As the summer heats up and the thermometer rises, I thought it would be the perfect time to talk about how Democratic state legislators have stepped up to tackle a problem that – only a few years back – would not have been considered a state legislative issue.

States started to seriously address climate change in 2006 in California. In that year, the Democratic legislature passed the “California Global Warming Solutions Act,” sponsored by Democratic Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (a DLCC board member). Assembly Bill 32 passed the Assembly on August 31, 2006 on a 47-32 vote. It then passed the Senate on August 30, 2006 on a 23-14 vote and was approved by the governor on September 27, 2006. The bill requires that, by 2020, California’s greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced to 1990s levels.

California’s landmark legislation in 2006 led to a number of successes nationwide in 2007.

Just a year after California’s success, the Democratically controlled Washington legislature passed Senate Bill 6001. This bill, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Craig Pridemore, establishes the following goals: by 2020, reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in the state to 1990 levels; by 2035, reduce overall GHG emissions in the state to 25 percent below 1990 levels; and by 2050, the state will do its part to reach global climate stabilization levels by reducing overall emissions to 50 percent below 1990 levels, or 70 percent below the state's expected emissions that year. The governor signed the bill on May 3, 2007.

That same year, the Democratically-controlled Oregon legislature passed HB 3543. The goals of Oregon’s bill are to achieve the following reductions in greenhouse gas emissions: by 2010, arrest the growth of Oregon’s greenhouse gas emissions and begin to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; by 2020, achieve greenhouse gas levels that are 10 percent below 1990 levels; and, by 2050, achieve greenhouse gas levels that are at least 75 percent below 1990 levels. The governor signed the bill on August 7, 2007.

The Iowa Democratic legislature passed Senate File 485 in 2007. SF 485 addresses power-plant greenhouse gas emissions by creating a greenhouse gas inventory to collect data on greenhouse gas production; by creating a greenhouse gas registry for tracking, and by creating the Iowa Climate Change Advisory Council to analyze the possibility of reducing emissions by 50 percent by 2050. On April 23, 2007, SF 485 passed the Senate 30-19, and, on April 18, 2007, the bill passed the House 66-32. On April 27, 2007, SF 485 was signed by the governor.

In 2007, the Democratically-controlled legislature in Minnesota passed Senate File 145, the “Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 and Omnibus Energy Policy Bill.” This bill -- sponsored by Democratic Rep. Bill Hilty and Democratic Sen. Yvonne Prettner Solon -- contains the Global Warming Mitigation Act of 2007. The goal of this bill is to reduce statewide greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors producing those emissions to a level at least 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2015, to a level at least 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and to a level at least 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. The governor approved the bill on May 25, 2007.

Also in 2007, the Democratically controlled New Jersey legislature passed Assembly Bill 3301. The bills sponsors include Democratic Assemblypersons Linda Stender, Valerie Vainieri Huttle, Reed Gusciora, Linda R. Greenstein, and John F. McKeon and Democratic Sens. Barbara Buono, and Bob Smith. Assembly Bill 3301 establishes a greenhouse gas emissions reduction program to limit the level of statewide greenhouse gas emissions, and greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generated outside the state but consumed in the state, to the 1990 level or below, of those emissions by the year 2020, and to reduce those emissions to 80% below the 2006 level by the year 2050. The real strength of this bill is that it mandates drastic reductions by 2050. According to the Washington Post (July 6, 2007), “U.S. states have taken action on their own and in regional groups because the federal government has not yet passed mandatory regulations on emissions.” This story notes that the New Jersey law is tougher than California’s 2006 law because the NJ law contains “hard,” “enforceable” mandates – whereas the CA law only contains targets. The bill was signed by the governor on July 6, 2007.

Democratic legislators are continuing to fight for the environment through legislation on “green jobs,” “green buildings,” and renewable energy standards. For a good overview of state legislative action on environmental issues, be sure to check out the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

In Nevada, Republicans control the state senate by a single vote. They also, apparently, don't have much to be excited about as a party. Citing lack of interest, GOP leaders in the state were forced to cancel their state convention and hold a conference call instead:

The state party broke up its original convention in April when supporters of Ron Paul hijacked the proceedings and tried to elect delegates for their candidate to the national GOP convention in September. Party officials tried to reconvene on July 26, but they needed a quorum of 675 and received only 300 RSVPs, according to local reports.

Here's to hoping that Republican supporters decide to stay home on Election Day, too.

In this interconnected world of ours, there are few better ways to draw attention to something than to protest its existence. Unfortunately for him and his state, I don't think Republican State Sen. David Thomas of South Carolina understands that.

Earlier this year, the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism of his state agreed to participate in an advertising campaign to promote South Carolina to gay European tourists. Similar ads were sponsored by the city governments of Atlanta, Boston, Las Vegas, New Orleans, and Washington, D.C.

The advertisements were timed for London’s Gay Pride Week, which ended Saturday. The posters touted the attractions of the state to gay tourists, including its "gay beaches" and its Civil War-era plantations.

Sen. Thomas found out about the ad when he was contacted by the SC blog Palmetto Scoop. He called for an audit of the state's tourism advertising budget and told the blog this:

"South Carolinians will be irate when they learn their hard earned tax dollars are being spent to advertise our state as 'so gay'...This campaign goes against our core values."

A Google search for the phrase, 'Sen. David Thomas "So Gay" ' now returns about 108,000 results. Because of him, copies and text from the advertisement have run alongside coverage from Time and Newsweek, and papers from all over the country and the world.

Maybe that's exactly what Thomas intended, but here's the thing. Prior to this kerfuffle, I had no idea that South Carolina even had gay beaches.

And more importantly, an advertisement designed to improve the state's tourism industry will now have the opposite effect. In tough economic times, you gotta think that's a little foolish.

It’s not easy being a first-time candidate running against an incumbent. Especially if you are a Democrat campaigning in Kansas. To be successful, you need to have something going for you -- even if that’s just the drive to outwork your opponent every day.

But it really does pay to be smart.

Sean Tevis is an information architect from Olathe, Kansas. He’s running against Rep. Arlen Siegfreid, a deeply conservative Republican (even by Sunflower State standards), and apparently, he's got polling showing him running three points back.

He’s also a geek.

Faced with the challenge of raising the $26,000 it will take to make this stage of the race competitive, Tevis found a brilliant, clever way to tell his story and in doing so has captured the imagination of a certain part of the Internet.

Writing in the style of xkcd (a web comic read by the geekiest of geeks), Tevis laid out his reasons for running and asked for 3,000 people to contribute $8.34 to his campaign. And then the Internets responded.

His appeal was picked up by BoingBoing -- an incredibly popular geek culture blog -- and promoted thousands of times by news aggregators Digg and Reddit. All the traffic overwhelmed the servers hosting his website, but the donations kept pouring in.

By 9:30 on Monday morning, 5,298 people had given to his campaign. Previously (as Tevis notes in his comic), no state rep campaign in Kansas had ever attracted even 650 donors, and more remarkable still, Tevis lives in a district where just 6,327 people voted in the last election.

Obviously the specifics of Tevis' story can't necessarily be repeated (no way that every candidate will be able to finance her campaign with a clever comic strip), but there's a whole lot to be said for his creativity.

This is the Internet -- a place where leaders can connect with thousands of passionate potential supporters...if the campaign can find a way to stand out.

(cross posted at TDS)

On Friday, about the same time that Megan was breaking down the National Popular Vote on this site, I was listening to a panel attempting to do the same at Netroots Nation. The guy sitting behind me was Matt Yglesias (who I read constantly and have linked to before).

He has more to say about the issue here and here.

Point being there are a ton of really good resources out there if you're interested in the NPV movement.

There has been a lot of talk in the office about the NCSL Legislative Summit next week, and one event that caught my attention was a breakfast to discuss the National Popular Vote movement. I am intrigued by this legislation, so for my second DLCC blog post, I thought I’d try to write a little more about it.

The National Popular Vote bill would award all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. This in turn would nationalize the race for the presidency and give a voice to the citizens who do not reside in battleground states (accounting for about two thirds of all voters) and are ignored under the current system.

I write about it here because this movement is one that is being advanced completely by the nation’s legislatures.

Last week the Massachusetts House of Representatives passed legislation to become a member of The Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by the National Popular Vote. The bill won by a 117-36 vote. Massachusetts is the 5th state to pass such legislation joining Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois and Hawaii. These states represent 19 percent of the 270 votes needed to activate the law and elect a president.

Legislation to change to a popular vote system has been introduced in 45 states and is making great progress in a majority of them. This bill currently has 439 sponsors at the state level.

For a much more detailed description of the movement, please visit the National Popular Vote website: nationalpopularvote.com

Megan Hannigan is a Klindt/Dye Intern for the 2008 Summer Semester

I'm sitting in an event for the Texas candidates here at Netroots Nation, and two great legislative candidates are sitting on the panel:

Joe Jaworski is a running for the 11th Senate District. He previously served as a member of the Galveston City Council, where he was mayor pro-tem in his last term. On Tuesday, he announced that he had raised more than $801,000 from 1,267 individual contributors so far in this campaign. Jaworski's campaign reports district has the highest Democratic performance of any Republican-held district in the state.

Sherrie Matula is running for House District 129. She is an educator and community activist who ran a very strong campaign for the same seat in 2006. On Wednesday, she announced that she had raised nearly $127,000, leaving her with more cash on hand than her GOP opponent, who is the incumbent. Her campaign is also running a very successful field operation -- she has knocked on more than 2,000 doors since June 1.

On Monday, I wrote about Democrats taking the lead on state legislation to promote children’s health through nutrition and physical-education legislation. Today, I would like to touch upon three more crucial issues in children’s health care: insurance coverage for autism, getting rid of toxic toys, and second-hand smoke in cars.

COVERAGE FOR AUTISM

On July 14, the Chicago Sun Times ran a story about another key children’s health care issue for which Democrats are fighting. Illinois Democratic Gov. Blagojevich added language to House Bill 4225 to create landmark legislation, making his state provide the most comprehensive autism coverage in the nation.

According to the organization Autism Speaks, one in 150 children is diagnosed with autism; a new case is diagnosed almost every 20 minutes; and it is the fastest-growing serious developmental disability in the country.

A recent story in Stateline provides a great overview of state laws on insurance coverage for autism. According to the piece, 12 states already require insurance coverage for autism, one state has passed legislation this year, and 12 states have legislation pending.

In Wisconsin, Democrats were blocked in their efforts to pass an autism bill. Democratic Rep. Amy Sue Vruwink wrote a newspaper column about how – after passing the Senate – SB 178 by Democratic Sen. Judy Robson (and co-sponsored by Democratic Sen. Russ Decker, among others), died in the Assembly. According to a story in the Daily Cardinal, the Autism Society of Wisconsin supported Democratic SB 178 over Republican AB 901.

In Oklahoma, Democrats were also blocked in their efforts to pass an autism bill. There have been at least 3 attempts this session to pass an autism insurance bill. SB 1537, written by Democratic Sen. Jay Paul Gumm and dubbed “Nick’s Law, did not even make it out of committee. HB 2531, which would require insurance coverage for autism, passed the Senate on a 30-18 vote, but -- despite the pleas of parents of autistic children -- House Republican leadership refused to hear the bill. SB 2118, another attempt to pass insurance coverage for autism, sailed through the Senate, but died in a House committee.

TOXIC TOYS

In Washington, Democratic Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson authored HB 2647, the “Children’s Safe Products Act of 2008,” which bans 3 toxins from children’s toys: lead, cadmium, and phthalates. This bill was signed by the governor on March 13.

In California, AB 1108 (2007) -- the “California Toxic Toys Bill” – was sponsored by Democratic Assemblywoman Fiona Ma and signed by the governor on October 14, 2007.

In New Jersey, Democratic Assemblywoman Linda Greenstein and Democratic Sen. Loretta Weinberg have joined the fight for safe children’s toys this year with their introduction of bills for the “Toxic-free Children's Products Act” – AB 2332 and SB 1428.

In Maine, Rep. Hannah Pingree authored LD 2048, “An Act to Protect Children's Health and the Environment from Toxic Chemicals in Toys and Children's Products,” which was signed by the governor on April 17, 2008.

In MARYLAND, Democratic Delegate James Hubbard sponsored HB 62, which prohibits children’s products containing lead. It was signed by the governor on May 13.

BANNING SMOKING IN AUTOMOBILES WHERE CHILDREN ARE PRESENT

Democrats are also going after adults who smoke in vehicles when children are passengers in those cars. For an excellent overview of state legislation through 2007, take a look at another story in Stateline. In 2008, we see the Democratically controlled legislatures in Maine and Washington State defending children’s health and safety in this area.

In Maine, LD 2012 -- which is a primary-offense prohibition smoking in a motor vehicle when a person under 16 years of age is present in that vehicle -- was signed by the governor on April 10, 2008. Democratic Rep. Patricia Blanchette sponsored a state-wide ban bill modeled on an ordinance in her town of Bangor, which protects children up to age 18. In the end, Blanchette’s version lost out to a Republican version which lowered the age from 18 to 16.

In Washington, HB 2519 (sponsored by Democratic Rep. Shay Schual-Berke) and SB 6287 (sponsored by Democratic Sen. Chris Marr) both ban smoking in cars with children inside. The House bill would cover children under 18, and the Senate version would include children under 14. Both bills make the violation a secondary offense. While neither bill made it into law this session, future success is very likely since the bills were supported by the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, and state law-enforcement agencies, troopers, and firefighters.

Bright and early tomorrow morning, I will be heading to Netroots Nation in Austin, Texas with the DLCC's Executive Director Michael Sargeant. We would love to connect with anyone who is interested in chatting (particularly those who want to talk about state legislatures). Just shoot me a line at compton [at] dlcc.org and let me know if you want meet up.

My Left Nutmeg -- a terrific blog for all things Connecticut -- reviewed DLCCWeb this week:

For many campaigns, technical knowledge and the cost of Web design consultants are barriers.

Now that other national committee, the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC) has stepped into the void with DLCCWeb, a service aimed at making it easy and cheap for state legislative candidates to have a professional-looking and powerful online presence. For $40 per month and no start up fees, any Democratic candidate can get:

• Web site hosting, including a content editor (no HTML knowledge required), use of prebuilt templates or customized designs, and a blog feature;
• An online database that enables campaigns to import or export lists of supporters;
• Unlimited e-mail blasts to supporters, with the ability to segment and target the list;
• Three e-mail accounts; and
• An event registration tool.

While I'm not necessarily endorsing this over other services, it is a good example of a party committee stepping up to help establish an important and inexpensive infrastructural tool for a huge number of candidates.

Connecticut is in fact one of the states where candidates are using this service to power their campaigns online. I can think of two pretty good examples:

Rep. Deb Heinrich is using DLCCWeb to run for reelection. Through her website, she is posting her news clips, organizing events, and asking for volunteers.

George Colli is running for state senate. He is writing a blog, sharing his endorsements, and distributing his press releases. Collli is also using his website to connect supporters to social networking like Facebook and YouTube.

If you see other mentions of DLCCWeb online, shoot me a line or post a comment. I really appreciate the feedback (even if it's suggestions for how to improve the service).