Former legislator makes ‘misguided’ claims against current one in describing session

Rep. Dan Fister
·3 min read

I am writing to shed light on the misguided claims made against me by Joe Graviss in the Herald-Leader on April 23, 2021. I want to preface my message by addressing the meritless claim that I did not read HB 312 before voting on it. This is simply not true. I take my role as your State Representative very seriously and I do my best to thoughtfully consider every issue before the General Assembly.

Not only are Mr. Graviss’ claims untrue, he also misrepresents the purpose of HB 312 and HB 563. These measures are not new ideas presented during the 2021 legislative session, in fact, they have been mulled over for years. He should know this since he served the 56th House District until his unsuccessful bid for the State Senate. HB 312 was created to restore the balance of power to the Legislative branch, just as the balance of power was restored in 1976 to the judicial branch when the Administrative Office of the Courts was created. This measure allows the Legislative Research Commission to have the final authority in determining open records requests to the legislature, just as the Administrative Office of the Courts decides open records requests to the judicial branch.

HB 312 does not stifle transparency in the legislative process. In fact, the Kentucky Press Association, the most ardent advocate for the open records and meetings laws, never opposed the bill! Input from our constituents is a vital part of the legislative process, and we must do everything we can to continue to earn their trust and protect their personal information. What kind of information am I talking about? For example, over the past year, legislators and their staff have received thousands of emails from constituents struggling with unanswered unemployment claims. These emails and conversations not only contain very personal pleas for help, but personal information like a social security number or address. Under the provisions provided in HB 312, these conversations will continue to be confidential information.

Mr. Graviss furthers his misguided claims when he talks about HB 563, a bill that expands education opportunities for Kentucky children. HB 563 allows SEEK funds to follow a student to other public school districts and requires public school districts to develop a plan for accepting non-district students. It also creates Education Opportunity Accounts (EOA) to provide financial assistance to families at or below 175 percent of the federal poverty level. EOAs will distribute financial donations based on needs-based criteria. The EOA funds may be used for tutoring, technology, online learning programs, testing, therapy, and several other resources to improve educational opportunities – including tuition to any Kentucky public school as well as private schools in counties with more than 90,000 people.

As we look towards post-pandemic world, we must remain mindful of the impact of virtual school on student’s future. The EOAs will benefit children and families who qualify and provide parents and guardians a historic opportunity to choose which school system best meets the needs of their children. Of course neither Mr. Graviss, nor Mr. Vandegrift mentioned the historic investments we made in education this session – including $140 million to finally fund full-day kindergarten, the highest SEEK funding level, and $1.15 billion to fully fund the actuarially required contribution to the Teacher’s Retirement System. All told, 42 percent of our budget goes to educating Kentucky’s elementary, middle and high school students. Children are my priority and they will continue to be.

Representative Dan Fister represents the state’s 56th House District, which is comprised of Woodford County and a portion of Fayette and Franklin counties.

Recommended Stories

  • Idaho governor signs education law but warns against reliance on ‘anecdotes and innuendo’

    “The process that produced this legislation over the last few weeks sends the wrong message to Idaho teachers, parents and students,” Gov. Brad Little said.

  • Man shot at Kansas City apartments dies at hospital; Police investigate homicide

    Crime scene investigators and homicide detectives were at the apartments collecting evidence and looking for witnesses.

  • Morehouse debate team leaves tournament over ‘anti-Black’ taunts

    The men of Morehouse College have decided to withdraw from a debate tournament due to racist taunts. The group’s A-team made the decision to leave the Penn United States Universities Debating Championship (USUDC) earlier this month due to racist taunts from opposing teams, per The Undefeated. Senior Daniel Edwards and sophomore Caleb Strickland said they were mocked by the rival teams and students from the University of Hawaii.

  • Miguel Cabrera says White Sox accused Tigers of sign stealing, 'Get the (expletive) out of here'

    Miguel Cabrera said he believed the Chicago White Sox — specifically second baseman Nick Madrigal — accused the Tigers of stealing signs.

  • Biden Has the Power to Change the State of Abortion. He Needs to Use It

    President Biden failed to mention abortion during his first address to a Joint Session of Congress. But if he actually wanted to fight stigma, he would have.

  • Kansas man whose son is accused of killing two boys is charged with sex crimes

    Donald Jackson Sr. has been charged with two counts of aggravated indecent liberties with a child.

  • Letters: Readers discuss Trump’s success, Missouri abortion law and COVID-19 reality

    Credit where credit is due. That’s to Donald Trump, says this Prairie Village resident.

  • Biden Says He Wants to Go Big On Health Care. But He Left Major Reforms Out of His Latest Plan

    U.S. President Joe Biden speaks during a joint session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Wednesday, April 28, 2021. During President Joe Biden’s speech to Congress on Wednesday, he called for an ambitious health agenda that would allow the federal government to negotiate prescription drug prices, expand Medicare coverage, build on the Affordable Care Act and lower deductibles. All of these ideas would transform the way Americans pay for health care—but most of them are not actually in the legislative plan the President has put forward.

  • State lawsuits over stimulus tax rule face uphill battle

    Vice President Kamala Harris speaks at an American Rescue Plan virtual briefing on March 11, 2021 in Washington, D.C. Tasos Katopodis/Getty ImagesStates were told by the federal government that they can’t use pandemic relief funds passed by Congress in March to lower taxes. In response, 16 states have filed lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of that restriction in the US$1.9 trillion legislation, known as the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. The rescue plan makes $350 billion available to state and local governments over the next four years to cover costs associated with COVID-19. It guarantees every state at least $500 million, but more can be provided based on unemployment numbers and poverty rates. The law, however, forbids states from using this money “to either directly or indirectly offset a reduction in net tax revenue” over those four years. In other words, rescue plan money cannot pay for state tax cuts. That restriction prompted the lawsuits, which are pending in Ohio, Arizona, Missouri and Alabama federal courts. The states claim that the rescue plan’s policies violate the 10th Amendment, which helps define the relationship between the federal government and the states. Historically, the Supreme Court has interpreted this provision to prevent the federal government from directing state policy rather than to limit what the feds can do themselves. The rescue plan might run afoul of the 10th Amendment if it dictated what laws state legislatures must or must not adopt. That would mean states could use the federal money to offset tax cuts. But as a constitutional law professor who has written extensively about federal powers, I think it’s unlikely that the rescue plan violates the 10th Amendment. That’s because it does not order states to do anything. Supreme Court precedent In 1992, the Supreme Court declared that a federal law ordering states to pass legislation for the safe disposal of nuclear waste violated the 10th Amendment. And in 2018 the high court struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, which forbade states from authorizing sports betting. But the rescue plan does not explicitly require or forbid states to enact legislation, as the nuclear waste and sports gambling laws did. It offers states a deal: If you want federal money, you can’t use it to subsidize tax cuts. States get to choose whether they prefer tax cuts or federal funding. So I believe the 10th Amendment challenge will likely fail. The plaintiff states rely more heavily on a claim that the tax provision imposes an unconstitutional condition on receipt of their funds. They have two main arguments. The states assert that the law forbids them from cutting taxes, even though it does not. They rely on the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn a provision of the Affordable Care Act that withheld all federal Medicaid funding from states that refused to expand the health coverage program. This was a real penalty: The feds were already providing more than half of all Medicaid money and would pay virtually all of the additional costs of expanding the program. States that refused to expand Medicaid would get no federal Medicaid money at all, leaving them much worse off than they were before. But the rescue plan does not put the states in a worse position. The rescue plan seeks only to make sure that the federal spending goes to cover the costs of the pandemic. It imposes a condition on federal spending, something that the Supreme Court has consistently approved. Funds for pandemic expenses The rescue plan tax provision more closely resembles a law that withheld federal highway money from states that had a drinking age below 21. The Supreme Court upheld that law in 1987. The Supreme Court recognized that a condition could be unconstitutionally coercive. But it dismissed that concern because states would lose only 5% of their highway money if they failed to raise their drinking age. Every state except South Dakota complied with the condition. Vice President Harris embarked on a three-state tour in March to highlight how the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 will help small businesses in driving the American economic recovery. Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images The same principle should apply here. The rescue plan withholds federal relief if the funds offset state tax cuts. The feds need not provide any relief, but it can make sure that the relief it does provide is used to defray pandemic expenses. The plaintiff states also maintain that the broad scope of the rescue plan’s tax provision – which covers “direct or indirect” reductions in net tax revenue, such as by lowering tax rates or providing tax rebates – makes its coverage ambiguous. That, states claim, violates the requirement that conditions on federal spending be “clearly stated.” But at least one state, Missouri, concedes that the provision simply forbids applying stimulus money “to offset a specific tax reduction of a similar amount.” That concession could hurt the states in court. And Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has authority to promulgate regulations to clarify any ambiguity. She recently issued guidance under the law, stating that changes to state tax laws that take account of recent changes to federal tax law will not be treated as tax cuts under the rescue plan. [The Conversation’s Politics + Society editors pick need-to-know stories. Sign up for Politics Weekly.] Other payment methods Suppose, however, that the rescue plan does have a broader sweep. States still could provide economic help to their residents and keep all of their COVID-19 money. They could do so by using ARPA money to pay people directly instead of reducing their taxes. Maybe states should be careful not to label those payments as rebates, which might run afoul of the restriction. But they could avoid that problem by calling them, in the rescue plan’s words, “assistance to households, small businesses, and nonprofits” and “aid to impacted industries.” However these cases get resolved, we should view them as the latest round in the political battle between the states and the federal government over contentious federal policy. Legal doctrines might evolve, but in many respects these lawsuits are really performances: They allow state officials to score political points with their constituents, whether or not their legal arguments ultimately prevail.This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Jonathan Entin, Case Western Reserve University. Read more:Severe COVID in young people can mostly be explained by obesity – new studyAmerica gets a D+ for school infrastructure - but federal COVID relief could pay for many repairs Jonathan Entin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

  • Woman who called police on Black delivery driver faces hate crime charge, CA cops say

    She used “hateful language disparaging people of color,” authorities said.

  • Feds Had Backup Plan to Arrest and Charge Derek Chauvin All Along: Report

    The Justice Department reportedly had a contingency plan to arrest former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the case he was found not guilty for the murder of George Floyd, and will move ahead with charges of civil rights violations against Chauvin and the three other ex-cops involved in Floyd’s death. According to sources who spoke to the Minneapolis Tribune, prosecutors out of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota and the Justice Department have been building out their own criminal case in private before a grand jury. If the jury of 23 votes to indict, Chauvin and the others — J. Alexander Kueng, Thomas Lane and Tou Thao — will face new charges in federal court. For Chauvin, the case not only relates to his involvement in Floyd’s death, but also to a 2017 incident in which the former cop allegedly hit a 14-year-old repeatedly with his flashlight while arresting him, and subsequently knelt on his back while the teenager complained that he could not breathe. Federal authorities also developed a plan to file a criminal complaint and take Chauvin into custody at the courthouse in the case of a mistrial or a not-guilty verdict, sources told the paper. Earlier this month, Chauvin was convicted of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter, after a little over ten hours of jury deliberation, and now faces sentencing of up to 40 years in prison. The New York Times reported Thursday that eleven of the 12 jurors were immediately ready to convict Chauvin. One day after the verdict, the Justice Department announced that it will be conducting a civil investigation into the Minneapolis police department to determine if it “engages in a pattern or practice of unconstitutional or unlawful policing,” according to Attorney General Merrick Garland.

  • 14-year-old driver crashes truck into 9-year-old riding dirt bike, Louisiana cops say

    The boy on the dirt bike “suffered extensive injuries,” officials said.

  • 100-year-old sturgeon one of the largest ever caught in the US, Michigan officials say

    Officials called it a “river monster.”

  • 1 in 5 electric vehicle owners in California switched back to gas because charging their cars is a hassle, new research shows

    New customers have to become returning customers in order to reach government goals for electric vehicle sales.

  • Michael Cohen says he thinks Rudy Giuliani's legal problems will go beyond the Ukraine dealings 'because Rudy is actually a stupid guy'

    Michael Cohen told MSNBC on Thursday that he thinks Rudy Giuliani's legal problems will mount further, after the FBI raided his apartment and office.

  • Researchers announce world's first known case of pregnant mummy

    Polish researchers announced the discovery of the world's first known case of a pregnant mummy on Wednesday.

  • Twisted Sister awarded $1.2m from Clive Palmer over copyright claim

    Australian billionaire Clive Palmer used a version of We're Not Gonna Take It when he ran for parliament.

  • Mars helicopter gets extra month of flying as rover's scout

    NASA’s little Mars helicopter has gotten a reprieve. Instead of wrapping up flight tests at the beginning of May, NASA is giving its Ingenuity helicopter at least an extra month to tackle tough new terrain and serve as a scout for its companion rover, Perseverance. Ingenuity was attempting its fourth flight Friday afternoon; Thursday’s effort failed because of a known software error.

  • The FBI investigation into Rudy Giuliani is focused on Trump's firing of the US ambassador to Ukraine, NYT says

    Federal agents are searching Giuliani's electronic devices for communications about Marie Yovanovitch's firing in 2019, The New York Times reported.

  • US to restrict travel from India over COVID starting Tuesday

    The U.S. will restrict travel from India starting on May 4, the White House said Friday, citing a devastating rise in COVID-19 cases in the country and the emergence of potentially dangerous variants of the coronavirus. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said President Joe Biden's administration made the determination on the advice of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “The policy will be implemented in light of extraordinarily high COVID-19 caseloads and multiple variants circulating in the India,” she said.