Growing Prosperity: Agriculture, Technology, and the Future of Farming

Southern state officials gathered in Atlanta for the “Growing Prosperity: Agriculture, Technology, and the Future of Farming” Policy Masterclass. Twenty officials from 11 CSG South states –Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia – participated in the event. 

Over two days, participants learned about recent developments in agriculture, technology, and relevant state and federal legislation. Briefings covered the current state of agriculture, farm labor shortages, food insecurity, agricultural trade, and the struggle of small rural farmers. Attendees visited the Georgia Institute of Technology’s Agricultural Technology Research Program to see new devices and techniques being developed to enhance agricultural methods and participated in roundtable discussions to hear from their colleagues about agricultural issues in Southern states. 

Experts from the Georgia Institute of Technology, American Farm Bureau Federation, West Virginia Department of Agriculture, Georgia Department of Agriculture, Georgia Center of Innovation, and AppHarvest shared their knowledge and insights with attendees through presentations and interactive briefings. Participants also met with Chancellor of the University System of Georgia Sonny Perdue to learn about his time as a state Senator (1991-2002), Governor of Georgia (2003-2011) and U.S. Secretary of Agriculture (2017-2021). 

The Masterclass was hosted by CSG South and moderated by Senator Tyler Harper of Georgia, chair of the CSG South Agriculture and Rural Development Committee. By interacting with subject matter experts and colleagues from other Southern states, participants increased their knowledge of agriculture, farm labor shortages, agricultural technology, and policies related to these issues. The Masterclass participants included: 

Representative Randall Shedd, Alabama 

Representative Harlan Breaux, Arkansas 

Representative Roger Lynch, Arkansas 

Representative Christine Hunschofsky, Florida 

Representative John Corbett, Georgia 

Representative Robert Dickey, Georgia 

Senator Tyler Harper, Georgia 

Senator Larry Walker, Georgia 

Representative David Wilkerson, Georgia 

Representative Phillip Pratt, Kentucky 

Senator Robin Webb, Kentucky 

Mr. Nicholas Cole, Louisiana 

Senator Tyler McCaughn, Mississippi 

Senator Benjamin Suber, Mississippi 

Representative Kenneth Walker, Mississippi 

Representative Jim Grego, Oklahoma 

Representative Russell Ott, South Carolina 

Representative Vincent Dixie, Tennessee 

Delegate Riley Keaton, West Virginia 

Commissioner Kent Leonhardt, West Virginia 

Click here for workshop photos

Presentations:

App Harvest

Small Rural Farmers

GA COI Ag Tech

Farm Labor Shortages

The post Growing Prosperity: Agriculture, Technology, and the Future of Farming appeared first on CSG South.

Ballot Curing 101

By Sarah Moon

Each state employs specific requirements for votes to be verified and subsequently counted. As a result, U.S. voters can face challenges in casting error-free absentee or mail-in ballots.

While those mail-in ballot requirements generally vary by state, in every state, voters are required to provide a valid signature on their ballot and related documents. However, mistakes do happen, so what do states do if a ballot is missing a signature or if there is a discrepancy in signature matching?

Some states utilize a range of ‘ballot curing’ procedures to notify voters and allow them ample time to correct these signature-related errors. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 24 states currently require election administrators and/or officials to conduct this ballot curing process. The remaining states typically do not count ballots that require correction.

How does ‘ballot curing’ work?

Most states employ a signature verification process to confirm the identity of absentee voters. These signatures are then compared to the voter’s signature that the state may already have on file, often sourced through an individual’s voter registration file.

When the voter’s signature is missing on the ballot envelope or if there is sufficient reason to claim discrepancy in the signature matching process, the voter’s eligibility may have to confirmed through alternative means.

Ballot curing requires both notification and correction. Often, election administrators or state election officials inform voters about problems with their ballot via phone, e-mail or mail. Then, the voter is given time to cure such errors. To resolve these discrepancies, voters frequently are asked to provide additional information to confirm their identity or to provide a new signature that verifies their eligibility.

What are some state variations?

States conduct the curing process in different ways. Some states only allow voters to correct their ballots in cases of discrepancies in signature matching but not in cases of missing signatures. Other states require a witness signature on mail-in ballots alongside the voter’s.

These ballot cures must be completed by a specified deadline, which also varies by state and locality. To complicate things further, many voters aren’t familiar with the curing process and may dismiss notifications that are sent to them via mail. Postal slowdowns could result in delays and because voters have limited time to correct any deficiencies, these delays could result in ballots not being counted.

These inconsistencies in process and the resulting challenges have continuously received pushback, most notably following the 2020 election.

While ballot curing is an important step in making sure each vote is counted, it does not provide a complete solution to ballot rejection. The lack of standardization and other disqualifying errors cannot be fixed through existing ballot curing procedures. In addition to streamlining and easing the ballot curing process, these issues and others could be further examined to improve the procedures for counting mail-in ballots.

What can states do?

States can make changes to their absentee/mail-in ballot processes and help educate voters about related rules and procedures. Employing available technologies, Colorado started an initiative to help voters ensure that their votes are counted. These efforts specifically targeted younger populations in order to encourage their experiences participating in the democratic process. All 64 counties in the state utilized the TXT2CURE program to minimize the impacts of ballot rejection, and the state continues to boast one of the lowest rates of signature-rejected ballots out of all states employing a vote-by-mail-for-all system.

The TXT2CURE program uses smartphones to ease voter accessibility following a rejected ballot. When a Colorado voter learns of a signature discrepancy on their ballot, they can simply text a provided phone number and receive a link to a customized webpage. Once the voter enters their voter identification number, they can simply sign a digital affidavit and submit a photo of an acceptable photo ID to complete the process. In a few minutes and conveniently on their phone, voters are assured that their ballot is cast and counted.

Associates in Action: CSG Associates Support Eastern Kentucky Flood Relief Efforts

By Sarahi Castillo

Several rounds of heavy rain moved across Eastern Kentucky from July 26 to July 30, causing torrential flooding and devasting damage. In the wake of the flooding, many CSG Associates have pledged to help donate and assist those in need of help. CSG is proud to highlight the excellent work that our Associates have contributed toward the relief in the wake of the catastrophic flooding.

AARP Kentucky has compiled a list of nonprofit organizations, government agencies, shelter organizations by county and helpful links to other groups that are accepting donations, organizing volunteers and offering supplies to victims and their families. Anyone affected by the storm can access AARP’s link via https://states.aarp.org/kentucky/disaster-response-resource-guide.

Amazon’s Disaster Relief Team responded to requests from- Save the Children, Feeding America, The American Red Cross and local organizations to donate over 580,000 relief items, including ready-to-eat meals, water, shelter items, solar chargers, lights, backpacks, pack-and-plays, strollers, baby tubs, baby carriers and diapers.

AT&T and the AT&T Foundation donated $50,000 to the Team Eastern Kentucky Flood Relief Fund and Volunteers of America. Their retail employees also provided phones and charging resources for use by residents who are housed at area shelters like Jackson command post, as well as hygiene kits. AT&T volunteers are supporting the Crisis Cleanup Hotline and FirstNet Response Operations Group by connecting residents with local relief organizations and first responders. Their FirstNet team deployed a combined total of 12 temporary mobile towers and generators to several Eastern Kentucky communities including Buckhorn Lake State Park in Perry County and the Knott County Community Center in Leburn to serve displaced residents and first responders. To further help individuals and families in the area, a text-to-give campaign was launched to collect donations for the Foundation for Appalachian Kentucky Crisis Fund. AT&T is also waiving overage charges to provide unlimited talk, text, and data for affected customers.

HCA Healthcare has committed $400,000 for Kentucky flood relief efforts. They will contribute $100,000 to the American Red Cross, $100,000 to the Team Eastern Kentucky Flood Relief Fund, $100,000 in colleague matching gifts and relief grants to Galen College Nursing students with disaster needs and $100,000 through in-kind donations to meet critical community needs.

Procter & Gamble’s Response Team, in partnership with Matthew 25: Ministries, is mobilizing the “Tide Loads of Hope Mobile Laundry Unit” to support relief and recovery efforts by providing free, full-service laundry as well as distributing free personal care kits with everyday essentials such as cleaning products and hygiene products in affected areas.

Teladoc will be providing free, 24/7 general medical telehealth visits to residents, first responders and others. However, individuals who are displaced within the area due to the flooding can seek treatment from a licensed health care professional for non-emergency illness by calling 855-225-5032.

The American Bankers Association, or ABA, will be contributing $25,000 to support flood relief efforts in Kentucky. ABA is donating the $25,000 to the Kentucky Bankers Relief Fund established by the Kentucky Bankers Association and encouraging its members to donate as well. Money from the fund will assist flood victims including more than 20 bank employees directly affected by the disaster. This marks the second ABA contribution to help victims of natural disasters in Kentucky in less than a year. ABA contributed $50,000 to relief efforts after devastating tornadoes in Kentucky last December.

International Paper, McKesson Corp., Microsoft Corp., and Wells Fargo have donated as members of the Red Cross Annual Disaster Giving Program and the Disaster Responder Program, which helps enable the American Red Cross to prepare communities for disasters big and small, respond whenever and wherever disasters occur and help families during the recovery process.

Associates in Action articles highlight the philanthropic efforts and public-private partnerships of members of the CSG Associates Program, our consortium of private-sector entities, national trade associations and nonprofits that support the work of The Council of State Governments.

How State Leaders Can Improve Maternal Health Outcomes 

By: Valerie Newberg 

Despite advances in technology and policy substantially decreasing the risk of deaths associated with pregnancy in the 20th century, the U.S. is one of only a few countries with significant increases in maternal mortality in the 21st century.   

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defines an instance of maternal mortality as a person dying during pregnancy or within 42 days of pregnancy from a cause that was not accidental or incidental. Maternal mortality is used by the World Health Organization to quantify the concept of maternal health and reflects the economic, social and public health conditions of mothers in a population. Maternal mortality also provides insight on disparities in care. The United States lags other developed nations, ranking 46th globally. Current data on maternal health, while imperfect, paints a troubling picture of inequity across American racial and ethnic groups, regions and states. The Department of Health and Human Services reports that Black and Indigenous Americans are 2-3 times more likely than white Americans to experience pregnancy-related mortality and rural mothers are increasingly likely to suffer from pregnancy-related morbidity and mortality due to decreases in rural hospital access. Maternal mortality rates are highly variable among the states. California has a rate of 10.2 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, just half of the U.S. average. Alabama currently has a rate of 36.2. 

Despite these challenges, there is reason for hope: many instances of maternal mortality and morbidity are preventable when medical professionals have the resources to provide care before, during and after a pregnancy. Additionally, the Biden administration released its “White House Blueprint for Addressing the Maternal Health Crisis,” which includes a request for a $470 million budget to develop much-needed tools that will help states and local communities mitigate this issue. The blueprint aims at “cutting the rates of maternal mortality and morbidity, reducing the disparities in maternal health outcomes, and improving the overall experience of pregnancy, birth, and postpartum for people across the country.” The plan also makes clear that reforming the American maternal health system cannot be the burden of one person, agency or institution alone. Efforts must reflect collaboration between the federal and state governments to be truly effective and equitable. 

As outlined in the blueprint, the federal government is taking several steps to help states improve pregnancy outcomes. 

Increasing data collection efforts 

  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Levels of Care Assessment Tool creates “standardized assessments” of maternal care levels for policymakers in participating states.  
  • A review of Women, Infants, and Children participation and maternal health outcomes will provide state policymakers with robust information on the risk factors for maternal mortality and extreme morbidity. 

Using equity as a guiding principle. 

  • Expansion of the Nurse Corps and Community Health Worker Training Program will bridge gaps in care for medically underserved communities, including rural areas, by providing additional resources for Health Professional Shortage Areas. 
  • Revision of guidelines will ensure rural and Indian Health Service medical facilities are prepared to care for pregnant people and mothers, even if those facilities do not have obstetric units. 
  • Utilization of self-monitored blood pressure regulation programs will assist those at risk for hypertensive disorders, which disproportionately impact pregnant people over 35 and Black and Indigenous mothers. 

Encouraging state innovation.  

  • A Maternal Health Taskforce will focus on state-level data collection on maternal mortality and morbidity. 

Potential options for state responses include expanding current programs to promote equity and implementing an all-government approach that incorporates several agencies and programs. 

  • In Arkansas, the governor proposed initiatives expanding Medicaid-eligible pregnancy benefits to include home visits for those at high-risk for pregnancy complications and coverage for mothers who earn up to 212% of the federal poverty level. 
  • In Delaware, lawmakers passed a bill requiring doula services be covered under Medicaid. At-risk populations not receiving doula care are twice as likely to suffer from pregnancy complications as those with doula care. Those receiving doula care covered by Medicaid report lower levels of C-sections and premature birth. 
  • In Nevada, lawmakers passed a bill revising the responsibilities of the Maternal Mortality Review Committee to include collaboration with the Advisory Committee of the Office of Minority Health and Equity of the Department of Health and Human Services, a practice that allows the committee to better analyze racial, age and geographic disparities in maternal care. 

As the Sept. 30 deadline for Congress to pass appropriations bills approaches, the Blueprint for Addressing the Maternal Health Crisis remains a valuable opportunity for Congress to prioritize state-federal partnerships. In the meantime, states have several options in place to address disparities in maternal health outcomes, including expanded Medicaid coverage, updated data collection and more comprehensive monitoring guidelines.  

Additional Resources: 

Finding a Path to Consensus: The CSG Justice Center Celebrates 20 Years

By Amelia Vorpahl

The U.S. criminal justice system can evoke complicated emotions.

If you asked people what the ultimate goals of the system should be, most answers would likely include things like reducing crime and recidivism, using public resources effectively, keeping people safe and allowing for a humane system that upholds accountability. However, how we achieve these goals is where much of the difficulty arises. Political realities, competing priorities and incomplete or contradictory data can make it incredibly hard for policymakers to fully grasp what’s needed. For decades, state leaders on both sides of the aisle have called for a way to talk about what’s working and what’s not without politics getting in the way.

“In the mid-1990s, it became very clear that if you had a meeting of legislators from different states, or of prosecutors, public defenders, or victims — that people agreed on a vast majority of the things that needed to be done to make the criminal justice system work better. And that was the genesis of what has grown into the [CSG] Justice Center,” said Mike Lawlor, a founding member of the CSG Justice Center advisory board.

EARLY DAYS OF THE CSG JUSTICE CENTER

The origin of the CSG Justice Center focused on the fundamental idea that leaders needed a space to help find consensus on how states could tackle complex issues of safety, health and justice. Two decades later, the organization has grown into a group of 120 researchers, practitioners, policy experts and writers with an advisory board representing a cross-section of key leaders shaping criminal justice policy across the country.“To have what’s effectively a 120-person criminal justice think tank attached to a membership organization like CSG and part of that family is very unique,” said CSG Justice Center Director Megan Quattlebaum. “We have staff going out in the field all over the country, which gives them a clear vantage point of what the needs of our members are. That is something special and important.”

To understand how the CSG Justice Center evolved from its beginnings to its current stature, you can start with one person: Mike Thompson. When 25-year-old Thompson was hired as a criminal justice policy analyst at CSG East in 1997, he was the sole staff member of the only CSG criminal justice program. While working to get the new CSG East program off the ground, Thompson targeted a handful of key justice issues that could earn consensus, including juvenile justice, support for victims of crime, improved responses to mental health needs and racial disparities in the justice system.

Although these topics sound fairly mainstream today, the late 1990s and early 2000s were challenging times for organizations in the criminal justice space. CSG East had to navigate a political atmosphere that lacked the bipartisanship and consensus on basic criminal justice policies seen today, especially regarding what drives crime and recidivism. Back then, Thompson said there were prevailing thoughts that people could fake a mental illness to get out of responsibility for committing a crime, or that people could be ordered into treatment without consent.

“I don’t care if you were a Democrat or a Republican, you didn’t want to be seen as soft on crime,” said Thompson. “But I came from corrections, and those guys weren’t ideological. They just said, ‘This is what needs to happen to run a safe prison and to reduce recidivism.’ So, I saw the mission as framing issues in a way that gets Republicans and Democrats around a table with experts to agree that these were problems we all want to solve.

”For one of its first major projects in 2002, CSG East brought together experts from behavioral health, criminal justice, law enforcement and other key fields to publish the Criminal Justice/Mental Health Consensus Project, a first-of-its-kind report with policy recommendations to help stakeholders address the needs of people with mental illness who are involved with the justice system. This report launched the type of work that the CSG Justice Center is now known for: gathering expertise from key leaders across impacted systems to promote data-driven and evidence-based policy ideas. Four years after this seminal report, the CSG Governing Board voted to establish the national CSG Justice Center, diverging the work of CSG East’s criminal justice program into a separate organization, still under Thompson’s leadership.

“A TRAIN GOING 400 MILES AN HOUR”

The staff and board members from early years describe the formation of the CSG Justice Center as having energy like that of a startup company, with the freedom, flexibility and hustle of having to build a program from the ground up. Everyone did everything, from hiring to budgets, to writing and even leading high-level meetings with federal and state leaders. There was no infrastructure and no rulebook to work from. Thompson laughed as he compared the CSG Justice Center to a “lemonade stand” in those early years. As with most startups, everyone has stories of mishaps and adventures they still love to retell.

Michael Festa, AARP Massachusetts state director and the first chair of the CSG Justice Center Advisory Board, fondly recalled an early board meeting in his Massachusetts garden enjoying a New England clambake when a torrential downpour started. The board members then spent hours on a bus, soaking wet. During the final meeting for the Consensus Project report, Thompson remembered running out of a ballroom with hundreds of top justice and health leaders to crowd around a phone because he was chosen as a friend’s “lifeline” on the television show “Who Wants to be a Millionaire?” which was taping the same day.

Renée Brackett, executive assistant to senior management and he Justice Center’s longest-serving employee, called the early days “a train going 400 miles an hour.” She spoke about being a “one-man shop” while planning a conference for 1,000 people during her first year on the job. “I can still remember the dates because I didn’t sleep the entire Christmas break,” she said.

While the founding CSG Justice Center team navigated the challenges of building a new organization, they also pioneered entirely new ways of approaching criminal justice policy. Marshall Clement, CSG Justice Center deputy director and one of the early staff members, remembers piloting the groundbreaking Justice Reinvestment Initiative. His small team traveled across the country multiple times a month to gather data, listen to stakeholders and convene working groups using the data to develop policy options that would reduce corrections costs and allow states to reinvest savings in making communities safer. In more than 30 participating states, their efforts through the years have led to a reduction — by thousands — of the number of people behind bars, as well as lower recidivism rates, prison closures and millions of dollars reinvested in community-based treatment and alternatives to incarceration.

Both Thompson and Clement are quick to commend the hard work of the early staff members and to uplift the critical role that the first advisory board members played in getting the organization started. The board’s early leadership and guidance set the stage for the incredible success of the CSG Justice Center over the next 20 years.Michael Festa says he feels blessed to have been one of the first board members and credits its focus on “bipartisanship, evidence-based policies, finding a path to consensus, and perhaps just as important, doing all of it with mutual respect and genuine affection.”

EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL EVOLUTION

By all accounts, the tireless work ethic, grit and drive of the founding CSG Justice Center staff and board members has paid off. The criminal justice policy landscape of 2022 is very different than that of 2002, and Quattlebaum attributes this to the Justice Center’s work over the last two decades along with its partners and members. For example, she argues that there is an increasing recognition of how outcomes on community supervision drive prison admissions and populations, crediting the Justice Center’s research division and its Confined and Costly 50-state revocations report for helping make that case. She’s also seen states focus more on how they can better respond to people with mental illness and behavioral health conditions by reducing justice system contact and expanding access to treatment, including through innovative ideas like co-responder teams and community responder programs.

“Twenty years ago, co-response programs in law enforcement departments were not something you’d find in jurisdictions across the country. Twenty years ago, the national recognition of a bipartisan consensus around criminal justice policies just wasn’t there,” said Quattlebaum. “We know the criminal justice system needs collaboration with the housing system, with workforce development, with mental and behavioral health systems and with education. From our earliest days, we had staff whose expertise came from the health side and not the criminal justice side.”

Clement agrees and said he’s proud of the major evolutions that he has seen take place at the CSG Justice Center over his 17-year tenure, including the growth of the organization and staff itself, the impact of its work in transforming the criminal justice and behavioral health fields and the rise in public awareness of necessary reform to our systems of safety and justice.

A DATA-DRIVEN APPROACH

Although the CSG Justice Center’s work touches on every facet of the justice system, a throughline is the focus on data and research. From the beginning, the Justice Center pioneered a bipartisan, data-driven approach to criminal justice reform in red and blue states alike that was unprecedented in the justice policy landscape. The key to this success, spanning the past 20 years, has been the Justice Center’s ability to uplift its members to speak firsthand about the needs in their communities.

“In order to build possibilities, you have to have a lot of perspectives at the table so that you’re really understanding the problem in its fullest dimension,” said Quattlebaum. “You have to have the courts and the executive and legislative branches at the table if you really want to see justice systems become more efficient and fairer. All those folks need to be in the conversation.”

While the CSG Justice Center has helped reform criminal justice policy in the United States, the organization is increasingly seeing the need to look further upstream to prevent justice system involvement altogether. This includes helping communities build more robust crisis response systems that prevent arrests and jail stays for people with behavioral health needs as well as a focus on front-end diversion in juvenile justice systems. Reentry and diversion systems also face challenges in growing to scale, and the Justice Center has prioritized ensuring that there is a baseline level of services across the country while helping states tailor supports to individual needs.

“The work of the CSG Justice Center over the last 20 years has been the work of a lot of people. You’d have to fill up the entire magazine with names if you really want to do it justice,” said Quattlebaum. “So many people’s ideas and effort have gone into making us what we are today. I can’t say enough how grateful we are to everybody who has been a part of this incredible project.”

LOOKING AHEAD

So, where does the CSG Justice Center go from here? Quattlebaum says that the organization’s commitment to consensus-based work won’t change, but one example of its new direction is found in its prioritization of racial equity. Internally, staff are having candid conversations about policies and practices that will ensure that the Justice Center is a transparent, fair and welcoming workplace. In its external work, there is increased focus on helping states directly tackle racially disproportionate outcomes in their justice systems. This focus has come directly from member requests.

“I think a lot about how policy and practice changes can be sustained over time. We assist policymakers to build a wide and deep base of support so that the reforms states enact are deeply embedded and sustainable moving forward. It’s important to think about how it lasts.” Quattlebaum said. “At some basic level, you have to be playing the long game.”

Looking ahead, the CSG Justice Center is focused on three big areas in which it sees broad bipartisan support, including breaking cycles of incarceration; advancing health, opportunity and equity; and using data to improve safety and justice. State and local leaders are focused on the shortcomings of safety and justice systems and are interested in ways to transform these systems to increase public safety at less cost. By ensuring its work is grounded in the present-day challenges of leaders on the ground, the Justice Center is moving the field forward with ground-breaking research and building capacity to develop innovative and practical tools while scaling up how it helps state and local leaders across all 50 states.

This article appeared in the CSG Capitol Ideas magazine (2022, Issue 4). View current and past issues at csg.org/publications/capitol-ideas.