Foundations
Here's a look at documents from U.S. foundations
Featured Stories
Reason Foundation: West Virginia House Bill 4819 Reduces Licensing Barriers for People With Criminal Records
LOS ANGELES, California, March 18 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following news:* * *
West Virginia House Bill 4819 reduces licensing barriers for people with criminal records
The bill would strengthen licensing reforms and give people with criminal records clearer access to stable employment.
By Vittorio Nastasi and David L. Morgan
Access to gainful employment can reduce the likelihood of criminal recidivism. Yet state occupational licensing restrictions create unnecessary government-imposed barriers that prevent people with criminal records from accessing stable careers, undermining ... Show Full Article LOS ANGELES, California, March 18 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following news: * * * West Virginia House Bill 4819 reduces licensing barriers for people with criminal records The bill would strengthen licensing reforms and give people with criminal records clearer access to stable employment. By Vittorio Nastasi and David L. Morgan Access to gainful employment can reduce the likelihood of criminal recidivism. Yet state occupational licensing restrictions create unnecessary government-imposed barriers that prevent people with criminal records from accessing stable careers, underminingboth individual rehabilitation and public safety.
Occupational licensing restrictions create significant barriers to employment for people with criminal records.
* One in five workers is required to hold an occupational license, and many licensing boards categorically deny applicants with criminal records--even when convictions are unrelated to the occupation.
* Research finds that stable, gainful employment significantly reduces recidivism.
* However, people with prior convictions don't know if their record disqualifies them until after they've completed all the licensing requirements and submitted their application. This uncertainty creates a barrier to entry and can waste applicants' time and money.
West Virginia recently adopted positive reforms, but significant gaps remain.
* In 2021, West Virginia enacted reforms establishing a "rational nexus" standard for considering conviction records and creating a predetermination process so applicants can petition a licensing authority to determine if their record is disqualifying before investing in required training and fees.
* However, the "rational nexus" standard leaves boards with broad discretion which may still result in arbitrary denials and the predetermination process was limited to people who had not previously applied for a license.
House Bill 4819 would improve West Virginia's current licensing laws by:
* Replacing the "rational nexus" standard and instead requiring boards to determine that a conviction directly and specifically relates to the duties and responsibilities of the occupation before denying an applicant based on their criminal record.
* Expanding predetermination eligibility to individuals who have previously applied for--but not held--a license.
* Requiring licensing boards to consider specific evidence of rehabilitation.
* Prohibiting licensing boards from considering arrest-only records or non-violent convictions after 5 years of good behavior.
These reforms align West Virginia with policy in other states.
* Since 2017, 44 states and the District of Columbia have enacted occupational licensing reforms to reduce barriers for people with criminal records.
* At least 26 states have adopted predetermination processes like the one expanded by HB 4819, including recent reforms in Virginia (2025), Colorado (2024), Nebraska (2024), and South Dakota (2024).
* * *
Vittorio Nastasi is the director of criminal justice policy at Reason Foundation.
David L. Morgan, Jr. is the government affairs associate at Reason Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/backgrounder/west-virginia-house-bill-4819-reduces-licensing-barriers-for-people-with-criminal-records/
Reason Foundation Issues Commentary: How Every State's Public Pension System Ranks
LOS ANGELES, California, March 18 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on March 16, 2026, by Mariana Trujillo, managing director of government finance, Jordan Campbell, managing director of government finance and senior quantitative analyst, Ryan Frost, director of budget and tax policy at the Washington Policy Center, Truong Bui, director of data strategy and analytics and managing director of the Pension Integrity Project and quantitative analyst Steve Vu:* * *
How every state's public pension system ranks
Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington lead the nation with fully ... Show Full Article LOS ANGELES, California, March 18 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on March 16, 2026, by Mariana Trujillo, managing director of government finance, Jordan Campbell, managing director of government finance and senior quantitative analyst, Ryan Frost, director of budget and tax policy at the Washington Policy Center, Truong Bui, director of data strategy and analytics and managing director of the Pension Integrity Project and quantitative analyst Steve Vu: * * * How every state's public pension system ranks Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington lead the nation with fullyfunded systems, while Illinois, Kentucky, and New Jersey remain at the bottom with the deepest shortfalls.
*
Reason Foundation's 2025 Pension Solvency and Performance Report ranks every state's pension system across five dimensions--funded status, investment performance, contribution adequacy, asset allocation risk, and the probability of meeting assumed returns--based on the latest fiscal year data from nearly every major plan in the country.
The sections below summarize the strongest and weakest performers in each category. For each state, the results reflect the aggregate values of its major pension systems, including plans administered at both the state and local levels.
Funded ratio state ranking
The funded ratio is the most straightforward indicator of a pension system's financial health. It states what share of liabilities can be funded with currently owned assets. States with higher ratios are better positioned to weather downturns, while those with persistent gaps carry a greater risk of future tax increases or benefit cuts.
Only three states had enough or more assets set aside to cover promised benefits. Tennessee (104%) ranked first nationally, followed closely by Washington (103%) and South Dakota (100%).
Conversely, Illinois (52%), Kentucky (54%), and New Jersey (55%) posted the weakest funded ratios.
Among the five most populous states, New York ranks 6th (94%), Florida ranks 19th (82%), California ranks 20th (82%), Texas ranks 22nd (80%), and Pennsylvania ranks 41st (66%).
Investment performance state ranking
The investment performance ranking evaluates how pension plans' long-term returns compare to their assumed rates of return. When plans fall short of expectations, unfunded liabilities accumulate and must eventually be addressed through higher contributions, typically from taxpayers.
Only four states have long-term returns exceeding assumptions. Kansas (+1.5%) leads this category, with long-term returns exceeding its assumptions by 1.5 percentage points. Michigan (+0.7%), Washington (+0.6%), and South Dakota (+0.4%) follow.
Maryland (-1.5%), Alaska (-1.4%), and New Mexico (-1.3%) posted the weakest investment performance relative to their own expectations.
Among the largest states, New York ranks fifth (-0.04%), Pennsylvania ranks seventh (-0.06%), Florida ranks 14th (-0.3%), Texas ranks 19th (-0.4%), and California ranks 35th (-0.7%).
Employer contribution adequacy state ranking
Contribution adequacy measures the extent to which states are providing sufficient funding each year to cover both the cost of new benefits and the amortization of existing debt. Underpaying contributions creates more pension debt, which compounds over time.
Thirty-nine states meet or exceed our contribution rate adequacy measure, which is based on actuarially determined benchmarks.
Louisiana ranks first in this category, contributing 13.4% more than the actuarial benchmarks. West Virginia (+12.3%), Maine (+10.4%), Connecticut (+10.1%), and Michigan (+9.7%) also posted contributions above actuarial requirements. Many states are dedicating supplemental funding to accelerate the elimination of pension debt, thereby significantly reducing long-term interest costs.
Mississippi (-8.3%), Oregon (-3.7%), and Illinois (-3.5%) posted the weakest contribution adequacy. Their negative measurements indicate they are contributing below the mark set by actuaries to avoid adding more unfunded liabilities.
Among the largest states, California ranks 10th (+7.1%), New York ranks 24th (+2.5%), Florida ranks 32nd (+1.2%), Texas ranks 38th (+0.2%), and Pennsylvania ranks 36th (+0.5%).
Alternative asset allocation state ranking
The alternative asset allocation ranking evaluates states based on the share of their portfolios invested in alternative assets. This category includes assets such as private equity, hedge funds, real estate, and private credit. Larger allocations to alternative assets indicate riskier and more opaque investment strategies.
Georgia (1%) and Alabama (9%) report the lowest allocations to alternatives, placing them at the top of the rankings. Oklahoma (11%), Nevada (12%), and Nebraska (14%) also maintain more conservative portfolios.
Seven states have at least half of their assets allocated to alternative assets, placing them among the riskiest systems in the country. Hawaii (60%) leads, followed by Maine (58%), Oregon (58%), and Washington (55%).
Among the largest states, New York ranks 15th (27%), Florida ranks 22nd (30%), California ranks 32nd (37%), Pennsylvania ranks 28th (35%), and Texas ranks 42nd (49%).
Assumed return rate probability state ranking
The assumed return rate probability ranking assesses whether states' return assumptions are realistic, using forward-looking models to estimate the likelihood of success over a 20-year period.
Michigan (68%) ranks first, with the highest probability of hitting its target returns. Idaho (63%), Maine (63%), Virginia (63%), and Maryland (63%) also rank near the top.
Nevada (43%), Alabama (44%), and Louisiana (44%) posted the lowest probabilities of hitting assumed returns.
Among the largest states, New York ranks 9th (61%), Florida ranks 17th (58%), Texas ranks 23rd (56%), California ranks 25th (55%), and Pennsylvania ranks 27th (55%).
Conclusion
These rankings show an uneven fiscal condition of state pension systems. Funding ratios vary widely: a few states, such as Tennessee, Washington, and South Dakota, are fully funded, while others, such as Illinois, Kentucky, and New Jersey, have funds to cover only half of promised pension benefits.
When pension contributions are found to be inadequate retroactively, underfunding--pension debt--emerges. This gap arises because past contributions and investment returns proved insufficient to meet the cost of benefits already earned. Reckoning with this debt requires governments to allocate a greater share of their budgets to amortization payments, often diverting funds from education, infrastructure, and other essential public services. Over time, these legacy costs can compound, limiting fiscal flexibility and placing growing pressure on taxpayers.
But even among states that appear stable on funding measures, vulnerabilities persist across other dimensions, such as investment performance, contribution adequacy, and asset allocation risk.
Sustained fiscal discipline, realistic assumptions, and transparent reporting remain essential to securing the retirement benefits promised to public workers and protecting taxpayers from escalating pension debt. States that consistently make full actuarially determined contributions, align return assumptions with long-term market expectations, and manage portfolio risk prudently are best positioned to maintain solvent and resilient pension systems.
To read more about our national findings, click here (https://annual-pension-report.reason.org/).
* * *
Mariana Trujillo is managing director of government finance at Reason Foundation.
Ryan Frost is director of budget and tax policy at the Washington Policy Center.
Truong Bui is the director of data strategy and analytics at Reason Foundation and a managing director of its Pension Integrity Project.
Jordan Campbell is managing director of government finance and senior quantitative analyst at Reason Foundation.
Steve Vu is a quantitative analyst at Reason Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/commentary/how-every-states-public-pension-system-ranks/
MHUB and Rockefeller Foundation Power HardTech Innovation To Strengthen U.S. Economies
NEW YORK, March 18 -- The Rockefeller Foundation posted the following news release:* * *
mHUB and Rockefeller Foundation Power HardTech Innovation To Strengthen U.S. Economies
New $1 million grant will support mHUB's work to lower barriers for hardtech founders and scale innovations in clean energy, advanced manufacturing, and sustainability -- creating jobs and economic opportunity across the United States.
*
CHICAGO -- The Rockefeller Foundation has awarded a two-year, $1 million grant to mHUB -- the nation's largest independent hardtech innovation center -- to deepen its support for hardtech ... Show Full Article NEW YORK, March 18 -- The Rockefeller Foundation posted the following news release: * * * mHUB and Rockefeller Foundation Power HardTech Innovation To Strengthen U.S. Economies New $1 million grant will support mHUB's work to lower barriers for hardtech founders and scale innovations in clean energy, advanced manufacturing, and sustainability -- creating jobs and economic opportunity across the United States. * CHICAGO -- The Rockefeller Foundation has awarded a two-year, $1 million grant to mHUB -- the nation's largest independent hardtech innovation center -- to deepen its support for hardtechfounders in the United States and launch a new accelerator focused on data center sustainability solutions. The funding will advance hardtech innovation and lower barriers for undercapitalized founders who are driving innovations in clean energy, advanced manufacturing, and industrial sustainability. Through this new collaboration, mHUB and The Rockefeller Foundation aim both to create jobs and ensure that industrial investments in hardtech benefit American communities.
"We are proud to help American entrepreneurs turn their bold ideas into cutting-edge solutions that help people thrive amid rising energy costs and the effects of climate change," said Derek Kilmer, Senior Vice President of U.S. Program and Policy at The Rockefeller Foundation. "mHUB has already supported more than 1,100 entrepreneurs and helped create nearly 7,000 jobs in energy storage, grid management, clean manufacturing, and more. We look forward to working with mHUB to help more entrepreneurs make big bets to help tackle today's energy and climate challenges and create jobs."
Every year, mHUB supports over 300 startups to commercialize new physical products in areas such as medical devices, energy, sustainability, and smart manufacturing. While hardtech and physical technologies will play an outsized role in solving some of society's biggest challenges, from devices that transform patient outcomes in healthcare to industrial solutions that mitigate impacts of the compute-energy nexus, the value chain of bringing a physical product to market is capital-intensive. It requires materials, manufacturing costs, and supply chain alignment at an early stage. Meanwhile, software companies secure more than twice as many early-stage rounds as hardtech companies where execution and capital risk is lower up-front. These barriers can hold back America's entrepreneurs, particularly those facing challenging socioeconomic limitations.
Funding from The Rockefeller Foundation will allow mHUB to continue overcoming the common pitfalls that stall hardtech innovation and commercialization. The grant will support resources and interventions for founders at all stages, from idea to growth, including the funding of mHUB's Experts-in-Residence program, a pre-accelerator for idea stage founders, and pilot and manufacturing readiness technical assistance for later stage founders. Additional funding will partially support a cohort of mHUB's venture-backed accelerator with a focus on data center sustainability.
"mHUB is proud to collaborate with The Rockefeller Foundation to strengthen U.S. hardtech commercialization and advance a new era of industrial revitalization," said Haven Allen, CEO and Co-founder of mHUB. "The next chapter of American innovation will be defined by physical technologies that are complex, resource-intensive, and built in the real economy. Creating clear pathways is essential to scaling solutions from lab to market and ensuring the economic benefits of reindustrialization are widely realized. This backing enables mHUB to expand support for founders at critical stages of commercialization and to put sustainability, communities, and prosperity for all at the center of this transition."
* * *
About mHUB
mHUB is an innovation platform that drives the commercialization of hardtech, helping companies build, scale, and innovate with speed and purpose. The platform includes a Chicago-based incubator and prototyping lab, venture and real estate investment company mHUB Ventures, and consulting and engineering arm. Together, infrastructure, capital, and expertise combine to enable emerging technologies, create new manufacturing businesses, and strengthen U.S. industry. To date, mHUB has worked with over 200 public and private partners and supported over 500 startups that have collectively generated $4.5B in economic activity.
* * *
About The Rockefeller Foundation
Investing $30 billion over the last 113 years to promote the well-being of humanity, The Rockefeller Foundation is a pioneering philanthropy built on unlikely partnerships and innovative solutions that deliver measurable results for people in the United States and around the world. We leverage scientific breakthroughs, artificial intelligence, and new technologies to make big bets across energy, food, health, and finance, including with our affiliated public charity, RF Catalytic Capital (RFCC). For more information, sign up for our newsletter at www.rockefellerfoundation.org/subscribe and follow us on X @RockefellerFdn, Instagram @rockefellerfdn, and LinkedIn @the-rockefeller-foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/news/mhub-and-rockefeller-foundation-power-hardtech-innovation-to-strengthen-u-s-economies/
Funding Education Opportunity: The Best Open Enrollment Proposals Moving Through State Legislatures
LOS ANGELES, California, March 18 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following news:* * *
Funding Education Opportunity: The best open enrollment proposals moving through state legislatures
Plus: Three states announced they will reconsider their initial opposition to the federal tax-credit scholarship program.
By Jude Schwalbach
With state legislative sessions in full swing, some clear trends are emerging and open enrollment is leading the way. This year, 31 states are considering nearly 100 open enrollment-related proposals during their current legislative sessions.
At least 36 of the ... Show Full Article LOS ANGELES, California, March 18 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following news: * * * Funding Education Opportunity: The best open enrollment proposals moving through state legislatures Plus: Three states announced they will reconsider their initial opposition to the federal tax-credit scholarship program. By Jude Schwalbach With state legislative sessions in full swing, some clear trends are emerging and open enrollment is leading the way. This year, 31 states are considering nearly 100 open enrollment-related proposals during their current legislative sessions. At least 36 of thebills would improve states' scores on Reason Foundation's open enrollment scoresheet, which examines and grades states' open enrollment laws based on seven best practices, including permitting cross- and within-district open enrollment, state and local transparency provisions, and ensuring that school districts can't charge tuition to public school transfer students.
K-12 open enrollment allows students to transfer to public schools other than their assigned schools when extra seats are available. A Dec. 2025 YouGov poll found that 74% of K-12 parents supported strong open-enrollment laws.
Since 2021, policymakers in 17 states have taken note, strengthening their open enrollment laws. During this time, the number of states with strong cross-district open enrollment laws, which let students transfer to schools in other school districts with open seats, increased from seven to 16.
Similarly, seven states established robust within-district open enrollment laws so students can transfer to public schools with open seats inside their district other than their assigned one, increasing the number of states with within-district transfer policies of this caliber to 17.
Figure 1 highlights states whose 2026 open enrollment proposals would be most impactful if codified, per Reason Foundation's best practices.
* * *
Figure 1: Most notable open enrollment bills of 2026
* * *
Michigan's proposed open enrollment bills, if passed, would be the most significant and establish the state as the preeminent leader in open enrollment nationwide, surpassing Oklahoma, which currently has the best open enrollment law in the nation. However, Michigan's bill has not yet passed the House Education Committee.
Likewise, active proposals in Georgia, Illinois, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Tennessee would improve their current open enrollment score from a grade of "F" to a grade of "A" or "B" per Reason Foundation's scorecard.
In other cases, such as Maryland and Missouri, policymakers proposed incremental reforms that are still steps in the right direction.
For example, Maryland House Bill 26 and Senate Bill 350 would establish discretionary open enrollment programs, making school district participation optional and ensuring that transfer students aren't charged public school tuition. Currently, Maryland is one of the four states without an open-enrollment policy established in state code, so this would be progress.
Overall, if all the proposed open enrollment bills in Figure 2 are codified, the number of states with strong cross-district open enrollment laws would increase from 16 to 23. The number of states with solid within-district open enrollment laws would increase from 17 to 18.
To date this year, only Nebraska has codified an open enrollment proposal, Legislative Bill 653. While this bill doesn't affect the state's score, currently a B- grade in Reason's review, it strengthens the state's policy by requiring school districts to accept the siblings of current transfers regardless of capacity restraints.
In two other states, Utah and Mississippi, open enrollment proposals have already failed to pass. Utah House Bill 528 would have improved open enrollment transparency at the state level, improving its grade from an "A-" to an "A".
In Mississippi, a modest reform, Senate Bill 2002, would have eliminated an onerous restriction that requires transfer applicants to receive approval from both the sending and receiving school districts, but the plan died in the House.
Despite those two setbacks, lawmakers across the country can still pass bills that would help students by improving their states' open enrollment policies. Policymakers should seize the current opportunity to let students attend public schools that are the best fit for them.
From the states
Mississippi's governor mulls calling a special session, and Tennessee policymakers advance a private school choice expansion in the House.
Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves announced that he may call a special session about teacher pay and school choice if the legislature fails to reach an agreement. Specifically, the governor stated that these issues should be "tied together," The74 reports. But House Speaker Jason White, who pushed school choice, said, "No one in the legislature is tying school choice policy to a teacher pay raise."
In Tennessee, a House subcommittee approved House Bill 2532, which would increase the number of participants in the state private school scholarship program from 20,000 to 40,000. During the 2024-25 school year, participants received scholarships valued at $7,500 on average per student to pay for private school tuition, textbooks, tutoring, and other approved education expenses. The program prioritizes students from households whose incomes are below 300% of the federal poverty line or who have disabilities.
The Florida legislature passed Senate Bill 182, which would let small private schools (enrolling 150 students at most) operate in zones designated for commercial or mixed-use purposes as long as the facilities comply with the Florida Fire Code Prevention Code.
Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear vetoed House Bill 1, which would have opted the state into the new federal tax-credit scholarship program. However, Republican lawmakers have promised to override the governor's veto. Earlier this year, Senate President Pro Tem David Givens (R-Greensburg) said, "And if you [Gov. Beshear] choose to veto, you know it's going to be overridden. That is what it is," the Kentucky Lantern reported.
What to watch
Three states announced they will reconsider their initial opposition to the federal tax-credit scholarship program; Vermont families sue over restrictions to the state's tuitioning program.
A second lawsuit was filed in Vermont against Act 73, arguing that its restrictions on the state's private school tuitioning program significantly limit students' education options. The tuitioning program lets students attend private schools at public expense when their assigned school district doesn't offer their grade level. In 2025, a new law prohibited eligible students from transferring to private schools outside Vermont or to private schools within a school district that offers schooling at all grade levels, likely excluding private schools in denser areas.
Three states, Oregon, Hawaii, and New Mexico, are reconsidering their initial statements that they would not participate in the new federal tax-credit program. These reassessments follow Gov. Jared Polis' announcement that Colorado would participate in the federal program. So far, Wisconsin and Kentucky are the only states officially opposed to the federal program. To date, 28 states have announced intentions to participate in the federal program. Set to launch in 2027, the new law allows individual taxpayers to contribute up to $1,700 annually to an approved scholarship-granting organization. Scholarship recipients may use these funds to cover approved education expenses, such as private school tuition, tutoring, or school uniforms. The map below shows the states that have announced decisions to participate in the program.
* * *
Figure 2: States that have announced decisions to participate in the federal tax-credit scholarship program
* * *
The latest from Reason Foundation
Missouri Senate bills 906 and 971 would improve open enrollment
Putting parents in the driver's seat of public education
Reason Foundation also submitted testimony on open enrollment proposals in Utah and Maryland.
Recommended reading
National, State Data Point to Slow Pace of Pandemic Recovery
Linda Jacobson at The74
"A recent report on pandemic learning loss from NWEA, an assessment company, captured that combination of frustration and hope over the state of academic recovery. About a third of schools have reached pre-COVID performance levels in reading or math, and just 14% have recovered in both subjects. But even some that were hit the hardest, like high-poverty schools, have made impressive gains."
School Choice Competition vs. New Education Spending
Patrick Graff, Ph.D., American Federation for Children
"The results are striking: scaling the tax credit scholarship program from 15,000 to over 100,000 students produced achievement gains for public school students that were - conservatively - over 11x larger than if that same funding had been used to increase state K-12 education budgets instead. Critics warned that expanding the state tax credits available to fund private school scholarships would come at the expense of public schools across the state. The best evidence we have suggests otherwise. Florida's policy environment benefited both public and private school students, as the effects of competition created a return on investment an order of magnitude larger than simply spending more."
SCOTUS: The Child Is Still Not a Mere Creature of the State
Robert Pondiscio, American Enterprise Institute
"California's policy did not merely encourage sensitivity; it instructed educators to conceal from parents a child's gender transition at school, including the use of new names or pronouns, unless the student consented to disclosure. The justification was protective: Some students could face hostility or emotional harm if parents were informed. Yet the effect was to institutionalize secrecy between schools and families on matters deeply intertwined with a child's psychological well-being. That's not a routine privacy decision. It is a profound intervention into the parent-child relationship."
* * *
Jude Schwalbach is a senior education policy analyst at Reason Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/education-newsletter/the-best-open-enrollment-proposals-moving-through-state-legislatures/
Freedom From Religion Foundation: Court Permanently Blocks Arkansas Public School 10 Commandments Law
MADISON, Wisconsin, March 18 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release on March 16, 2026:* * *
Court permanently blocks Arkansas public school 10 Commandments law
A federal district court issued a permanent injunction today prohibiting the school district defendants from implementing an Arkansas law that requires all public schools to permanently display a government-chosen, Protestant version of the Ten Commandments.
In his decision in Stinson v. Fayetteville School District No. 1, U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Brooks wrote, "Act 573 must be permanently ... Show Full Article MADISON, Wisconsin, March 18 -- The Freedom From Religion Foundation issued the following news release on March 16, 2026: * * * Court permanently blocks Arkansas public school 10 Commandments law A federal district court issued a permanent injunction today prohibiting the school district defendants from implementing an Arkansas law that requires all public schools to permanently display a government-chosen, Protestant version of the Ten Commandments. In his decision in Stinson v. Fayetteville School District No. 1, U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Brooks wrote, "Act 573 must be permanentlyenjoined. Failing to do so would violate the Establishment Clause rights of all Arkansas public-school children and their parents and also violate plaintiffs' Free Exercise rights."
Ruling that the law, which sought the display of the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom and library in the state, would lead to unconstitutional religious coercion of the child plaintiffs and interfere with their parents' rights to direct their children's religious education, Brooks explained: "Act 573's purpose is only to display a sacred, religious text in a prominent place in every public-school classroom. And the only reason to display a sacred, religious text in every classroom is to proselytize to children. The state has said the quiet part out loud."
Brooks added: "Nothing could possibly justify hanging the Ten Commandments -- with or without historical context -- in a calculus, chemistry, French or woodworking class, to name a few. And the words 'curriculum,' 'school board,' 'teacher' or 'educate' don't appear anywhere in Act 573. Accordingly, there is no need to strain our minds to imagine a constitutional display mandated by Act 573. One doesn't exist."
"Act 573 is a direct infringement of our religious-freedom rights, and we're pleased that the court ruled in our favor," said Samantha Stinson, who is a plaintiff in the case along with her husband, Jonathan Stinson. "The version of the Ten Commandments mandated by Act 573 conflicts with our family's Jewish tenets and practice, and our belief that our children should receive their religious instruction at home and within our faith community, not from government officials."
"We are delighted that reason and our secular Constitution have prevailed, and that children will be spared this unconstitutional proselytizing," said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. "Our public schools exist to educate, not to evangelize a captive audience."
"Today's ruling is a resounding affirmation that public schools are not Sunday schools. The Constitution protects every student's right to learn free from government-imposed religious doctrine," said John C. Williams, legal director for ACLU of Arkansas. "Arkansas lawmakers cannot sidestep the First Amendment by mandating that a particular version of the Ten Commandments be displayed in every classroom. As the court recognized, this law served no educational purpose and instead placed the authority of the state behind a specific religious message. We're grateful that the court has permanently blocked this unconstitutional law and protected the religious freedom of Arkansas students and families of all faiths and none."
"Today's decision ensures that our clients' classrooms will remain spaces where all students, regardless of their faith, feel welcomed and can learn without worrying that they do not live up to the state's preferred religious beliefs," said Heather L. Weaver, senior counsel for the ACLU's Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief.
"Today's decision honors the Constitution's promise of church-state separation and religious freedom," said Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. "It will ensure that Arkansas families -- not politicians or public-school officials -- get to decide how and when their children engage with religion."
"Today's thoughtful decision reinforces a bedrock principle of our constitutional system: The government may not compel adherence to any religious doctrine," said Jon Youngwood, co chair of Simpson Thacher's Litigation Department. "This ruling is a critical affirmation of the First Amendment rights of students and families to decide for themselves whether -- and in what ways -- they engage with religion."
The injunction, issued by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, permanently prohibits the school-district defendants, including Bentonville School District No. 6, Conway School District, Fayetteville School District No. 1, Lakeside School District No. 9, Siloam Springs School Dist. No. 21 and Springdale School District No. 50, from "complying with Act 573." Last year, the court issued a preliminary injunction temporarily barring the school district defendants from displaying the Ten Commandments in classrooms and libraries.
Represented by the Freedom from Religion Foundation, American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, the ACLU, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel, the plaintiffs in Stinson v. Fayetteville School District No. 1 are a group of 10 multifaith and nonreligious Arkansas families with children in public schools.
* * *
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a national nonprofit organization with 42,000 members and several chapters nationwide. FFRF's purposes are to defend the constitutional principle of separation between church and state, and to educate the public on matters relating to nontheism.
* * *
Original text here: https://ffrf.org/news/releases/court-permanently-blocks-arkansas-public-school-10-commandments-law/
[Category: Religion]
Foundation for Economic Education Posts Commentary: Monaco's Unlikely Savior
DETROIT, Michigan, March 18 -- The Foundation for Economic Education issued the following commentary on March 17, 2026, by Portuguese writer and political commentator Claudia Ascensao Nunes:* * *
Monaco's Unlikely Savior
How gambling built a tax-free paradise.
*
At a time when gambling is increasingly treated by governments as a vice to be regulated or restricted, it is worth recalling a curious episode in European economic history: a casino once saved a country. In the 19th century, Monaco went from being a virtually bankrupt state to the playground of millionaires that we know today.
In ... Show Full Article DETROIT, Michigan, March 18 -- The Foundation for Economic Education issued the following commentary on March 17, 2026, by Portuguese writer and political commentator Claudia Ascensao Nunes: * * * Monaco's Unlikely Savior How gambling built a tax-free paradise. * At a time when gambling is increasingly treated by governments as a vice to be regulated or restricted, it is worth recalling a curious episode in European economic history: a casino once saved a country. In the 19th century, Monaco went from being a virtually bankrupt state to the playground of millionaires that we know today. Inthe 19th century, the Principality of Monaco lost the territories of Menton and Roquebrune, which were annexed by France in 1861. With this territorial loss, the small principality was left with almost no tax base, since much of its revenue had come from taxes on agricultural production, particularly olive oil and fruit.
It was in this context of near bankruptcy that the Monegasque government made an unexpected decision: to bet on gambling.
The idea was to create a luxury casino capable of attracting the European elite and generating new revenue. Across much of continental Europe, gambling was prohibited or heavily restricted, which made Monaco a particularly attractive destination for aristocrats and wealthy visitors seeking entertainment.
The casino proved so successful that it allowed investments in infrastructure such as hotels, roads, and railway connections, gradually transforming Monaco into an increasingly luxurious destination.
By 1869, casino revenues had grown so large that Prince Charles III abolished all direct taxes for Monegasque citizens, a policy that remains in place today.
This story becomes particularly interesting when we consider how many governments view gambling today, primarily as a moral vice that should be limited.
John Stuart Mill, in his essay On Liberty, argued that the state should only limit individual freedom when there is direct harm to others. Activities that involve personal risk, even when imprudent, do not in themselves justify government intervention.
For Mill, private betting between consenting adults can be tolerated. He acknowledged that restrictions on public gambling houses might be justified if they exploit vulnerable individuals or cause serious social disruption. However, he rejected general prohibitions or punitive taxation as forms of paternalism.
In Monaco, the approach diverged from modern trends in a nuanced way. Rather than imposing broad restrictions or heavy "sin taxes" on gambling for moral reasons across the entire population, the principality strategically liberalized access to non-residents and visitors, attracting those already seeking such entertainment elsewhere, while maintaining a longstanding paternalistic ban on its own citizens entering the gaming rooms.
This prohibition dating back to the 19th century, and initiated to protect locals from financial ruin, remains strictly enforced today.
The result was sustained prosperity funded by voluntary foreign participation, rather than coercive taxation on citizens.
The principality also became an example of tax competition and low taxation. Over time it attracted wealthy residents, international banks, and businesses, transforming a tiny territory into one of the most prosperous places in the world, with GDP per capita exceeding $250,000 in recent years.
Today the casino contributes only a modest share of government revenue, roughly 4-7% in recent years, according to reports from the Societe des Bains de Mer and industry analyses. However, it was the initial catalyst.
Monaco's economy eventually diversified into luxury tourism, financial services, and high-end real estate, all supported by a light tax regime that encourages wealth creation.
While many modern governments expand regulations, maintain state monopolies over lotteries, or impose sin taxes on gambling, the case of Monaco suggests that a strategic liberalization can sometimes generate more collective prosperity than decades of prohibition or paternalistic policy.
This is not about glorifying gambling, which can be destructive for some people. The real question is whether the state should decide for responsible adults what counts as a "vice" and punish it through taxation or intervention.
Freedom also includes the freedom to make mistakes, as long as one person's choices do not harm others. This principle sits at the core of the classical liberal tradition.
For this reason it is worth reflecting on the growing powers that governments claim in the name of protecting citizens from gambling addiction, powers that often go far beyond targeted safeguards and extend to broad restrictions on consenting adults.
In the United States, proposals such as the SAFE Bet Act include mechanisms like financial affordability checks and advertising bans that are concerning from the standpoint of privacy and market interference.
Mill would likely recognize the lesson implicit in Monaco's experience. When risk is assumed voluntarily and without direct harm to others, individual freedom, including the freedom to offer and consume risky entertainment, can generate unexpected positive outcomes such as economic innovation and lower tax burdens.
The history of Monaco shows that activities often treated as marginal can, when approached pragmatically, become unexpected engines of prosperity.
* * *
Claudia Ascensao Nunes is a Portuguese writer and political commentator. She is the President of Ladies of Liberty Alliance - Portugal and a columnist featured in both national and international publications. Claudia collaborates with Young Voices and focuses on economic freedom, European policy, and transatlantic cooperation. She has over 20,000 followers on X (formerly Twitter), where she shares insights on politics, liberalism, and cultural issues.
* * *
Original text here: https://fee.org/articles/monacos-unlikely-savior/
Denver Foundation Engages Colorado Legislature on Affordability, Housing and Nonprofit Sector
WASHINGTON, March 18 -- The Denver Foundation announced its 2026 policy positions for its fifth Colorado legislative session, prioritizing legislation aimed at advancing affordability, housing and environmental justice for Metro Denver residents. The foundation is monitoring HB26-1046, which would regulate earned wage access services, citing concerns that the proposed framework falls short of existing consumer lending protections, while supporting HB26-1003 to broaden Colorado's small business recovery loan program beyond COVID-19 relief.
-- Shanskar Shaw, Targeted News Service
* * *
2026 ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, March 18 -- The Denver Foundation announced its 2026 policy positions for its fifth Colorado legislative session, prioritizing legislation aimed at advancing affordability, housing and environmental justice for Metro Denver residents. The foundation is monitoring HB26-1046, which would regulate earned wage access services, citing concerns that the proposed framework falls short of existing consumer lending protections, while supporting HB26-1003 to broaden Colorado's small business recovery loan program beyond COVID-19 relief. -- Shanskar Shaw, Targeted News Service * * * 2026Policy Positions
As a community foundation, we are proud to provide grants to nonprofits in the community to advance our mission. For 100 years, we have activated this kind of funding to meet the most pressing needs of the community.
Several years ago, we heard from the community that we could supplement our grantmaking by offering our voice to policy and advocacy efforts. In this way, we could support systemic changes to positively impact our community. We are proud to be engaged in this way in our fifth legislative session.
This session, we are prioritizing engagement on legislation that furthers affordability in areas related to economic opportunity, housing, and environment and climate. We are also focused on preserving funding for programs that support youth well-being and the nonprofit sector. Lastly, we remain committed to engaging on policy proposals that respond to timely issues impacting our community.
We will update this blog throughout the legislative session.
Economic Opportunity
We believe economic opportunity is achievable when the community has the tools and resources to build individual and community wealth.
(Monitor) HB26-1046: Regulate Earned Wage Access Services
What is this about: This bill establishes a regulatory framework for earned wage access (EWA) service providers operating in Colorado. EWA services let employees access earned but unpaid wages before their regular payday.
Why we care: Colorado has established safeguards for other lending tools to help prevent individuals from entering long-term cycles of debt. While this bill establishes a framework and requirements for EWA providers to operate in our state, we, along with our partners, have concerns that the proposed framework does not align with existing consumer lending protections, and more is needed to truly protect against potentially predatory practices
To learn more about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1046).
(Support) HB26-1003: Small Business Recovery Modifications
What this is about: This bill updates and broadens Colorado's small business recovery and resiliency loan program to support small businesses generally, rather than only applying to COVID-19 pandemic recovery.
Why we care: Small businesses play a critical role in Colorado's economy, and this bill makes it easier for small businesses to access the capital they need to continue and grow their business.
To learn more about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1003).
Economic Opportunity | Housing
We believe economic opportunity is achievable when the community has the tools and resources to build individual and community wealth.
(Support) HB26-1013: Ratio Utility Billing Systems
What is it about: This bill provides technical clarification regarding the use of Ratio Based Utility Billing Systems (RUBS) under Colorado law. RUBS are used to allocate the cost for utilities in multi-family housing, such as apartments. This fix is intended to prevent confusion in the implementation of HB25-1090.
Why we care: Clarity on the use of RUBS will increase transparency across tenants and landlords. Consumers and landlords will experience more consistent enforcement, clarity around what is allowed, increased fee transparency, and the prevention of disruption of existing billing systems that comply with the law.
For more information about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1013).
Economic Opportunity | Environment and Climate
We believe that environmental justice must be rooted in policy change and government investments in under-resourced communities to reduce the impacts of climate change.
(Support) HB26-1007: Improve Customer Use Distributed Energy Resources
What this is about: This bill expands customers' ability to install and use distributed energy resources (DERs), like small-scale solar systems, by removing certain utility restrictions and updating interconnection requirements.
Why we care: This bill removes barriers for individuals to utilize devices that can save them money while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
To learn more about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1007).
Housing
We believe the continuum of housing programs designed to address affordable housing and homelessness should be well-funded and respond to the history of exclusionary housing policies.
(Support) HB26-1001: Housing Developments on Qualifying Properties
What is this about: This bill would allow local governments to use a streamlined review process for certain land owned by school districts, state higher education institutions, public housing authorities, or nonprofit organizations with a demonstrated history of providing affordable housing.
Why we care: This bill expands housing opportunities by allowing housing-focused nonprofit organizations and educational institutions to develop housing on land they own, helping to address the housing crisis. The bill promotes community development by reducing administrative barriers, aligning with our mission.
To learn more about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1001).
(Support) HB26-1202: Strategy to Reduce & Prevent Homelessness
What this is about: This bill instructs the Department of Local Affairs to create a statewide plan to combat homelessness, creates a special district and response authority for collaboration between local governments, and allows housing fee revenue to be used for homelessness response.
Why we care: The Denver Foundation has supported local ballot measures to raise funds to address housing affordability and homelessness response efforts. This bill will simplify the requirements for local governments to develop regional solutions and funding to address homelessness.
To learn more about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1202).
(Support) HB26-1015: Colorado Homeless Contribution Tax Credit Extension
What this is about: This bill aims to extend the homeless contribution tax credit through 2030 income tax year. Through this tax credit, Colorado taxpayers are encouraged to make contributions to nonprofits that provide housing and services for individuals experiencing homelessness.
Why we care: This bill protects funding for nonprofits that address homelessness.
To learn more about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1015).
Philanthropy and Nonprofit Sector
We support policy proposals to promote charitable giving and foster collaboration among philanthropists, nonprofit organizations, and government entities in Metro Denver.
(Support) SB26-009: Charitable Organization State Sales & Use Tax
What is this about: This bill would ensure that legitimate 501(c)(3) organizations keep their state tax exemption, even if the federal government takes away their federal tax-exempt status for political reasons. At the same time, it would allow the state to deny tax exemptions to organizations that lose their federal nonprofit status for valid, non-political reasons.
Why we care: Nonprofits are the cornerstone of our communities. It's imperative to ensure that nonprofit organizations are recognized as tax-exempt in Colorado, regardless of actions taken at the federal level, to prevent disruptions to their programs and operations that families and individuals rely on.
To learn more about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB26-009).
Support) SB26-118: Legacy Giving to Charitable Organizations
Plain language rewrite: The bill establishes that if a bank or other financial institution is holding money or benefits, such as retirement earnings, that a donor has promised to a charity, it must pay that money to the charity within 60 days after the charity submits a sworn statement confirming the donor has died and provides specific information.
Why we care: Legacy gifts are a key part of nonprofits' funding streams, enabling them to provide essential services, meet community needs, and carry out their charitable missions. We believe that uniformity can bring a sense of certainty to nonprofit organizations in uncertain times.
To learn more about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/SB26-118).
(Support) HB26-1274 State Agency Payments to Grant Recipients
What this is about: This bill stems from the unsuccessful efforts to advance House Bill 25-1101, which the foundation supported. The bill allows a state agency to dispense up to 25% of the total grant amount to the grantee immediately upon signing or renewing a contract. A grantee may use this payment only on expenses related to the contracted work.
Why we care: This bill ensures more equitable and timely funding for nonprofit organizations, allowing them to provide critical services without financial delays. By requiring transparency in leadership and business structure, the bill also promotes accountability and equity in state funding, aligning with our commitment to fostering inclusive and well-supported communities.
To learn more about this policy, click here (https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1274).
* * *
About The Denver Foundation's 100 years
For 100 years, The Denver Foundation has been building a stronger, thriving Metro Denver, Colorado, and beyond. We've received $2.1 billion from generous donors and given $1.6 billion in grants to support community initiatives. We're the foundation of Denver, connecting and collaborating to address the current and future challenges of our community.
* * *
Original text here: https://denverfoundation.org/2026/03/2026-policy-positions/