ATLANTA – Legislation providing private-school vouchers to Georgia students attending low-performing public schools is struggling to get through the General Assembly in the final days of this year’s session.
After a lengthy debate late Thursday, the state House of Representatives tabled a bill that would create $6,500 vouchers for Georgia students.
House Speaker Pro Tempore Jan Jones, R-Milton, moved to table Senate Bill 233, likely because it did not have the votes to pass. The House voted 95-70 in favor of the motion, with many Democrats voting against putting off a vote on the measure.
That leaves just two legislative days – Monday and Wednesday – to get the bill passed.
“This is a chance to say to those children, those families, ‘We are here to give you an opportunity, a choice to be able to go to an alternative, to be able to do something at home or through hybrid, to be able to allow you to extend the educational opportunity,’” said Rep. Todd Jones, R-South Forsyth, who sponsored the bill in the House.
“We can help the public school system and provide choice. We [have] got to be able to provide a system that allows the family to have an opportunity.”
The Georgia Student Finance Commission would oversee the program, and parents would be required to live in Georgia for one year before availing their children of the scholarships.
Parents could spend the money at private or virtual schools, or for home-schooling and other expenses such as tutoring. Up to $500 could go for transportation.
Students using the scholarship would need to take at least one assessment test each year to help ensure accountability.
House Democrats criticized the measure, arguing it would harm public schools.
“We should not be diverting resources to support private interests that undermine Georgia’s public schools,” said Rep. Miriam Paris, D-Macon.
Paris said private-school tuition is usually around $10,000 to $12,000 annually, far more than the $6,500 voucher the bill would provide.
“This is a gift to our most well-off Georgians,” she said. “School vouchers do not address the root causes of poor educational outcomes. … We need to fully and equally invest in our public schools.”
The state Senate earlier this month approved the “Georgia Promise Scholarship” bill 33-23 along party lines. If the House passes the voucher measure next week, the Senate would have to vote again to approve it because it has been amended by a House committee.
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
Students from the Georgia Youth Justice Coalition oppose the new law limiting care for transgender minors.
ATLANTA – A new Georgia law limiting medical care for transgender children is likely to face serious legal challenges, experts say.
Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed a bill into law Thursday that prevents Georgians under 18 from obtaining gender-affirming hormone replacement therapy or surgery.
The Georgia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has vowed to sue the state over the new law. The challenge is likely to succeed, law professors told Capitol Beat.
Federal courts have blocked, at least preliminarily, similar laws banning gender-affirming care in Arkansas and Alabama, said Katie Eyer, a professor of law at Rutgers University. Neither of those cases has reached a full conclusion yet, but preliminary injunctions indicate the courts are likely to find the laws invalid, Eyer said.
“Federal courts have been pretty protective of transgender rights recently,” added Scott Skinner-Thompson, a professor at the University of Colorado Law School. “[The laws] are targeting trans kids and their parents and therefore discriminating against them on the basis of sex.
“[It] interferes with the parents and children’s right to make medical decisions about their lives, which the courts have also recognized as a fundamental right under the due process clause of the Constitution.”
The Georgia law, which takes effect July 1, is likely to face similar arguments.
“We can and will file a lawsuit before then,” said Cory Isaacson, legal director for the ACLU of Georgia. “[The law] violates fundamental constitutional rights under both the state and federal constitutions, including the right to be protected from discrimination and the right to parental autonomy.”
Georgia joins a growing list of states that have banned such care. Since the start of this year, similar laws have been enacted in South Dakota, Mississippi, Utah and Tennessee.
Florida has taken a slightly different approach. The state’s Boards of Medicine and Osteopathic Medicine adopted a rule banning gender-affirming care that took effect this month.
In the Peach State, Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr will be tasked with defending the new Georgia law when it goes to court.
“The Attorney General will do his job, which includes defending laws enacted by the General Assembly and signed by the governor,” Carr spokeswoman Kara Richardson said.
“States … have broad authority to regulate in areas fraught with medical uncertainties,” one such brief argued.
But medical experts disagree. Major medical societies such as the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) oppose the bans because they conflict with established protocols. The Georgia chapter of the AAP and many other medical professionals called on state legislators not to adopt the law.
In contrast, some supporters of such bans in Georgia wish the law had gone even further.
“We are disappointed that this bill remains one of the weakest in the country, and we are mindful of those who worked to undermine full protections for children,” said Cole Muzio, president of Frontline Policy Action, a Christian advocacy group.
The Alabama and Arkansas laws both banned puberty blockers, while the Georgia law does not.
Puberty blockers are typically used to stop puberty from starting in children with gender dysphoria, a recognized medical condition that results in mental distress because of a mismatch between the sex a person was born with and the person’s own sense of their gender.
Puberty blockers often need to be followed by hormone therapy to help transgender youth go through the puberty process, said Ren Massey, an Atlanta-area psychologist who specializes in treating gender dysphoria.
Massey and others are concerned that the ban on hormone therapy will prevent transgender youth from going through the normal stages of teenage development – psychologically, socially and physically.
“Medical professionals try to approximate a normal pubertal development,” often starting with low doses of hormones, he said.
The gender transition process is a lengthy one that includes numerous psychological and medical assessments, Massey said.
He’s concerned that now doctors and psychologists won’t have all the tools they need to help children and teenagers with gender dysphoria – and that these Georgians will suffer.
Massey expects to see an increase in self-harm, attempted suicides and completed suicides among transgender youths in Georgia.
“I’ve had a couple of families already move out of Georgia because of fear of these kinds of laws,” he said. “I am hopeful that lawsuits will lead to an injunction. … [Transgender youths] are in desperate need of support and help to cope with this additional stress.”
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
ATLANTA – Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed into law a controversial bill Thursday banning most gender-affirming care for transgender Georgians under 18.
Kemp wasted little time in signing the bill, which received final passage from the General Assembly just two days earlier.
Senate Bill 140 will ban Georgia transgender youths from receiving hormone replacement therapy and gender-affirming surgery.
Hospitals could lose their permits and doctors their licenses. The legislation also opens up doctors to civil and criminal liability for providing such services.
The new law does allow transgender youths to take puberty blockers. It also provides exceptions for youths with certain medical conditions who need hormone replacement therapy and gender-affirming surgeries.
Kemp and other Republican supporters framed the law as a measure to protect children from irreversible physical changes.
“As Georgians, parents, and elected leaders, it is our highest responsibility to safeguard the bright, promising futures of our kids – and SB 140 takes an important step in fulfilling that mission,” Kemp said Thursday in a statement on Twitter.
“I appreciate the many hours of respectful debate and deliberation by members of the General Assembly that resulted in the final passage of this bill.”
The legislation drew fierce criticism from legislative Democrats, parents of transgender youth, and major medical societies who argued it would harm vulnerable transgender youths’ mental health. They also maintained it violates parents’ rights to make decisions about their children’s care and prevents doctors from following medically accepted standards of care.
“This really is about us bullying children in order to score political points,” said Sen. Kim Jackson, D-Stone Mountain, while speaking against the bill on the Senate floor earlier this week. “It does not protect children…”
The law is slated to take effect on July 1, 2023. Advocates for transgender youth have vowed to fight it.
“Courts around the country have already stopped similar laws from going into effect on constitutional grounds, and we expect Georgia courts would do the same,” the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia said in a statement released this week. The group plans to sue the state.
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
Rep. Todd Jones, R-South Forsyth, sponsored a bill in the House that would prohibit government agencies from requiring proof of COVID-19 vaccination to access government facilities or services.
ATLANTA – The state House of Representatives gave final passage Thursday to legislation that would prohibit government agencies from requiring proof of COVID-19 vaccination to access government facilities or services.
Last year, the General Assembly enacted a measure barring the use of a person’s COVID vaccine status to prevent access to government facilities, services or licenses. The law included an automatic repeal date of June 30, 2023.
The bill passed Thursday removes the repeal date, making the provision a permanent part of Georgia law. The bill passed the Republican-controlled chamber by a 99-69 nearly party line vote.
Senate Bill 1 continues a long debate about what role COVID vaccinations should play in public life in Georgia after they first began to be administered in December 2020.
“SB 1 is a simple bill. It extends in perpetuity the current law as it relates to the COVID-19 vaccination status by removing the sunset clause,” said Rep. Todd Jones, R-South Forsyth.
“The current law prevents government and all of its subdivisions, agencies and authorities from discriminating against citizens and denying services based on COVID vaccination status. I believe in [Georgians’] freedom and their liberty. I expect them to take all proper precautions just like they did before 2020.”
House Democrats opposed the measure, arguing the bill politicizes what should be a public health matter and expressing concerns about how it limits local control.
“This bill aims to eliminate the ability for government agencies, including public schools, to require COVID vaccination ‘as a condition of providing any service or access to any facility’,” said Rep. Michelle Au, D-Johns Creek. “The harms posed by bills like this are not abstract. … Bills like this tie our hands with respect to the response we can provide.”
“I thought local control was a huge thing,” added Rep. Shelly Hutchinson, D-Snellville. “When does local control matter?”
The Georgia chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics opposes the measure, according to a letter the organization’s leaders sent to the Senate Health and Human Services Committee last month.
“Permanently prohibiting schools from requiring vaccination could severely hinder our ability to combat the pandemic,” states the letter, which is signed by the group’s president, Dr. Angela Highbaugh-Battle, and legislative chairwoman Dr. Melinda Willingham.
“A permanent ban sets a dangerous precedent which may lead to erosion of the current vaccine requirements for school attendance for other diseases.”
Georgia has had 2.4 million confirmed COVID-19 cases and 35,153 deaths, according to the Georgia Department of Public Health. Only 59% of Georgians are fully vaccinated with both COVID vaccine doses.
The bill now moves to Gov. Brian Kemp’s desk for his signature.
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
ATLANTA – Georgia’s banks are in a strong position in the wake of the failure of two large American banks this month, the deputy commissioner of the state agency that oversees banks said Tuesday.
“The state of banking overall in this country is very strong, and that’s especially the case in the state of Georgia,” Bo Fears of the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance told the state Senate’s banking committee.
The problems that caused the collapse of Signature Bank and Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) do not plague Georgia banks, Fears said, pointing to three major distinctions between the failed banks and Georgia’s banks.
First, SVB and Signature’s business was heavily concentrated in the high-tech industry. The banks were focused on serving fintech (financial technology) companies, venture capitalists who supported fintech, and cryptocurrency companies, Fears said.
“In Georgia, we don’t have that concentration,” he said. “We’re much more diversified. I’m unaware of any Georgia state-chartered bank that even banks a crypto-company.”
Second, 90% or more of SVB and Signature Bank’s deposits were uninsured, Fears said. No Georgia bank comes close to approaching that very high level of uninsured deposits, he said.
Third, like most banks, SVB and Signature were heavily invested in securities.
“When the interest rates were relatively flat, that was fine,” Fears said. “But within the last year, when there have been the interest rate raises, that’s created unrealized losses – so essentially paper losses in the bond portfolio.”
Just before its collapse, SVB liquidated a large portion of its security portfolio and the losses were realized – to the tune of about $1.8 billion. Public notice of those losses helped fuel the run on the bank and its failure soon thereafter.
Most banks have unrealized losses on their securities portfolio, like SVB did, Fears noted. But those losses – unlike in the case of SVB – continue to remain unrealized.
“Our [Georgia] banks have done a very good job of accounting for that interest rate risk by hedges or other mechanisms, so they don’t have that same exposure,” Fears told the committee.
In addition, since the two banks’ collapse, the Federal Reserve has established a program to provide the face value of securities rather than the lower market amount if a bank needs the securities as collateral in order to prevent an SVB-like situation from happening again.
That new program provides further guarantees that other banks do not face the same risks SVB and Signature did, Fears said.
“This is very different than the [2008] recession,” he said. “I’m very confident in the safety and the strength of the banking system in the state of Georgia.”
This story is available through a news partnership with Capitol Beat News Service, a project of the Georgia Press Educational Foundation.
