Rep. Alicia Gregg, a Nashua Democrat, serves on the House Child and Family Law Committee, but outside of her work at the State House, she serves as a domestic abuse victims’ advocate and is a survivor herself. And she’s gravitated toward legislative issues surrounding protecting others from abuse.

“The one gaping hole that I continued to find on all the special committees I was on and the study committee was that we don’t have an updated definition of what child abuse and endangerment looks like in this state,” Gregg said.

She filed House Bill 553 to address that.

The bill, which is co-sponsored by a bipartisan group of lawmakers, would amend the legal definition of abuse and neglect, and create instructions for officials on dealing with such abuse.

For example, the bill adds, “Evidence of serious injury, broken bones, or unexplained injury to any non-ambulatory child, or frequent illnesses that are not being adequately addressed or controlled,” to the list of factors to be considered evidence of child abuse. The goal is to strengthen the existing language and make it more explicit.

Additionally, instructions to “determine if the preservation of family unity is in the best interest of the child” would become “presume that family unity is in the best interest of the child; but, if it is determined to not be in the child’s best interest, to secure placement in the least restrictive setting.” The bill also calls for “frequent” reviews of any child removed from the home with the goal of returning that child home as quickly as possible.

The bill also creates a legal definition for “trauma informed,” describing it as “a service system in which all parties involved recognize and respond to the impact of traumatic stress on those who have contact with the system …” Several other verbiage changes the bill calls for are aimed at making the language more “trauma informed.”

“I think too much of it (the language) was left to interpretation before with the courts,” she said. “And when you are dealing with families I think a lot of times there is a hesitancy to step in.”

Gregg said the goal of the changes isn’t necessarily to improve the prosecution of crimes against children, but rather to empower officials to intervene before that becomes necessary.

“That way DCYF (the Division for Children, Youth and Families) and the courts have extra tools in their belt to say, ‘This is when we need an intervention,’” she said. “And we can have the intervention before we have a crisis.”

Gregg added that the language changes were developed through a study committee this past summer that included Sen. Sharon Carson, a Londonderry Republican, and former Sen. Rebecca Whitley, a Hopkinton Democrat. That committee, she said, consulted New Hampshire child advocacy centers, Court Appointed Special Advocates – commonly known as CASA – and physicians who care for children, among others.

HB 553 isn’t the only proposed legislation tackling child abuse-related issues this session. 

House Bill 493, also sponsored by Gregg, seeks to require physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants who treat patients 18 or younger to complete child abuse and neglect education. That education, which would be at least two hours, must be accredited and recognized by the New Hampshire chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Meanwhile, a pair of Republican-backed bills seeks to push back against certain aspects of the state’s existing child abuse prosecution system.

House Bill 243, sponsored by Deerfield Republican Rep. James Spillane, targets people who file false reports of child abuse and neglect. The bill forbids people from making false reports “maliciously or with the intent to harm” and allows them to face criminal charges or civil suits for doing so. It also allows the name, address, or phone number of the person filing the report to be listed.

Spillane also sponsored a bill regarding false reports of abuse and neglect. House Bill 430 seeks to shorten the amount of time the Department of Health and Human Services holds onto records on “unfounded” reports of abuse or neglect. Presently, the department keeps records of unfounded abuse or neglect for 10 years from the date it was deemed unfounded, unless there is “reasonable concern” at which point it’s kept indefinitely. This legislation would change that 10-year period to three years. Once that time period elapses, the department destroys all electronic or paper records in the case.

Both Spillane’s bills are co-sponsored by fellow Republicans.

The House Child and Family Law Committee will take up HB 553 on Jan. 28 at 1:30 p.m., and HB 243 is scheduled for a hearing before the same committee on Jan. 21 at 3 p.m.

❗ Trump declares state of emergency at Southern Border
❗ NJ is home to 2.2 million immigrants
❗ Gov. Murphy declared NJ a ‘sanctuary state’

A showdown is likely between New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy and the Trump administration over immigration.

One of President Donald Trump’s first official actions after returning to the White House was to declare an emergency at the U.S. Southern border with Mexico.

It is the first step toward implementing the president’s promised mass deportation of immigrants in the U.S. illegally.

Trump has promised to deport up to one-million undocumented immigrants per year and use the U.S. military to accomplish his goal.

New Jersey could end up being a central battle ground between the anti-immigration policies of the Trump administration, and the pro-immigration policies of New Jersey.

New Jersey’s immigrant population

The Migration Policy Institute estimates New Jersey’s immigrant population at 2.2 million people.

That makes New Jersey home to one of the largest immigration populations in the United States.

Of that number, an estimated 475,00 are in the U.S. illegally.

Another 2,600 are children of undocumented parents. They are the so-called “dreamers” and are considered U.S. citizens under the 14th Amendment.

President Trump has indicated he could challenge birthright citizenship but eliminating it would likely require a repeal of the 14th Amendment by Congress.

New Jersey: A Sanctuary State

Prior to his re-election to a second term, Murphy vowed to make New Jersey a safe haven for undocumented immigrants.

“We’ll be a sanctuary – not just city – but state,” Murphy proclaimed.

In 2018, Murphy’s then-Attorney General Gurbir Grewal issued the Immigrant Trust Directive.

Under the directive, Murphy banned state and local police from cooperating with federal immigration authorities.

It also banned local and county jail facilities from housing individuals arrested by immigration agents. The cooperative agreements dated back to the Democratic Bill Clinton administration. In 1996 a law signed by President Clinton allowed local and state law enforcement to partner with the federal government for enforcement of immigration laws.

There have been several republican led efforts to repeal New Jersey’s Immigrant Trust Directive. All have failed.

Democrats in the legislature have introduced a bill that would codify the directive into actual state law, but the bill has been stalled in committee.

What happens now?

Immigrant rights groups have begun holding weekly meetings in an effort to educated migrants about their rights and what to do if immigration agents knock on the door.

Federal law supersedes any state law, but states cannot be compelled to cooperate with immigration agents.

New Jersey cannot, however, prevent teams of immigration agents from moving into the Garden State to round up undocumented individuals.

The recently passed Laken Riley Act would require federal authorities to detain migrants accused of theft and violent crimes.

Where these individuals could be held is still an issue of much debate in New Jersey. Gov. Murphy has banned immigration detention contracts with local and county jails, but that ban is being challenged in court.

Some have speculated the Trump administration could threaten to withhold federal aid to states that refuse to aid immigration agents in their enforcement actions.

Murphy has signaled he is willing to work with President Trump and has asked him to help end New York $9 congestion pricing toll.

“I will never back away from partnering with the Trump Administration where our priorities align,” Murphy said in his State of the State speech last week, “But just as importantly, I will never back down from defending our New Jersey values — if and when they are tested.”

Given Murphy’s and Trump’s vastly different positions on illegal immigration, the issue will surely test the relationship between the Statehouse and the White House.

Report a correction 👈 | 👉 Contact our newsroom

Twenty one states raised their minimum wages on Jan. 1, but Pennsylvania was not among them.

The minimum wage, the lowest hourly wage employers can legally pay, has remained unchanged at $7.25 an hour since 2010, when the federal minimum wage last increased.

That’s not for a lack of desire or effort to increase it over the last decade and a half. While the Democratic controlled House last year passed a measure to increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour, it died in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Pennsylvania Democrats say raising the wages of the commonwealth’s lowest-paid workers will again be at the top of their agenda in the 2025-2026 legislative session. 

“The fact that Pennsylvania’s minimum wage continues to be $7.25 an hour is just immoral,” House Majority Leader Matt Bradford (D-Montgomery) told reporters when the newly elected House convened for the first time on Jan. 7. 

“It’s unconscionable. I can’t imagine with the affordability crisis that we have in this commonwealth, that anyone thinks it’s appropriate to be paying someone $7.25 an hour,” he said.

Gov. Josh Shapiro also said increasing the minimum wage will be top of mind when he introduces his 2025-2026 budget proposal next month. Shapiro’s first two budgets included increases in the minimum wage.

“To strengthen the economy, we need to raise wages. We need to finally pass a minimum wage increase in Pennsylvania,” Shapiro said Wednesday at a news conference in Lycoming County.

“I’ve been for it for years, the House passed it two or three times, the Senate has yet to take it up.”

Nearly 68,000 Pennsylvania workers earned minimum wage or less in 2023, according to the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry’s Minimum Wage Advisory Board. Another 800,000 earned between $7.25 and $15 an hour. Those earning minimum wage or less were most likely to be female, white and between 20 and 24 years old, among other attributes.

Yanette Lathrop, senior researcher and policy analyst for the National Employment Law Project, said $7.25 an hour is a poverty wage in Pennsylvania and across the country. 

“Even for a single adult without children it’s not enough,” Lathrop said.

The United Way developed the ALICE (Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed) model to calculate living wages for families across the country. It estimates the minimum cost of housing, child care, food, transportation, health care and technology plus a 10% contingency fund.

Under that model a single full-time worker must earn between $13 and $19 an hour to survive financially in Pennsylvania. A family of four with two adults working full-time, a survival wage is between $16 and $23 an hour.

“The inaction in Pennsylvania and in Congress is essentially dooming the workers who earn the federal minimum wage to poverty,” Lathrop said.

In June 2023, the House passed a bill that would incrementally increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour over the next three years, with ongoing increases keyed to the consumer price index.

Although it received some bipartisan support, with votes from two House Republicans, it was not considered in the GOP-led Senate.

Bradford called on Senate Republicans to make a counter offer.

“We’ve shown what we can pass. What can you pass on the minimum wage? Or do you actually just agree with keeping it at $7.25, an hour? I think that’s a conversation that needs to be out in the public,” Bradford said. 

Senate Majority Leader Joe Pittman (R-Indiana) said in 2023 and repeated last week that although Senate Republicans are open to discussing a “reasonable adjustment” to the minimum wage, $15 an hour is a non-starter.

Pittman said the General Assembly’s focus should instead be on creating more opportunities for businesses and workers.

“The minimum wage debate fails to recognize the importance of maximum wages, which are what actually allow families to grow and prosper across the Commonwealth,” Pittman said in a statement to the Capital-Star. “I continue to struggle with the lack of focus our friends in the House place on initiatives to foster maximum wage job opportunities, such as those that come from the responsible use of our God given natural resources.”

Pittman added, “Until our friends in the House understand a more reasonable number must be put on the table, there is little to deliberate.”

Among the reasons Senate Republicans have opposed a $15 an hour minimum wage is the impact it could have on nonprofit organizations that deliver essential social services, Pittman said.

For those organizations, wages for care workers present a complicated problem in balancing the ability to deliver services to as many clients as possible with the moral obligation to pay a living wage, Anne Gingerich, executive director of the Pennsylvania Association of Nonprofit Organizations, said.

“We don’t want to send our folks to get public benefits like SNAP or Medicaid,” Gingerich said, adding that many nonprofit organizations have struggled to retain workers as other employers have offered higher wages.

Child care providers and other groups have lobbied successfully for more state funding to support higher wages for workers. The 2024-2025 state budget included $280 million to raise wages for direct support professionals who provide individual care for autistic and intellectually disabled people.

“Our workforce is the most valued asset of all nonprofit organizations,” Gingerich said. “We have long taken the stance that we support efforts that would lead to sustainable wages for those who work for nonprofit organizations and those we serve.”

Senate Minority Leader Jay Costa (D-Allegheny) said the Republican position doesn’t dampen Democrats’ sense of urgency to increase  minimum wages and he’s hopeful that the parties can reach an agreement on a higher hourly wage and how soon to implement it.

Pennsylvania has lagged behind other states in the region as each of its neighbors has increased minimum wages above $7.25 an hour. Only West Virginia and Ohio remain below $15 an hour and New York leads the group at $15.50 an hour.

That puts employers seeking a stable and reliable workforce at a disadvantage when workers can make considerably more at the same job by crossing the border.

“The ball is really in the court of my colleagues in the Senate Republican caucus,” Costa said, adding that he has had no recent conversations with Republican leaders on the topic. “We’re hopeful that we’ll be able to sit down among the four caucuses and work out a pathway to a higher minimum wage.”