In 2006, state governments stepped in where the federal government has refused to act. They passed legislation to address global warming and create renewable energy sources, make health insurance affordable, expand universal pre-kindergarten programs, rectify inequitable tax burdens, and more.

In that way, state governments can often serve as bastions of progressive policymaking. People expect their local legislators to create policy that will directly improve the quality of their lives, not get bogged down in battles over ideology.

Through the following State of the States, produced with our partner Progressive States, whose mission is to pass progressive legislation in all fifty states by providing coordinated research and strategic advocacy tools to forward-thinking state legislators, we highlight a few places where innovative policies are becoming law. But don’t be fooled. When it comes to getting all state governments on the same progressive page, we still have a long way to go.

Massachusetts

WARRIORS FOR THE

MINIMUM WAGE

The dangerous depreciation of the minimum wage in recent years has left many longing for the good ol’ days. In 1968, the federal minimum wage, adjusted for inflation, was $9.16 an hour. In 2006, it was $5.15 an hour—not enough for a family to stave off poverty.

It’s hard to believe that the federal government has yet to intervene, but it’s true. State governments that want to care for their workers have had no choice but to take matters into their own hands.

And they did. In 2006, Massachusetts leapfrogged other states by passing a law that will raise its state minimum wage to $8 per hour by 2008. California followed with a similar $8 per hour increase to begin in 2008.

Unfortunately, neither state indexed their minimum wage to inflation, which means that increases in the cost of living will steadily erode the value of the minimum wage year by year unless legislatures raise the rate. Early versions of legislation passed by the Massachusetts Senate and by the California Legislature included indexing, but opposition from Republican governors in both states led to their defeat.

Washington State—the leader on the minimum wage before 2006—remains the reigning champion. Its government enacted indexing back in 2001, and in 2006 its rate was $7.63 an hour.

With a new Congress promising a federal increase in the minimum wage, and six states passing such increases by Proposition in the midterm elections, it looks like the country is finally back to the future.

Illinois

BALANCING WORK

AND FAMILY

It’s a rare breed, that public policy Promised Land. But imagine a single reform that delivers expanded economic growth, helps working parents balance work and family demands, and increases educational equity between rich and poor families. Illinois did just that, and came up the first law in the nation that establishes the goal of universally-available public pre-school for all 3- and 4-year olds.

“Pre-school for All reflects the science that demonstrates success in education is dependent on what happens during children’s earliest years,” said Jerry Stermer, President of Voices for Illinois Children.

Currently, federal and state dollars pay for pre-school for 130,000 low-income or academically “at risk” Illinois children, but the new law aims to make pre-K available regardless of income, with the goal of enrolling 190,000 children in publicly-funded preschool by 2010. This distinction is important. It’s hard to miss the fact that balancing work and family is an issue felt by almost all working Americans, including the increasingly squeezed middle class.

Florida, Georgia and Oklahoma currently offer pre-school to all four-year olds. Illinois’ commitment to the goal of pre-school for all three-year olds as well is a smart and needed policy advance, raising the bar for early education. Let’s see who follows.

Vermont

MASSACHUSETTS AIN’T

THE ONLY PLAN IN TOWN

It’s become blatantly clear that, with 47 million Americans uninsured, America has a health care coverage crisis. Fed up with federal inaction, states have started expanding coverage on their own terms.

While Massachusetts’ health plan got the media splash, Vermont enacted a far better plan in 2006 with clearer standards for health care affordability and without the problematic “individual mandate”—the cornerstone of the Massachusetts plan—that requires struggling middle-class families to purchase health insurance without addressing its skyrocketing costs.

In contrast, Vermont’s 70,000 uninsured will have the option to purchase “Catamount Health,” a comprehensive insurance package offered by health insurers. Premiums are subsidized on a sliding scale for families who earn less than 300% of the federal poverty level ($60,000 for a family of four). Vermont will also offer a program to help workers afford employer-based coverage.

The program is paid for through a combination of cigarette and tobacco tax increases, a $365-per-employee annual assessment on employers that do not provide private coverage, and Medicaid funds. To improve health and reduce costs, Vermont is doing things like developing a new chronic care management program.

As a voluntary system, Vermont’s plan does not ensure universal coverage. But it promises to make a significant dent in the size of the State’s uninsured population.

Alabama

TAKING THE TAX BURDEN

OFF THE WORKING POOR

Too often, the debate about taxes is oversimplified into two positions: high taxes or low taxes. This obfuscates the real issues: who is being taxed, how much, and to what end? For example, California is considered a “high-tax” state. But, in what many would consider smart tax policy, the state imposes no income tax until a married couple with two children makes at least $42,700. In contrast, other supposed “low-tax” states hit poorer working families much harder, largely because they let wealthier residents and corporations off the hook for paying their fair share of taxes.

A report this year by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that in 19 states that levy income taxes, two-parent families of four with incomes below the federal poverty line are liable for income tax.

Among these states was Alabama. Until this year, Alabama was the only state in the nation that taxed the income of working families making less than $10,000 per year.

2006 changed that. New legislation makes the first $12,500 of income exempt from taxes for a family of four. Because it concentrated tax relief at the bottom, Alabama’s tax changes, however modest, delivered more help to working families in that state than the rubber stamp tax cuts, skewed to favor wealthy taxpayers, that are too often seen on the federal level.

Colorado

RIDING THE POPULAR VOTE ALL

THE WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE

The real sin of the 2000 presidential election wasn’t the few hundred mishandled butterfly ballots, it was that our convoluted Electoral College system left the winner of the national vote a loser of the election.

Imagine if the candidate who actually won the most votes nationwide automatically became President. In a bi-partisan effort, Colorado took the first step towards realizing that goal when its Senate passed legislation to implement what is being called the interstate “Agreement among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote.”

Under the interstate agreement, the participating states would award all of their electoral votes from the presidential candidate receiving the most votes of Americans in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The National Popular Vote agreement would not take effect until identical legislation is passed by enough states to possess a majority of the electoral votes. Thus, the agreement would be on hold until an Electoral College majority for the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes can be guaranteed.

Following Colorado’s lead, Illinois, Missouri, California, and Louisiana introduced National Popular Vote legislation in their state houses. California’s bill passed both houses of the legislature before being vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger. In all, 29 states have legislative sponsors for the bill for the upcoming 2007 legislative sessions.

As Colorado Senate Majority Leader Ken Gordon said, “I think it makes sense to make the President the person who gets the most votes. It is revolutionary, I admit. It is called democracy.”

Wisconsin

SMART GROWTH

AND CLEAN JOBS

State legislatures are dismantling the myth that environmental protection and economic growth are mutually exclusive. In 2006, the Wisconsin State Legislature passed a renewable energy bill that could create over 2,000 jobs for the state and save its businesses and homeowners over 200 million dollars a year in heating costs.

Thanks to this legislation, ten percent of the state’s electricity will be generated by renewable sources by 2015, resulting in a decrease of 5.5 million tons of greenhouse gases. By 2011, the six largest state agencies will purchase 20 percent of their energy from renewable sources. The Act also requires the state to update building codes to include higher efficiency standards and creates special energy standards for state building projects and purchases.

And here’s the kicker: the bill creates new industries and new jobs. Not to mention the fact that the Wisconsin Act expands the technology muscle of the state by investing new funds in research and the development of state-specific alternative energy sources, such as testing the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of burning leftover corn plants to heat residential spaces.

With the federal government AWOL on the dangers of global warming, the state of Wisconsin joins Colorado, California and others that are moving us towards energy independence and confronting global warming, one state at a time.

RETURN TO DMI’S 2006 YEAR IN REVIEW MAIN PAGE