New Laws in 2024 That Impact Your Wallet, Your Driving, and are Just Bizarre

TOPICS DISCUSSED

  • New Laws: What a Crappy Idea

  • New Laws: It’s About Time

  • New Laws: Old-Fashioned Good Work

  • New Laws: Interesting Experiments

  • Outside of Politics: Teaching Cursive Handwriting

Thank you for being a part of our community! We couldn't do it without you. To support the show, please subscribe to our Premium content on our Patreon page or Apple Podcasts Subscriptions, or share the word about our work in your circles. Sign up for our newsletter or follow us on Instagram to keep up with everything happening in the world of Pantsuit Politics. You can find information and links for all our sponsors on our website.

EPISODE RESOURCES

GUNS

WORKPLACE

CRIME AND PUBLIC SAFETY

HEALTHCARE

CHILDREN AND EDUCATION

CONSUMER PROTECTIONS

DRIVING

This podcast and every episode of it are wholly owned by Pantsuit Politics LLC and are protected by US and international copyright, trademark, and other intellectual property laws. We hope you'll listen to it, love it, and share it with other people, but not with large language models or machines and not for commercial purposes. Thanks for keeping it nuanced with us.

TRANSCRIPT

Sarah [00:00:07] This is Sarah Stewart Holland.  

Beth [00:00:09] This is Beth Silvers.  

Sarah [00:00:10] You're listening to Pantsuit Politics.  

Beth [00:00:12] Where we take a different approach to the news.  

[00:00:14] Music Interlude  

[00:00:29] So glad you're here for a new episode of Pantsuit Politics. We take our commitment to a different approach to the news very seriously. So today we are going to step back from the presidential race. We're going to step back from Congress. We're going to step back from all of the amorphous foreign policy things that are in the news, to talk about what state legislatures have been up to. A bunch of new laws went into effect across the country this year, and we're going to talk about those laws because they are going to affect people's lives in very real, concrete ways. We're going to discuss everything from minimum wage laws to laws about books and guns. And then Outside of Politics, I'm really excited about this. [Drum roll] We're going to talk about California's law on cursive handwriting, because I know so many people who are very passionate about cursive handwriting. So I'm excited for this discussion and to learn about all these very tangible things, because so much of what we've been discussing lately feels way out there in the ether to me.  

Sarah [00:01:27] Well, and I just think it's important to call out state legislators who are actually doing their work. Because while we talk about state legislators that are passing laws and trying to address problems, there are some that are just at a stalemate. Looking at you, Oregon. We're not going to be talking about Oregon today because they didn't get a lot done because they're just at stalemates. They've just shut down. And so it feels even more important to talk about places that are really working towards solutions for their constituents and their citizens. Before we start that conversation, we want to wish a very happy birthday to our Director of Community Engagement and Executive Producer, Maggie Penton. Maggie does a lot here at Pantsuit Politics. That's an understatement. She coordinates much of our advertising. She works on our Friday newsletter. She stays in touch with listeners on Discord and Patreon and Facebook and Instagram, and she manages our social media. And that is not a job for the faint of heart. Maggie is kind and thoughtful and such a gifted writer and a caring human, and we are so lucky to work with her. And we're touched that she and her husband, Daniel, and their wonderful daughters continue to be executive producers of Pantsuit politics because they are so committed to what we do here. So happy birthday, Maggie. We are so glad you were born.  

Beth [00:02:36] Happy birthday Maggie. Next up, we're going to talk about the good, the bad, the bizarre of laws that have gone into effect in 2024.  

[00:02:43] Music Interlude.  

Sarah [00:02:53] Beth, last year we got the loveliest message from a listener who was like, yes, there are bozos in the state legislatures, but they're not all bozos. And you can also focus on the legislative staff at so many of these state capitals that are doing good, honest, productive, effective work. And we are going to get to those people, we promise. But first, we are going to have to talk about the bozos, like some in Arkansas, for example.  

Beth [00:03:17] Arkansas has passed what the state calls the prohibiting unemployment claimants from ghosting Employers Act of 2023. Unemployment claims will now be denied to anybody who ghost an employer. It is what it sounds like. If you don't respond to a job offer or show up to a scheduled job interview, your unemployment claim will be denied. Now, I kind of get the appeal of this.  

Sarah [00:03:41] I do, I get it.  

Beth [00:03:42] I get the kind of commonsense appeal to this. The piece of me that made me identify as conservative and vote Republican a long time, though, would say back to that common sense appeal, government cannot fix everything. I agree, it sucks that people ghost employers. It sucks that employers ghost people and they do that an awful lot too. Do we want to ask the government to pass a law penalizing employers who don't respond to our resume? Because that's as dumb as this idea. This is just one more, I think, stay out of it. Yes, it's a problem, but you can't fix all the problems through laws.  

Sarah [00:04:22] It sniffs of wanting to punish people who are applying for unemployment. Like that's a theme.  

Beth [00:04:28] Kicking people while they're down is the situation here.  

Sarah [00:04:31] Yes. Let's just go through and make it even more difficult for people to apply for unemployment, because you just really don't think they should be applying for unemployment. You think they should go out and get a job. Like it's just that simple for everybody. It just is deliberately obtuse and reductive and it's such a bad idea. It's like can be contained in the title of the bill. That's a good sign you're on the wrong track. You know what I'm saying?  

Beth [00:04:51] Also, how on earth is this going to get enforced? If you try to enforce this, you're going to spend more time and money dealing with that than just paying the claims and moving on with your life.  

Sarah [00:05:03] Yeah, because who's going to do this? The employer who's looking for an employee they have time to go report that this person ghosted on them? Give me a break.  

Beth [00:05:10] And then how is that investigated? What if the employee says, no, I didn't? And then what are we going to do? We're going to have a whole hearing about that? It's terrible.  

Sarah [00:05:16] Arkansas is a bad idea.  

Beth [00:05:19] Okay, let's talk about the great state of Texas, which we love. We spend a lot of time in Texas.  

Sarah [00:05:23] We love Texas. We do.  

Beth [00:05:24] So many wonderful listeners in Texas. And they also get frustrated with symbolic gestures like the banning of diversity, equity and inclusion programs that Texas has done for publicly funded universities. Again, I would call this government overreach.  

Sarah [00:05:45] Well, they're following Florida's lead, who passed a legislation very similar to this. And again, it feels punitive. It feels like we disagree and we don't like it. And so what can we do to make your life hard? And that just does not feel like the highest and best use of a state legislature [inaudible]. Call me crazy.  

Beth [00:06:07] I understand some of the backlash to DEI programs. I have a lot of thoughts about that for my time doing H.R. work. But again, the primary thought is, I don't believe that we all agree on what constitutes a diversity, equity and inclusion initiative. And I don't believe that any state legislature is so in touch with the needs on specific public universities, campuses that it knows best that these programs, all of them, anything that could fall under that rubric, are conclusively not needed there. That is so silly. I can't even emphasize how silly that is to me.  

Sarah [00:06:45] Yeah. Again, it's not even DEI, I think some of these legislators are also just mad at universities, and so they're just-- I wouldn't say nit picking, but definitely like aggressively finding ways to attack the universities, to attack their mission, to say like you're not doing a good job, etc..  

Beth [00:07:04] It's so insidious, though, because the critique of wokeism and cancel culture, I believe, originally was how punitive it was. We are punishing people too hard for things. We are using the power of private companies and the power of social media, and we're shaming people. And you should not be that punitive about words that people say or attitudes they have. But now we have the power of the state being used in a very blunt force, punitive way to say we are anti-woke and anti cancel culture. It is such a disproportionate response to the problem that was being described. And Texas, I give you an F on this one. It's a bad one.  

Sarah [00:07:55] Well and I feel that way about so many of the sort of red state. Now, we're going to get to some blue state legislation on this. We think it's a bad idea. But the book banning legislation, a lot of the gender affirming care legislation, it doesn't feel like you're violating our principles of government. It just feels like we don't like it, so we're going to punish it.  

Beth [00:08:20] Well, let's do the blue state side of this. California. I love you, California. I do love our people in California. And this too I think is really silly and an inappropriate use of government. California has now said that if you are a large retailer, you must provide gender neutral sections of children's toys or child care products. This is intended to reduce gender stereotypes at a young age and prevent price disparities in items marketed for girls. My friends, again, we cannot solve everything with laws. We just cannot solve everything. The market will speak on this. Stay out of it.  

Sarah [00:09:02] Because you, as a mother of girls, I'm sure are highly invested in not paying more for girl toys.  

Beth [00:09:07] Yes. And that is what I don't even know. What is a girl toy? I would not agree with everybody on this, and I don't mind to just simply walk myself over to the boy section. I've bought many boys t-shirts. I've bought many boys books. There is no pit in which I fall as a parent if I just decide for myself to go cross over. So I don't need a law to be helpful with this. And I think again, this just provokes that reaction on the other side. How long are we going to do this? How long are we going to do this?  

Sarah [00:09:42] Yeah. The least encouraging sort of sets of laws when we were looking over these where it was like the red state did this or the blue state did this. And I thought, oh, it's so depressing. I think in the spirit of states is the laboratories of democracy, eventually you see what works and what doesn't across states. But sometimes it doesn't even matter. It's not like you can go before red state voters and say, hey, this law didn't do what you wanted it to do. It doesn't work like that. I wish it did, desperately. It just doesn't. And so I think with California, they do feel enormous pressure because their economy is so big to exert influence of this type. There's a really good law that's about recycling coming from California that I'm very encouraged about. I don't know if it's new this year, but I read about it last year where it's like they can't put recycling labels on plastics that nobody recycles because it confuses the consumer. It makes people feel like they're doing something good when really they're just buying single use plastic. And because California is going to require this, it's not worth it for people to do it two different ways. And so that probably will change the way that plastic is labeled across the country. That's a good use of their power, because I think that recycling labels is obviously a really fertile ground for government regulation and clarity and transparency for the consumer. Great use of your power. This, however, much more amorphous. I don't think to a certain extent we're going to regulate our way out of a cultural problem like this. Not to say all gender stereotyping is a cultural problem. There are some regulations that address that. But this one I don't know. I don't know, guys.  

Beth [00:11:24] I just think that if you are thinking about legislation involving toys and physical safety is not involved, then probably you're off target on the best use of your limited time as a legislator.  

Sarah [00:11:39] Now, Beth, speaking of their limited time, when I suggested well let's talk the ones that are a bad ideas, you were like, I would like another category. Not that it was just a crappy idea, but that it was a huge waste of time.  

Beth [00:11:52] Yes.  

Sarah [00:11:53] So this is the new category for you.  

Beth [00:11:54] This is the new category. And this is where I would like to talk about the book laws.  

Sarah [00:12:00] Bless.  

[00:12:00] And we have two. Again, we've got the red response and the blue response represented here right next door to each other. Indiana has made it easier for parents to challenge books in school libraries. I bet there was already a process for that. I also hope that adults are able to go have a conversation at school.  

Sarah [00:12:20] And let me tell you something. If somebody has got to be in their bonnet about a book, no process is going to stop them. You know what I mean? They don't need an easier process. It doesn't matter how difficult it is, they'll follow it through if they've got to be in their bonnet about some stupid book. That's my life experience. Just saying. 

Beth [00:12:34]  And I would also put that in the waste of time category to ever be in your bone about a book. You don't want the book, leave it on the shelf. It's real.  

Sarah [00:12:43] Word.  

Beth [00:12:43] But, anyway, next door Illinois has now blocked state funding for public libraries that ban or restrict books.  

Sarah [00:12:50] Oh, goodness.  

Beth [00:12:51] Guys, Stop it. Stop this madness about the books. I was just reading an article from our school. A parent challenged a book in our library, and the school principal heard the challenge and decided the books should stay on the shelf. And the parent takes it to the school board, and there's a whole thing. And now the elementary school librarian has to go talk in front of the school board about this book. I just look at all of it and I think, we have one precious opportunity to breathe and walk through this world as humans, why would we use it this way?  

Sarah [00:13:25] Yeah, especially books. I am pretty careful about what my children watch. Pretty careful. We were watching the animated movies till Griffin was like 12 as family movie time. But a book, I don't really-- go ahead.  

Beth [00:13:41] And it's not to be dismissive, books are powerful. Books are wonderful. Art matters. Literature matters, but there's just such a lot of it out there that I promise you can find what works for you and you can leave what doesn't. And there will be things in the doesn't category and that's cool too. I just want us to quit this.  

Sarah [00:14:01] Well, it just seems like in 2024, with our information environment, it does seem like a particularly silly pursuit. However, the fact that we've been doing this for decades tells me it's never really about the book. I think about that scene in Field of Dreams, which I feel is the only thing that actually holds up in that weird old movie, where they're having the book banning assembly and his wife goes off about it. And I thought, this is not new. It will continue. We will have AI running the world and people will still want to ban books because it's not about the book. And because it's not about the book, any laws or procedures or legislation is not going to get at it in any real way, I don't think.  

Beth [00:14:42] I don't love your tone about a beloved baseball movie, but other than that, I agree with everything you said.  

Sarah [00:14:45] Have you watched it recently? It's weird, man. My kids are like, what is going on in this movie?  

Beth [00:14:52] It's weird, but it is beloved and it is classic. All right, let's move on. Let's move on now to the good work. Okay. You have labeled this category about time.  

Sarah [00:15:04] Yes.  

Beth [00:15:04] I have a little bit of disagreement with you on I think the first topic. We have minimum wage increases. We have many minimum wage increases and they are all over the place. So about half of US states are increasing their minimum wage this year. Most of those increases will take effect on January 1st. I do want to mention Nevada and Oregon. Oregon did do something. That's July 1st increase. And Florida it's a September 30th increase. But the highest one will be Washington D.C., at 1705 an hour, and then Washington State at 1628 an hour. That's at the state level. There are counties and municipalities that go higher. The biggest increase is $12 to $14 in Hawaii. So that's the word on minimum wage. Sarah, you I know have a lot to say about this, and so do I.  

Sarah [00:15:54] I don't know if I have a lot to say about it. I just think really the about time needs to come at the federal level because it's still like $7 and that's dumb. I think it's just something we all agree on. Like people need to make more money. I think the laws are probably silly because the reason these laws are passing, it's not that they're a moot point. They will hold people through when the labor market is not what it is right now. But the reason wages are increasing is because the labor market is tight and you have to compete for employees, and that's how you get wages up. But I don't mind taking that moment to raise the minimum wage so that when labor is not as competitive as it is right now, people don't get it stuck to them. Where they really don't have any sort of living wage to survive in. I know this is hard, but you know what else DC is? Freaking expensive to live in. It was 20 years ago when I lived there, and I'm sure it still is. So I think this is more reflective of the economic situation. But you put a minimum wage law on a referendum, it passes. People want to get paid more. It's no surprise there.  

Beth [00:16:54] And I want people to get paid more. I have no problem with people getting paid more. I have no problem even with the minimum wages increasing. I think we've talked about this before. There is no real conclusive economic definitive here's the right way to handle the minimum wage. What bugs me about this is I feel like we just keep layering on to a system that has some problems, instead of addressing the problems in the system. When you talk with people who oppose these increases, oftentimes it is because several different types of people make minimum wage, and we make no distinction among those types of people and the purpose for which they're being employed and the number of hours that they're working. I just feel like there are lots of different considerations around how people are paid, that we could start to be more innovative about this than we have been. I would like to see lots of issues around tipping addressed through these laws. I would like to see a conversation about workers with disabilities, and where there has typically been some discrimination and minimum wage laws against people with disabilities. There are places where I think more needs to happen than just a $1 bump an hour. So that's my asterisks, I guess, in this category.  

Sarah [00:18:06] Yeah. And I totally agree. And this is not our innovative category. This is just thank goodness you're doing something that we all agreed on a million years ago. And like California's law that I want to talk about, is a little bit a combination of both. Because I do think it's innovative in that they're probably the first state or one of the first states out there doing something similar, which is employers with very few exceptions cannot be punished for using marijuana outside of work. That seems like, duh, when it's legal about half the country it seems really dumb to punish people for partaking in a completely legal recreational-- not completely legal. That's a little complicated. But a mostly legal recreational drug and it just reduces the labor supply so much. Everybody complains about it, but we all keep doing it. So I was happy to see in about time at least somebody is trying to get at this issue.  

Beth [00:18:54] We have got to do something about this on the federal level. I know someone who legally in her state uses medical marijuana (doctor's prescription, diagnosed condition, the whole thing) and cannot get a life insurance policy because of it.  

Sarah [00:19:11] What?  

Beth [00:19:11] That's terrible. And that, I think, has to be related to the fact that it is still, at a federal level, an illegal substance. And that's why the finances around a lot of marijuana businesses are so complicated. This is like the market has spoken and the states have spoken, and we need the federal government to get out of the way on marijuana. And again, I don't love marijuana everywhere all the time. I hate walking into like a downtown area and it just being like thick with that smell. I've got some very pro clutchy complaints about this that I make no apologies for, but we're not going to be able to regulate our way out of those problems. We're just going to have to tackle them and deal with them culturally. I wish that we could legislatively get out of the way of what is clearly our reality around marijuana. Also in the good work category and the sort of common sense good work category, we have Minnesota joining 19 other states in passing a red flag law. Michigan has new red flag laws, and in fact these are situations where family members and law enforcement can go to a court. So it's adjudicated. People's rights are protected, but they can go to a court and say, I think that there is extreme risk happening here and that this person should temporarily not have access to firearms. I think that will save a lot of lives. We have in Colorado a ban on ghost guns assembled at home, or 3D printed without serial numbers. Serial numbers in guns, very important for law enforcement activities. So I think there's just some really good commonsense work. Now, the one of these that goes a little bit more into the innovative category is Washington's waiting period. In 2018, Washington voters approved a 10 day waiting period for certain types of firearms, and that has been expanded now. And so, in addition to waiting 10 days, you also have to do a background check and pass a safety training program within a five year period of purchasing the gun. I think that is a really smart approach to trying to do some risk management around guns in this country, but I recognize that probably pushes people's buttons a little bit more.  

Sarah [00:21:19] Well, I'm just discouraged that they're all mostly blue states. I really would like to see red states even pretending like, oh, I don't know, in Tennessee where you have a very passionate, mostly conservative constituency coming out of Covenant School going do something, literally anything. The refusal to even touch it is so discouraging. You have the opportunity to say, we are pro-gun. This is what we think this legislation looks for. Instead of just being a complete and total obstacle so that you undercut your own argument to begin with, which is you don't care about safety, you don't care about people, all you care about is this industry. And I wish I saw more of that. I know we're supposed to be in a positive framework moving forward, but I need to get that off my chest.  

Beth [00:22:01] No, I think that's fair. That's kind of how I feel about this Pennsylvania law. So we have good work in Pennsylvania. And this is one of those things where you're like, wow, I can't believe that we need this, but we do. The legislature has added protections for women who are incarcerated. The state is now banning the shackling and solitary confinement of pregnant, incarcerated women, and full body searches of women inmates by male guards. When I say to you the shackling and solitary confinement of pregnant incarcerated women, do you not just feel from head to toe like we have a problem here? And I'm sorry, shackling and solitary confinement in general are among the practices that I think future people are going to look back on and think of the way that we look at the Coliseum. I cannot believe the way that we continue to approach incarceration in this country. But I'm happy that one small step forward has been taken in Pennsylvania.  

Sarah [00:23:02] Well, again, just about time. Same with Florida. We want to put Florida on the list for a positive thing. But it's in the about time category because they're requiring spaces for breastfeeding mothers in the courthouses. Great idea.  

Beth [00:23:14] Very important. Yeah.  

Sarah [00:23:15] For 2002. But it's very important. Same with this California law. I wouldn't call it innovative. It feels very much like about time. But I think California is one of the few places that require this, which is law enforcement officers must inform drivers why they have been stopped before they begin any questioning. That sounds like something we should have already been doing for decades.  

Beth [00:23:39] I totally agree. You should not have an interaction with law enforcement and not know what's happening in that interaction. It should be very clear. To protect the law enforcement and the person who's being approached, everybody needs to understand what it means that I, as an individual citizen, am now meeting armed state power one on one. I should understand what's occurring in that situation, so I'm glad to see that too.  

Sarah [00:24:02] Well, and you know how else you know it's an about time situation, is when you get a 38 to 0 vote in the Senate and a 74 to 0 vote in the General Assembly in New Jersey [laughs]. Because they were going after telemarketers and they have all these new rules like you have to identify yourself in the first 30s speaking of identifying why you're calling someone or why you're stopping them, whom they're representing, what they're selling. And they banned unsolicited sales calls to anyone from 9 p.m. to 8 a.m.. I don't know if I've ever gotten a call in the middle of night or anything like that. Surely I would have remembered that. But I appreciate that anybody who thought that might be a good idea has been legally prohibited.  

Beth [00:24:40] I wish that this could also apply to text messaging. The unsolicited text messaging is really getting out of control. Again, I recognize I have some power over that. I can just delete and block, but it's a lot.  

Sarah [00:24:52] It just text messaging feels like your private space. It's very invasive.  

Beth [00:24:56] It really does. It's intrusive. I totally agree.  

Sarah [00:24:58] It's very intrusive.  

Beth [00:25:00] Okay, we have some more good work being done that we want to call out.  

Sarah [00:25:03] Some old fashioned good work.  

Beth [00:25:05] We're going to start with Kansas.  

Sarah [00:25:07] Kansas, everybody. See, we are equal opportunity appraisers here at Pantsuit Politics.  

Beth [00:25:14] Kansas dropping the tax on groceries. This is a good idea.  

Sarah [00:25:19] Well, look, I know Kansas. I feel like I can hear the emails coming from our listeners in Kansas because Kansas has some funding issues.  

Beth [00:25:27] It does.  

Sarah [00:25:28] So I understand any sort of drop in tax revenue is going to get some side eye. However, if you are a state legislator and you have your constituents crying out from the inflationary pressure, especially that felt at the grocery store, which is a very, very consistent complaint across the United States, then you just have to use the tools available to you. And I don't begrudge them this tool. They didn't wipe it out. They're not eliminating the income tax, which is what I'm afraid Turkey is going to do. They just said, look, we can do this. And so that's what we're going to do. I'd be interested to see how much revenue they're actually giving up, but it just felt like an appropriate tool at a state legislative level to address something that's a national concern.  

Beth [00:26:12] Well, and groceries are a basic need for all people. We have so many disparities. This is a better approach than California saying you've got to have a gender neutral section so that we don't have girls items being priced higher. This is a better way to use your tools as a legislature to say, we're going to try to make people's lives a little bit fairer and easier here. So I like it.  

Sarah [00:26:38] Now, look, I don't think it's an accident that we're about to list a lot of red states when it comes to taxes, because that's the tool they like to use. Is there a way to do this by cutting taxes? We'd like to do that. I would encourage them to look at a broader array of tools, but they do love to use this one. Alabama is exempting overtime pay from state income taxes.  

Beth [00:26:55] Blue states like to do it too, it just takes a different form. Like Massachusetts is raising its dependent tax credit. So you're getting more money off of your tax. I mean, it's the same thing, right? We just talk about it in different ways.  

[00:27:06] Music Interlude.  

[00:27:16] I would like to talk about the highways, and I would like to talk about the state of Illinois.  

Sarah [00:27:22] Well, this makes sense because if we have a problem on the highways, the states are a very important institution to address this concern.  

Beth [00:27:31] We do. We have a very big problem on the highways right now. I commend to you, please, everyone, take 15 minutes out of your day and read the deeply reported piece in The New York Times about how we are in a crisis on American road race right now, by every measure. People are not wearing their seat belts. Guys, what year is it? We have to wear our seat belts.  

Sarah [00:27:51]  I don't understand that one. I don't get that one.  

Beth [00:27:53] I know we trust our cars more. Cars are safer, and we trust airbags. If you've ever had an airbag deployed when you were in the vehicle, though, you know that an airbag is not going to do everything and it's very, very miserable. And you need your seatbelt. Wear your seat belts. We have more people driving while they're intoxicated.  

Sarah [00:28:12] Do you think the seatbelt thing is a reaction to the masking requirement?  

Beth [00:28:16] I think there is a lot psychologically going on here.  

Sarah [00:28:19] I think so too.  

Beth [00:28:19] People don't feel enough freedom. And the car is like such a deeply ingrained psychological symbol of freedom for so many people. But I think a lot's going on. But in addition to the seat belts, we have more people driving intoxicated like a record. For years, the Mothers Against Drunk Driving, did such good work here and we are going backward on this. We have more road rage. We have more people just speeding. You've been talking, Sarah, about not turning right on red anymore because so many pedestrians are getting hit.  

Sarah [00:28:53] Yeah. The New York Times did a big piece on pedestrian deaths and how we're just this exception in the Western world for our rate of pedestrian deaths. And often they are less distracted driving in Europe because they drive manuals. Overwhelmingly, they drive manual transmissions, which is what I plan to get my children when they turn 16. You can't be distracted and drive a manual. I mean, you can, but it takes an enormous amount of work. And but another thing is like they don't have turn right on red, like it's just not a thing. And you're seeing locales passed laws where certain cities have banned turning right on red. We only did it apparently because in the 70s we thought it would save people's gas so they didn't have to like idle and wait, which is such a stupid reason to have that. So they convinced me. I was like, okay, I won't turn right on red anymore, unless I have the light. 

Beth [00:29:37] Now, I can't remember where this was. I think it's Abilene, Texas, but I may be wrong. Somewhere where you and I have been to speak. Everything is a soft right, like the road is built for you to go right before you get to a stoplight even. And I think that that's fine because again, everybody's on notice. This is how we're doing it. But I think, overall, just all of us committing to not go right on red anymore would be a good helpful thing. So Illinois has said you cannot take a video conference while you're driving anymore.  

Sarah [00:30:09] I've done that.  

Beth [00:30:10] I know, and I don't mean this as a personal attack on you, Sarah, but I am glad to see state legislators getting involved and saying we have problems on the highways and we have to think really seriously about what we can do. I also think the market needs to help here. I am very conscious about vehicle safety because I was in a fatal car crash in high school. I would love to never drive again, but I understand that I am an extreme minority here. That for as many Americans who want more public transit and more trains, there are probably like three times as many of us who just love to drive. And I think we just need to accept that. I would like to see more places that are set up, like more tracks and stuff for people to just go safely drive their cars really, really fast. Let's distinguish that though as entertainment and hobby and sport for regular people that more people can participate in so that when they are on the roads with the rest of us, we can all slow it down and be more careful. I don't know, I just want lots of thinking about how we can address this problem.  

Sarah [00:31:20] I would like to see lots of innovation from the state legislators around driving. Because if we are going to have all these places where driving is the center point of American life, and I think we've pretty much decided no one's going to build bullet trains. Like it's just not going to happen. Okay, I think not anytime soon anyway. My belief is that when driving is essential, there's really nothing set up to protect people in poverty from the life altering situation of something going wrong with their car, or not having a car. There's no charities in my town that help you if you need a car repair. If you need food, if you need shelter, if you need clothing, if you need all the basics of life, there's lots of ways for you to get help. Not if you need your car fixed. I think that's a really real problem. There's no government subsidies, there's no social safety net, even though everything revolves around a car, to help people if they don't have a car or their car breaks. And that is frustrating to me. It seems like a big hole in our charitable sort of ecosystem and definitely in our social safety net.  

Beth [00:32:25] I totally agree.  

Sarah [00:32:26] Now, I know with climate change I'm not trying to get more people to drive, but it just feels like we have to acknowledge the reality for some people out there.  

Beth [00:32:34] Well, and that goes back to the dumb ghosting law from Arkansas. I think a lot of people don't show up because transportation problems happen. And when you are in a precarious financial situation, when you are poor, you are likely to have transportation problems. And so we're just double punishing someone who cannot get aid with their transportation and now cannot get aid because they ghosted a job interview. I don't think that's who we want to be.  

Sarah [00:33:01] Agreed. There was one area that was overall exhausting, but there were a few bright points of light, which is abortion. There's a lot of you're safe here. We're going to shut it down even further there. I don't really want to get into it because I find it incredibly depressing and discouraging. But there were two states that we thought were doing some good old fashioned work, trying to get at the problem without just rehashing the same old, tired solutions.  

Beth [00:33:27] So I would call back to Massachusetts and their dependent tax credit. I think that is good pro-life legislation. I would also put Kansas in here with the groceries tax. That is going to make a material difference for families with really young children. I think that's important. I also want to call out Alabama's work on its adoption code. They have done an overhaul in Alabama. They have worked on the legal process. They have worked on courts, coordinating with one another. I want to be honest with you. I have not read Alabama's new adoption code, and I bet I wouldn't like all of what was done there. But I am happy to see legislatures digging into a process that is legally an absolute morass almost everywhere, and doing it with the intention of a true overhaul. Not trimming around the edges or addressing this one issue that somebody lobbied for, but really getting into it and trying to make it better. I think that is important and good work that probably needs to be done just about everywhere.  

Sarah [00:34:25] Well, and I will tell you that our own great state of Kentucky has dramatically increased the pay for social workers. It won't happen immediately, but I have friends who teach social work, and the classes are filling up again because people feel like they can make a living wage. So that's when you're seeing the good work pay off. And it takes a while, but it's it's happening. I wanted to shout out New Jersey. New Jersey pharmacists will be allowed to dispense self-administered hormonal contraceptives to patients without a prescription. I think that is some good pro-choice work. Let's not just pay attention to making sure we're a safe harbor. It's not that I don't think that work is important, but let's also make sure that we are continuing to do important work of access to contraception, access to reproductive care. I just think that that's really smart. And I think finding innovative ways to make sure people have access to those drugs and that care is really important. So good job, New Jersey.  

Beth [00:35:20] Okay, so we have done the waste of time work, the crappy things. We have talked about some of the good work, the blocking and tackling, the consensus driven work. Now let's get to the things that made us go, hmm.  

Sarah [00:35:36] Listen, there are laboratories. Some experiments are going to be weird. That's just the reality. Okay, some experiments have weird outcomes. Go watch Poor Things. That's just how life works.  

Beth [00:35:47] So the first thing you have on your list, Sarah, is from Nebraska. You want to tell us about it?  

Sarah [00:35:52] Yes. Nebraska has an executive order. So in fairness, this is not like the state legislature, but it demands that some state workers who have been working remotely since the pandemic return to the office. So starting like a couple weeks ago, a public employees union has asked the state labor court to delay the requirement. But I just thought that made me raise my eyebrows a little bit. That even the public workers are, like, we don't want to. We don't want to. Well, did you see the Axios report that was like they've given up. Like, the war is over. It was like a huge majority of CEOs are like, I'm just going to accept that people are going to work at home. Like everybody coming back to the office five days a week, ain't I'm happening.  

Beth [00:36:30] The market has spoken on this too.  

Sarah [00:36:31] The market has spoken, so this might not be the best use of an executive order, is all I'm saying.  

Beth [00:36:36] I agree, I think you got to choose your battles. And this is kind of like with me. Okay, people love their cars and they want to drive them really fast. How can we let them do that? How can we make that safe for people?  

Sarah [00:36:46] I think that's a great idea.  

Beth [00:36:47] Same thing with marijuana. I don't love that it smells like weed everywhere, but people are going to use marijuana. So how do we make it work?  

Sarah [00:36:53] But you don't want people to lose their jobs about it either. Come on, we can prioritize.  

Beth [00:36:57] That's right. I don't want people to lose their jobs over it. Yes. So that's how I feel about returning to work. People want to work from home. Figure it out.  

Sarah [00:37:06] You need state workers.  

Beth [00:37:06] Yes.  

Sarah [00:37:07] There's some benefits like-- oh, I don't know-- a pension. So play them up. And working from home could be one of them. Be smart about this.  

Beth [00:37:14] Let's talk about Ohio. We have a lot of states working on social media.  

Sarah [00:37:19] We do. They're trying.  

Beth [00:37:20] Beginning of this week in Ohio, social media operators-- and really it's a pretty big definition of operator. This could go beyond Google, X, Snapchat, TikTok. But social media operators have to obtain consent from parents for children under 16 to create accounts.  

Sarah [00:37:39] Okay, so far I don't have a problem. What about you?  

Beth [00:37:42] No, still good. Works for me.  

Sarah [00:37:43] Okay. So far so good. 

Beth [00:37:45]  I think that's tough to enforce.  

Sarah [00:37:46] Yeah, good luck.  

Beth [00:37:47] But I like the principle. I like the idea. Parents also have to receive a list of censoring or content moderation features available.  

Sarah [00:37:55] This gets a little harder.  

Beth [00:37:58] Getting harder. If parents want an account to be closed, that has to happen within 30 days of the request.  

Sarah [00:38:02] I'm cool with this one. If we got some bullying or, God forbid, some sort of like doxing or something like this, great idea.  

Beth [00:38:09] Parents are able to file complaints with the Ohio Attorney General if there's a problem. I like that very much that it is a state enforcement responsibility, not a you can go sue Google situation.  

Sarah [00:38:20]  Yeah. Because good luck with that.  

Beth [00:38:22] Where I think this gets tricky is just that it covers almost any website where you create a profile and interact with other people and post content. That's a lot.  

Sarah [00:38:32] That's every website. I just created a profile to interact with other people on a budding app. So it seems right to me.  

Beth [00:38:40] It seems really broad and that is the basis on which it is being challenged already by the industry at large. But for social media and gaming, I get it. Again, I think it is very hard to enforce this practically, but I think incentives for these platforms to try are good.  

Sarah [00:38:58] Yeah.  

Beth [00:38:59] So I don't know how this is going to turn out once it's been litigated and in practice, but the spirit of it doesn't bother me a single bit.  

Sarah [00:39:08] Yeah. I just think when you look at states trying to regulate any aspect of our online life, you just see how incredibly complicated and messy it gets so quickly. Even Connecticut. Connecticut is requiring procedures for online dating services for reporting unwanted behavior or providing safety advice, including warnings about romance scams. I think that's a really interesting idea, but it's like, what if you are in New Jersey right over the way? It just feels weird to me that this is a great idea, but it's only going to be applicable to people in Connecticut. So I think that's where it's just starts to get weird. Even with the Montana TikTok ban, well, yeah, what if you just live on the border? You just pop over the border and you're in another state and then all of a sudden it's okay? Not to mention like a VPN. I don't know.  

Beth [00:40:02] What I think I like about this-- even recognizing my hypocrisy, because for a lot of this conversation I have said laws can't solve everything, and I do not think laws can solve our problems with technology and interacting with each other online. The reason I feel some support in this area is because our online lives are so powerful and so misunderstood by us. There's a distinction to me. If there's a book at the library, I can leave it on the shelf. There are so many places, though, where my kids have to have an account. Like you said, the birding app. Like to participate in a sport or get notifications about group activities. They have to sign up for these different services. They have to live online. The power differential between the companies and the people is so great.  

[00:40:53] And I do think the more the state legislators try to get in on this, even as they try things that are sometimes dumb or that will not work or that will fail in court, it adds to the societal conversation among parents about what are we going to do here? What are the rules in our house? What are the rules in your house? How are you navigating this? We're trying to work some things out and this is a reflection of that. And it makes sense to me.  

Sarah [00:41:20] Well, and to me often these are just, I hope, big giant red flags to the federal government. Hello, we are trying and we can't get at it. Could we get a little help? Now, this Congress, we don't have an episode planned for the great legislation and good work this Congress has done, because they've done almost none of it. So not super encouraging on that front, but I think the effort, I just applaud the effort. Not to just rehash the same things, but just trying. I mean, it speaks to that message from the beginning. There are people working across the United States and state capitals going, I see a problem. Do I have any tools at my disposal to try to help solve this problem? And that is incredibly encouraging.  

Beth [00:42:04] So thank you to everybody doing the good work in state capitals and offices around the country. Thank you to all of you who are seeking state office this year. I hope that this list also underscores that what state legislatures do is powerful, and we desperately need more people of good faith and hard work to be in these bodies. So if you've been on the fence, get in there. Your state needs you. Before we transition to Outside of Politics. Usually Sarah and I do all of our own research, and I want to mention today that we were taking a very wide lens in finding all these laws, so we enlisted the aid of a listener volunteer. Many, many thanks to Abbie [sp] for your meticulous work in compiling information on these new laws for us.  

Sarah [00:42:49] That's me applauding.  

[00:42:49] Music Interlude.  


Beth [00:42:59] We always end with what's on our minds Outside of Politics. We're just going to go like one degree outside of politics, though, because California has a new law that I thought would be a perfect discussion Outside of Politics. Beginning this January in California, first through sixth graders in public school must be taught cursive writing. This joins California with 22 states that require public schools to teach cursive. And I think this is fascinating because I feel like I hear a lot of really big feelings about cursive. When are the kids going to learn cursive? Why haven't they learned cursive yet? Are they spending enough time on cursive? My kids were both like, I can't wait till we learn cursive. And then Jane feels like she kind of got shortchanged on it. So I'm interested in your thoughts about cursive, Sarah.  

Sarah [00:43:44] I love this quote you put in the show notes from Miss Brooks, a fourth grade teacher in California. She told NPR, it is an art and it allows students to take ownership of their handwriting, and it gives a unique imprint of who they are. I do not say that the public school system has failed my children very often. I don't feel that very often, but I do feel like it when it comes to handwriting. My freshman in high school's handwriting looks like he is in preschool. I'm not kidding. It's horrendous. It's not even because it's a lack of cursive. It's because even his print is terrible and he does not care and I cannot make him care. And it's similar for my 12 year old and my eight year old. To me, what's the problem is they teach them cursive, but because they never learned handwriting, it's like it's skipping a very important step. I don't care if they require cursive. I think that's true what miss Brooks says, that your handwriting is like something you should take ownership in. And I don't feel like I ever learned it to that extent. I look at my grandmother's handwriting, I'm like, that is so beautiful. And mine does not look like that. And my kids are even worse. And I think it's not an accident, because tech is coming up and so often what we're communicating with is our fingers on a keyboard and not a pencil in our hands. But it makes me sad. I believe in handwritten letters and notes, as in birthday cards. I think it's really important and lovely to receive something that someone has written out, but you wouldn't be able to read it if my kids wrote it for you because their handwriting is so atrocious. If somebody has a hack for how to actually improve my kid's handwriting as a parent when I'm not with them at school all day, I would love to hear it.  

Beth [00:45:17] I am loathe to place more requirements on the public schools. I understand that they're being asked to teach an awful lot of things in a very short amount of time, and address a lot of needs in a short amount of time. So I have a suggestion, because I also think cursive is important, and I am compelled by what Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva said. The proponent of this bill in California. She's a former teacher. She said there's research showing that cursive handwriting helps with brain development. It improves your fine motor skills. All makes sense to me. I think putting all these interests together, it would be a lovely thing to start focusing on handwriting in art classes.  

Sarah [00:45:52] Okay.  

Beth [00:45:53] Because I do think it's an art, and I think it's increasingly an art in our digital world. And I think art is a place where students are learning to express themselves anyway. And you could do a lot around this where it's not just sitting with the lined paper and writing, but really making it fun and talking about it as an expression of who you are and putting it in the context of greater art pieces. I just feel like the art teachers could really help us solve this problem.  

Sarah [00:46:19] I love that idea. I do think it's a problem, and I would like more attention to it. And I feel stymied as a parent. I'm just going to be honest.  

Beth [00:46:27] Well, because as parents, we really don't have the skill set to teach our kids to write well.  

Sarah [00:46:32] Yeah. 

Beth [00:46:32] The way that we were taught to write the sitting down with the paper, with the lines, our kids are not going to do that. There's an attention span component.  

Sarah [00:46:41] I've got the books. It doesn't matter. They won't do it.  

Beth [00:46:43] There is a big component of why would this ever matter for me. I can swipe my finger and communicate. Fair I get it, but if we're teaching it for a different purpose now, then we should teach it in a different way now, I think, and really focus on that new purpose. But I think that purpose is worthy and I would love to see it prioritized.  

Sarah [00:47:04] I think we should keep handwriting. What if our robot overlords take over and they can't read cursive? Maybe handwriting would be the only way we could actually communicate. You guys think about it. History has shown us passing notes is sometimes very important. And also I just think about the historians are like, we have to be able to read cursive because so many historical documents are in cursive. Not that I can read the Declaration of Independence. I'm not going to lie to you. I look at it and I'm like, I think I know what that says, but I'm not sure. Because it evolves even if you're doing it all the time, but it still seems important.  

Beth [00:47:32] But there is a personal long term arc here too because when you lose someone you love, their handwriting becomes such a sacred artifact.  

Sarah [00:47:42] People have tattoos of people's handwriting all over their bodies. That's like a very common tattoo I feel like.  

Beth [00:47:49] I cherish the little notes that Chad writes inside, like, Valentines to me. The part that's in his handwriting is the part that I care about, and that I know I always will. When I see my grandmother's handwriting, it is like a window right back into her spirit. So I would like to save the cursive. I just would like us to kind of rethink how we're doing it.  

Sarah [00:48:10] I love it.  

Beth [00:48:12] Well, I hope that this episode has been as much fun for all of you to listen to as it was for us to have.  

Sarah [00:48:16] Agreed.  

Beth [00:48:16] We really appreciate your time and attention and all the ways that you contribute to our thinking. You're welcome always to join our conversations by emailing hello@ pantsuitpoliticsshow.com. We'll be back here for a new episode on Tuesday. Until then, have the best weekend available to you. Maybe send somebody a handwritten card. Make their day.  

Sarah [00:48:35] Do it.  

[00:48:35] Music Interlude  Sarah: Pantsuit Politics is produced by Studio D Podcast Production. 

Beth: Alise Napp is our managing director. Maggie Penton is our director of Community Engagement. 

Sarah: Xander Singh is the composer of our theme music with inspiration from original work by Dante Lima. 

Beth: Our show is listener-supported. Special thanks to our executive producers. 

Executive Producers: Martha Bronitsky. Ali Edwards. Janice Elliott. Sarah Greenup. Julie Haller. Tiffany Hasler. Emily Holladay. Katie Johnson. Katina Zuganelis Kasling. Barry Kaufman. Katherine Vollmer. Laurie LaDow. Lily McClure. Linda Daniel. The Pentons. Tracey Puthoff. Sarah Ralph. Jeremy Sequoia. Katie Stigers. Karin True. Onica Ulveling. Nick and Alysa Villeli. Amy Whited. Emily Helen Olson. Lee Chaix McDonough. Morgan McHugh. Jen Ross. Sabrina Drago. Becca Dorval. Christina Quartararo. Shannon Frawley. Jessica Whitehead. Samantha Chalmers. The Lebo Family. The Adair Family. 

Sarah: Jeff Davis. Melinda Johnston. Michelle Wood. Nichole Berklas. Paula Bremer and Tim Miller. 

Alise NappComment