05 State News March issue 2/18/05 5:05 PM Page...

05 State News March issue 2/18/05 5:05 PM

2 state news march 2005

senior editorJack Penchoffmanaging editorLaurie Clewettgraphic design staffJeff BledsoeSusie BushLisa Eadsreprint permissions(800) [email protected] and advertising sales(800) [email protected](859) [email protected]

headquartersDaniel M. Sprague, Executive Director2760 Research Park Drive P.O. Box 11910Lexington, KY 40578-1910(859) 244-8000

washingtonJim Brown, General Counsel and DirectorHall of the States444 N. Capitol St. N.W., Suite 401Washington, DC 20001(202) 624-5460

easternAlan V. Sokolow, Director40 Broad Street, Suite 2050New York, NY 10004-2315(212) 482-2320

midwesternMichael H. McCabe, Director641 E. Butterfield Road, Suite 401Lombard, IL 60148(630) 810-0210

southernColleen Cousineau, DirectorP.O. Box 98129Atlanta, GA 30359(404) 633-1866

westernKent Briggs, Director1107 9th Street, Suite 650Sacramento, CA 95814(916) 553-4423

judiciary

Judging the CourtsStates consider performance standards for courts.

by Judge Kevin Burke

11

agriculture

10 Change Drivers in Rural AmericaEmerging changes impact state policy-makers.

by Dr. Carolyn Orr

14

health care

Upgrading Health CareStates promote health information technology.

by Sarah Donta

16

On the cover:States Stride Forward

Cover by Susie Bush.

state

emergency management

Worldwide Wake-Up CallTsunami disaster holds lessons for communitiesaround the world.

by Ellis M. Stanley Sr.

20


the council of state governments www.csg.org 3

4 Inside StoryWorld events shape federalism debate.by Jack Penchoff

5 ToolboxStrategies for surviving high health care costs and more.

8 PerspectiveWhat’s at stake for states in the 109th Congress?by Gov. Ruth Ann Minner and Gov. James H. Douglas

26 PerspectiveSaving the land that sustains us.by Jimmy Daukas

leadership

States Stride ForwardSolutions in governors’ state of the state messages bridge party lines

by Laurie Clewett

23

Departments

28 State TrendsTerrorism’s impact on state law enforcement.by Chad S. Foster and Gary Cordner

33 CSG SpotlightHighlights of activities and events by CSG, its affiliates and other associations.

38 Conference CalendarMeetings and conference activities of CSG, itsaffiliates and other associations.

39 TimelineA look back in time.

e news05 State News March issue 2/18/05 4:45 PM

The Councilof State Governments

Preparing states for tomorrow, today . . .

Executive CommitteePresidentGov. Ruth Ann Minner, Del.

ChairAssemblyman Lynn Hettrick, Nev.

President-ElectGov. Jim Douglas,Vt.

Chair-ElectSenate President Earl Ray Tomblin,W.Va.

Vice PresidentTo be determined.

Vice ChairRep. Roger Roy, Del.

2005 executive committeeSen. Carolyn Allen,Ariz. • Assemblyman Jeffrion Aubry, N.Y. • JerryBassett, Legislative Reference Service,Ala. • Treasurer Tim Berry,Ind. • Sen. Patricia Birkholz, Mich. • Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Ill. • Rep.Dan Bosley, Mass. • Sen. Shane Broadway,Ark. • Sen. Kate Brown,Ore. • Delegate Anthony Brown, Md. • Attorney General JonBruning, Neb. • David Byers, Supreme Court,Ariz. • Lt. Gov. JohnCarney Jr., Del. • Rep. Joe Carothers Jr.,Ala. • Sen. John Chichester,Va. • Sen. Kevin Coughlin, Ohio • Rep. Bob Damron, Ky. • Sen. BartDavis, Idaho • Sen. Denise Ducheny, Calif. • Sen. Hugh Farley, N.Y. •Rep. Craig Fitzhugh,Tenn. • Gov. David Freudenthal,Wyo. • Rep.Bob Godfrey, Conn. • Bill Goodman, Senate chief of staff,Ark. •Sen. John Hainkel Jr., La. • Sen.Toni Harp, Conn. • Sharon Hershey,legislative aide, Ohio • Sen. Linda Higgins, Minn. • Sen. JohnHottinger, Minn. • Gov. Mike Huckabee,Ark. • Rep. DeborahHudson, Del. • Rep. Jean Hunhoff, S.D. • Judge Robert Hunter, N.C.• Rep.Thomas Jackson,Ala. • Rep. Libby Jacobs, Iowa • Rep.Douglas Jones, Idaho • Lilia Judson, Supreme Court, Ind. • Gov.Dirk Kempthorne, Idaho • Michael King, Legislative Office forResearch Liaison, Penn. • Kurt Knickrehm, Dept. of HumanServices,Ark. • Chief Justice Joseph Lambert, Ky. • Rep. Pete Laney,Texas • Sen.T.D. Little,Ala. • Rep.Ward Loyd, Kan. • Sen. MichaelMachado, Calif. • Sen. Carl Marcellino, N.Y. • Sen. John Marchi, N.Y.• Sen. Kenneth McClintock, Puerto Rico • Rep. Kim McMillan,Tenn.· Andrew Molloy Jr., National Institute of Corrections, D.C. • Rep.Jeff Morris,Wash. • Gov. Frank Murkowski,Alaska • Gov. GeorgePataki, NY • Gov. Sonny Perdue, Ga. • Treasurer John Perdue,W.V. ·Rep. Danice Picraux, N.M. • Sen. Pam Redfield, Neb. • Mary Regel,Dept. of Commerce,Wis. • Gov. Jodi Rell, Conn. • Sen. Pam Resor,Mass. • Jack Ries, InterTechnologies Group, Minn. • Sen. StanRosenberg, Mass. • Rep. Chris Ross, Pa. • Assemblyman RobinSchimminger, N.Y. • Rep. Mary Skinner,Wash. • Rep.Tom Sloan,Kan. • Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, N.D. • Rep. DonnaStone, Del. • Sen. Ron Teck, Colo. • Sen. Robert Thompson, Pa. •Sen. Donne Trotter, Ill. • Rep. Steve Urquhart, Utah • Sec. of StateRebecca Vigil-Giron, N.M. • Treasurer Jody Wagner,Va. • Sen. JeffWentworth,Texas • Sam Wilkins, Office of Human Resources, S.C.• Sandra Winston,Workforce Investment Board,Ark.

STATE NEWS, 1549-3628, March 2005,Vol. 48, No. 3—Published monthly with combined issues in June/July andNov./Dec. by The Council of State Governments, 2760 ResearchPark Drive, Lexington, KY 40511-8410. Opinions expressed in thismagazine do not necessarily reflect the policies of The Council ofState Governments nor the views of the editorial staff. Readers’comments are welcome. Subscription rates— In the U.S., $55 per year. Single issues are available at $6 per copy.POSTMASTER: Send address changes to State News, SalesDepartment, P.O. Box 11910, Lexington, KY 40578-1910.

Advertising—Black and white, two-color and full-color adver-tising available. For complete circulation and advertising informa-tion, contact the advertising department at (800) 800-1910.Mailing lists are available for rent upon approval of a sample mailing.

Copyright 2005 by The Council of State Governments.Periodicals postage paid at Lexington, Ky., and at additional mailing offices.

insidestory

For more than 200 years, the federalism debatecentered on the relationship between states andthe national government. While the issues havechanged, the sovereignty of the states versus thecontrol of a central government has framed thearguments.

In recent years, however, the nation’s role ininternational relations has helped shaped federaland state policy responses to changing conditions.Shifting federal priorities, for example, haveforced state and local law enforcement agencies

to assume greater rolesin criminal activity han-dled by federal agencies prior to Sept. 11. Chad Foster, a public safety and justice policy analystwith CSG, reports this month how the FBI’s missionhas changed from criminal justice to national security,leaving state and local governments to deal with drugtrafficking, organized crime and bank robberies.

That is just one of the findings of a 50-state surveyof law enforcement agencies conducted by CSG andEastern Kentucky University.

The Indian Ocean tsunami inDecember took place half a

word away from the United States. Nevertheless, thatdisaster holds lessons for communities worldwide, saysEllis M. Stanley Sr., chair of the EmergencyManagement Accreditation Program Commission, aCSG affiliate.

Emergency services directors said the natural disas-ter raised public awareness that rare natural disasterscan be catastrophic. The tsunami has triggered discus-sion in the states and worldwide about the pros andcons of warning sirens in disaster-prone areas. The states’role in the global marketplace was also addressed in manyof the state-of-the-state messages delivered by governors this year. State NewsManaging Editor Laurie Clewett reports on the challenges states face and thegovernors’ proposed solutions. Utah Gov. John Huntsman Jr. summed it up suc-cinctly: “Today, the marketplace is regional, national and global—with a levelof speed and complexity not seen before in human history.”

This month two of CSG’s leaders, Gov. Ruth Ann Minner of Delaware,CSG president, and Gov. Jim Douglas of Vermont, president-elect, providetheir perspectives on the willingness of state officials to work with the 109th Congress.

—Jack Penchoff is senior editor of State News.

World Events ShapeFederalism Debate

Jack Penchoff

Laurie Clewett

Chad Foster


By Jack Penchoff


CSG’s partnership to promote public health

healthy states

The Councilof State Governments

In par tner sh ip wi th the Center s for Disease Contro l and Prevent ion , The Counc i l o f State Governments announces i t s new Hea l thy States in i t ia t ive

to educate s tate of f i c ia l s on publ ic hea l th i s sues . Areas inc lude cancer, d iabetes , immunizat ion , school hea l th and env i ronmenta l hea l th .

Look for these new resources and ser v ices :

CSG’s partnership to promote public health

For more information, check out the Healthy States website at www.healthystates.csg.org.

� Quarterly newsletter, issue briefs and other publications� e-Weekly� Inquiry service� Issues analysis� Comprehensive website

toolbox

State budgets are still tight. Health care costs are still rising. AndMedicaid is still a front burner issue in most state capitals.

What are some innovative ways state officials are coping? How arethey continuing to provide and expand health insurance coveragewithout large tax increases or cuts in other areas?

A new report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s StateCoverage Initiative answers these questions and more. State of theStates: Finding Alternate Routes offers a comprehensive analysis ofstate health care activities in 2004.

According to the initiative, in recent years state governments faceda “perfect storm” characterized by a combination of surging costs,enrollment and the number of uninsured. The report shows how statesare weathering the storm without making large cuts in their Medicaidprograms. It highlights innovative new strategies that tackle the prob-lem with everything from new co-pay arrangements to new public-private partnerships.

This report is available online at www.statecoverage.net/pdf/stateofstates2005.pdf.

States Survive Perfect Storm


A new report from the Government Performance Projecttakes a detailed look at how well state governments are run. Thereport, Grading the States 2005, evaluates the states based onkey management benchmarks like money, people, infrastructureand information.

The report is the “nation’s only comprehensive, independent,analysis of how well each state is managed,” according to apress release. It is designed “to show leaders how to identifytheir state’s strengths and weaknesses and how to compare theirperformance with other states.”

The project’s findings are based on managerial surveys,analysis of public records, and interviews with legislators andexecutive officials.

Among the findings:

� States have coped with fiscal difficulties with a range ofpolicies including spending cuts, efficiency measures, bor-rowing, and revenue enhancements—but many are still notout of troubled water.

� While many states have avoided using creative accountingto balance the books, there have been cuts to governmentsthat “risk-long term damage.”

� Virginia was held up as an example of excellent financialmanagement and Georgia was noted for the state’s “groundbreaking” human resources policies.

� A potential state worker crisis is brewing. In a majority ofstates, 20 percent of all employees will be retiring by 2010. Thenumber is higher in some states, with Tennessee topping thecharts at 40 percent and Maine and Nebraska not far behind.

� Infrastructure is in jeopardy in several states because ofunderfunded maintenance budgets. “The repeated deferralof maintenance will eventually result in higher repairbills,” the report warned.

� E-government is booming as states are moving servicesonline. Many states now offer everything from driver’slicenses to income tax forms through their Web sites.

To find out how your state ranks and to view comparative dataon all 50 states, view the report online at results.gpponline.org.


toolbox

State Sen. Karen Keiser thinks that people who can affordcosmetic surgery can also afford to pay taxes on the service.

On January 25 the Washington legislator introducedSenate Bill 5451, which would levy a 6.5 percent tax onelective cosmetic surgery and earmark the funds for chil-dren’s health services.

According to a press release issued by the Senate DemocraticCaucus, taxable services would include facelifts, liposuction,Botox, hair transplants, chemical peels, laser hair removal andcosmetic dentistry.

“Cosmetic surgery is a fast growing industry—just look at anymagazine,” Keiser said. “And every session for the past three ses-sions, we have faced enormous budgetary pressures to reducehealth care coverage for low-income children. This retail tax—paid by the consumer, not the health care provider—could gener-ate some additional revenues for our children’s health care.”

Similar legislation is already on the books in New Jersey,where a 6 percent tax on cosmetic surgery went into effect in

September 2004. Garden State officials hope to generate $26million in revenue.

Illinois State Comptroller Dan Hynes is also proposing a tax onelective cosmetic surgery, but he wants to divert the revenues tofund a stem cell research institute to “place Illinois on the cuttingedge of 21st century medical science,” he said in a press release.

The idea is not without opposition, however. A recent USAToday article reports that The American Society of PlasticSurgeons is calling New Jersey’s law a “dangerous precedent,”and quotes a Seattle surgeon who claims there’s an inherentgender bias to the tax.

“This is an unfair tax on women,” said Dr. Phil Haeck, editorof Plastic Surgery News. “The bulk of the people who have pro-cedures are not financially upper-class women. They’ve savedhard, and this is about restoring their self-esteem.”

A copy of the Washington legislation is available on the Internet at www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2005-06/Htm/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5451.htm.

Taxing the Nip and the Tuck

What Grade Does Your State Get?

States have coped with fiscal difficulties with a range of policies including spending cuts,efficiency measures, borrowing, and revenueenhancements—but many are still not out of troubled water.


perspective

As the state-federal relationship changes, particularly as the fed-eral deficit balloons, state government leaders face increasing poli-cy-making and budgeting challenges. No Child Left Behind, theHomeland Security Act, and the Medicare Modernization Act, cou-pled with a slow climb in state revenues, have put increased budg-eting pressures on state government.

These challenges resonate with Delaware Gov. Ruth Ann Minner,president of CSG, and Vermont Gov. James Douglas, CSG’s president-elect. In their first terms, they worked to increase the visibility of stateissues among federal officials. Through their participation in theNational Governors Association, they called for Medicaid reform, urgingthe administration and Congress to work with governors to enact reformsthat will create savings for both states and the federal government.

The president recently submitted a budget to Congress that woulddo away with or make cuts to 150 government programs. While theadministration did not specify capping federal Medicaid spending, thebudget seeks to create $45 billion in Medicaid savings over 10 years,and the president has encouraged governors to search for these funds.Other programs, including Amtrak, food stamps, and home-heatingassistance, could see funding levels decrease.

While Minner and Douglas continue to work closely with the 109thCongress to build a strong and equitable state-federal partnership, theyalso are exploring innovative programs at the state level, including ini-tiatives to lower prescription drug costs, improve transportation infra-structure, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

—Karen Imas, CSG/ERC publications manager

The 109th Congress began work in 2005 with a full agenda of pressing issues, particularly thosehighlighted by President George W. Bush in theState of the Union address and proposed 2006budget.The way in which Congress handles theadministration’s 2006 budget request will havefar-reaching impacts on state government.Governors are increasingly calling attention to the significant new fiscal demands placed on states.

What’s at Stakefor States in the 109th Congress?



perspective

Medicaid reform, No ChildLeft Behind, the Individualswith Disabilities EducationAct (IDEA) and transporta-tion reauthorization, coupledwith federal fiscal austerity,will impact our region andour nation. Governors andthe Congress must work to-gether to avoid aggravatingthe states’ fiscal conditions.

States are incubators ofknowledge and are just emerg-

ing from the worst economic downturn of the last 60 years.Governors have managed through a soft economy, dealt with thenegative effects of federal tax cuts on state revenues, workedwith flat or reduced federal budgets and coped with the escalat-ing costs of health care. We know that in good and badeconomies alike, we still need teachers to educate our children,buses to take people to work, foster care placements, and policeofficers to keep our communities safe; and we still must care forthe poor, elderly and disabled.

Health CareProviding for the well-being of our

citizens is governors’ primary respon-sibility. Two issues important to meare fighting cancer rates that plagueDelaware and our region and provid-ing basic health care to the Medicaidpopulation. No Delawarean should diefrom cancer because they make toomuch money for Medicaid but not

enough to afford health insurance. That is why we used a por-tion of Delaware’s federal fiscal relief to pay for cancer treat-ments for those without health insurance.

However, as health care costs rise, the availability of federalfunds are drying up. The federal fiscal relief that my colleaguesand I fought so hard to receive is expiring. And Congress maytarget Medicaid in 2005 as a potential program for achievingsignificant federal savings.

However, cuts to the Medicaid program or shifting costs tostates are not true reforms. At a time when overall state budgetsare just beginning to recover, Medicaid’s forecasted growth isalready approaching double-digit percentages. During fiscal2005, Medicaid is projected to grow by as much as 12.1 percent,due in part to the expiring federal fiscal relief. Long-termgrowth of Medicaid is expected to be a hefty 8 percent to 9 per-cent, a number that is well above expected state revenuegrowth. Serious structural changes to Medicaid are thereforenecessary if we are to meet the needs of the nation’s burgeoningsenior population in the years to come.

EducationState leaders know that we cannot create an era of opportu-

nity without devoting considerable resources to our children. InDelaware, our education efforts focus on preparing students forthe future and ensuring they have the skills necessary to enterand compete in the work force. If we set high goals for our chil-dren, and if we consistently provide our students and schoolswith the tools they need, we will realize improvements yearafter year. Recently, Delaware students were among the bestperformers in the country on the National Assessment ofEducational Progress, one of the few tests that allow state-to-state comparison of student performance.

State-Federal Partnership MustProtect Citizens’ Well-Being

By Gov. Ruth Ann Minner

As the 109th Congress convenes, states faceunresolved issues from the 108th Congress,new legislation, and the possibility of federalcosts shifting to the states because of thecontinued budget deficit.

“The next few years hold the promise of endless possibilities.However, this possibility must be realized through active

partnerships and joint action. It should not be thwarted by unfunded mandates and a shifting of federal responsibility.”

—Gov. Ruth Ann Minner

Continued on page 10



In agriculture, health care,education, the environmentand other areas, the federaldeficit is having a significantimpact on state and local gov-ernments. Reducing this short-fall and working to protect theessential services of govern-ment must be made the top pri-orities of the 109th Congress.

The deficit jeopardizes ourfiscal stability, basic economicand health protections, and thealready over-taxed American

family. Every dollar our nation spends beyond our ability to payis one that future generations must repay with interest. I com-mend President Bush for his call to cut the federal deficit in halfby 2009.

There are many responsible options Congress can consider tomeet this objective.

Take Medicaid, for example. Approximately one in sevenAmericans now falls under the umbrella of this program origi-nally designed specifically for the poor, infirm and disabled. InVermont, it’s currently an unsustainable one in four.

Vermont’s Medicaid program is among the most generous inthe nation, but today, like many other states, we are facing arecord annual Medicaid deficit. The forecasts paint a picturethat is dire and worsening.

Doing nothing is not an option. States would be forced to castthousands into the ranks of the uninsured, exacerbating ourhealth care dilemma, and leaving our most vulnerable residentsunprotected.

Raising taxes is not a responsible option. To cover theserecord deficits, we would need to levy dramatic tax hikes.

Working Americans are taxed enough and higher taxes wouldthreaten to reverse our recent success in putting people back towork. The fact is we could not raise taxes fast enough or highenough to solve this problem.

Cobbling together a short-term solution will only intensifyour problems in the coming years and make the hard decisionseven more difficult. And balancing the federal government’sshare of the Medicaid burden by shifting more costs to states isnot an option and must be avoided.

Our only option is for the federal government to join togetherwith the states to confront these challenges honestly and directly,set reasonable limits, seek enhanced flexibility, and make sometough choices.

Vermont is seeking what we refer to as a “global commit-ment” from the federal government. Such a commitment wouldoffer us the ability to combine a number of waivers and inven-

tive programs under one umbrella, allowing us to be innovativeand allowing a sufficient degree of flexibility in program designand management.

We believe this new approach would give states the ability toprovide seamless health care packages to residents below adefined income eligibility level without negotiating multipleindependent waivers for each coverage group.

This model also offers states the ability to overlay programslike our groundbreaking Chronic Care Initiative to improve thehealth of participants, implement financially sustainable man-agement policies, and forge a public-private partnership toenhance a new system of care for Medicaid patients.

perspective

Vermont Seeks‘Global Commitment’By Gov. James H. Douglas

As public servants at all levels of governmentwork diligently to craft responsible budgets,one constant we face is the federal deficit anda corresponding reduction in federal resources.

“Getting spending under control willrequire leadership, and I know that

governors and state legislators are preparedto work with Congress to provide it.”

—Gov. James H. Douglas



I have worked to ensure that as much new funding as possi-ble goes directly into the classroom. However, the costs associ-ated with implementing major programs, such as NCLB andIDEA, continue to increase. It is critical that these programs befunded at the authorized levels in order to meet the rigorousaccountability standards established by law, attract and retainhighly qualified teachers for our students, and implement newand innovative programs. This is one of the issues states willwatch closely in this Congress.

TransportationThe ability to move people and goods effectively and over

various modes of transportation is important to the Northeastbecause our economies depend upon movement over an inter-connected transportation system. The reauthorization of surfacetransportation funding will dictate our ability to achieve ourhighway and transit goals. Adequate funding for highways and

transit, firewalls and guarantees are necessary to provide thefunding predictability that our states require to meet the region’sgrowing transportation needs.

Continued and improved Amtrak service is another vitalcomponent of the Northeast’s transportation systems. UntilCongress develops a comprehensive, national passenger railpolicy along with a secure source of federal funding to imple-ment that policy, Amtrak will have to rely on inconsistent fund-ing through the annual appropriations process.

As we look at our nation’s recent history, we know that a timeof economic growth can mean good things for our states, regionsand the nation. The next few years hold the promise of endlesspossibilities. However, this possibility must be realized throughactive partnerships and joint action. It should not be thwarted byunfunded mandates and a shifting of federal responsibility.

—Ruth Ann Minner is governor of Delaware and president ofThe Council of State Governments.

State-Federal Partnership—Continued from page 8

perspective



By Judge Kevin Burke

or many court leaders these are interestingtimes; indeed, for some courts, times of dan-ger. There is danger fostered by attacks oncourts allegedly populated with activistjudges. There is danger fostered by the radical restriction of judicial discretion.Securing adequate funding for courts surely isa challenge in these interesting times. On the

other hand, even legislators who are the most sympathetic to thejudiciary see danger in bewildering court arguments to justifybudgets competing for scarce dollars that are critically neededfor education and health care.

Neither the judiciary nor the other two branches of govern-ment can afford the temptation to follow the easy path or to restin the comfort of old ways of viewing our courts. Our timesdemand the creation of a new paradigm to assess court perform-ance accurately.

All of us—in the courts, legislative and executive branches

and the community at large—pay a price for misunderstandingthe judiciary. While there is far more trust and satisfaction withthe court system than critics might lead one to believe, it is easyfor those of us in the judiciary to feel a bit under siege at times.

Put in perspective, however, our nation has always been crit-ical of the judiciary. Chief Justice John Marshall, who today isrevered, was nearly impeached in an effort led by PresidentThomas Jefferson. Marshall, without the benefit of a court pub-lic information officer, responded to critics by writing a seriesof letters to the editor in his own defense, using a pseudonym.Nearly a century later President Theodore Roosevelt, upset witha ruling from the Supreme Court, said he could carve out of abanana a judge with more backbone than the backbone ofJustice Oliver Wendell Holmes. Billboards populated the nationdemanding the impeachment of Chief Justice Earl Warren.Former President Ford at one time wanted to impeach JusticeWilliam Douglas. Every state has a similar story of conflictregarding some aspect of its own judicial history.

Judgingthe Courts

“There is a Chinese curse whichsays ‘May he live in interestingtimes.’ Like it or not, we live in

interesting times.They are times ofdanger and uncertainty; but they arealso the most creative of any time in

the history of mankind.And every-one here will ultimately be judged—will ultimately judge himself—on theeffort he has contributed to buildinga new world society and the extent

to which his ideals and goals haveshaped that effort.”

—Robert F. Kennedy

FStates consider performance standards for courts



Court PerformanceThere will always be debate and occasionally tension

between the branches of government. Although those debatesstrengthen our democracy, we should never mistake activity foraccomplishment. To ensure that the debate between the branch-es is directed toward accomplishment, not just activity, the judiciary needs to adopt and to be held accountable for under-standable, meaningful performance standards. Courts canensure their future independence by accepting the notion ofpublic accountability for their performance.

The late congresswoman Barbara Jordan of Texas once saidthat what the people want is an America as good as its promise.A court as good as its promise looks at fairness and respect aswell as efficiency. Fairness, respect and efficiency should be thefoundation of court performance standards. If courts adopt stan-dards of performance based on fairness, respect and efficiency,the dialogue among the branches of government will improveand, more importantly, the people who use our courts will bebetter served.

Legislatures and the executive branch use performancestandards. Many states, for instance, have become more andmore interested in performance standards in education. To listjust a few examples, Georgia, Illinois, Arizona, Colorado andKentucky have enacted educational performance standards.

The states that have established these educational perform-ance standards did so to close the gap of achievement and toprovide for a well-rounded educational experience. More fun-damental, the premise of educational performance standards isto rationalize the response to the question, “Are our schoolsdoing well?” Intuitively we all know that social promotion ineducation poorly serves children. If high school graduates can-not read, the answer to the question, “Are our schools doingwell?” is simply no.

Similarly, in health care, we intuitively understand that dis-charging the hospital patient in record time, although efficient,is not a desired option if the patient promptly dies at home.Courts are in the same position as education and medicine, butarguably are even more vulnerable to criticism because of theill-defined way the judiciary frequently responds to the ques-tion, “Are our courts doing well?”

State Courts InitiativeCourts around the country have on their own initiative

increasingly adopted performance standards tailored to them.Recently the National Center for State Courts developed theCourt Tools Performance Measures, which embody a lot of thebest thinking regarding court performance. (See box)

Court leaders as well as policy-makers outside the judiciarycan easily understand the NCSC’s or similar performance meas-ures. Most of the measures adopted by courts have focused on

court efficiency and timeliness. In part, this is because it is easyto measure and timeliness is important. The adage “justicedelayed is justice denied” in fact can understate the importanceof timeliness. In family law, timeliness allows a fifth gradechild to know which parent they will live with permanentlybefore they reach the eighth grade. Timeliness in family law isa major factor in ensuring that parents don’t spend their child’scollege education savings on their divorce lawyer’s child’s col-lege education. Timeliness in criminal law is the singular mostimportant contribution the judiciary can make to reduce recidi-vism. In civil law, timeliness and efficiency in courts, becauseof more certainty in trial dates, allows business to contain liti-gation costs.

But how do courts measure fairness?What you measure is what you care about, and while all of us

express the commitment to a fair justice system, few courts meas-ure it. Those courts that do not measure fairness fail themselvesand contribute to the unfortunate rhetoric of some court critics.

Listening to the PeoplePeople do not have a right to win in court.

They do have a right, however, to be listenedto in every case. They do have a right toleave the courthouse in every case under-standing the court order. The combination ofthese two concepts is what fairness is about.People need to be heard and to understandcourt orders. The first answer to the questionof “Are our courts doing well” should there-fore be, what percent of people who come toour courts leave feeling they were heard?The second response should be what per-centage of people who leave our courtsunderstand what the court ordered? Anythingless than a desire to get a 100 percent is thejudicial equivalent of social promotion,which we intuitively know has not worked in education.

Last year the state courts of our nation hadmore than 100 million cases. Two decades ofsocial science research tells us a lot aboutthose litigants. Those millions of people whocame to court had expectations that the courtwould “get the right result” and, for the mostpart, courts do get the right result. Moreover,what the social scientists tell us is that thosepeople knew they might not win, and althoughdisappointed, can accept and obey court orderswith which they disagree. Their willingness tocomply with orders, however, is driven bytheir perception of how they were treated in


court, whether they were heard and whether they understood theorder or expectations of the court.

Measuring the performance of courts, particularly the court’sfairness, is an achievable goal. Frankly, it might even be easierto achieve than the ambitious tasks on which education andhealth care have embarked. As Robert F. Kennedy said, we livein interesting times and we will be judged on our contributionsand our ideals in building a new world society.

Today, one of the tools to help us gauge our contributions isavailable, so that when we look back we can definitively saythat by listening and making sure court participants understoodwhat happened in court, we contributed to shaping a bettercourt system.

—Judge Kevin Burke of the Hennepin County district court inMinneapolis was selected by Governing magazine as one of eightPublic Officials of the Year in 2004. Burke was recognized fordeveloping performance measures that made the HennepinCounty courts more efficient. He is a CSG Toll Fellow, Class of 1996.

The National Center for State Courts

10 Core Performance Measures:Access and Fairness

� Clearance Rates (the number of outgoing cases as a percentage of the number of incoming cases)

� Time to Disposition of Cases (the percentage ofcases resolved within established timeframes)

� Age of Active Pending Caseload (another way oflooking at timeliness)

� Trial Date Certainty (a court’s ability to hold trials onthe first date they are scheduled)

� Reliability and Integrity of Case Files (the accessibility,organization and completeness of court files)

� Collection of Monetary Penalties (percentage ofmonetary penalties collected and distributed withinestablished timelines)

� Jury Yield and Utilization (the number of citizens whoare summoned, report for duty and are not needed)

� Court Work Force Strength (court employees’ ratingsof their knowledge, motivation and preparedness)

� Cost per Case (the average cost of processing a single case, by case type)

People do not have a right to win in

court.They do have a right, however,

to be listened to in every case.

They do have a right to leave the

courthouse in every case under-

standing the court order.The combi-

nation of these two concepts is

what fairness is about.


By Dr. Carolyn Orr

As part of its 2005 trends research,The Council of State GovernmentsAgriculture and Rural Policy Group will monitor these 10 change drivers as

they impact agricultural producers and rural communities and the policy-makers who work with them.

Emerging Changes Impact State Policy-Makers

10 Change Driversin Rural America




1. New Forces at Work—Agriculture in a Global Economy

Rapidly rising agricultural productivity and worldwide economicgrowth have led to an integrated international market for food. Astrade barriers have fallen, U.S. agriculture, traditionally a protectedsector of the economy, has faced fierce global competition.

� International trade agreements and increasing export compe-tition. Natural resource endowments, the global spread of tech-nology and a large underemployed labor force are advantagesthat developing nations can exploit to supply foreign con-sumers. Global markets will increasingly liberalize and inter-national trade agreements may limit states’ legislative powers.

� Internationalization of the supermarket and changes in agri-cultural trade balance. Income, urbanization and populationgrowth are changing the way the world eats. The rapidgrowth of U.S. agricultural imports relative to exports comeseven as the United States continues to be the world’s leadingexporter of farm products.

� New challenges for food safety. Increased contact betweendisparate parts of the world has introduced new problemssuch as the spread of disease and pests, as well as increasedconcerns of agriterrorism.

� Increasing threats from invasive species. Invasive alienspecies are considered second only to habitat destruction asthe greatest threat to biological diversity loss. It is importantthat state governments work with the federal government tostop the accidental and unintentional introduction of alienspecies into existing ecosystems.

Even though trade and commerce have always been about com-petitiveness, globalization has initiated trade patterns that favoreconomies of scale, making it difficult for local producers to sur-vive in even their own domestic marketplace.

2.The Economy in Flux—Keeping Rural Economies Competitive

The U.S. economy has evolved from one based on manufactur-ing that is centered on natural resources to one based on servicesand knowledge. Today, about 55 million Americans live in morethan 2,000 nonmetropolitan counties. This economic restructuringhas important implications for these rural residents.

� Changing farming structure. While farming continues to bean important component of the rural economy, it no longeranchors most rural communities. Producers and rural busi-nesses will seek value added opportunities such as specialtysoybeans, identity preserved grains or biopharmaceuticals.

� Revitalizing rural communities. Rural communities oftenlack the educated work force needed to compete for jobs inthe new economy. Raising educational levels and the qualityof education is essential to improving the economic life ofrural communities. Homegrown entrepreneurship will be thedeterminant of vibrant and growing rural communities.

� Farming goes high tech and organic too. Telecommuni-cations have transformed farming into a modern global busi-ness. Tractors equipped with Global Positioning Systems,Internet access that keeps farmers abreast of instant changesin prices, genetic modifications that can make plants inher-ently resistant to pests or nutritionally superior are all part oftoday’s agriculture. While some producers will select live-stock based on genetic markers, others will find profitabilityin the growing organic market.

3. Quality of Life—Managing Our Natural Resources

Increased demand on limited resources threatens the quality ofour environment. Much of the population growth is occurring inwater deficit areas, and extended droughts challenge even themost efficient allocation plans.

� Increased complexity of natural resource management andallocation. While crop irrigation is the dominant use of freshwater in the United States, agriculture’s share is dropping asurban demands increase. Water management will be at thetop of the political agenda in many areas.

� Energy security requires increased utilization of bioproducts.Bioproducts have the potential to revitalize agricultural com-munities by using millions of tons of agricultural waste thatare currently sent to land fills.

4. Regional Hot Spots—Adapting to Shifting Populations

Urban sprawl, moderate climates and attractive scenery havestimulated rapid population growth in many rural areas. In someareas these new settlement patterns are contributing to the revital-ization of small towns. In other areas, rapid growth is strainingcommunity resources. However, there are many towns in theGreat Plains and western Corn Belt that continue to lose popula-tion as they wrestle with declining farm employment and the lackof replacement jobs. More than half of “farming dependent” coun-ties have fewer residents today than in 1990.

� Keeping farmland affordable. Agriculture conservation ease-ments and tax consideration for working farmlands can


The U.S. economy has evolved fromone based on manufacturing that is

centered on natural resources to onebased on services and knowledge.Today,about 55 million Americans live in more

than 2,000 nonmetropolitan counties.



Improving CommunicationHealth information technology can be defined simply as the

use of technology to help health care providers communicate.This can include online educational resources for providers andconsumers, electronic medical records, registries, diagnosticand monitoring tools, bar codes, electronic prescribing, andelectronic processing of payments and claims. For state policy-makers and others interested in the “big picture” of health care,implementing HIT is about the infrastructure and capabilitynecessary for purchasers, providers, payers and researchers toshare information securely at the touch of a button.

Health information technology has the potential to reducemedical errors, improve the quality of care, help doctors trackimportant information about patients, and give consumersmore information about their own providers, finances andoverall health.

“IT is changing the way work gets done,” said Dr. DavidBrailer, the first national coordinator for health informationtechnology. “Decisions get made differently. Facts are recalleddifferently. Those are all positive things. It’s much easier andless frustrating for a clinician to have tools that can do all that.”

On April 27, 2004, President Bush issued an executive ordercalling for “widespread deployment of health information tech-nology within 10 years to help realize substantial improvements

By Sarah Donta

lthough the U.S. health care sys-tem is known worldwide forits high-tech advances, when itcomes to adopting informationtechnology, the health care sec-

tor lags behind many other industries. Whileother professions have eagerly embraced elec-tronic tools, the doctor’s office has become thelast bastion of the handwritten record.

For years, health care experts have recognizedthat improving health information technology(HIT) has the potential to control or reducehealth care costs and improve the quality of care.But actually implementing new technology facesmajor barriers.

UpgradingHealth Care

States promote health information technology

A



in safety and efficiency.”In May 2004, he appoint-ed Brailer to implementthe executive order.

Brailer helped establishthe National Health Infor-mation Network (NHIN)to meet these goals andprovide the infrastructurenecessary to integratehealth information tech-nology nationwide. Thenetwork is a nationwideutility that allows for the

secure and seamless exchange of health information. TheNHIN, sometimes called the “Medical Internet,” would allowdoctors’ offices, hospitals, clinics and laboratories to exchangeinformation securely in real time. It would also connect clini-cians to data about their patients at the point of care. Capitalexpenses would be paid by public and private investments, andprivate organizations would operate the network. Federal agen-cies would use it to collection and share data.

“Health care information exchange interoperability is notjust about the technology. It’s about the legal, financial, cultur-al, clinical, operational and organizational policy issues thatcome up whenever we allow on a widespread basis informationto be shared among and across doctors, patients and other play-ers,” Brailer said.

In order to develop this network, the federal government hasdeveloped Regional Health Information Organizations(RHIOs) to oversee the exchange of health care information.RHIOs consist of stakeholder groups that make sure that thenetworks meet the needs of individual communities and com-ply with national goals and policies.

“Our goal, very simply, is to have every American coveredby [an RHIO]. We want to see the basic RHIO infrastructure upand running within two years in the United States. And I thinkwe’re well on our way toward doing that,” said Brailer. Sincefunding has been an issue, the Agency for Healthcare Researchand Quality, part of the U.S. Department of Health and HumanServices, announced $139 million in contracts to states andpilot programs for three years for HIT projects starting inOctober 2004. Although Congress denied the department’srequest last year for an additional $50 million appropriation for2005, Brailer said HHS expects more funding in 2006.

Health IT BarriersDespite this plan and the numerous benefits incorporating

health information technology could bring to the medical com-munity, a survey by Medscape and the Commonwealth Fundshowed that physicians have been slow to adopt HIT. Thereport, titled Information Technologies: When Will They MakeIt into Physicians’ Black Bags?, found the following:

� Seventy-nine percent of physicians use electronic billing.

� Only 27 percent of physicians use electronic medicalrecords or order tests, procedures or drugs electronically.

� Only 6 percent of physicians routinely use electronic clin-ical decision support systems.

� Only 3 percent of doctors communicate with patients by e-mail; 7 percent communicate with other doctors by e-mail.

Given that the U.S. health care system has a reputation as themost technologically advanced, practitioners’ reluctance toadopt new information technology seems almost ironic.Although other industries have eagerly implemented many ofthese technologies or their counterparts, several factors haveslowed their adoption in health care:

� High implementation costs. Implementation of HIT takes asignificant amount of time and money—money that somecash-strapped doctors’ offices simply do not have. Otherhealth care entities may have more resources to implementthe latest HIT. However, the decentralized nature of the U.S.health care system means that returns on investment for HITmay be hard to document. For instance, a clinic that uses anelectronic reminder system for ensuring patients withexpensive chronic illnesses receive the care they need is notpaid any more than its competitors that don’t do this.Providers that use HIT to improve care face a double wham-my: Although they spend the time and money on new tech-nologies, their income may decrease because their patientsare healthier and need fewer doctor visits.

� Effectiveness. Another challenge for health care purchasersand providers is determining which technologies will yieldthe biggest bang for the buck. There is not much solid sci-entific evidence on which technologies are cost-effectiveor improve quality. The high price tag of implementing anew software program, for instance, along with the train-ing needed for health care professionals and staff, is hard

“It’s not just about technology.It’s about changing the culture, mindset

and finances of health care.”

—Dr. David Brailer,national coordinator for

health information technology



to justify without strong evidence that the new technologywill make the delivery of care more efficient, reduce errorsor simplify health care for patients.

� Privacy. Patients, physicians and government officials allhave concerns about sharing personal health care informa-tion. The Health Insurance Portability and AccountabilityAct of 1996 addressed this concern by requiring the U.S.Department of Health and Human Services to set standardsfor protecting confidentiality and security of health data.The department developed rules to ensure the security ofelectronic health information, including medical, adminis-trative and financial records. These rules were published in the Federal Register on February 20, 2003, and areavailable at www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/.

State ActionsSeeing the potential for health information technology to

decrease costs and improve quality, some states have movedforward with efforts to promote HIT and electronic informationnetworks in health care.

DelawareThe Delaware Health Information Network is a statewide

health information and electronic data interchange program man-aged by the Delaware Health Care Commission. Created in 1997,this initiative was established to reduce costs,increase competition, and improve access tocare by providing easy access to timely, reliableand relevant health care information.

“Our vision is that of a sort of hub, if youwill, that connects and transmits information toclinicians with patient permission,” explainedPaula Roy, executive director of the commis-sion. “We focus on how you move data acrosslabs, hospitals and providers so that physicianscan make better decisions.”

The initiative provides resources and infor-mation for policy-makers, physicians, patientsand researchers. Some features planned for thefuture include:

� medical record access for patients and health care professionals;

� links to proposed state and federal legislation;

� information on state health programs and outside insuranceprograms;

� a Digital Health Library; and

� links to health resources, such as Intellihealth, KaiserPermanente and Hospital Finder.

Funding for the network comes from local foundations anda grant from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.“Those amounts of money are allowing us to move forward,but they’re only seed money,” Roy said.“The investment tobuild and operate these kinds of systems is significant. One ofthe things we are putting the finishing touches on is a revenuemodel and sustainability model.”

Rhode IslandThrough a partnership with SureScripts, the Rhode Island

Quality Institute has founded an e-prescribing initiative tomodernize the prescription process and improve prescribingaccuracy for physicians, pharmacists and patients. RhodeIsland is working as a test site for implementing a statewideelectronic system among all retail pharmacies and all pre-scribers in the state.

The pilot program linked 39 physicians to 70 percent ofRhode Island’s pharmacies. More than 10,000prescriptions went through the system. Todate, the results have been very positive.Streamlining the renewal process reduced theprocessing time by more than half. Calls toand from the physicians’ offices have beenreduced as well. At Anchor Medical, a 10-physician office, e-prescribing led to 50 fewerphone calls per day.

“We were finally able to produce for ourclinical community a genuine, bona fidevalue-added program. Not just anotherunfunded mandate, but value added. Thathelped our adoption tremendously here,” saidLaura Adams, president and CEO of theRhode Island Quality Institute.

Health information technology offers manypotential benefits to the health care industry and to states.However, some key players are concerned about privacy issues,high start-up costs and unproven effectiveness of some tech-nologies. Because of the health care system’s incentive struc-ture, many observers believe that government funding and leadership will be essential for widespread adoption of thesenew technologies.

The potential to improve quality, reduce medical errors, andultimately reduce health care costs is the enticing vision that isstimulating innovation at the national and state levels.

—Sarah Donta is a health policy research associate at TheCouncil of State Governments.

Internet ResourcesIn December 2004,The Council of State

Governments hosted a teleconference titled“Upgrading Health Care: State Plans for HealthInformation Technology.” To hear an audio record-ing of the conference or for more informationabout health information technology, please visitwww.csg.org (keyword: Health IT).


hroughout history, mankind has livedunder the threat of natural disasters. Forour current time, a wake-up call occurredon December 26, 2004, as an IndianOcean tsunami focused attention in theUnited States and abroad on the hugeimpact of a catastrophic disaster and thecapabilities needed to protect residents.

The December earthquake-tsunami disaster wastriggered by a shallow magnitude 9.0 earthquake 155miles from Sumatra. Ten-meter tsunami waves impact-ing two miles inland devastated shorelines in 12

nations. There was no warning system in the area, andworse yet, little public education had there been a warn-

ing. More than 250,000 people were killed, according torecent estimates. Many more may be affected by health care

problems that will occur as a result of the tsunami. Millionshave been displaced from their homes, and billions of dollars

are needed for reconstruction.U.S. states and their residents responded to the tsunami with

relief assistance and renewed attention to tsunami vulnerability inthis country. Henry Renteria, director of the CaliforniaGovernor’s Office of Emergency Services, said he hopes theimages from the South Asia tsunami stay in the minds of residentsin tsunami-prone areas so they can recognize warning signs andtake action.

“Probably the biggest impact on California has been anincrease in the public’s awareness of the potential danger on theCalifornia coast,” Renteria said. “We hope there is an increasedimmediacy placed on tsunami preparedness so that we can con-tinue to make progress in working with local governments to uti-lize tsunami inundation maps toward the increased safety ofcoastal communities.”

Tsunami disaster holds lessons for communities around the world

By Ellis M. Stanley Sr., CEM


T

Indonesian citizens run toward a U.S. Navy SH-60 Seahawk helicop-ter carrying food and other relief supplies in Sumatra, Indonesia, onJan. 7, 2005. The Navy conducted humanitarian operations in thewake of the Dec. 26, 2004, tsunami that struck the Indian Ocean.Photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Jacob J. Kirk, U.S. Navy, courtesyof the U.S. Department of Defense.

Worldwideake-Up Call


“Tsunamis are rare on the California coast, with the mostrecent damaging tsunami being in 1964,” Renteria continued.“So, while we have been studying tsunamis for years, until oneactually occurs, it is difficult to fathom the true impact a tsuna-mi can make on a community.”

According to Eric Noji of the U.S. Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention and Linda Bourque from the Universityof California-Los Angeles Center on Disasters and PublicHealth, vulnerability to natural disasters is rising throughout theworld because of rapid population growth (especially amongthe urban poor), unplanned urbanization, and the concentrationof industry and infrastructure in disaster-prone areas. More than25 percent of the world’s population lives in areas that are athigh risk for natural disasters. There are 90 “super-cities” withpopulations of more than 2 million, 64 of which are located inhighly seismic zones, and the majority include concentrationsof the highly vulnerable urban poor.

Richard Andrews, former director of the California Officeof Emergency Services and most recently director of theCalifornia Office of Homeland Security, noted that the IndianOcean tsunami highlights a difficulty that government offi-cials face in the United States and abroad. West Coast statesare understood to have the highest vulnerability to tsunamis inthis country.

“It teaches us that high risk, low probability events do occur,and when they do, the consequences can be catastrophic,”Andrews said. “These events are fairly rare so it is difficult toget funding and attention to them.”

David Liebersbach, director of the Alaska Division ofHomeland Security and Emergency Management and presidentof the National Emergency Management Association, said thereare good tsunami forecasting and warning capabilities in thewestern United States. “One of the most important things we’vedone in the U.S. is educate the public on what to look for orwhat to do if they are near the ocean in the event an earthquakeoccurs or if there is a sudden change in the beachfront wherethey are.”

But, Liebersbach said, there’s still room for improvement inapplying forecasting and warning technologies and in educatingthe public, including tourists in coastal areas. “We have done afair amount to prepare for tsunamis, but that doesn’t mean wecan’t continue to improve.”

The Relief in ResponseIn the aftermath of the disaster, states and individuals looked

for ways to help in the massive relief effort. Search and rescueexpertise from several states was deployed to assist with theresponse effort, including members of California and Virginiasearch and rescue teams, in response to a request from the U.S.Agency for International Development.

In Massachusetts, Gov. Mitt Romney, like many other leaders,urged residents to contribute to relief agencies. New Hampshireand other states provided information to their residents about themost effective means to contribute to the relief effort. Even inland

in Idaho, communication assets stood by to accept and relay mes-sages related to the disaster, including providing informationregarding individuals impacted by the disaster to relatives inIdaho. The Idaho Military Division Joint Operations Centertracked response information to determine Idaho National Guardassets that could be needed. Officials in coastal jurisdictions pre-pared for the “could it happen here?” questions and providedinformation about the relative risks posed in their states.

Pacific States Familiar with Tsunami Risk

U.S. states on the Pacific Ocean have long understood thethreat of tsunamis. Mission records reveal a tsunami inCalifornia in 1806, and tsunami occurrences stretch back intothe region’s geological history, including 32 tsunamis withwave heights of at least one meter above sea level inHawaii since 1811. Alaska, California, Hawaii,Oregon and Washington are members of theNational Tsunami Hazard MitigationProgram, which was created to reducetsunami risk in the region through mit-igation, hazard assessment and warn-ing guidance.

A tsunami can affect any U.S.coastline, although the Pacific Coastis historically and geologicallymore at risk than the East orSoutheast Coast. A tsunami in1755 in the Atlantic was caused byan earthquake off the shore ofPortugal, and a notable NorthAmerican tsunami in 1929 inNewfoundland, Canada, was felt allthe way to South Carolina. Move-ment of the ocean floor because ofan earthquake is the most frequentcause of tsunamis. According to infor-mation from the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency/U.S. Department ofHomeland Security Emergency Prepared-ness and Response Directorate, should amajor earthquake occur close to land, wavescould reach the coastline in a few minutes. Areas athighest risk are those less than 25 feet above sea level and withina mile of the shoreline.

The Pacific Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii provideswarnings for tsunamis to most countries in the Pacific basin aswell as to Hawaii and other U.S. interests in the Pacific outsideof Alaska and the continental United States. The Alaska-WestCoast Tsunami Warning Center in Alaska provides bulletins,watches and warnings to state and local governments in Alaskaand the U.S. West Coast via various notification systems.Notification systems for this information include the National


More than 25percent of

the world’spopulation livesin areas that are

at high risk for natural

disasters.



Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Weather Wire andHazard Alert Radio, National Warning System and others.

Pacific states in the United States have plans and warningprocedures in place for tsunamis. Steps taken in Oregoninclude evacuation maps and brochures, as well as “TsunamiHazard Zone” signs along Highway 101 and in many coastalparks and playgrounds. Evacuation route and assembly areasigns are posted in communities in the Tsunami Hazard Zoneto provide fixed markers to guide people to safer ground.Public education on tsunami and earthquake risks is providedin schools, public meetings, special events, advice to localofficials, and information to partners and the media. SomeEast Coast states, such as Delaware, also address tsunamiresponse in their disaster plans.

In California, the Office of Emergency Services works with theCalifornia Geological Survey and other agencies as well as localgovernments on preparedness, planning and awareness activities.The office provides several guidance documents for local govern-ments and the public, including “Designing for Tsunamis—SevenPrinciples for Planning and Designing for Tsunami Hazards,2001.” Renteria said California has developed tsunami inundationmaps for most of the California coast, with the remaining sixcounties in northern California planned for completion in March2005. The state is providing the maps, funded by grants from theNational Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program, to local govern-ments and encouraging their use in developing evacuation andemergency response plans.

Among the needs identified by these West Coast states toimprove U.S. tsunami preparedness and response are: bettermapping resources to speed delivery of inundation maps tolocal governments, resources for evacuation and local planning,

resources to improve warning capability (including coastalwarning sirens), signage and public education.

The need for improved detection and notification systemshas been widely discussed since the South Asia tsunami. U.S.federal officials have proposed improvements to tsunamidetection and warning, including expanding the global sys-tem of ocean sensor buoys, enhancing and coordinating warn-ing capabilities, and providing public education. As a con-sultant to the World Bank in various countries on disaster pre-paredness and other issues, Andrews has worked with leadersin India to look at that country’s disaster planning and miti-gation issues. He said the capabilities of detection, warningand overall emergency management systems in other coun-tries vary widely, which adds to the difficulty in setting upand maintaining a global tsunami warning system. AsAndrews noted, it would be difficult to create a tsunami-onlywarning system, but maintaining a system that is used forother disasters—such as cyclones and hurricanes—is morefeasible. “Whatever system you have in place has to build oninstitutional structures—notification and warning, planningand operations capabilities.”

Effective WarningThe tsunami has reinvigorated discussion—in the states

and internationally—about the benefits and drawbacks ofwarning sirens in disaster-prone areas. Concerns includecosts of maintenance, limited audibility in high winds orstorms, and public confusion as to the meaning of warnings.

Cannon Beach, Ore., is a notable example of a coastal com-munity that has invested in sophisticated siren and voicedelivery systems for alert notification.

A warning is information provided to people at risk inadvance of or during a hazardous event with the objective ofinducing those at risk to take appropriate action to reduce loss-es. The goal of a warning is to prevent hazards from becomingdisasters; the success of a warning is measured by the timelyand appropriate actions taken to mitigate hazards and securepersonal safety.

In a world of competing interests, shortattention spans and politics, risk issues and disaster preparedness often are sidelined.

Overview of receding waters near the resort town of Kalutara, SriLanka. Satellite image by DigitalGlobe, collected December 26, 2004.



By Laurie Clewett

StatesStrideSolutions in Governors’ State of the State MessagesBridge Party Lines

ccording to the pundits, theUnited States is a nation divided:it’s the “reds” versus the “blues”;the tax-and-spend, big-govern-ment liberals versus the tax-cutting, small-government conservatives.

The reality, however, is that governing in the 21st century—especially governing at the state level—requires leaders who are willing to let go of traditionalstereotypes in order to help move their communitiesforward. Despite some ideological differences, thenation’s governors—Democrats and Republicansalike—face similar challenges as they try to adapt stategovernment to the realities of a rapidly changingworld.And, to a large extent, they are turning to similar strategies and solutions.

Forward

A



Not Your Father’s GovernmentGoverning at the state level is no longer just a matter of making

sure the lines at the Department of Motor Vehicles aren’t too long.From global trade agreements to biotechnology, from cloning toelectronic voting, today’s state officials face a host of complexchallenges and opportunities.

But too often, they find themselves working within bureau-cratic structures and legal frameworks that haven’t kept pacewith the changes. This dilemma was evident in many of thegovernors’ state of the state addressesthis year.

“Today, the marketplace is regional,national and global—with a level ofspeed and complexity not seen before inhuman history,” said Utah Gov. JohnHuntsman Jr. “We either rise to meet thecompetitive challenges of today or wefall behind.”

As Huntsman called for reform of thestate’s tax system, he noted, “The lasttime we had a major revision in the taxcode was in 1959—before I was evenborn. The personal computer didn’texist. The word ‘Internet’ hadn’t enteredour lexicon. Our economy relied onmining, not microchips. Eisenhowerwas president. It is time for change.”

Similarly, Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fle-tcher also called for tax reform, notingthat “the current telecom tax structurewas designed in the era of the crankphone and Alexander Graham Bell. … Our corporate license taxwas established in 1906—11 years before the Soviet Union wasestablished. Superpowers may come and go, but Kentucky’s taxcode is apparently forever.”

“We must … reform and reorganize the structure of govern-ment itself,” said California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. “Weneed a 21st century government to match a 21st century world.”

Despite these challenges, overall, the governors’ annual add-resses were optimistic. While a few described the state of theirstate as challenging, most of the 47 governors who deliveredspeeches in January and early February portrayed their state’scondition as strong or on the mend.

Like last year, education and economic development continuedto top the list of priorities. Health care was an equally prominenttheme this year. The governors also paid considerable attention toimproving government performance, public safety and justice, theenvironment and natural resources, and infrastructure.

K-12 Education Every governor mentioned education as a priority—not surpris-

ingly, given the percentage of state budgets that go toward fund-ing it. Most governors framed their discussions of education interms of its role in preparing the future and current work forces.“Education is the number one economic development issue here

and everywhere else,” said Colorado Gov. Bill Owens. “Publiceducation, K-12, is the top priority of state government.”

“Educational excellence is not an option in the knowledge-based economy of the 21st century,” said Virginia Gov. MarkWarner. “It is an imperative.”

Discussions of K-12 education focused largely on funding.About half the governors announced increased funding, and somehighlighted the need to revisit the funding formula (Arkansas,Indiana, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, New York,North Dakota and Texas). Fourteen governors called for propertytax reform, although not all within the context of education funding (Iowa, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nevada,

New Hampshire, New Jersey, NewYork, Rhode Island, South Dakota,Texas, Vermont and Wisconsin).

Teacher pay was another commontheme, with at least 14 governors call-ing for salary increases. Eight gover-nors (seven Republicans and oneDemocrat) proposed linking teachers’pay to their performance, rather thanjust length of tenure (Alabama, Cali-fornia, Idaho, Minnesota, Nevada,Rhode Island, Texas and Wisconsin).

The governors also focused on earlychildhood education, accountabilitymeasures, and school choice, specifi-cally charter schools. Other commonthemes included the need to strengthenhigh school curricula—especially inmath and science—to prepare studentsfor college, and increasing the numberof high school graduates.

Higher EducationThe governors also acknowledged that, in today’s economy, a

high school degree just isn’t enough. “If we’re only going to build an economy that depends upon a

high school graduate, then, my friends, we are going to build aneconomy that will see to it that every single Arkansas student willbe stuck in poverty,” Gov. Mike Huckabee told the legislature.“We have to ensure that every Arkansan has something beyond the12th-grade year, whether it’s vocational and trade training orwhether it’s a full university degree. Higher education is not a lux-ury. It is a necessity in tomorrow’s economy. In fact, it is a neces-sity in today’s economy,” he said.

About two-thirds of the governors highlighted some aspect ofhigher education—often stressing the need for increased statefunding and support for financial aid and scholarships. “If we donot reverse the decade-long disinvestment in post-secondary edu-cation, and pay more attention to retraining lower wage workers,it is only a matter of time before a future governor stands whereI’m standing and says ‘The state of our state is in decline,’”declared Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski.

Approximately half of the governors emphasized the role ofthe state’s universities in the economy and economic develop-ment—largely through their involvement in research and devel-opment. “Virtually every business I talk to either has a link or islooking to develop one with our universities,” said North

“Today, the marketplace isregional, national andglobal—with a level of

speed and complexity notseen before in human

history. We either rise tomeet the competitive

challenges of today or wefall behind.”

—Gov. John Huntsman Jr. (Utah)



Dakota Gov. John Hoeven. “That includes research and devel-opment for new products and services, ongoing education andwork force training, and access to an exceptional quality of life.To truly build the best business environment, we must link ourcampuses to the private sector.”

Economic DevelopmentLike several other governors, Hoeven pinned many of his hopes

for economic development on the state’s “centers of excellence.”“Centers of Excellence are partnerships between higher educationand business to create new, good paying jobs,” he explained.“These hubs of research and technology commercialize their workinto products and services, and they provide a nucleus for businessclusters across our state.” These centers—and many of the gover-nors’other economic development proposals—often focus on newand emerging technologies, from stem cell research to renewableenergy to nanotechnology.

“Economists now predict that 75 percent of the S&P Fortune500 companies in the year 2020 will be comprised of companiesthat don’t even exist today,” Hoeven said.

Some governors focused on courting niche industries, such asthe tourism or film industries. Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich sethis sights on the $100-billion-a-year homeland security industry,announcing a new division within the Department of Commerceand Economic Opportunity “whose sole purpose is to encouragecompanies that make homeland security products to either cometo Illinois or expand in Illinois.” “I’m asking our universities towork with us to develop a curriculum that trains our students towork in the homeland security industry,” he added.

Along with the role of technology, the governors also recog-nized the role of globalization in today’s economy. “Job creationin the 21st century economy can’t be business as usual,” saidColorado Gov. Owens. “Competition is global, and it’s fierce.”They proposed standard economic development tools like tax

credits and incentives, venture capital funds, skills training forworkers, and international trade efforts, along with measures toimprove the state’s business climate, such as cutting or reformingtaxes and eliminating regulatory barriers. Nine governors calledfor reform of the workers’ compensation system (Colorado,Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, Oklahoma, Rhode Island,Texas and West Virginia).

The governors also stressed the role of small businesses andentrepreneurs. “The bottom line is we want to see more little busi-nesses make it,” said South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford. “Theentrepreneur with a dream, the lady who puts a second mortgageon the house to start the business that had to wait until after thekids finished school, the fellow covered in grease still repairinglawn mowers at half past seven on Friday—these are all econom-ic heroes and they deserve our help.”

Health CareOne of the biggest barriers to small businesses’ success, they

said, is the rising cost of health care. Every governor mentionedhealth care in his or her address, with most focusing on the grow-ing affordability crisis.

“Health care costs continue to soar, and that affects all Kansasfamilies and all Kansas businesses,” said Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.“This trend will only accelerate in years to come, consuming pub-lic resources that would otherwise be spent on schools, roads, andeconomic development.”

“There is just no reason why the richest nation in the worldcan’t provide health care to all its people,” said Washington Gov.Christine Gregoire. “This is a national problem that begs for anational solution. We can’t truly solve this problem at the statelevel. But we can make a difference.”

They offered solutions such as importing prescription drugs,creating a statewide purchasing pool, encouraging low-cost insur-ance plans for the uninsured and small employers, tax credits forsmall businesses that offer insurance, and allowing small business-es to buy into the state’s insurance plan. Rhode Island Gov. DonaldCarcieri created a Health Care Cabinet; Nevada Gov. Guinnannounced a new Nevada Commission on Medical Research andHealth Care; West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin III appointed a statepharmaceutical advocate; New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch creat-ed a task force to explore innovative solutions; and Illinois Gov.Blagojevich announced a partnership between the state and localchambers of commerce.

About half the governors focused specifically on Medicaid andhow to deal with the fact that it is consuming an ever-greater shareof state budgets. “We’re spending more on Medicaid this year thanwe did for the entire state budget in 1986,” said Ohio Gov. BobTaft. “It is squeezing out all other areas of state government. …We must tame the Medicaid monster.”

“Without aggressive action we cannot properly fund education,or any of our other public policy priorities,” said Missouri Gov.Matt Blunt.

Some governors, in the name of fiscal responsibility, ann-ounced difficult cuts to Medicaid funding, benefits or eligibility.Others vowed to protect benefits or increase funding to keep up




perspective

espite significant progress in the past10 years, America’s best farm andranch land continues to be paved overand degraded at an alarming rate,affecting our quality of life.

We lose 1.2 million acres per yearand lose our best land the fastest.Growth itself is not the issue; the prob-

lem is unplanned, ill-considered growth. The amount of land eachAmerican uses has risen over the past several decades because oflarge-lot subdivisions and sprawling com-mercial development.

The consequences are well document-ed. Sprawl threatens our food produc-tion—86 percent of U.S. fruit and veg-etable production occurs on the edge ofurban areas. Development pushes produc-tion on to more marginal land, requiringmore inputs and increasing soil erosion. It reduces wildlife habitat—farms andranches provide homes to more than 70percent of the nation’s wildlife. And sincefarmland generates more in local tax rev-enue than it costs in services, loss of farm-land increases costs to local taxpayers.

This is the land that directly sustains usin body and spirit; it benefits us all. It isprivate land with enormous public impor-tance and it urgently needs our commit-ted stewardship. Saving this land is thenext frontier of conservation.

So what can we do? Across the coun-try, farmers and communities are coming together to plan forthe future of agriculture and to mobilize federal, state and localresources to create real options. Based on nearly 25 years ofexperience, American Farmland Trust has found that policy-makers need to work on three closely coordinated fronts:

� Save the best land. The most secure protection comes fromdeveloping publicly funded easement programs that givelandowners an option other than selling out. There are manystate and local programs along with the federal Farm andRanchland Protection Program, yet with insufficient fund-ing, countless farmers still wait in line to permanently pro-tect their land.

� Plan for growth and agriculture. When cities grow sensi-bly and local farms and ranches thrive, Americans enjoythe benefits of urban vitality, healthy farms and open space.Communities need to plan for the future of agriculture anddevelop programs to support local agriculture.

� Keep the land healthy. Promote farm practices that con-tribute to a clean environment. The fact is that runoff

from agricultural lands is a major source of pollution.Most farmers are good stewards, but they need betterinformation on environmentally friendly practices, alongwith policies that reduce the risk of adopting conservationpractices and provide incentives to do the right thingenvironmentally.

Without a broader plan, protecting individual farms is only astopgap measure. Likewise, saving land only to degrade it withpoor farming practices is little better than paving it over. Ourexperience shows we must succeed on all three fronts. First you

need a vision for working farms andranches in your community, state orregion. Then you need a plan to protectthe land, along with a plan for the futureof agriculture.

Public Land Protection Programs

One proven way to protect farmland is through publicly funded programsknown as purchase of development rights(PDR) programs or purchase of agricul-tural conservation easement (PACE) pro-grams. There are 24 state programs and45 independent local programs through-out the country.

One of the biggest challenges in devel-oping and administering these programsis figuring out how to pay for them. It isnecessary to have reliable revenuesources to allow land owners to incorpo-

rate the sale of easements into their long-term financial plans.While most programs are funded through appropriations or gen-eral obligation bonds, states and localities have used a widevariety of innovative funding sources. There are at least 21 dif-ferent sources of funding, including the following:

� Appropriations. Funds are allocated from general or otherdiscretionary funds, usually for start-up funding. For exam-ple, the Vermont Legislature appropriated $20 million tothe Vermont Housing and Conservation Trust Fund.

� Bonds. General obligation bonds are the most popularfunding source for PACE programs. They may requireapproval by the legislature, voters or both. Bonds allowprograms to commit large sums while land is still availableand relatively affordable.

� Credit card royalties. A portion of state-sponsored creditcard charges is allocated toward a land protection fund.The first such program was the Land for Maine’s FutureProgram, which dedicates 0.5 percent of all charges towardland purchases. According to Tim Glidden, the program

Saving the Land that Sustains UsBy Jimmy Daukas

DGrowth itself is not

the issue; the problem isunplanned, ill-consid-

ered growth.Theamount of land each

American uses has risenover the past severaldecades because of

large-lot subdivisionsand sprawling commer-

cial development.



provided $50,000–$100,000 in unrestricted funding forfarmland preservation. The state is phasing out the pro-gram, however, because “the changing markets for theaffiliate-style credit cards make it more difficult for thephilanthropic cards to succeed.” Glidden believes similarefforts could be more successful in larger states with awider base of card holders.

� Gaming revenues. The Great Outdoors Colorado TrustFund receives a portion of lottery revenues for land conser-vation and wildlife habitat restoration. This funding sourceis also used in Kane County, Ill.

� State and county grants. These are dedicated revenuesources that use environmental, historic preservation ortransportation-related grant funds.

� Private contributions or loans. Kent County, Md., has avoluntary check-off box program to help fund easementacquisitions. Other programs make annual appeals fordonations and loans from private sources.

� Tobacco settlement funding. The settlement included $5.15billion paid over 12 years to growers and communities.Fourteen states received this funding, with the largestamounts going to North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee,South Carolina, Virginia and Georgia. Several states use aportion of their settlement funds for PACE programs.

� Repayment of property tax relief credit. If a qualified appli-cant pulls out of a property tax relief program, it must repaythe tax credit with interest. These funds can be earmarked forPACE programs.

� Mitigation fees. These fees are charged to developers whoconvert agricultural land to a non-agricultural use. Stateand local governments can include “no net loss of farm-land” amendments in right-to-farm and farmland preserva-tion ordinances so that for every acre converted from farm-land, an acre is preserved.

� Agricultural transfer tax. This is a back tax collected onland enrolled in an agriculture assessment program.

� Other taxes and fees. State and local governments haveused a wide variety of taxes, some very innovative, tofund farmland protection. These include taxes or fees oncell phone use, cigarettes, property, real estate transfers ordeed recording, general sales, timber sales, and hotel ormotel stays.

When developing funding for a PDR or PACE program,remember to consider all the options to decide which is best foryour community. Then be opportunistic. Sometimes the climateisn’t right for a new bond, but it is possible to allocate part of anexisting tax. Also, consider new and innovative financing mech-anisms such as Installment Purchase Agreements (IPAs), whichhelp governments stretch available funds while offering uniquebenefits to landowners. IPAs spread out payments so that

landowners receive semi-annual, tax-exempt interest over anumber of years (typically 20 to 30). The principal is due at theend of the contract term. Landowners can also sell or securitizeIPA contracts at any point to collect the outstanding principal.

Developing local funding for a PACE/PDR program makes iteligible to apply for federal matching funds through the Farm andRanch Land Protection Program, the Grassland Reserve Programand the Wetlands Reserve Program. The 2002 farm bill dramati-cally increased funding for these programs. For more information,contact the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural ResourcesConservation Service office or visit policy.nrcs.usda.gov.

Working at the state level to develop farmland protectionprograms and at the federal level to direct U.S. farm policytoward conservation will be the most effective way to protectworking farms and ranches for our children. One of the mosteffective approaches over the next three years will be to funda-mentally change U.S. agriculture policy. The next farm bill in2007 represents an unprecedented opportunity to dramaticallyexpand the protection and stewardship of farm and ranch land.We can achieve increased diversity of economically and envi-ronmentally sustainable agricultural operations by shifting fromsubsidies based on commodity production to subsidies based onstewardship. This effort will provide more funds for agricultur-al land conservation.

This is the new frontier of conservation. We can ensure thatall Americans will be able to enjoy fresh local food, drive downa country road past farms and ranches, drink and swim in freshclean water, and live in healthy communities. Together we cansave the land that sustains us.

For more information or technical assistance on developingfarmland protection programs, visit www.farmlandinfo.org orcall (800) 370-4879.

—Jimmy Daukas is director of communications/project man-ager farm policy reform campaign at the American FarmlandTrust.



Terrorism’s Impacton State Law Enforcement

statetrends

CSG work group examines new roles and changing conditions

By Chad Foster and Dr. Gary Cordner

In recent years, Arizona established the Arizona CounterTerrorism Information Center, a combined facility/informationsystem that supports the analysis and sharing of law enforce-ment information. New York hired 120 new state troopers toguard critical infrastructure along the northern border. The stateof Washington implemented an explosive detection canine pro-gram to provide additional security screening at terminals to itsferry system, the largest in the United States.

These developments all suggest heightened roles for statelaw enforcement agencies since the September 11, 2001 terror-ist attacks. Not only are state police organizations taking onthese new terrorism-related responsibilities, they and their localcounterparts are shouldering many new burdens because ofshifting federal priorities.

In 2004, The Council of State Governments and EasternKentucky University conducted a 50-state survey of lawenforcement agencies and convened an expert work group toexamine how these changing conditions are affecting police andtheir traditional duties and to form recommendations for states.As state policy-makers and legislators seek policy improve-

ments, results from this terrorism-prevention study and recent-ly drafted guidance may help them understand current condi-tions and strategic directions for the future.

State Law Enforcement—Yesterday and Today

General purpose state law enforcement agencies exist in allstates but Hawaii. These agencies or departments typically fallunder the rubric of state police, state patrol or highway patroldepartments. One of the oldest and most well-known state policeorganizations is the Texas Rangers, established in 1835. Moststate agencies, however, are relatively new. The proliferation ofthe interstate highway system during the mid-20th century andthe need for traffic safety and enforcement forced most states toestablish or expand their state law enforcement agency.

Although the structure and function of these agencies variesamong states, they share similar characteristics. A common com-ponent of most state law enforcement agencies is a criminal inves-

Photo courtesy of Nebraska State Patrol.



statetrends

Security for Critical Infrastructure

Intelligence Gathering,Analysis and Sharing

Security for Special Events and Dignitaries

Terrorism-Related Investigations

Preventive Patrol

Commercial Vehicle Enforcement

Port Security

Airport Security

High Tech/Computer Crime Investigation

Border Security

Responding to Calls for Service

Community Policing

Drug Enforcement and Investigation

Traffic Safety

Traditional Criminal Investigation

Res

pons

e Pe

rcen

tage

State Law Enforcement100

80

60

40

20

0

Local Law Enforcement

Figure 1: State Versus Local Law Enforcement’s Allocation of Resources The following percentages of state and local law enforcement agencies say they have allocated more or many more resources towardcertain operational responsibilities since Sept. 11.

Source: CSG and EKU National Survey of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, 2004.

tigation division. Roughly 50 percent of all states use a unifiedmodel or one that combines police/highway patrol function andinvestigation responsibilities into a single department. The otherhalf of states have a separate bureau of criminal investigation thatworks independently or within the state attorney general’s office.

In addition to highway safety and criminal investigations, gen-eral purpose agencies play many other lead and supporting rolesin the states. For example, these agencies often provide states withspecial weapons and tactics teams; search and rescue units;marine and aviation assets; crime labs; criminal history reposito-ries; uniform crime reporting; statewide information systems;training for local law enforcement; and statewide communication,intelligence and analysis.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, there were rough-ly 700,000 full-time, sworn state and local law enforcement per-sonnel in 2000. Within this total, state law enforcement agenciesaccount for roughly 56,000 officers. The Federal Bureau ofInvestigation, on the other hand, employed just 11,523 special

agents in 2000. Law enforcement numbers substantially increaseat all levels of government, especially at the state and federal lev-els, once special jurisdictions with arrest and firearm authoritiesare considered (e.g., alcoholic beverage control, fish and wildlife,state park services).

Local police departments and sheriffs’ offices provide thebulk of law enforcement services to rural communities. As withmany other services, however, rural areas are severely con-strained by the lack of law enforcement resources. In 1999, forexample, 52.4 percent of all local law enforcement agenciesemployed less than 10 sworn officers while 5.7 percentemployed just one sworn officer. For this reason, state policedepartments often play enhanced roles in rural areas by provid-ing critical support services to smaller local agencies.

Generally speaking, state law enforcement agencies existed ina fairly stable environment before Sept. 11, fulfilling traditionalroles. And then the attacks occurred, creating and shifting respon-sibilities and paradigms among all layers of law enforcement.



statetrends

Traditionally, state-level law enforcement has represented about10 percent of total police employment in the United States. Inkeeping with this employment level, state law enforcement has his-torically played an important but relatively small role in the overallpicture of policing in America. The information collected for thisproject, however, indicates an expanding role for state law enforce-

ment since 2001, partly because of new roles and responsibilitiesassociated with homeland security, and partly because state policeare filling gaps and vacuums created by shifts in federal law enforce-ment priorities.Thus, while it is true that all types of police agen-cies have been significantly affected post-Sept. 11, it seems thatstate law enforcement agencies have been affected the most.

According to the 50-state survey carried out by CSG andEKU in the spring of 2004, state law enforcement agencies arevery involved in their state’s homeland security initiatives,and they are being stretched thin today because of these newroles and changing federal priorities.

Roughly 75 percent of state agencies say they either have agreat amount of involvement or serve as their state’s leader interrorism-related intelligence gathering, analysis and dissemi-nation. In addition, more than 50 percent of state agenciesreport similar involvement in homeland security planning andcoordination at the state level, conducting vulnerabilityassessments of critical infrastructure, providing protection forthis infrastructure and dignitaries, and emergency response toterrorism-related incidents.

How are these responsibilities affecting state police interms of resource allocation? In comparison to the periodbefore Sept. 11, more than 70 percent of state agenciesreport allocating more or many more resources for securityof critical infrastructure, special events and dignatories;intelligence gathering, analysis and sharing; and terrorism-related investigations. Furthermore, at least 50 percent ofstate police organizations say more or many more resourceshave been allocated for airport, border and port security;commercial vehicle enforcement; high-tech/computer crimeinvestigation; operational assistance to local agencies; andpreventive patrols.

These resources are likely generated from a number of possi-ble sources; the survey results and interviews suggest three.First, more than 10 percent of state agencies report allocatingfewer resources for traditional criminal investigation and drugenforcement following Sept. 11. Therefore, it is likely that someresources have been shifted internally among competing publicsafety problems and priorities. Interviews with state officials in2004 support the conclusion that other crime-fighting effortshave suffered as a result of new terrorism-related demands. Thismay be especially troublesome for states experiencing problemswith other types of crime, such as synthetic drugs (e.g.,methamphetamines and prescription drug abuse), new violentgang activities, identity theft and cybercrimes.

Second, state police organizations are receiving funds andresources through a number of federal grant programs such asthe State Homeland Security Program and Law EnforcementTerrorism Prevention Program. Although state law enforce-

ment agencies will likely see a small portion of these funds,roughly $1.5 billion was allocated to states for these two pro-grams in 2005.

Third, interviews with state officials suggest they are sim-ply doing more with less. For example, much of the overtimepay incurred during heightened levels of alert, participation onmultijurisdictional task forces and working groups, andexhaustive planning and coordination have been absorbedinternally. And, these new responsibilities come at a timewhen state police organizations, like local agencies across thecountry, face personnel shortfalls due to National Guard andReserve activations.

How do state law enforcement agencies measure againstlocal agencies? In general, law enforcement relationships andresponsibilities continue to be assessed and redefined at alllevels, and they will continue to evolve because of the chang-ing nature of terrorist threats, prevention needs and transform-ing operations and tactics. The survey results do suggest, how-ever, that certain responsibilities are more state or local innature. State agencies were more likely to report allocatingmore or many more resources to the following operationalresponsibilities: intelligence gathering, analysis and sharing;security for critical infrastructure, special events and digni-taries; and commercial vehicle enforcement. Conversely, localagencies were more likely to indicate allocating more or manymore resources to community policing, drug enforcement andtraditional criminal investigation.

Shifting Federal PrioritiesAccording to the 9/11 Commission Report in 2004, “the con-

cern with the FBI is that it has long favored its criminal justicemission over its national security mission.” In 2002, the FBIannounced a reshaping of priorities to guide future activities, withthe new number one priority being “protecting the United Statesfrom terrorist attacks.”

Shifting federal law enforcement priorities since Sept. 11 haveforced state and local agencies to assume greater roles for thosepreviously held federal responsibilities (e.g., financial crimes,bank robberies, organized crime and drug trafficking). These pub-lic safety and crime issues have not disappeared since Sept. 11,and state and local law enforcement agencies are obligated toaddress these deficiencies by assigning new personnel and shifting

Key Research Finding



statetrends

resources. Although the FBI may still be involved in these cases,they are much more selective today than before 2001.

In addition to the strain on state resources, state officials areconcerned that the shift by the FBI away from traditional crimeswill cascade to the state and local levels, thus hindering efforts toscreen and analyze possible precursor crimes for linkages to larg-er-scale terrorist activities. There is a strong indication that a nexusexists among types of criminal activity, including illegal drugoperations, money laundering, fraud, identity theft and terrorism.

Where Should States FocusFuture Efforts?

CSG convened an expert work group in 2004 to explore thesechanging conditions and a broad range of alternatives toimprove terrorism prevention at the state level. As states devel-op strategies concerning prevention and, to a lesser extent,emergency response, they should consider the following recom-mendations. (Visit www.csg.org, keyword: protect, for a com-prehensive listing and description of recommendations forstates on improving terrorism prevention efforts.)

Intelligence Fusion Centers and Analysts “Fusion centers are an integral part of a state’s strategy

regarding the prevention of terrorism,” said Colonel BartJohnson of the New York State Police. The centralization ofintelligence sharing and analysis at the state level, through onephysical center or network of facilities, provides a means togather and analyze disparate networks of information moreeffectively and efficiently.

Arizona was one of a handful of states to establish an infor-mation fusion center after Sept. 11. The Arizona CounterTerrorism Information Center is nationally recognized for pro-viding tactical and strategic intelligence support to law enforce-ment officials across the state and for being uniquely locatedwith the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force.

According to the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Planreleased in 2004, “Analysis is the portion of the intelligenceprocess that transforms the raw data into products that are use-ful … without this portion of the process, we are left with dis-jointed pieces of information to which no meaning has beenattached.” Today, terrorism and crime prevention missionsrequire a much more proactive approach to identify terroristsbefore they act and interdict attacks that are occurring. To meetthis new need, states should pursue specialized intelligence ana-lysts and improved analytical tools. The Florida Legislature, forexample, authorized more than 30 new intelligence analystpositions following Sept. 11 to address this need.

Collaboration Among Law Enforcement Partners “Terrorism prevention and response requires law enforce-

ment agencies at all levels to work together, exchange informa-tion, train and coordinate efforts to a much greater extent thanhas ever occurred,” said Sheriff Al Cannon of CharlestonCounty, South Carolina.

The 9/11 Commission also recognized the importance ofintegrating law enforcement assets at all levels of government.The commissioners cite the nation’s 66 Joint Terrorism TaskForces as a model intergovernmental approach. According tothe commission, state and local law enforcement agencies“need more training and work with federal agencies so that theycan cooperate more effectively with those federal authorities inidentifying terrorist suspects.”

To foster intergovernmental cooperation, the work group rec-ommends that states do the following: draft and implement astatewide counterterrorism program for the law enforcementcommunity; develop standardized training programs and tools;build partnerships with key residential, commercial propertyowners and security personnel and provide them with resourcesand tools to identify and report suspicious activities; and devel-op and implement a public education and outreach plan thatestablishes and formalizes public information policies and pro-cedures that relate to terrorism prevention and response.

Integration with the Criminal Justice System Not only must state agencies work closely with their local

and federal counterparts, they must integrate terrorism preven-tion responsibilities into the criminal justice system at large.“It’s now more important than ever to incorporate terrorism pre-vention into law enforcement’s toolbox of crime fighting pro-grams,” said Rep. John Millner of Illinois.

Law enforcement officials generally agree that an associationexists among types of criminal activity and terrorism. “Someterrorist operations do not rely on outside sources of money andmay now be self-funding, either through legitimate employmentor low-level criminal activity,” said the 9/11 Commission.“Counterterrorism investigations often overlap or are cued byother criminal investigations, such as money laundering or thesmuggling of contraband. In the field, the close connection tocriminal work has many benefits.”



� Every state except Hawaii has a state police or highwaypatrol agency.

� State police agencies range in size from 126 sworn officers(North Dakota) to 6,678 sworn officers (California).

� The average size of state police agencies is more than1,000 sworn officers, compared to roughly 40 sworn offi-cers for local police and sheriffs’ agencies.

� State police agencies represent about 7 percent of all thenon-military sworn law enforcement personnel in the UnitedStates. After factoring in other special-jurisdiction agencies atthe state level (e.g., Bureaus of Investigation, AlcoholicBeverage Control Agencies), the states likely account forabout 10 percent of all the sworn police in the United States.

� The states with the most sworn state police officers perpopulation are Delaware (74 officers per 10,000 residents),Vermont (50) and West Virginia (38).These states also havethe largest percentage of state police when compared tothe entire law enforcement presence in the state. Statepolice account for 33 percent of all sworn officers inDelaware and 29 percent in Vermont.

� The states with the fewest sworn state police officers perpopulation are Wisconsin (9 officers per 10,000 residents),Georgia (10), Florida (10) and Minnesota (11). Georgia hasthe smallest percentage of state police when compared tothe entire law enforcement presence statewide—4 percentof all sworn officers.

statesnapshots

State Police in the United States—2000

State, Local and Federal Law Enforcement Personnel, 2000Full-Time Sworn Personnel

Federal 88,496 (11%)

State law enforcement56,348 (7%)

Local police440,920 (56%)

Sheriff164,711 (21%)

Special jurisdiction(state and local)

43,413 (5%)

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics

Therefore, states should embrace an “all crimes”approach to terrorism prevention. This strategy ensures thatpossible precursor crimes are screened and analyzed forlinkages to larger-scale terrorist activities. Also, statesshould develop and implement protocols to leverage allcriminal justice and regulatory personnel, resources and sys-tems, including local law enforcement; probation and paroleofficers; court documents such as pre-sentence investiga-tions; and other state and local regulatory agencies.

Governance and Legal IssuesThe work group addressed a number of state-level gover-

nance, planning and legal issues affecting state law enforcementand general terrorism prevention duties. First, states should con-sider regional approaches for homeland security planning andoperational purposes. Creating or realigning existing regions orzones helps to remove or reduce local jurisdictional barriers foroperational purposes and may enhance the distribution of feder-al grants.

States should also assign a principal point of oversight andreview for homeland security through a legislative committeeor multibranch commission. In many states, disparate over-sight is provided through individual disciplines and policyareas such as agriculture, military affairs, public health andpublic safety. Similarly, certain aspects of the homeland secu-rity mission should be codified into law, such as key terms anddefinitions, general duties and responsibilities for the primarystate-level stakeholders, and strategic planning processes.

Finally, as a condition of accepting federal funds, statesshould ensure that state and local agencies have plans in placeto sustain newly acquired equipment and capabilities for thelong term. Future homeland security grant proposals and ini-tiatives, therefore, should sufficiently demonstrate these long-term obligations, strategies and plans.

States’ Critical RoleToday, state police organizations are taking many lead and

supporting roles in terrorism prevention. They provide a criti-cal information sharing and analysis capability at the statelevel and a link between local and federal authorities. Theirrole is especially important in rural areas where resources arescarce. Thus, they provide a critical link among large andsmall local agencies.

In addition, state troopers patrol the interstate and statehighways and serve as “eyes and ears” for suspicious activi-ties, and would play a critical role in managing mass evacua-tions and aid for disaster areas. State police continue to playimportant roles guarding border crossings, seaports, airportsand critical infrastructure. Furthermore, their specialized serv-ices (e.g., SWAT, canine units, air and marine assets) are oftenrequested at the local levels, and are important assets to deter,interdict and respond to acts of terrorism.

State policy-makers should be informed about these chang-ing conditions, as well as the risks that accompany them. Forexample, should drug enforcement resources be sacrificed at




csgspotlight

When the fifth annual Western Legislative Academy convenedin Colorado Springs from December 7–10, 36 state legislators intheir first four years of service became the Class of 2004.

The WLA is an intensive professional development programoffered by the nonpartisan Council of State Governments-WEST and designed exclusively for Western legislators.Lawmakers spend 31/2 days in classes on the legislative institu-tion, ethics, leadership, time management, negotiations, teambuilding and communications. The academy maintains animpressive faculty of experts from academia, the U.S. AirForce, state legislatures and the corporate sector.

Lawmakers are chosen for this highly rated scholarship pro-gram on a competitive basis from the 13 Western state legisla-tures. Each state is allocated at least two, but no more than fourslots at the annual WLA.

In addition to expressing its gratitude to the El PomarFoundation, which donates the WLA campus as well as agrant, CSG-WEST would like to thank the following sponsorsof the 2004 Western Legislative Academy: Altria CorporateServices, AT&T, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Healthcare,Coors Brewing Company, Cox Communications, EastmanKodak Company, Electronic Data Systems, GlaxoSmithKline,Grande River Vineyards & Winery, Intermountain RuralElectric Association, Johnson & Johnson, MedImmune Inc,Microsoft Corporation, Pfizer Inc., The Procter & GambleCompany, The Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of Colorado, and Wyeth.

The 2005 Western Legislative Academy will conveneNovember 15–18. Please call CSG-WEST at (916) 553-4423 formore information.

The WLA Class of 2004

Back row: Rep. Joseph Cannon (Idaho); Sen. Ralph Seekins (Alaska); Rep. Scott Nishimoto (Hawaii); Rep. Paul K. Seaton (Alaska); Sen. James

F. Waring (Ariz.); Rep. Gordon S. Anderson (Ore.); Rep. Bill Konopnicki (Ariz.); Rep. David R. Edwards (Wyo.); Sen. Dick Compton (Idaho);

Sen. Frank Morse (Ore.). Third row: Rep. Gregg Buxton (Utah); Rep. Dan Newhouse (Wash.); Rep. David Guttenberg (Alaska); Rep. Ed Orcutt

(Wash.); Sen. Jim Isgar (Colo.); Sen. Ken Hansen (Mont.); Rep. Marty Martin (Wyo.). Second row: Rep. Todd Kiser (Utah); Rep. Cheri Jahn

(Colo.); Sen. Gabrielle Giffords (Ariz.); Rep. Teresa Zanetti (N.M.); Assemblywoman Valerie E. Weber (Nev.); Rep. Nancy Dahlstrom (Alaska);

Rep. Jose Campos (N.M.); Rep. Scott Mendenhall (Mont.). First row: Assemblyman Roderick Sherer (Nev.); Rep. George L. Gilman (Ore.);

Rep. Glenn Wakai (Hawaii); Rep. Lynn Finnegan (Hawaii); Rep. Rosalind J. McGee (Utah); Rep. Rosie Berger (Wyo.); Rep. Janice E. Arnold-

Jones (N.M.); Rep. Andy Nunez (N.M.); Rep. Mack G. Shirley (Idaho); Rep. Robert J. Ring (Idaho). Not pictured: Sen. Jeff Denham (Calif.).

Photo by Lynn Boutte of Boutte’s Photography.

Western Legislative Academy Class of 2004



csgspotlight

This year, the Midwestern Legislative Conference willcelebrate its 60th anniversary during its Annual MeetingJuly 31–August 3 in Canada. As Saskatchewan, the hostprovince, celebrates its centennial, this will definitely be theyear to attend the annual meeting.

“We are pleased to be the first affiliate to host the MLCAnnual Meeting,” said Myron Kowalsky, speaker of theSaskatchewan Legislative Assembly and chair of the ProvincialHost Committee. “It is even more significant that we are doingthis as we celebrate our province’s centennial.”

The centennial will be a time to reflect on Saskatchewan’splace in Canada and the contributions of its people. Much haschanged over a hundred years, but other things—like the100,000 lakes, the rooted sense of history, colorful culturalexperiences, immense natural beauty and the friendly nature ofthe people—have remained the same.

“When delegates come to Regina for the MLC AnnualMeeting they will have an opportunity to experience theSaskatchewan way of life,” Kowalsky said. “No matter whereyou go in this province you will find a friendly smile, a helpinghand and a warm greeting.”

Saskatchewan’s history is about its people: their strong con-nection to family and community and their sense of ingenuityand spirit. The dreams and struggles of the province’s peopleare captured in the museums and are celebrated annually in a

wide range of special events. Saskatchewan’s development isalso closely linked to the history of the Royal CanadianMounted Police. MLC attendees will visit some of these touristattractions and museums and see firsthand the history that hasshaped Saskatchewan.

Along with Saskatchewan’s traditional symbols of theprairies, like the grain elevator and fields of wheat, delegateswill see symbols of the province’s future: oil and gaspipelines, mining sites, windmills, research facilities, fields ofpeas and specialty crops. Saskatchewan has enormous invest-ment, business and trade opportunities in its energy, mining,agriculture and manufacturing sectors. It is also home toCanada’s first synchrotron, The Canadian Light Source, locat-ed at the University of Saskatchewan, which will set the stagefor ground-breaking research in the medical and pharmaceuti-cal sectors.

“Resources and resourceful people—that describesSaskatchewan,” Kowalsky said. “Celebrating Saskatchewan’scentennial together with the Midwestern LegislativeConference’s 60th Anniversary will be an event that no oneshould miss. I encourage delegates to come and spend sometime experiencing all that we have to offer. I guarantee you willleave here with good memories and a better understanding ofSaskatchewan.”

For more information, visit www.csgmidwest.org.

Several Midwestern constitutional officersare settling into new positions after a series ofsmooth transitions. Nebraska Gov. Dave Heine-man took office January 21, 2005, through gu-bernatorial succession following the resignationof Mike Johanns to become U.S. secretary ofagriculture. Heineman had served as lieutenantgovernor since October 2001.

As lieutenant governor, Heineman was thestate director of homeland security, head of theInformation Technology Commission, and waspresiding officer of the Nebraska Legislature.“He has probably been more involved in thepolicy side of state government than any otherlieutenant governor I have ever known,” saidBarry Kennedy of the Nebraska Chamber ofCommerce. Those duties will now be assumedby Lt. Gov. Rick Sheehy, a mayor and para-medic appointed to the position by Heineman.

In Ohio, a vacancy was created in November in the officeof state treasurer when Joseph Deters was elected HamiltonCounty prosecutor. Gov. Bob Taft tapped Lt. Gov. JennetteBradley, who has an extensive banking background, tobecome treasurer. On January 5, 2005, Bruce Johnson, direc-

tor of development, was appointed to fill theposition of lieutenant governor.

“When business leaders from across the nationand around the world look to Ohio to expand orlocate their business, they will deal personallywith not only the development director, but alsoOhio’s lieutenant governor,” said Taft.

“A national trend is emerging of governorsand legislatures using the office of lieutenantgovernor to perform cabinet level duties and tocoordinate diverse services across state govern-ment from an executive branch level, as shownin the duties of lieutenant governor in these twostates,” said Julia Hurst, director of the NationalLieutenant Governors Association.

At this writing, New Jersey was advancinglegislation to create a statewide elected office oflieutenant governor. In November 2004, Senate

President Richard Codey succeeded to governor upon JamesMcGreevy’s resignation. In the absence of an office of lieutenantgovernor, New Jersey is experiencing a unique situation wherebyCodey is both the Senate president, retaining all powers of theposition, and governor. Only eight states do not have an office oflieutenant governor.

Smooth Transitions

Celebrating with Saskatchewan and MLC

Gov. Dave Heineman



Worldwide Wake-up Call —Continued from page 22

More than 60 years of federally funded social scienceresearch is available on how people respond to disaster warn-ings and how messages can be made more effective. Researchbased on extensive observation of natural and technological dis-asters reveals that mass panic is unlikely when accurate infor-mation is provided. Rare false warnings do not seem to lead toa “cry wolf” syndrome. People want accurate and reliable infor-mation, and if official sources do not provide it, they will seekit from less reliable sources.

A challenge in designing a uniform all-hazards warning systeminvolves knowing what people need to know to cause them tointerrupt normal activities to take appropriate action. It is impor-tant to view warning as a continuous process that requires educa-tion and training and often involves moving from incompleteinformation to increasingly specific information. People at riskmust participate in this progression to understand the imminence,severity and likelihood of experiencing a hazardous situation.People rarely respond effectively to a last minute, “out of the blue”alert to take action unless they can directly perceive the threat.

Given that warnings are issued for many types of hazards,recipients are more likely to quickly assess what is happeningand determine what to do if the same terminology to describerisk and suggested action is used in all situations. Thus, aneffective unified, all-hazard, public education system wouldadopt a standard terminology for hazard warnings.

In a world of competing interests, short attention spans andpolitics, risk issues and disaster preparedness often are side-lined. After all, the event has not happened, so why worry?Then people die, and demands are made about why nothing wasdone before the disaster. The habit of thinking and acting onlywhen it is too late must be reversed. Fundamentally, it is abouteducation. Elected leaders, chief executives and, in particular,children must be re-educated so that it becomes second natureto think and act before potential disasters strike. As these chil-dren enter the work force, anticipating such threats will becomepart of normal thought patterns, values, decisions and day-to-day behavior and public policy. A further disaster would be forus not to learn from this one and apply our learning in a waythat causes real change.

—Ellis M. Stanley Sr. is general manager of the Los AngelesEmergency Preparedness Department and is chairperson of theEmergency Management Accreditation Program Commission,a CSG affiliate.

Internet ResourcesAn interesting resource for more information about the “can it hap-

pen here?” question is found on the Web site of the U.S. GeologicalSurvey at earthquake.usgs.gov/eqinthenews/2004/usslav/canit.html.

the expense of terrorism prevention? What new structures,capabilities and resources benefit both responsibilities? Policeorganizations are becoming more proactive through new infor-mation-led policing initiatives and tools such as crime mapping.Can state-level fusion centers support these new general crimefighting initiatives?

“The fact remains that the Sept. 11 terrorists lived andshopped in small towns across the country, frequented bars andother establishments in these small towns, rented cars and droveacross states, and took flying lessons at small regional airports,”stressed Sheriff Cannon. “If not the state, then who should takethe lead in establishing and maintaining the unprecedentedcooperation required to prevent a future attack?”

Today, a tremendous opportunity exists for states to leveragetheir law enforcement resources to prevent future acts of terror-ism and to improve overall public safety.

This project was supported by Grant No. 2003-DT-CX-0004awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of JusticePrograms, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view in thisdocument are those of the authors and do not necessary repre-sent the official policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

—Chad Foster is chief public safety and justice policy analystwith The Council of State Governments. Gary Cordner, Ph.D.,is a professor with the College of Justice and Safety at EasternKentucky University.

Terrorism’s Impact on State Law Enforcement—Continued from page 32

Global Commitment—Continued from page 9

If we work together, we can protect the most vulnerable; wecan safeguard fundamental programs and services of govern-ment; and we can secure the economic future of our familiesand our communities.

It falls on all elected officials to find a solution that will saveMedicaid for future generations before it collapses under theburden of its own weight.

The federal-state relations of the 109th Congress must focuson economically prudent policies that will reduce the federal

deficit, while meeting the needs of our most vulnerable citizens. Getting spending under control will require leadership, and I

know that governors and state legislators are prepared to workwith Congress to provide it. A solution will require a commitmentas well from the Congress to make those tough decisions requiredto put a responsible budget on the president’s desk.

—James H. Douglas is governor of Vermont and president-electof The Council of State Governments.



with the growing demand. However they decided to address theproblem, the governors agreed it is not going away any time soon.In order to address long-term health care costs, many governorsemphasized prevention efforts—including screening programs forvarious diseases—and “healthy living” initiatives, such as effortsto reduce obesity and smoking, increase exercise and improvenutrition. “We have to decide that there is a better approach tohealth care than just pouring money into trying to treat sick peo-ple,” said Huckabee.

Other health-related subjectsincluded children’s health care,long-term care, medical malprac-tice insurance, mental health andsubstance abuse treatment, technol-ogy and worker shortages.

Smarter GovernmentAnother prominent theme was

the need to make government moreefficient and effective. “Too oftenthese days, politicians shout at eachother about ‘big government’ and‘small government,’” said ArizonaGov. Janet Napolitano. “In Arizona,we are showing that what matters issmart government, efficient gov-ernment, effective government.”

“From paper clips to pharmaceu-ticals, driving down the cost of gov-ernment and creating more valuefor the people of Kansas is the orderof the day,” said Sebelius.

Although most states’ financesare better than they have been forseveral years, the governors seem tohave learned a few lessons from therecent recession: extra revenueshould not necessarily be funneled

into new programs; adopting business practices and innovativebudgeting processes can help states identify and fulfill their prior-ities; states should save for a rainy day; and some governmentservices are, in fact, essential.

“Unfortunately, in the 1990s, state government let [the people]down,” said Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle. “At a time when thenational economy was booming and state revenues were soaring,the state’s rainy day fund sat empty. A culture of overspendingdeveloped. The state’s bureaucracy grew bigger—and slower torespond to the needs of everyday people.”

Republicans and Democrats alike stressed the need to limit orreduce government spending (although perhaps not to the samedegree), and for the most part, members of both parties refused toraise taxes.

Other PrioritiesIssues related to public safety and justice also were high on the

governors’ agendas. Most of the chief executives acknowledgedmembers of the military and the National Guard serving in Iraqand Afghanistan, and 17 proposed some sort of benefit for activeservice members or veterans, such as life insurance, income taxexemptions, tuition assistance and financial or other support.Thirteen of the 14 governors who mentioned drug or substanceabuse singled out methamphetamine. Several of them proposedcopying Oklahoma’s anti-meth law, the strictest in the nation.

Other topics included funding for law enforcement personnel,drunk driving, domestic violence, sex offenders, DNA testing,homeland security funding, communications interoperability, sen-tencing reform and natural disasters.

When it comes to the environment and natural resources, waterissues topped the list of concerns. The governors primarilyfocused on water quality, but for those in the drought-strickenWest, the issue was adequate supply. Another prominent topic wasenergy—both the effect of high energy costs and the potential eco-nomic effect of developing new and traditional energy sources.Fifteen governors highlighted renewable energy initiatives,including wind, ethanol and other biofuels, hydrogen and solar.The Midwestern governors, in particular, emphasized renewableenergy as an economic development tool. The governors alsomentioned land preservation and air quality, and several Westerngovernors discussed issues related to endangered species andwildlife protection.

Perhaps as confirmation that state finances are, in fact, improv-ing, the governors focused more on infrastructure and capitalimprovements this year. More than half of them proposed trans-portation projects, while others called for investments in housing,energy and telecommunications.

Human services and social policy were not major themes in thisyear’s speeches, but 10 governors did call for improvements intheir state’s child protective services. Others mentioned issuessuch as child support, homelessness, welfare reform, faith basedservices, affirmative action and services for the disabled.

To be sure, there were some noticeable differences betweenthe parties, especially in social policy. For example, all fourgovernors who proposed health savings accounts wereRepublicans (Georgia, Minnesota, Rhode Island and Texas), aswere those who discussed abortion (Missouri and Texas). Allthree who discussed child care were Democrats (Arizona, Iowaand Wisconsin), as were the two who proposed laws to banwork place discrimination against gays and lesbians (Delawareand Oregon). Republican Gov. Bob Riley of Alabama was theonly one who discussed the definition of marriage, which hecalled a union between a man and a woman.

But these issues accounted for a very small portion of the gov-ernors’ focus. When it comes to the bread-and-butter issues ofstate government—education, health care, economic develop-ment, and public safety—the Democrats and Republicans sound-ed remarkably similar. Whatever the political reality may be on theground, in their agendas, at least, the governors have more in com-mon than they have differences.

—Laurie Clewett is the managing editor of State News.

States Stride ForwardContinued from page 25

Governorsfocused more oninfrastructure andcapital improve-ments this year.More than half of them proposedtransportationprojects, while others called forinvestments inhousing, energyand telecommuni-cations.



protect farmlands from suburban development and reducetransfer costs. Preserving farmland helps protect rural ameni-ties and local food supplies, prevents flood damage, booststourism, and safeguards clean air and water.

� Population shifts are changing the face of farming. Changingpopulation densities are resulting in changes in farming pro-grams. Air quality concerns are changing some industries inhigher density areas. Others are taking advantage of growingpopulations by operating equine facilities and agritourismoperations. Large livestock facilities are being zoned out ofsome areas and “right-to-farm” laws are under judicial review.

� Rural communities losing political power. Rural communi-ties that are losing population or undergoing urban migrationare feeling shifts in political power. The number of rural res-idents elected to state offices continues to decrease.Redistricting plans are also likely to shift legislative power tothe metropolitan areas.

5.The Age Wave—The Graying of AmericaThe aging population will accelerate the growth in the number

of Americans over 65, who will number 54 million by 2020. OlderAmericans are likely to require greater governmental services intransportation and health care than most rural communities cancurrently provide.

� Increased demand for services in rural communities. Surveyshave shown that fewer than 30 percent of nonmetropolitancounties have affordable assisted living projects. Rural trans-portation routes involve greater distances, a limited numberof riders and often operate fewer hours.

� Increased importance of farmland transition strategies andyoung farmer programs. The average age of America’s farm-ers continues to increase, approaching 60. As these producersno longer wish to farm, farm ownership transition becomesincreasingly a societal problem. Seventy percent of farmlandwill be transferred in the next 15 years.

To meet these challenges, states will have to find ways to keepelderly rural residents independent and in their homes longer.

6.A Nation of ImmigrantsThe United States, always a nation of immigrants, today

receives twice as many immigrants each year as any other coun-try. Immigration now accounts for one third or more of annualU.S. population growth, with many immigrants using agricultureas their entry-level employment.

� Importance of migrant labor to agriculture continues to grow.Nearly 50 percent of hired farm workers are Hispanic andmore than 40 percent are not U.S. citizens.

� Increasing need for immigrant housing, health care and edu-cation in rural communities. Housing conditions for ruralminorities are worse than for any other population in the U.S.Rural education resources addressing gaps between native

and immigrant children at the primary and secondary levelsare particularly taxing in rural districts.

7. Disseminating Information Rural areas must have equal access. Successful businesses must

have instant access to almost any type of information to compete.

� High speed internet access a must for rural communities.Support for telecommunication infrastructure will providerural entrepreneurs with better access to information, marketsand technical assistance.

� Farm and rural businesses need to learn how to use newmethods of information dissemination to their advantage.Research has shown that information can sway consumerattitudes for or against products; therefore, producers need tobe aware of activist agendas and learn to use new informa-tional technologies to their advantage.

7. Privacy and Security—Keeping the Balance in Agriculture

One of the major security issues states are facing with regard toagriculture is food safety. Increasing expectations for guaranteesrelated to food safety and agriterrorism are resulting in the demandfor almost instant trace back of food products.

8.A Growing Chasm—Increasing PolarizationThere is a growing polarization of U.S. society. The lack of

understanding of the contributions of each segment of a diversepopulation is leading to greater rifts between officials and the gen-eral public. In many states, there is a disparity in both income andpolitical choices between urban and rural areas.

10.The role of GovernmentThe role of government in American society has shifted many

times during our country’s history. Two forces in particular arehaving an impact on the role of state government.

� Local regulations and ballot initiatives. Citizen ballot initia-tives and local patchwork regulations make uneven playingfields which producers find difficult to negotiate. Inconsistentregulations are hardest on small producers.

� Federalism. Federal mandates and court decisions havemajor influences on rural communities and farm viability.The unintended consequences of mandates on small farmsand rural communities can be devastating. Rural advocateswill need to work with other groups to build coalitions,express their concerns and learn from others.

CSG will continue to monitor and advise state officials of theimpact of these change drivers through our national meetings,publications and programs like Suggested State Legislation andthe Innovations Awards Program and Agriculture and Rural PolicyTask Force work.

—Dr. Carolyn Orr is the chief agriculture and rural policy analystat CSG.

10 Change Drivers—RuralContinued from page 15



conferencecalendarThis calendar lists meetings as designated by CSG’s Annual Meeting

Committee. For details of a meeting, call the number listed. “CSG/” denotesaffiliate organizations of CSG. Visit www.csg.org for updates and more extensive listings.

Other meetings have value to state officials. Purchase a meeting listing by calling1 (800) 800-1910 or by e-mailing [email protected]. Announce your meetings to thou-sands in the state government market through an advertisement, a Web listing, or abanner ad in In the News, CSG’s weekly electronic newsletter. Get your free sub-scription to In the News at www.csg.org.

April 2005

April 6–8 CSG/National Youth Court Center: Youth Court ProfessionalDevelopment Institute—New York, NY. Contact the National YouthCourt Center at (859) 244-8193 or [email protected] or visitwww.youthcourt.net

April 8–9 CSG-WEST/Border Legislative Conference—San Diego, CA.Contact Edgar Ruiz at (916) 553-4423 or [email protected]

April 30–May 4 CSG/NASTD–Technology Professionals Serving State Govern-ment Eastern Region Seminar—Burlington, VT—Wyn-dhamBurlington. Contact Karen Britton at (859) 244-8187 or [email protected]

May 2005

May 1–5 CSG/National Association of State Treasurers Southern StateTreasurers & National Association of Unclaimed PropertyAdministrators Annual Conference—Point Clear, AL—GrandHotel Marriott. Contact Adnee Hamilton at (859) 244-8174 [email protected]

May 2–4 CSG/National Youth Court Center:Youth Court ImplementationTraining Seminar—Anaheim, CA. Contact the National YouthCourt Center at (859) 244-8193 or [email protected] or visitwww.youthcourt.net

May 14–17 CSG/NASTD Midwestern Region Seminar—Des Moines, IA—Des Moines Marriott. Contact Karen Britton at (859) 244-8187 [email protected]

May 22–25 CSG/National Association of State Treasurers LegislativeConference—Washington, D.C.—Willard Inter-Continental Hotel.Contact Adnee Hamilton at (859) 244-8174 or [email protected]

June 2005

June 4–8 CSG/NASTD Western Region Seminar—Salt Lake City, UT—Hilton Salt Lake City Center. Contact Karen Britton at (859) 244-8187 or [email protected]

June 5–8 CSG Spring National Committee and Task Force Meetings—LakeTahoe, CA—Resort at Squaw Creek. Contact Wanda Hines at (859)244-8103 or [email protected]

June 11–15 CSG/NASTD Southern Region Summer Seminar—Nashville,TN—Renaissance Hotel. Contact Karen Britton at (859) 244-8187or [email protected]

June 19–22 CSG/National Association of State Treasurers Midwestern &Western State Treasurers Conference—Rapid City, SD—Rushmore Plaza Holiday Inn. Contact Adnee Hamilton at (859)244-8174 or [email protected]

June 25–29 CSG/National Association of State Facilities Administrators/National Association of State Chief Administrators Joint AnnualConference—Phoenix, AZ—Ritz Carlton. Contact Marcia Stone at(859) 244-8181 or [email protected]

July 2005

July 8–12 CSG/Midwestern Legislative Conference 11th Annual BowhayInstitute for Legislative Leadership Development—Madison, WI—

Fluno Center for Executive Education.Contact Laura Tomaka at (630)810-0210 or [email protected]

July 16–19 National Governors Association Annual Meeting—Des Moines, IA.Contact Susan Dotchin at (202) 624-5327 or [email protected]

July 16–20 CSG/National Association of State Personnel Executives AnnualMeeting—Denver, CO—Westin Tabor Center Downtown.Contact Leslie Scott at (859) 244-8182 or [email protected]

July 23–27 CSG/National Association of Government Labor OfficialsSummer Conference—Portland, ME—The Eastland Park. ContactMelinda Glazer at (202) 624-5460 or [email protected]

July 24–28 CSG/National Association of State Treasurers Northeast State Treasurers and College Savings Plan Network AnnualConference—Baltimore, MD—Renaissance Harborplace Ho-tel. Contact Adnee Hamilton at (859) 244-8174 [email protected]

July 24–27 CSG/American Probation and Parole Association 30th AnnualTraining Institute—New York, NY—Marriott Marquis Hotel. ContactKris Chappell at (859) 244-8024 or [email protected]

July 25–28 CSG/Eastern Regional Conference Annual Meeting—Uncasville,CT—Mohegan Sun. Contact Pamela Stanley at (212) 482-2320 [email protected]

July 26–30 CSG/National Lieutenant Governors Association Annual Meeting—Waikiki Beach, HI—Hawaii Hilton Resort. Contact Julia Hurst at(859) 244-8111 or [email protected]

July 30–Aug. 3 CSG/Southern Legislative Conference Annual Meeting—Mobile,AL.Contact Nai Vienthongsuk at (404) 633-1866 or [email protected]

July 31–Aug. 3 CSG/Midwestern Legislative Conference 60th Annual Meeting—Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada—Delta Regina Hotel. Contact MikeMcCabe at (630) 810-0210 or [email protected]

August 2005

Aug. 12–14 CSG/National Association of State Election Directors SummerConference—Beverly Hills,CA—Hotel TBA.Contact Melinda Glazerat (202) 624-5460 or [email protected].

Aug. 14–21 National Conference of State Legislatures Annual Meeting—Seattle,WA.Visit www.ncsl.org

Aug. 28–Sept. 1 CSG/National Emergency Management Association AnnualConference—Anchorage,AK—Hilton Anchorage.Visit www.nemaweb.org

Aug. 28–30 CSG/Southern Governors' Association Annual Meeting—Greens-boro, GA—Ritz Carlton Lodge at Reynolds Plantation. Contact LizPurdy at (202) 624-5897 or [email protected]

September 2005

Sept. 11–14 CSG-WEST Western Legislative Conference Annual Meeting—Portland, OR—Hilton Portland & Executive Tower. Contact CherylDuvauchelle at (916) 553-4423 or [email protected]

Sept. 12–14 CSG/Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision AnnualBusiness Meeting—Phoenix, AX—Pointe South Mountain Resort.Contact Kelli Price at (859) 244-8235 or [email protected]

Sept. 18-22 CSG/National Association of State Treasurers and State DebtManagement Network Annual Conference—Lake Tahoe, NV—Hyatt Regency. Contact Adnee Hamilton at (859) 244-8174 [email protected] or visit www.nast.net

Sept. 24-29 CSG Henry Toll Fellowship Program—Lexington, KY. ContactAmanda Mays at (859) 244-8236 or [email protected]

November 2005

Nov. 15–19 CSG-WEST Western Legislative Academy—Colorado Springs,CO—Cheyenne Mountain Resort. Contact Cheryl Duvauchelle at(916) 553-4423 or [email protected].



timelinelthough the federal government tends to get more attention, stateofficials are often on the front lines of cutting-edge trends andissues. On the other hand, sometimes in the community of stategovernments, the more things change, the more they stay thesame. In print since 1958, State News (formerly State GovernmentNews) has chronicled many of the changes … and continuities.

Here’s what we reported on:

40 Years Ago—March 1965Battered Child Syndrome

In February 1965, the Arkansas Legislature adopted a lawrequiring medical personnel to report cases of child abuse to theproper authorities. According to State Government News, suchlaws were unknown in 1960, but by the end of 1964, at least 23states had adopted them “to counteract what has come to be calledthe ‘battered child syndrome’—physical abuse of babies by theirparents.” Similar measures were introduced in almost all otherstates in 1965.

Arkansas’ law was based on a model act adopted in 1964 byCSG’s Committee of State Officials on Suggested StateLegislation.

25 Years Ago—March 1980Federal Financing of Abortions

In February 1980, two federal courts ruled that the federal“Hyde Amendment” was unconstitutional. The original amend-ment, first passed in 1976, banned Medicaid reimbursement forabortions unless they were necessary to save the woman’s life. Asubsequent version passed in 1978 allowed reimbursement if apregnancy was the result of rape or incest. Before the amendment,according to the magazine, Medicaid funded approximately250,000 abortions a year. In 1978, there were fewer than 3,000.

On February 20, 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a stay issuedagainst the Hyde Amendment by a U.S. judge in New York, whichmeant that states could no longer refuse to pay their share ofMedicaid financing for legally necessary abortions. Four monthslater, however, the Supreme Court ruled in Harris v. McRae thatthe original version of the Hyde Amendment was constitutional.Some version of it has been part of federal law ever since.

10 Years Ago—March 1995Fiscal Fantasy

Hal Hovey, the late editor of State Budget & Tax News and StatePolicy Reports, warned elected officials who campaigned on cut-ting government not to expect miracles from budget reform. “Thebad news is that most budget reforms will provide little help for

many newly elected officials who pledged they would solve thepuzzle of government,” he wrote. “Reforms won’t allow them tolower taxes without cutting important services or shifting costs tolocal taxes. Reforms aren’t giant steps to cheaper government. Thegood news is that budget reforms, by making state policy slightlymore comprehensible, can improve some decisions in day-to-daygoverning.”

Budget reforms, Hovey continued, “won’t ever solve the realproblem, which is that we voters want to spend more than wewant to pay in taxes, and insist on electing state officials whoagree with us. Their problem is to recognize that we have passedthe buck to them, that the buck can’t be further passed to magiccalled ‘budget reform,’ and to get on with the business of mak-ing tough decisions.”


The Council of State Governments is now accept-ing applications to the 2005 Henry Toll Program.

The Henry Toll Fellowship holds a national reputa-tion of being the most prestigious developmentprogram for state government officials. CSG’s missionfor the Toll Fellows Program is to equip talented statepolicymakers with the skills and strategies to meetthe leadership challenges these turbulent, dynamictimes demand.

Tolls are a very diverse group representing all threebranches of state government.

In its 19th year, the Toll Fellows Program will convene in Lexington, Ky. September 24–29, 2005.

Applications Now Available!

“Of all the leadership programs that I have been to, this has been the mostuseful to me. It is a program about personal growth. A program that develops me as a leader so that I maygo back and face those challenges athome more effectively.”

—Senate President Gene Therriault, AlaskaClass of 2004

If you have questions on the application process or the Toll Fellows Program, call Amanda Mays at(859) 244-8236 or send e-mail to [email protected].

Applications are available at www.csg.org, keyword “tolls” and must be postmarked by March 17, 2005 to be

considered for the 2005 Class.


05 State News March issue 2/18/05 5:05 PM Page...

Documents

Transcript of 05 State News March issue 2/18/05 5:05 PM Page...