Bills to watch for
From Kentucky Citizen Digest, Jan, 1998

From a pro-family perspective, there are two kinds of bills: the good ones to cheer on and the bad ones to watch out for. Consequently, pro-family forces in Kentucky will, like every year, be playing both offense and defense.

Because of a stronger conservative presence in Frankfort, both among rank-and-file legislators as well as (in the Senate) among legislative leaders, good pro-family laws stand a better chance of passage this year than in any previous session, and bad laws could face stiffer opposition.

Pro-life forces seem to be among the most optimistic about their prospects in 1998. In past years, two pieces of pro-life legislation were the victims of political maneuvering. This year, that could change.

One of the bills would ensure a woman a 24-hour waiting period in which to consider her decision. The bill would require abortionists to supply women with information on the developmental state of their unborn child as well as the risks of the abortion procedure itself.  Another would require that abortion facilities live up to the same health and safety standards as other surgical-care facilities. Past sessions have seen pro-abortion groups strongly opposing these measures, even though they have wide popular appeal.

Gambling, too, could be an issue for state lawmakers this year. More pressure is being put on Kentucky riverboat casinos from bordering states. Advocates of legalized gambling maintain that such establishments threaten the state by siphoning off the money of Kentuckians that is needed here. The best way to deal with it, they argue, is to legalize more forms of gambling here.

Legislation could be introduced that legalizes video-lottery gambling, which basically consists of computerized gambling that would be available across the state.

But with evidence showing that the lottery is taking money out of poorer areas of the state, the case for the societal benefits of gambling will be hard to make.

Although many parents are still unaware of it, most schools that now have Internet access on school computers have done little to keep students from accessing hard-core and violent pornography from school terminals.

State officials have dragged their feet on the issue and have actually discouraged some schools from placing restrictions on such access. Watch for a bill to deal with this problem.

Another issue waiting to explode is the issue of same-sex marriage. A bill is expected to be filed by two influential conservative Democrats, Jim Bruce, D-Hopkinsville, and Bob Damron (D-Nicholasville) that would preserve the traditional view of marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman.

With the possibility that other states, such as Hawaii, might recognize such marriages, states such as Kentucky have been forced into taking preemptive measures. Already the sides have lined up. Homosexual organizations and the ACLU are set to oppose such a bill, while pro-family groups like The Family Foundation and Concerned Women for America are backing it.

Although the Senate judiciary committee chairman, Ernesto Scorsone, D-Lexington, opposes legislation banning same-sex marriages, he could have a hard time stopping a bill with more conservative senate leadership sworn to bring any piece of legislation with the support of 20 or more senators to the floor.

During the special session in late 1997, legislators dealt with two proposals to fix the failed 1994 health care reforms. One would create a “risk pool” that would help Kentuckians who currently have health problems to pay their health-care bills. The pool would initially be funded by tax dollars, but would eventually be paid for by insurers operating in the state.

The competing proposal was called “pay or play.” It would have required insurance companies operating in the state to share the burden of insuring those who currently have health-care problems along with healthy customers. If not, they would pay a fee.

Critics of the risk pool argued that it was not right for taxpayers to foot the bill. Critics of pay or play argued, however, that while the risk pool is operating successfully in other states, pay or play had failed. Besides, they argued, pay or play would offer health-insurance consumers in rural parts of the state little choice among insurers, since many parts of the state might only have one or two companies willing to participate.

There is some talk, however, of a third alternative: a simple repeal of the 1994 law to bring the state under federal legislation passed two years ago that those with preexisting conditions with current policies would keep insurance and could take it with them from job to job.

In the 1996 General Assembly session, pro-KERA lawmakers succeeded in preventing any education legislation from reaching the Senate floor, fearing that rising concerns over the state tests, the nongraded primary program and other issues would result in legislation rolling back reform efforts in these areas. This year, however, the legislators who held back the dike, northern Kentucky’s Joe Meyer, is gone. He was replaced by Jack Westwood, who favors changes in the reforms.

Watch for legislation making changes in the state’s controversial testing system, as well as proposals to change the makeup of school councils and offering more freedom for elementary schools to run their own primary classrooms as they see fit.
 

Key Family Foundation Contacts: Kent Ostrander, Executive Director Martin Cothran, Senior Associate Policy Analyst