top of page

 

2024 Summer Forum

Park City, Utah

July 7–10, 2024

•     •     •

States at the Vanguard

Reid Wilson

Founder and Editor

Pluribus News

Reid Wilson's Bio

Reid Wilson, Founder and Editor, Pluribus News, emphasized the interconnectedness and responsiveness of state legislatures, highlighting how forums like the Senate Presidents’ Forum demonstrate that state legislatures are not isolated but rather dynamic and influenced by each other.

Reid Wilson can be reached at reid@pluribusnews.com
and invites SPF members to sign up for daily state news at pluribusnews.com.

 

To download Reid Wilson’s complete slide presentation, click here:

Current Legislative Trends and Issues

State Lobbying: Significant increase in lobbying expenditures at the state level, nearing $2.2 billion in 2021, indicating growing influence and attention.

Key Legislative Focus Areas: Digital privacy, AI reform, and regulation are emerging as pivotal issues at the state legislative level.

State Legislative Initiatives

Education: Red states are expanding education savings accounts; school safety and cultural issues are also prominent.

Housing: States including Utah, New Mexico, and Oregon are taking steps to address shortages with strategies such as zoning preemption.

Economy: The boom times are over. Diverse tax approaches are in play among the states.

Infrastructure: States are utilizing funds from federal infrastructure bills for roads, broadband, and electric vehicles.

Technology and AI: State-level initiatives on AI regulation and technology governance are increasing in light of continued inaction at the federal level.

Challenges and Outlook for State Legislatures

Workforce Shortage: Critical issue across sectors like healthcare, corrections, and education, impacting service delivery and economic stability.

Legislative Environment: Increasing complexity and polarization, with challenges in constituent interactions and partisan pressures.

Public Perception: Growing dissatisfaction with incumbents and political institutions, reflecting broader societal concerns about governance.

The decisions made in state legislatures today are the seeds of major federal policy tomorrow.

— Reid Wilson

Electoral and Ideological Considerations

Voter Sentiment: Rising dissatisfaction with incumbents globally, influencing electoral outcomes and legislative priorities.

Partisan Dynamics: Despite some polarization, state legislatures often exhibit less partisanship compared to federal counterparts.

A 2023 survey found that American voters of all parties are in a “really bad mood.”

Societal Impact and Policy Divergence

Policy Fragmentation: Significant divergence in policy priorities between states and between political parties, exacerbated by media polarization and societal divisions.

Technological Influence: Increasing use of data analytics in political campaigns, shaping voter outreach and electoral strategies.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion

Participants' comments are paraphrased and edited for the purposes of this report.

Senator Robert Stivers (President of the Senate, Kentucky):

  • Discussed the differing worldviews depicted by various media outlets and questioned the distinction between the press and businesses, given that most media outlets operate under a business model. He also raised the issue of regulating social media and how it fits within the concept of press freedom.

Mr. Wilson:

  • Noted that legal battles have arisen from social media/tech companies against state legislation related to social media and children's privacy.

  • Noted that mainstream media like CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News are profit-driven and frequently feature divisive content, contrasting them with less sensationalistic sources like the Associated Press and his own publication.

  • Mentioned bipartisan agreement on regulating algorithms and protecting children despite the contentious nature of other social media-related issues.

Tom Finneran (Moderator):

  • Asked about the profitability and future of traditional media outlets like the New York Times, Washington Post, and Boston Globe.

​​

Mr. Wilson:

  • Highlighted the success of the Wall Street Journal with its strict subscription paywall and the New York Times with its various revenue streams, including traditional journalism, a cooking app, and games, all of which contribute to financial stability.

Senator Lee Schoenbeck (Senate President Pro Tempore, South Dakota):

  • Inquired about the rise of internet-based publications covering state legislatures, mentioning the presence of such reporters in South Dakota.

​​

Mr. Wilson:

  • Confirmed the presence of organizations like States News and Center Square that provide comprehensive and independent coverage of state legislatures, operating as nonprofits for sustainability.

  • Stated that Pluribus News (where Mr. Reid is Found and Editor) maintains a non-partisan approach and mentioned state-specific outlets like the Texas Review and outlets in New York.

  • Acknowledged an increase in such coverage compared to a decade ago, though it remains below the peaks of 20 to 30 years ago.


School Choice

Samuel E. Abrams

Director

International Partnership for the Study of Educational Privatization

National Education Policy Center

University of Colorado

Samuel E. Abrams' Bio

abrams-2024su.jpeg

Douglas N. Harris

Chair, Department of Economics

and

Director, National Center for Research on Education Access

Tulane University

Douglas N. Harris' Bio

harris-2024su.jpg

As legislation concerning choice in K-12 education continues to take hold across the country, this session delved into opposing perspectives to better understand the calls for reform as well as the benefits and challenges associated with school choice. Samuel E. Abrams, Director, International Partnership for the Study of Educational Privatization, National Education Policy Center, University of Colorado — who led SPF’s April 5, 2024, virtual session on the topic — was joined by Douglas N. Harris, Chair, Department of Economics, and Director, National Center for Research on Education Access, of Tulane University.

To download the complete slide presentation from our session on School Choice, click here:

Recent Shifts in Educational Landscape

  • Thirteen states have adopted universal or near-universal voucher programs.

  • States including Utah and Arizona implemented Education Savings Accounts (ESAs), universal since 2022, covering private school tuition for all, including affluent families, leading to unforeseen state costs.

  • New Hampshire’s policy covers individuals up to 300% of the federal poverty threshold, making it almost universal.

Support from Conservatives and Progressives

  • Early libertarian concepts (Milton Friedman, 1973) advocated for vouchers that can be divided to cover diverse expenses with minimal regulation, similar to current ESA debit card systems.

  • Progressive left support stemmed from frustration with big city public schools and a desire to provide opportunities for disadvantaged children.

  • Betsy DeVos, Secretary of Education under President Trump, significantly advanced school choice advocacy. The COVID-19 pandemic further increased demand for school choice due to varying family circumstances and dissatisfaction with public school policies.

Separation of Church and State

  • Pre-2001, the Supreme Court's stance made vouchers legally untenable due to church-state separation.

  • The 2001 Cleveland voucher case Zelman v. Simmons-Harris set a precedent allowing voucher programs. Recent Supreme Court decisions under Trump appointees further support government funding for private and charter schools.

  • A major issue with vouchers is the subsidization of religious education, complicating church-state separation, especially as many eligible schools are church-affiliated.

  • Recent Supreme Court decisions further support government funding for private and charter schools.

Standards

  • Without oversight and teacher certification requirements, there is no public accountability, relying solely on market accountability, which can be problematic given parents’ limited access to accurate data on educational outcomes.

  • Inadequate regulation of standards raises concerns about educational effectiveness and sustainability.

TradeOffs

  • School choice creates a trade-off between selective and open access. Public schools must accept all students in their zones, while private schools can select students on various bases except race, potentially burdening public schools with more challenging students and creating a tiered, discriminatory system.

2024su-figure3b.png

Topping Up

  • Vouchers, intended to aid disadvantaged children, often end up subsidizing affluent families for higher private school tuitions or non-academic activities, causing significant state financial burdens.

  • The loss of students from public schools leads to school closures and long travel requirements for remaining public school students.

Public vs. Private Benefits

  • Vouchers allow parents to prioritize their children’s perceived best interests, possibly at the expense of broader public values like tolerance and democracy.

  • Bringing diverse groups together in public schools fosters a common language, values, and belief in democracy, which may be compromised by widespread use of vouchers.

Conclusion

  • Vouchers and other means of funding school choice can be implemented with appropriate regulation. The risk of negative externalities diminishes with attention to certain critical factors:

– Teachers must be certified

– Targeted vouchers for those at need makes sense

– Curricula must comport with national standards

– Students and staff should be shielded from discrimination

--------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion

Participants' comments are paraphrased and edited for the purposes of this report.

Senator Gary Stevens (President of the Senate, Alaska):

There are concerns that voucher schools might not accept special education students, leading to public schools becoming "dumping grounds" for these students. This situation could deepen the divide between families who can afford better educational opportunities and those who cannot.

​​

Mr. Harris:

There are concerns about segregation in education due to high-performing charter and private schools not accommodating students with special needs. These schools often have strict behavioral and academic expectations, leading students who can't meet these standards to default to public schools. This creates a negative "peer group effect" in public schools. Private schools' ability to selectively admit students exacerbates the concentration of special needs students in public schools, reinforcing the perception that public schools are for students with more significant challenges.

Senator Stuart Adams (President of the Senate, Utah):

Utah's history with a statewide voucher system initially passed in 2007 but was overturned by referendum due to public backlash. The idea of school choice gained renewed interest during the COVID-19 pandemic when many schools struggled with reopening, leading to the recent implementation of an education savings system. A voucher program for students with special needs allowed them to attend specialized schools, reflecting parental frustration over educational disruptions during COVID-19 and a greater demand for choice.

​​

Mr. Abrams:

Early voucher programs initially targeted students with disabilities, low-income kids, and students in low-performing schools. Trade-offs and inequalities emerge when the school choice system is universal and non-targeted, without means testing and without standards and monitoring. The details and execution of a given program can have a profound effect on outcomes.

Senator Bill Ferguson (President of the Senate, Maryland):

The challenge with vouchers is often seen in a binary way—either totally for or totally against them. There’s a need for a more nuanced approach. Are there dynamics or characteristics of districts where voucher programs are more effective, such as rural vs. urban settings?

​​

Mr. Harris:

Voucher and charter school systems tend to have more positive impacts in urban areas due to greater availability of school choices and population density, which makes it easier for parents to access and participate in schools. In contrast, rural areas have fewer private school alternatives due to lower population density. Urban environments see improved academic outcomes with voucher systems; a trend also seen in countries like Finland. The importance of regulation in these systems deserves attention, as states may adopt different approaches depending on their regulatory frameworks.

Tom Finneran (Moderator):

Is it parents' frustration over their children's education quality that drives the push for Education Savings Accounts (ESAs), universal vouchers, and charter schools?

Mr. Abrams:

Surveys show that, while parent satisfaction with public schools has been around 75% since 1990, general adult population surveys show much lower satisfaction with the national school system, dropping to around 20%. This disparity suggests media and societal perceptions drive negative views, despite steady parent satisfaction. The push for ESAs, vouchers, and charter schools is more influenced by political changes and court decisions than by a decline in parent satisfaction.​

Is Insurance Boring in a Hotter World?

Alice C. Hill

David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment

Council on Foreign Relations

Alice C. Hill's Bio

hill-2024su.jpg

Alice C. Hill, the David M. Rubenstein Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment at the Council on Foreign Relations, addressed the critical role of insurance in mitigating the adverse impacts of catastrophic events — such as floods, hurricanes, extreme heatwaves, and wildfires — which have become increasingly common.

Insurance System Elements

  • Ms. Hill began by emphasizing the outdated infrastructure across the United States, exemplified by the recent collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore due to a container ship incident. Despite being insured for $390 million, the estimated repair cost had neared $1.9 billion, underscoring a significant insurance shortfall.

  • She outlined the insurance ecosystem, highlighting the role of private insurers, reinsurance companies like Munich Re, and federal programs such as the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Ms. Hill discussed the limitations of NFIP, which had been $20 billion in debt and had struggled to accurately price flood risks, leading to reduced participation and coverage gaps.

  • Each state has an Insurance Commissioner responsible for insurance affordability and availability. States also use residual insurance plans (e.g., FAIR or Citizens) when private insurers withdraw coverage.

Rising Costs

​​

  • Property insurance is critical for economic security and the stability of communities. However, there have been significant increases in homeowner insurance premiums: 11% nationally, and over 20% in some states over the past year alone.

  • Increases were attributed to various factors including inflation, demographic shifts, and development patterns that increased vulnerability to disasters. As insurance costs escalated, some homeowners, especially in middle- and lower-income brackets, had opted to forego insurance coverage due to affordability concerns, potentially exacerbating financial vulnerabilities in the event of disasters.

  • Insurers also face financial strain, and in many states have reported losses where payouts have exceeded premiums collected. Insurers are facing increased losses due to more frequent and severe disasters. Many insurers are struggling financially, especially smaller companies with limited geographic coverage.

Climate Change and Insurance

  • This unsustainable insurance model was compounded by an increase in severe weather events linked to climate change, including wildfires, floods, and hurricanes. As these events have become more frequent and severe, insurers have faced growing challenges in managing and pricing risks effectively.

2024su-figure2a.png

Source: climatecentral.org

“No insurer denies climate change.”

  • The Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) is one of the fastest-growing land use areas, with approximately 115 million people living adjacent to wild areas, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. WUI is defined as a region where residential areas are close to grasslands, forests, or other fire-prone areas. From 2010 to 2020, many states saw an increase in people moving into these areas, which are more susceptible to wildfires.

  • In 2023, various disasters contributed to increased insurance costs, and the Census Bureau reported that 2.5 million Americans had to leave their homes due to catastrophes.​

  • Ms. Hill predicted continued increases in insurance rates due to worsening climate-related risks and the likelihood that more properties will enter state-backed insurance plans as private insurers pull out from high-risk areas.

Coastal properties are at risk from climate-driven ocean rise and those in Wildland-Urban Interfaces face increasing risk from wildfires, making affordable insurance harder to find.

  • 10% of US land is coastal

  • 40% of US population lives on coasts

  • 115 million people live in the “WUI” (Wildland-Urban Interface)

Solutions

  • Ms. Hill advocated for proactive measures to enhance building codes and create resilience infrastructure to mitigate risks. She urged proactive measures to maintain affordable insurance, ensuring economic and community stability amidst growing climate risks. She also noted that every dollar spent on a good building code saves eleven dollars in damages.

  • She warned of potential impacts on real estate markets and economic stability if insurance were to become unaffordable or unavailable in high-risk areas.

 

  • Ms. Hill concluded with a call to action for local leaders and policymakers to prioritize resilience in building construction and insurance affordability to safeguard communities and national economic security in the face of escalating climate-related risks.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion

Every dollar spent on a good building code saves eleven dollars in damages.

Participants' comments are paraphrased and edited for the purposes of this report.

Senator T.J. Shope (Senate President Pro Tempore, Arizona):

  • Raised concerns about the federal government owning over 85% of land in Arizona and questioned whether protecting these areas imposes an additional tax burden on residents. He also mentioned rising insurance rates despite not living near fire-prone areas and questioned the federal government's responsibility in managing its lands.

Ms. Hill:

  • Explained that while vegetation contributes to fire risk, the increased risk to structures is mainly due to people living in wildland-urban interface (WUI) areas. She emphasized that this issue is related to private insurance, not federal taxes. She mentioned the need for a national disaster insurance program and highlighted that reinsurers and primary insurers believe the federal government should clear vegetation from its lands to reduce fire risks. Risks are exacerbated by factors like pest infestations due to warmer temperatures.

Senator Rodrick Bray (Senate President Pro Tempore, Indiana):

  • Asked whether insurance rates fully reflect the risk in communities with poor construction ordinances and in areas near wildlands, and questioned whether such rates are subsidized by all policyholders.

Ms. Hill:

  • Stressed the importance of building codes in mitigating wildfire damage, despite their limitations. She cited the effectiveness of California's wildfire code implemented in 2008. She noted that insurance rates should reflect the higher risks of building near wildlands to discourage such construction and discussed efforts to incentivize safer construction practices, which vary by state. She compared this to the National Flood Insurance Program's community-based pricing for flood insurance.

Bob Watkins (State Farm Insurance):

  • Highlighted the challenges in California's insurance market, where laws prevent the use of predictive modeling for setting rates, relying solely on historical data. This has led to suppressed rates and unprofitability for insurers. He emphasized the need for risk-based pricing to ensure market stability. He also mentioned initiatives like the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS), which promotes fortified building standards and wildfire preparedness.

Senator Lee Schoenbeck (Senate President Pro Tempore, South Dakota):

  • Criticized the poor management of federal lands in the West, which poses significant risks and leads to the closure of mills due to unscientific management practices.

Ms. Hill:

  • Acknowledged that most wildfires are caused by human activity and that insurers focus on property rather than federal lands. She discussed the role of controlled burns and the link between insurance and climate change, emphasizing the need for collaboration with organizations like State Farm and IBHS to develop mitigation solutions.

Senator Ogden Driskill (President of the Senate, Wyoming):

  • Discussed the impact of federal land management on insurance rates and the intensity of fires. He contrasted the conditions of federal and private lands, highlighting the benefits of grazing, logging, and proper management. He emphasized the need for public education on the impact of federal land management decisions on insurance and losses.

Ms. Hill:

  • Suggested significant improvements in planning new developments to consider the risks. She referenced former California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones' suggestion to allow insurance rates to reflect actual risks, which could lead to unaffordable insurance for some families. She discussed the dilemma of whether to force families to move or find ways to keep insurance affordable, stressing the need for collective solutions

Senator Ronald Kouchi (President of the Senate, Hawaii):

  • Described the aftermath of the Maui fires, with claims potentially settling around $2 billion and a possible high of $7 billion. He mentioned the involvement of various parties in liability, including poorly managed state land, Maui County's emergency response, and utility companies. Efforts are underway to settle with all parties involved, and mitigation plans for state-owned lands are being developed. He highlighted rising insurance premiums due to flooding and hurricanes, which pose a significant challenge for Hawaii.

  • Climate change exacerbates risks (e.g., wildfire frequency and intensity, sea level rise), driving up insurance costs. Ms. Hill pointed to inadequate disaster-resilient building codes in many areas, increasing risk as well as insurance premiums — particularly in locations where development is adjacent to wild areas.

Address by Hon. Spencer Cox

Spencer Cox

Governor

State of Utah

Spencer Cox's Bio

cox-2024su.jpg

The Honorable Spencer Cox, Governor of the State of Utah, welcomed the Forum and reflected on the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government, emphasizing the importance of each branch operating within its intended role.

Dysfunctional Politics

Governor Cox critiqued current politics at the federal level, where, he asserted, the executive branch, particularly the presidency, has amassed too much power at the expense of Congress and state legislatures. This shift, he argues, has led to a performative rather than substantive legislative process, with elected officials prioritizing platforming over effective governance.

The Governor lamented the decline in bipartisan cooperation in recent years, emphasizing that unity did not mean unanimous agreement but rather working together despite differences. Drawing a parallel to his childhood experiences of razing an old barn in mere minutes, he illustrated the value of building and preserving institutions over the easier path of tearing them down. He critiqued modern culture's inclination towards quick gratification and destruction, highlighting the importance of valuing and preserving critical institutions.

Moving Toward a More Productive Political Process

Referencing the book American Covenant: How the Constitution Unified Our Nation―and Could Again by Yuval Levin (Basic Books, 2024), the Governor reflected on the challenges of governance and the importance of unity and collaboration in a constitutional framework. He championed the Constitution’s power to repair our broken civic culture, rescue our malfunctioning politics, and reunify America.

We must learn to “Disagree Better,” Governor Cox said suggesting a pathway to better communication of diverse opinions.

Community Needs Are the Primary Focus for Government

In reflecting on governance, he highlighted the historical reliance on institutions beyond government to address community needs, such as hospitals and schools, often initiated through associations and volunteer groups like Rotary Clubs and Lions Clubs. He lamented the decline of such institutions, emphasizing their role in fostering connections and meaning for individuals. The Governor critiqued modern culture's trend towards quick gratification and division, noting how political identities increasingly overshadowed broader identities like being American or belonging to a community.

” Trust is the currency of governing relationships.”       — Governor Spencer Cox

Non-Partisan Organizations Get the Job Done

The Governor commended non-partisan organizations like the Senate Presidents’ Forum and the National Governors Association (NGA, where Governor Cox recently served as Chair) for providing spaces where political differences could be set aside to focus on problem-solving. He shared his initiative Disagree Better, aimed at promoting respectful dialogue and finding common ground amidst deep disagreements. This initiative, he argued, is crucial in a polarized political climate where trust in institutions is at historic lows.

Procedural Integrity Breeds Trust

Governor Cox discussed the importance of process in governance, sharing examples from his own state of Utah where procedural integrity was prioritized even in controversial legislative sessions. He emphasized the value of inclusive processes that allowed all voices to be heard, fostering trust and legitimacy in governance.

The Governor concluded by encouraging continued commitment to constructive engagement and mutual respect across political divides, underscoring the belief that collaborative efforts are essential for addressing the nation's challenges effectively.

China:
The Nature of Economic Competition

Rush Doshi

C.V. Starr Senior Fellow for Asia Studies

and

Director of the China Strategy Initiative

Council on Foreign Relations

Rush Doshi's Bio

doshi-2024su.jpg

Rush Doshi, Director of the China Strategy Initiative at the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Forum that the competition between the U.S. and China is often compared to a new Cold War, marking the most intense rivalry the U.S. has faced since its contest with the Soviet Union. This rivalry garners significant attention and resources from Congress and communities nationwide as they contend with China's increasing involvement in American society.

To learn more, visit the Council on Foreign Relations’ website:

China's Ambition to Replace the U.S.

China's primary goal is to replace the U.S. as the world's leading state, and this was a consistent concern across both the Biden and Trump administrations. China's ambition stems from its historical status as the dominant power in Asia, which waned following significant losses and humiliations, including the Opium Wars and invasions by colonial powers and Japan. Since 1949, under the Chinese Communist Party, China's rapid economic growth has bolstered its strategic capabilities, fueling its aspiration to regain global supremacy through economic competition, technological advances and political strategies.

China’s Strategic Evolution

With a population of 1.4 billion, over four times that of the U.S., China's large population can significantly contribute to advancements, making the country globally indispensable. China's strategy has evolved significantly since the Cold War, moving from a quasi-allied relationship with the U.S. to a strategy of undermining American power while advancing its own economic strength.

At first, China adopted a "Blunting" Strategy, a quiet, non-assertive strategy known as "hiding your capabilities and biding time," allowing investment in military capabilities to counter American influence in the Asia-Pacific region. But the 2008 global financial crisis marked a shift from blunting to a "Building" strategy with initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative and a significant military buildup to put Asia under China's governance model.

In 2016, China embraced a more assertive global strategy expressed in the phrase “Great changes unseen in a century.” This strategy focuses on building a global military, gaining economic leadership, dominating technology, and rewiring the world politically.

Economic Leadership

China's economy has been dependent on the housing market. As housing prices decline, China needs a new engine for economic growth. China has chosen manufacturing as this new engine, reallocating funds from housing into industry manufacturing to dominate global manufacturing.

China aims to become the global manufacturing hub, making the world dependent on its supply chains while reducing its own dependence on external sources. Under President Xi Jinping, China seeks to dominate supply chains globally, ensuring its central role in the world economy.

Technological Ambitions

China's goal is to surpass the United States in technology, supported by substantial state investments and local protections. For example, China leads in electric vehicle production due to significant government support and internal competition. China now competes with the U.S. in high-end manufacturing sectors, such as electric vehicles (EVs) and internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, partly due to significant government subsidies. China dominates the solar panel market through its massive manufacturing scale, repeating this pattern across various sectors, including automotives, smart manufacturing, and robotics.

Tariffs on Chinese vehicles help protect American automakers, but without these tariffs, Chinese EVs and ICE vehicles would dominate the market. However, China's membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO) means there are few trade barriers, allowing Chinese manufacturers to export goods to the U.S. market with relative ease.

Political Aspirations

China intends to reshape the international system to be more neutral or favorable to autocratic regimes, displacing the U.S. as the world's leading power across various domains. China's extensive territorial claims in the South China Sea, a crucial area for global trade, pose a significant risk of conflict. The U.S. faces the dilemma of whether to intervene militarily. Taiwan's geopolitical importance is critical for global supply chains. A conflict over Taiwan could cause up to $10 trillion in damage to the global economy. The U.S. could be drawn into such a conflict due to the Taiwan Relations Act. China's support for Russia in its war against Ukraine exacerbates tensions with NATO. China's assistance enables Russia to be a more formidable threat to NATO.

"If the U.S.-China economic relationship gets blown up … it will have implications for American businesses, American workers, and American families in states all across the country."

—Rush Doshi

U.S. Competitive Advantages

Competition with China spans all regions and policy areas. China's pursuit of military facilities in the Western Hemisphere exemplifies its strategic ambitions. This decade is crucial for the U.S. to improve its competitive position before unfavorable trends solidify.

Innovation and Education

The U.S. has numerous advantages, including a strong market, innovative companies, a robust financial system, and a decentralized approach with 50 states serving as laboratories for economic strategies. The U.S. maintains advantages in innovation, with strong universities and research institutions driving technological advancements.

State-level Initiatives

The U.S. has advantages through alliances and partnerships with Japan, Korea, Australia, and Europe. Combined, these allies surpass China in GDP and technological know-how. Japanese and Korean investments are revitalizing U.S. manufacturing in states like Georgia, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Collaborating with allies and partners is essential to compete with China, leveraging combined economic and technological strengths. Maintaining U.S. competitiveness lies at the state level, with states seen as the frontline in dealing with competition from China.

Maintaining U.S. competitiveness lies at the state level, with states seen as the frontline in dealing with competition from China.

 

Conclusion

China will persist as a major global power. The U.S. must find a way to coexist and compete with China, as altering China's trajectory is unlikely. President Xi Jinping's focus on preventing collapse and ensuring strong leadership reflects this enduring presence. The U.S. should focus on building capacity and competitiveness at the local and state levels. This decentralized approach will be crucial in responding effectively to the economic and technological challenges posed by China.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion

Participants' comments are paraphrased and edited for the purposes of this report.

Senator Bill Ferguson (President of the Senate, Maryland):

How does the fact that China has more people than the entire United States living on less than $6 a day impact your analysis?

 

Mr. Doshi:

China has a population of 1.4 billion and a GDP, adjusted for purchasing power, larger than the U.S. Without this adjustment, China’s GDP is still 70% of the U.S. GDP. No American competitor has ever been this close in economic size. China is no longer relying on cheap labor but is betting on technology to drive its manufacturing sector. The country invests ten times more in industrial robots than any other nation, integrating AI to develop humanoid robots for assembly lines using extensive manufacturing data. This positions China to dominate future manufacturing landscapes, looking 10-15 years ahead. 

China is positioned to dominate future manufacturing landscapes. 

Senator Gary Stevens (President of the Senate, Alaska):

The only reason the U.S. is an Arctic nation is because of Alaska. The U.S. has minimal Arctic exploration and development, with only one elderly icebreaker ship; while China, with no physical presence in the Arctic, has multiple icebreakers and a long-term strategy.

 

Mr. Doshi:

China is positioning itself strategically in the Arctic, referring to itself as a "near-Arctic power" and investing in icebreakers, aspiring to build nuclear-powered ones. The U.S. lacks the capacity to build new icebreakers due to the decline of its shipbuilding industry. Revitalizing this sector could generate jobs across various states. China's shipbuilding capacity, supported by government investments, vastly surpasses the U.S. The U.S. needs more icebreakers and a stronger northern presence, working with European allies and using facilities in Iceland and Alaska. China's Arctic interest includes proximity to the U.S., resource potential, and strategic value as an alternative trade route. The U.S. must elevate its efforts at federal and state levels, collaborating with countries like Denmark or Norway to build icebreakers domestically. 

China sees "four new frontiers" of national power: the Arctic and Antarctic, Deep Sea, Space, and Cyberspace.

Senator Stuart Adams (President of the Senate, Utah):

 AI will likely determine global leadership; however, AI requires data centers, which in turn need substantial power. Utah faces challenges in meeting this power demand, having transitioned from fossil fuels to solar and wind power, and is working on developing nuclear power. The permieng process for small nuclear reactors takes about ten years and is extremely difficult. Without adequate power, AI development will be hampered, allowing China to surpass the U.S. 

Mr. Doshi:

AI is the future, and we're in an AI arms race. Power generaMon is crucial for AI progress, yet America is not investing enough. To keep up, the U.S. needs to fix permitting for nuclear power and possibly invest in natural gas and coal. China is rapidly building 50 nuclear plants and investing in coal-fired plants to power data centers and electric vehicle manufacturing. The U.S. must balance climate objecMves with the need to outpace competitors in power generation. Small modular reactors (SMRs) present an advantage, but addressing permitting issues and scaling SMRs quickly are vital. The U.S. holds an advantage over China due to export controls on advanced chips but needs to scale AI capabilities across states and universities to remain competitive. Adequate power generation is critical, as falling behind in AI could jeopardize U.S. military and technological superiority.

 

Sen. Rodrick Bray (Senate President Pro Tempore, Indiana):

Many premier companies from U.S. states have entered the Chinese market attracter by its size, but often face challenges such as intellectual property theft and declining market share over time. As China scales up production and profitability, concerns arise about the loss of intellectual property. 

Mr. Doshi:

It is crucial for states to consider their interactions with China in trade and manufacturing. Recommendations include:

  • enhancing protections for intellectual property

  • fostering stronger trade agreements

  • ensuring transparency in business practices

 Balancing economic opportunities with safeguarding IP rights is essential. U.S. companies entering China face high tariffs and are required to share IP through joint ventures. This has enabled China to advance rapidly in sectors like electric vehicles, smartphones, rare earths, and manufacturing. The solution lies in helping U.S. companies find alternative manufacturing opportunities in countries with better IP protections and free trade agreements. Engaging with China requires awareness of their sophisticated strategies and balancing economic opportunities with national security concerns.

Faced with competition from China, states should consider:

   1. Enhancing IP protections

   2. Fostering stronger trade agreements

   3. Ensuring transparency in business 

Balancing economic opportunities with national security concerns is crucial in managing relations with China effectively. 


Regulating Social Media

Travis Moore

Founder and Executive Director

TechCongress

Travis Moore's Bio

moore-2024su.jpg

Travis Moore, Founder and Executive Director of TechCongress, addressed the Forum about the key initiatives being undertaken to bring technological capabilities and savvy to the U.S. Congress. TechCongress focuses on recruiting computer scientists, engineers, and other technologists to serve as tech policy advisors to members of Congress through a one-year fellowship program. Established about a decade ago, their mission is to bridge the gap between technology expertise and legislative decision-making. TechCongress is bipartisan and funded entirely by public interest foundations.

To download Travis Moore’s complete slide presentation, click here:

Despite the allure of tech careers, many in the industry are disillusioned and seek meaningful problem-solving opportunities. Mr. Moore highlighted the success of TechCongress’ AI safety fellowship, which attracted 351 applications from top AI thinkers, demonstrating a strong interest in public service. TechCongress’ fellows have made significant legislative impacts, such as enhancing Capitol security and influencing tech policy on issues like social media restrictions, data privacy, and AI regulation.

Like the transformative impact of electricity on society, AI has the potential to alter how we live, work and learn on a fundamental, infrastructural level.

2024su-figure6a.png

Mr. Moore stressed the critical need for tech expertise in government, noting gaps in resources currently available to legislators. He advocated for expanding existing fellowship programs to include more tech expertise and encourage collaboration between legislators and tech organizations. Mr. Moore concluded by urging proactive legislative action to address emerging tech challenges, such as protecting children and personal information and public infrastructure from inappropriate Internet interactions.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion

Participants' comments are paraphrased and edited for the purposes of this report.

Senator Phil Berger (Senate President Pro Tempore, North Carolina):

It is important to have someone on staff who is tech- and AI-savvy, whether they're interns or paid permanent staff. We have one or two members who all the other members defer to for tech questions, but having access to specifically trained staff would be more helpful.

Bob Watkins (State Farm Insurance):

With technology changing so rapidly, how will TechCongress keep up-to-date, providing people with new skills?

 

Mr. Moore:  

Fellowships are a helpful intervention here to get a refresh of talent and knowledge. Workers today don't stay in jobs for the whole of their lives anymore. Having these interdisciplinary, more flexible approaches to staffing and knowledge management are key.

Sean Connor (Lowe’s):

There are two key venues where lawmakers are actively engaging with technology. First, the Consumer Technology Association (https://www.cta.tech/) in Las Vegas annually hosts around 40 members of Congress and their staff to showcase cutting-edge technologies, with calls to extend this program to the state level. Second, the National Retail Federation (https://nrf.com/) launched a similar initiative two years ago, inviting legislators to their tech-driven retail show, fostering understanding of innovations like machine learning and AI among state and local officials.

Mr. Moore:

I would also recommend Def Con (https://defcon.org/), which is an iconic venue for improving and discussing matters in computer security, privacy, technology, and other related subjects.

 


Election Integrity:
Driving Trust and Limiting Risks

Charles Stewart III

Kenan Sahin Distinguished Professor of Political Science

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Charles Stewart III's Bio

stewart-2024su.jpg

Wendy Underhill

Director

Elections & Redistricting 

NCSL

Wendy Underhill's Bio

underhill-2024su.jpg

This program was presented by Charles Stewart III, Director, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, in an interview with Wendy Underhill, Director, Elections & Redistricting, NCSL. Their goal: sharing knowledge about how to ensure elections are secure, convenient, and accurate.

 

Mr. Stewart’s MEDSL lab at MIT grew out of concerns sparked by controversies during the 2000 U.S. election when “hanging chads” — incomplete ballot papers resulting from incorrectly punched voting cards — gained infamy for altering the final vote count. The technology failed to serve the people.

To download the complete slide presentation from Election Integrity session, click here:

The initial aim of the elections laboratory was to avoid such problems by creating a perfect voting machine, but Mr. Stewart’s team discovered that focusing solely on technology was misguided. The real issues stemmed from human and management failures within the election system. This experience underscored the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration, including across party lines, and holistic problem-solving approaches learned from engineers. It also highlighted that humans often represent the weakest link in systems. 

The goal: Make elections secure, convenient, and accurate.

Uses of Data

An abundance of data is generated by elections, including SCIM codes for election results and additional data from electronic poll books. These data are utilized to optimize polling places, facilitate audits, and support academic research aimed at enhancing election processes. The MIT Election Data + Science Lab (MEDSL) is committed to evidence-based analysis and scientific approaches to election administration.

Trustworthiness vs. Trust

Mr. Stewart distinguished two aspects of trust in elections: trustworthiness and trust. Trustworthiness refers to elections that are dependable and worthy of confidence. The laws, administrative procedures, and the mindset of election administrators aim to achieve trustworthy elections that inspire confidence among participants and the public. In contrast, trust is a psychological construct that describes the conclusion reached by the public about the functioning of the process.

 

Trustworthiness and trust do not necessarily go hand-in-hand, Mr. Stewart pointed out, using the 2020 election as an example. That election looked to be a trustworthy election, at least as far as election boards and judges were concerned. But there are people who still don't trust those results. 

 

There are four factors that contribute to confidence in election results. In surveys, Mr. Stewart found that voters are more trusting and confident in the outcomes when the object of the election is close to them; when they have a good experience voting; when trusted voices interpret the election as trustworthy — and when their candidate wins.

Voter experience is key to driving trust, and this is an aspect election officials can control.

Voting Advances

  • More states are using multiple voting formats, from traditional in-person voting to early in-person voting and mail-in voting.

  • Voting technologies have evolved from written ballots to lever pulls, to the mark-and-scan ballot that is dominant today.

  • Results of voting are now quickly available on the web.

  • When implementing innovations in voting, such as ranked votes, it must be approached slowly, Mr. Stewart advised, to avoid increasing confusion among the voters and undermining confidence.

2024su-figure7a.png

Voting modes have evolved from in-person voting to also include vote-by-mail and early in-person voting.

Data sources: Census Bureau, Voting and Registration Supplement (1996-2022).

Mr. Stewart concluded noting that there is room for legislation to encourage good uses of technology and to make sure that our election laws, many of which were written more than a century ago, are updated to reflect how elections are being implemented today.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion

Participants' comments are paraphrased and edited for the purposes of this report.

Tommy Suter (Novartis):

Is there still a role for mail-in ballots given its potential unreliability compared to newer, faster methods enabled by technology? For example, college admissions tests have moved online. Should elections similarly transition towards more advanced and potentially more reliable online voting methods instead of relying on traditional mail-in ballots?

 

Mr. Stewart:

There are societal trends towards convenience in voting but also longstanding concerns about the security and chain-of-custody issues associated with mail-in ballots. Computer scientists generally advocate for leveraging technology to deliver and return ballots electronically, but they highlight significant challenges in ensuring ballot authenticity and security at every step of the process. Existing practices under the UOCAVA Act, where electronic means such as emailing PDF ballots or faxing are used for overseas voters, pose unique security challenges that technologists find troubling.

 

Senator Stephen Fenberg (President of the Senate, Colorado):

“Vote by mail” is often misunderstood as solely mailing ballots back. In Colorado, most people receive their ballot by mail but return it in person at polling centers, minimizing chain-of-custody concerns. This method, akin to a take-home test, allows voters to fill out their ballots at home but ensures they physically deliver them, akin to voting in person. Colorado's system, touted as “all-mail,” actually offers various voting options, with in-person returns becoming the norm. Maintaining multiple voting options will build trust and accommodate voter preferences.

 

Senator Bill Ferguson (President of the Senate, Maryland):

In Maryland, we have a little bit of everything, and it's become a bit overwhelming. We have eight days of early vote mail in and election day voting. Does the actual voting turnout increase based on what method was being used, or does a combination of methods bring the best turnout?

Mr. Stewart:

There are some laws that will increase turnout. The Voting Rights Act, for instance, increased turnout significantly in the South. But if the question is: “Will reform X increase turnout or decrease turnout?” The answer is no. Turnout may change by 1%. What happens when you go to more convenient forms of voting is that people who would have voted anyway find it more convenient and take advantage of those new ways of voting. But it's not going to bring people into the electorate who would not have voted. What drives big changes in turnout is what the campaigns do and what’s on the ballot.

Jennifer Jura (Edison Electric Institute):

As an election worker, I was amazed at the level of security and oversight that happens on-site. Two election judges, a Democrat and a Republican, patrolled the site with their rule books in hand, watching for any possible violations. I think it’s useful for the public to get some education about all the controls that are built into the system to ensure election integrity. 

The Senate Presidents’ Forum convened in Park City, Utah, hosted by the Hon. Stuart Adams, President of the Senate (UT), and welcomed by Hon. Spencer Cox, Governor of Utah. The Forum covered a broad range of highly relevant topics including legislative trends, school choice, home insurance, China, social media, and election integrity. 

bottom of page