Connect with us

News from the South - Kentucky News Feed

House bill would hurt efforts to remediate lead hazards in Louisville

Published

on

kentuckylantern.com – Tom FitzGerald – 2025-02-25 23:04:00

House bill would hurt efforts to remediate lead hazards in Louisville

by Tom FitzGerald, Kentucky Lantern
February 26, 2025

In Metro Louisville, after extensive input from the public, including landlords and health officials, Metro Council adopted an ordinance in 2022 that took effect in December 2024, requiring residential rental properties be screened for lead hazard and that identified hazards be corrected. The ordinance creates a registry of residential rental properties and their compliance status. Based on the age of the residential unit, a lead hazard screening and control would be required in one, two, or three years.

Lead poisoning is one of the most pernicious and avoidable of child health hazards. Yet opponents of the Louisville ordinance requiring residential rental properties be screened for lead hazard and the hazards corrected before leasing them, have found an apparently sympathetic ear in the sponsors of House Bill 173, a bill that would preempt any local government from maintaining a registry of residential rental properties for any purpose, including lead hazard assessment and correction.

The intent of HB 173 seems clear – local government should not be allowed to require a landlord holding out rental property for human habitation, to assess and correct lead hazards, and to list the property and its compliance status on a registry.

Although banned for residential use in 1978, EPA estimates that some 31 million pre-1978 houses still contain lead-based paint, and 3.8 million of them have one or more children under the age of 6 living in them.  Lead-contaminated dust is one of the most common causes of elevated blood lead levels in kids and commonly occurs when lead-based paint deteriorates or is disturbed. Due to normal behaviors such as crawling and hand-to-mouth activities, young children are particularly at risk of higher exposure to ingesting lead-containing dust. Lead exposure can pose a significant health and safety threat to children and can cause irreversible and life-long health effects, including behavioral problems, lower IQ, slowed growth and more. There is no safe level of exposure to lead, and no beneficial, therapeutic, or non-consequential level of lead in a child, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency notes.  And the effects of lead poisoning on children are irreversible.  Once measurable blood lead levels are detected, the injury has already occurred.

Lead was banned in paint in 1978, yet 47 years later, we are still grappling with the legacy of the harm to children from its past use in residential housing. In Metro Louisville alone, it is reported that 10,000 children tested positive for elevated blood lead levels from 2005-2021.

Every single day that passes where a rental property contains a lead hazard that has not been detected and corrected (both of which can be accomplished at reasonable cost in most cases), we are risking further exposure of children, including infants, to the easily preventable yet irreversible health hazards of lead poisoning.

No one holding out pre-1978 properties for residential rental should be allowed to ignore the potential risk of lead-based paint hazards. No child should be exposed to the risk of a life of diminished health and opportunity from lead hazards.  The Kentucky House of Representatives appears poised to move forward a bill to preempt the local registry unless the ordinance is weakened this week. The threat of preemption appears to be working, since on Thursday evening Metro Council will consider an ordinance to eliminate the requirement that owners proactively test and remedy lead hazards in all residential rental units.  For fear of preemption, some in Metro Council appear ready to acquiesce, using the anemic argument that “something is better than nothing.”  Assessment and correction of lead hazards in pre-1978 private residential rental units would be required under the revised ordinance only after a code enforcement inspection detects potential lead hazard.

Let us be clear here. “Something,” in this case, is not a responsible compromise. Agreeing to allow more lead poisoning of kids by letting residential landlords off the hook for testing and correcting lead hazards in all pre-1978 rental units in a timely manner; and instead requiring assessment and correction only after a complaint or where a test shows that child to have been damaged by lead poisoning, is indefensible.  It is not a compromise. It is a capitulation under duress to which neither the General Assembly nor the Metro Council should be party.  Kentucky’s kids deserve better.

The majority in our state legislature claim to favor local control.  After working with local governments for 45 years, on hazardous waste, air quality, solid waste management, planning and zoning, and other issues affecting public health and quality of life, I believe that local officials are closest to the community, and are usually best suited to craft strategies to improve and protect public health and quality of life. During my 45 years as a lobbyist, I testified before numerous legislative committees, and helped to author reforms in solid and hazardous waste, mining regulation, and utility regulation.  During that time, the importance of local authority in matters of public health and quality of life, was usually respected.

Yet the General Assembly has in recent years all too often become the focus of special interests who, because they haven’t gotten their way on a local issue, seek to embroil the General Assembly in overriding or preempting local control as a tool to gain what could not be won locally in arguments on the merits. 

After countless hours of effort, involving a broad range of interests, Louisville’s government adopted a reasoned and balanced ordinance to address the tragic legacy of lead-based paint poisoning in our community’s private rental housing, and to give effect to what basic humanity and justice demands – you shouldn’t take money for renting living space without identifying and remedying hazards, and you shouldn’t either knowingly or as a matter of convenient ignorance, expose children to lead hazards and a lifetime of negative health outcomes.

If there is a concern regarding cost, an ordinance could impose reasonable upper bound limits on remediation and require notice to tenants of any risks remaining.  If the concern is one of “private property rights,” then don’t hold your private property out as fit for public habitation for compensation, without first determining it to be safe.

If successful in using the threat of state preemption as a tool to weaken public protection in this case, there will be no end to future efforts by special interests to preempt reasonable local government efforts to protect public health.  If a local government acts arbitrarily in a matter of public health regulation, the courts are always open to review that claim. But where a local community, after extensive input from all parties, crafts an ordinance to require reasonable actions in pre-1978 rental housing to detect and correct avoidable lead health hazard to kids, the General Assembly should respect that judgment, and make clear that it will not be party to any effort to undercut local government efforts to protect the health of kids, including from lead hazards in rental property.

Kentucky Lantern is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kentucky Lantern maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jamie Lucke for questions: info@kentuckylantern.com.

The post House bill would hurt efforts to remediate lead hazards in Louisville appeared first on kentuckylantern.com

News from the South - Kentucky News Feed

Stormy weather continues into the mid-week

Published

on

www.wtvq.com – T.G. Shuck – 2025-06-17 15:06:00

SUMMARY: Central and Eastern Kentucky have experienced persistent stormy weather with scattered showers and slow thunderstorms causing localized heavy rain and minor flooding. Tuesday saw cooler highs in the upper 70s to low 80s under thick clouds. Wednesday brings muggy conditions with mid-80s highs and mostly dry skies early, but a cold front will increase late-day thunderstorm chances, with a Level 2 severe risk for damaging winds northwest of Lexington. The front passes Thursday, ending daily storms but not lowering temperatures. Summer kicks off Friday with mid-80s warmth, rising to upper 80s and low 90s by the weekend, with humid, mostly dry weather and possible afternoon storms early next week.

Read the full article

The post Stormy weather continues into the mid-week appeared first on www.wtvq.com

Continue Reading

News from the South - Kentucky News Feed

Smiths Grove man arrested after motorcycle pursuit

Published

on

www.wnky.com – WNKY Staff – 2025-06-17 13:28:00

SUMMARY: A Warren County man, Steven Dye, 38, of Smiths Grove, was arrested after leading Kentucky State Police on a high-speed motorcycle chase in Bowling Green. The pursuit began when troopers attempted a traffic stop for a missing taillight. Dye fled, reaching 75 mph in a 35 mph zone, ran a red light, nearly caused a head-on collision, and eventually lost control on Rock Creek Drive. Authorities found meth, pills, marijuana, a handgun, digital scales, cash, and a stolen motorcycle. Dye faces multiple charges including drug trafficking, fleeing police, possessing a firearm as a felon, and driving under the influence.

Read the full article

The post Smiths Grove man arrested after motorcycle pursuit appeared first on www.wnky.com

Continue Reading

News from the South - Kentucky News Feed

Two-thirds of those in nonpartisan poll view GOP’s tax and spending cut bill unfavorably

Published

on

kentuckylantern.com – Jennifer Shutt – 2025-06-17 06:37:00


A KFF poll reveals broad public opposition to the GOP’s House-passed “big, beautiful bill,” with 64% of Americans disapproving, including 87% of Democrats and 73% of independents, though 61% of Republicans and 72% of MAGA supporters favor it. Opposition grows when informed of impacts like a $700 billion Medicaid cut and 10 million losing insurance. The bill risks reducing funding for hospitals and blocks Medicaid funds for Planned Parenthood, a provision opposed by 67%-80% of respondents. Despite controversy, 83% support Medicaid overall. Senate Republicans are modifying the bill, facing vote-a-rama debates before approval.

by Jennifer Shutt, Kentucky Lantern
June 17, 2025

WASHINGTON — Republicans and backers of President Donald Trump’s Make America Great Again platform support the party’s “big, beautiful bill” as passed by the U.S. House, though Americans overall view the legislation unfavorably, according to a poll released Tuesday by the nonpartisan health research organization KFF.

The survey shows that nearly two-thirds of those polled, or 64%, don’t support the tax policy changes and spending cuts Republicans have included in the sweeping House version of the bill that the Senate plans to take up this month.

When broken down by political affiliation, just 13% of Democrats and 27% of independents view the legislation favorably. Those numbers are in sharp contrast to Republicans, with 61% supporting the bill and 72% of those who identify as MAGA supporters.

But those views fluctuated when the people surveyed were asked specific questions about certain elements of the package and the real-world impacts of the legislation:

  • The overall percentage of those surveyed with an unfavorable view of the bill increased from 64% to 67% when they were told it would lower federal spending on Medicaid by more than $700 billion, an estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
  • Dislike of the legislation rose to 74% when those polled were told policy changes would lead to 10 million people losing their health insurance coverage, another estimate from the CBO analysis.
  • Opposition rose to 79% when people were told the legislation would reduce funding for local hospitals.

“The public hasn’t had much time to digest what’s in the big, beautiful, but almost incomprehensible bill as it races through Congress, and many don’t have a lot of information about it,” KFF President and CEO Drew Altman wrote in a statement. “Our poll shows that views toward the bill and its health-care provisions can shift when presented with more information and arguments about its effects, even among MAGA supporters.”

Senators wrestling with what to do

The House voted mostly along party lines to approve its 11-bill package in late May, sending the legislation to the Senate.

GOP senators have spent weeks internally debating which parts of the House legislation to keep, which to change and which to remove, while also conducting closed-door meetings with the parliamentarian to determine which parts of the bill comply with the rules for the complex reconciliation process.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., plans to bring his chamber’s version of the package to the floor next week, though that timeline could slip. Before the Senate can approve the rewritten bill, lawmakers will spend hours voting on dozens of amendments during what’s known as a vote-a-rama.

Significant bipartisan support for Medicaid

The KFF poll released Tuesday shows that 83% of Americans support Medicaid, slated for an overhaul and spending reductions by GOP lawmakers.

That support remains high across political parties, with 93% of Democrats, 83% of independents and 74% of Republicans holding a favorable opinion of the state-federal health program for lower-income people and some with disabilities.

Those surveyed appeared supportive of a provision in the House bill that would require some people on Medicaid to work, participate in community service, or attend an educational program at least 80 hours a month.

The change is supported by about two-thirds of those surveyed, though the numbers shift depending on how the question is asked.

For example, when told that most adults on Medicaid already work and that not being able to complete the paperwork associated with the new requirement could cause some to lose coverage, 64% of those polled opposed the new requirement. 

Planned Parenthood

There was also broad opposition, 67% overall, to language in the House bill that would block any Medicaid funding from going to Planned Parenthood for routine health care. There is a long-standing prohibition on federal funding from going toward abortion with exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the pregnant patient.

Opposition to the Planned Parenthood provision increased to 80% when those polled were told that no federal payments to Planned Parenthood go directly toward abortion and that ending all Medicaid payments to the organization would make it more challenging for lower-income women to access birth control, cancer screenings and STD testing.

Republicans are more supportive of that change, with 54% backing the policy and 46% opposing the new block on Medicaid patients going to Planned Parenthood. But 78% of independent women and 51% of Republican women oppose the change.

Food assistance program

Those surveyed also had concerns about how changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, would impact lower-income people’s ability to afford food, with 70% saying they were either very or somewhat concerned.

Democrats held the highest level of concern at 92%, followed by independents at 74% and Republicans at 47%.

Overall, Republicans hold the highest share of people polled who believe the dozens of GOP policy changes in the “big, beautiful bill” will help them or their family.

A total of 32% of Republicans surveyed believe the legislation will benefit them, while 47% said it will not make much of a difference and 21% said it will hurt them or their family.

Thirteen percent of independents expect the legislation will help them, while 39% said it likely won’t make a difference and 47% expect it will harm them or their family.

Of Democrats polled, just 6% said they expect the GOP mega-bill to help them, while 26% said it wouldn’t matter much and 66% expected it to hurt them or their family.

When asked whether the bill would help, not make much of a difference, or hurt certain groups of people, the largest percentage of those polled expect it to help wealthy people.

Fifty-one percent of those surveyed said they expect wealthy people will benefit from the bill, 21% believe it will help people with lower incomes and 20% said they think middle-class families will benefit.

Seventeen percent think it will help immigrants, 14% expect it to help people who buy their own health insurance, 13% believe it will help people on Medicaid, 13% think it will help people on SNAP and 8% expect it will benefit undocumented immigrants.

KFF conducted the poll June 4 – 8, both online and by telephone, among a nationally representative sample of 1,321 U.S. adults. The margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points for the full sample size. 

Kentucky Lantern is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kentucky Lantern maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jamie Lucke for questions: info@kentuckylantern.com.

The post Two-thirds of those in nonpartisan poll view GOP’s tax and spending cut bill unfavorably appeared first on kentuckylantern.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This article presents data from a nonpartisan poll while highlighting public opposition to a Republican-backed bill, emphasizing the negative impacts of proposed GOP policy changes, particularly in areas like Medicaid, SNAP, and Planned Parenthood funding. The framing often underscores how public support drops when consequences are explained, and it presents the perspectives of Democrats and independents more sympathetically. Although factual and sourced, the tone and selective emphasis on adverse outcomes and dissent suggest a modest Center-Left bias in how the information is contextualized and presented.

Continue Reading

Trending