(The Center Square) – Small businesses’ access to federal aid in rebuilding from Hurricane Helene is supported through a North Carolina congressman’s proposal in the House of Representatives.

Helene Small Business Recovery Act, authored by Rep. Chuck Edwards, R-N.C., drew the immediate support when filed last week of Democratic Rep. Don Davis and Republican Reps. Virginia Foxx and David Rouzer, all of North Carolina. The 5th Congressional District of Foxx and 11th of Edwards were significantly hit by the storm six months earlier, and the 7th Congressional District of Rouzer and the 1st of Davis are in the southeastern and eastern regions, respectively, of the state and the most often hit places by hurricanes.

“The Helene Small Business Recovery Act clarifies that SBA loans and federal grants, like those that will be offered through the CDBG-DR program, are not duplicative,” Edwards said in a release. “Without this clarification, businesses that took an SBA loan to keep themselves afloat would be prohibited from accessing federal grant money when it becomes available.

“Loans and grants are inherently different, and this bill will allow small business owners access to both federal resources so that western North Carolina, and every small business that makes our mountains such a great place to live, has the resources needed to recover.”

CDBG-DR is the acronym for Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery; SBA is an acronym for Small Business Administration.

The Stafford Act doesn’t allow federal agencies to duplicate benefits, and a loan is considered duplicative of a grant. SBA loans must be repaid; CDBG-DR grants are one-time payments to victims that do not have to be repaid.

A sunset passed in 2021 on the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 that, temporarily, said a loan is not part of a grant, Edwards’ release said.

The American Relief Act aiding in Helene recovery awarded $1.65 billion in disaster block grants to western North Carolina.

(The Center Square) — Louisiana voters overwhelmingly rejected four proposed constitutional amendments which aimed to reshape the state’s approach to justice, juvenile crime, taxation, and judicial elections. Each amendment was rejected by more than 60% of voters.

“This was a “primal scream” kind of vote, driven by robust Democratic EV turnout that I’m not seeing being offset by a strong GOP Election Day vote,” John Couvillon, an award-winning pollster, said in a post on X. 

“Although we are disappointed in tonight’s results, we do not see this as a failure. We realize how hard positive change can be to implement in a state that is conditioned for failure,” Gov. Jeff Landry said in a statement. “We will continue working to give our citizens more opportunities to keep more of their hard-earned money and provide a better future for Louisianians. This is not the end for us, and we will continue to fight to make the generational changes for Louisiana to succeed.” 

Amendment 1: Expanded Court Powers and Specialty Courts

Voters rejected a measure expanding the Louisiana Supreme Court’s disciplinary authority over out-of-state attorneys and allowing lawmakers to establish specialized trial courts that cross district lines. The amendment followed controversy over mass hurricane lawsuits filed by an out-of-state law firm and was challenged in court earlier this month. Amendment 1 was rejected by over 170,000 votes.

Amendment 2: Sweeping Fiscal Overhaul

Amendment 2, which would have rewrote Article VII of the Louisiana Constitution, was rejected by over 150,000 votes. The 100+ page overhaul includes capping state spending growth, consolidating reserve funds, shifting nearly $2 billion from education savings accounts to pay down retirement debt, and phasing out business inventory taxes. It has been a cornerstone of Landry’s tax reform agenda. 

Amendment 3: Adult Prosecution for Juveniles

This amendment would allow lawmakers to expand the list of crimes for which minors can be tried as adults without another constitutional vote. Authored by Sen. Heather Cloud, R-Turkey Creek and opposed by youth justice advocates who argue the current list is already broad enough, Amendment 3 saw the most resounding rejection−a margin of over 180,000.

Amendment 4: Judicial Election Timing Fix

A technical amendment to align special judicial election timing with Louisiana’s soon-to-be closed-party primary system was rejected by over 120,000. Supporters say it prevents logistical issues when filling judicial vacancies; opponents said the change was minor and could have been handled by statute. It was the only measure not subject to a legal challenge.

(The Center Square) – Live Nation Entertainment, the events giant that operates Ticketmaster, is fighting to hold on to practices that states and the federal government allege are anti-competitive and hurt both fans and musicians.

The company recently lost its bid to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice and a coalition of state attorneys general. The lawsuit alleges that Live Nation runs a monopoly that most recently came under fire during Taylor Swift’s Eras tour as fans struggled to get limited tickets to fast-selling shows. 

District Judge Arun Subramanian denied Live Nation’s motion to dismiss the federal action, ruling the DOJ could proceed with its case.

“These allegations aren’t just about a refusal to deal with rival promotors,” Subramanian wrote in his ruling. “They are about the coercion of artists.”

Live Nation is also working on multiple fronts at the state level. More than 25 states and Puerto Rico debated more than 75 bills on ticket sales during 2023 legislative sessions after the fallout from Swift’s mega-tour, according to a report from the National Conference of State Legislatures.

In the wake of the Eras collapse, Arkansas stopped local governments from banning the sale or resale of a ticket at any price; Maine required resellers to refund customers in some circumstances; and Oklahoma prohibited the use of software to bypass controls on a ticket seller’s website, according to the NCL report. In 2016, Congress passed similar legislation banning the use of bots on ticket websites.

In Massachusetts, Live Nation spent $120,000 lobbying lawmakers to pass the Mass Leads Act, a $4 billion economic development measure that ran 319 pages, according to The Verge. Despite opposition from consumer groups, it also allows ticket sellers to restrict the transferability of the tickets they sell, meaning a buyer could be limited to reselling on the seller’s platform. 

The Chamber of Progress, a tech industry trade group, asked the governor to amend the bill, concerned that Live Nation could use ticket terms to force buyers to resell tickets exclusively on their own platform, “further entrenching their monopoly position in the live events ecosystem,” according to a letter from the group.

The Chamber of Progress also opposed a bill in New Mexico to cap resale prices. The group said in a letter that price caps were arbitrary and ineffective.

Diana Moss, of the Progressive Policy Institute, said Live Nation is “pursuing an aggressive state-level campaign to push for laws that effectively regulate the resale market while [the company] continues to operate, unfettered, in the primary market.”

Live Nation has defended its practices. Dan Wall, executive vice president of corporate and regulatory affairs at Live Nation Entertainment, wrote in a blog post that the company isn’t a monopoly and doesn’t reap monopolistic profits.

“The defining feature of a monopolist is monopoly profits derived from monopoly pricing. Live Nation in no way fits the profile,” Wall wrote. “Service charges on Ticketmaster are no higher than on SeatGeek, AXS, or other primary ticketing sites, and are frequently lower. In fact, when Ticketmaster loses a venue to SeatGeek, service charges usually go up substantially. And even accounting for sponsorship, an advertising business that helps keep ticket prices down, Live Nation’s overall net profit margin is at the low end of profitable S&P 500 companies.”