North Dakota

More Republicans back spending on child care, saying it’s an economic issue

Published

2 years ago

February 10, 2024

More Republicans back spending on child care, saying it’s an economic issue

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) – Like a lot of mothers, North Dakota state Rep. Emily O’Brien struggled to find infant care when her daughter Lennon was born in 2019. So O’Brien, a Republican who represents the Grand Forks region, brought Lennon along to meetings with local leaders and constituents.

O’Brien had her second daughter, Jolene, in 2022, not long before legislators were due to meet. Wanting more time to bond before returning to work, O’Brien brought the newborn with her to Bismarck, where she snoozed through Gov. Doug Burgum’s State of the State address on her mother’s desk.

Not long after, O’Brien persuaded her colleagues to back a plan to invest $66 million in child care, an unprecedented sum for a state that had, like others with Republican leadership, long resisted such spending. But O’Brien argued it could help the state’s workforce shortage by helping more parents go to work and attracting new families to the state.

“It was definitely not, you know, an easy sell, because this is probably somewhere where you don’t want the government to get involved,” O’Brien said. “But it’s a workforce solution. We have people that are willing and able to work, but finding child care was an obstacle.”

Republicans historically have been lukewarm about using taxpayer money for child care, even as they have embraced prekindergarten. But the pandemic, which left many child care providers in crisis, underscored how precarious the industry is and how many working parents rely on it.

In 2021, Congress passed $24 billion of pandemic aid for child care businesses, an unprecedented federal investment. Now, as that aid dries up, Republican state lawmakers across the country are embracing plans to support child care — and even making it central to their policy agendas.

To be sure, the largest investments in child care have come not from Republicans but from Democratic lawmakers. In New Mexico, the state is covering child care for most children under 5 using a trust funded by oil and natural gas production. In Vermont, Democratic state lawmakers overrode a Republican governor’s veto to pass a payroll tax hike to fund child care subsidies.

Red states are following suit with more modest — but nonetheless historic — investments in child care.

In Missouri, Republican Gov. Mike Parson has proposed spending nearly $130 million to help low-income families access child care once the pandemic relief money dries up and to create tax credits to support child care providers. The House passed the tax credit legislation Thursday with bipartisan support, sending it to the Senate.

Republican state Rep. Brenda Shields, who sponsored the tax credit bill, said she tells conservative colleagues that child care accessibility is vital to grow the state’s economy.

“Child care is a critical infrastructure, just like roads and bridges and ports and trains,” Shields said. “Businesses have been saying, ‘What are you doing about child care?’ So I’m trying to be part of the solution.”

Missouri’s number of child-care facilities is down 14%, and the 167,000 slots for children is about 6,000 fewer than before the coronavirus pandemic in December 2019, according to data from the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Elsewhere, Louisiana last year approved an unprecedented $52 million for child care subsidies for low-income families. Alabama provided $17 million worth of incentives for child care providers to get licensed. And Texas voters approved a property tax cut for some day care centers.

More Republicans have pledged to tackle the child care crisis this year. In Missouri, Senate President Pro Tem Caleb Rowden, a Republican, said he hoped the Statehouse would focus less on culture war issues — like criminalizing drag shows and censoring library books — and more on expanding access to child care and school choice. Nebraska and Indiana have both pitched programs to make child care free for child care workers. Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican who ran on a conservative education agenda, pitched boosting the state’s child care and education spending by $180 million.

Child care advocates say the investments are not enough and called on Congress to authorize a new round of money to keep the child care industry afloat. Already, day care centers report they are raising tuition and losing workers because they are no longer receiving federal subsidies. Some have folded.

GOP resistance to child care spending dates to the 1970s, when President Richard Nixon vetoed a bill to establish a national child care system, invoking fears of communism and saying it had “family-weakening implications.” Many of those arguments persist. Some conservative lawmakers have panned child care funding as ” socialist,” arguing that people who can’t afford day care should not have children. Two years ago, an Idaho state lawmaker apologized after he opposed federal early childhood money because it encouraged women to ” come out of the home and let others raise their children.”

The new and expanded funding reflects a growing sentiment that the nation’s broken child care system will not be fixed without public support. Families have long faced issues finding affordable, reliable child care. But during the pandemic, many child care workers left the industry for better-paying jobs, and some child care centers closed for good, exacerbating the problem.

Child care is a labor-heavy enterprise — in some states, one person may only care for four infants at once. Even before the pandemic, child care providers often had razor-thin margins. When families kept their children home during the pandemic, many day cares were barely hanging on.

Many parts of the country do not have enough child care providers to offer slots for all children. Even when slots are available, the cost is out of reach for many families. It’s a problem that disproportionately affects women, who are typically the primary caregivers for children.

But a lack of child care access is also keeping people from the workforce, contributing to a labor shortage in many states. Many industries have started lobbying for states to invest more in child care. One of the strongest proponents is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation, which surveyed a dozen states and estimated they lost billions of dollars in economic activity because of child care gaps.

Resistance persists in many parts of the country. While North Dakota passed ground-breaking measures to support child care, Republican Gov. Kristi Noem in South Dakota said she opposed proposals to spend state dollars helping families pay for child care.

“The one thing … that I’m not wiling to do is to directly subsidize child care for families,” Noem recently told KWAT News in Watertown, South Dakota. “I just don’t think it’s the government’s job to pay or to raise people’s children for them.”

Source link

North Dakota

ND Supreme Court Justice Daniel Crothers retiring, stepping onto new path

Published

12 hours ago

February 27, 2026

Press Room

ND Supreme Court Justice Daniel Crothers retiring, stepping onto new path

BISMARCK, N.D. (KFYR) – The North Dakota Court System threw a reception for a retiring member of the state Supreme Court.

Justice Daniel Cothers is leaving after serving for more than 20 years.

He plans to step down on Feb. 28.

Before Crothers became a judge, he served as a lawyer and as president of the State Bar Association of North Dakota.

Mark Friese is set to replace Crothers starting March 9.

“He knows what is important and what to keep focused on. Justice Friese will be an exceptional replacement to me on the bench,” said Crothers.

Crothers plans to keep up on teaching gigs and spend time at his family’s farm as he steps into retirement.

Source link

North Dakota

North Dakota ambulance providers losing money on every run, according to survey

Published

24 hours ago

February 26, 2026

Press Room

North Dakota ambulance providers losing money on every run, according to survey

By: Michael Achterling

FARGO (North Dakota Monitor) – North Dakota ambulance service providers lost nearly $500 on average for every patient transported to a medical facility last year, according to a survey.

The recent survey of three dozen providers in the state, conducted by PWW Advisory Group, was the result of a study created by House Bill 1322 passed during the 2025 legislative session. The group presented the results to the Legislature’s interim Emergency Response Services Committee on Wednesday.

The average revenue generated from an ambulance transport was about $1,100 during 2025, but the expenses were nearly $1,600, said Matt Zavadsky, an EMS and mobile health care consultant with PWW, based in Pennsylvania.

“They are losing money every time they respond to a call,” Zavadsky said during the meeting. “That financial loss has to be made up, typically, by local tax subsidies, fundraisers, bake sales, or all too often, service reductions to try and match expenses with the revenue they can generate.”

He said the problem cannot be fixed by billing reform alone because the revenue generated isn’t enough to fund the cost of readiness, such as personnel, equipment and supplies, among other items.

The survey highlighted 74% of ambulance provider expenses went to personnel costs, but equipment costs have also increased in recent years.

Zavadsky said survey respondents plan to invest about $12.9 million into vehicle and equipment purchases over the next five years, averaging to about $358,000 per provider. However, the cost of a new ambulance has risen to between $275,000 to $480,000 per vehicle. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, a new ambulance could cost up to $250,000, he said.

There are more than 100 ambulance service providers in North Dakota. The 36 survey respondents represented a diverse group of providers from city and county services to district-owned, hospital-based and private providers, he said. The average patient transport distance is 34 miles, according to the survey.

Zavadsky said the survey respondents reported 53% of their total revenue was generated from fees for service with the remaining 47% coming from local tax subsidies, state grants and other fundraising.

“What you guys are experiencing in North Dakota and what is happening in the local communities … is not the fault of the local communities, not the fault of the state, this is just our new normal,” Zavadsky said.

Rep. Todd Porter, R-Mandan, owner of Metro-Area Ambulance Service which serves Morton and Burleigh counties, said Medicare patients reimburse ambulance providers at a much lower rate than private insurance and Medicaid patients. He added Medicare patients make up about 60% of the call volume in the Bismarck-Mandan area.

“If we’re being underpaid for 60% of our call volume, then we have to make it up some place,” Porter said.

He said some providers can make up that difference in reimbursement with tax dollars, but not all providers have that option.

“We do other contracted work for nursing homes, hospitals, funeral homes in order to make up that difference,” Porter said. “This is a federal government problem. This is a CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) problem that we’ve known about for years.”

Porter also said ambulance services are not reimbursed for responding to a call with a Medicare patient that doesn’t require a transport to a hospital. According to the survey, about 17% of all ambulance calls don’t require transport to a medical facility.

The survey also showed about 2,300 of the nearly 33,600 patient transports billed last year ended up in collections after being more than 90 days delinquent, totalling $2.7 million, Zavadsky said. The average total of a claim sent to collections was about $1,100.

Zavadsky estimated the total of unpaid claims for more than 100 providers across North Dakota was about $5.8 million in 2025. Some providers don’t have procedures to pursue delinquent billing in collections, he said.

Rep. Jim Grueneich, R-Ellendale, chair of the committee, said the committee will take a deeper look at the data presented on Wednesday and may have recommendations, and possible draft legislation, to address the issue in the 2027 legislative session.

Source link

North Dakota

Judge orders Greenpeace to pay $345m over Dakota Access pipeline protest

Published

1 day ago

February 26, 2026

Press Room

Judge orders Greenpeace to pay 5m over Dakota Access pipeline protest

A North Dakota judge has said he will order Greenpeace to pay damages expected to total $345m in connection with protests against the Dakota Access oil pipeline from nearly a decade ago, a figure the environmental group contends it cannot pay.

In court papers filed Tuesday, Judge James Gion said he would sign an order requiring several Greenpeace entities to pay the judgment to pipeline company Energy Transfer. He set that amount at $345m last year in a decision that reduced a jury’s damages by about half, but his latest filing did not specify a final amount.

The long-awaited order is expected to launch an appeal process in the North Dakota supreme court from both sides.

Last year, a nine-person jury found Netherlands-based Greenpeace International, Greenpeace USA and funding arm Greenpeace Fund Inc liable for defamation and other claims brought by Dallas-based Energy Transfer and subsidiary Dakota Access.

The jury found Greenpeace USA liable on all counts, including conspiracy, trespass, nuisance and tortious interference. The other two entities were found liable for some of the claims.

The lawsuit stems from the pipeline protests in 2016 and 2017, when thousands of people demonstrated and camped near the project’s Missouri River crossing upstream of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation. The tribe has long opposed the pipeline as a threat to its water supply.

Damages totaled $666.9m, divided in different amounts among the three Greenpeace organizations before the judge reduced the judgment. Greenpeace USA’s share of that judgment was $404m.

Energy Transfer previously said it intends to appeal the reduced damages, calling the original jury findings and damages “lawful and just”. The Associated Press contacted the company for comment on the judge’s Tuesday action.

In a financial filing made late last year, Greenpeace USA said it does not have the money to pay the $404m ordered by the jury “or to continue normal operations if the judgment is enforced”. The group said it had cash and cash equivalents of $1.4m and total assets of $23m as of 31 December 2024.

Greenpeace declined to comment on the judge’s filing, but Greenpeace USA interim general counsel Marco Simons reiterated that the organization could not afford the judgment.

“As mid-sized nonprofits, it has always been clear that we would not have the ability to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in damages,” Simons said Wednesday.

Simons added that the case is far from over and expressed optimism about the group’s planned appeal.

“These claims never should have reached a jury, and there are many possible legal grounds for appeal – including a lack of evidence to support key findings and valid concerns about the possibility of ensuring fairness,” Simons said.

Greenpeace has said the lawsuit is meant to use the courts to silence activists and critics and chill first amendment rights. The pipeline company has said the lawsuit is about Greenpeace not following the law, not free speech.

At trial, an attorney for Energy Transfer said Greenpeace orchestrated plans to stop the pipeline’s construction, including organizing protesters, sending blockade supplies and making untrue statements about the project.

Attorneys for the Greenpeace entities said there was no evidence for the oil company’s claims, and that Greenpeace employees had little or no involvement in the protests and the organizations had nothing to do with Energy Transfer’s delays in construction or refinancing.

Source link