ReportWire

Tag: states

  • Teaching might be synchronous, but learning is always happening asynchronously

    [ad_1]

    Key points:

    The bell rings at 10:00 a.m. A teacher begins explaining quadratic equations. Some students lean forward, pencils ready. Others stare at the clock. A few are still turning yesterday’s lesson over in their minds. On the surface, it’s a standard, well‑planned class period. But here’s the catch: Learning doesn’t always happen on schedule.

    Think about your own class last week. Did every student learn exactly what you were teaching? Or did some of them circle back a day or two later with new questions, fresh insights, or sudden understanding?

    Across the country, laws and regulations attempt to define and balance synchronous and asynchronous instruction. Some states fund schools based on seat time, measuring how long students sit in classrooms or log into live online sessions. Here in Indiana, recent legislation even limits the number of e‑learning days that can be asynchronous, as if too many days without live teaching would somehow shortchange students. These rules were written with the best of intentions–ensuring students are engaged, teachers are available, and learning doesn’t slip through the cracks.

    Over time, “asynchronous instruction” has picked up a troubling reputation, often equated with the idea of no teaching at all–just kids simply poking through a computer on their own. But the truth is far more nuanced. The work of teaching is so difficult precisely because all learning is, at its core, asynchronous. The best teachers understand the enormous variance in readiness within any group of students. They know some learners grasp a concept immediately while others need more time, multiple exposures, or a completely different entry point. Giving them space beyond the live moment is often exactly what allows learning to take hold.

    Devoting resources to well-designed asynchronous learning, such as recorded lectures available for rewatch, self-paced learning modules, project-based activities, and educational games, allows students to immerse themselves in instructional materials and gain a better understanding of content on their terms. Instead of helping students catch up during class time, teachers can focus on whole-group instruction and a deeper analysis of curriculum content.

    When we’re measuring butts in seats or time in front of a screen with an instructor on the other end, live, we’re measuring what’s easy to measure, not what’s important. Real student engagement happens in the head of the learner, and that is far harder to quantify.

    That’s why I can’t help but wonder if some of these mandates, while well‑intentioned, actually get in the way of real learning, pushing schools to comply with a regulation rather than focus on the conditions that actually help students grow.

    What if, instead of focusing so much on the ratio of synchronous to asynchronous minutes, we asked a better question: Are students being given the time, space, and support to truly learn? Are we creating systems that allow them to circle back and show growth when they’re ready, not just when the bell rings? As an administrator, I know our district is still figuring out the complexities of putting these goals into practice.

    Instead of tying funding and accountability to time in a seat, imagine tying it to evidence of growth. Imagine policies that encourage schools to document when and how students show understanding, no matter when it happens. Imagine giving educators the freedom to design opportunities for students to revisit, rethink, and re‑engage until the learning truly sticks.

    The teaching might be synchronous. But the learning is always happening asynchronously, and if we can shift our policies, practices, and mindsets to honor that truth, we can move beyond compliance and toward classrooms where students have every chance to succeed.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    [ad_2]

    George Philhower, Ed.D., Eastern Hancock Schools

    Source link

  • California Strikes Back in the Redistricting War

    [ad_1]

    The skew in Texas mirrored national trends: in the wake of Republicans’ 2010 gains, Democrats could conceivably have won the national popular vote by five percentage points or more and not won a majority of House seats. But that advantage eroded, such that, by last year, “the party that won the most votes for the House was quite likely to win the most seats,” as Nate Cohn, the data maven at the Times, recently explained to my colleague Isaac Chotiner. There are a variety of reasons for this reversal. Several states created California-style independent processes that took map-drawing out of politicians’ hands, and some state courts overturned partisan maps. In others, Democrats aggressively countered Republican gerrymanders with their own.

    Changing voting patterns also played a role, as did (at least at the margins) what political scientists call “dummymandering,” a term—named for the Massachusetts governor Elbridge Dummy (just kidding)—that describes when gerrymanderers inadvertently spread their party’s votes too thin, or fail to correctly predict voter behavior. Especially since Trump first won, in 2016, “our politics have been very volatile,” Michael Li, an attorney focussed on redistricting and voting rights at the Brennan Center, told me. When politicians gerrymander, “you’re placing a big bet that you know what the politics of the future look like, and if you’re wrong, it can really backfire.” By way of example, Li pointed me, again, to Texas, where state legislative maps drawn to maximize G.O.P. gains after 2010 proved less advantageous by 2018, when suburbs of Dallas, for instance, swung to the left, and demographic shifts made heavily white districts more diverse.

    Last year, politics shifted again: Trump performed surprisingly well with Latino voters in Texas, according to exit polls, winning fifty-five per cent to Kamala Harris’s forty-four. Since then, his approval among Latinos nationally has receded, and, after Texas passed its new maps this year, some Democrats expressed optimism that Republicans in the state might prove to be dummies—that the projection of five new seats was based on a risky bet that Latino voters would stick with the Party at Trump-2024 levels. Mitchell, who drew California’s retaliatory maps, told me that his Texas counterparts may have made existing G.O.P. seats less safe. (Mitchell claims that his maps in California will offer Democrats pickup opportunities and shore up vulnerable incumbents.) According to the Texas Tribune, Republicans in Texas were reluctant to redraw the maps before Trump demanded that they do so.

    The independent data journalist G. Elliott Morris, however, told me that the Texas redistricting does not look like a dummymander, and other observers agree. (A lawsuit challenging the new maps alleges that they were drawn to distribute Latino voters who have lower rates of turnout in a manner that amounts to disenfranchisement.) Morris told me that, nationally, the worst-case net outcome of the current redistricting war for Democrats would lead to “potentially a pretty big drop” in representation. But predicting the precise number of seats they might lose is tricky, given that redistricting efforts remain in flux in several states—in addition to the purely partisan tit-for-tat, Utah and Ohio have been in the throes of mid-decade redistricting for mandated legal reasons—and, dummymanders or not, voter behavior can indeed buck expectations, especially in this era. (At least one Republican operative has expressed concern that moderate voters could punish the Party for initiating the mid-decade redistricting, which smacks of foul play.) Cohn told Chotiner that Democrats may have to win the over-all House vote by two or three points to gain the most seats in 2026—not a fair requirement, but hardly an insurmountable one given Trump’s unpopularity. If they fail, they won’t be able to blame redistricting alone.

    Well, they might be able to. Recently, the Supreme Court heard a case that could gut Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which currently prohibits racial discrimination in mapmaking and has been, as the law professor Atiba Ellis told NPR, “the most important check” on partisan gerrymanders in many G.O.P.-led states in the South. The weakening of Section 2 could swing as many as nineteen House seats in Republicans’ favor; even a lesser effect, per Cohn, would put Democrats severely on the back foot.

    [ad_2]

    Jon Allsop

    Source link

  • The paradox of Hispanic Heritage Month: Celebrating heritage means honoring students’ languages

    [ad_1]

    Key points:

    Every year, Hispanic Heritage Month offers the United States a chance to honor the profound and varied contributions of Latino communities. We celebrate scientists like Ellen Ochoa, the first Latina woman in space, and activists like Dolores Huerta, who fought tirelessly for workers’ rights. We use this month to recognize the cultural richness that Spanish-speaking families bring to our communities, including everything from vibrant festivals to innovative businesses that strengthen our local economies.

    But there’s a paradox at play.

    While we spotlight Hispanic heritage in public spaces, many classrooms across the country require Spanish-speaking students to set aside the very heart of their cultural identity: their language.

    This contradiction is especially personal for me. I moved from Puerto Rico to the mainland United States as an adult in hopes of building a better future for myself and my family. The transition was far from easy. My accent often became a challenge in ways I never expected, because people judged my intelligence or questioned my education based solely on how I spoke. I could communicate effectively, yet my words were filtered through stereotypes.

    Over time, I found deep fulfillment working in a state that recognizes the value of bilingual education. Texas, where I now live, continues to expand biliteracy pathways for students. This commitment honors both home languages and English, opening global opportunities for children while preserving ties to their history, family, and identity.

    That commitment to expanding pathways for English Learners (EL) is urgently needed. Texas is home to more than 1.3 million ELs, which is nearly a quarter of all students in the state, the highest share in the nation. Nationwide, there are more than 5 million ELs comprising nearly 11 percent of the U.S. public school students; about 76 percent of ELs are Spanish speakers. Those figures represent millions of children who walk into classrooms every day carrying the gift of another language. If we are serious about celebrating Hispanic Heritage Month, we must be serious about honoring and cultivating that gift.

    A true celebration of Hispanic heritage requires more than flags and food. It requires acknowledging that students’ home languages are essential to their academic success, not obstacles to overcome. Research consistently shows that bilingualism is a cognitive asset. Those who are exposed to two languages at an early age outperform their monolingual peers on tests of cognitive function in adolescence and adulthood. Students who maintain and develop their native language while learning English perform better academically, not worse. Yet too often, our educational systems operate as if English is the only language that matters.

    One powerful way to shift this mindset is rethinking the materials students encounter every day. High-quality instructional materials should act as both mirrors and windows–mirrors in which students see themselves reflected, and windows through which they explore new perspectives and possibilities. Meeting state academic standards is only part of the equation: Materials must also align with language development standards and reflect the cultural and linguistic diversity of our communities.

    So, what should instructional materials look like if we truly want to honor language as culture?

    • Instructional materials should meet students at varying levels of language proficiency while never lowering expectations for academic rigor.
    • Effective materials include strategies for vocabulary development, visuals that scaffold comprehension, bilingual glossaries, and structured opportunities for academic discourse.
    • Literature and history selections should incorporate and reflect Latino voices and perspectives, not as “add-ons” during heritage month, but as integral elements of the curriculum throughout the year.

    But materials alone are not enough. The process by which schools and districts choose them matters just as much. Curriculum teams and administrators must center EL experiences in every adoption decision. That means intentionally including the voices of bilingual educators, EL specialists, and, especially, parents and families. Their life experiences offer insights into the most effective ways to support students.

    Everyone has a role to play. Teachers should feel empowered to advocate for materials that support bilingual learners; policymakers must ensure funding and policies that prioritize high-quality, linguistically supportive instructional resources; and communities should demand that investments in education align with the linguistic realities of our students.

    Because here is the truth: When we honor students’ languages, we are not only affirming their culture; we are investing in their future. A child who is able to read, write, and think in two languages has an advantage that will serve them for life. They will be better prepared to navigate an interconnected world, and they carry with them the ability to bridge communities.

    This year, let’s move beyond celebrating what Latino communities have already contributed to America and start investing in what they can become when we truly support and honor them year-round. That begins with valuing language as culture–and making sure our classrooms do the same.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    [ad_2]

    Altagracia “Grace” Delgado, Texas Association for Bilingual Education & Assessment for Good

    Source link

  • USA star on playing at the Rugby World Cup with an ostomy bag

    [ad_1]

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Did Wisconsin Gov. Evers’ 400-year veto lock in property tax increases for centuries?

    [ad_1]

    While Democratic Gov. Tony Evers is retiring from political life, one policy will remain part of his legacy — and become a talking point in Democratic and Republican campaigns to succeed him.

    That’s the “400-year veto,” the colloquial name for Evers’ maneuver in the 2023-25 state budget that essentially changed the game for public school funding.

    In April, the state Supreme Court upheld it as an allowable use of the governor’s veto powers, which are considered the most expansive in the country. But it’s been a continued source of debate.

    “The (Evers) Era locked Wisconsin families into a 400‑year property tax increase,” Americans for Prosperity posted on X on July 28, 2025, four days after Evers announced he wouldn’t seek reelection.

    “His actions are now our problem,” said the conservative group, which advocates for policies such as income tax cuts and school choice.

    Sign up for PolitiFact texts

    The graphic includes Evers’ two lieutenant governors — Sara Rodriguez, who is now running for governor herself, and Mandela Barnes, who was out of the office by the time Evers made the veto in 2023.

    The 400-year veto has gotten plenty of attention, but not as much scrutiny into how school districts will use the funding increases — and what that means for your future property taxes. 

    We’ll take a closer look at a few key questions.

    Will school districts use the $325 per pupil increase each year?

    Let’s start with understanding what the veto actually did.

    School districts have state-imposed limits on how much money they can take in through two sources: State general aid and property taxes. The veto raises those limits by $325 per student, per year, until 2425. 

    So, an initial question is whether school districts will take advantage of those increases or forgo them.

    When we reached out to Americans for Prosperity’s Wisconsin chapter for backup, state director Megan Novak said “history and data point to the reasonable conclusion that Gov. Evers’ veto can and will raise property taxes.”

    The group pointed to a state Department of Public Instruction spreadsheet that showed only about 14% of the state’s 421 school districts taxed below their limits in the 2024-25 school year.

    Dan Rossmiller, executive director of the Wisconsin Association of School Boards, said it’s “theoretically possible” that a school district would not choose to levy the maximum amount.

    But “it’s unlikely that it would, given that inflation is running between 2 and 3% right now,” he said. 

    As school districts and the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau pointed out in 2023, the $325 per year doesn’t actually keep pace with inflation.

    It’s safe to say school districts will take advantage of the increases. 

    Does that equate to higher property taxes, though?

    Will property taxes go up because of the 400-year veto?

    Let’s remember the second part of those revenue limits: State general aid.

    To the dismay of some Democrats, the new state budget — a compromise between Republicans and Evers — did not include increases to general school aid.

    And the Legislative Fiscal Bureau projected in 2023 that if lawmakers didn’t provide that aid in this budget, school districts could raise local taxes by around $260 million in 2025-26 and $520 million in 2026-27.

    A report from the nonpartisan Wisconsin Policy Forum found property tax levies for K-12 schools rose $327 million in 2024. That was driven by the $325 boost, but also funding referendums approved by voters.

    We’ll get a better picture of the 2025 numbers come fall, when school districts set their tax levies. 

    “In general, the larger the revenue limit increase, the larger the property tax increase — unless state lawmakers also significantly raise general school aids,” the report explained.

    Because there were no general aid increases in the 2025-27 budget, expect K-12 property taxes to go up.

    Are these funding increases ‘locked’ in for 400 years?

    Onto the final part of the claim: Are these property tax increases guaranteed for the next 400 years?

    Rossmiller argued it’s not necessarily the case that Evers “locked” Wisconsinites into a 400-year property tax increase, for a few reasons. 

    One, the Legislature could boost general school aids in future state budgets, or increase credits meant to reduce tax bills.

    Lawmakers “could provide enough money to negate any property tax increase, if they choose to,” Rossmiller said.

    Another reason this increase might not last for the full 400 years? 

    GOP lawmakers are trying to repeal the law, an effort that could succeed if a Republican replaces Evers as governor and Republicans maintain legislative control.

    Property taxpayers are “locked into it, until such time that the Legislature changes (the law),” Rossmiller said. 

    Republicans could repeal the law, Democrats could provide more general school aid, or either party could completely overhaul the way schools get funding, for example.

    Still, we can’t predict when the state government will switch partisan control. And at PolitiFact Wisconsin, we rate claims based on current law — even if it’s likely to change one day.

    Our ruling

    Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group, said “the (Evers) Era locked Wisconsin families into a 400‑year property tax increase.”

    There’s reason to believe school districts will keep using those $325 per student increases as they deal with inflation. 

    And, the new budget included no increases to general school aids, meaning districts are likely to raise property taxes as they did in 2024.

    While no one expects the law — and permanent increases in property taxes — to stay in place for all 400 years, we also can’t rate the claim based on what we don’t know about the future.

    Our definition of Mostly True is “the statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.”

    That fits here.


     

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Claim Walz ‘forced’ tampons in boys rooms misinterprets law

    Claim Walz ‘forced’ tampons in boys rooms misinterprets law

    [ad_1]

    “Tampon Tim.”

    Allies of former President Donald Trump coined this nickname for Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz the same day Vice President Kamala Harris tapped him to be her running mate.

    “He’s sick,” Fox News host Jesse Watters said on his Aug. 6 show, hours after Harris’ announcement. “Walz forced schools to stock tampons in boys’ bathrooms. Tampons in fourth grade boys’ bathrooms. What a freak. What do boys need tampons for? This guy is not Minnesota nice. He’s Minnesota nuts.”

    (Internet Archive)

    The narrative quickly spread across conservative social media. Fox News host Sean Hannity, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Newsmax host Greg Kelly made similar claims

    A Fox News spokesperson pointed PolitiFact to a law requiring schools to provide access to free menstrual products for all students in grades 4 through 12. 

    But the claim about schools being “forced” to provide period products in boys’ bathrooms exaggerates the law’s requirements and reveals a lack of understanding of both the law and its practical application.

    The Minnesota state Legislature passed the provision in May 2023 as part of a larger education bill that passed 35-32 in the Senate and 70-62 in the House. Walz signed it into law May 24, 2023. 

    Democrats, who had a majority in both chambers, championed the bill; one Republican state senator voted in its favor. Students had advocated for the law for years.

    We contacted Walz and Minnesota’s Department of Education with questions about the law’s goals, interpretation and implementation. We received no response from Walz, and no specific answers from the Education Department, whose spokesperson reiterated the text of the statute. 

    What does this Minnesota law require of schools? 

    The law, which took effect Jan. 1, requires schools to provide access to menstrual products such as pads, tampons or other similar period products, “in restrooms regularly used by students in grades 4 to 12 according to a plan developed by the school district.” 

    As adopted, the law does not distinguish by sex or gender. It says the products “must be available to all menstruating students.” 

    This means transgender boys and nonbinary students — who might menstruate and are permitted to use boys’ restrooms — must also have access to the menstrual products. 

    That does not mean menstrual products must be stocked in boys’ restrooms, legal experts told PolitiFact. 

    “As written the law does not require products to be put in men’s restrooms,” said Lacey Gero, director of government relations at the Alliance for Period Supplies, a nonprofit organization. “The law leaves it up to the local school districts to create a plan for providing products in restrooms, but does not specify which restrooms.”

    Some states with similar laws specify that period products should be provided only in girls’ restrooms, said Suzanne Herman, a lawyer and legal director at Period Law, a legal group that advocates making menstrual products free. Minnesota does not. 

    “It’s more inclusive than other laws, but it certainly doesn’t mandate that they be in all boys’ restrooms,” Herman said of Minnesota’s law. 

    For example, the law would allow a school administrator who knows there are trans or nonbinary students who only use the boys’ restrooms to provide menstrual products in those bathrooms, she said.

    “But they don’t have to,” Herman said. “They could just put (the products) in the unisex ones.”

    Herman, who has been reviewing states’ laws that require schools to provide menstrual products, said the Minnesota’s law’s wording leads her to believe that, in practice, period products “are probably in all girls’ bathrooms and unisex ones.”

    Republicans tried to amend the Minnesota law so it would require providing menstrual products only in restrooms regularly used by “female students”, but the proposed change failed to win enough support.

    When the law passed in May 2023, Minnesota became the 16th state to require that schools provide free menstrual products, said Sarah Howard, vice president of marketing at Aunt Flow, a company committed to ensuring access to period products.

    Herman said that these state laws typically start either in fourth or sixth grade, and the states that provide products to students as early as fourth grade help include students who start menstruating at an early age.

    Students advocated for free menstrual products to help address “period poverty,” MPR News, Minnesota’s public radio station, reported. Period poverty refers to insufficient access to the menstrual products, education and sanitation facilities that would allow people to manage their menstrual health.  

    Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a former teacher, delivers his third State of the State address, March 28, 2021, from his old classroom at Mankato West High School in Mankato, Minn. (Glen Stubbe/Star Tribune via AP)

    It’s unclear exactly how many Minnesota public school students grades 4 to 12 are transgender or nonbinary, but by the best available data, the number is small.

    A 2022 report by the Williams Institute, a public policy research institute at the UCLA School of Law, found that about 0.94% of Minnesota’s 13-17 age group was trans, according to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data from 2017 to 2020. And nationally, among adults, 2022 survey data found that from 0.5% to 1.6% of U.S. adults are transgender or nonbinary. Meanwhile, 2023 aggregated data from Gallup found 0.9% of U.S. adults reported that they were transgender. 

    Some districts, such as Minneapolis Public Schools, require schools to provide improved bathroom access for transgender and nonbinary students, including more accessible all-gender bathrooms, MinnPost, a local news organization, reported. 

    The Minnesota Department of Education said it wasn’t tracking school districts’ implementation of the laws, and we were unable to determine how each district has done this. 

    In an Aug. 8 editorial, the Star Tribune reported that a spokesperson for Anoka-Hennepin schools, the state’s largest school district, said free menstrual products aren’t found in male-only bathrooms, but they are provided in nongendered bathrooms, girls’ bathrooms or from health staff.  

    Searching the Nexis news database, we found no reports that menstrual products are being provided currently in boys’ restrooms in any Minnesota school district.

    Our ruling

    Watters said, “Walz forced schools to stock tampons in boys’ bathrooms.”

    In 2023, Walz signed a law requiring schools provide access to menstrual products in bathrooms regularly used by students in grades 4 to 12, according to a plan school districts will create. 

    The law requires “all menstruating students” have access to the products. Legal experts said a school would be compliant if it provided period products only in girls’ bathrooms and unisex or all-gender bathrooms, for example. 

    Although conditions could exist under which a school might be required to stock menstrual products in a restroom traditionally used exclusively by boys, we found no reports that schools  were regularly doing so. Surveys show that transgender and nonbinary people make up less than 2% of adults in the U.S. and an analysis of Minnesota transgender youth ages 13-17 put the figure at less than 1%. 

    Legal experts said the law, which Watters pointed to as proof of his claim, does not specify that tampons must be provided in boys’ bathrooms.

    The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False. 

    PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

    RELATED: Who is Tim Walz? What to know about Kamala Harris’ new running mate

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Does Mark Robinson become governor if Roy Cooper leaves NC?

    Does Mark Robinson become governor if Roy Cooper leaves NC?

    [ad_1]

    For the past few years, North Carolina Democrats have worried every time Gov. Roy Cooper has left the state — fearful that Republican Lt. Governor Mark Robinson would seize the opportunity as acting governor to issue executive orders and help the GOP-led legislature quickly pass conservative laws.

    Sometimes Cooper has even left in secret, not telling Robinson — or his predecessor, former Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Forest — that he’s been gone.

    Those concerns among Robinson opponents are bubbling up again on social media now that Cooper has been put on a short list of possible running mates for Vice President Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president since President Joe Biden dropped out.

    As political strategists and media pundits speculate about the pros and cons of each potential vice presidential pick, North Carolina’s succession laws stand out.

    The state constitution says: “During the absence of the governor from the state, or during the physical or mental incapacity of the governor to perform the duties of his office, the lieutenant governor shall be acting governor. The further order of succession as acting governor shall be prescribed by law.”

    Does that mean Robinson could take executive action with Cooper out of town? It depends on who you ask.

    Robinson, the Republican nominee for governor, has had the opportunity to take executive action as acting governor many times — and he’s done it once before. But it likely would be difficult for him to make a permanent mark on state law.

    After Hamas launched its attack on Israel in October, Robinson assumed the role of acting governor and declared “North Carolina Solidarity With Israel Week” while Cooper was in Japan pursuing economic development recruitment efforts.

    Cooper could strike down executive orders upon return, so those could be short lived. And for Robinson to pass laws with Cooper out of the state, both legislative chambers would have to meet, pass a bill and get Robinson’s approval before Cooper gets back to the state, an exceedingly difficult feat — even in a legislature with a veto-proof majority.

    Interpreting the law

    North Carolina case law doesn’t appear to provide a significantly deeper interpretation of the state’s gubernatorial succession law. A big reason might be because the governor and lieutenant governor represented the same political party for most of modern history.

    Meanwhile, legal analysts disagree over how the state’s gubernatorial succession laws should be applied.

    Robinson’s office interprets the statute as written, said Brian P. LiVecchi, Robinson’s chief of staff and general counsel. “When the governor is out of state, the lieutenant governor serves with the powers and duties of the Governor,” LiVecchi said.

    Gerry Cohen, an attorney who worked with the legislature for more than 30 years, agrees with that interpretation.

    “An acting governor has all the powers of the governor,” Cohen said. “I researched this about 15 years ago and found out that the [lieutenant governor] as acting governor signed extradition warrants not uncommonly.”

    Cooper’s office disagrees. His office has previously said Robinson has no real authority to act as governor, so long as the governor can continue to perform his duties. The transfer of powers whenever the governor leaves the state dates back to at least the 19th century — long before the advent of technology that enables people to work from far-flung places. The office has pointed to rulings in other states striking down rules similar to the one in the North Carolina Constitution.

    Critics, including those in Cooper’s office, say it’s antiquated and that in modern times, the governor can easily conduct the state’s business even if he or she is physically located in Washington, or even Japan.

    “The governor’s official duties at times require out-of-state travel, and the governor remains the state’s chief executive whether traveling for trade missions, meetings in Washington, National Governors Association Meetings, policy summits or visits with family,” said Sadie Weiner, a spokeswoman for Cooper.

    “North Carolina’s constitution contains language similar to other states where this issue has been settled reasonably to conclude that the governor’s powers do not transfer to the lieutenant governor so long as the governor is able to remain in communication and direct state government action when traveling,” she said. “If the governor ceded official responsibility and authority during any physical travel outside North Carolina, it would lead to chaos and confusion.”

    When Cooper has announced travel out of state, he has been quick to emphasize that he’s still in charge. Before the Japan trip, his office said Cooper would continue to direct state business” while traveling.
    Attorney General Josh Stein’s office agrees. State Department of Justice attorneys reviewed the issue years ago, according to Laura Brewer, a spokeswoman for the office.

    “Their conclusion was that under the constitution a governor is not absent from the state within the meaning of the relevant clause simply because he or she has physically stepped beyond the state’s borders,” Brewer said. “A governor is absent only if they have lost the ability to contact the state during travel in a way that prevents them from fulfilling the duties of the office.”

    Stein, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee, will face Robinson in the November general election. Cooper is nearing the end of his second term as governor and is prohibited by law from running again.

    Anticipating action

    While Robinson has previously taken action as acting governor, some say he would be unlikely to make any controversial moves while campaigning for governor.

    While he used Cooper’s Japan trip to issue the pro-Israel proclamation, Robinson doesn’t appear to have taken any formal actions as governor when Cooper was in Europe for a week this spring, when he was on another economic development summit. Nor has Robinson tried to sign any bills into law, issue other executive orders, hire or fire state officials, or other gubernatorial duties, during shorter windows when Cooper has been out of state for a day, or even a few hours.

    Historically, North Carolina’s statewide elections are close contests, often decided by 1 to 4 percentage points. To win, candidates typically need to appeal to unaffiliated voters — North Carolina’s largest voting bloc. So Robinson would be wise to tread carefully, some in his party say.

    “It would be complete political suicide [for Robinson] to try and preform roles of the governor,” Dallas Woodhouse, former executive director of the state Republican Party, said on social media.

    A spokesman for Robinson’s campaign declined to comment on whether Robinson might want to take actions as acting governor in the next few months, if given the chance, to show voters how he might govern if elected.

    U.S. Rep. Deborah Ross, a Democrat representing a Raleigh district, agreed that Robinson would hurt his reputation by seizing the reins of state government with Cooper out of the state.

    “If Mark Robinson starts to do some of the crazy things … when Governor Cooper is out of the state, it will just give the voters a taste of what he would be like as governor,” Ross said. “And I think that would be helpful to Josh Stein.”

    WRAL state government reporter Will Doran contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Evers says Wisconsin tourism is having a big moment.

    Evers says Wisconsin tourism is having a big moment.

    [ad_1]

    It’s not a stretch to say Wisconsin tourism is having a moment.

    Season 21 of “Top Chef,” which just finished airing, gave viewers a glimpse of Wisconsin’s traditions. Business boomed at Frank Lloyd Wright’s Taliesin in Spring Green after it was featured in an episode.

    In a few weeks, the Republican National Convention will blanket Milwaukee, bringing thousands of delegates, politicians, staff and media who will spend money on entertainment, hotels and restaurants. 

    And don’t forget about next April, when an estimated 240,000 visitors will come to Green Bay and surrounding cities for the National Football League draft. An economic impact of $94 million is the early projection. 

    That boom isn’t lost on Wisconsin politicians, especially Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, who has frequently hyped up a “record-breaking year” for tourism in posts on X, the site formerly known as Twitter. 

    “Wisconsin saw another record-breaking year for tourism, with a historic $25 billion economic impact in 2023,” Evers posted June 11. “That blows 2022’s record year out of the water.”

    On June 22, Evers also called out “Wisconsin’s record-breaking year for tourism” and credited outdoor recreation opportunities. 

    PolitiFact Wisconsin was interested in these numbers, because tourism will surely continue to be a hot topic in Wisconsin in the months ahead.

    $25 billion is clearly a large number, but what goes into the formula to generate that economic impact? Is it spread throughout the state, or only in cities? And how does it compare to past years?

    In short, is Evers right that it’s record-breaking? Let’s take a look. 

    Outside report calculates visitor spending and other variables to reach $25 billion number

    The $25 billion number Evers is referring to comes from the Tourism Economics Report, which is available on the Wisconsin Department of Tourism website.

    The report was created by Tourism Economics — a company of global advisory firm Oxford Economics — not the state itself. 

    The methodology explains the firm used a model to trace the “flow of visitor-related expenditures through the state’s economy and their effects on employment, wages, and taxes.” 

    Visitors were considered people who stayed overnight on a trip or traveled more than 50 miles to a destination. Multiple data sources were used, such as from surveys and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    With that said, let’s take a closer look at how they calculated the $25 billion total impact. 

    A large portion of that number — $15.7 billion — comes from direct visitor spending on things like lodging, food and beverage, retail, entertainment and transportation. 

    Then there’s about $4.6 billion in what’s called supply-chain effects, such as needing to purchase more from food wholesalers and utilities. 

    Finally, there’s $4.7 billion in “induced impacts” — which refers to wages that are generated directly or indirectly by visitor spending and spent in the local economy. 

    That gives a picture of what goes into the $25 billion: It’s more than just the raw amount that visitors are spending in Wisconsin. 

    Is that impact equally felt in the state?

    The tourism department said all of Wisconsin’s 72 counties saw an increase in their total economic impact number from 2022 to 2023. A spreadsheet of county-level data confirms that. 

    The top five counties with the highest economic impact, in millions, were Milwaukee, Dane, Sauk, Waukesha and Brown. 

    Interestingly, popular tourism destination Door County ranked eighth at $620 million, far below Milwaukee’s $4.17 billion. 

    The counties with the lowest economic impact from tourism were Menominee, Florence, Pepin, Forest and Lafayette. Those ranged from $6 million to $29 million in impacts. 

    The counties that saw the highest growth in their total economic impact from 2022 to 2023 were Monroe, Menominee, and Green Lake. They saw increases from 10 to 11 percent each. 

    Bottom line: All counties experienced growth in 2023, though some counties clearly benefit more from tourism than others.

    Records often set each year, with COVID-19 pandemic as an exception 

    Let’s go back to the part of Evers’ claim about 2023 being a “record-breaking year.” 

    The tourism department has said the $25 billion last year broke a record, surpassing the previous record of $23.7 billion set in 2022. That increase is above the rate of inflation, too.

    There’s a history of setting a new tourism record every year, at least under normal circumstances.

    In 2017, the economic impact was about $20.6 billion, then $21.6 billion in 2018, the Oshkosh Northwestern reported. In 2019, the economic impact was $22.2 billion, according to a WPR story. 

    Then came the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2020, the economic impact dropped significantly to around $17.3 billion, then increased 21% to $20.9 billion in 2021, according to the department. 

    Clearly, the tourism industry has been rebounding from COVID-19. The report says that “key indicators point  to the normalization of Wisconsin’s visitor activity in 2023.” 

    But some of those indicators haven’t quite caught up to pre-pandemic levels. Those include employment directly supported by visitor activity, and local and state tax revenues. 

    Still, previous reports show that 2023 was a record-setting year for tourism. That economic impact number appears to steadily rise and set new records each year, with the onset of COVID-19 as an exception. 

    And it certainly won’t be a surprise if Wisconsin sets another record in 2024, when the effects of “Top Chef” and the RNC are accounted for.

    Our ruling 

    Evers claimed Wisconsin had a “record-breaking year” for tourism in 2023.

    The $25 billion total economic impact did set a record in 2023. Setting a new record each year is common, though COVID-19 caused a dip that the state has largely recovered from. 

    That impact isn’t felt equally in all communities in Wisconsin; some counties benefit far more from tourism than others. But all counties saw at least some increase in their totals from 2022 to 2023. 

    And don’t be surprised if the state Department of Tourism announces another huge increase in 2024. 

    We rate the claim True.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Evers did veto PFAS bill and is still asking for funding

    Evers did veto PFAS bill and is still asking for funding

    [ad_1]

    “Forever chemicals” have become a flashpoint for Wisconsin politics. 

    Although there has been money set aside — a $125 million trust fund — to address the growing number of communities and homeowners impacted by PFAS, Republicans and Democrats disagree over how best to release the money to the state Department of Natural Resources for spending. 

    Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, wants the department to decide how to best spend the money to help residents. Meanwhile, Republicans say they want a clear spending plan for the money, created through legislation. 

    Over the last several months, Evers has continually called for the release of the PFAS trust fund to the Department of Natural Resources, so the agency can focus on solving issues being caused by the chemicals. 

    But with that call for release has also come controversy, as pointed out by state Sen. Van Wanggaard, R-Racine, in April 15 on X. 

    “Do you think he realizes that he’s using the fact that he vetoed how to spend the money to ask that we give him the money anyways?” the post said. 

    Wanggaard’s post was meant as a comment on a previous post by Evers, in which the governor again called on the Legislature to “release these funds and get this important work done for folks and families across our state.” 

    But let’s look at Wanggaard’s claim – basically, he’s saying that Evers is asking the GOP to release money for PFAS, but “vetoed (a bill outlining) how to spend the money.” 

    Is that true? 

    PFAS have faced a partisan battle

    When asked for backup, a Wanggaard spokesperson declined to share any information about the claim. But plenty of information already exists, so let’s dive in. 

    PFAS, polyfluoroalkyl substances, are widely used, long-lasting synthetic chemicals found in a wide array of consumer products including stain-resistant carpet, waterproof clothing and nonstick cookware. They’re called “forever chemicals” because they’re nearly indestructible — they don’t dissolve in water and break down slowly. Scientific studies have linked exposure to some PFAS in the environment to harmful health effects in humans and animals.

    In April, Evers did veto a bill created by Republicans that outlined how they thought the $125 million trust fund should be spent. Issuing the veto, of course, is Evers’ prerogative.  

    The bill included a provision that some believe could harm the Department of Natural Resources ’ authority to address PFAS contamination, and another targeted at “innocent landowners” that environmental advocates worried would excuse some PFAS manufacturers and users from having to take responsibility for a contamination. 

    Officials with the department, Evers and Republican bill authors met several times throughout the drafting process and the amendment process, but did not reach a compromise, according to an Oct. 11, 2023, report from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. 

    Republicans have insisted that the veto also blocks them from releasing the funds currently held in the trust fund, the Journal Sentinel report said. 

    Republicans voted along party lines to override Evers’ veto, but the Assembly — also controlled by Republicans — has offered no indication it will schedule its own vote.  

    So, the matter has been left in limbo. 

    Evers has repeatedly asked the Legislature to release the money. He even tried to call in the Joint Finance Committee to release the funding and his administration submitted several draft plans to the panel that outlined how the money could be spent without further legislation. 

    On May 7, 2023, for example, the committee released funding from the national opioid settlement agreement, after altering the Department of Health Service’s submitted plan, according to the Journal Sentinel. 

    But the committee twice refused to hold a vote. 

    Republican leaders on the committee said the panel can’t hold a vote to release the funding, because “it would be essentially ignoring the governor’s veto on the bill spending the money,” a May 14, 2024 report from the Journal Sentinel said.

    Leadership also suggested that releasing the funding after the veto could open the Legislature up to legal action. 

    Our ruling

    Wanggaard claimed that despite the governor’s calls for Republicans to release the PFAS “trust fund,” Evers “vetoed (a bill outlining) how to spend the money.” 

    Evers in April 2024 did veto a Republican-authored bill that outlined how the money could be spent, and created new programs to aid in cleaning up PFAS and protecting “innocent landowners” from being held liable for contamination on their property. 

    Of course, Evers isn’t obligated to agree to the Republican plan, any more than Republicans on the Joint Finance Committee are obligated to sign off on his administration’s plans to let the DNR spend the PFAS trust fund. 

    And without some sort of agreement between Republicans and Democrats, Wisconsin is unlikely to see the PFAS funding released to communities. 

    We rate this claim Mostly True. While Wanggaard’s statement is accurate, it needs clarification or additional information.

     

     

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tiffany partially correct on gray wolf population recovery

    Tiffany partially correct on gray wolf population recovery

    [ad_1]

    Gray wolves bring mixed feelings in Wisconsin and other places where the animals have repopulated over the last several decades. 

    While advocates support strong protections for the animals, many farmers see them as a nuisance. And for hunters, a wolf can be the ultimate prize. 

    No matter where the debate falls, in Wisconsin gray wolves are under the federal protections of the endangered species list, meaning they can’t be hunted or killed for any reason. The animals were relisted in February 2022, according to a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel report from Feb. 10, 2022.

    U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany, a Republican from Minocqua, and others strongly disagree with the recent relisting of the wolves.

    In an April 30, 2024 post on X, formerly known as Twitter, the representative pushed for delisting. 

    “The science is clear – the gray wolf has met and exceeded recovery goals,” he said. 

    What’s up with gray wolves?

    In Wisconsin, wolves have become a bitter topic, resulting in hours of testimony over the Department of Natural Resources’ proposal to maintain a flexible number of animals in the state. Most recently, the Republican-controlled Legislature tried to overrule the agency, but failed, according to a Sept. 22, 2023 report from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. 

    As of late 2022, Wisconsin had 972 wolves in 288 packs.

    Elsewhere, there has also been a struggle over what to do with wolves, and how large of a population needs to be maintained. 

    In 2020, the federal government under former President Donald Trump removed wolves from the endangered species list, allowing for the animals to be hunted for the first time in decades, according to a Feb. 12, 2022 report from CNN. As a result, states like Wisconsin opened hunting for the first time in years. For the Badger state, the uncoordinated season resulted in hunters killing more than 215 gray wolves, nearly double the state’s quota for the hunt.

    But in 2022, under President Joe Biden, gray wolves were once again listed as endangered, meaning they could no longer be hunted. While the number of wolves in Wisconsin and Michigan have rebounded in recent years under protections, other states are still working to reestablish a population. 

    According to CNN, without the protections, wolf populations on the West Coast and in the Southern Rocky Mountains would be particularly vulnerable, and there would be a risk of losing wolves forever in those areas.

    So have populations rebounded enough to delist gray wolves?

    When we asked Tiffany’s office about the claim, Communications Director Caroline Briscoe responded with several documents based on information from the U.S. Department of the Interior. 

    They all included a variation of the same message, that wolves had recovered in the two main regions of the country where repopulation efforts were focused, the Great Lakes and the Rocky Mountains.

    One of the documents shared, a 2022 op-ed in USA TODAY by Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland even uses similar language to Tiffany’s post: “gray wolves recovered from near extinction.”

    And information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service upheld that conclusion too. 

    “In total, the gray wolf population in the lower 48 states is more than 6,000 wolves, greatly exceeding the combined recovery goals for the Northern Rocky Mountains and Western Great Lakes populations,” said an Oct. 29, 2020 release from the agency. 

    The release notes that the wolf population in the Western Great Lakes is the largest outside of Alaska, a testament to the species’ recovery, and says it was up to individual states to now craft their own strong protections.

    But not all researchers and experts agree that the population has recovered.

    According to the Center for Biological Diversity, an activist organization that aims to protect endangered species, wolves have made a recovery, but not enough to no longer need some kind of protection and management.

    “Despite these substantial gains amid extreme challenges, the job of wolf recovery is far from over,” the Center website said. 

    “Wolves need connected populations for genetic sustainability, and natural ecosystems need wolves to maintain a healthy balance of species. Yet today wolves occupy less than 10% of their historic range and continue to face persecution.”

    Other researchers have also pointed out that there are not wolves in many of the states they once roamed outside of the federally designated zones, meaning the population is not yet fully recovered.

    Our ruling

    Tiffany claimed science has shown that “the gray wolf has met and exceeded recovery goals.”

    Gray wolves have seen significant population growth in two areas: the Great Lakes region and the Northern Rockies region, the two designated recovery regions for the animals.

    But while wolves are thriving in those areas, environmental organizations argue that wolves are not seen across all of the lower 48 states they once roamed – meaning the population is not fully recovered. 

    And removing protections from the animals could lead to overhunting, which could prevent populations from spreading, or limit the gene pool for the animals. 

    We rate this claim Half True.

     

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Were more bills signed into law, vetoed this year?

    Were more bills signed into law, vetoed this year?

    [ad_1]

    Lawmakers in the state Capitol have wrapped up their legislative work and are now in campaign mode. 

    As you hear from politicians who are seeking your support, they may highlight the work they did to pass bills into law — that is the primary purpose of state lawmakers, after all. 

    The end of a legislative session — a two-year period — is often the time when legislators highlight how many bills were signed and how many were vetoed, major proposals that passed and ones that failed. 

    In April, Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, who is responsible for signing or vetoing the bills that lawmakers send to him, said he was “proud to have signed 185 bills” since the start of the year.

    That may seem like a fairly large number, especially after PolitiFact Wisconsin just found that Congress passed only 27 bills last year, the fewest since the Great Depression. However, onlookers of state government have pointed out that fewer bills now become law, especially with a Democratic governor and a Republican-led Legislature. 

    The Badger Institute, a conservative advocacy group, wrote a piece on that trend, adding that Evers has “vetoed more legislation than any governor in the last two decades.”

    Rather than fact-checking one specific claim from a politician or group, we decided to provide some historical analysis for how many bills were signed or vetoed in the last few years.

    This also provides context for a key issue voters care about: How productive is state government?

    This session had more bills signed into law, Evers has vetoed more than other governors

    PolitiFact Wisconsin reached out to the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau, which keeps track of what bills are introduced and how they fare. 

    During the 2023-24 legislative session, they said, Evers signed 272 bills into law and vetoed 73.

    But those numbers don’t mean a lot unless we put them in the context of previous years. To do that, we referenced the Blue Book, which has a running list of enacted laws and vetoes each year since Wisconsin became a state in 1848. 

    One point of clarification: These tallies include bills from special sessions, which is when the governor calls on the Legislature to take up a specific proposal. 

    Let’s begin with the session starting in 2021, which included special sessions held in 2022. In all, 267 bills were signed into law, and 126 were vetoed. Comparing those numbers: In the last two years, about 79% of bills sent by the Republican-led Legislature to the Democratic governor were signed into law. In 2021-22, it was about 68%. 

    Now let’s look at 2019-20. In that period, 186 bills were signed into law and 20 were vetoed. While that reflects a much less eventful session due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s still about a 90% signing rate. 

    In 2017-18, it was a much different story: 370 bills were signed into law, and none were vetoed. 

    Former Republican Gov. Scott Walker was governor through the end of 2018, so it’s not surprising that he and the GOP-led Legislature agreed on more bills and rejected fewer.

    It was a similar case in 2015-16: 392 bills were signed into law, and only two were vetoed.

    All in all: Many more bills were approved than vetoed under Walker, when the Legislature was also Republican.

    Still, looking farther back in the Blue Book shows Evers has typically vetoed a higher number of bills than most governors, even ones who had a different party in the Legislature. 

    When former Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat, was opposite a Republican majority in both chambers in 2003 and 2004, he signed 327 bills into law and vetoed 57. 

    And no governor appears to have vetoed more than 100 bills in one session, like Evers did in 2021-22. 

    That higher veto trend isn’t solely Evers’ responsibility, however. Republicans sometimes send him bills that Democrats call “veto bait” — ones known to have virtually no chance of getting his approval. 

    A small percentage of bills introduced in the Capitol make it to the governor’s desk

    There’s another number worth looking at, the one the Badger Institute was referencing. That’s the number of bills that are introduced, or “proposed” by lawmakers.

    Not all bills in the Capitol are sent to the governor. Many bills introduced by Democrats aren’t approved by the Republican majority, and sometimes Republican leaders don’t advance bills from their own colleagues. 

    So, if you’re hearing from candidates about their work, know that there’s a distinction between introducing or sponsoring a bill — and whether it was signed into law. 

    In 2023-24, 2,343 bills were introduced in the state Legislature. In the two years prior, it was 2,307. That is quite a bit higher than the 1,986 bills introduced in 2019-20, the 2,010 in 2017-18, and the 1,830 in 2015-16.

    The Legislative Reference Bureau did note, however, that it’s now more common for companion bills to be introduced in both chambers. That means it’s the exact same bill, just duplicated for the Assembly and Senate.

    So, although it might not be a perfect method to compare years, the bigger takeaway is that the percentage of bills that actually get sent to the governor for a chance at his signature or veto is pretty slim.

    A look back at major bills that passed, ones that were vetoed

    As we look back on the past session, Evers and Republicans came to more significant compromises than they have historically.

    That included a deal to boost shared revenue for local governments, a plan to keep Major League Baseball’s Milwaukee Brewers in Wisconsin and an overhaul of the state’s alcohol regulations. 

    And, Republicans passed Evers’ plans for new legislative districts into law — though that was because they saw his maps as the best option compared to others that could further reduce their party’s control. 

    Still, Republicans were upset that Evers vetoed some of their large initiatives this year, including tax cuts. And he’s vetoed bipartisan proposals, too, such as expanding the authority of some nurses and allowing out-of-state providers to provide telehealth mental health care to Wisconsin patients. 

    But if you hear from politicians this summer who celebrate more bipartisanship and productivity in state government than in years prior, there were major compromises to back up those claims. 

    Our conclusion

    To summarize: Evers signed more bills into law this past session than in his previous years as governor. He vetoed fewer in 2023-24 than in 2021-22, but he’s also vetoed more than previous governors overall. 

    Lawmakers also introduced more bills — 2,343 — than in recent memory. A small percentage of those bills actually reach the governor, which is an important distinction when candidates talk up their work. 

    Although Evers and the Republican-led Legislature have often butted heads, they reached significant compromises this year, such as the shared revenue deal. 

    All of this creates a complicated picture of how productive state government was last session. But it’s important context to keep in mind when state lawmakers talk about it this summer on the campaign trail.

     

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Where is iGaming Legal in the United States? A State-by-State Guide – Southwest Journal

    Where is iGaming Legal in the United States? A State-by-State Guide – Southwest Journal

    [ad_1]

    iGaming is an umbrella term that encompasses all forms of online gambling that involve betting on a future prediction. Some examples that fall under the ‘iGaming’ category include:

    • Online casino games
    • Online sports betting
    • Online Poker
    • Esports

    In 2022 the online gambling and betting industry was estimated to be worth around $63.53 billion. That’s insane- To put it into perspective, you could buy one hundred and ninety million Ferrari 296s with that!

    Federal vs. State Regulation

    Federal vs. State Regulation of iGaming in the US

    The regulation of iGaming in the United States involves a complex interplay between federal and state laws. 

    Historically, federal legislation such as the Wire Act of 1961 and the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) of 2006 has shaped the legal landscape by imposing restrictions on certain forms of online gambling activities.

    In 2018, the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. NCAA paved the way for states to legalize sports betting, leading to a surge in legislative activity at the state level.

    Source: https://www.sportstalkphilly.com

    States Where iGaming is Legal

    • Nevada: Known as the gambling capital of the world, Nevada was among the first states to legalize online poker in 2013. The state’s long-standing reputation as a hub for gaming innovation has positioned it as a pioneer in the iGaming space.
    • New Jersey: Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), New Jersey wasted no time in legalizing sports betting. Today, the Garden State boasts a thriving online gambling market, offering a wide range of casino games and sports wagering options.
    • Pennsylvania: With the passage of comprehensive gambling legislation in 2017, Pennsylvania emerged as one of the most iGaming-friendly states in the country. Residents and visitors can enjoy online casinos, poker, and sports betting platforms licensed by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board.
    • Michigan: In 2019, Michigan joined the ranks of states with legal online gambling, including both casino games and sports betting. The state’s robust regulatory framework ensures consumer protection and generates significant revenue for education and infrastructure projects.
    • Delaware: As one of the first states to legalize online gambling, Delaware offers a variety of iGaming options through its licensed casino operators. Players can access virtual slots, table games, and poker tournaments from the comfort of their homes.
    • West Virginia: Following the lead of neighboring states, West Virginia legalized online casino gaming and sports betting in 2019. The state’s licensing process prioritizes integrity and transparency, fostering a safe and competitive gaming environment.

    States with Pending Legislation

    US States with Pending iGaming LegislationUS States with Pending iGaming Legislation

    While several states have embraced iGaming, others are still in the process of exploring regulatory options or awaiting legislative approval. 

    States such as New York, Connecticut, and Illinois have introduced bills to legalize online gambling, signaling growing momentum for expansion beyond traditional brick-and-mortar casinos.

    States with Strict Prohibitions

    Despite the rise of legalization, some states maintain strict prohibitions on iGaming activities. States like Utah and Hawaii have historically opposed gambling in any form, citing moral and social concerns. 

    Technological Advancements

    Virtual Reality (VR) CasinosVirtual Reality (VR) Casinos

    One of the most significant drivers of change in the iGaming industry is technological innovation. From virtual reality (VR) casinos to blockchain-based gambling platforms, advancements in technology are revolutionizing the way people experience online gaming. 

    These innovations not only enhance the immersive nature of iGaming but also offer greater security, transparency, and efficiency for players and operators alike.

    Expansion of Mobile Gaming

    The proliferation of smartphones and mobile devices has transformed how people access and engage with online content, including iGaming. 

    Mobile gaming has become increasingly popular due to its convenience and accessibility, allowing players to enjoy their favorite casino games and sports betting activities on the go. 

    Regulatory Developments

    Regulatory frameworks governing iGaming vary significantly from state to state, reflecting the diverse attitudes and approaches towards online gambling. 

    As more states legalize and regulate iGaming activities, there will likely be greater harmonization and standardization of regulations across the country. 

    Emergence of Esports Betting

    Emergence of Esports BettingEmergence of Esports Betting

    Esports, or competitive video gaming, has exploded in popularity in recent years, attracting millions of viewers and participants worldwide. As esports continues to gain mainstream acceptance, the market for esports betting is also expanding. 

    Many states are exploring the legalization of esports betting, recognizing the potential economic benefits and consumer demand for wagering on competitive gaming events. 

    Social Responsibility and Player Protection

    As the iGaming industry continues to grow, there is a growing emphasis on social responsibility and player protection. 

    Responsible gaming initiatives, such as self-exclusion programs and mandatory age verification measures, are increasingly being implemented to prevent problem gambling and protect vulnerable individuals. 

    Global Acceptance

    iGaming is legal in many areas in the globe including:

    Country Legalization Date
    Australia 2001
    Canada 2019
    Belgium 2010
    Brazil 2018
    Denmark 2012
    France 2010
    Germany 2012
    Ireland 2015
    Italy 2006
    Mexico 2004
    Netherlands 1964
    New Zealand 2003
    Spain 2012
    Sweden 2019
    Switzerland 2019
    United Kingdom 2005

    Regulatory Framework

    The Legalization of iGaming in The USThe Legalization of iGaming in The US

    The legalization of iGaming has had significant economic and social implications in countries where it is permitted. One of the most notable impacts is the contribution to government revenues through taxation and licensing fees. Governments use these funds to support various public services and initiatives, including healthcare, education, and infrastructure development.

    Frameworks typically include provisions for licensing, taxation, consumer protection, and responsible gambling measures. Regulatory bodies oversee the operation of online gambling operators, ensuring compliance with established regulations and standards.

    To address concerns linked to gambling, governments and regulatory authorities have implemented measures to promote responsible gambling practices, including self-exclusion programs, age verification procedures, and limits on advertising and promotions.

    For example, in the United Kingdom, the UK Gambling Commission regulates iGaming activities under the Gambling Act 2005. Operators must obtain a license from the Commission to offer their services legally, and they are required to adhere to strict guidelines regarding player protection and anti-money laundering measures.

    In jurisdictions like Malta and Gibraltar, regulatory authorities provide licenses to online gambling operators, subjecting them to stringent regulatory requirements. These frameworks aim to foster a safe and transparent environment for players while mitigating potential risks associated with online gambling.

    [ad_2]

    Natasa Pantelic

    Source link

  • Guenther Steiner on F1 in the States, Being a Team Principal, and Starring in ‘DTS’

    Guenther Steiner on F1 in the States, Being a Team Principal, and Starring in ‘DTS’

    [ad_1]

    Meg is joined by former team principal and Netflix star Guenther Steiner to discuss his new role as ambassador of the Miami Grand Prix and how Formula One is incorporating the American audience in the sport. Then, they hit on Steiner’s Drive to Survive stardom, talk about his friendships on the grid, get into his approach as team principal, and then wrap things up with quick season predictions.

    Host: Megan Schuster
    Guest: Guenther Steiner
    Producer: Erika Cervantes

    Subscribe: Spotify

    [ad_2]

    Megan Schuster

    Source link

  • Milwaukee mayor says the city “never defunded the police.”

    Milwaukee mayor says the city “never defunded the police.”

    [ad_1]

    Republican U.S. Senate candidate Eric Hovde is criticizing large cities for how much they are spending on law enforcement.

    As in, not spending enough.

    Hovde tweeted out a clip of an interview on the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show podcast on Feb. 25, 2024 where he mentioned conversations he had with Milwaukee voters and criticized the movement to “defund the police,” calling it the “dumbest idea of the last 100 years.” 

    Milwaukee Mayor Cavalier Johnson responded to Hovde on X, saying Milwaukee “never defunded the police.” 

    In his tweet, Johnson included a page of the 2023 proposed budget for the Milwaukee Police Department showing an increase in funding from the $280 million adopted in 2022, to more than $300 million. 

    That’s a piece of evidence, but is it the full picture?

    Funding for police in previous budgets

    We contacted Johnson’s office for backup, and spokesman Jeff Fleming responded by using the Wikipedia definition of the phrase “defund the police,” which describes it as “removing funds from police departments and reallocating them to non-policing forms of public safety and community support, such as social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources.”

    Previous fact-checks have described “defund the police” as a movement to reduce funding to law enforcement and invest in community services such as social services, youth services and public housing. 

    Fleming said any reduction to the police department’s funding in the past was a result of “across the board cuts” or “transfer of significant numbers of employees out of MPD to the new Department of Emergency Communications. No money has been taken from the police and reallocated for other non-policing forms of public safety.”

    In previous budgets, positions within the police department also were eliminated through attrition.

    Fleming also shared a chart from the city’s budget office showing funding for police at the highest levels since 2018 –  at $304 million in the adopted budget for 2024. We went back to each year mentioned in the chart and verified its accuracy. 

    The lowest amount of funding the department received during that time was in 2022 when it received $280 million. 

    Further, in 2020, several aldermen pushed the city to explore a 10% cut in the police budget for 2021, but no such budget amendments were proposed or voted on. 

    That’s not to say police haven’t been negatively impacted by Milwaukee city budgets. 

    The 2021 budget cut 120 police positions under then-Mayor Tom Barrett. Johnson, as Common Council president, was among those who voted in favor of the budget. 

    Also, Johnson’s tweet does not mention the number of sworn officers has decreased in Milwaukee from 1,864 in 2019, despite spending more on police. 

    In this year’s budget, the Police Department’s average sworn strength would increase to about 1,645. The increase is a product of a requirement in a 2023 state law that boosted funding for local governments across the state but also required Milwaukee to increase police sworn strength. 

    The city is spending more on police in this current budget, at $304 million, than any other department. And that was the case 15 years ago when the city was spending $230 million on police.

    The total 2024 City of Milwaukee budget is $1.92 billion.

    Our ruling

    When responding to a claim about Democrats defunding the police, Johnson said Milwaukee “never defunded the police.” 

    The city of Milwaukee has continued to fund the police department through multiple budgets and for years no department has gotten more funding than police.

    However Johnson does not mention the reduction in recent years of sworn police officers because of across-the-board cuts.

    Our definition of Mostly True is a statement that is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. That fits here.

      

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – Yes, Minnesota incarcerates far less people than Wisconsin

    PolitiFact – Yes, Minnesota incarcerates far less people than Wisconsin

    [ad_1]

    The number of people incarcerated in Wisconsin is getting more and more attention, especially due to claims of overcrowding and understaffing for the number of people behind bars. 

    During an event hosted on Feb. 1, 2024, in Madison by advocates for incarcerated people in Wisconsin,state  Sen. Kelda Roys, D-Madison, compared Wisconsin to other nearby states that incarcerate fewer people. 

    In particular, she mentioned Minnesota, which “incarcerates about a third of the number of people Wisconsin does.” 

    Is that true? 

    Wisconsin does incarcerate far more people than Minnesota 

    Data from the Minnesota Department of Corrections and the Wisconsin Department of Corrections show that, yes, Wisconsin does have far more people incarcerated than Minnesota, as of the end of June 2023. 

    According to the Minnesota DOC data, there were a total of 8,274 people incarcerated in state prisons about mid-way through the year. 

    And in Wisconsin, there were 21,332 people incarcerated in state prisons around that same time. 

    One third of 21,332 is about 7,110 people. 

    So Minnesota has more than one-third of the number of people incarcerated in its prisons, but Roy’s estimation really wasn’t far off. 

    For reference, Wisconsin’s population is about 5.9 million people, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, while Minnesota’s population is about 5.7 million. 

    When asked for more information about the claim, Jalen Knuteson, an aide to Roy, sent over a host of information regarding prison populations from the Prison Policy Initiative, which had slightly different numbers, from earlier in the year. 

    According to information from the Initiative, as of May 2023, Wisconsin had about 20,000 people in state prisons. 

    And for Minnesota, the Prison Policy Initiative listed 8,000 people in state prisons. 

    Using those numbers, 8,000 is more than one-third of 20,000 as well. 

    So while Wisconsin does have far more people in prisons across the state, Minnesota’s number of incarcerated people isn’t quite as low as one-third of Wisconsin’s numbers. But Roys didn’t claim that the number was exact, only about one-third. 

    Roys, too, weighed in over the phone.

    “The bottom line is that we are so far out of step with our peer states like Minnesota,” she said. “We’ve been incarcerating between double and triple the rate of folks. It’s just way too many.” 

    Wisconsin incarcerates more people, not because people are committing more crimes, but because of revocations for rule violations by people on community supervision after being released from custody, according to an Oct. 26, 2023 report in the Green Bay Press-Gazette. About 30% of all new admissions in the state between 2000 and 2020 were for revocations. 

    Revocations are strongly associated with substance abuse issues, the report said. 

    Our ruling

    Roys claimed that Minnesota has about one-third the number of people incarcerated than Wisconsin. 

    As of the end of June last year, the most recent data available, Wisconsin had 21,332 incarcerated people, compared to the 8,274. That is about one third.

    We rate the claim True. 

     

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – Wisconsin clerks’ guidance to voters on absentee voting was wrong, but claim has caveat

    PolitiFact – Wisconsin clerks’ guidance to voters on absentee voting was wrong, but claim has caveat

    [ad_1]

    By early 2020, COVID-19 was sweeping through the United States and began wreaking havoc on the daily lives of millions of Americans. 

    Confusion over voting and the polls swirled around the April 7, 2020, election. On the ballot was the presidential primary and elections for state Supreme Court, Milwaukee mayor, Milwaukee County executive and other local offices.

    With regular polling places drastically reduced in many cities, many voters cast their ballots by alternative means, with county officials in Dane and Milwaukee offering guidance to voters, specifically on what they needed to do to get an absentee ballot. 

    “Unfortunately during COVID, the clerks in Madison and Milwaukee told their constituents that they were actually indefinitely confined and did not have to come and vote, which was incorrect,” state Rep. Cindi Duchow, R-Town of Delafield, said Nov. 9, 2023, during an Assembly floor session in which she spoke in favor of Assembly Bill 494. 

    One of the provisions of A.B. 494, introduced Oct. 16, 2023, by Duchow and other lawmakers, states that a voter seeking indefinitely confined status must apply for that status on an application prescribed by the Elections Commission. Also under the bill, an outbreak or epidemic of a communicable disease in a voter’s community does not qualify the voter as indefinitely confined.

    So, did the clerks in Dane and Milwaukee Counties tell their constituents that they were actually indefinitely confined and did not have to come and vote and was the advice from the clerks off-base on what voters needed to do to obtain an absentee ballot?

    Let’s take a look. 

    The Supreme Court ruling

    When asked for backup for the claim, Duchow, in an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin, said AB 494 is designed to “ensure that voters clearly understand when they can declare themselves ‘indefinitely confined,’ and do not rely on election misinformation from left-wing clerks.”

    Duchow said in preparing the measure, she reviewed several sources, including the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision in Republican Party of Wisconsin v. Dane County. 

    As reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the court on March 31, 2020, blocked Dane County’s clerk from telling voters they could request absentee ballots without showing a photo ID because of the coronavirus pandemic.

    According to ruling, Dane County Clerk Scott McDonell, on March 25, 2020, posted the following guidance to voters on his Facebook page:

    “I have informed Dane County Municipal Clerks that during this emergency and based on the Governors Stay at Home order I am declaring all Dane County voters may indicate as needed that they are indefinitely confined due to illness. This declaration will make it easier for Dane County voters to participate in this election by mail in these difficult times. I urge all voters who request a ballot and have trouble presenting a valid ID to indicate that they are indefinitely confined.

    “A voter can select a box that reads ‘I certify that I am indefinitely confined due to age, illness, infirmity or disability and request ballots be sent to me for every election until I am no longer confined or fail to return a ballot.’  The voter is then able to skip the step of uploading an ID in order to receive a ballot for the April 7 election.”

    The Milwaukee County Clerk, George Christenson, issued a nearly identical declaration on Facebook later that same day, the high court ruling said. 

    The Milwaukee County Clerk “urged all voters who request a ballot and do not have the ability or equipment to upload a valid ID to indicate that they are indefinitely confined,” the Supreme Court ruling said.

    McDonell, the Journal Sentinel reported, said he was not trying to circumvent the voter ID law, but wanted to alert voters that those who are confined can get absentee ballots without an ID. 

    Christenson, as the Journal Sentinel reported, wrote in a letter that he had informed the county’s municipal clerks that this is an appropriate course of action during Gov. Tony Evers’ stay-at-home order and the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s guidance.

    The Journal Sentinel reported that the justices ruled all voters could not be considered confined just because Evers ordered people to stay at home except when they are conducting essential business

    “McDonell appeared to assert that all voters are automatically, indefinitely confined solely due to the emergency and the Safer at Home Order and that voters could therefore declare themselves to be indefinitely confined when requesting an absentee ballot, which would allow them to skip the step of presenting or uploading a valid proof of identification,” the justices wrote.

    What the clerks say

    In Dane County, McDonell, in an email, acknowledged the court action.

    “The state supreme court affirmed in 2020 that under state law individual voters, not clerks or lawmakers, determine whether they are indefinitely confined due to illness or age,” McDonell said. “During the pandemic, many voters around the state temporarily determined they were indefinitely confined due to the COVID virus. Nothing has changed and that is still the law today.”

    In Milwaukee County, Christenson said Duchow’s statement “isn’t accurate” and pointed to an updated statement his office  issued following clarified guidance issued by the Wisconsin Election Commission on March 27, 2020. 

    That guidance said, partly, that voters must decide for themselves whether they qualify for the ‘indefinitely confined’ photo identification exception based upon their current circumstances. Also, according to the WEC guidance, “indefinitely confined status shall not be used by electors simply as a means to avoid the photo identification requirement.” 

    Christenson said his office followed the science around COVID-19 and adhered to the law. 

    “This measure not only aligned with public health considerations at the time, but also ensured the preservation of the fundamental right to vote for all eligible individuals. We followed the science, we followed the law, and I would make the same decision today.” 

    The court ruling, in fact, says the clerk guidance on how to obtain an absentee ballot was “erroneous”: 

    “Accordingly, we conclude that the Respondents’ interpretation of Wisconsin election laws was erroneous. Additionally, we conclude that Emergency Order (No.) 12 did not render all Wisconsin electors ‘indefinitely confined,’ thereby obviating the requirement of a valid photo identification to obtain an absentee ballot.”   

    Legal expert weighs in

    Rick Esenberg, president and general counsel for Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, a nonprofit conservative law firm, pointed out in an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin that the clerks’ initial guidance said people were confined because of the pandemic, and the Milwaukee clerk added an additional statement that “urged all voters who request a ballot and do not have the ability or equipment to upload a valid ID to indicate that they are indefinitely confined.”

    Esenberg said the clarified guidance issued by the Wisconsin Elections Commission didn’t address the COVID-19 issue directly but said an elector couldn’t claim indefinitely confined status to avoid uploading a photo ID to obtain a ballot.

    After oral arguments, Esenberg said, the Supreme Court enjoined the clerks from giving advice contrary to the commission’s guidelines.

    “After the election, it reached the issue on the merits and said the clerks were wrong, WEC was right and that a voter couldn’t claim to be indefinitely confined because of the condition of another, i.e., couldn’t claim to be confined because others were sick and he or she was afraid of becoming infected,” Esenberg said. “In its view, the statutory language just doesn’t say that. It did say, however, that whether someone was indefinitely confined was a determination to be made by the voter.”

    So, the clerks were wrong according to the court, Esenberg explained, but there is a major caveat to Duchow’s statement.

    “The issue wasn’t really ‘coming to vote’ if, by that, we mean voting in person. It was what you have to do to get an absentee ballot,” Esenberg said.

    Our ruling

    Duchow said, “Unfortunately during COVID, the clerks in Madison and Milwaukee told their constituents that they were actually indefinitely confined and did not have to come and vote, which was incorrect.” 

    Although it’s true that clerks in Dane and Milwaukee Counties offered incorrect guidance to voters, Duchow’s claim mischaracterizes what the clerks’ posts said with the phrase “did not have to come and vote.” 

    According to the Supreme Court ruling, the clerks’ guidance did not refer to not coming in to vote. 

    Rather, the clerks were offering advice to voters on indicating, as needed, that they are indefinitely confined because of illness when requesting an absentee ballot, which would allow them to skip the step of presenting or uploading a valid proof of identification, as the Supreme Court justices noted.

    When a statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, the rating is Mostly True, and that fits here. 

     



    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • States WIth The Biggest Chance For SAD And Can Weed Help

    States WIth The Biggest Chance For SAD And Can Weed Help

    [ad_1]

    Seasonal Affective Disorder is in full bloom with short days and long dark evenings and nights…here is what you need to know.

     Season Affective Disorder (SAD) is a common winter ailment. Roughly 5% of adults in the U.S. experience SAD and it typically lasts about 40 percent of the year. More women than men are hit with this issue.  SAD has been linked to a biochemical imbalance in the brain prompted by shorter daylight hours and less sunlight in winter.  How do you know know if you have it, what to do and does where you live make a difference? Here are the states must likely to have SAD and can weed help?

    RELATED: 8 Ways to Enjoy Marijuana Without Smoking It

    One of the most crucial steps in combating SAD is properly identifying its symptoms. Some of those symptoms include:

    • Anxiety
    • Social withdrawal
    • Sleepiness and fatigue
    • Weight gain
    • Suicidal thoughts
    • And several others

    Those who are suffering from any of these symptoms should refrain from self-diagnosis and seek professional assistance. 

    Photo by Andrew Neel via Unsplash

    There are a number of ways to offset some of the sadness that comes with the changing of the seasons. or example. While there is more clinical research needed, is data suggesting that CBD could help to alleviate anxiety and support healthy sleep patterns. CBD has also been seen as instrumental in boosting dopamine levels.

    Cannabis contains cannabinoids which can have a positive impact on mood, while potentially increasing serotonin levels. Marijuana is also a proven sleep aide.  Sleep can help your body rebalance and directly help moods.

    Once you have been diagnosed, make a plan and you will see gradually improvement.  Travel to bright places can help.

    RELATED: 5 Ways To Overcome The Winter Blues This Year

    Based on a study, here is the data on chances of having SAD based on where you live.

    State

    Average ° F

    Average rainfall in Inches

    Total Hours of sunlight

    Highest Chances of S.A.D Based on weather 0/90

    Alaska

    26.7

    2.49

    358

    74.25

    New York

    48.1

    3.76

    414

    68.14

    Washington

    48.5

    3.46

    437

    66.97

    Vermont

    45.7

    3.77

    451

    66.54

    Michigan

    47.3

    3.08

    474

    62.90

    New Hampshire

    46.3

    3.84

    526

    62.61

    Maine

    44.2

    3.71

    564

    61.43

    Connecticut

    51.2

    4.35

    562

    60.08

    Wisconsin

    45.7

    2.84

    498

    59.91

    Oregon

    48.9

    2.29

    467

    58.94

    Massachusetts

    50.3

    4.11

    587

    56.63

    New Jersey

    54.8

    3.76

    576

    56.00

    Rhode Island

    53.1

    4.04

    590

    55.96

    Pennsylvania

    50.9

    3.58

    566

    55.61

    Ohio

    52.9

    2.95

    499

    54.68

    Minnesota

    43.5

    2.25

    527

    54.66

    Indiana

    53.8

    3.25

    546

    53.92

    West Virginia

    53.3

    3.31

    644

    53.69

    Illinois

    53.8

    3.15

    565

    52.59

    Delaware

    57.4

    3.62

    586

    52.19

    Tennessee

    58.6

    3.98

    591

    51.67

    Kentucky

    57

    3.55

    579

    51.21

    Maryland

    56.1

    3.58

    586

    51.08

    Louisiana

    67.4

    4.56

    643

    51.07

    Virginia

    56.5

    3.58

    644

    50.25

    North Carolina

    60.2

    3.92

    617

    49.68

    Missouri

    56

    3.7

    610

    49.61

    Arkansas

    61.4

    4.33

    616

    49.16

    Hawaii

    71.8

    5.23

    546

    49.08

    Mississippi

    64.2

    4.13

    642

    48.94

    Iowa

    49.8

    2.68

    588

    48.87

    Alabama

    63.7

    4.07

    622

    48.67

    Florida

    72.7

    4.24

    659

    47.72

    North Dakota

    42

    1.29

    560

    47.37

    South Carolina

    63.4

    3.7

    669

    45.38

    South Dakota

    46.4

    1.36

    627

    43.47

    Nebraska

    49.5

    1.6

    610

    43.07

    Montana

    43

    1.08

    576

    42.85

    Georgia

    64.6

    3.47

    701

    42.54

    Kansas

    55.4

    2.19

    642

    40.41

    Oklahoma

    60.6

    3.32

    695

    40.19

    Texas

    65.5

    2.71

    658

    37.80

    Idaho

    44.8

    1.48

    661

    35.60

    Wyoming

    42.5

    0.97

    679

    33.70

    California

    60.9

    1.47

    727

    31.74

    Utah

    49.1

    1.12

    700

    30.58

    Colorado

    45.9

    1.18

    734

    26.02

    New Mexico

    53.8

    1.32

    802

    19.50

    Nevada

    50.2

    0.76

    851

    19.36

    Arizona

    61.3

    1.16

    888

    6.72

    [ad_2]

    Amy Hansen

    Source link

  • Scientifically here are the states with the worst drivers hands-down (25 GIFs)

    Scientifically here are the states with the worst drivers hands-down (25 GIFs)

    [ad_1]

    Everyday on your work commute, you probably think to yourself “My state has the worst drivers ever,” and for some of you, that’s absolutely true. But some of you out there don’t have it nearly as bad as others do. Forbes Advisor has released their stats on our country’s drivers.

    The results are based on each state’s Number of Fatal Crashes Per 100,000 Drivers. Try not to be offended if your state makes the top 25 worst, we’re sure it’s definitely not your fault personally.

    [ad_2]

    Zach Nading

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – Wisconsin Public Service Commission has approved rate hikes, but not $1.9 billion

    PolitiFact – Wisconsin Public Service Commission has approved rate hikes, but not $1.9 billion

    [ad_1]

    Electric and natural gas are always on Wisconsin residents’ minds, especially during the winter months. 

    Like many other things, the cost of electric and natural gas has been rising.

    That’s due to a host of factors, with the increases governed by the Wisconsin Public Service Commission, an independent regulatory agency. The body sets new rates and approves major construction projects such as power plants, water wells and transmission lines.

    The Wisconsin chapter of Americans for Prosperity took note of those increases, which are typically approved only a few at a time, did a little math and posted Dec. 4, 2023 on X, formerly know as Twitter:

    “Wisconsin utilities have charged ratepayers more than $1.9 billion of increases since 2019.” 

    That’s an eye-popping number, especially at a time when there are concerns about the impact of inflation on the pocketbooks of state residents.

    Is the math right? No.

    A look at increases approved by the Commission

    When we reached out to Americans for Prosperity, spokesperson Emilee Taylor told us the initial post – which was deleted after we asked about it –  contained an error: The $1.9 billion should actually be $1.5 billion. 

    A followup tweet used the correct figure. But our practice is to rate initial statements, which typically reach the widest audience.

    When asked for more information about how the group reached the $1.5 billion number, Taylor sent a host of links to various Public Service Commission meeting agendas from the past several years, which show approved increases. 

    “The Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group used PSC agendas to calculate $1.5 billion in approved rate increases since 2019. In our calculations, we account for both electric and natural gas — operating under the assumption that most Wisconsinites associate the two related as they are sometimes on the same utility bill,” Taylor said in a Dec. 18, 2023 email.

    “All items added together—rate cases, fuel cases, and fuel surcharges—for electric and natural gas utilities equals $1.5 billion: $1.3 billion in electric, and $250 million in natural gas.”

    When we contacted the commission, communications director Meghan Sovey shared an analysis assembled by employees. 

    According to that information, since 2019 there have been nearly $959 million in increases authorized for electric retail customers, and about $269 million in increases authorized for natural gas customers. 

    Those numbers include some recently-authorized increases that won’t go into effect until 2024 and 2025. 

    Their total: $1.472 billion in increases. 

    Of course those increases are split across consumers, and no one person or community is footing the bill for that amount. And, a large portion of the increase is being paid by businesses, and not directly by consumers.

    Our ruling 

    Americans for Prosperity claimed “Wisconsin utilities have charged ratepayers more than $1.9 billion of increases since 2019.” 

    After we asked, the organization said the tweet contained an error, deleted it, then updated the number to $1.5 billion. While AFP did delete the tweet, we are still rating that $1.9 billion claim. 

    The lower figure was on point, but as is our practice, we rate the original claim – not what groups and individuals do later to make it more accurate. 

    We rate that original claim False.

     

     

    See Figure 1 on PolitiFact.com

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The science of reading, beyond phonics

    The science of reading, beyond phonics

    [ad_1]

    Key points:

    Schools across the country have been shifting their reading strategies to incorporate knowledge and best practices they have learned from the science of reading. More than 30 states have written legislation that requires schools to utilize scientifically researched instructional strategies.

    The largest change most states will see as a result is a dramatic increase in explicit phonics instruction. As a result, an increasing number of students will be able to access grade-level texts.

    I predict this will be reflected in summative and benchmark scores. However, picking words off the page is only a portion of what is measured in benchmark assessments. If we wish to see continued success, we will need to use everything the science of reading has taught us and provide students with a healthy diet of explicit literacy instruction that includes foundational skills like decoding, in addition to building content knowledge and higher-order comprehension strategies.

    While I do believe that there will be some adjustment to find the right mix, I don’t think improved literacy results from aligning instruction to the science of reading will be cyclical or short-lived. Schools are on the right track; they just need to find the correct balance between instruction and reading experiences.

    Combining phonics and background knowledge

    The science of reading is not a program, curriculum, nor something you can purchase. It’s a collection of scientific research from a variety of fields—including cognitive psychology, education, and neuroscience—that helps us understand how we acquire written language.

    Instruction aligned to the science of reading is sequential and explicit. Currently, it may seem like the science of reading is focused solely on phonics. Perhaps that is an over-correction in response to several popular reading programs that place too small an emphasis on phonics. However, the science of reading includes a lot of research about the importance of skills like background knowledge, vocabulary, and concepts of print.

    In fact, background knowledge can even make phonics instruction more effective. If a student is spending 80 percent of their mental energy trying to figure out what the words on the page mean, they only have 20 percent left to decode. The more background knowledge they have, the more vocabulary they bring to bear on the assignment, and the more they are able to focus on applying their phonics skills.

    Background knowledge and vocabulary also allow students to self-check as they read. If a student decodes the word “cake,” but they’ve never encountered it before, they have no way to know if they actually applied their decoding skills correctly. If they were at a birthday party a few days ago and know what cake is, they have immediate confirmation that they got the word correct when they decode it.

    The need for authentic texts

    To be truly skilled readers, students need diverse experiences and a varied vocabulary. I live in Connecticut, and if a teacher here asked students to read about college football on an assessment, they wouldn’t do as well as students from Texas, where college football is a lot more relevant. Reading a variety of texts on subjects they are already interested in will help students expand their background knowledge and vocabulary naturally over time by adding to what they already know and get excited about.

    Instructional material for student reading is often very didactic. Its purpose is to be used by a teacher to give examples of different elements of writing, and it’s usually highly patterned to make those elements, like a main idea or a conclusion, relatively easy to pick out. Text in the real world isn’t structured the same way. It’s messier, and not laid out in the same way every time. To improve their reading and comprehension skills, students need access to authentic texts whose main purpose is to entertain and inform.

    Libraries that are designed to be enjoyed—whether they’re traditional libraries, digital libraries, or classroom libraries—motivate students to read. When I was in school, one of my teachers flagged me as a reluctant, struggling reader. Every time the moment came to pick up our copy of Island of the Blue Dolphins, I appeared, at best, distracted, and at worst, like I would much rather be anywhere else. However, when we started the next book, a fantasy novel, I finished it independently that same day. Access to books students enjoy can be the difference between them doing everything in their power to avoid reading and them sitting at their desks during recess because they can’t put their books down.

    Ideally, a teacher provides explicit instruction, models the new skill, does it with their students, and then sends students off to practice the new skill in something similar to a real-world context. If students don’t have engaging material to read, they’ll only practice their new reading skills when they’re told to, and that’s not enough.

    Reading as a steppingstone to higher literacy skills

    A good library will offer students not just texts they’re eager to read, but writing that exposes them to things outside their typical experience. This helps expand background knowledge and generate engagement. These days, digital libraries offer a supportive reading experience by providing features such as the ability to hear a fluent reader reading aloud. Many of them offer a glossary, so students can look up unfamiliar words as they read, growing their vocabulary naturally from in-context examples. Once a student finishes reading an article on axolotls, for example, they can move on to another article about reptiles and see many of the same vocabulary words in slightly different contexts.

    Unfortunately, instead of receiving accessible texts with scaffolds to support them, what struggling or disinterested students often receive are watered-down texts at a lower difficulty level. Reading a book for younger children can make an already discouraged student feel even worse, and those simpler texts won’t push them to develop their comprehension skills at the appropriate level, which they need to do if they are going to catch up.

    My hope for the future is that educators won’t let the pendulum swing too far in the direction of phonics. Students are finally getting the kind of explicit instruction in reading that they need and deserve, but they also need lots of opportunity—and motivation!—to practice this foundational academic skill along the way. Whether you graduated from teacher prep in 1950 or 2023, one universal truth all teachers know is that students become good readers by reading, and great readers by enjoying authentic, engaging texts.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    [ad_2]

    Joe Burns, Product Marketing Expert, Capstone Publishing

    Source link