|
|
Home | Contact Us | Press Room | Site Overview | Help | Login | Register |
![]() |
![]() |
| About NCSL | State & Federal Issues | Legislatures | Legislative Staff | Meetings | Bookstore | Legislators & Staff Only |
| NCSL Home > State & Federal Issues: NCSL Standing Committees > | Add to MyNCSL |
|
Posted June 25, 2003
SPRING FORUMApril 24 - 27, 2003
|
|
Thursday, April 24, 2003 |
|
7:30am - 5:30pm |
Preconference Seminar |
How Can Rural Development and Health and Human Services Improve Small Communities? The Role of States
Convened by NCSL with support from the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration's (HRSA) Office of Rural Health Policy.
State lawmakers and rural and economic development, health and human service officials representing 20 states and American Samoa convened to debate and discuss opportunities for states to effectively link their rural development initiatives to improving small town health care and human services. The meeting addressed three major themes:
The meeting began with a series of NCSL-facilitated panel and small group discussions among participants structured to maximize audience participation and allow ample time for general discussion. Lawmakers in attendance learned about and debated the relevance of the above issues to their states and reached the following conclusions:
|
1. |
Tight budgets are requiring most states to find new ways to structure and finance health and human services by reexamining the cost and effectiveness associated with categorical funding and service delivery. Particularly for many rural areas, there is an increasing need for greater coordination and integration of such services and programs to sustain or improve the access-to-care infrastructure as well as economic security. |
|
2. |
State rural development activities are particularly effective when organized to address a wide array of financial and service delivery challenges in rural communities. Health care services are an important part of this strategy. A comprehensive and permanent approach to rural development involving health care has been institutionalized in North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Texas. |
|
|
|
3. |
Health care services are an important proven factor in the economic viability of many rural communities. |
|
|
|
4. |
The economic incentives of federally-funded, state workforce investment boards (WIBs) --mission is to partner with business, labor and the public sector to alleviate state and local workforce needs and sustain a high-skill economy -- and the expertise of state health workforce planning commissions, can be important resources for addressing critical shortages of health care workers in many rural communities. |
|
|
|
5. |
Rural low-income populations have distinct needs for health and human services that need to be addressed. |
|
There was a consensus among workshop attendees for NCSL to convene additional forums for state officials that discuss challenges and opportunities for improving state rural health care programs and policy.
|
Friday, April 25, 2003 |
|
8:00 am-9:30 am |
Plenary Breakfast: State Fiscal Conditions |
The budget challenges facing state legislatures this year are unprecedented. This session covered the latest economic trends and how state legislatures are coping with these tight fiscal times.
Speakers:
|
9:45 am-11:15 am |
Keeping State Budgets Afloat |
Many states are dealing with the most disturbing fiscal conditions in a decade, presenting policymakers with both opportunities and significant challenges. How are these being handled? This roundtable discussion covered the latest approaches for dealing with state budget gaps.
Facilitator:
|
11:30 am-1:00 pm |
Working Lunch: Committee Business Meeting and Roundtable |
|
Representative Yusuf Salaam, Alabama |
Barry Denk, Pennsylvania |
|
Representative Ethel Peterson, Kansas |
Representative Dale Hargens, South Dakota |
|
Representative Roger Thomas, Kentucky |
Bobby Gierisch, Texas |
|
Representative Neal Nitz, Michigan |
Jeremy Meadows and Monica Kearns, NCSL |
|
Representative Clay Pope, Oklahoma |
|
Committee Activities
State-Federal Policies
|
1:15 pm-2:15 pm |
Agricultural Trade (Joint Session with Economic Development, Trade & Cultural Affairs Committee) |
The Committees heard presentations from the speakers/resource people and reviewed joint policy on this issue that will expire at the NCSL 2003 Annual Meeting.
The speakers noted that many state procurement preference policies will be affected by international trade agreements. States with significant agricultural subsidies also will be greatly affected, and agricultural biotechnology issues have a major role in trade discussions. Session attendees generally agreed that the NCSL policy could benefit from: mention of the Doha Round of trade talks, mention of agricultural biotechnology issues, consideration of what kind of federal trade adjustment assistance might be appropriate (certain regions and agricultural industries may need more help), and deletion of the reference to trade promotion authority (since this authority has been achieved).
Presiding:
Speakers/Resource People:
|
2:15 pm-3:15 pm |
Wetlands: Should the Federal Government Define Isolated Waters of the U.S.? (Joint Session with the Environment & Natural Resources Committee) |
The Committees may consider a policy on water issues at the NCSL 2003 Annual Meeting.
The speaker noted that at least 40 states have filed comments on the SWANCC decision, which concerns federal regulation of isolated waters. The comments are posted on the Internet at http://cascade.epa.gov/RightSite/dk_public_home.htm (docket no. OW-2002-0050).
Mr. Kinney has read through comments from nine states, which fall into the following general categories of opinion: no new rule is necessary (SWANCC is sufficient); a new rule is necessary; and some clarification of SWANCC may be necessary. Two meeting participants said that clarification would be helpful and NCSL could devise a policy to communicate this.
Presiding:
Speaker:
|
3:30 pm-5:00 pm |
Biotechnology as Cluster Development in New England (Joint Session with Economic Development, Trade & Cultural Affairs Committee) |
Cluster development is a relatively new state strategy to encourage business growth. Biotechnology-for agricultural, pharmaceutical, life sciences research and other industries-has emerged as such a cluster. This session examined the value of cluster development generally and Massachusetts' successful experience with a biotechnology cluster.
The speaker said that, in her view, the role of state government in promoting biotechnology development is to establish a transparent regulatory system, provide a single point of contact within state government, create incentives for companies to locate manufacturing facilities in the state, and fund and support a system for training entry-level biomanufacturing workers. The National Institute of Health is a primary source of public funding for biotechnology development. The importance of seed and venture capital and solid K-12 education systems were discussed as major concerns of biotech companies.
Representative Pope said that it would be helpful to understand where are the green (agricultural) biotechnology clusters compared to the red (medical) biotech clusters.
Presiding:
Speaker:
|
5:15 pm-6:00 pm |
NCSL Standing Committees Steering Committee Meeting |
|
Saturday, April 26, 2003 |
|
8:45 am-10:15 am |
Rural Policy Roundtable |
This session was a roundtable discussion that touched on several rural policy themes, including the definition of "rural" and federal-state-local relationships on rural issues.
Barry Denk presented information on various ways rural areas can be defined. Pennsylvania uses a definition based on population density, which is calculated by dividing the number of persons in each county by the number of square land miles. In Pennsylvania, rural areas are defined as having less than 274 people per square mile.
Also during this session, Bobby Gierisch summarized the policy he developed, which is being sponsored by Oregon Representative Jeff Kropf, concerning broad rural development issues. Representative Pope suggested adding language concerning helping places that are losing their population.
The Committee decided that advance work is needed on policies to be voted on at the 2003 NCSL Annual Meeting. Jeremy Meadows said that policies and comments can be circulated via the Committee mailings and discussed on the listservs (see www.ncsl.org/standcomm/scag/scag.htm for subscription information).
Presiding:
Speaker:
|
10:30 am-12 noon |
Forum Business Meeting |
State-federal policies adopted in Committee during the Spring Forum were considered, along with other business before the Forum, at this time.
|
12:15 pm-2:00 pm |
Plenary Lunch: Leadership in Trying Times |
|
2:15 pm-4:00 pm |
Special Briefings |
|
Sunday, April 27, 2003 |
|
9:00 am-11:30 am |
Plenary Session: Media Training - Winning the Interview Game |
Ever been caught off-guard by a reporter, or wished you had answered an interview question differently? Participants in this session engaged in a hands-on workshop, designed especially for legislators and staff, to help sharpen skills for dealing with the media.
Speaker:
The NCSL Standing Committee on Agriculture & Rural Development
will next meet during NCSL's Annual Meeting & Exhibition in
San Francisco, California
July 21 - 25, 2003.
Please Plan to Attend. Information is available at http://www.ncsl.org/am03/.
For additional information about the Agriculture & Rural Development Committee, please contact Jeremy Meadows at (202) 624-8664 or jeremy.meadows@ncsl.org or Monica Kearns at (303) 364-7700 or monica.kearns@ncsl.org. The committee web page address is http://www.ncsl.org/standcomm/scag/scag.htm.
© 2008 National Conference of State Legislatures, All Rights Reserved
Denver Office: Tel: 303-364-7700 | Fax: 303-364-7800 | 7700 East First Place | Denver, CO 80230 | Map
Washington Office: Tel: 202-624-5400 | Fax: 202-737-1069 | 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515 | Washington, D.C. 20001