FRANKFORT, Ky. – Gov. Matt Bevin is expected to appeal Wednesday's ruling that nixes the pension reform law passed this year.

A Franklin County Circuit Court judge said the process to pass Senate Bill 151 was unconstitutional, calling it a "legislative sleight of hand."

House Minority Leader Rocky Adkins explains the legislation started as an 11-page sewer bill that morphed into a nearly 300-page pension reform bill.

"The bill was introduced on one afternoon and passed through the House and the Senate and on the governor's desk in less than six hours,” he points out. “The bill did not have the proper readings or the proper debate. The bill did not have an actuarial analysis, which the statute requires.”

A statement from the governor's office said the judge invalidated the bill based on procedural argument and failed to consider whether or not it violated the inviolable contract with teachers and other public workers.

The statement also noted hundreds of bills have passed the General Assembly using the same process.

An appeal to the Kentucky Supreme Court is expected.

The new law would have put newly hired teachers into a hybrid plan similar to a 401k, and increase the age for retirement. It also raises health care costs for some state workers.

Bevin maintains it would fully fund pensions and prevent the plans from becoming insolvent.

But Adkins and other opponents say the state is back to fully funding the ARC (actuarial required contribution), and says returns for state retirement systems are growing due to their investments.

"The retirement systems are back on track,” he states. “The reforms we made in '13 are working very well.

“The bill that was passed would have cost the taxpayers more money and would have had no impact on the unfunded liability."

Republicans said they are confident Wednesday's ruling will be overturned on appeal, and called the lawsuit brought about by Democratic Attorney General Andy Beshear "politically motivated."


get more stories like this via email

This month marks 160 years since the first Medal of Honor was awarded by President Abraham Lincoln. More than a dozen of the 65 recipients alive today are in Washington D.C. to discuss a planned Medal of Honor museum in Texas and monument in the nation's capital.

Patrick Brady, a Seattle native and retired army general received the medal for his service piloting an ambulance helicopter in the Vietnam War, rescuing U.S. and Vietnamese soldiers wounded in battle.

He was in Washington, D.C. this week advocating for a Medal of Honor monument.

"The purpose is not so much to glorify those who have received the medal, but rather to emphasize the values that are embedded in the medal: courage, sacrifice, patriotism - which, of course, are the pillars of American excellence," he said.

Brady said he and his crew were able to rescue about 5,000 people wounded during the war, including civilians. In 2021, Congress unanimously approved the Medal of Honor museum for Arlington, Texas, and a monument in D.C.

The museum is slated to open late next year. Brady said he and other Medal of Honor recipients tour the country speaking to students about courage, sacrifice and patriotism, but added there is only so much you can convey in a school setting.

"The museum may be the best schoolhouse for values that we have, and so in that museum, we will show not just what these people did in combat, the recipients, but more importantly what they did as civilians," Brady said.

Chris Cassidy, Head of the Medal of Honor Museum and Foundation, said the museum bridges political disconnects.

"There's lots of stuff right now that divide people," Cassidy said. "There's very few things that bring people together. And this project is something that unites people. And that's why we're so proud to be part of it."

In 160 years, fewer than 3,600 people have received the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest award for valor in combat.


get more stories like this via email

Like others across the country, many Missouri families struggle with the cost of child care, and state lawmakers are proposing some relief.

Rep. Hannah Kelly, R-Mountain Grove, serves Webster County, where the average child care cost for a family with two young children is more than $12,000 a year a year. Kelly has introduced legislation to create a state child care tax credit for parents who qualify for the federal child care tax credit. As with the federal credit, it requires having earned income.

Kelly pointed out no one who's paying attention to "everyday reality" can miss the fact young families are struggling.

"Nobody wants to give a handout, we only want to invest and give a hand up," Kelly stated. "This is money that people have earned, and we're putting it back in their pocket, once we can verify that they're making responsible choices, for their family and for their businesses."

Under House Bill 1335, individuals earning up to $75,000 a year and couples earning up to $150,000 would be eligible for a tax credit toward their child care expenses. The amount would be $1,800 for children up to age two, and $1,200 for kids ages three to six, for a maximum of two children per family.

Kelly added the credit is nontransferable and nonrefundable, features which can make tax credits more expensive. She explained her bill allows parents to choose their child care provider, who does not have to be licensed, but it does include limitations.

"You cannot have your spouse qualify as a day care provider," Kelly noted. "You can't have an older child qualify. It's all very tightly run; it's all very accountable."

Kelly stressed she supports the governor's child care tax credits included in House Bill 870, sponsored by Rep. Brenda Shields, R-St. Joseph.

The credits in Shields' bill would go to child care providers, corporations subsidizing their workers' child care expenses, and donors to child care centers, whereas the credits in Kelly's bill would go directly to families. Kelly feels combining the tax credits in both bills would benefit people "in every corner of the state."

The Iowa Legislature's powerful Ways and Means Committee has advanced a measure to eliminate the state income tax. The move is the latest in a series of votes to reduce taxes in Iowa.

Senate Study Bill 1126 would lower Iowa's income-tax rate to flat 2.5% in five years.

Then in 2030, the income tax would be eliminated completely. This comes just after Iowa passed a 3.9% flat tax last year.

Executive Director of nonprofit, nonpartisan Common Good Iowa Anne Discher said - given that the state income tax accounts for 50% of the Iowa's budget - eliminating it would decimate crucial public services.

"State aid to public schools is 43% of our state budget," said Discher. "We could entirely eliminate state aid for our entire public school system and it wouldn't be enough to cover the kind of income tax cuts that we're talking about. So, the kinds of service cuts really would be draconian."

Republicans have said this bill, and the flat tax signed into law last year, are designed to give Iowans broad tax relief and also make the state attractive to businesses that may be considering locating in Iowa.

Discher pointed out that Iowa is already facing a revenue shortfall due to last year's tax cut.

She added that eliminating the income tax revenue would affect mental health, safety and other social service programs in Iowa. But she warned that it could have other consequences, too.

"It is certainly a shot across the bow against racial equity, as well," said Discher. "We are further advantaging the wealthiest Iowans - further advantaging, as a group, white Iowans. Iowans of color are over-represented at the lower end of the income distribution, because of longstanding discrimination in housing, education and employment."

The bill moves next to the full Senate.