions of dollars in campaign donations, the campaign also received support from fashion icon Karlie Kloss.

Kloss was in the St. Louis area earlier this month to gather signatures for the abortion initiative. Like other volunteers, she noticed that a good share of people who wanted to sign the petition were Republicans who disagreed with their party on the right to a legal abortion.

"It's no secret that there's an enormous amount of bipartisan support," Kloss said earlier this month in an interview with St. Louis Public Radio. "Many signatures and people showing up here today and organizing this effort are Republicans as well as Democrats."

Kloss, who grew up in the St. Louis suburb of Webster Groves, said the rest of the country should pay attention to what's happening in Missouri and not just for political implications. The lack of abortion access is causing stress on smaller health care facilities, especially in Illinois where the procedure is legal. That's one of the reasons she started a group called the Gateway Coalition to support those facilities.

"It's devastating to me the reality of what is happening and how it has become so politicized," Kloss said. "Because to me, this is a conversation that belongs between an individual and their physician, and an individual and their loved ones. Politicians should not be involved."

Missourians should know sometime over the summer if they're going to vote to legalize abortion.

"To me, this issue is about dignity," Kloss said.

Visit link:
Voters could support abortion rights and Republicans in November - NPR

WASHINGTON Republican lawmakers have one big message on the avian flu outbreak in cows: Calm down.

As the H5N1 strain hops from birds to more than 36 dairy farms in nine states, both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have pressed the Biden administration for quick and clear information on the risks for dairy cows and, potentially, people. But even as new tests show pasteurized milk is safe and agriculture officials impose testing regimens for interstate cattle moves, Republicans have another burgeoning concern that alarm means harm for the dairy industry.

The issue I have is, because its been talked about emotionally, people may respond to that, said Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. I just point to the swine flu [outbreak in 2009] that had nothing to do with hogs [but] had a significant negative impact on the hog industry.

There has been one reported transmission of the current H5N1 strain to a farm worker, in Texas. Scientists and federal officials have said that while viral fragments in pasteurized milk do not appear harmful, raw milk popular in states like Thompsons, where it is legally sold could still pose a threat.

My concern is [the Biden administration is] going to be using this for more fear porn, said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), a vocal critic of the administrations response to another infectious disease crisis, the Covid-19 pandemic. His state, Wisconsin, has reported H5N1 cases in birds but not cows.

Republicans insist they are not dismissing initiatives to bolster infectious disease resources, at least among livestock. Thompsons committee on Wednesday released an outline for its renewal of the expansive Farm Bill, which allows oversight and support for agricultural programs that include the dairy industry, now in the throes of new testing and surveillance demands.

The bill summary says it brings together provisions related to livestock health and management, foreign animal disease preparedness. Thompson told STAT that these efforts predated the H5N1 outbreak, but that he is also separately pushing for more funds to back up the initiatives.

Basically, were trying to double what we invest in terms of the trifecta of animal health, or research, infrastructure, and personnel, he told STAT on Tuesday. That would be a roughly $2 billion investment through the budget process that he said has broad support.

The Farm Bill is scheduled for a May 23 markup by Thompsons committee, its first step towards passage; a new federal budget, on the other hand, is on a distant horizon. In the meantime, state health officials and farm workers have already expressed concerns about keeping up with new federal testing requirements for dairy cows.

Scientists and even some Democrats say that testing, and the federal governments information-sharing, have been too limited to get a clear picture of the H5N1 risk for other cows and potentially humans.

Some were left shocked when the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention last month released data showing that cases among cows were more widespread than previously thought, and that viral fragments were found in milk.

The basic question here is why wasnt more done to prevent this? Once this moves into cattle, potentially pigs, all this is increasing the chances for it to be contagious in humans, said Nigel Sizer, executive director of a network of scientific research and advocacy organizations, Preventing Pandemics at the Source.

Stephen Ostroff, a former FDA deputy commissioner for food and veterinary medicine, also voiced concerns about how widespread testing truly is, and the lack of clear public communication about risks.

Its very reminiscent of the early stages of Covid, when we were flying a little bit blind, because we simply didnt have sufficient testing capacity to be able to know exactly who was infected, said Ostroff. The lack of context for it is really a challenge. How many samples were tested? Where were they from?

Democrats from dairy-laden states are also calling for a federal action plan to aid farmers struggling to isolate and test herds.

The federal government has to step up to help our dairy farmers and producers weather and combat this outbreak, stop the spread of this virus, and ensure consumers know what is being done to keep them safe, Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) said in a letter to agriculture officials Thursday.

But at least for now, Republicans are urging Americans to not panic.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), the highest ranking Republican on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, in April asked federal health and agriculture officials for committee briefings on the bird flu developments.

He told STAT on Tuesday that he texted CDC Director Mandy Cohen directly and they are trying to set up a briefing, and she stressed that its not spread to humans.

Cassidy admitted hed like to have more information about potential risks, but it seems like they are appropriately monitoring it.

See more here:
Republicans, concerned about dairy industry, urge calm about H5N1 bird flu - STAT

Washington, D.C. House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) wrote to NPR CEO Katherine Maher regarding reports of political and ideological bias at the taxpayer-funded public radio organization. In addition to requesting answers to questions, the letter requests Ms. Maher appear before the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee for a hearing on May 8, 2024.

"The Committee has concerns about the direction in which NPR may be headed under past and present leadership. As a taxpayer funded, public radio organization, NPR should focus on fair and objective news reporting that both considers and reflects the views of the larger U.S. population and not just a niche audience," the Chairs wrote.

They continued , "We also find it disconcerting that NPRs coverage of major news in recent years has been so polarized as to preclude any need to uncover the truth. These have included news stories on matters of national security and importance, such as the Mueller report, the Hunter Biden laptop, and the COVID-19 origins investigation. On each of these issues, NPR has been accused of approaching its news reporting with an extreme left-leaning lens."

In light of the recent, disturbing revelations about National Public Radio (NPR) and its leadership, Ive directed Chair McMorris Rodgers and the Energy and Commerce Committee to conduct an investigation of NPR and determine what actions should be taken to hold the organization accountable for its ideological bias and contempt for facts. The American people support the free press but will not be made to fund a left-leaning political agenda with taxpayer funds. saidSpeaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) regarding the effort.

CLICK HERE to read the letter.

View original post here:
E&C Republicans Open Investigation into Allegations of Political Bias at Taxpayer-Funded NPR, Request Attendance ... - Energy and Commerce Committee