Legislative Progress Tracker

[{"id":"b-1780813827509-mnu0a","type":"paragraph","html":"<p>The&nbsp;<strong>Future Appeals Accessibility Act</strong>&nbsp;is a property valuation fairness and appeals-access proposal. It does not reduce tax rates, cap levies, or function as a property tax cut.</p><p>The Act requires property owners to receive at least&nbsp;<strong>120 days’ advance notice</strong>&nbsp;before scheduled property valuation activity. After receiving notice, the property owner has&nbsp;<strong>60 days</strong>&nbsp;to request a full onsite inspection. If the owner does not respond within that period, the State or responsible public authority may proceed with valuation as planned and is not required to send a second notice, reminder, or follow-up warning.</p><p>The proposal is intended to make the valuation process easier for homeowners to understand and use. Many property owners are not aware when valuation activity is coming, what options they have, who to contact, or how to prepare if they believe a valuation is inaccurate. The advance notice requirement gives homeowners time to ask questions, request inspection, gather documents, and determine whether appraisal evidence may be needed.</p><p>After the 60-day inspection-election period expires, the homeowner’s recourse is the established property valuation complaint and appeal process. If the property owner substantially prevails in an appeal, the State shall reimburse reasonable and documented appeal-related costs, including appraisal costs.</p><p>The goal is balanced fairness: property owners receive meaningful notice, inspection access, appeal guidance, and reimbursement when they prove a valuation was wrong, while public authorities retain clear deadlines, administrative certainty, and the ability to proceed when a property owner does not respond.</p>"}]

[{"id":"b-1777745778270-9fuid","type":"paragraph","html":"<p><span style=\"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);\">This policy establishes enforceable consumer protections over personal data by requiring companies to disclose the source of information used for commercial contact, provide timely acknowledgment and deletion upon request, and cease further use of such data. It introduces a structured penalty framework, including enhanced consequences where misuse contributes to identity theft or fraud, while preserving lawful access to public information. The proposal modernizes consumer protection to reflect the risks of large-scale data aggregation and strengthens individuals’ ability to control how their personal information is used.</span></p>"}]

The Violence Prevention, Accountability, and Constitutional Safeguards Act is a constitutional public-safety framework focused on reducing violent misuse through enforcement, institutional accountability, and prevention — without registries, surveillance, or infringement on lawful firearm ownership. It separates learning from enforcement by creating tightly bounded research and crisis-response safeguards grounded in due process.

To permanently secure Social Security, modernize its revenue base, protect beneficiaries’ purchasing power, and ensure Medicare affordability without reducing earned benefits.

The Continuity of Stabilizing Treatment Act establishes a continuity-first standard for clinically necessary therapy within Ohio-regulated health plans. The proposal preserves insurer utilization review authority while preventing treatment interruption and protecting patients from retroactive financial liability arising from administrative disputes.

A federal legislative proposal establishing a continuity-first standard for clinically necessary stabilizing treatments within federally regulated health programs. The framework ensures that patients receiving time-sensitive therapy are not exposed to treatment interruption due solely to prior authorization or administrative review processes while preserving appropriate utilization oversight.