State Government News 1003 - Entire Issuethe council of state governments 3 headquarters 2760 Research Park Drive P. O. Box 11910 Lexington, KY 40578-1910 (859) 244-8000 washington

October 2003

SGNRRDtemplate03 11/4/03 12:30 PM Page 1

2 state government news october 2003

featuresfeatures

senior editorJack Penchoff

associate editorLaurie Clewett

graphic design coordinatorSusie Bush

contributorsMatthew Bowdy • Chad S. Foster

Barry Hopkins • Wayne HallAmy Hughes • Chris Hunter

Julia Nienaber Hurst • Chad KinsellaKaren Marshall • Trudi Matthews

Magdalena Mook • John MountjoyCarolyn Orr • Charlotte Postlewaite

Scott Richards • Amy ScottLeslie Scott • Jenny Sewell

Allison Spurrier • Melissa TaylorBill Voit • Chris Whatley reprint permissions

Mona Lewis(859) 244-8238

publication sales(800) 800-1910

[email protected] sales

Melissa Newman(859) 244-8155

[email protected]

(859) 244-8001e-mail

[email protected]

www.csg.org

on the coverMaryland Delegate

Ana Sol Gotierrez speaks at the National Hispanic Caucus of State Legislators press conference

Cover by Susie Bush

federalism

Federalism in flux 6The changing nature of state-federal relations.

by Laurie Clewett

elections

2003 elections already historic 9California’s recall and budget-related measures dominate election landscape.

by Julia Nienaber Hurst

demographics

Facing the gender gap 13Women’s gains in state legislatures have slowed.

by Tim Anderson

international

International states 16States are more active than ever in foreign policy.

by Peter Howard

demographics

Finding focus 19The National Hispanic Caucus of State Legislators issues first policy report.

by Jack Penchoff

technology

States and the “stateless” technolgy 22Use of Internet telephone calls on the rise in state governments.

by Wayne Hall

environment

Budgets are bruised, but still strong 24Environmental spending is down slightly, but to the second highest level ever.

by R. Steven Brown and Michael J. Kiefer

public safety

Amber Alerts 31States use technology to combat child abduction.

by Chad Kinsella

health

Literacy: Rx for good health 34States address the relationship between health and literacy skills.

by Jenny Sewell

page 6

page 31

October 2003

page 16

page 19


the council of state governments 3

headquarters2760 Research Park Drive

P.O. Box 11910Lexington, KY 40578-1910

(859) 244-8000

washingtonJim Brown, General Counsel

and DirectorHall of the States

444 N. Capitol St. N.W., Suite 401Washington, DC 20001

(202) 624-5460

easternAlan V. Sokolow, Director

40 Broad Street, 20th FloorNew York, NY 10004-2315

(212) 912-0128

midwesternMichael H. McCabe, Director

641 E. Butterfield Road, Suite 401Lombard, IL 60148

(630) 810-0210

southernColleen Cousineau, Director

P.O. Box 98129Atlanta, GA 30359

(404) 633-1866

westernKent Briggs, Director

1107 9th Street, Suite 650Sacramento, CA 95814

(916) 553-4423

council officesDaniel M. Sprague, Executive Director

Executive Committee

PresidentGov. Mike Huckabee, Ark.

ChairRep. Dan Bosley, Mass.

President-ElectGov. Frank Murkowski, Alaska

Chair-ElectSen. John Hottinger, Minn.

Vice PresidentGov. Ruth Ann Minner, Del.

Vice ChairAssemblyman Lynn Hettrick, Nev.

2003 executive committeeSen. David Adkins, Kan. • Sen. Carolyn Allen,Ariz. • Terry C.Anderson, Director, Legislative Council,Wis. • Sen. Manny Aragon,N.M. • Jerry Bassett, Director, Legislative Reference Service,Ala. •Carl Bianchi, Director, Legislative Services, Idaho • Sen. PattyBirkholz, Mich. • Sen. John Chichester,Va. • Rep. John Connors,Iowa • Sen. Eileen Daily, Conn. • Rep. Bob Damron, Ky. • Rep.Carol Donovan, Mass. • Gov. Jim Douglas,Vt. • Sen. DeniseMoreno Ducheny, Calif. • Treasurer Dan Ebersole, Ga. • Sen. HughFarley, N.Y. • Sen. Paul Feleciano, Kan. • Rep. Hector Ferrer-Rios,Puerto Rico • Lt. Gov. Charles Fogarty, R.I. • Sen. Hillman Frazier,Miss. • Gov. David Freudenthal,Wyo. • Sen. Lisa Gladden, Md. •Secretary of State Dan Gwadosky, Maine • Dan Rep. Joe Hackney,N.C. • Senate President John Hainkel Jr., La • Rep. Eric Hamakawa,Hawaii • Speaker Seth Hammett,Ala. • Sen.Toni Nathaniel Harp,Conn. • Sen.Tom Hatch, Utah • Sen. Douglas Henry,Tenn. • Sen.Kip Holden, La. • Gov. Bob Holden, Mo. • Rep. Deborah Hudson,Del. • Judge Robert Hunter, N.C. • Del. John Hurson, Md. • Sen.Cindy Hyde-Smith, Miss. • Hale Irwin, Communications &Information Technology,Vt. • Rep. Suzanne Jeskewitz,Wis. • Rep.Greg Jolivette, Ohio • Rep. Douglas Jones, Idaho • Lilia Judson, Div.of State Court Administration, Ind. • Gov. Dirk Kempthorne, Idaho• Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, Minn. • Michael King,Executive Director, Legislative Office for Research Liaison, Pa. •Sen. Peter Knudson, Utah • Rep. Kim Koppelman, N.D. • SpeakerPete Kott,Alaska • Treasurer Brian Krolicki, Nev. • Chief JusticeJoseph Lambert, Ky. • Sen. Sue Landske, Ind. • Gov. Mike Leavitt,Utah • Sen.T.D.“Ted” Little,Ala. • Sen. Carl Marcellino, N.Y. • Sen.John Marchi, N.Y. • Sen. Kenneth McClintock, Puerto Rico •Kathleen Alana McGinty,Acting Secretary, Dept. of EnvironmentalProtection, Pa. • Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr., Md. •Andrew Mollow, Dept. of Criminal Justices Services,Va. • Sen.Angela Monson, Okla. • Lt. Gov. Karl Ohs, Mont. • Sen. Jose Ortiz-Daliot, Puerto Rico • Gov. George Pataki, N.Y. • Gov. Paul Patton,Ky. • Rep. Danice Picraux, N.M. • Virgil Puskarich, ExecutiveDirector, Local Government Commission, Pa. • Sen. Pam Redfield,Neb. • Mary Regel, Director, Bureau of InternationalDevelopment,Wis. • Del. Jack Rollison,Va. • Rep. Chris Ross, Pa. •Rep. Roger Roy, Del. • Sen. Steve Saland, N.Y. • Thomas Sandretto,Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of Buildings & General Services,Vt. •Sen. DiAnna Schimek, Neb. • Assemblyman Robin Schimminger,N.Y. • Jeffrey Schutt, Dept. of Personnel and Admin., Colo. • Rep.Mary Skinner,Wash. • Assemblyman Robert Straniere, N.Y. • Sen.Brian Taniguchi, Hawaii • Sen. Robert Thompson, Pa. • SenatePresident Earl Ray Tomblin,W.Va. • Sen. Donne Trotter, Ill. • Sen.Rich Wardner, N.D. • Jeff Wells, Secretary, Dept. of Labor &Employment, Colo. • Sen. Jeff Wentworth,Texas • SandraWinston, Executive Director,Transitional Employment Board,Ark. •Glen Woodbury, Director, Emergency Management Division,Wash.

STATE GOVERNMENT NEWS, ISSN 0039-0119,October 2003,Vol. 46, No. 9 — Published monthly with com-bined issues in June/July and Nov./Dec. by The Council of StateGovernments, 2760 Research Park Drive, Lexington, KY 40511-8410. Opinions expressed in this magazine do not necessarilyreflect the policies of The Council of State Governments northe views of the editorial staff. Readers’ comments are wel-come. Subscription rates — In the U.S., $45 per year. Singleissues are available at $6 per copy. POSTMASTER: Sendaddress changes to State Government News, SalesDepartment, P.O. Box 11910, Lexington, KY 40578-1910.Advertising — Black and white, two-color and full-coloradvertising available. For complete circulation and advertisinginformation, contact the advertising department at (800) 800-1910. Mailing lists are available for rent upon approval of a sam-ple mailing.

Copyright 2003 by The Council of State Governments.Periodicals postage paid at Lexington, Ky., and at additional mail-ing offices.

departmentsdepartments

Inside story 4Forum reflects states’ problems.

by Jack Penchoff

Trends alert 15The cost of judicial campaigns is rising.

by Melissa Taylor

State trends 27Annual forum addresses state policy issues.

by CSG’s Trends Research and Response Group

Conference calendar 33Meetings and conference activities of CSG, affiliates and other associations are listed.

Excellence in action 36Activities and events by CSG, its affiliates and other associations are highlighted.



The diversity of issues that state govern-ments face every day is reflected in the agendafor The Council of State Governments’ 2004Annual State Trends and Leadership Forumscheduled for October 23 through October 26in Pittsburgh.

State officials attending the meeting will havean opportunity to hear problems and potentialsolutions on a variety of issues ranging fromwater scarcity to implementing provisions inthe No Child Left Behind Act.

Even the relationship between America andFrance is on the agenda as the FrenchAmbassador to the United States, Jean-David Levitte,delivers a keynote address.

This month in State Government News, CSG’s Trends Research andResponse Group provides an overview of topics that will be discussed inPittsburgh. There’s no shortage of problems confronting states, but there arealso potential solutions out there that make attendance at the annual forum avaluable experience.

This month’s issue of State Government News magazine also reflectssome of that same diversity found in the community of states.

Our cover story looks at the development of the National HispanicCaucus of State Legislators as a player in the national political landscape.Asthe nation’s Hispanic population has grown, so has the number of Hispaniclegislators.When NHCSL began in 1989, only nine states had Hispanic legis-lators.Today, there are Latinos in 36 state legislatures.

The organization took a major step forward this year when it released itsfirst policy briefing. “Closing Achievement Gaps: Improving: EducationalOutcomes for Hispanic Children offers Hispanic state legislators recommend-ed activities for improving the educational achievement of Hispanic students inelementary and secondary schools.

States are becoming more involved with foreign policy, writes PeterHoward, an assistant professor in the School of International Service atAmerican University in Washington, D.C.Howard points to the success of the National Guard’s State PartnershipProgram which began as a military exchange program and has evolved to includecivilian activities, including emergency response, education and environmentalclean up efforts. Over the past 10 years, 37 countries have been paired with 34states, two U.S. territories and the District of Columbia.

SGN’s associate editor, Laurie Clewett, writes about a provocative sessionthis summer at CSG’s Midwestern Legislative Conference’s annual meeting.Robert F. Nagel, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Colorado,and Dennis Dresang, professor of political science and public affairs at theUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, contend that initial claims of a “devolution rev-olution” were overblown.

There are only a handful of statewide elections this year, but what they lackin numbers they make up for in significance. Julia Nienaber Hurst, executivedirector of the National Lieutenant Governors’ Association, a CSG affiliate,reports that elections of historic proportions will affect nearly every region ofthe country.While the California recall vote is receiving the most attention, gubernatorialbattles in other states could tilt the partisan balance of the top executive officesof the nation’s state capitols.

And Wayne Hall, technology program manager with the National Associationof State Telecommunications Directors, a CSG affiliate, looks at the evolution ofvoice communications over the Internet and the policy implications for states asthey look at converging telecommunications and other data networks.

Forum reflects states’ problemsBY JACK PENCHOFF

October 1933October 17Albert Einstein immigrated to the United Statesfrom Germany. Einstein, a Jew, left to avoid persecu-tion by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Party.

October 16President Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued“Executive Order 6340 Creating the CommodityCredit Corporation.” The government-owned corpo-ration,which still exists,was designed to stabilize,sup-port and protect farm income and prices.

Gov. Frank O’Bannon of Indiana died September13, five days after suffering a massive stroke.

In office since 1997, O’Bannon was a powerfuland effective leader who was re-elected by Indianavoters in 2000.

He was credited with thesuccessful promotion oflegislation that overhauledK-12 public education inIndiana, created a commu-nity college education sys-tem and restructured thestate’s tax system.

O'Bannon began his 33years of public service in1970 when he was elected

to the Indiana Senate where he served 18 years, thelast 11 of those years as Democratic floor leader.

He was elected Evan Bayh’s lieutenant governorin 1988 and again in 1992, before winning his firstterm as governor in 1996.

“The state government community and CSGmourn the loss of our dear friend Governor FrankO’Bannon of Indiana,” said Dan Sprague, executivedirector of CSG.“We are thankful for his outstand-ing service and his thoughtful, gracious manner.Wesend our heartfelt sympathies to his lovely wife JudyO’Bannon and the entire family, and to theGovernor's staff.”

O’Bannon was succeeded by Lt.Gov. Joe Kernan,who declared a statewide Day of Remembrance forO’Bannon on September 14.

Gov. Frank O’Bannon will be missed Indiana leader dies at age 73


T

onventional wisdom holds that the 1990s was thedecade of the states.

Bolstered by a series of U.S. Supreme Court rul-ings and congressional actions, the argument goes,states gained significant power and influence inrelationship to the federal government. Indeed,many observers declared there was a “federalismrevolution.”

And when George W. Bush became president in 2001, bringing withhim to Washington, D.C. former governors such as Tommy Thompson,Christine Todd Whitman and, later, Tom Ridge, many people expected the“devolution revolution” to continue.

Yet, in 2003, the promise of increased state power seems to havefaded in many areas, and some observers wonder whether the initialclaims of change were overblown.

“The federalism revolution never really was much of a revolution,”Robert F. Nagel recently told a group of Midwestern state legislators,speaking of the Supreme Court’s record during the last decade.

Nagel, the Ira C. Rothberger Jr. Professor of Constitutional Law at theUniversity of Colorado Law School, is theauthor of The Implosion of AmericanFederalism. He spoke at the 58th AnnualMeeting of the Midwestern LegislativeConference in Milwaukee, Wis.

Nagel’s co-panelist during the keynotesession, titled “The Changing Nature ofState-Federal Relations,” was DennisDresang, professor of political science andpublic affairs, and director of the Center forState, Local and Tribal Government at the LaFollette School of Public Affairs at theUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison.

Like Nagel, Dresang seemed skepticalabout how much power states have really

federalismfederalism

C

Federalism in fluxExperts examine the changing nature of state-federal relationships

BY LAURIE CLEWETT


DA


gained in recent years. “Be very wary of governors who go toWashington, D.C.,” he advised, “whether their name is Reagan orCarter or Clinton or Bush.”

“As they campaign for office, they talk about their position ashaving been governors, appreciating state governments, and real-ly wanting to return a lot of discretion to the states,” Dresang said.“But … once they get there, they become very infatuated with theconditions that they can put on federal dollars, and with the wholeidea of mandates, and we really don’t see a lot of follow-throughon those kinds of pledges.”

The federal government, he explained, has “an enormousamount of cash” because of the federal income tax and because thefederal government does not have to balance its budget. “It’s animportant source of money; there’s no way of getting around it,”he said. “And whereas they could be using this to equalize oppor-tunities, to enhance what states do best, the tendency is instead touse it for control.”

Along with conditions on federal aid, Dresang pointed tounfunded mandates as “a major issue, a major burden, a majorchallenge for state governments.”

When he asked audience members to name the most costlyunfunded mandates that states and local governments have, leg-islators quickly answered “Medicaid” and “special education.”Yet, as Dresang reminded them, these programs both come withsome funding.

The most costly unfunded mandates for state and local gov-ernments, according to Dresang, are the Safe Drinking WaterAct, Clean Air Act, Americans With Disabilities Act, Family andMedical Leave Act, Fair Labor Standards Act, OccupationalSafety and Health Act, and, most recently, the Patriot Act. Hepredicted that HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability andAccountability Act, will be added to the list once its costsbecome clearer.

In 1995, Congress passed the Unfunded Mandates Reform Actto protect states and local governments from the burden of unfund-ed mandates. Title I of the act allows Congress to make a proce-dural objection if a bill imposes on states and local governmentsan unfunded mandate greater than $50 million per year in directcosts. Title II of the act requires executive branch agencies toreview the costs to states and local governments when they prom-ulgate rules.

“There have been some instances where this act has reallyhelped,” Dresang said.“However, it’s important tonote that we’ve got someexemptions from theUnfunded Mandates Act.”Laws or regulations that exist-ed before the measure wentinto effect, those that dealwith civil rights or nationalemergencies, and conditionsof federal aid are all exemptfrom the act’s provisions.

In addition, Dresang said,Congress gets around the lawby structuring bills so their

cost to state and local governments is less than $50 million. “Soinstead of having one big bill, you break it up into parts, each oneof which the effect is less than $50 million.”

Meanwhile, during both the Clinton and Bush administrations,less than 1 percent of federal agencies have complied with the lawas they have promulgated rules. “They’re just not obeying thelaw,” Dresang said, “so they’re not making the estimates of howmuch it is going to costs states to comply.”

Dresang did point to one hopeful development in state-federalrelationships: the increased use of waivers.

Although states have always been able to request waivers fromfederal requirements, there has been an increased emphasis on theuse of waivers since the middle of the Clinton administration, hesaid. “And this has been continued full force in the Bush adminis-tration.” Medicaid is one example of a program in which a signif-icant number of states have been granted waivers.

Through waivers, the federal government can exempt statesfrom certain federal regulations and allow them to develop alter-native ways of administering programs or providing services torespond to local needs. Waivers must be cost-neutral, meaning thatstates receive no additional money.

“The whole idea and the whole emphasis on waivers is to rec-ognize when you really need to be flexible to achieve your goals,”Dresang said. “The second reason is really a long-standing at leastslogan, if not dynamic, and that is treating states as laboratories.”

“I think most of us have agreed that [waivers are] probably astep in the right direction,” Dresang said, although he noted that itis getting harder for states to obtain them. But, he added, “there areproblems with the waivers and we need to be aware of them.”

Dresang said there is little federal monitoring of states’ use ofwaivers, and that the federal government could do a better job ofsharing information among states about their successful uses.

“Even more than that, what concerns me is that the federal offi-cials who are working with these waivers … continue to be reallydistrustful and, frankly, disrespectful as they approach state offi-

Like Nagel,Dresang seemed

skeptical about how muchpower states have really

gained in recent years.“Be very wary of governors

who go to Washington, D.C.,”he advised,“whether theirname is Reagan or Carter

or Clinton or Bush.”


S

D


cials,” he said. “There’s always the sort of notion that you’ve gotsomething to prove, rather than going into the discussions on theassumption that everybody’s really there out of the best intentionsand to do some problem-solving.”

Dresang’s comments echoed those made by Nagel as hedescribed the Supreme Court’s relationship to the states inrecent years.

Although many observers have remarked on the Court’s appar-ent embrace of federalism and its deference to states’ rights, Nagelsaid its record really shows “a very shallow form of respect anddeference for state officials.”

Those cases during the 1990s that were hailed as the beginningof a federalism revolution – which dealt with the commerceclause, the “commandeering” of state governments by nationallaws, and state sovereign immunity – really did not affect thenational government’s regulatory power, Nagel said. “The bulk ofthe national power to regulate remains in place and did so through-out this so-called revolutionary period.”

In addition, he said, to understand the Court’s overall record,one must look not only at these federalism cases, but also at cases

that deal with individual rights. Every time the national govern-ment expands individual rights, it limits states’authority to set pol-icy over their own residents.

“If you look at the record of states’ rights and individual rightsover the same period of time, what you see is … an enormous lackof respect and deference for state institutions and state decision-making, and a concomitant decrease in the scope of regulatorypower for the states.”

“There are many, many [cases] from grand, important issueslike abortion to more technical, lower visibility issues … in whichtime after time the Supreme Court deprecates the decisions of statelegislatures and state officials in general,” Nagel said.

Even those cases that, on the surface, appear to uphold statepower really indicate a preference for national authority whenmore closely examined, according to Nagel.

In Grutter v. Bollinger, for example, one of the Michigan affir-mative action cases the Court heard during the last term, it heldthat the University of Michigan Law School may use race as anadmissions criteria, deferring to the law school’s judgment thatdiversity is essential to its educational mission.

“But why are they to be deferred to?” Nagel asked. “Becausethis is the judgment that was already made by Justice Powell sev-eral decades ago and had become the established law of the landbecause state officials were following the instructions laid out bythe Supreme Court. … What the court is really respecting anddeferring to here is its own decision in the Bakke case” (Universityof California Regents v. Bakke, 1978).

Looking at the Court’s record during this past term and at itsoverall record for the last 15 years, “the message that I see read-ing these decisions carefully,” Nagel said, “is essentially that whenstates follow the judgment and the policies laid out by the nation-al government – and especially by the Supreme Court – then theyare entitled to great respect, but not otherwise.”

The Supreme Court’s apparent preference for national powerover state power should come as no surprise, Nagel said. Althoughthe framers of the Constitution saw the states as “a source ofimportant competition to the national government on both policyand the meaning of the Constitution itself,” the very nature of thejudicial function makes it difficult for judges to encourage or sup-port this competition.

Judges have to settle disputes authoritatively, by showing thatone side is right while the other is wrong, attempting to answerquestions definitively. “So judges as a matter of habit … are notlikely to respect over the long run this sort of messy, but in the end,ennobling, political process that is or was supposed to be our sys-tem of federalism,” said Nagel.

“The institutions you have to look to for independence of judg-ment and strength of will, for open-mindedness,” Nagel said, “arenot the people on the Supreme Court, but the people who occupystate legislative chambers.”

So what should state officials expect for the future of federalism?“Federal-state relationships are very dynamic; they are chang-

ing all the time,” Dresang said. “We do have some general trends,a general framework, but given that the devil is in the details, thedetails and the specific approaches change a lot.”

— Laurie Clewett is the associate editor of State GovernmentNews.

Dennis Dresang and Robert F. Nagel discussed the changingnature of state-federal relations at the MidwesternLegislative Conference’s 58th Annual Meeting.



he 2003 elections have already proven historiceven though most of them haven’t taken place.The nation’s most populous state was sched-

uled to decide on Oct. 7 whether to recall itsgovernor. But on Sept. 15, three weeks beforeCalifornia voters would go to the polls foronly the second gubernatorial recall effort inU.S. history, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of

Appeals ordered a postponement of the election until March 3,saying the state’s punch-card voting system was flawed.

As State Government News went to press, recall supportersvowed to appeal the order to the U.S. Supreme Court in hopes ofgetting the appeals court’s order overturned.

The federal appeals court ruling also affects a groundbreakingpolicy question that would allow the state to classify data by race.

In Alabama, voters in September decided the fate ofthe state’s largest ever proposed tax increase.

And in three other states, elections could tilt thenationwide partisan balance of governors, whileresults in New Jersey state Senate races may break apartisan tie in that chamber.

Five states are holding state government electionsin 2003. Kentucky, Louisiana and Mississippi willvote for statewide officeholders while New Jersey,Mississippi and Virginia will elect state legislators.Eight states will vote on ballot issues, primarily relat-ed to economic issues and education.

But the contest that has garnered the most nationalattention is California’s recall election.

Recall election “The state of California enters the new millennium as, literally

and symbolically, a global phenomenon,” writes Kevin Starr, a his-

torian and state librarian, on the state’s Web site. Adding to the state’s“phenomenal” reputation will be the gubernatorial recall ballot.

Among those who filed to run as replacements for Gov. GrayDavis were a pit bull dog, a lap dancer, a pornography publish-er, a 100-year-old woman, two Hollywood actors, and the lieu-tenant governor.

The recall made it to the ballot as a result of an initiative peti-tion. The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center says approximately900,000 signatures were required to qualify for the ballot. Recallsupporters turned in more than 1.3 million valid signatures, out ofabout 1.6 million submitted.

Supporters of the recall initiative provide a diverse list of rea-sons for the recall, including: a $38-billion state budget deficit; atripling of personal vehicle fees this year; and periodic rollingblackouts because of an energy crisis. Opponents say the recall is

a costly miscarriage of democracy given thatelections were less than a year ago.

The state’s recall provision provides for atwo-part ballot question. The first part asksvoters to decide whether Davis should berecalled. The second part lists the replacementcandidates voters must choose from in theevent that part one passes.

In the flurry of lawsuits following the cer-tification of the recall, the state Supreme Courtclarified that all voters will vote on both ques-tions. The center reports the reasoning was thata voter who votes “no” on the recall cannot bedisenfranchised from helping to select a newgovernor, should part one pass. Another courtruling found that Davis could not appear as a

replacement choice. With all the candidates having filed, the press routinely recog-

electionselections

California’s recall and budget-related measures dominate election landscape

BY JULIA NIENABER HURST

T

2003elections already historic


nizes only one filed candidate as “theDemocrat” option, the state’s Lt. Gov.Cruz Bustamante.

Bustamante announced his candida-cy in both English and Spanish, reflect-ing changing demographics in theGolden State. According to Starr, onein every four Californians was bornoutside the United States. Bustamanteurges Californians, “Vote ‘no’ on therecall, ‘yes’ on Bustamante.”Bustamante’s position, as reported byThe Sacramento Bee, is to continue tooppose the recall, but to offer aDemocratic option should voters recall Davis.

As lieutenant governor, Bustamantewas elected separately from the gover-nor. Among his duties is the constitu-tional requirement to act as governor inthe governor’s absence. As such,Bustamante called the special recallelection and set the date “in lieu of thegovernor,” he said.

A court challenge to Bustamante’s decision questioned why asuccessor would be picked as part two of the ballot, instead of hav-ing Bustamante succeed – his constitutionally defined duty. TheSupreme Court ruled that California’s recall provisions allow elec-tion of a successor at the same time as a recall “if appropriate” anda successor election was called and would, therefore, take place.

Several Republicans filed for the office, including BillSimon, the unsuccessful 2002 gubernatorial nominee, and stateSenator Tom McClintock. Simon, however, withdrew his candi-dacy in August.

Most of the national spotlight, though,has focused on Hollywood actor ArnoldSchwarzenegger, a Republican candidatewho was born outside the United Statesand is now in the middle of an election inwhich immigration and racial diversityare hot issues.

Yet, with the media attention focused onthe governor’s race, scant attention has beenpaid to a racially charged ballot question.

Ballot issues Californians will vote on the Classifica-

tion by Race, Ethnicity, Color, or NationalOrigin (CRENO) initiative on the sameballot as the recall election. The constitu-tional amendment would not allow thestate to classify any individual by race, eth-nicity, color or national origin in the opera-tion of public education, public contract-ing, public employment, or any other stateoperation. There is a list of exemptions butuniversities are not exempt.

Proponents say this is a racial privacyinitiative that will lead to a colorblind society by eliminatinghiring and other preferences based on race. They also point toits fiscal impact with annual state savings ranging from severalmillion dollars to more than $10 million beginning in 2015.Backers include the Association of Concerned Taxpayers, theCenter for the Study of Popular Culture and the Chairman of theAmerican Civil Rights Coalition.

Opponents include the NAACP, several chapters of theAmerican Civil Liberties Union, the American Public HealthAssociation and Kaiser Permanente. They say the plan woulddamage efforts in health care, disease research, education, hatecrime and discrimination by eliminating the ability to address dis-parities by race or ethnicity.

Aside from this issue, it’s probably no surprise that most ballotquestions this year deal with finances. With states strapped forcash, six of the statewide ballot questions have something to dowith money and several are linked to education or business,according to the Initiative and Referendum Institute.

In two states, voters made their decisions in September. In Alabama, voters on Sept. 9 rejected Gov. Robert Riley’s pro-

posed Alabama Tax Reform Act. The package was designed toplug a $675 million deficit in the state budget, institute govern-ment accountability measures and provide funding for new educa-tion programs, according to Alabama press reports.

On September 13, Texas voters approved a constitutional amend-ment that allows lawmakers to set limits on civil judgment awards.Some observers see an emerging trend nationwide in the initia-tive process.

“Governors are trying to make their mark by pushing their ownplans through the initiative process,” according to the BallotInitiative Strategy Center.

In Ohio, a $500-million bond proposal from Gov. Bob Taftis meant to encourage new, high tech business in the state. Thegovernor says the “Third Frontier Bonding Proposal will pro-vide the resources to recruit academics, attract additional

U.S. Congressman Ernie Fletcher, Kentucky,Republican candidate for governor

Kentucky Attorney General Ben Chandler,Democratic candidate for governor



research dollars, and help researchers move their productsfrom the laboratory to the marketplace.” That vote takes placein November.

Meanwhile, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has proposedan increase in payouts from the state education fund and the cre-ation of a secretary of education. That election was heldSeptember 23, after this magazine went to press.

The November ballot in Maine will contain the Maine TribalGaming Act which would permit two tribes to build and operatea $650-million casino.

The Maine Slot Machine Reform Amendment would allow slotsat race tracks. Advocates of that measure say 10 percent of profitswould go toward education and prescription drugs for seniors.

A third ballot question for Maine voters will be the pro-posed School Finance and Tax Reform Act. Under that propos-al, state funding for education would increase from 43 percentto 55 percent at an estimated cost of $200 million annually.

According to the ballot lan-guage, however, there is nosource for the money.

In addition to votingOctober 4 on statewideelective offices, Louisianavoters will also decide thefate of 15 proposed consti-tutional amendments.

Three amendments centeron the protection and rest-oration of the Louisianacoastline. Two others redi-rect some lottery money toeducation and allow “under-performing” schools to beassumed and managed bythe state.

Finally, The Seattle Timesreports that an initiative torepeal the state’s sweep-ing workplace ergonomicsrules is on the November 4ballot. Initiative 841 back-ers – especially the Build-ing Industry Association ofWashington – handed in258,411 signatures to getthe proposal on the ballot.It would immediatelyrepeal the ergonomics rules

issued in 2000 by the state Department of Labor and Industries.The department says it was trying to reduce worker injuriescaused by repetitive motion and heavy lifting, but businessessay the rules are putting them out of business.

Statewide racesNew governors will definitely be chosen this year in

Kentucky and Louisiana, and Mississippi’s Gov. RonnieMusgrove faces re-election. While statistically unlikely, if all threeseats go Democratic and if California retains a Democrat for gov-ernor, the party balance among state chief executives would tilt

from the Republicans’ cur-rent advantage nationwideto an even split.

Other interesting racesinclude the deadlockedNew Jersey Senate and theMississippi Senate and lieu-tenant governorship.

In New Jersey, thestate Senate is deadlockedin a 20-20 party split withpower shared between theleaders of each party. Theelections could break that,which would have inter-esting electoral implica-tions since the Senatepresident in that state alsoserves as first in line ofsuccession to governor.

In Virginia, the Repub-licans have nearly a 30-seatlead in the House, and a sixseat lead in the Senate.Elections are unlikely tochange party control.

In Mississippi, the lieutenant governor serves as Senate pres-ident. In February, Lt. Gov. Amy Tuck switched from Democrat to

Republican. Some state senators and several House members fol-lowed her lead. Going into the elections, there is a six seat advan-tage for Democrats in the Senate, according to press reports, whilethe House has a sizable Democratic advantage of 82-37-3. Partycontrol change is possible in the Senate.

Lt. Gov. Tuck faces opposition from state Sen. BarbaraBlackmon. The Clarion-Ledger says that if Blackmon prevails she

It’s probably no surprise that most

ballot questions this year dealwith finances.With states

strapped for cash, six of thestatewide ballot questions have

something to do with money and several are linked to education

or business, according to the Initiative

and Referendum Institute.

Utah Lt. Gov. Olene Walker

Louisiana Lt. Gov. Kathleen Blanco



would be the first black person elected to statewide office sinceReconstruction. Meanwhile, Ronnie Musgrove faces re-electionfor governor against challenger Haley Barbour, former chairmanof the National Republican Party.

In Mississippi, the governor and lieutenant governor are elect-ed independently of each other.

Louisiana voters also choose their governor and lieutenant gov-ernor separately. The state uses a unique open primary system. TheAdvocate newspaper in Baton Rouge reports all candidates runagainst each other in the October 4 primary. If any one candidatewins a majority of the vote, that person wins the statewide officesought. If no one candidate wins a majority, the top two vote-get-ters, regardless of party, run against each other in the general elec-tion on November 15.

This system makes identifying top candidates more difficult.Several polls indicate that leading gubernatorial contenders include

current Lt. Gov. KathleenBlanco, Bobby Jindal, andAttorney General RichardIeyoub. In the lieutenantgovernor’s race, StephenRue, Kirt Bennett, formerLt. Gov. Melinda Schweg-mann and Mitch Landrieuare top contenders.

Kentucky selects itsgovernor and lieutenantgovernor together on a ticket.

Democrat AttorneyGeneral Ben Chandler isrunning for governor withCharlie Owen, an attorneyand businessman whoserved several governors.They face Republican U.S.Rep. Ernie Fletcher, whohas served in the U.S. AirForce and as a state repre-sentative, and lieutenant governor candidate Steve Pence, a U.S.Attorney who led Kentucky’s Anti-Terrorism Task Force.

In a different twist, it’s also likely that Utah will get its firstfemale governor. On August 11, Utah Governor Mike Leavittaccepted a presidential nomi-nation to become head of theEnvironmental ProtectionAgency. If Leavitt is con-firmed by the U.S. Senate, Lt.Governor Olene Walker willsucceed him as governor. “It’squite an honor to (potentially)be the state’s first womangovernor,” said Walker, thelieutenant governor for thepast 11 years.

Walker is former chair-woman of the National Lieu-tenant Governors Association,a CSG affiliate. She personallyled the three-year overhaul ofthe state’s Department ofWorkforce Services, headingefforts to reform welfare andbroaden insurance to more ofUtah’s residents. As lieutenantgovernor, Walker also was thestate’s chief elections officer.

Election coverage will con-tinue as a project of theNational Lieutenant Governors Association and CSG. For electioncoverage, visit www.nlga.us and www.csg.org.

— Julia Nienaber Hurst is executive director of the NationalLieutenant Governors Association, an affiliate of The Council ofState Governments.

Resources• The Council of State Governments, “The Changing

Population in the U.S.,” www.csg.org (keyword: demo-graphics).

• The National Lieutenant Governors Association, 2003election coverage project, www.nlga.us.

• The Initiative and Referendum Institute, www.iandrinsti-tute.org.

• Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, www.ballot.org.

California Gov. Gray Davis

Mississippi Lt. Gov.Amy Tuck

Mississippi Sen. Barbara Blackmon,Candidate for lieutenant governor



mong the top elec-tion stories in theMidwest in 2002were the guberna-torial victories oftwo women, thefirst time that hasever happened in

the region. But for those who study womenin American politics closely, another trendwas being viewed as similarly significant.

After decades of near-constant yearlygains in the percentage of women in statelegislatures, the rate dropped slightlybetween 2002 and 2003 (from 22.7 percentto 22.3 percent). Over the last 10 years, thepercentage has increased by just more than1 percent, compared to a 6 percent risebetween 1983 and 1993.

“It’s fair to say that we are right now ina period of stagnation,” said DeborahWalsh, director of the Center for AmericanWomen and Politics at Rutgers University.This trend is troubling to those pushing toclose the gap in gender representation. Inaddition, as Walsh points out, the fact thatthere are more U.S. women governorstoday than ever before isn’t a one-year phe-nomenon. Instead, it is a reflection of “30years of grass-roots efforts.”

“The governors didn’t come from out ofnowhere; they worked their way up thepolitical system,” she said. That oftenincluded time in state legislatures, so theleveling off of female representation is animportant concern for people wanting morewomen in all elective offices.

demographicsdemographics

Amidst successes, women’s gains in state legislatures have slowed

BY TIM ANDERSON

A

Facing thegender gap

Walsh cites various factors causing thiscurrent period of stagnation. The first is theproliferation of term limit laws, which somethought would actually increase the numberof women in office by opening up more leg-islative seats to people previously shut outof the political process. However, Walshsays, term limits have forced out manywomen state legislators. In Michigan, forexample, in the year term limits first kickedin, the state lost 52 percent of the femalestate lawmakers.

The open seats are not always filled bywith women. Walsh says studies haveshown that men and women make theirdecisions to run for political office in differ-ent ways. Analysis by political scientist GaryMoncrief found that men are more likely todecide to run for political office on theirown, while more encouragement and out-reach efforts are needed to persuade women.

Furthermore, Walsh believes both polit-ical parties simply are not making enoughof a concerted effort to recruit potentialfemale candidates. Women win at essen-tially the same rate as men, but they justdon’t run as often.

The openness of political parties is a crit-ical dynamic in determining the ability ofwomen to get their names on the ballot andwin. For example, this factor, along withvarying cultural conditions, goes a long wayin explaining state differences in the per-centage of women lawmakers.

Recruitment, though, does not have to berelegated to the Democratic and Republicanparties. Statistics indicate that female repre-

sentation in American government does nothave to be a partisan issue, as women havebeen making making up a greater percent-age of both parties’ state legislative caucus-es over the past few decades.

Two efforts in the Midwest underscorehow the recruitment of women candidatescan extend beyond parties. In response to thehuge impact that term limits was having inthe Wolverine State, the Michigan Women’sCampaign Fund and Michigan Women’sPolitical Caucus teamed up to search forcandidates. They hired a former state legis-lator to help with the recruitment efforts.

Meanwhile, a bipartisan group calledIowa Women in Public Policy is working toincrease female representation in electiveoffice, says Kira Sanbonmatsu, a visitingprofessor at the Center for AmericanWomen in Politics.

While the number of female state legisla-tors has not risen lately, long-term trends tella much different story. Since 1969, the per-centage has increased from 4 percent to 22.4percent. Walsh contends this change has hadan important influence on public policy.

“Diversity in the legislature brings with ita different set of life experiences and prior-ities,” she says. “It’s not that men don’twant to address things that have traditional-ly been considered women’s issues or prob-lems, but sometimes it takes a woman tobring them to the forefront.”

— Tim Anderson is publications managerfor the Midwestern Office of The Council ofState Governments. This article originallyappeared in Stateline Midwest, a publica-tion of CSG Midwest.

“Diversity in the legislature brings with

it a different set of life experiences

and priorities.”

— Deborah Walsh, Center forAmerican Women and Politics



trendsalert

udicial elections are becoming more expensive. Inaddition to skyrocketing costs, more interest groups

are becoming involved in judicial campaigns than everbefore, and these groups can avoid certain campaign financereporting requirements by not specifically endorsing a partic-ular candidate. These trends have an unfor-tunate consequence – loss of public confi-dence in the court system.

Almost 90 percent of all state judges facesome kind of election, so issues concerningjudicial campaigns affect most state judges.

The average amount of campaign fundsraised by judicial candidates has increasedsince 1995. This trend was underscored instate Supreme Court races of 2000 whichproved to be the most expensive judicialelection cycle to date. In fact, fundraisingfor Supreme Court races jumped more than60 percent between 1998 and 2000.

Judicial candidates are raising moremoney because races are becoming moreexpensive. Escalating campaign costs canbe attributed to at least two factors. First, courts have madeseveral rulings that have changed public policy, so interestgroups have shown increased interest in promoting their ideasthrough judicial rulings rather than legislation. Second, judi-cial candidates have tried to raise public awareness of theircampaigns through multimedia outlets, which is expensive.

While campaign fundraising is growing, public confi-dence in the judicial system is falling. Two recent nationalsurveys conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Researchand American Viewpoint revealed a low level of public con-fidence in state court systems because of the increasingimpact of politics, money and special interests.

These surveys also found significant public support for avariety of judicial reforms. Experts have proposed severalreforms ranging from mandating disclosure of campaigncontributions and placing caps on campaign contributionsand expenditures to the more extreme suggestion of publicfinancing for judicial campaigns. Other reforms center onjudicial accountability, such as toughening rules to disquali-fy judges in cases in which one or more parties have con-tributed to a judge’s campaign or establishing judicial performance evaluation commissions to review a judge’sconduct and performance.

In recent years, the judiciary has increasingly intervenedin areas, such as education reform, that were traditionally

reserved for legislative policy-makers. Consequently, inter-est groups and lawyers have shifted some of their attentionand resources to the judicial branch. This, in turn, has ledsome voters to question the integrity of the bench.

The judicial branch is a key element in the Americansystem of checks and balances, so judi-cial reform is likely to be a hot topic atthe state level in the coming years.

CSG has just produced TrendsAlert:Judicial Democracy, which explores therising costs of judicial elections in moredetail and examines the different methodsof judicial selection. It also looks atoptions for judicial reform. The report canbe downloaded for free from www.csg.org (keyword: judicial democracy).

TrendsAlert: Judicial Democracy ex-plores the rising costs of judicial electionsin more detail and examines the pros andcons of different methods of judicial selec-tion as well as various options for judicialreform. The report can be downloaded

from http://www.csg.org (keyword: judicial democracy).

— Melissa Taylor is chief research analyst at The Council ofState Governments.

JCost of judicial campaigns is rising

BY MELISSA TAYLOR

Melissa Taylor

$500,000

$450,000

$400,000

$350,000

$300,000

$250,000

$200,000

$150,000

$100,000

$50,000

01993-1994 1995-1996 1997-1998 1999-2000

Source: The Brennan Center for Justice and National Institute on Money in State Politics

Average funds raised by judicial candidates, 1993-2000



T

hen Estonia wanted to transform itsSoviet-era army into a modern mil-itary force, the U.S. EuropeanCommand turned to the MarylandNational Guard to provide the mod-el of an effective modern militaryunder democratic civilian control.

For the past 10 years Maryland and Estonia have been activepartners, paired through the National Guard’s State Partnership

Program. Since 1993, a variety of Marylandstate government officials have worked with

their Estonian counterparts, assistingEstonia’s rapid transition to a vibrant

democracy and NATO ally.The Maryland Emergency

Management Agency has helpedEstonia develop an advancedemergency management system.The recreational studies depart-ment at Tallinn PedagogicalUniversity is working with fac-ulty experts at Maryland’sGarret Community College torefine both schools’ programs.

State governments today aremore active internationally than

ever before, making an impactnot just on the economic front, but

on national security as well. Arecent survey by George Washington

University found that while nearly allstates engage in some level of internation-

al activity, most state officials remain unawareof the extent of their state’s international programs.

A little-known vehicle for internationalism by state govern-ments has been the National Guard and its State Partnership

Program.Originally partof a small militaryprogram designed toassist in Eastern Europe’sdemocratization, SPP has expand-ed over the past 10 years to pair 37 coun-tries with 34 states, two U.S. territories, and the District ofColumbia. Through the SPP, National Guard and state officials arelending their expertise to strategically important countries aroundthe world. The Maryland-Estonia partnership is one of the mostdynamic and mature in the program.

Maj. Mark Teel is Maryland’s man in Estonia. As the bilateralaffairs officer, he works for the U.S. European Command, the U.S.Embassy in Tallinn, and the Maryland Army National Guard,coordinating both the SPP and the Joint Contact Team Program, amilitary-to-military exchange program that gave rise to the earli-est state partnerships. Initially, a four-person liaison team managedthese programs from a suite of offices inside the headquarters ofthe Estonian Defense League. Today, with the program reachingmaturity, the team has been reduced to just one man, Teel.Renovations have forced him to temporarily share his office suitewith the Defense League commander. He is now responsible forplanning the future direction of the program as Estonia’s needsgrow narrower and more technically specific. He also arranges andcoordinates the program’s civilian-to-civilian exchange visitsbetween Maryland and Estonia.

The SPP was born in early 1993, designed to augment the U.S.European Command’s JCTP for familiarizing former communistmilitaries with the U.S. concept of a democratically controlledmilitary. Early SPP activities were no more than having NationalGuard personnel provide familiarization as part of a JCTP event.

Slowly, state Guards increased the number and types ofexchange programs they could run, and today, the two programsremain linked, even as the SPP has expanded beyond Europe and

homeland securityhomeland security

W

InternationalstatesStates are more active thanever in foreign policy

BY PETER HOWARD

A little-knownvehicle for internationalismby state governments has been theNational Guardand its StatePartnershipProgram.


T

beyond strictly mili-tary issues. The mil-itary side of theSPP is part of theregional Comba-tant Commanders’theater engage-ment strategies toshape the peace-time security envi-ronment in theirrespective areas of

responsibility. It haspaid dividends, as

European partnershave successfully join-

ed NATO and CentralAsian partners have

emerged as key allies in thewar on terrorism. Estonian

troops have beensent to both Af-

ghanistan and Iraq tosupport U.S. led mis-

sions. But, in pairing stateswith countries, the Combatant

Commanders and the rest of the federalgovernment have ceded a small part of an

important national security program to state gov-ernments. States now determine, in many respects,what type of relationship these engagement pro-grams produce.

Maryland and Estonia have built a close rela-tionship. Traveling contact teams of Marylandexperts regularly visit Estonia to familiarizeEstonians with U.S. military concepts, and smallteams of Estonians visit Maryland Guard facilities to seehow U.S. facilities and units work. The knowledge gainedby the Estonians on these trips has helped them, in just over10 years, develop from scratch a military good enough to beinvited to join NATO.

The Estonian Defense League is Estonia’s reserve mili-tary force, similar to the National Guard. The MarylandNational Guard and Estonian Defense League are of similarsize and structure, and this has made the partnershipbetween them beneficial. In this respect, the Guard was ableto provide better advice than the active duty Army becausethe Defense League had to overcome issues unique to acommunity-based force of volunteer reservists. The DefenseLeague is interested in expanding its mission to assist local com-munities and has looked to the Maryland Guard’s “ChalleNGe”program of outreach to at-risk youth as a model. Having learnedabout the program’s success in Maryland, the Defense League isnow poised to begin a similar program in Estonia.

The citizen-soldiers of the Guard demonstrate civilian controlof the military with their traditional mission of providing militaryassistance to civilian authorities in emergency situations. In

Estonia, the Border Guard and Rescue Board have the responsibil-ity to respond to natural disasters, search and rescue, and potentialterrorist attacks.

The Maryland Guard has developed partnerships with bothservices. Rescue Board officials have toured the Baltimore Countyemergency response center, seen a National Guard Civil SupportTeam in action, and visited the Maryland Fire and Rescue Institute.Not only does this help Estonia develop and enhance its own capa-bility to respond to emergency situations, but it demonstrates theway in which the military forces of the Guard act in support ofcivilian state agencies. Among the Rescue Board and DefenseLeague, there are usually one or two individuals in each unit whohave had substantial contact with the Maryland National Guard.

Each state Guard has its own partnership coordinator who man-ages the overall relationship between the state and its partnercountry. These coordinators now have the space and opportunityto develop a wide array of programs between their state and itspartner country. As the partnerships have evolved, they haveinvolved more civilian-based contacts. The only real limit on whatpartners can do together is funding.

Members of the Maryland–EstoniaNational Guard partnership partici-pate in a disaster-response exercise.



S

B

States, as well as the federal government, can reap the benefitsof the SPP with a relatively small investment in people andresources. Nearly all of the funds for SPP come from federal pro-grams in the Department of Defense. Federal funding for Guardactivities covers most of the cost of the full time Guard staff whocoordinate and run the program at the state level. Guard personnelstationed in country as members of a bilateral affairs office, suchas Major Teel, have salary, travel, and other expenses covered byEuropean Command headquarters. Military exchanges that con-tribute to the JCTP mission are funded by that program’s budget.The National Guard Bureau has additional funds to sponsor non-military exchanges through Minuteman Fellowships. These fel-lowships fund participation by civilian state employees.Enterprising states have tapped into other federal funds for individ-ual programs, such as environmental clean up efforts.

States do pay their normal share of Guard activities and over-head, the regular salary of state employees involved in anexchange program, and any spe-cial programs that they maychoose to initiate or sponsor. Somestates will assign a part-timeGuard member the dual role of astate civil service employee in themilitary department to work on theprogram. With the energy and ded-ication of key individuals, a stategovernment can still run a robustState Partnership Program despitesignificant budget restrictions.

Using Minuteman Fellowships,the Guard has been able to includecivilians in its exchanges andexpand the partnership program toother areas. While the mission offamiliarization is decreasing, exchanges, joint participation inexercises and other forms of security cooperation are increasing tohelp Estonia develop as a fully capable NATO ally.

The long-term goal of the partnership is to spread into civilianareas. Two leading initiatives launched by the Maryland Guardaddress education and local government.

Maryland and Estonia have developed a substantial partnershipin higher education, as Estonian and Maryland universities havebegun to exchange students, faculty, and even develop joint pro-grams. Reet Kaani, head of international relations for TallinnPedagogical University, coordinates much of the partnership forEstonian universities. According to Kaani, Estonia is now regular-ly sending students to Garrett Community College on scholarshipto study in the United States. The schools have also engaged infaculty exchanges. Both Tallinn Pedagogical and Garrett shareprograms in recreation studies and have exchanged faculty toteach in the other’s program. Kaani said that “they have a lot tolearn from each other.” Using Garrett as a model has helpedTallinn Pedagogical refine some of its existing courses and majors.The University of Baltimore also has a Baltic Studies program,and it is now developing a summer term in Estonia for students tostudy the Baltics firsthand.

Cities are involved in the partnership as well. Ten Marylandcities have sister cities in Estonia. While at Frostburg StateUniversity on an educational exchange, Katri-Liis Lepik wrote her

Master’s thesis on the Maryland-Estonia partnership. She returnedto Tallinn to coordinate the partner city program and now worksfor the Tallinn city government. According to Lepik, Westminster,Md. and Paide, Estonia have developed one of the most robustpartnerships. In addition to regular communication, the two citieshave exchanged employees for several weeks so that each couldlearn from the other. Westminster helped Paide build a skateboardpark, giving Paide teens a safe place to play. In her work for theTallinn city government, Lepik is attempting to further develop itspartnership with Annapolis. In addition to both being capital cities,both are trying to make better use of their local ports and couldlearn from each other’s experiences.

While the SPP’s benefits to the partner countries are highly vis-ible, especially among new NATO members in Eastern Europe,participating states also reap significant rewards. The most obvi-ous beneficiary is the Guard, which directs and leads the program.The program is extremely popular among participating Guard

troops who have a unique opportu-nity to conduct an exciting andimportant mission, boosting moraleand retention rates. Strong bondsdevelop between paired Guard unitsand national militaries, as each feelsthat it makes a meaningful differ-ence in the lives of the other.

Beyond the Guard, the SPP canalso help other areas of state gov-ernment. It has the potential toopen trade ties to promote exportsand local businesses, with severalstate partners having launchedtrade missions to expand their eco-nomic ties. It has also helped in

state law enforcement. On one law enforcement related programin Ukraine, California officials identified stolen California carsthat had been shipped by international criminals for resale inUkraine. Educational exchanges, like the Maryland-Estonia part-nership, have increased the options available to students. Sistercity pairings also allow local governments to swap ideas andlearn new ways to handle local issues by seeing how others tacklesimilar problems.

Across Europe and especially in Estonia, while the militaryside of the SPP is leveling off, civilian contacts are growing.The Defense Department has been so impressed with theMaryland-Estonia pairing that it has offered Maryland a newstate partner, Bosnia-Herzgovenia, where the cycle of military-to-military contacts can start anew. The net result is that,through the SPP, states have a growing international role whichincludes implementing U.S. foreign policy in a select group ofstrategically important countries.

— Peter Howard is an assistant professor in the School ofInternational Service at American University in Washington, D.C.Research for this article was supported in part by a grant from theInternational Research and Exchanges Board (IREX) with fundsprovided by the United States Department of State through theTitle VIII Program. None of these organizations is responsible forthe views expressed.



he 14-year-old National Hispanic Caucusof State Legislators came of age this sum-mer in the library of an inner city schoolin San Francisco.

Standing before a row of televisioncameras and radio microphones with a

group of Latino students behind them, the NHCSL lead-ership unveiled their organization’s most ambitious proj-ect ever, a policy paper addressing the obstacles to edu-cational achievement facing Hispanic students.

Released on the heels of a U.S. Census Bureau reportthat showed Latinos are now the majority minori-

ty in the United States, Closing Achieve-ment Gaps: Improving Educational

Outcomes for Hispanic Children notonly addressed a central issue in

the Hispanic community butraised NHCSL’s profile amongthe general public.

“Hispanics are now thelargest ethnic minority in theUnited States,” Arizona Rep.John Loredo, a member ofNHCSL’s executive commit-tee, said during the news con-ference. “Now more than ever

it is critical that we as state leg-islators make education a top

priority. The ability of our chil-dren to compete in the 21st century

economy depends on it.”The 44-page policy report, which

was produced by NHCSL with The TomasRivera Policy Institute in Claremont, Calif., cites a variety ofobstacles to Hispanic educational achievement and proposespotential policy and program solutions.

“The educational crisis is a national crisis, not just a Hispanic

one,” said Harry Pachon, president of the Tomas Rivera PolicyInstitute. “Hispanics will be a significant segment of the futurework force of America. Likewise, it will be a national disaster ifthis generation’s potential is not fully developed.”

Maryland Delegate Ana Sol Gutierrez agreed with Pachon thatimproved education achievement for Hispanic students will bene-fit all Americans.

“Throughout the nation, our schools are failing to deliver thebest educational experiences and opportunities that our Latinostudents, families and communities are hungry for,” she saidduring the press conference. “Years of systemic low expecta-tions condemn too many to second-class minimum-wage lives.As the largest ethnic minority in the United States, it is in every-one’s interest to better prepare and educate this nation’s futurework force.”

The report was developed from an education symposium heldin February by NHCSL and the Tomas Rivera Institute. The goalof the symposium was to develop a blueprint for action byHispanic state legislators.

The report was timely because the nation’s attention has beendrawn to education with the Bush administration’s No Child LeftBehind Act.

“While a federal mandate has been established by the No ChildLeft Behind legislation, much needs to be done to ensure success-ful implementation in the states at a time of fiscal crisis,” saidKansas Sen. Paul Feliciano, president of NHCSL.

demographicsdemographics

Finding focusThe National HispanicCaucus of State Legislatorsissues first policy report

BYJACK PENCHOFF

T“The educationalcrisis is anational crisis,not just aHispanic one.”

—Harry Pachon,Tomas Rivera Policy

Institute

Sen. Paul Feliciano Jr. of Kansas addresses a press conference this summer inannouncing the release of the National Hispanic Caucus of State Legislators’ poli-cy briefing on the need for closing the achievement gap for Hispanic students.


A

T


The education policy report marked a major development inNHCSL’s role on the national stage.

“This report was a major step forward in beginning the processof NHCSL shaping public policy,” said Mickey Ibarra, a NHCSLconsultant who served as assistant to the president and director ofintergovernmental affairs at the White House from 1997 to 2001.The organization is also considering policy reports on health careand affordable housing, two important issues in the Hispanic com-munity, said Ibarra.

And NHCSL, which in this past year became an affiliate ofThe Council of State Governments, is forging ties with theNational Black Caucus of State Legislators to take joint action inpolicy issues such as health care, education, economic develop-ment and housing.

The NHCSL was founded in 1989 by Sen. Larry Trujillo ofColorado. At the time, said Feliciano, out of approximately 7,500state legislators in the United States, Puerto Rico and the VirginIslands, 163 were Hispanic, with 78 of those in Puerto Rico.

As the nation’s Hispanic population has grown, so has thenumber of Hispanic legislators, with 300 now representedthrough NHCSL.

“In 1980 there were Hispanic legislators in nine states,” saidFeliciano. “By 1990 there were Hispanics in 18 state legislatures.Today Hispanics are represented in 36 legislatures.”

Along with a growing population,the nation’s Hispanic communities are agrowing economic force.

“There’s a phenomenal growth inwealth among Hispanics,” saidFeliciano. “The Hispanic Chamber ofCommerce and the Census Bureaureport that in 2003, Hispanics held $460billion in annual buying power. Overthe next seven years that’s expected togrow to more than $1 trillion.”

Hispanics are also young, with 17million of the country’s 43 millionHispanics under the age of 18.

“That’s where the workforce is thatwill generate the income and wealth weneed to keep social security sound andwell,” said Feliciano.

That’s why, said the 31-year-memberof the Kansas State Senate, becoming aU.S. citizen should be less difficult forimmigrants.

“The process impedes them. It takes7 to 10 years, and it’s not getting anybetter,” said Feliciano.

Corporate America is taking noticeof the growth of the Hispanic popula-tion and the potential political cloutHispanic legislators can wield in thenation’s state houses.

“In the past year the members of ourBusiness Board of Advisors has grownfrom about 16 members to 27,” saidFeliciano.

A cross-section of the nation’s corpora-tions, including Verizon, Citigroup,American Express, Ford Motor andPfizer, have invested in the ongoingefforts of NHCSL and its programs.

In August, the NHCSL met in ahealth care conference to set theiragenda in promoting better healthamong Hispanics.

“We decided diabetes, obesity, con-gestive heart failure and asthma havethe most effect on the Hispanic popula-tion,” Feliciano said.

In November, the NHCSL and theNBCSL will hold a joint health caresummit to address health care issueamong minorities.

“There are 900 black state legislatorsand 300 Hispanic legislators. That’s1,200 legislators who can truly affectpublic policy in the United States,”said Feliciano.

Channeling the political power ofHispanics and African-Americans ishigh on the agendas for both theNHCSL and NBCSL.

“There are 43 million Hispanics and40 million blacks,” said Feliciano.“That’s incredible power. And that’sdoesn’t include the Asian and other ethnic communities. That’s why it’simportant to educate people about theimportance of voting.”

Arizona state Rep. John Laredo said it was critical that Hispanic state legislatoa top priority.

Sen. Efrain Gonzalez of New York, a foundingmember of the NHCSL.



Feliciano credits Sen. Efrain Gonzalez, whoalong with Feliciano was one of the foundingmembers of NHCSL, with helping the organ-ization survive.

“The saving grace of NHCSL has beenSenator Gonzalez, who was able to get NewYork to appropriate $125,000 annually to pro-vide the services for our offices in New Yorkand Washington. We owe him a debt of grati-tude,” said Feliciano.

Feliciano is serving his second stint asNHCSL’s president. He served a two-yearterm in the early 1990s. In 2002, the organiza-tion’s dynamic president, Representative JohnS. Martinez of Connecticut, was killed in atraffic accident and Feliciano was selected tofill Martinez’s unexpired term. In a letterappearing in the front of the education policyreport, Feliciano credits the project toMartinez, “whose vision made this accom-plishment possible. It was his passion andcommitment to the success of our childrenthat initiated this project.”

The full report on improving educational achievement forLatinos can be found in PDF format on NHCSL’s Web site,www.nhcsl.com. There is also a version on the Tomas Rivera Website, www.trpi.org.

— Jack Penchoff is senior editor of State Government News magazine.

“Now more than ever it iscritical that we as state legislators make education a top priority.The ability of our children to compete in the 21st century economy depends on it.”

— Arizona Rep. John Loredo

gislators make education

Right: Maryland Delegate Ana Sol Gutierrez said better education for Hispanics will benefit all Americans.Below: New York Assemblyman Felix Ortiz, a member of the NHCSL executive committee, stands with a group of Hispanic students during a pressconference at which Closing Achievement Gaps: Improving Educational Outcomes for Hispanic Children was released.


TO

Antil recently most ofthe justification for“Internet calls,” referr-ed to as Voice-over-Internet Protocol, orVoIP in the telecom-munications industry,came down to savings.

After all, a free phone call sounded prettygood. But for state government networkmanagers, the technology was not muchmore than a curiosity. Voice quality, relia-bility and a lack of technical standardsmade it problematic at best and career-end-ing at worst.

Still, testing in state government hascontinued because for all the potentialproblems, streaming IP, whether it carriesvoice or video, provides what amounts tothe Holy Grail of networking: the potentialto consolidate voice, data and video on asingle infrastructure, lower the cost of

voice communications, andprovide an infinitely flexiblenetwork.

As the technology hasmatured, more organizationsare moving beyond testing touse streaming VoIP to carryvoice traffic – and not justbetween major telecommuni-cations facilities, but all theway to the desktop. In fact,the technology appears tohave crossed the acceptancegap – from “early adopters”to an “early majority” asdescribed by GeoffreyMoore’s frequently refer-enced book on technology,Crossing the Chasm.

Furthermore, most surveysof communications managersnow show that up to two-thirds of them areeither deploying VoIP or are planning to doso within the next couple of years. Again,this rate of acceptance goes well beyond theearly adopter phase.

One measure of the emerging acceptanceof VoIP as an everyday technology is thefocus on return on investment studies,which estimate savings when using IP voicein specific situations. Unlike early adopters,who don’t mind making it work, the “earlymajority” doesn’t want to debug the tech-nology in order to benefit from it.Corporations that loathe spending moneyon technologies that will not enhance thebottom line are now clearly measuring thepossibilities in dollars and cents.

VoIP proponents usually cite as benefitsthe savings from a converged network and

increased employee productivity. In addi-tion, costs associated with telephonemoves, adds and changes, collectivelyreferred to as “MACs,” are reducedbecause VoIP telephony, when fully imple-mented, makes it easier to manage networkdevices such as phones.

The very nature of communicationstoday makes a wide implementation ofany technology difficult simply because itmust work with so much other technology.More and more devices such as wirelessphones are software-driven; they are“intelligent” in the sense that they can domore than deliver a dial tone. They cansend, store, retrieve and manipulate digitalinformation.

As these devices proliferate, “networkintelligence” is said to be pushed “to the


technologytechnology

U

States and the ‘stateless’ technologyUse of Internet telephone calls on the rise in state governments

BY WAYNE HALL

Two-thirds ofcommunicationmanagers areeither deployingVoIP or plan to do so withinthe next couple of years.


Iedges.” This contrasts with the telecom-munications network of 20 or 30 yearsago when Ma Bell kept a tight hold on thetechnology. In those days, a phone wasnot much more than a sophisticated ver-sion of the tin can on the end of a wire.The brains behind the network residednearer the center of the voice network in the Bell switches and communica-tions facilities.

Using the analogy of a desktop com-puter, making the network work withperipheral devices like personal digitalassistants and digital phones can be prob-lematic. In theory, managing a phone in anIP environment is not so different frommanaging any other data device attachedto the computer.

In practice, of course, it’s different.State networks cross agencies, depart-

ments and bureaus, many with their ownhardware and software – and all withunique communications needs. Add in theelement of the unknown in the form oflocal “hotspots” for wireless networking,and the management difficulty isincreased exponentially.

Approached from the top down, statecommunications networks must be con-figured to work together. All the devicesmust be known, secured and powered.Small wonder that state chief informationofficers and information technology agen-cies are developing “enterprise architec-tures” that can describe the entire networkand its many relationships.

Part of the answer to successful VoIPtelephony rollouts may lie with enablingtechnologies such as Multiprotocol LabelSwitching, or MPLS. This development is

important because VoIP networks are“stateless” or “connectionless.”

In existing circuit-switched networks, anopen voice connection is maintained end-to-end. There is literally a clear starting andending point to each call.

In the IP or packet-based network, how-ever, the voice call is chopped into frag-ments, or packets. Each packet contains amap to the ultimate destination, but doesnot necessarily travel the same route to getthere. So when the packets are reassembledat the other end – when the conversation isreconstructed – packets that are missing orarrive out of order manifest themselves as“jitter,” “latency,” or just nonsense tohuman ears and eyes. MPLS provides amore traditional connection-oriented envi-ronment that enables more management ofpacket networks.

VoIP networking is desirable because thetransmission of data in the form of e-mail,file transfers and other information that hasbeen digitally converted has overtakenvoice communication in volume. Ratherthan try to use the old voice network builton copper for data communication, whichwould be technically very difficult, itmakes more sense to extend the digital rev-olution to voice calls by transferring thetelephone call onto a modern network.

IP telephony, like the development ofpersonal computers and e-mail, is part ofthe ongoing digital reformation of stategovernment. This reformation cannot hap-pen unless state employees are included.Despite its promise, technology cannot bethe only answer.

NASTD members increasingly findthemselves in converged organizations,which have led to more professional dia-logue between managers traditionallyengaged in the separate disciplines of voiceand data communications.

Anecdotal evidence gathered fromNASTD meetings shows that state govern-ment communications agencies, whichhave traditionally been responsible for con-necting state government agencies acrosstown and between every corner of the state,are increasingly responsible for local areanetworks, or LANs, as well. The LAN iswhere the vast majority of day-to-day net-working between computers in the sameoffice takes place.

Continued on page 38


IP telephony is part of the ongoing digital reformationof state government.


In the midst of the states’ budget crisis, how has theenvironment fared?

ECOS’ 2003 survey of environmental and naturalresource spending by the states shows that, despite adecline in state spending from the previous year, there is acontinued state commitment to environmental protection.

The survey shows that states budgeted $15.1 billion in2003, with about 1.4 percent of the total budget of all states goingtoward the environment and natural resources. (All figures in thisarticle are adjusted to a 2003 basis.) Our findings also show anincrease in federal funds to states for these pur-poses, up to $5 billion, or one-third of stateenvironmental/natural resource budgets. Theremaining $10 billion is from state sources.

State environmental funds come mostlyfrom state sources such as permit fees, trustfunds, and the state general fund. These aresupplemented by federal funds. While thestate portion has declined from its 1999 peak,these losses have been somewhat compensatedfor by a commensurate rise in federal funds,which have increased since 1998.

The $15.1 billion total is less than stateenvironmental spending for 2002, duringwhich the states spent about $15.35 billion.However, the $15.1 billion spent in 2003 is thesecond-highest amount that states have everspent on the environment and naturalresources. On the other hand, the states’ com-mitment of 1.4 percent of the total state budgetis the lowest we’ve seen in 17 years of obser-

vation. The average percentage spent on environment/naturalresources over that period is 1.63 percent. The peak was 1.73 per-cent in 1991.

ECOS surveyed state budgets in all 50 states for fiscal 2003 todetermine environmental and natural resource spending in 15categories. This is the latest survey in a series that began in 1986at The Council of State Governments. A consistent methodologyover this 17-year period allows multiyear comparisons for eachcategory and by source of funds. Only funds used to operate orsupport state or federal programs are included. Funds must be in


environmentenvironment

I

Budgets are bruised,but still strongState environmental spending is down slightly, but to the second highest level ever

BY R. STEVEN BROWN AND MICHAEL J. KIEFER

Table 1.State environmental/natural resources spending by region, 2003

Region Budgets States Average(in billions)

West Coast $3.15 CA, OR,AK, HI,WA $629,424,423

Southeast $3.41 FL, GA, NC,TN, KY,AL, MS, SC $426,767,358

Midwest $2.24 IL,WI, MI, OH, IN, MN $373,221,165

South Central $1.34 LA,TX,AR, OK $334,410,538

Mid-Atlantic $1.87 PA,WV,VA, MD, NJ, DE $311,658,139

Northeast $1.21 NY, ME, NH, MA, RI,VT, CT $173,445,204

Plains $0.85 IA, SD, MO, ND, NE, KS $141,751,919

Mountains $1.09 MT,AZ, UT, ID, CO,WY, NM, NV $136,106,228



the state budget to be included. Direct EPA grants to state uni-versities, for example, are not included, nor are funds to EPAregional offices and laboratories that are in the states. State fundsinclude funding for both federal and nonfederal programs.

Federal funds to states are an important component of thestates’ environmental/natural resource pool of funds. States imple-ment about 75 percent of the federal programs that can be delegat-ed to them. ECOS suspects that the workload delegation is actual-ly much higher, because many of the programs not operated bystates are very small ones with few sources.

As recently as 1996, the federal portion of total state spend-ing on the environment/natural resources was about 23 percent.By 1999, the federal portion of state spending on the environ-ment was 24.5 percent, after which it began to climb steadily toits current peak of about 33 percent. We expect that this rise haslikely helped offset some problems that states might have oth-erwise experienced during the budget decline in 2003.

Table 1 shows regional differences in spending patterns, withthe West Coast states spending the largest amount (founded on

California’s efforts), followed by the Southeastern states. On aver-age, Plains and Mountain states spend the least, which reflectstheir smaller state budgets.

Per capita spending for these regions is depicted in Table 2.Again, the West Coast and the Southeast lead the nation. Percapita spending across the nation at large is $51.80, about whatit has been since 1993.

States spent the most on water issues (water resources, waterquality, drinking water andmarine/coastal), a com-bined $4.63 billion. Land management (forestry, landmanagement, soil conser-vation, mining reclama-tion, pesticides and geolog-ical survey) was second,just over $3.8 billion. Fishand wildlife spending wasthird, at $2.83 billion.Waste issues (hazardouswaste, solid waste andnuclear waste) rankedfourth, at $2.57 billion.(See Table 3 for details).

Data show that, since1986, the states haveassumed a very large por-tion of the cost of protect-ing the nation’s environ-

0

5

10

15

20

25

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

FY 1

986

FY 1

987

FY 1

988

FY 1

989

FY 1

990

FY 1

991

FY 1

992

FY 1

993

FY 1

994

FY 1

995

FY 1

996

FY 1

997

FY 1

998

FY 1

999

FY 2

000

FY 2

001

FY 2

002

FY 2

003

50.0

Stat

e En

viro

nmen

tal/N

atur

al R

esou

rce

Expe

nditu

res

(in b

illio

ns)

Env/NR funding to states from all federal sources (in billions)State Env. & NR budgets/adjusted spending % of funding from all federal sources

% o

f Fed

eral

Fun

ding

Table 2.Per capita spendingon state environ-mental/naturalresources, 2003

Region Per capita

West Coast $69.90Southeast $64.11Mountains $59.92Plains $59.40Mid-Atlantic $52.43Midwest $44.72South Central $42.54Northeast $36.21

Chart 1. State environmental / natural resources spending, 1986-2003

Federal funds to states are animportant component ofthe states’ environmental/natural resource pool of funds.



ment. During this time, state spending has nearly doubled, from $8.7billion in 1986 (expressed as 2003 dollars), to more than $15 billionin 2003 (see Chart 1).

Sources of that funding have shifted during this period.States’ environmental and natural resource spending usuallycomes from the general fund, trust funds, and permit fees. Theseare supplemented by federal funds, most of which come fromthe U.S. EPA. In 1986, the nonfederal portion of state spendingon the environment was 55.6 percent, but in fiscal 1996 thispeaked at 76.8 percent.

In recent years, the federal portion of state environmentalbudgets has been increasing. As recently as 1999 the federal por-tion was as low as 24.5 percent, but it has increased each yearsince then. For fiscal 2003, 33.1 percent of the states’ environ-mental budget is from federal sources. This increase has nodoubt blunted the effect of state budget problems, coupled per-haps with some state permit fee increases.

Trends in spending on “media” programs (e.g., air, waterand waste) are somewhat similar (see Chart 2). Air spendingshows a slow growth over the years, with a recent rapid increase.Water spending has also grown steadily over the years, but with

Air quality: Funds for administrating the state’s clean air laws and the Clean Air Act.Drinking water: Funds for administrating the Safe Drinking Water Act, as well as state public drinking water laws, including laboratory test-

ing, and monitoring systems construction and maintenance.Forestry: Funds for managing and protecting the state’s forest resources.Fish and wildlife: Funds for protecting, managing and enhancing fish and wildlife (game) resources and enforcing the state’s fish and

game laws.Geological survey: Funds for conducting research on states’ terrain, mineral resources, and possible geologic hazards such as earthquakes

and volcanoes.Hazardous waste: Funds for developing and maintaining a comprehensive hazardous waste management program (which could also

include remediation of Superfund sites and addressing leaking underground storage tanks).Land Management: Funds for managing state-owned and state-administered land resources (including rangeland and wetlands) not iden-

tified as state parks and recreational areas.Marine and coastal: Funds for planning and implementing programs for the orderly development and research of coastal zones (including

Federal Sea Grants and related spending).Nuclear waste: Funds for developing and maintaining comprehensive low-level and high-level nuclear waste management programs.Pesticides control: Funds for regulating the sale, use, and content of agricultural and commercial pesticides.Soil conservation: Funds for coordinating and operating programs to conserve and protect the state’s soil resources.Surface mining reclamation: Funds for enforcing mining reclamation standards and administrating state reclamation programs and/or aban-

doned mined lands cleanup.Solid waste: Funds for developing and maintaining solid waste management programs.Water quality: Funds for developing and maintaining water quality protection and water pollution abatement programs (including requi-

site criteria of the Clean Water Act).Water resources: Funds for administrating state’s water conservation, development, use, and planning programs.

Category definitions for state environmental/natural resources budgets (Table 3)

Table 3.State environmental budgetsby category, 2003

Budget category Total

Water Water resources $2,186,940,159 Water quality $1,439,087,967 Drinking water $576,505,872 Marine & coastal $429,659,056 Subtotal $4,632,193,054

Land management Forestry $1,597,786,882 Land management $1,090,775,125 Soil conservation $378,869,448 Mining reclamation $348,707,294 Pesticides control $225,225,047 Geological survey $179,089,909 Subtotal $3,820,453,705

Fish & wildlife $2,835,858,428

Waste management Hazardous waste $1,581,965,318 Solid waste $939,234,944 Nuclear waste $49,099,929 Subtotal $2,570,300,191

Air Quality $1,279,960,353

Total $15,138,765,731

Continued on page 38


he CSG Agriculture and Rural Policy TaskForce has developed an agenda for theAnnual State Trends and Leadership Forumthat considers a wide range of topics affect-ing profitability.

Pennsylvania is a national leader indeveloping a comprehensive plan that

addresses the needs of rural communities. According to Gov.Edward G. Rendell, his “Plan for a New Pennsylvania” isdesigned to “help rural and agriculturalcommunities by focusing on property taxreform, education, and economic devel-opment.” The plan includes an economicstimulus package to attract new compa-nies, modernize agricultural technologyand expand tourism, with farmers havingaccess to $100 million in low-interestloan financing. Pennsylvania Secretary ofAgriculture Dennis G. Wolfe will discussthe steps the state is taking to revitalizethe rural economy.

The task force will also hear from Chandler Keys, vice pres-ident of government affairs for the National Cattlemen’s BeefAssociation, and from a U.S. Trade Representative agriculturespecialist concerning Country of Origin Labeling (COOL),international trade and commodity check-offs.

COOL was already a contentious issue before the identificationof Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy in Canada. Since then, theU.S. Department of Agriculture preliminary guidelines have beenthe topic of discussion at hearings across the country, in Congressand among our trading partners.

Commodity sales and marketing are an important aspect affect-ing profitability in rural areas. Commodity research and promotionprograms, developed to increase commodity demand, have beenaround for decades. Commonly called check-offs, they direct asmall part of the revenue from selling a product to be used

for advertising, promotion, re-search and education. Theyhave never been as controver-sial as they are now. Farmerassessments for everythingfrom the boll weevil eradica-tion program to the beef check-off are facing court challengesover their collection and use.

The Agriculture and RuralPolicy Task Force is also spon-soring a field study to look atdifferent aspects of Pennsyl-vania agriculture and statepolices that affect them. Thestudy will include visits to afamily-owned horticultureoperation and an integrateddairy, plus an investigation ofvideo lottery terminals at horseracing tracks.

— Carolyn Orr, lead agricul-ture and rural policy analyst,corr@ csg.org

State TrendsState Trends

Forum addresses state policies

The Council of State Governments will offer state leaders a diverse and in-depthlook at policy issues affecting their states during the 2003 Annual State Trends andLeadership Forum that will be held in Pittsburgh Oct. 23-27.

Topics on the agenda include the revitalization of rural communities, the impacton states of the No Child Left Behind Act, the scarcity of water across our nation,the changing nature of corrections and the emerging debate over specialty hospitals.

TAgriculture and Rural Policy Task Force

Pennsylvania is a national leader in

developing a comprehensiveplan that addresses the

needs of rural communities.


A

W


While the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 gained biparti-san approval in Congress and generated enthusiasm and earlyacceptance among educators for its lofty goals and vision, italso has gained skeptics and critics since states began imple-mentation in 2002.

Two months into the new school year, governors and state leg-islators feel squeezed when it comes to educational issues.Increased litigation by parents, local school districts, and specialinterest groups – coupled with federal reauthorizations and man-dates – have not done much to improve the dire financial straits ofmost states, which already spend the largest part of their generalfund budgets on education.

State and local officials around the country are still trying to fig-ure out how they will pay for requirements spelled out in the No

Child Left Behind Act. Manystate legislators face a new gen-eration of legal claims aimed atthe educational finance systemsthat fund local school districts.State supreme courts are takinga closer look at funding formu-las, this time against the addedbackdrop of state standards andaccountability systems that, byfederal law, must achieve profi-ciency for all students by 2014.

For all local school dis-tricts, achieving adequacy andsustaining the federal mandateof adequate yearly progress forall students in all schools

depends on a combination of factors, which district superintend-ents say will take sufficient funding in order to give studentsand parents a uniform, equal and efficient educational system.

Taxpayers appear to be in no mood for increased taxes at a timewhen educational demands are high and state coffers are low.

State legislators need a clearer understanding of what theDepartment of Education expects them to do to align their statutesand administrative regulations with federal education reform. Atthe same time, they also want to understand how restructuringtheir education policies to align with federal education mandateswill benefit the children and families in their own home districts.

Discussions at the annual forum will feature Ken Meyer, U.S.Department of Education; Lois Adams-Rodgers, The Council ofChief State School Officers; and William Mathis, a Vermontschool district superintendent named as one of the four nationalfinalists for 2003 Superintendent of the Year by the AmericanAssociation of School Administrators.

The session will be moderated by David J. Hoff, EducationWeek’s assistant editor in charge of state coverage for No ChildLeft Behind.

— Charlotte Postlewaite, chief education policy analyst, [email protected]

No Child Left BehindImplementation challenges in the states

A new front in the medical arms race has taken shape as com-munity hospitals square off against specialty or boutique hospitals.These combatants are taking their fight to state legislatures acrossthe country.

Recent legislative battles in at least 10 states illustrate legisla-tive approaches by critics of specialty hospitals.

In Arizona, California, Louisiana and Washington, new billswould use licensure and administrative rules to ensure that special-ty hospitals provide at least some emergency services, according tothe Kansas Hospital Association. In Ohio, HB 71 aimed to limitphysician self-referral to specialty facilities. There was a similar billin Indiana. New Mexico’s SB 767 would use the licensure processto review the impact of specialty hospital development on healthcare costs and access to acute and emergency services, and it wouldrequire specialty hospitals to provide emergency and charity care.

In Wisconsin, legislators have tried to put a moratorium on allnew hospital building projects, particularly specialty facilities, tohold down health care costs. In Oklahoma, specialty hospitals arerequired to pay a fee if fewer than 35 percent of their patients areMedicare, Medicaid or charity care cases.

States with a certificate of need process for hospital develop-ment have seen fewer battles over this issue. But some are review-ing their process for loopholes. Kentucky, for instance, recentlyexamined its regulations regarding imaging services and heartcatheterization.

Specialty hospitals are not new, having traditionally focused onchildren, rehabilitation needs and other areas where charitablefunding is critical.

Recently, though, new forms of for-profit, physician-ownedspecialty hospitals have cropped up, focusing on profitable areas

The debate over specialty hospitals

Governors and state legislators feelsqueezedwhen it comesto educationalissues.


S

in health care such as heart and orthopedic services. These newlybuilt hospitals with higher profits are able to provide first-rateservice and accommodations for patients including posh privaterooms, gourmet food and other amenities.

Critics of specialty hospitals maintain that specialty hospitalswin over patients needing the more profitable services, leavinggeneral hospitals to provide the services that routinely lose money,such as emergency care, neo-natal intensive care and burn units.

Critics also argue that specialty hospitals have an unfair com-petitive advantage over general hospitals. Because patients arereferred to hospital care by their physicians, there is concernthat specialists will refer their patients exclusively to facilitiesthat they own. There is also concern that specialists who ownthese hospitals will perform more procedures than are medical-ly necessary, inflating their incomes while increasing medicalcosts for everyone else.

Proponents of specialty hospitals counter by pointing to thehigh rate of customer satisfaction and the quality of care patientsreceive as signs they are doing the right thing.

Advocates say they are able to create centers of excellence

designed to meet the unique needs of their patients. Consumershave criticized health care as being one of the industries that isleast oriented toward customer service. Yet, aging baby boomerswill demand more of health care. Specialty providers say they aresimply responding to the needs of their customers and to trends inthe marketplace.

Supporters also argue that specialization means there will beincreased quality at a lower cost to payers. Some studies haveshown that hospitals that perform higher numbers of certain pro-cedures have lower death rates and better outcomes overall.

During the annual forum, CSG’s Health Task Force will hosta tour of the University of Pittsburgh’s cutting-edge organ dona-tion and transplantation facilities at CSG’s Annual Meeting. Thetour will take place on Thursday, October 23, between 8 a.m.and noon. To register for this tour, contact Trudi Matthews,CSG’s health task force liaison, at (859) 244-8157 [email protected].

— Trudi L. Matthews, chief health policy analyst, [email protected]

States are struggling with costly corrections policies, a recordnumber of prisoners, and the ongoing need to maintain public safe-ty. These issues and potential solutions will be examined duringCSG’s Public Safety and Justice Task Force Meeting on Oct. 24.

Because of the “get-tough-on-crime” policies during the 1980sand 1990s, states today face a record population in corrections.There are now more than 1.2 million prisoners in state custody,many of whom are nonviolent offenders. In fact, according to theBureau of Justice Statistics, 51 percent of all state prison inmateswere sentenced for nonviolent crimes and 21 percent of those aredrug related. Combined with more than 4.6 million adults and over670,000 juveniles in community supervision, corrections facilitiesare quickly reaching unmanageable levels.

What is it costing states? Corrections was one of the fastestgrowing line items in state budgets during the 1990s. In fact, statespaid roughly $40 billion in 2000 for corrections, up from $5 bil-lion in the late 1970s. Estimates suggest that on average it costs$60 per day or $22,000 per year to house an inmate.

Now states are exploring many options to decrease the cost ofcorrections such as releasing inmates early, abolishing mandatoryminimum sentencing laws, developing treatment opportunitiesfor nonviolent offenders, and capitalizing on community-basedsupervision.

During the past year, most states have taken some of the follow-ing measures to decrease costs:

• Arkansas, Kentucky, Montana, Oklahoma andTexas released nonviolent criminals early bygranting clemency.

• Ohio and Illinois are closing prisons.• Iowa laid off prison guards.• Minnesota started charging inmates room and

board.

• Michigan, Mississippi and North Dakota have either repealedor changed their mandatory minimum sentencing laws.

Many states are also looking to the courts for help in divertingoffenders away from incarceration using a mix of treatment, pro-bation and judicial oversight. Drug courts, interagency treatmentprograms, have thus far demonstrated success in reducing recidi-vism and are relatively cost effective. Other specialized courtsemerging nationwide include mental health courts, domestic vio-lence courts, homeless courts, teen courts, tobacco courts, andsome forms of family courts.

Additionally, the use of community-based supervision costs farless than incarceration and is considered a viable alternative.Probation and parole personnel and resources, however, are get-ting stretched thin as increasing numbers of people enter the sys-tem. Public safety concerns will likely arise given the increasingnumber of offenders on the streets and in communities withoutproper supervision.

A panel of national experts will discuss state corrections trendswith an eye toward cost-saving measures and effective alternativepolicies. The forum will showcase perspectives from state policy-makers, corrections officials, and other national experts.

—Chad Foster, public safety and justice policy analyst,[email protected]

Evolving corrections policies in the states



AAt the CSG Annual State Trends and Leadership Forum inPittsburgh, water supply issues will take center stage in the session,“Water: Delivering in an Age of Scarcity.”

Georgia Rep. Bob Hanner will address the increasing tensionbetween urban and agricultural water demands. Hanner chairs theHouse Environment and Natural Resources Committee. He hassponsored legislation to develop a statewide water managementplan. Unique to this legislation was a provision that would allow thesale of water between farmers, cities and industries in years of lim-ited supplies.

The Department of the Interior’s Bureau of ReclamationCommissioner, John Keys III, will discuss the department’s initia-tive, “Water 2025: Preventing Crises and Conflict in the West.”Water 2025 is a blueprint for federal agencies to work with stateand local officials, water user groups, environmental organiza-tions, tribes, and others in a strategic, focused approach to predict-ing, preventing and alleviating water supply crises and conflicts inthe West.

Keys oversees the operation and maintenance of the reclama-tion bureau’s water storage, water distribution, and electric powergeneration facilities in the 17 Western states. The bureau is thenation’s largest wholesale water supplier and the fifth largest elec-tric utility in the West.

George Sherk will provide an overview of water conflicts in theEastern United States and examine the tools available to states toaddress water conflicts, especially interstate water conflicts.Sherk’s law practice specializes in the fields of natural resourcesand environmental law, policy and management. Previously,Sherk taught at George Washington University; litigated for theU.S. Department of Justice on issues related to natural resourcesand environmental issues, including interstate water conflicts; andworked on water-related conflicts between the federal and stategovernments for the Interior Department.

—Scott Richards, chief environmental policy analyst,[email protected]

Water Wars: Delivering in an age of scarcity

WWhile we are accustomed to seeing economic indicators likegross domestic product and Consumer Price Index that signalhow well the economy is doing, there are no equivalent systemsto measure the ecological state of the nation. Kim Nelson, chiefinformation officer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, willreport on the EPA’s efforts to develop a first-ever picture of thenation’s environment.

The EPA “Draft Report on the Environment” describesenvironmental conditions and trends using existing data andindicators, and identifies data gaps and research needed toimprove our understanding of the environment. The report cov-ers five topics: Cleaner Air, Purer Water, Better Protected Land,Human Health and Ecological Conditions. The long-term goalsof the initiative are to develop an integrated set of national, region-al and local indicators and put them into practice in planning andmanaging programs and in communicating environmental andhealth outcomes.

A key piece of the ecological indicator puzzle is water quality.Roger Blair from EPA’s Environmental Monitoring andAssessment Program will provide a closer look at a uniquewater quality monitoring assessment tool that seeks to improveour understanding of the trends and conditions of the nation’saquatic ecosystems.

States are mandated by Congress to assess the condition of theirwaters. Currently, the EMAP approach is the only statisticallyvalid means of assessing the condition of all waters. Blair will pro-vide an overview of the EMAP program and how it contributes toefforts such as the “Report on the Environment.” Also, Blair willdiscuss how EMAP can assist states in preparation of the CleanWater Act’s 305(b) Report to Congress and how it can provide animportant framework for a more scientifically defensible 303(d)listing process of impaired waters.

The task force will also take up wastewater treatment.Projections show that over the next 20 years, it will take between$200 billion and $1 trillion to replace aging infrastructure, accom-modate growing populations and meet water quality standards.The Governmental Accounting Office reports that while most util-ities have programs in place to repair or replace failing pipelines,65 percent of wastewater treatment facilities are not conductingwork at needed levels and many have postponed maintenance orcapital expenditures or both.

According to GAO, nearly half of all utilities say they will nothave enough money to fund capital needs to improve their sys-tems. The task force will hear from the 3 Rivers Wet WeatherDemonstration Program, a unique partnership of 83 communitiesin Pittsburgh area. 3 Rivers Wet Weather addresses the issue ofuntreated sewage overflowing into the region’s waterways andpromotes the most cost-effective, long-term, sustainable solutions.

The nonprofit organization benchmarks sewer technology, pro-vides financial grants, educates the public and advocates intermu-nicipal partnerships.

James Hartman of the U.S. Army Environmental Center willspeak to the Environmental Task Force about how the growingurbanization around military bases and their environmental regu-latory requirements impact the testing, training and operations atthose bases. When the Department of Defense reconsiders thecapability of each base through the Base Realignment and Closureprocess, those issues could play a considerable role in the BRACCommission’s decisions. Hartman will discuss the BRAC processand innovative state proposed and enacted legislation aimed atensuring that bases and local governments cooperate via zoningand land use around bases.

— Scott Richards, chief environmental policy analyst, [email protected]

Monitoring the environment


A


n the morning ofJuly 31, local policein Shelby County,Kentucky, were call-ed to a motel. Whilethere they learnedthat a 16-year-oldgirl had reportedly

been abducted at gunpoint. Law enforce-ment officials immediately began to gatherinformation, learning details about the kid-napped girl, the suspects, and the getawayvehicle. Shelby County police then calledthe Kentucky State Police and requested anAmber Alert, Kentucky’s first since it wasenacted in December 2002.

Kentucky State Police immediately hadthe state’s Department of EmergencyManagement activate the Amber AlertSystem. The department immediately sentout information about the abducted girl andthe suspects to state news outlets. The infor-mation appeared on radio and television sta-

tions across the state. Even lottery ticketspurchased at the time of the alert containedinformation about the victim and suspects.Within one hour after the alert was issued,the victim was located. She showed up on astranger’s doorstep in Louisville, and said,“I am the Amber Alert girl.

The victim later said that her captors tookher to a Louisville residence, where threemen held her in captivity. One of her captorsturned on the television and saw a newsbroadcast describing the abductors and thegirl. Two of the men fled on foot and theother ordered the girl into a car, drove herseveral blocks, and then told her to get out.All three suspects are now in custody andthe victim told authorities that the AmberAlert System probably saved her life. “Thesystem, although not completely withoutflaws, exceeded all expectations,” said Lt.Lisa Rudzinski, head of Kentucky StatePolice community relations.

America’s Missing: Broadcast Emerg-ency Response – better known as AmberAlert – has been credited with saving morethan 90 children nationwide. The firstAmber plan was created in 1996 in theDallas, Texas area in response to the murderof 9-year-old Amber Hagerman, who wasabducted while riding her bicycle. After thishorrific event, community outcry turnedinto an innovative idea to help save kid-napped children. The Dallas/Fort WorthAssociation of Radio Managers teamed upwith local law-enforcement agencies innorthern Texas and developed what wouldbecome the first Amber Alert system in thenation. Since then, 92 other local, state andregional systems have been created.

Amber Alert success stories have alsotaken place recently in other states:� In Michigan, a man posing as a goodSamaritan while helping a grandmother in astore parking lot stole her car with her 3-

year-old granddaughter in it. MichiganState Police activated the Amber Alert andthe girl was found the next morning, alonein the abandoned car.� In Massachusetts, a husband notifiedpolice that his estranged wife came to hishouse to pick up their three children for avisit. Later, when she failed to return asscheduled, she called her husband andthreatened to harm herself and the children.State Police issued an Amber Alert andabout an hour later, a friend of the motherconvinced her to release the children. Thechildren were safely returned to their father.� In California, two teenagers were kid-napped at gunpoint from a popular hilltophangout. After state police activated theAmber Alert system, an animal control offi-cer reported seeing the vehicle described bythe alert. This tip allowed sheriff’s deputiesto corner the suspect on a dirt road and res-cue the two girls, 12 hours after the alertwas issued. Both victims told police that thealert saved their lives.

According to the National Center forMissing and Exploited Children, Amberplans are voluntary partnerships betweenlaw enforcement agencies and broadcastersto activate an urgent bulletin in the most

public safetypublic safety

OAmber AlertsStates use technology to combat child abduction

BY CHAD KINSELLA

America’s Missing:Broadcast Emerg-ency Response –better known asAmber Alert –has been creditedwith saving morethan 90 childrennationwide.


O


serious child abduction cases. “Ourresearch has shown that the first fewhours are critical in the safe recovery ofan abducted child,” said Assistant U.S.Attorney General Deborah Daniels, theNational Amber coordinator, speakingat the Annual Meeting of the NationalAlliance of State BroadcastersAssociation. “Seventy four percent ofchildren who are kidnapped and laterfound murdered are killed within thefirst three hours after being taken, so aquick response is vital in saving the lifeof an abducted child.”

Not every missing child case is eli-gible for an Amber Alert. There arecritical thresholds that must be met toensure that the alert is not overused.Each system has established criteriafor the activation of their Amber Alert.Although no standard, adopted formu-la exists, The National Center forMissing and Exploited Children rec-ommends that law enforcement offi-cials should:

� confirm that a child has been abducted;

� believe the circumstances surroundingthe abduction indicate that the child isin danger of serious bodily harm ordeath; and

� have enough information about thechild and the abductors, plus adescription of the vehicle used by theabductors.

If the case meets these three criteria, anAmber Alert may be issued and informa-tion released to the public. Using theEmergency Alert System, information issent to primary radio and TV stations,which in turn send the information toother radio, television and cable stations.The information is then sent out through abreak in radio broadcasting thatannounces the alert, a “crawl” or “ticker”

on television and cable television accom-panied by a picture of the child. Manystates are even using electronic highwaysigns to distribute the information.

On April 30, President Bush signed intolaw the Prosecuting Remedies and ToolsAgainst the Exploitation of Children TodayAct, which established a national AmberAlert System. PROTECT also created theposition of national Amber Alert coordina-tor and set aside more than $25 million in50 percent matching grant funds to be dis-tributed to states by the U.S. Departments ofJustice and Transportation to help with theirAmber Alert plans.

Currently, of the 93 Amber Alert systemsnationwide, 46 are statewide, 16 are region-al, and 31 are local systems. There is also aNational Advisory Board comprised of offi-cials from the Transportation and JusticeDepartments, the National Center forMissing and Exploited Children, broadcast-ers and law enforcement officials.

Amber Plans showcase how multiplepublic and private agencies cooperatingtogether can ensure child safety, how citi-zens in communities can play an active rolein fighting crime, and how normal technol-ogy can be used to thwart criminals.

—Chad Kinsella is a public safety and jus-tice policy analyst at The Council of StateGovernments.

According to the Justice Department’s recently launched Amber Web site, NationalCoordinator Deborah Daniels and the National Advisory Board have collaborated tocreate a strategy to help supporting states and communities strengthen the AMBERalert system nationwide to help ensure abducted children will be recovered swiftly andsafely.Activities include:

• determining the number of local, statewide and regional plans;• comparing plan operations and Amber Alert criteria; and• evaluating available technology.

They have also agreed to create a coordinated Amber system by:• developing guidance on criteria for issuing an Amber Alert;• establishing federal, state and local partnerships; and• promoting technological compatibility among communication systems.

Also, they want to spread information about lessons learned by:• working with law enforcement and broadcasters on missing children issues and

the proper issuance of Amber Alerts;• helping states and communities develop and enhance their Amber Alert Plans;

and• raising public awareness on how to protect children and prevent abductions.

Strategy for Amber coordination

Amber plans America’s Missing Broadcast Emergency Response

Statewide Amber plansRegional Amber plansLocal Amber plansNo plan

Source: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children



educationeducationconference calendar

This calendar lists meetings as desig-nated by CSG’s Annual MeetingCommittee. For details of a meeting,call the number listed. “CSG/” denotesaffiliate organizations of CSG. Visitwww.csg.org, for updates and moreextensive listings.

Other meetings have value to state offi-cials. Purchase a meeting listing bycalling 1 (800) 800-1910 or by email-ing [email protected]. Announce yourmeetings to thousands in the state gov-ernment market through an advertise-ment, a Web listing, or a banner ad inIn the News, CSG’s weekly electronicnewsletter. Get your free subscriptionto In the News at www.csg.org.

OCTOBER 2003October 14-17 — CSG/CSG-WESTWestern Legislative Academy —Colorado Springs, CO — DoubletreeHotel. Contact Cheryl Duvachelle at(916) 553-4423 or [email protected] 18 — CSG/CSG-WESTExecutive Committee Meeting —Colorado Springs, CO — DoubletreeHotel. Contact Cheryl Duvachelle at(916) 553-4423 or [email protected]

October 22-23 — CSG/EasternRegional Conference – LegislativeService Agencies Directors Meeting —Pittsburgh, PA — Hilton Pittsburgh.Contact Pamela Stanley at (212) 912-0128 or [email protected]

October 23-26 — CSG Annual StateTrends and Leadership Forum —Pittsburgh, PA — Hilton Pittsburgh.Visit www.csg.org or contact WandaHines at (859) 244-8103 [email protected]

October 25 — CSG/Eastern RegionalConference Executive CommitteeMeeting — Pittsburgh, PA — HiltonPittsburgh. Contact Pamela Stanley at(212) 912-0128 or [email protected]

October 26-28 — CSG/NationalAssociation of State Treasurers –Midwest State Treasurers and StateDebt Management NetworkAnnual Conference — Omaha, NE— Embassy Suites Old Market.Contact Adnee Hamilton at (859)244-8174 or [email protected] orvisit www.nast.net

NOVEMBER 2003November 6-7 — CSG/MidwesternGovernors’ Conference — St. Louis,MO — Renaissance Grand Hotel.Contact Ilene Grossman at (630) 810-0210 or igrossman@ csg.org

November 7-11 — CSG/SLC FallLegislative Issues Conference —Point Clear, AL— Marriott Grand HotelResort and Golf Club. Contact NaiVienthongsuk at (404) [email protected] or visitwww.slcatlanta.org

November 13-14 — CSG RegionalRural Development Summit (IN,KY, TN) — Louisville, KY —Kentucky Fair and Exposition

Center. Contact Carolyn Orr at (859)244-8221 or [email protected]

November 23-25 — CSG/NationalAssociation of State TreasurersIssues Conference — New York,NY — The Waldorf-Astoria Hotel.Contact Adnee Hamilton at (859)244-8174 or [email protected] orvisit www.nast.net

DECEMBER 2003

December 6-9 — CSG/Eastern RegionalConference Annual Meeting — SanJuan, PR — Ritz Carlton. Contact PamelaStanley at (212) 912-0128 [email protected] or visitwww.csgeast.org

December 9-11 — CSG/MidwesternRadioactive Materials TransportationCommittee — Chicago, IL — EmbassySuites Chicago, Downtown Lakefront.Contact Lisa Sattler at (920) 803-9976 [email protected]

JANUARY 2004

January 30-February 1 — CSG/National Association of StatePersonnel Executives Annual Mid-Year Meeting — Arlington, VA —Crystal City Courtyard by Marriott.Contact Leslie Scott at (859) 244-8182or [email protected]

January 31-February 3 — NASTD—The Association for Telecommuni-cations and Technology Profession-als Serving State GovernmentSouthern Region WinterMeeting —Biloxi, MS — Beau Rivage Resort.Contact Pamela Johnson at (859) 244-8184 or pjohnson@ csg.org

FEBRUARY 2004

February 8-11 — CSG/AmericanProbation and Parole AssociationWinter Training Institute — Reno,NV. Contact Kris Chappell at (859)244-8204 or visit www.appa-net.org

February 10-13 — National Lieut-enant Governors Association WinterMeeting — Washington, D.C. — TheMadison Hotel. Contact Julia Hurst at(859) 244-8111 or [email protected] visitwww.nlga.us

February 13-15 — CSG/NationalAssociation of State Election DirectorsWinter Conference — Washington,D.C. — Hyatt Regency Washington.Contact Melinda Glazer at (202) 624-5460 or [email protected]

February 14-18 — CSG/NationalEmergency Management Assoc-iation Mid-Year Conference —Washington, D.C. — Hotel TBA. Visitwww.nemaweb.org

February 21-24 —National GovernorsAssociation Winter Meeting —Washington, D.C. — Hotel TBA.Contact Susan Dotchin at (202) 624-5327

MARCH 2004March 7-10 — CSG/National Assoc-

iation of State Treasurers LegislativeConference — Washington, D.C. —Willard InterContinental Hotel. ContactAdnee Hamilton at (859) 244-8174 [email protected] or visit www.nast.net

JUNE 2004June 26-July 1 — CSG Henry TollFellowship Program — Lexington,KY — Hilton Suites Lexington Green.Contact Allison Spurrier at (859) 244-8249 or [email protected]

JULY 2004July 7-11 — CSG/National LieutenantGovernors Association AnnualMeeting — Big Sky, Montana — BigSky Resort. Contact Julia Hurst at (859)244-8111 or [email protected]

July 11-14 — CSG/MidwesternLegislative Conference 59th AnnualMeeting— Des Moines, IA— Marriott.Contact Mike McCabe at (630) [email protected]

July 19-23 — National Conference ofState Legislatures Annual Meeting—Salt Lake City, UT — Hotel TBA

July 25-28 — CSG/AmericanProbation and Parole Association 29thAnnual Training Institute — Orlando,FL — Orlando Marriott World Center.Contact Kris Chappell at (859) 244-8204or visit www.appa-net.org

July 28-August 1 — AmericanLegislative Exchange Council AnnualMeeting — Seattle, WA— Hotel TBA

July 30--August 3 — CSG/MidwesternLegislative Conference 10th AnnualBowhay Institute for LegislativeLeadership Development — Madison,WI — Fluno Center for ExecutiveEducation. Contact Laura Tomaka at(630) 810-0210 or [email protected] orvisit www.csgmidwest.org

July 31-August 3 — NationalGovernors Association AnnualMeeting — Seattle, WA— Hotel TBA.Contact Susan Dotchin at (202) 624-5327

July 31-August 4 — CSG/NationalAssociation of State PersonnelExecutives Annual Meeting — Biloxi,MS — Beau Rivage Resort. ContactLeslie Scott at (859) 244-8182 [email protected]

AUGUST 2004

August 8-11 — CSG/EasternRegional Conference AnnualMeeting — Springfield, MA —Sheraton. Contact Pamela Stanley at(212) 912-0128 or [email protected]

August 14-18 — CSG/SouthernLegislative Conference AnnualMeeting — Little Rock, AR — ThePeabody Little Rock and the DoubletreeHotel. Contact Nai Vienthongsuk at (404)633-1866 or [email protected] or visitwww.slcatlanta.org

August 21-26 — NASTD Annual Con-

ference and Trade Show— Providence,RI — Westin Providence & RI Conven-tion Center. Contact Karen Britton at(859) 244-8187 or [email protected]

SEPTEMBER 2004

September 11-15 — CSG/NationalEmergency Management AssociationAnnual Conference — New York, NY— Hotel TBA. Visit www.nemaweb.org

September 12-14- — CSG/SouthernGovernors’ Association AnnualMeeting — Richmond, VA — HotelTBA. Contact Liz Purdy at (202) 624-5897 or [email protected]

September 25-29 — CSG Annual StateTrends and Leadership Forum —Anchorage, AK — Egan ConventionCenter. Visit www.csg.org or contactWanda Hines (859) 244-8103 [email protected]

September 25-29 — CSG-WESTAnnual Meeting — Anchorage, AK —Hilton Anchorage Hotel. Contact CherylDuvauchelle at (916) 553-4423 or [email protected]

FEBRUARY 2005

February 12-16 — CSG/National Em-ergency Management Association Mid-YearConference— Washington, D.C. —Hotel TBA. Visitwww.nemaweb.org

February 26-March 1 — NationalGovernors Association WinterMeeting— Washington, D.C. — Hotel TBA.Contact Susan Dotchin at (202) 624-5327

JULY 2005July 8-12 — CSG/MidwesternLegislative Conference 11th AnnualBowhay Institute for LegislativeLeadership Development —Madison, WI — Fluno Center forExecutive Education. Contact LauraTomaka at (630) 810-0210 or [email protected] or visit www.csgmidwest.org

July 24-27 — CSG/Eastern RegionalConference Annual Meeting —Connecticut — Hotel TBA. ContactPamela Stanley at (212) 912-0128 [email protected]

July 24-27 — CSG/AmericanProbation and Parole Association30th Annual Training Institute —New York, NY — Marriott MarquisHotel. Contact Kris Chappell at (859)244-8204 or visit www.appa-net.org

July 30-August 3 — CSG/SouthernLegislative Conference AnnualMeet-ing — Mobile, AL — HotelTBA. Contact Nai Vienthongsuk at((404) 633-1866 or [email protected] orvisit www.slcatlanta.org

July 31-August 3 — CSG/MidwesternLegislative Conference 60th AnnualMeeting — Regina, Saskatchewan,Canada — Delta Regina Hotel. ContactMike McCabe at (630) 810-0210 [email protected]


ealth literacy – the ability to read, under-stand and act on health information – isessential for anyone trying to navigatetoday’s complicated health care system.Without a basic level of skills, individualswith low health literacy face barriers to

accessing care and achieving positive health outcomes. As a result,these individuals are likely to have higher health care costs.

Throughout the country, state policy-makers have started torecognize that many of those most at risk for low health lit-

eracy – seniors, low-income people and the chronicallyill – are the same people who qualify for enroll-

ment in public health care programs such asMedicaid, the State Children’s Health

Insurance Program (SCHIP) andMedicare. In response, several

states have undertaken initia-tives or passed legisla-

tion to address lowhealth literacy.

healthhealth

States address the relationshipbetween health and literacy skills

BYJENNY SEWELL

H

Literacy:Rx for good health

AAdministered by the Office of Adult Literacy, Department ofTechnical and Adult Education, Georgia’s Health Literacy PilotProject is a unique educational program that uses health informa-tion – such as insurance applications, dosage instructions andhealth guidelines – to improve literacy skills in adults.

“The curriculum incorporates instruction on information gather-ing, asking appropriate and informed questions, and decision-making competency,” said Kim Lee, director of assessment andevaluation and GED administrator for the Office of Adult Literacy.

During the first session, the instructor administers the TOFHLA– the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults. This test meas-ures each student’s health literacy by evaluating numeracy andreading comprehension skills. Using the results, the teacher is bet-ter able to plan class activities and tailor lessons to meet students’needs. Themes covered in the class include the following:

� understanding the content of medical forms;� identifying ways to pay for medical care;� identifying health resources and services in the community;� understanding medicine labels and prescription directions;� effective verbal and nonverbal communication skills for

health;� understanding the influence of culture-based beliefs on

health-related behaviors;� demonstrating strategies for preventing common illnesses;� maintaining safety at home and at work;� understanding nutrition for good health.

Project designers hope that the classes, now offered at 12 sitesthroughout the state, serve as a gateway to adult literacy for partici-pants, a way to attract individuals who have low literacy skills butwho have not previously attended adult education classes.

Instructors at each site are responsible for recruitment and areencouraged to partner with community organizations to increase

awareness of health literacy and identify individuals who wouldbenefit from the class. When partnering with the medical

community, project staff found it was important fordoctors to understand that the purpose was not to

teach health education or to interfere with thephysician-patient relationship.

“Doctors want their patients to take


TS


their medicine every eight hours. Adultliteracy teachers want students to knowhow to tell time. Using prescription drugdosing instructions to teach this skill is awin-win for everyone,” said Amy Jones,health literacy coordinator for the Officeof Adult Literacy.

Efforts are currently underway todetermine program outcomes by com-paring pre- and post-test TOFHLAscores and by tracking the number ofparticipants who go on to enter the AdultLiteracy Program and completeGeorgia’s GED program. “We know thatmany do transition into adult basic edu-cation programs,” Lee said, “and thefuture of the program looks good.”

State policy-makersplay an important role in

assisting individuals with low health literacy.Through policies mandating that health materialsshould be prepared at a certain grade level or in mul-tiple languages, or informational campaigns thatincrease awareness among health care providers,state leaders can improve health communication.Legislation passed in Maryland and Louisiana in2003 illustrates first steps in responding to this issue.

In order to evaluate how low health literacyaffects the state, in 2003, the Louisiana Legislaturepassed HB 2019 to create the Interagency Task Forceon Health Literacy. The task force is charged with:

� examining how low health literacy affectsaccess to care and use of services;

� identifying groups at risk for low health literacy; and � determining if providing appropriate health information

and improving overall health literacy would increase effi-ciency and decrease expenditures.

Based on this examination, the task force will present recom-mendations to the Legislature by December 15, 2005.

In Maryland, legislators recently passed a bill to address dispar-

ities among racial and ethnic groups. According to a recent reportby the Institute of Medicine, Unequal Treatment: WhatHealthcare Providers Need to Know About Racial and EthnicDisparities in Healthcare, even when factors such as level ofinsurance and ability to pay are considered, racial and ethnicminorities receive lower quality care than whites.

In response, Maryland passed HB 883, the Health CareServices Disparities Prevention Act. This legislation encouragesstate colleges and universities that train health care professionalsto offer classes that increase awareness of the issue, including therole of health literacy. The bill also urges courses or seminars forthose individuals who are required to participate in continuingeducation to maintain licensure.

“Good communication is essential,” said Delegate Shirley Nathan-Pulliam, lead sponsor of the bill. “When people understand how totake their medication, for example, or what their diagnosis is, theyare able to take better care of themselves. From this comes

improved health outcomes.”

The Council of State Governments is at theforefront in analyzing states’ roles in improv-ing low health literacy. In 2002, CSG conduct-ed the National Survey on Health LiteracyInitiatives to find out what states are doing toimprove health literacy or to make the healthcare system easier to navigate for someonewith low literacy skills. Results from the sur-vey were reported in CSG’s State Official’sGuide to Health Literacy.

To complement the guide, CSG has recent-ly published a Health Literacy Took Kit. Thekit contains:� An executive summary of CSG’s StateOfficial’s Guide to Health Literacy.

� “New Tools for an Old Problem: Overcoming Health Lit-eracy Barriers in Medicaid” Issue Brief.

� “Opportunities for Change: Improving Health Communi-cation” Issue Brief.

� “Kids are the Key: Elementary and Secondary HealthLiteracy Education” Issue Brief.

� “Teaching Health Literacy: Adult Education Initiatives”Issue Brief.

� Health Literacy Fact Sheet.� Louisiana HB 2019 – “Interagency Task Force on Health

Literacy.”� A Health Literacy Tool Kit CD-ROM, which contains dig-

ital files of all tool kit contents, a digital copy of CSG’sState Official’s Guide to Health Literacy, and “The HighCost of Low Health Literacy,” a new documentary videofrom Pfizer Inc.

Using information from the guide and the tool kit, state leaderscan learn why health literacy is important, what states have doneto address the issue, and what they can do in their state.

For more information about health literacy at CSG, please visitwww.csg.org (keyword: Health Literacy) or contact Jenny Sewellat (859) 244-8154 or [email protected].

— Jenny Sewell is a health policy analyst at The Council of StateGovernments.

The Council of State

Governments isat the forefront

in analyzingstates’ roles inimproving lowhealth literacy.


Midwestern governors gathered inIndianapolis in August to review plans fortheir upcoming Annual Meeting in St.Louis and to hear updates on theprogress of three regional workinggroups examining issues related to jobcreation and economic growth. TheMidwestern Governors’ Conferenceworking groups are focusing on the fol-lowing: enhancing education and work-force skills, targeting knowledge-intensiveindustries, and increasing research andcommercialization capacity. This year’stheme for the work of the bipartisanMGC is “Investments for the Knowledge-Based Economy.”

Also at the August meeting, which washeld in conjunction with a NationalGovernors Association meeting, the MGCdiscussed its continued efforts in the areaof agricultural terrorism.The MGA AnnualMeeting will be held Nov. 6-7.

West

When the CSG-WEST Executive Committee met on August 1, 2003 at theannual Western Legislative Conference, Idaho Senate Majority Leader BartDavis was elected chair of the organization for 2003-2004. Davis’s termbegins October 17 when the current chair, Hawaii Senator Brian Taniguchiturns over the gavel to Davis. As immediate past chair,Taniguchi will remainas one of the top four officers in the Western region of CSG.

Davis distinguished himself in recent years by serving on the national CSGCommittee on Suggested State Legislation and on the CSG InternationalCommittee. He chaired the CSG-WEST Committee on the Future ofWestern Legislatures, holding major forums on election law reform and theimpact of the media on state legislatures.This summer he chaired a workshopon ethical fitness for lawmakers.

Davis is an attorney and a member of the National Conference ofCommissioners on Uniform State Laws. In 1999, Davis was selected as a TollFellow by the national CSG.Toll Fellows represent “the best and brightest”state officials in the nation.

Joining Davis and Taniguchi in the new CSG-WEST officer line-up is OregonSenate Democratic Leader Kate Brown, who moves up from vice chair tochair-elect. Colorado Senator Ron Teck was chosen as the new vice chair.

The Western region of CSG serves state legislators from Alaska,Arizona,California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah,Washington and Wyoming. CSG-WEST promotesexcellence in state legislatures through regional cooperation, collaboration and professional development.The region holds forumson key Western issues, works with other Western governmental associations and each year convenes the Western LegislativeAcademy for newer lawmakers. CSG-WEST’s officers guide all policy and program decisions for CSG in the region.

IDAHO SENATE MAJORITY LEADER TO CHAIR CSG-WEST

MIDWESTERN GOVERNORS GATHER

FRESHMAN LEGISLATOR JOINS NSASS EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE


NSASS

When Rep. George Wilber was elected to the Connecticut Assembly inNovember of 2002,his title as freshman belied a wealth of experience in state, localand national government affairs primarily focused on agriculture and rural issues.

Rep.Wilber grew up on the family dairy farm in Colebrook, Connecticut. Heattended the University of Connecticut and graduated with a degree in dairyhusbandry. In 1973, as he loaded cow manure on a neighbor’s truck, the talkgrew political and he was suddenly running for first selectman, against an incum-bent who had been in office since before Wilber was born.

The race was close, a dead heat.The runoff provided him with a one-vote winand the title “Landslide Wilber.” In 1975,he was appointed agriculture commission-er under Gov. Ella Grasso. Then President Carter appointed him to lead theConnecticut Farm Services Agency.Through all the appointments he stayed firmlygrounded in his guiding principle that “you can’t forget your roots, you need totake care to listen, learn and understand the people.” One of his top priorities hasalways been conservation and preservation of agricultural land.

“The issue is the same today,” noted Rep.Wilber,“but without a regional foodpolicy and the preservation of regional agriculture we have no food security.”Conflict between working farms and newly rural neighbors is a hot issue inConnecticut as well as the rest of the Northeast.“Farmers sell off a few houselots to keep going and then the owners want the farmer to stop running trac-tors in the morning, or spreading manure because it smells bad; if farmers got

excellence in action: spotlighting CSG activities

Idaho Senate Majority Leader Bart Davis



paid a fair price for their products there wouldn’t be half theseproblems,” he said.

Rep. Wilber is particularly proud of having shepherded a bill

through the legislature that increases the allowable weight formilk trucks to bring Connecticut into conformity with neighbor-ing states.Another bill that this savvy freshman was successful in

passing was a bill to allow the practice of horsemassage, known as Myofascial Trigger PointMassage. In a state that is second only to Texas inthe per capita population of equines, this was animportant bill for the agricultural economy and thewell being of many equine “constituents.” Currentlyhe is working on legislation to address the collapseof the dairy industry.

Rep.Wilber has been appointed to the NortheastStates Association for Agricultural StewardshipExecutive Committee. NSAAS is an affiliate of theCSG Eastern Regional Conference.“I am looking for-ward to working with the other states in the regionto move our agricultural agenda forward,” saidWilber.“It’s the only way that the Northeast can besuccessful on issues such as electric costs for farmers,dairy prices, market concentration, low commodityprices and land use.”

NLGA

The National Lieutenant Governors Association announcesLt. Gov. Karl Ohs of Montana as its new chairman and DelawareLt. Gov. John Carney, former CSG Toll Fellow, as vice chair.Theweek that officers were selected, four lieutenant governors werefacing the possibility of becoming governor through successionor election, and two others were serving as acting governors.Ohs says the association will continue to strengthen its role inpreparing for service those who are first in line of succession togovernor.

Other officers include:� Treasurer: Lt. Gov. Jan Brewer,Arizona� Eastern Region Chair: Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll,

Pennsylvania� Midwestern Region Chair: Lt. Gov. Barbara Lawton,

Wisconsin� Southern Region Chair: Lt. Gov. Winthrop Rockefeller,

Arkansas� Western Region Chair: Lt. Gov. Jane Norton, Colorado

� Ex-Officio: Lt. Gov. Mary Fallin, Oklahoma; Lt. Gov. StephenHenry, Kentucky; Lt. Gov. Olene Walker, Utah; Lt. Gov.Charles J. Fogarty, Rhode Island

Members-at-Large:� Eastern Region: Lt. Gov.Vargrave Richards, U.S.Virgin Islands;

Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie,Vermont � Midwestern Region: Lt. Gov. Patrick Quinn, Illinois; Lt. Gov.

Jack Dalrymple, North Dakota� Southern Region: Lt. Gov. Lucy Baxley, Alabama; Lt. Gov.

Andre Bauer, South Carolina� Western Region: Lt. Gov. Loren Leman, Alaska; Lt. Gov.

Diane Denish, New Mexico All members of the NLGA serve as first in line of succes-

sion to governor and the officers work to provide professionalassistance and training for the members.This sometimes occursthrough public-private partnerships with NLGA’s sustaining cor-porate, labor and association members. For details, visitwww.nlga.us.

LIEUTENANT GOVERNORS SELECT NEW OFFICERS

Rep. George Wilber and friend

Lt. Gov. John Carney, Del.; Sec. of State Jan Brewer,Ariz.;Lt. Gov. Karl Ohs, Mont.

NLGA Executive Committee: Lt.Gov.Winthrop Rockefeller,Ark.;Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn, Ill.; Lt. Gov. Diane Denish, N.M.; Lt. Gov. JohnCarney, Del.; Lt. Gov.Andre Bauer, S.C.; Lt. Gov. Karl Ohs, Mont.;Sec. of State Jan Brewer, Ariz.; Lt. Gov. Olene Walker, Utah; Lt.Gov. Jack Dalrymple, N.D.; Lt. Gov. Charles J. Fogarty, R.I.


TSince IP calls are completed on LANS, a

closer working relationship between staffswith responsibility for them is important.Network World suggested as much in anOctober 2002 article, “Rules for a SuccessfulVoIP Rollout: to support your converged net-work, you need converged staffers.”

Sharp managers also will take seriouslythe concerns of some tenured voice man-agers, who may believe that VoIP will putthem out of business. Nothing could be fur-ther from the truth. Voice managers adhereto call completion standards and reliabilitythat data managers can only hope toapproach. Both camps must be included.

Like all large enterprises, state govern-ment is good at making plans. When man-aging the transition of large VoIP telephonyrollouts, planning is crucial.

NASTD members in states such asMississippi have developed guidelines andchecklists to enable such transitions.Mississippi’s “customer checklist for transi-tioning to VoIP,” for example, covers all theareas important to a successful implementa-tion – estimating savings, evaluating theLAN for suitability and securing the new IPimplementation.

The agency has also identified some ofthe policy issues that must be addressed.These include estimating the cost of movingto VoIP, the scale of the deployment, aninventory of the current infrastructure and its

suitability for VoIP, methods for resolvingtechnical issues, training staff – and the train-ing of agency clients – in the use of the tech-nology, and a timetable for the transition.

This spring, Jack Ries, an informationtechnology planner from Minnesota, con-ducted an IP telephony survey of his peers.In all, a total of 39 state responded.

Regarding the status of implementation,Ries found that:

• 23 states are in the process of imple-menting IP telephony and/or VoIP,mostly as a pilot or proof of concept;

• eight states have no activity yet, buthave plans to do something in the nextyear or two;

• five states have no activity yet, butmight or are considering their options;

• three states have no activity yet andhave no immediate plans so far.

Regarding cost savings:• 24 states indicated that the cost savings

were unknown;• eight states reported there were cost

savings;• seven states reported there were no cost

savings.

— Wayne Hall is technology program manag-er for NASTD—The Association forTelecommunications and TechnologyProfessionals Serving State Government, anaffiliate of The Council of State Governments.

• VoIP – “Voice-over-IP” refers to the delivery of voice communications using InternetProtocol, or “IP.” It is sometimes referred to as “IP Telephony.”

• IP – is the method or protocol by which data is sent from one computer or digitaldevice to another on the Internet.

• Protocol – Refers to the agreed upon set of rules used by end points in a commu-nications network to exchange information or data.

• A “stateless network” – is a network that does not maintain an end-to-end con-nection, or circuit, for the duration of the transmission. Information is insteadexchanged in packets. Each packet includes the ultimate destination for that packet.Individual packets may travel different routes to reach that point.The call is complet-ed when the packets are reassembled into a conversation at end point.The Internetis a “stateless network.”

Glossary

States and the ‘stateless’ technology Continued from page 22

many ups and downs along theway. Finally, waste spendinggrew rapidly during the 1990sbut has fallen off in recent years.

— R. Steven Brown is the exec-utive director of ECOS and hasled research efforts on stateenvironmental spending since1986. Michael Kiefer is anECOS research associate.

© Copyright, 2003, EnvironmentalCouncil of the States (ECOS).Permission is granted to state andfederal governments to duplicatethis article for government business.

$0FY

1986FY

1987FY

1988FY

1989FY

1990FY

1991FY

1992FY

1993FY

1994FY

1995FY

1996FY

1997FY

1998FY

1999FY

2000FY

2001FY

2002FY

2003

$1,000

Water

$ m

illio

ns, a

djst

ed t

o 20

03

Waste Air

$2,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$6,000

Budgets are bruised, but still strong Continued from page 26

Chart 2. State spending on air, water and waste management, 1986-2003



Documents

State Government News 1003 - Entire Issuethe council of state governments 3 headquarters 2760 Research Park Drive P. O. Box 11910 Lexington, KY 40578-1910 (859) 244-8000 washington