nuclear waste: on the road to nowhere · client: nei (nuclear energy institute) pub: ncsl st....

May 2013

M o r e S t a t e S U n d e r o n e - P a r t y C o n t r o l P a g e 2 4

INSIDE:

Transit on the Move

Online Voter Registration

Mortgage Rules

Changing

Nuclear Waste: On the Road to Nowhere

Client: NEI (Nuclear Energy Institute) Pub: NCSL St. Legislatures Run Date: March 29, 2013

Size: 8.5” x 10.875” (trim size), 0.125 (bleed) VeR.: Jobs Ad - Full Page 4CP:

Nuclear energy powers America’s high-tech lifestyle at a price we can afford.Imagine what our lives would be like without a reliable supply of electricity. It powers our homes, offices and industries. It enables communications, entertainment, medical services and various forms of transportation.

Nuclear energy is a reliable and affordable source of 24/7 electricity that emits no greenhouse gases. Nuclear energy already provides one-fifth of our electricity and new reactors are being built to power future generations. Providing more low-carbon, affordable electricity cannot be achieved without nuclear energy playing a significant role in America’s balanced energy portfolio.

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Reliable & Affordable Electricity

Nuclear. Clean Air Energy.

nei.org/value

VOL 39 No- 5 | CONTENTS STATE LEGISLATURES | 05.2013

12 nUClear WaSte: on the road to noWhere

By Scott Hendrick and Claire Lewis

States confront the challenges of what do with

growing amounts of nuclear waste.

16 no lineS online

By Wendy Underhill

More states are offering voters the convenience

of registering online because it’s cheap, easy and

increasingly secure.

20 life on the faSt traCk

By Douglas Shinkle

States and cities are finding ways to meet the

growing demand for rapid transit and rider-

friendly communities.

24 theSe Unified StateS

By Karl Kurtz

The country’s highly polarized politics has

significant repercussions for state governments.

28 Mortgage rUleS reModeled

By Heather Morton

Homebuyers will see broad new protections when

state and federal reforms take effect in January

2014.

MAY

FEATURES©

201

3 B

ru

CE

HO

LD

EM

AN

Client: NEI (Nuclear Energy Institute) Pub: NCSL St. Legislatures Run Date: March 29, 2013

Size: 8.5” x 10.875” (trim size), 0.125 (bleed) VeR.: Jobs Ad - Full Page 4CP:

Nuclear energy powers America’s high-tech lifestyle at a price we can afford.Imagine what our lives would be like without a reliable supply of electricity. It powers our homes, offices and industries. It enables communications, entertainment, medical services and various forms of transportation.

Nuclear energy is a reliable and affordable source of 24/7 electricity that emits no greenhouse gases. Nuclear energy already provides one-fifth of our electricity and new reactors are being built to power future generations. Providing more low-carbon, affordable electricity cannot be achieved without nuclear energy playing a significant role in America’s balanced energy portfolio.

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Reliable & Affordable Electricity

Nuclear. Clean Air Energy.

nei.org/value

4 | CONTENTS | 05.2013

5 StateStatSSocial media uses by legislatures

6 PeoPle & PolitiCSInsight into what’s happening under the domes

7 trendS & tranSitionSVirtual committee sign ups, restrictions on plastic bags, interlock devices for drinkers, nurses by the numbers and tuition tax credits

10 StatelineNews from around the nation—from lottery winners to the death penalty

32 toolS of the tradeGuidelines for Ethical LobbyingBy Peggy Kerns

35 aS they See itQuotes and cartoons from around the states

ViSit WWW.nCSl.org/Magazine thiS Month to:

◆ Find a state-by-state listing of legislatures’ use of social media.

◆ Link to the federal government’s “Strategy for the Management and Disposal of used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level radioactive Waste.”

◆ read a Q and A with computer security expert, J. Alex Halderman, on online voter registration.

◆ Find maps and charts on transit activity around the country.

◆ read more details about the new mortgage rules.

DEPARTMENTS SL ONLINE

Executive DirectorWilliam T. Pound

EditorKaren Hansen

Managing EditorJulie Lays

Assistant EditorMary Winter

Web EditorEdward P. Smith

Copy EditorLeann Stelzer

ContributorsJane Carroll Andrade

Jonathan GriffinKarmen HansonLauren HeintzKara HinkleyMandy rafoolLaura Tobler

rich WilliamsMark Wolf

Art DirectorBruce Holdeman

Advertising Sales ManagerLeAnn Hoff

(303) 364-7700....................................

NCSL OFFICERSPresident

representative Terie Norelli,New Hampshire

President ElectSenator Bruce Starr,

Oregon

Vice PresidentAssemblywoman Debbie Smith,

Nevada

Staff ChairPatsy Spaw, Texas

Staff Vice ChairTom Wright, Alaska

Immediate Past PresidentSenator Stephen Morris, Kansas

Immediate Past Staff ChairMichael Adams, Virginia

....................................Denver Office

7700 East First PlaceDenver, Colorado 80230

(303) 364-7700

Washington, D.C. Office444 North Capitol Street, N.W.

Suite 515Washington, D.C. 20001

(202) 624-5400

Websitewww.ncsl.org/magazine

....................................State Legislatures (ISSN 0147-0641), the national magazine of policy and

politics, is published monthly by the National

Conference of State Legislatures except July/August and October/November, which are combined.

Postmaster: Send address changes to: State Legislatures, 7700 East First

Place, Denver, CO 80230.

© 2013, All rights reserved.

Opinions expressed in this magazine do not necessarily reflect the policy

of NCSL.

Go to www.ncsl.org/bookstore/ to subscribe. united States—$49 per

year; foreign—$55. Teachers only $25 (enter promo code SLMTEA). Single

copy: $6.50.

Letters to the Editor may be mailed to the Denver office or sent by e-mail to: [email protected]. Send requests for permission to reprint to Edward Smith in Denver. Send

subscriptions and changes of address to the Denver office Attn: Marketing

Department.

Periodically, NCSL rents mailing labels to outside organizations. If you prefer your name not be used, please

send a written request.

State Legislatures is indexed in the PAIS Bulletin and Expanded

Academic Index. It is also available in microform and electronically

through university Microfilms Inc. (uMI) at (800) 521-0600.

25 yearS ago

Articles from the May/June 1988 issue of STATE LEGISLATURES

BioteChnology: there’S a Challenge ahead“Biotechnology’s techniques for altering the genetic material of organisms are bringing us new medicines, new foods, new industrial products and a great potential for economic development. But as the industry develops, lawmakers increasingly will be expected to regulate its risks as well as support its economic potential.”

the CoStS of fiXing UP the SChoolS“States are investing more money than ever in public education. Will results follow?”

What CoUntS MoSt in the raCe for deVeloPMent?“ranking the states’ business climates is big business. But do the scores really mean much?”

did yoU knoW …

When the state of Tennessee recruited renowned architect William Strickland to design its Capitol, he identified the sources of his design. “The architecture of the building consists of a Doric basement, four Ionic porticos, surmounted by a Corinthian tower. The porticos are after the order of the Erechtheum, and the tower from the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates at Athens,” he wrote. Already famed for his contributions to the Greek revival Movement and the designer of many public buildings, especially in Philadelphia, Strickland considered the Tennessee Capitol, a classic example of antebellum architecture, to be his finest work. Alas, he became ill in 1851 and died in 1854, five years before the Capitol was completed. But so enamored was he of his creation that he has never left it. His request to spend earthly eternity in the Capitol was granted. He is buried in a tomb he designed near the south entrance. —Tennessee State Library virtual archives

WhoSe CaPitol iS it?

To find out, go to: www.ncsl.org/magazine

THEN & NOW

STATE LEGISLATURESA NATIONAL CONFErENCE OF STATE

LEGISLATurES PuBLICATION

STATE LEGISLATURES

Ten years ago, only about half of Americans went online regularly. Today, more than 80 percent do, and an increasing number are logging on to learn about politics, sign up for government services, and connect with legislators. Around 68 percent of Americans have broadband at home, and 46 percent have wireless devices. Both allow them to view interactive Web pages or watch live webcasts or videos, including those from their state capitol.

Every legislature offers some level of live audio or video streaming. Forty-one states, Puerto rico, the u.S. Virgin Islands and Washington, D.C., offer video webcasts of floor proceedings. At least 33 states post videos on YouTube

or Vimeo, and about 31 states and D.C. offer live viewing of all or select committee hearings. Legislatures in at least half the states have developed mobile apps or adapted websites to fit smartphones and tablet formats.

As legislatures strive to reach citizens “where they’re at,” they increasingly are turning to social networks, where about 40 percent of Americans have participated in some kind of civic or political activity. This could be posting a political view, inviting friends to act, following candidates, “liking” and linking to others’ content, or joining a political group. Legislative caucuses, offices and committees in 49 states use Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other sites. Two years ago, a third of legislators had Facebook profiles; by now, that’s likely to be even higher.

—Pam Greenberg

What Is Social Media?definition: Social media includes the var-ious electronic communication tools—text, audio, video, images, podcasts—people use to share information, ideas, calls to action and personal messages through online com-munities created on social network sites.

Most VisitedSocial

Networks

1Facebook

2Blogger

3Twitter

4Wordpress

5LinkedIn

6Pinterest

7Google+

8Tumblr

9MySpace

10Wikia

Source: Nielsen, State of the Media, Social Media

Report 2012.

Socially Engaged

facebook108 Legislative Partisan Caucuses 40 states

22 Legislative Chambers or Agencies 15 states

(+ u.S. Virgin Islands)

Blogs36 Legislative Partisan Caucuses 20 states


twitter101 Legislative Partisan Caucuses 37 states


(+ D.C. and Puerto rico)

google+5 Legislative Partisan Caucuses 3 states


Source: NCSL, February 2013

At Home With Broadband

An average 68 percent of Americans in 2010used broadband at home to connect to the Internet.

Percent of Population With Broadband at Home 70% or more 60% – 69% 59% or less

Sources: National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Commerce Department and U.S. Census Bureau’s Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2012.

Sources: Pew Internet & American Life Project; Social Media Report 2012, Nielsen; U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2012; the DCI Group; NCSL.

For a state-by-state listing of legislative social media use, go to www.ncsl.org/magazine.

05 .2013 | STATESTATS | 5

Legislatures Want to Friend You

thiS MiSSiSSiPPi legiSlatUre haS faCed a diffiCUlt Period

of loss. Over five months, five sitting lawmakers have died. Senator Bennie Turner (D) died in November at age 64 of a brain tumor. He was appointed chair of the Judiciary Committee three years after his election in 1992 and was the first African American senator to chair a major Senate committee. Nine days later, Senator Alice Harden (D) died at 64 of an undisclosed illness. She had served in the legislature for 24 years and was a former teacher serving on the Education and Appropriations Committee. representative David Gibbs (D), 76, died of cancer in January. He was first elected in 1992 and had sent a letter of resignation five days before his death, but rescinded it the next day. House Ethics Committee Chair Joe Gardner (D) died in February of an apparent heart attack at 68. He had served since 2007. In March, representative Jessica Upshaw (r) died of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound. She was elected in 2004 and chaired the Conservation and Natural resources Committee. She was 53.

illinoiS Veteran laWMaker daWn Clark netSCh (D), who loved cigarette holders, champagne, beer and the White Sox, died at 86 after battling Lou Gehrig’s Disease. First elected in 1972, she served in the Senate for 18 years. She was the Democratic candidate for governor in 1994, beating out two men—the attorney general and the Cook County Board president. She lost in the general election to republican Jim Edgar. “She was an original. But the most important thing is she was a trailblazer,” said David Axlerod, director of the university of Chicago Institute of Politics. Illinois u.S. Senator Dick Durban delivered a tribute to her on the Senate floor, saying that “The Illinois political scene will not be the same without that pool-shooting Sox fan with a cigarette holder, but generations of Illinois women can thank the indomitable force of Dawn Clark Netsch for blazing their path.”

MiChigan rePUBliCanS are angered at public employee unions—and public employers—that scrambled to sign long-term contracts before the state’s new right-to-work law went into effect March 28. Proponents of the

law didn’t have the votes to make it immediately effective when it passed in December. The result has been a race to approve agreements of up to 10 years with unions representing counties, school districts, Wayne State university and the university of Michigan, essentially delaying the effective date of the law for a decade. The public employers argue that the contracts in fact save money, and won concessions on retiree health care and pension costs. The GOP isn’t buying it. Bills

are moving through the Legislature to reduce state aid to the universities that signed the new contracts by 15 percent—a $27.5 million cut to Wayne State and $47.3 million at u of M. “We see [these union contracts] as a non-best practice,” said right-to-work sponsor representative Mike Shirkey (r), “that is setting up a very long-term contract that is financially irresponsible.” The head of the Michigan Education Association doesn’t agree, saying it’s unreasonable to try to enforce a law before it goes into effect.

MinneSota laWMakerS don’t Make nearly enoUgh Money, according to Governor Mark Dayton (D). Their $31,140 annual salary hasn’t increased since 1999, but they are 17th in the nation in terms of

pay, and that’s higher than their Midwestern neighbors Iowa and North and South Dakota (but lower than Wisconsin). The State Compensation Council wants to raise lawmakers’ salaries to $40,800 in 2015. That’s not enough, according to the governor. He thinks they should earn $56,954, the same as what the average Minnesota family earns. Senator Kent Eken (D) is proposing a constitutional amendment creating a bipartisan compensation council with eight members

appointed by the governor and eight by the chief justice of the state supreme court to set legislative salaries. “We shouldn’t be spending our time here debating what our pay should be,” he says.

the firSt Shot in What CoUld Be the great Border War of 2013 was fired in March when the Georgia Senate overwhelmingly passed a resolution to change its northern border with Tennessee to the 35th latitude, where, the state claims, it should have been in the first place—back in 1882. It was a bad survey, senators agree, that marked the northern boundary a mile south of where it should have been after Georgia gave up the Mississippi territory. What difference does it make? Part of the Tennessee river would then flow through Georgia, giving the state water rights it badly wants during a difficult and lengthy drought. Georgia tried the same thing in 2008, but Tennessee wasn’t interested. If it is this time, Congress would have to approve the boundary change.

05 .2013 | TRENDS & TRANSITIONS | 76 | PEOPLE & POLITICS | 05.2013

tUrner harden giBBS

gardner UPShaW

Shirkey

eken

Clark

05 .2013 | TRENDS & TRANSITIONS | 7

State legislatures are making it easier for citizens to testify at House and Senate committee hearings by allowing them to sign in online. The innovation speeds and streamlines the process for witnesses, allows committee heads to manage hearings better and cuts down on clerical work. Arizona was a pioneer with the technology, first offering an online sign-in form in 2003.

For a decade, Arizonans have been able to register to testify by stop-ping by kiosks outside Capitol committee rooms. Once registered, they can submit a request to speak to a particular committee via the Legislature’s website, or at a kiosk. Committee chairmen and chairwomen have instant electronic access to the list of speakers.

Several states have followed suit. After conducting pilot projects in a few committees in 2012, the Illinois General Assembly now offers an online sign-up option for most or all committees. Citizens can use the General Assembly’s website “dashboard” to create, track and manage their online sign-up forms—called witness slips—for bills. In Washington, the Senate launched an electronic sign-up system in two committees in 2012

and expanded it this year. Information about the program is available on the Senate website, but the sign-up itself is available only on the Capitol campus, either at a kiosk or via the Legislature’s public wireless network.

The Texas House this year repurposed older iPads for its online wit-ness-registration system, stationing them around the Capitol for the public. Citizens also can use their own iPads to access the public wireless network to sign up. Chris Griesel, House parliamentarian, says the system is pop-ular and has increased efficiency. Committee clerks have less paperwork, and committee heads can see instantly how many people plan to testify for or against a bill. The information is also sent to committee members’ iPads, where, for example, they can see if a witness is from their district. “It’s been a very gratifying experience,” Griesel says.

Florida House and Senate websites this year added online committee and subcommittee appearance forms. Scott McPherson, chief information officer for the House, describes them as “baby steps toward a digitization of the full committee process.” Those planning to testify can fill out and print the form from their home computer, then give it to a committee clerk,

who scans it so the information is instantly accessible when the per-son testifies. North Carolina uses an electronic “request to Speak” form for larger public hearings.

Hawaii’s “Submit Online Testimony” website feature, launched in 2009, operates somewhat differently. It can be accessed from any location using the “Submit Testimony” icon on the Legislature’s website or from bill-information web pages. After clicking on the icon, citizens submit their written testimony electronically and indicate if they will be present at the hearing. If so, their name will appear on the witness list. The system is limited to bills formally referred to committee and scheduled for hearings. The website tells users the testimony they submit will be available for public viewing on the Legislature’s website.

—Pam Greenberg

A Click to Sign Up

8 | TRENDS & TRANSITIONS | 05.2013

It’s All in the Bag

Ignition Interlocks: Stalling Drinkers

In 2011, 9,878 people died in alcohol-related car accidents. In each of those cases—31 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year—the driver had a blood-alcohol level of .08 higher, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Although fatalities in alcohol-impaired driving crashes have decreased in the last few years, the alcohol-impaired driving fatality rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled remained the same from 2010 to 2011.

At least 11 states are considering expanding their ignition interlock laws. This technology is one tool legislators find effective in alleviating the problem. Ignition interlock devices are connected to a vehicle’s and analyze alcohol on the breath. They prevent vehicles from starting if alcohol

above a set limit is detected on the driver’s breath.All 50 states and the District of Columbia have some type of ignition interlock laws. Fourteen states—Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Hawaii,

Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Oregon utah, Virginia and Washington—require all convicted drunken-driving offenders to install the devices. Other states require only repeat offenders or drivers convicted with higher blood-alcohol concentrations to use them. In 2012, Virginia mandated the use of ignition interlock technology for DuI first offenders, and Florida has introduced similar legislation in 2013.

New Jersey is looking at legislation that would let offenders get back behind the wheel sooner if they agree to install the devices. rhode Island may amend its ignition interlock law. Currently, on a second conviction, a judge may require the offender to install an ignition interlock. A proposed bill would make it mandatory.

With the passage of MAP-21, the new federal transportation bill, grants are available to states that adopt and enforce a mandatory alcohol-ignition interlock law for all drunken-driving offenders. It’s a change from the previous federal law that withheld highway funding from states that did not suspend the driver’s licenses of repeat offenders for at least a year, among other things.

—Anne Teigen

in 2011, 9,878 people died in alcohol-related crashes at an estimated cost of $37 billion.Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Plastic bags are the bane of vacant lots and landfills everywhere. They take up to 1,000 years to decompose, occupying valuable room in landfills, harming wildlife and waterways, and creating eyesores. State legislatures are debating a number of proposals to reduce consumers’ reliance on one-time, disposable plastic bags—which are generally not biodegradable

nor easily recycled. Proponents of banning bags cite the environmental damage they cause, while opponents argue bans limit personal choice and disproportionately burden the poor. State legislatures are looking at measures that would:

1. Ban bags used only one time. Legislatures in seven states, Arkansas, California, Florida, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island and Washington, are considering bans this year. California’s proposal includes single-use bags made of plastic, paper and other materials. Proposals in Florida and Massachusetts would allow shoppers to bring their own single-use bags, but stores would not be permitted to offer them. Other measures under consideration in Florida and Washington would create rules for cities and towns that impose bans or fees on plastic bags.

2. Charge a fee or tax on bags. Eight state legislatures—Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont

and Washington—have proposals that would charge a fee or tax on the distribution of bags. Opponents point out that shoppers ultimately will pay, directly or indirectly, for the retailers’ increased costs. Rhode Island is considering charging shoppers 10 cents a bag. Hawaii would start with 10 cents, increasing to 25 cents if use has not decreased 75 percent by a specified date. The revenues would go to state parks, school districts, community improvement trusts or other public programs.

3. Give credits for bringing your own bag. A bill under consideration in Maryland would require retailers to credit shoppers 5 cents for every bag they bring. Nationally, several retail and grocery stores already give such credits on the theory that it’s cheaper than providing bags.

4. Encourage reuse. California, Delaware, Maine, New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island promote recycling and reusable grocery bags with highly visible in-store recycling bins, signs and labels on bags to reinforce recycling—and offers of paper bags as an alternative to plastic. Over two years, bins in Rhode Island stores collected 18 million plastic bags, which were sold and recycled into composite lumber and other products. In 2013, California, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island have proposed legislation to create or bolster existing plastic bag recycling efforts.

—Douglas Shinkle and Stacie Edelman

05 .2013 | TRENDS & TRANSITIONS | 9Thank a Nurse

Who are the most trusted professionals in America? Nurses have earned that honor in 13 of the past 14 annual Gallup Polls, which ask respondents to rank 22 occupations for honesty, trustworthiness and ethics. National Nurses Week is May 6-12, and today, the

profession is bracing for a tsunami of need. Legislatures are looking at various proposals that affect them, such as permit-ting advanced practice nurses and nurse anesthetists to treat patients without a doctor’s supervision and to prescribe drugs. Below, a few statistics about the people on the front line.

No. 1Projected rank, in terms of job growth through 2020

1 in 5Health-care sector’s share of all jobs created in 2011

260,000Projected shortage of nurses by 2025

$64,690Median annual salary of registered nurses

45.5Average age of registered nurses

50-54Largest age group of working nurses

155,000Number of nurse practitioners, who generally have

advanced degrees and can perform many of the roles

doctors can

$95,000Average annual salary of nurse practitioners in 2012

Sources: U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Association of Colleges of Nursing, Health Resources and Services Administration, U.S. NEWS, American Academy of Nurse Practitioners, American Nurses Association

Tuition Tax Credits Boost Choices

Interest in tuition tax credits continues to grow. Twelve states now offer the credits—also known as scholarship tax credits —which fund private school scholarships for low-income students. Although similar to traditional school vouchers, these scholarships are managed by private, nonprofit organizations rather than government. In tuition tax credit programs, individuals or corporations donate money to organizations that award scholarships for tuition, fees and other private

school expenses. The state awards a tax credit to donors. Proponents believe that because they increase competition in education, student

achievement in all schools will improve. Tuition tax credits also have the potential, proponents say, to save states money by moving students from public to private schools, as long as the savings from the shift is greater than the cost of the tax credit.

That appears to be the case in Florida, where the Legislature’s non-partisan Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountablility estimates tuition tax credits will save the state $57.9 million in FY 2012-13. The credits will cost Florida $229 million, but the state should save $286.9 million in per pupil funding to public schools, the office says. Some critics, however, believe Florida’s analysis overstates the savings.

Tuition tax credit opponents argue the program siphons funding from public schools, and that losing a few students does little to reduce a public school’s operating costs but has a big impact on the funding it receives. Critics also are concerned that organizations granting scholarships can limit which private schools participating students can attend. In some states, a number of scholarship organizations are aligned only with religiously affiliated schools.

Tuititon tax credit programs have survived legal challenges in Florida and Arizona, where traditional vouchers have been found to violate state constitutions.

In 2011 and 2012, 32 states considered, and eight passed, legislation to create new programs or amend existing ones. This year, 17 states are considering legislation. In New Hampshire, opponents are trying to repeal the program enacted last year, which they believe is unconstitutional because scholarships will go mostly to religious schools.

—Josh Cunningham

3DEATH PENALTY DELIBERATEDDebates over whether to abolish the death penalty continue in several of the 32 states that authorize it. Maryland in March became the most recent state to repeal the death penalty. A bill to eliminate it in Washington has been buoyed, supporters believe, by some high profile convictions overturned by DNA testing, along with the high costs of prosecuting and appealing death penalty cases. Opponents argue that executions are appropriate under certain horrific circumstances. Next door in Oregon, the legislature is considering a joint resolution to ban the practice; if it passes, voters would need to approve the constitutional amendment. Lawmakers in Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska and New York have also introduced proposals to abolish the death penalty this year, according to NCSL.

10 | STATELINE | 05 .2013

1AND THE WINNER IS … ?As counterintuitive as it may seem, lottery winners can have it rough. They often have to deal with a prying media, scam artists and others looking for a piece of their pie. Some become crime victims, like the $30-million winner in Florida who befriended a woman who later killed him for his money. Only five states—Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, North Dakota and Ohio—don’t require the names of lottery winners to be disclosed. And a few states even stipulate that winners must appear at press conferences. Lawmakers in Michigan and New Jersey in 2012 debated, but did not pass, bills to give lottery winners more privacy. The Michigan legislation would have allowed winners to remain anonymous, and the New Jersey measure called for a one-day delay in releasing the winners’ names. A proposal in Georgia still under consideration would allow lottery winners to remain anonymous if they donate 25 percent of the prize to the Lottery for Education Account. Lottery officials argue winners’ names should be made public to drive sales.

LINCOLN CONTINUES TO INSPIREThe Oscar-nominated movie “Lincoln”

inspired a Mississippi man to delve further into the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery. What ranjan Batra found surprised him, and it wasn’t that Mississippi failed to ratify the amendment in 1865 along with three-fourths of the states. What caught his attention was that when the state did ratify it in 1995, it didn’t officially notify the u.S. archivist, rendering the ratification invalid. Batra told his friend Ken Sullivan what he had discovered and together they took their case to the Legislature. A resolution calling for official notification passed both the House and Senate in February.

5

2PUPPY LOVELive animals cannot be sold on streets, highways, boardwalks, parking lots or carnivals in California. Flea markets would be added to that list under legislation proposed by Assemblyman roger Dickinson (D). A first offense under the bill would be an infraction with a $250 fine, but the charge would rise to misdemeanor—with a fine of up to $1,000—if the animal suffers or is injured. Dickinson told The Sacramento Bee that puppies, kittens, bunnies, turtles and other animals are often mistreated at flea markets, housed in small pens with little or no food or water. At least one other state, Louisiana, prohibits selling animals at flea markets.4CAMERA SHY

Cameras are watching more American drivers as they approach intersections, and that’s driving debates in state capitols. The cameras snap photos of speeders and red-light runners, who receive tickets in the mail, causing some to object to them as an invasion of privacy. Around 400 communities use cameras to catch red-light runners, while 40 use them to enforce speed limits. State laws run the gamut, from prohibiting their use altogether (Arkansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Hampshire, South Carolina, West Virginia and Wisconsin) to allowing their use in certain cities. Pennsylvania, for example, allows specific cities to use cameras for red-light enforcement. Nevada prohibits the use of cameras unless operated by an officer or installed in a law enforcement vehicle or facility. Advocates say the cameras save lives. A 2011 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that cameras reduced deaths caused by red-light runners 24 percent in large cities. But a study by New Jersey’s transportation department found that crashes in most levels of severity increased during the first year of use. With red-light running causing about 260,000 injuries and 750 deaths every year, the debate is likely to continue.

JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN … DOESN’T MEAN THEY WILLLawmakers in Washington are trying to get used to the idea that they can raise taxes with a simple majority vote. It hasn’t been that way for much of the past two decades—ever since voters first approved the supermajority rule in 1993. But in February, the state Supreme Court said the voter-approved requirement for a two-thirds vote in the Legislature to raise taxes is unconstitutional, and that a constitutional amendment would be necessary to impose such a rule. The honeymoon for those wanting to raise taxes to fill the almost $1 billion budget shortfall may be short-lived, however. The republican-controlled Senate has introduced a constitutional amendment requiring a two-thirds majority to raise taxes, although it may not make it through the Democrat-controlled House. According to NCSL,17 states require supermajority votes to raise all or some taxes. Depending on the state, “supermajority” means there must be a three-fifths, two-thirds or three-fourths majority vote in both chambers.

05 .2013 | STATELINE | 11

10 GUN SAFETY 101Public high schools in Maine would be required to offer gun safety courses under legislation sponsored by representative Paul Davis (r). A former state trooper, Davis said the measure is meant to enhance public

safety and educate people about the use of firearms. He said gun clubs and organizations could provide volunteer certified instructors so

cash-strapped schools would not have to pay for the courses. Opponents argued that gun safety programs are already

available, and schools shouldn’t have their resources stretched thin by another mandate from the state. South Carolina and Washington are considering similar bills that would either allow or promote, but not require, gun safety programs. At least three states—Arizona, Michigan and Texas—allow

gun safety instruction in schools, according to NCSL.

9A SMOKING QUANDARYYoung smokers in Texas got a reprieve when Senator Carlos uresti (D) asked that consideration of his bill be delayed. uresti had proposed raising the legal age to buy cigarettes from 18 to 21. He wanted to curb teen smoking and cut Medicaid expenses for treating smoking-related illnesses. But with a $1.41 per pack tax on cigarettes, the Texas Legislative Budget Board estimated the state would lose millions of dollars annually in revenues. Most states allow 18-year-olds to purchase cigarettes, but the legal age is 19 in Alabama, Alaska, New Jersey and utah. Texas would have been the first state to require cigarette buyers be at least 21.

6HEAVY METALArizona may soon recognize coin or bullion with gold or silver content to be legal tender. A bill by Senator Chester Crandell (r) passed the Senate in March. The metal money would serve as a contingency should the u.S. dollar collapse. utah became the first state in 2011 to authorize an alternative currency when the Legislature passed a law allowing gold and silver coins from the u.S. Mint to serve as an acceptable form of payment. More than 15 states have considered alternative currencies since utah’s action in 2011. In the 2013 legislative sessions, Arizona, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, utah, Virginia and Wyoming have had bills introduced regarding using gold or silver as legal tender, according to NCSL.

7A BUFFALO ‘MAKE MY DAY’ MEASURE

Landowners would be allowed to shoot wild bison that trespass on their property under a bill passed by the Montana House in February. Bison seeking winter foraging ground outside Yellowstone National Park often move onto private land, causing conflicts with landowners. Proponents of the bill argued that wild bison can damage property and injure humans, and that their destruction would be only a last resort. Opponents said state law does not allow landowners to shoot other game animals, and some Native Americans expressed concern that tribal bison could be targeted. State officials estimate that 100 bison could be killed annually under the measure.

8

By Scott Hendrick and claire lewiS

One thousand feet under a rocky ridge in southern Nevada lies a five-mile-long, 25-foot-wide u-shaped tunnel. Known as Yucca Mountain, the passageway was supposed to house the bulk of the nation’s used nuclear fuel and hottest radioactive military waste.

Instead, it sits empty—a glaring reminder of how difficult it is to find a permanent resting place for some of the world’s most dangerous materials.

Meanwhile, utilities (and indirectly their ratepayers) con-tinue to pump money—$27 billion since 1982—into a fund that has remained untouched since plans for Yucca Mountain were shelved in 2010.

And the waste piles up. More than 68,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel have been produced by the nuclear energy industry, the bulk of which sits at operating or shuttered nuclear power plants in 35 states. The military has gener-ated about 13,000 metric tons of high-level waste. And an additional 2,000 metric tons are added each year.

Local Cooperation CrucialThe story of Yucca Mountain is a cau-

tionary tale about what can happen when the federal government imposes its will on a state without its cooperation or consent. Despite objections by many in Nevada, Congress officially designated it a future nuclear waste repository in 1987 and began

to study and develop it—at a cost of more than $15 billion. Nevada claimed its sovereign rights were being violated and

launched a series of legal attacks on the project, challenging the

federal government’s environmental, public health and safety standards.

But it was President Obama’s decision to withdraw the site’s operating license application—with support from u.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry reid of Nevada—that ultimately derailed the project. Although the decision is being challenged in court, the prospects of Yucca Mountain ever receiving waste at this point are dim.

“What the demise of the Yucca Mountain project tells us is that the federal government needs to work with states and local communities during the entire process of siting, building and

Scott Hendrick and Claire Lewis track radioactive waste management issues for NCSL.

On the Road to Nowhere

States confront the challenges of what do with the

growing amounts of nuclear waste.

12 | HIGH-LEVEL WASTE | 05.2013

NCSL’s Working GroupNCSL’s Nuclear Legislative Working Group consists of

about 75 state legislators from around the country who dis-cuss issues surrounding the cleanup of cold-war weapons production areas, the shipment of radioactive waste through the states, and nuclear energy. For more information on this bipartisan working group and other nuclear waste concerns, go to www.ncsl.org/magazine.

“The federal government needs to work with states and local communities

during the entire process of siting, building and

operating a nuclear waste repository.”

—rEPrESENTATIVE JOHN rAGAN (r),

TENNESSEE

operating a nuclear waste repository,” says Ten-nessee representative John ragan (r).

That’s also the conclusion of The Blue rib-bon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, charged by President Obama to find a new way to manage nuclear waste. In 2012, the commis-sion made eight major recommendations to Con-gress and federal agencies. The first was that the federal government establish a consent-based approach to finding places to store waste.

Perception ProblemFinding communities that will take the nuclear waste is not

the most difficult part of the problem. The jobs, federal money and other economic benefits that follow a nuclear waste site make it attractive to many.

The most significant hurdle can be convincing others in the state that the benefits of accepting nuclear waste outweigh the potential risks.“Finding a consenting community is merely a first step,” wrote William Alley, the former chief of the Yucca Moun-tain waste storage site, in a recent opinion piece in New Scien-tist.“The harder part is getting everyone else to sign on.”

In addition to Nye County, Nev., where local officials were strongly in favor of the Yucca Mountain project, Oak ridge, Tenn., and the Skull Valley Band of the Goshute Nation in utah, also saw local efforts to open nuclear waste sites scuttled by statewide opposition.

But not all attempts to site nuclear waste disposal facilities have failed. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) outside Carlsbad, N.M., has stored protective gear, tools and other long-lived radioactive debris (known as transuranic or Tru waste) from the military’s nuclear weapons research and production facilities since 1999. The waste is kept 2,150 feet below ground

05 .2013 | HIGH-LEVEL WASTE | 13

High-Level Nuclear Waste 101What is high-level radioactive waste?used fuel from nuclear power plants and certain military waste, such as nuclear fuel from submarines and byproducts from nuclear weapons research and pro-duction.

how much waste is out there?More than 68,000 metric tons of used fuel from nuclear power plants and about 13,000 metric tons of military waste. About 2,000 metric tons are produced every year.

is this waste dangerous?It is very radioactive, and will remain so for thousands of years. Direct exposure can cause cancer and even death. When properly stored and managed, however, most believe it does not pose a risk to human health or the environment.

Where is all this waste?In storage in 35 states. Most of the military’s high-level radioactive waste is stored at the Hanford facility in Washington, the Idaho National Laboratory site, the Savannah river site near the border of South Carolina and Georgia, and the West Valley site near Buffalo, N.Y. In 31 states, commercial waste is stored at the oper-ating nuclear power facility producing it; in four states, the waste remains onsite at closed power plants. The military waste could theoretically stay at the four major sites permanently. The safest place to store waste, however, is underground in a geologic repository.

how is the waste stored?First in pools of water at least 20 feet deep. It cools there for five to 10 years. The water shields workers and the surrounding environment from the radiation. After the initial cooling period, the fuel can either stay in the pools or be moved to dry casks—leak-proof steel and concrete cylinders. The u.S. Nuclear regula-tory Commission has determined that the waste can be safely stored this way for at least 30 years after a plant stops operating.

how do other countries store high-level waste?In wet pools and dry casks at nuclear power plants. No country has yet to open a permanent underground storage place, although significant progress toward opening sites is being made in several countries. Finland and Sweden are fur-thest along, having selected sites with local support and pursued approval to begin construction.

Representative

John Ragan (R)

Tennessee

in the Salado Formation, a giant salt deposit that stretches from northern Mexico through southeastern New Mex-ico and into west Texas. Salt beds keep the waste dry and seal it away from groundwater that could eventually move the waste to the surface.

When local officials first suggested the idea in the 1970s, it was met with skepticism by many. Some didn’t want their highways used for shipments of other states’ radioactive waste. Others raised concerns about the design of the transportation casks and the environmental and public health standards that would govern the site. New Mexico twice filed lawsuits to stop development and agreed to the site only after Congress passed a law in 1992 that gave the state authority to regulate the wastes and permit the site.

That law also gave New Mexico money for highway safety and emergency preparedness, and required the u.S. Department of Energy to prepare plans for eventu-ally extracting the waste and shutting down the site. It also guaranteed that highly radioactive nuclear fuel and military waste would not be stored at the site, eliminating the possibility of using WIPP to fulfill the role of Yucca Mountain without changes to federal law.

Nonetheless, WIPP may provide a model for how local, state and federal officials can work together to open a permanent repository for high-level radioactive waste.

A Fresh StartWith the appropriate authorization from Congress,

the u.S. Department of Energy plans to kick-start a new process to locate nuclear waste sites that incorporates the Blue ribbon Commission’s recommendations and includes all affected parties. The department’s goal: to open temporary storage sites by 2021 and 2025 to house waste until a permanent repository is opened by 2048.

In the meantime, states with nowhere to store their radioactive waste are losing patience with the federal gov-ernment. It was supposed to begin collecting used nuclear fuel by 1998, and continues to collect fees from nuclear utilities and their customers for the Nuclear Waste Fund.

“Continuing to pay millions of dollars each year to the Nuclear Waste Fund is beyond frustrating,” says Minnesota rep-resentative Joe Atkins (D). “The Nuclear Waste Fund is like a garbage service we hired 30 years ago, which has never once shown up to collect the trash, yet we keep paying for it. It makes no sense.”

The Pressure Mountsrepresentative Atkins and lawmakers in five other

states have proposed legislation over the years to stop

Where Used Nuclear Fuel Sits in Storage(End of 2011)

14 | HIGH-LEVEL WASTE | 05.2013

Metric Tons01 – 1,0001,001 – 2,0002,001 – 3,0003,001 – 4,0004,001 – 5,000More than 5,000

America’s High-Level

Waste By the

Numbers

81,000 metric tons

Amount of waste with nowhere to go

2,000 metric tonsAmount of waste

produced each year

104Number of nuclear power

plants in the county

20%Amount of our electricity

needs produced by nuclear power

$27 billionAmount sitting in the Nuclear Waste Fund

19Number of new reactors in the planning stage in

15 states

Source: Nuclear Energy

Institute, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission,

U.S. Department of Energy

Representative

Joe Atkins (D)

Minnesota

Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission

1. Use a consent-based approach to siting future nuclear waste-management facilities.2. Dedicate a new organization solely to implementing the waste-manage-ment program with the authority and resources to succeed.3. Allow funds nuclear utility ratepayers have been paying to be used for nuclear waste management without having to compete with other federal spending priorities.4. Develop one or more permanent geologic repositories and temporary con-solidated storage facilities promptly.5. Prepare for eventually transporting large-scale spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste to these facilities when they become available.6. Support research and innovation in nuclear energy technology. 7. Offer appropriate training to prepare workers.8. Provide leadership in international efforts to address safety, waste man-agement, proliferation and security concerns.

or reduce payments to the fund to force some federal action. Although none have yet passed, until the federal government upholds its side of the bargain, radioactive waste will continue piling up at nuclear facilities around the country.

State legislatures are working to ensure the continued safety of the nuclear power industry and its stockpiles of used fuel. State agencies routinely check for the presence of radioactive materials in areas surrounding the power plants. States can also conduct independent safety inspections of power plants to ensure operations comply with state laws.

Many states also have established accounts funded by power plant operators or the state to pay for emergency response and cleanup efforts if an accident occurs at a nuclear power plant.

In addition, faced with the uncertainty of what will happen with the growing amount of high-level waste, some states are reluctant to include nuclear power in future energy planning decisions. Thirteen state legislatures have passed laws prohibit-ing construction of new nuclear facilities until a permanent dis-posal site is opened.

Meanwhile, the u.S. Nuclear regulatory Commission has

announced it will not issue final approval of any new plants until it determines the safety and environmental implications of storing fuel at nuclear power plants for more than the 30 years originally intended after a plant closes.

The “Waste Confidence Decision,” which will evaluate on-site fuel storage for an addi-tional 30 years, is expected sometime in 2014 and is part of the required environmen-tal analysis for all new reactor licenses and license renewals. If the decision is that fuel can be stored safely at plants for 60 years after they close, the Nuclear regulatory Commission will continue to issue new reac-tor licenses and license renewals. But if the final decision is that safety could be compromised after 30 years, further environmental analysis will have to be done. This could have a chilling effect on plans to open new plants or continue operating existing plants as their licenses come up for renewal.

Much is left to be done to lay the foundation for a successful waste management system. Con-gress needs to authorize new interim storage and permanent disposal sites and consider how they should be managed and paid for. And a process for locating these facilities needs to incorporate the interests and concerns of all parties, from city hall to the statehouse.

“State policymakers are ready and willing to play a meaningful role in creating a timely, cost-effective solution to this important public policy challenge,” says Maryland Delegate Sally Jameson (D), chair of NCSL’s Nuclear Legislative Working Group. “We can help to break the logjam on this issue.”

“The Nuclear Waste Fund is like a garbage service we hired 30 years ago, which has never once shown up to collect the trash, yet we

keep paying for it. It makes no sense.”

—rEPrESENTATIVE JOE ATKINS (D)

MINNESOTA

Delegate

Sally

Jameson (D)

Maryland

05 .2013 | HIGH-LEVEL WASTE | 15

By wendy UnderHill

Online voter registration is a nonpartisan trend with a capital “T.”

We know it’s a trend because of history: Arizona led the way in 2002, Washington was second in 2008, and today, 17 states offer, or will soon offer, online voter registration. And, legislatures in at least 12 states

are considering it this year.

We know it’s nonpartisan because it appeals to efficien-cy-minded lawmakers from both sides of the aisle. Democratic states such as Maryland and Washington have it, and so do republican states such as Arizona and South Carolina (where it passed unanimously in 2012).

But what exactly is it? What’s called online registration or electronic registration is in fact just the opportunity for a citizen to complete an online application for voter registration. (Voters are still welcome to fill out a paper application if they prefer.) As with a paper-based registration, authorities check eligibil-ity before the registration is completed and the voter’s data are transferred into the statewide database.

No Lines Online

Wendy Underhill tracks and writes about voting and election issues for NCSL.

16 | VOTER REGISTRATION | 05.2013

More states are offering voters the convenience of registering online because it’s cheap, easy

and increasingly secure.

Easy on Voters and a Cost Saver “I’m a huge fan of online registration because it has made

registration easy for our citizens,” says Scott Gessler, Colora-do’s republican secretary of state. In 2012, Colorado went a step beyond a computer-based online registration process and devel-oped a web-optimized version that makes it possible to regis-ter from smartphones and tablets. Gessler also ran a $1 million public education campaign in the summer and early fall—one of the reasons that registrations in the Centennial State jumped 13 percent compared to four years earlier.

“I look at it as a way to increase the franchise as much as possible, but also a way to increase security,” says Gessler. By giving people the opportunity to update their own registration record, the system also “cleans up our database at the same time—and we’re not doing it by spending a massive amount of state resources.”

By state resources, Gessler means money. Setting up online systems has been relatively inexpensive for states. On the low end, utah spent $37,000 on initial costs, and Oregon character-ized its expenses as “minimal.” Colorado spent $120,000, mostly for programming. And on the high end, Louisiana estimates it spent $750,000 to $1 million; its system includes a number of add-ons, such as the option to request an absentee ballot online. All states report that ongoing expenses are absorbed within exist-ing departments.

The money question is really more about savings than costs. For example, in Arizona, a paper-based registration costs 83 cents to process, while an online registration comes in around 3 cents. From a national perspective, David Becker of the Pew Charitable Trusts says research indicates that “states that have implemented online registration have improved access to the rolls, greatly increased accuracy and experienced significant cost savings.”

Security Steps Costs and convenience don’t seem to be a problem. What

about security? How do we know if a person is really who he says he is? In Colorado, to use the online voter registration system, citizens must have a Colorado driver’s license or iden-tity card, both of which required a visit at some point to a state department of motor vehicles office with appropriate identifica-tion in hand.

Other states use similar systems. That provides a degree of certainty that “a human being is behind every registration,” says Gessler.

There’s another level of security to consider: protection against hacking. In 2012, computer scientists, including the uni-versity of Michigan’s J. Alex Halderman, pointed out vulnerabil-ities in Maryland’s and Washington’s online voter registration

systems. “What legislators need to remember is that voter regis-tration is an important part of the overall security of the election system,” Halderman says. “Security experts must be consulted during the design of the system, adequate security testing must be conducted before the system goes live, and ongoing monitor-ing and threat-detection efforts must be built in.”

And yet, he’s a fan: “It’s possible to do online voter registration securely. We just need to take the necessary precautions.”

To read a Q and A with computer expert J. Alex Halderman, go to www.ncsl.org/magazine.

05 .2013 | VOTER REGISTRATION | 17

STATE LEGISLATURES

Where Citizens Can Register to Vote Online

Offer online registration

Offer partial online registration

Have passed but not implemented online registration

Are considering online registration

Notes: Most states with online registration passed enabling legislation to create their systems, but Arizona and Kansas did so without changing the law. Delaware offers online registration for citizens who have digital signatures; New York’s system is paper-less from the voter’s perspective, but not entirely electronic between the motor vehicle department and the statewide voter registration database.

Source: NCSL, March 31, 2013.

DREAM OF GREATNESS

COME TO ATLANTA

This summer, be part of the nation’s largest gathering

of legislators and legislative staff at the 2013 Legislative

Summit in Atlanta—a city that dares to dream big.

Opportunities to cOnnecT with legislators, staff

and experts from around the country.

Hundreds of sessions that LeAd you to solutions

to the toughest problems you face.

Speakers who inSpire with fresh perspectives,

new ideas and seasoned wisdom.

REGISTER TODAY AT WWW.NCSL.ORG/SUMMIT

By doUglaS SHinkle

Light rail in Charlotte, rapid buses in Cleveland, street-cars in St. Louis, commuter rail between Albuquer-que and Santa Fe. Communities across the nation are responding to citizens’ demands for more transporta-tion choices. In 2013 alone, more than 700 rail, street-car and “bus rapid transit” projects are being planned

or are already under construction, according to reconnecting America, a national transit advocacy group.

All levels of government have invested hundreds of billions of taxpayers’ dollars into these projects nationwide, stirring skeptics to question whether transit is a wise public investment. Given the high initial costs of some of these transit options, ensur-ing there will be enough riders is essential. In most instances,

careful studies are conducted before any track is laid or lane is designated. New transit is much more likely to be used, however, if the area has been developed to encourage the use of public trans-portation—a strategy known as transit-oriented development.

Lawmakers, developers, residents and business owners are anxious to capitalize on transit investments to bolster economic development, lessen traffic congestion and meet the increased market demand for transit- and walker-friendly communities, especially popular among young workers and empty-nesters.

Transit on the InclinePublic transportation is in. People are choosing mass transit at

levels unseen since the late 1950s, before many cities began to dismantle their systems. In 2012, people took 10.5 billion trips on transit systems, the second-highest number since 1957—sur-passed only by 2008, a year with record high gas prices. Young people ages 16 to 34 especially are choosing transit, hopping

Life on the Fast Track

Doug Shinkle is a senior policy specialist for NCSL’s Environment, Energy and Transportation Program.

States and cities are finding ways to meet the growing demand for rapid transit and rider-friendly communities.

20 | TRANSIT | 05.2013

on buses or light-rail trains a whopping 40 percent more than in 2001.

The effect of the recession on household budgets may be playing a role. Taking transit instead of driving a car can save a person more than $10,000 a year in gas, insurance, maintenance and other costs, according to the American Public Transportation Association.

More and more, state legislatures are considering the value and economic benefits of funding and supporting transit-oriented developments.

In utah, new tracks have been laid at a blistering pace, from zero miles in 1998 to 80 miles in 2013 to a projected 150 miles of light and commuter rail by 2015. These new transportation choices are proving popular with utahans; ridership on com-muter and light rail both increased almost 15 percent from 2011 to 2012.

In 2010, to encourage economic investments and increase tax

What’s TOD?“Transit-oriented developments” provide moderate- to high-density housing, shopping, services and businesses where people can easily walk, bike and take transit. These communities generate revenue for the public and private sectors, offer more transportation choices and boost transit ridership.

What’s BRT?“Bus rapid transit” is increasingly common across the globe but is relatively new in the United States. It refers to a bus system with limited stops that uses dedicated lanes and has a quick, easy way to collect fares. These bus systems are more reliable and faster than regular buses. They usually use existing roads and stations, making them a cheaper option than rail systems that require new construction. An analysis by the Government Account-ability Office found the bus systems averaged a capital cost of $13.5 million per-mile compared to $34.8 million for light-rail. Business owners and transit riders, however, sometimes prefer the permanency and perceived economic development opportunities of rail lines.

05 .2013 | TRANSIT | 21

Ridership’s Up11.0 –

10.5 –

10.0 –

9.5 –

9.0 –

8.5 –

8.0 –

7.5 –

7.0 –

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

rid

ers

in m

illio

ns

STATE LEGISLATURES

Source: American Public Transportation Association.

22 | TRANSIT | 05.2013

TRANSIT By the Numbers

1827The year the first transit

service was offered in New York City—via horse-drawn

buggy.

10.5 billionTransit trips taken by Americans in 2012.

40% Increase in transit miles ridden

by Americansages 16 to 34 from 2001 to 2009.

79%Local ballot measures on

transit funding approved by voters in 2012.

3.4 million (1%)Americans who met the daily recommended 30 minutes of

physical activity by walking to and from transit stops.

$10.578 billionFederal money dedicated to

transit for 2013.

$1.9 billionFederal money in New Starts

program for new and expanded rail, bus rapid transit and ferry

systems for 2013.

Sources: The American Public Transportation Association, Frontier Group, the Center

for Transportation Excellence, American Journal of Public

Health, Budget and Tax Center/North Carolina Justice

Center, Federal Transit Administration.

revenues for communities, utah lawmakers passed legislation to improve access to and increase popu-lation density along these new transit routes. The law allows the utah Transit Authority to enter into five public-private partnerships for mixed-use develop-ments near transit stations. The government authority contributes the property while the private develop-ers contribute the equity. The transit authority will receive a return on its investment and a share in the profits to offset future transit oper-ating costs that otherwise would be funded by taxes and fares.

“utah is attracting more high-qual-ity companies that require well-edu-cated and well-trained employees,” says representative Bradley Last (r), House sponsor of the legislation. “Some of the employees move from other cities where public transit and limited use of cars is more prevalent. Transit-oriented developments could be a very natural fit.”

The program already has two large mixed-use developments slated to break ground in 2013. These projects will be built to be convenient and efficient to attract and keep rid-ers, the majority of whom use transit by choice, not by necessity.

utah representative Greg Hughes (r) was skeptical of investing in new transit projects until he learned how cost-effective they can be compared to building new roads. He’s now

chairman of the utah Transit Authority board and has come to believe that transit-oriented development is essential to capitalizing on the $3 billion already invested in transit projects in the region.

“What a missed opportunity,” says Hughes, “if we don’t develop and take advantage of this growth.”

Connecting the Dots In Minnesota, the Metropolitan Council—created

by the Legislature in 1967 “to coordinate planning and development within the Twin Cities metropoli-tan area”—announced $32 million in grants would be available to communities to develop the areas around transit corridors. The money comes from the Livable Communities Fund, created by lawmakers in the 1990s and funded primarily through property taxes. Minnesota Senator Scott Dibble (D), chairman of the Transportation and Public Safety Committee, says the fund is intended to support projects that reinforce a community’s com-mitment to transit-oriented develop-ment and vice-versa—that developing those kinds of communities will only encourage more investment in mass transit projects.

The state has awarded $25 million so far for a wide variety of activities, including acquiring land, build-ing affordable housing, cleaning up polluted land and designing pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods. This support is not only helping to provide transportation choices, says Dibble, but also is promoting the wise

Representative

Bradley Last (R)

Utah

Representative

Greg Hughes (R)

Utah

Senator

Scott

Dibble (D)

Minnesota

05 .2013 | TRANSIT | 23

use of government funds by targeting investments in existing communities. “Chances are pretty good that new mixed-use tran-sit development is going into areas that already have services and streets, making use of existing, expensive public infrastructure that is already paid for.”

Location, Location, LocationHousing in walkable communities near transit services is a

hot commodity. A recent study in Denver found property within a quarter-mile of light-rail stops was fetching about 25 percent more from developers, and renters were willing to pay about 4 percent more to live near a light-rail stop.

This trend, however, can hurt the very people who need afford-able, close-by transit options. Although all workers use public transit more when they live near it, another Denver study found that low-income workers within a half-mile of a stop commuted by transit twice as often as any other group. With these dynamics in mind, most state laws require a mix of housing options in transit-oriented developments.

“Locating homes and workplaces near transit stations relieves some of the burden on family budgets by increasing access to more affordable transportation options,” says Massachusetts rep-resentative Joseph Wagner (D), chairman of the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. In Boston, for example, housing and transportation costs eat up nearly half of an average family’s income because affordable housing is difficult to find.

Wagner hopes new transit-oriented development may help the venerable city provide more options for its families. In 2012, the legislature made this kind of development the centerpiece of MassWorks, a comprehensive infrastructure grant program intended to be a one-stop resource for municipalities and other public entities. Lawmakers allocated almost $96 million to it in FY 2012 and FY 2013. At least 67 percent of the funds must sup-port infrastructure developments within a half-mile of a transit stop where two or more routes converge.

MassWorks also supports affordable housing development within a quarter-mile of a transit station or ferry terminal. This supplements the $50 million the legislature allocated in the past decade for a Transit-Oriented Development Bond Program, which also helped provide affordable housing near transit ser-vices for lower-income families.

Massachusetts’ efforts, combined with market forces and demand, appear to be making a significant dent in the housing scarcity. Between 2000 and 2010, the Boston region added more than 15,000 housing units near transit. Wagner believes tran-sit-oriented development can be a key to improving the state’s overall economic competitiveness and promoting efficient use of limited infrastructure funds.

Moving AheadExpanding transit systems in response to the demand may be

an important element in moving the country forward, literally.

Transit’s future will depend in part on developing communities where hopping on the light-rail or jumping on rapid transit bus is an easy, safe and inexpensive choice.

“It would be a shame if we don’t take advantage of opportuni-ties to develop these transit systems,” says utah representative Hughes. “They have the potential to serve a large part of the pop-ulation in a very cost-effective and easy way.”

Transit and the Transportation Funding Crisis

Transportation revenues continue to fall short of infrastructure needs. State transportation budgets rely heavily on federal and state gas taxes, which have steadily declined in light of the growing use of alternative-fuel and fuel-efficient vehicles, making it difficult to meet ever-rising construction costs.

Traditionally, the federal government and local governing bodies have shared responsibility for building new transit projects, while states took the lead on roads. In recent years, however, states have played a greater role in provid-ing affordable, accessible transit options—to the tune of around $13.6 billion in 2010, more than the federal government contributed, according to the most recent Survey of State Funding for Public Transportation.

Transit projects have been an important part of many ongoing transporta-tion funding debates in state legislatures. The Missouri General Assembly, for example, is looking at imposing a 10-year sales tax for transportation projects (including transit). The Minnesota Legislature is considering a sales and use tax for transit projects in the Twin Cities area, while Maryland is proposing to pay for transit by raising fares and tying them to inflation. And the Virginia General Assembly enacted a high-profile transportation funding overhaul that is expected to increase funding for highways, transit and rail. An idea to raise more money for transit and rail by hiking vehicle registration fees, however, did not make it into the final bill.

Local governments, however, still provide the lion’s share of funds for transit, and some state legislatures are considering giving them more flexibility in their transit funding options. Lawmakers in Maryland, Michigan and Washington, for example, are considering whether to allow regional or local entities to col-lect additional fees or taxes to benefit transit, while Colorado legislators debate whether localities should be allowed to spend their portion of gas tax revenues on transit projects.

—Jaime Rall

Representative

Joseph

Wagner (D)

Massachusetts

STATE LEGISLATURES

BY KARL KuRTz

The political landscape changed dramatically after the 2012 election. For the first time in more than 50 years, one party controls both chambers of the legislature and the governors’ office in 37 states—Republicans in 23 states, Democrats in 14.

“The 2012 election drove home a key political trend: The red states are getting redder and the blue states are getting bluer,” says university of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato. “This is a highly polarized era.”

This stark political divide has significant political and policy consequences in highly charged partisan areas such as health care, labor, social issues, immigration and tax policy.

The last time there were this many states under one-party control was during the height of the Cold War and “Communist threat,” following Dwight D. Eisenhower’s first election as pres-ident in 1952. Just about everyone liked Ike, his coattails were long, and Republicans won the majority of state legislatures out-side the South.

Following Eisenhower’s time in the Oval Office and through the 1970s, the number of “unified governments” declined to about half the states. Then during the mid-’80s through 2004, divided governments were more common than not, with each party controlling at least one chamber or the governorship in more than half the states.

The change in the dominant party has been just about as dra-matic. until 1994, Democrats controlled more states than Repub-licans, partly because they held the 13 southern states. Since Democrats started losing their dominance in the Solid South in 1994, Republicans have controlled more states after every elec-tion except two.

What has brought about this increase in unified governments? According to Sabato, nearly 90 percent of voters identify with or lean toward one party, and increasingly they vote for all or almost all members of that party on Election Day. A 2012 Gallup Poll at the national level showed that a record-high 38 percent of voters preferred that the president and Congress be of the same party. “The electorate itself does what straight-party levers in the voting machines used to do,” says Sabato.

The 2012 state elections reflect this party-line voting. In 22 of the 24 states that Governor Mitt Romney carried, Republicans either held on to or gained the majority in both legislative cham-bers. The exceptions are Kentucky and West Virginia, where Democrats still hold on at the state legislative level against the trend of Republican gains in the South, but voters reliably choose Republicans in presidential elections.

Likewise, Democrats now control or maintained the majority of both houses in 18 of the 26 states President Barack Obama won.

The eight states that voted for Obama but have legislatures at least partially under republican control are Florida, Iowa, Mich-igan, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wis-consin. All were battleground states and could have gone either way in the presidential results. Obama won all eight, and Demo-crats made some gains in their state legislatures, but not enough to take control of both chambers.

These Unified States

Karl Kurtz, director of NCSL’s Trust for Representative Democracy, has analyzed legislatures and elections for NCSL for more than 40 years.

24 | LEGISLATURES | 05.2013

The country’s highly polarized politics has significant repercussions for state governments.

Safe States and DistrictsThe great majority of states are anchored so deeply in either

the blue or red political sea that only 12 to 15 states are com-petitive enough that both parties have a chance to control the entire government during the next 10 years. Not that either party couldn’t win the odd governorship or one chamber of the legisla-ture in the other states, but the great majority of states are “safe” for one party or the other.

Of course safe states are a result in part of safe districts —constituencies that overwhelmingly vote for one party, and the other one often doesn’t even contest. The number of safe districts ebbs and flows over time and is comparatively high right now. Just as the national parties pick and choose a few states to focus on in presidential elections, state parties target only certain state legislative races. And the more likely the majority party is to prevail in the election, the less like the minority party is to field candidates—at both the state and district levels.

Experts disagree about whether partisan redistricting or the ten-dency of people with similar political leanings to flock together is more responsible for the increasingly large number of “safe” legislative districts. But there can be little doubt that partisan redistricting after the 2010 Census solidified the advantages of the party that controlled the process in the states that had unified government and the legislature controls the redistricting process.

A handful of states have nonpartisan redistricting commissions. Still, history warns against assuming any political shift is per-

manent. “Divided government isn’t going to disappear,” says Sabato. “One reason is because we have staggered elections, with different state offices coming up in different years that generate contrary party waves.” He points out 2006 and 2008 as examples of wave elections for Democrats, while the Republi-cans, in 2010, took the big census year in a landslide.

“This creates a mix-and-match landscape in many states,” he says. “What’s truly remarkable is that we have this degree of uni-fied government in the states today despite staggered elections.”

Policy Pendulum Swings “Whatever the reasons for the increase in unified state gov-

ernments, it means that one party controls the policy agenda and usually the outcomes,” says Boise State university political sci-entist Gary Moncrief.

In policy terms, the all-Republican and all-Democratic states are like trains going in opposite directions on parallel tracks. On highly charged partisan issues like collective bargaining, immi-gration, gay marriage, abortion, health care exchanges and voter ID, Republican governors and legislators are moving in one direction while Democrats head the opposite way.

The most interesting states to watch are the ones that have

05 .2013 | LEGISLATURES | 2524 | LEGISLATURES | 05.2013

States With Unified Government

STATE LEGISLATURES

Unified Under Republicans

Unified Under Democrats

flipped the most. In Wisconsin, Repub-licans wasted no time making significant policy changes after winning control of both chambers and the governorship in the 2010 election. The most visible change was the controversial rollback in 2011 of public employee unions’ power to bargain collectively.

Republicans also took control in Maine after the 2010 election and pro-ceeded to cut taxes, curtail the issuance of bonds for infrastructure development and take positions against the establish-ment of a health care exchange.

This year, the new Democratic major-ities in both legislative chambers are looking to alter those decisions, although they likely face the opposition of Repub-lican Governor Paul LePage.

Similarly, the election of a Republican governor in Michigan in 2010 allowed the already Republican legislature to

pass a right-to-work bill and a number of restrictions on abortions at the end of the 2011-12 biennium.

When Democrats recaptured the House in Colorado in 2012, they went immediately to work on two issues sty-mied in the previous Republican-con-trolled legislature: civil unions for gays and in-state college tuition for children of undocumented immigrants. A third issue emerged as well in the wake of last summer’s theater shootings in a Denver suburb—gun restrictions. The General Assembly passed all three, and Dem-ocratic Governor John Hickenlooper signed them into law.

In North Carolina, the 2012 election of Governor Patrick McCrory rounded out Republican control in the Tar Heel State. And as a result, the 2013 legis-lative session has focused on voter ID, environmental deregulation and tax reform initiatives that the conservative majority was unable to pass under the previous Democratic governor.

“We call this the ‘policy pendulum swing.’ When one party gains substan-tial control after years in the minority or in a divided government, the pendulum swings,” says Moncrief. “But if the new majority party overreaches, and the pol-

icy swings too far, there may be public reaction.”

Examples of his point include a series of recall elections against Wisconsin senators initiated by both sides over the contentious collective bargaining debate, as well as popular referenda that suc-cessfully repealed legislation enacted by powerful legislative majorities in Idaho (teacher collective bargaining and pay and education financing), Maine (elim-ination of election day registration), Michigan (state authority for local gov-ernment emergency management), Ohio (collective bargaining) and South Dakota (teacher pay and collective bargaining.)

Veto-Proof MajoritiesToday’s polarized politics also have

produced majorities with enough votes to overturn a governor’s veto in 25 states. In most states, this requires a two-thirds majority in both houses. But in a few states, either a three-fifths or a simple majority suffices.

While this is an unusually large num-ber of veto-proof legislatures, these supermajorities only really matter in the three states where the governor and the legislature are from different parties—Arkansas, Missouri and Rhode Island.

Counting to 37 Determining how many unified state governments

there are at any one time is an inexact science and can change even within a two-year election cycle. Depending how and when one counts, for example, puts the number of unified states after the 2012 election anywhere from 34 to 38 states. Historically, NCSL has counted whether one party holds the majority of seats in both chambers of the legislature and the governorship immediately after even-numbered-year elections only. This method, how-ever, has the following caveats:◆ The states that hold odd-year elections are counted in the succeeding even-numbered year. ◆ Nebraska is not counted because it is officially non-partisan, even though it is widely known to be a unified state under Republican control. Adding the Cornhusker State would increase the total to 38 states. ◆ Coalitions formed after an election to change party control are not counted. This happened in the New York and Washington senates this year, where a small number of Democrats, who are nominally in the majority, joined with Republicans to take control of those chambers. To count those states as divided would reduce the number of unified states to 35. ◆ Judgment calls must be made on occasion. For exam-ple, the Virginia Senate is tied, but the Republican lieu-tenant governor has the tie-breaking vote, so NCSL counts Virginia as unified under the Republicans. If counted as divided, the total number of states under the control of one party would be reduced to 34.

26 | LEGISLATURES | 05.2013

(When they are of the same party, differences are more often negotiated, and governors sel-dom resort to vetoes.)

In Rhode Island, Republican-turned-inde-pendent Governor Lincoln Chafee—who had five of his 20 vetoes overridden during the 2011-12 biennium now faces even more Demo-crats, in three-fourths of the legislative seats. In Arkansas, holdover Democratic Governor Mike Beebe faces a new Republican majority in both chambers where a simple majority suffices to overturn vetoes. While Beebe did not veto any bills in the previous legislative session when his fellow Democrats held a majority in both cham-bers, he has vetoed three bills already this ses-sion, two dealing with abortion restrictions and one on voter ID, and the legislature has overrid-den them within hours.

Missouri Governor Jay Nixon (D) now faces a stronger Republican majority in the General Assembly after it gained in the last election the two-thirds needed to override his vetoes. (The legislature was able to overturn only one of Nix-on’s 33 vetoes during the previous two years.)

Both Beebe and Nixon face a new political reality that requires a different kind of nego-tiation in which the veto is less a threat to the legislature. In fact, today’s extreme polarization has changed the way legislatures, in general, do business, says Rutgers university’s Alan Rosen-thal, a national expert on state government.

Based on his research on governors, he says they “tend to be very pragmatic, often more so than their own party in the legislature. They’re looking for a legacy, a history of governing. They may act as a brake on a legislature that might want to hammer the political opposition.”

In the past, even when the majority party was in firm control, leaders might negotiate with the minority party, giving them something to get them to go along, he says. “Today, the bases of the two parties are further apart. There’s no overlap between conservatives and liberals, so there’s no benefit to negotiating. The party in power goes for everything they can get. There’s no longer any need or desire to go across the aisle for support,” says Rosenthal.

Lessons from the StatesCould the federal government learn some-

thing from states? It’s definitely easier to com-promise in the states than in the federal gov-ernment, Rosenthal says, because of the lower visibility of state policy issues. He also points

out that one-party dominance does not necessar-ily mean the end of compromise. Even in uni-fied states there is a need and a willingness to negotiate, he says, because governors and leg-islators of the same party don’t always have the same perspectives or goals.

Moncrief and Peverill Squire with the uni-versity of Missouri, co-authors of Why States

Matter, find another benefit to the Washington, D.C., comparison. “With political stalemate on many issues at the national level, states are left with more latitude to pursue their own policy agendas on some issues. And unified government with supermajorities means different states may pursue widely different policies. It is federalism, and it is an example of why states still matter.”

05 .2013 | LEGISLATURES | 27

SSI-20/20 Ignition

Interlock

SSI-20/30Ignition

Interlock

IN-HOM®

The smart way to save lives.The best equipment backed by the best service. From ignition interlocks to low cost, portable devices for home use, Smart Start offers the most accurate testing in the industry. And every unit is backed up by our 24/7 bilingual customer service. Going with the best is always a smart move.

By HeatHer Morton

Millions of Americans lost their homes to foreclosure during the recession, and more continue to be at risk. Many simply could not make their monthly payments. Either they weren’t qualified for the loan to begin with, circumstances changed, or they weren’t prepared when the rate increased.

The federal government responded with The Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform and Consumer Protection Act—the largest and most

complex reform of the financial services industry since the Great Depression. Enacted in 2010, it established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to better regulate the products of all kinds of financial institutions, including mortgage lend-ers, loan originators and mortgage servicers.

The bureau, in January, issued new oversight rules to ensure prospective homebuyers have the ability to repay their mortgages and to make the whole process more transparent. They go into effect in January 2014.

“It is important to ensure that the lending situation that occurred in the last decade is addressed and proper lending poli-cies and practices supported. While not perfect, some of the rules

Mortgage Rules Remodeled

28 | CONSUMER FINANCE | 05.2013

Homebuyers will see broad new

protections when state and federal reforms

take effect in January 2014.

Senator

Wayne

Harper (R)

Utah

Heather Morton is a program principal in NCSL’s fiscal affairs department.

from the CFPB are good and support this goal,” says utah Sena-tor Wayne Harper (r).

Concerns Expressed The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has not been

without controversy. “The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has already greatly increased compli-ance costs for Texas community banks. Smaller banks have seen their compliance and employee costs increase by tens of thousands of dollars on an annual basis as some of the regulations come out,” says Texas representative Dan Flynn (r).

“Further, these new costs will drive down profitability and lead to the consolidation of the banking industry. Fewer banks mean less credit and fewer choices for borrowers across the state.”

Critics also object to the bureau having a single director rather than a board of commissioners and contend there is inadequate oversight of the agency’s funding.

But others, including the bureau’s Director richard Cordray, argue America’s mortgage borrowers bore the brunt of the reces-sion and deserve a robust set of laws to protect them.

Consumer groups generally support the CFPB rulemaking. According to the Center for responsible Lending, the new rules “generally strike a balanced, reasonable approach to mortgage lending.” The center supports the new guidelines as “appropri-ately broad enough to include the vast majority of creditworthy home owners, and it is clear enough for lenders and borrowers alike to understand.”

“These rules set new, national standards to help make sure borrowers are treated fairly and have a better chance of getting a loan modification,” says Norma Garcia, senior attorney and manager of the financial services program of Consumers union, the policy and advocacy arm of Consumer reports.

The New Federal RulesStaring next January, mortgage lenders must:

◆ Verify a borrower’s employment, income, assets, debt and credit history.◆ Document what the monthly payments on the mortgage are and any other mortgages that exist on the property.◆ Evaluate the borrower’s ability to repay the loan by looking at his monthly debt-to-income ratio.◆ Evaluate the homebuyer’s ability to repay based on the entire mortgage, not just the introductory teaser rate.

Lenders will face financial penalties if they fail to exercise good faith in assessing home buyers’ ability to repay. And, they can no longer offer so-called “no-doc” or “low-doc” loans to homebuyers, which require little or no documentation.

To demonstrate their compliance with the ability-to-repay requirements, mortgage lenders (with a few exceptions) can

choose to issue “qualified mortgages” that prohibit particular features that could harm consumers. Qualified mortgages protect lenders from potential liability.

Transparency PromotedNew rules for loan originators—the people hired by lenders

to take residential mortgage applications and negotiate their

05 .2013 | CONSUMER FINANCE | 29

States Respond to ForeclosuresLawmakers have been working to keep people in their homes

whenever possible, trying to balance the needs of homeowners with the mortgage industry. “While I certainly support the objectives of the CFPB,” says Minnesota Representative Joe Atkins (D), “their efforts will only yield the best results for consumers if they are made in con-cert with the good work that many states are already doing.”

“A number of states, including utah, recognized the lending challenges and problems in the foreclosure process,” says utah Senator Wayne Harper (R). “It is important for states to exercise leadership in this area and to establish laws and rules that are honed to their individual states’ needs and fit into the larger national finan-cial and mortgage framework.”

Recognizing there is seldom a “one-size-fits-all” solution to complex policy issues, state lawmakers have introduced hun-dreds of bills each session on mortgages and consumer protection. Recently enacted legislation falls into four categories: foreclosure consulting services, mediation programs, maintenance of foreclosed property, and notice of foreclosure procedures.

foreclosure consultants: Thirty states and the District of Colum-bia regulate standards for foreclosure consultants to prevent scam artists from taking advantage of desperate homeowners. Contracts must be in writing and give the homeowner the right to terminate the agreement.

Mediation programs: As the recession dragged on, payment-assis-tance programs couldn’t meet the demands, so several states created programs to bring lenders and homeowners together to renegotiate the mortgage terms. Starting with Connecticut in 2008, nearly 20 states have created foreclosure mediation or alternative loan-modi-fication programs through legislation. Other states have mediation programs initiated by their state judiciaries.

Property maintenance: To reduce neighborhood blight and main-tain property values for nearby homes, 17 state legislatures have enacted laws on maintaining empty properties. For example, Cal-ifornia, Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland and Massachusetts main-tain registries of foreclosed properties to track the property owners responsible for maintaining the vacant properties.

notice and foreclosure procedures: Lawmakers in several states have passed laws to: protect tenants renting homes in foreclo-sure, determine a homeowner’s liability in a deficiency judgment when the foreclosure sale price is lower than the loan amount, and require more documentation from lenders, among other measures.

Representative

Dan Flynn (R)

Texas

STATE LEGISLATURES

Stay in the loop with state research,

news and networking!

facebook.com/NCSLorg

twitter.com/NCSLorg

ncsl.org/enewslettersncsl.typepad.com/the_thicket/

NCSL

Link, friend and follow us today!

has more for you!

f

f

@

05 .2013 | CONSUMER FINANCE | 31

terms—are aimed at financial incentives. For example, a broker or loan originator can no longer receive additional compensation for steering homebuyers into more expensive loans or for sending them to affiliates for title insurance.

The new mortgage-servicer rules are aimed at making the whole process more transparent for homebuyers, who don’t usu-ally select the mortgage servicers. They are selected by the own-ers of the mortgage note, and they handle payment collections, escrow accounts, loan modifications and foreclosures.

New regulations, among other things, will require these ser-vicers to:◆ Provide billing statements that contain a clear breakdown of the payments by principal, interest, fees and escrow and if appli-cable, information about how to bring delinquent loans current.◆ Notify homebuyers of rate changes in adjustable-rate mort-gages before the first payment is due.◆ Notify homebuyers about alternatives to foreclosure after they are late with two consecutive mortgage payments.

The new rules restrict mortgage servicers from starting fore-closure proceedings if a homeowner has submitted an application to modify the loan, or before a mortgage is more than 120 days delinquent. This additional time gives homeowners an opportu-nity to look at alternatives to foreclosure. Small servicers—com-munity banks, credit unions—are exempted from several of these provisions.

State Laws Largely ProtectedAlthough the new rules fill hundreds of pages, they generally

allow states to enact additional protections for mortgage borrow-ers, if they choose to do so.

“Both consumers and industry will win when the new rules are understood, applied, and carried out evenly and effectively,” says Cordray. Mortgage borrowers, who have dealt with much heart-ache since the financial crisis, deserve this level of attentiveness.”

The mortgage industry’s response to the announcement of the new rules has been mixed. The American Bankers Association

recognizes the need to reform certain mortgage practices and supports informing consumers about the terms of their mortgage loans, but worries about potential federal overreach.

“We’re concerned that some of the CFPB’s new requirements are not expressly mandated by Dodd-Frank and could lead to fur-ther consolidation in the servicing industry, increasing the cost of credit and harming borrowers,” says Frank Keating, head of the American Banking Association.

Debra Still, chairman of the Mortgage Bankers Association, also has concerns. “ultimately, the final verdict on this rule will be made by the market. We believe the rule will effectively block the return of risky product features and inadequate doc-umentation. If it also provides lenders the cer-tainty needed to originate qualified mortgages broadly across the market to creditworthy bor-rowers, it will have been a success. However, if the result is a tightening of credit as lenders pull back from offering loans that would create greater risk of litigation, the CFPB may need to quickly revisit the rule to avoid harming the housing recovery.”

The response from state policymakers has been mixed, with a sense of relief that at least the rules are out. “Many states hit the ‘pause’ button in our own consumer protection efforts in this arena, at least to some extent, while awaiting rules from the CFPB,” says Minnesota represen-tative Joe Atkins (D).

“The new rules face a big challenge. Attempt-ing to strike a balance between reining-in the potential for aggressive lending abuses that con-tributed to the meltdown on the one hand and being too restrictive for first time home buyers on the other,” says Connecticut representative Chris Perone (D). “New state laws created in the wake of the meltdown will also affect how that balance is achieved—on a state-by-state basis.”

Representative

Chris Perone (D)

Connecticut

STATE LEGISLATURES

Mortgage Delinquencies and Foreclosures, All Loans

Source: Mortgage Bankers Association of America’s National Delinquency Survey.

Foreclosure Process

90 days past due

60 days past due

30 days past due

Stay in the loop with state research,

news and networking!

facebook.com/NCSLorg

twitter.com/NCSLorg

ncsl.org/enewslettersncsl.typepad.com/the_thicket/

NCSL

Link, friend and follow us today!

has more for you!

f

f

@

Representative

Joe Atkins (D)

Minnesota

By Peggy kernS

The name of the first lobbyist is not recorded in time. But rest assured, lobbying has been around since governments were formed and political decisions were first made.

Lobbying is simply communicating a point of view to a lawmaker in an attempt to influence

government action. It is a right protected by the 1st Amendment to the u.S. Constitution. It’s one way different views, opinions and concerns get expressed. No one disagrees with this. But “how” lobbying is done sometimes creates controversy. Like in the movies.

An Image ProblemMovies have not been kind to lobbyists. “Thank You

for Smoking” (2005) and “Casino Jack” (2010), are recent examples that depict people who practice lobbying, an honorable and respected profession, as conniving and manipulative.

To some, the recent movie “Lincoln” is guilty of such a portrayal. In the movie, the president and Secretary of State William Seward strategize on how to persuade the House of representatives to pass the 13th Amendment to abolish slavery. With the republicans on board, Lincoln and Seward identify a handful of Democrats they may be able to win over to pass the amendment. Lincoln rejects the idea of buying their votes, but stays open to the possibility of offering them appointments to government jobs.

Enter W.N. Bilbo, along with a couple of fellow lobbyists, to get the needed votes. They sit in the gallery of the u.S. House and watch the selected Democrats in action, sizing up their mannerisms and style. Then Bilbo and his buddies lobby the targets one by one—not railing against the evils of slavery, but describing what the lawmaker will receive if he switches votes. It is difficult and slow going. Lincoln, too, meets with some, using his eloquent words to convince them to vote yes.

In an emotional scene with Seward and the lobbying team, Lincoln expresses how essential it is that they get those last two votes. “I am president of the united States, clothed with great power … those two votes must be procured. I leave it to you to determine how it shall be done.”

Sticking to his principles, yet exerting and even expanding his powers to get what he wants, Lincoln pushes ahead for passage. Abolishing slavery justified the lobbying tactics taken. To him, the end justified the means.

The State of LobbyingFast-forward to today. The days of patronage are long gone,

and lobbying standards have vastly improved. The profession is regulated in all states, and lobbyists are required to register, disclose their activities and limit gifts.

Still, unethical lobbyists look for loopholes and ways to skirt laws, says Keeneland Association’s Judy Taylor, the first professional female lobbyist in Kentucky. If they don’t get caught, she says, they get bolder, and at some point convince themselves that their actions are common and acceptable.

But the vast majority of lobbyists follow the rules, and honesty is one of their essential attributes.

“As a lobbyist, the only thing you have to sell is your credibility,” says Peg Ackerman of Ackerman Information, a

Guidelines to Ethical LobbyingToday’s lobbyists bear scant resemblance to characters in “Lincoln.”

32 | TOOLS OF THE TRADE | 05.2013

Peggy Kerns directs the Ethics Center at NCSL.

Colorado lobbying firm. “Legislators must be able to rely on you to give accurate information,” which means being honest about the provisions of a bill and the reasons for a client’s position.

“It is not unethical to argue your client’s case in the most favorable way possible, as long as this does not entail being less than truthful or withholding significant information,” she adds.

Taylor says ethical lobbying is the product of an “ethical culture where there is respect for the law, respect for the individual and respect for the public—many of whom do not have a voice.”

So what should lawmakers expect from ethical lobbyists? Without exception, they should:

B1b

Maintain trust .Ethical lobbyists build strong relationships, show mutual

respect and honor commitments with legislators, staff and fellow lobbyists.

B2bConduct business with integrity.

Good lobbyists are proud of their profession and see themselves as problem solvers and resources for information.

B3bObey state laws.

States have a variety of laws for lobbyists to follow—from how to register, to when to wear identification to how

much they can give.

05 .2013 | TOOLS OF THE TRADE | 3332 | TOOLS OF THE TRADE | 05.2013

The American League of Lobbyists’ Code of Ethics (Key Elements)

a lobbyist shall:◆ Conduct lobbying activities with honesty and integrity.◆ Comply fully with all laws, regulations and rules applicable to the lobbyist.◆ Conduct lobbying activities in a fair and professional manner.◆ Avoid all representations that may create conflicts of interest.◆ Vigorously and diligently advance the client’s or employer’s interests.◆ Have a written agreement with the client regarding terms and conditions

of services.◆ Maintain appropriate confidentiality of client or employer information.◆ Ensure better public understanding and appreciation of the nature, legitimacy

and necessity of lobbying in our democratic governmental process.◆ Fulfill duties and responsibilities to the client or employer.◆ Exhibit proper respect for the governmental institutions before which the

lobbyists represent and advocate clients’ interest.

STATE LEGISLATURES

34 | TOOLS OF THE TRADE | 05.2013

B4bTreat fellow lobbyists with courtesy.

Lobbyists know they may be on opposite sides on one issue but allies on others.

B5bTell the truth.

Principled lobbyists don’t mislead lawmakers or mischaracterize their clients’ positions or supporting data.

B6bFollow the spirit of the law.

It is not enough to just act within the law. Ethical lobbyists embrace the rule of law and its underlying principles.

B7bAvoid conflicts of interest.

If a potential conflict arises, ethical lobbyists disclose it immediately to both parties and recuse themselves until the

matter is resolved.

B8b

Strive for transparency.Good lobbyists don’t hide information—they share it.

A policymaker is entitled to expect candid disclosure from the lobbyist, including accurate and reliable information about the identity of the client and the nature and implications of the issues, according to WoodstockTheological Center’s Principles for the Ethical Conduct of Lobbying.

But ethical behavior should be a two-way street. Legislators need to be just as ethical as lobbyists. This includes no surprises and no tricks. As Kurt Leib, lobbyist for Ohio’s Capitol Advocates, told new lawmakers at their orientation session, “Don’t introduce legislation Monday morning based on watching ‘60 Minutes’ the night before.”

STATE LEGISLATURES

Want the latest online news about federal and state public policy issues?

Go to www.ncsl.org/magazine and look for the “Grasscatcher,” a collection of the day’s top news clippings.

05 .2013 | AS THEY SEE IT | 35

STATE LEGISLATURES

“it’s not just one side that puts in wacky bills.”—Virginia Delegate Scott A. Surovell (D) in a Washington Post article

about how the General Assembly attracts stand-up comedians

and political pundits with its quirky legislation.

“the problem isn’t technology. it’s how humans use the technology.”

—Arizona Representative Jeff Dial (R) in the Arizona Republic, on his

support of more drone research as well as limits to their use by law-

enforcement officials without a search warrant.

“People have the right to live as they choose. they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us. ... We are jeopardizing freedom, not expanding it.”

—Illinois Senator Kyle McCarter (R) in the Chicago Tribune,

opposing a Senate measure to legalize gay marriage.

“for the love of god, i feel like i’m sitting in 1865, where similar debates were created on why slavery should continue in this country.”

—Illinois Senator Willie Delgado (D) in the Chicago Tribune,

supporting a Senate measure to legalize gay marriage.

“there’s the political piece as well. and yes, that political piece will be in play. as it should be.”

—Florida Representative Michelle Rehwinkel Vasilinda (D) in the Miami

Herald, about the Democrats’ ability to deny Governor Rick Scott (R)

his top legislative priority—a $141 million tax cut for manufacturers.

“it’s unfortunate for the citizens of this state. But thank goodness we have the coalition majority in the Senate, which is committed to no new taxes.”

—Washington Senator Don Benton (R), responding to the state Supreme

Court’s ruling that the voter-approved requirement for a two-thirds vote in

the Legislature to raise taxes is unconstitutional, in The Seattle Times.

“none of us likes to raise taxes; however, the responsible thing to do is to pay off our credit card and return to the ‘pay as you go’ system that served this state so well for many years. it’s one option we can at least give the voters the opportunity to decide.”

—Texas Senator Kevin Eltife (R) in a statement in the Texas Tribune, about

temporarily raising the state sales tax to pay off billions in bond debt

accrued by the Department of Transportation.

TA

YL

Or

JO

NE

S, E

L N

uE

VO

DIA

(Pu

Er

TO

rIC

O)

MIK

E K

EE

FE, C

AG

LE

CA

rT

OO

NS

CH

rIS

TO

PHE

r W

EY

AN

T, T

HE

HIL

L

AND BE INSPIRED BY OUTSTANDING SPEAKERSAUGUST 12-15, AT THELEGISLATIVE SUMMIT™

Sandra Day O’ConnorFirst woman appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court, former Arizona state senator, assistant attorney general and county superior court judge

David GergenPolitical analyst for CNN, director of the Center for Public Leadership at the Harvard Kennedy School and former adviser to four presidents

INSPIRESandra Day O’ConnorFirst woman appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court, former Arizona state sena-tor, assistant attorney general and county superior court judge

Roger W. Ferguson, Jr. Economist, lawyer and CEO of TIAA-CREF, former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and an adviser to President Obama

REGISTER TODAYWWW.NCSL.ORG/SUMMIT

nuclear waste: on the road to nowhere · client: nei (nuclear energy institute) pub: ncsl st....

Documents