State House Republicans Pose Legislative Issues For 2014

Delaware State House of Representatives - Minority Caucus identifies issues for 2014 on facebook:

The lobbyists' revolving door ~ 

31 states bar former legislators from leaving office and then immediately taking a job as a lobbyist, requiring that they serve a "cooling off" period (usually one year) before being eligible for such a job. One intent of these "revolving door" laws is to hinder former legislators from using their legislative connections to gain an unfair advantage for their clients. Additionally, it's believed these types of laws prevent legislators from selling their votes in exchange for a lucrative lobbyist position. Delaware's revolving door law applies to certain state positions and statewide office-holders, but not state legislators. Attempts to pass a measure covering state lawmakers has failed in the past. Earlier this year, by a vote of 30 to 11, the House passed House Bill 13, seeking to establish a one year cooling off period for legislators. The bill had bipartisan support, but partisan opposition, with all 11 "no" votes coming from majority Democrats including the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader. The bill is currently pending action in the Senate Executive Committee, where it spent the last seven weeks of the 2013 legislative session. Should Delaware enact House Bill 13? For more information, see the link to the National Conference of State Legislatures brief:

http://ecom.ncsl.org/webimages/legisbriefs/October2013/2140.pdf

 Chemicals in consumer products ~

Earlier this month, California put into effect the Safer Consumer Products regulations, requiring manufacturers to seek safer alternatives to chemical ingredients in consumer products that the state deems as harmful.

In the past, the state took a piecemeal approach, banning specific chemicals from particular products, such as bisphenol A in baby bottles. (Delaware also did this.) Under the new rules, the state will identify classes of products (like oven cleaners) for review and manufacturers will have to perform detailed analyses to justify whether hazardous chemicals are needed or whether better substitutes are available.

Industry ofifcials say the new regs will drive up costs without significantlly improving public health or safety. Public health advocates support the new rules.

What do ou think? Should consumer product safety be the exclusive domain of the federal government? Is the California appproach a good idea that other states, like Delaware, should emulate? See a link to the LA Times article
Rules are changing for many consumer products

 And pension plan alternatives ~

The issue of pensions has been of increasing concern for state and local governments around the country. Most have "defined benefit pension plans," which promise a specified monthly benefit on retirement that is determined by a formula based on an employee's earnings history. The problem is that this benefit provides an ongoing, and often growing, future financial obligation that some governments are finding difficult to adequately fund. Such plans were once the norm in the business sector, but most have moved to individual retirement accounts (IRAs), giving their employees a set monthly contribution towards their retirement and providing help for investing that money. The system presents employers with a predictable obligation that ends with the worker's retirement. Although adjustments were made a couple of years ago to reduce costs, Delaware still has a defined retirement plan for its full-time workers. Should the state look at adopting the IRA system for all future employees, while retaining the defined pension covenant it has with current workers?