For Delaware families, passing down a home just got a bit easier.

By: Michael E. Kozikowski Sr., Guest Contributor

Delaware has enacted the Transfer on Death Act, creating a new way for residents to pass real estate directly to heirs without the cost and delays of probate. Sponsored by Representative Harris and Senator Lockman, House Bill 147-Substitute 1 allows property owners to use a TOD deed to name beneficiaries who will automatically inherit property upon the owner’s death.

TOD deeds work much like naming a beneficiary on a bank account or life insurance policy. It has no effect while the owner is alive—the property can still be sold, mortgaged, or otherwise transferred at any time. It only takes effect at death, transferring ownership directly to the beneficiary and helping families avoid probate.

For a TOD deed to be valid, it must be notarized, signed before two witnesses (whom are not a beneficiary), and recorded with the county Recorder of Deeds before the owner’s death. Beneficiaries do not need to sign or be notified in advance, though it’s helpful for them to be made aware to avoid confusion later. It can be revoked at any time by filing a revocation, recording a new TOD deed, or transferring the property during life.

Importantly, TOD deeds are exempt from Delaware’s realty transfer tax. Standardized forms will be available on all the county recording offices website to make both creating and revoking these deeds more accessible to the public.

When a property passes through a TOD deed, it transfers with any existing mortgages or liens still attached. Creditors are protected, as debts and statutory allowances can be recovered from the property if the estate lacks sufficient assets. As real estate is often a family’s greatest asset, transfers previously required lengthy probate. With TOD deeds, a parent can leave their home directly to their child without court involvement.

“The reason for my ongoing support of this bill is the benefit it would bring to underserved communities, affording them a greater degree of self-determination when it comes to their loved ones and property. A recent study performed by the AARP shows that many individuals in these communities do not create a will before death, leaving their loved ones with the consequences of probate,” stated New Castle County Recorder Michael E. Kozikowski Sr.

With this Act, Delaware joins more than 30 other states that have enacted similar laws, promoting consistency in estate planning across the country. The measure reflects a bipartisan effort to reduce red tape and give residents more control over how property passes at death.

New Castle County’s Recorder of Deeds office has been working closely with Kent and Sussex Counties to prepare for the acceptance of TOD deeds. New Castle and Sussex Counties will begin recording these documents on December 4, 2025, while Kent County weighs an earlier start.

The December 4th start date is important: if a property owner passes away before December 4, 2025, the TOD deed will not be valid. In those cases, heirs or loved ones would still need to rely on a will, estate proceedings, or other legal documentation to transfer ownership.

To help residents prepare, TOD deed forms will be posted on our website in the coming weeks leading up to the December 4th launch date. As with any document recorded in our office, we strongly encourage individuals to seek legal advice to fully understand this document’s purpose and scope, while determining if it is the right option for their circumstances. Our office is proud to provide this new option for families and remains committed to serving the public with clear and efficient service.

Michael E. Kozikowski Sr. is the Recorder of Deeds for New Castle County, serving six consecutive terms. During his tenure, he has introduced initiatives aimed at improving transparency and accessibility for residents of New Castle County.

Two New Releases from the DOE and EPA Are Set to Change the Energy Landscape

By: Dr. David R. Legates, Advisory Board Member, A Better Delaware

Amid a renewed push for energy deregulation under the second Trump administration, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) released a pivotal report titled “A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate” on July 29, 2025.  Commissioned by Energy Secretary Chris Wright and authored by a panel of five independent scientists, the report has been made available for public comment until September 2, 2025.  This report scrutinizes the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on U.S. climate, extreme weather, sea level rise, agriculture, the economy, and societal well-being.

Key findings of this report challenges mainstream narratives with current state-of-the-art science.  It concludes that climate models overestimate warming, as they are biased in their representation of surface and tropospheric warming, stratospheric cooling, snow cover, and albedo. The report highlighted the benefits of CO₂, such as global greening and enhanced crop yields, while noting that no long-term trends in extreme weather events (e.g., hurricanes, tornadoes, and droughts) have occurred. The report notes that sea level rise projections carry deep uncertainties, with rates in the U.S. (~8 inches since 1900) being influenced more by local subsidence than acceleration. Economically, the report argues climate impacts are minor compared to energy poverty, with a low social cost of carbon (median $0.37-$18.67 by 2050) and potential net benefits from warming (e.g., reduced cold-related mortality that far offsets heat-related deaths). Conclusions urged prioritizing affordable energy over aggressive mitigation, as U.S. actions yield undetectable global effects.

Released on the same day as this report, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a rule to rescind the 2009 Endangerment Finding, which had declared greenhouse gases a public health threat under the Clean Air Act, thereby enabling regulations like vehicle greenhouse gas standards. The rule, informed by the DOE report, aims to eliminate all greenhouse gas emission standards for light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles, aligning markets with consumer preferences amid declining EV interest.  For example, surveys show a 30-40% sales drop without incentives like IRA tax credits, which was repealed via the Congressional Review Act. The new rule also cites changed circumstances since 2024, including lower fuel prices, policy shifts, and high compliance costs.

Arguments emphasized economic misalignment—consumers undervalue fuel savings, EVs strain electrical grids ($57 billion annual costs), and regulations increase fossil fuel use via substitution effects (i.e., half of U.S. reductions are offset globally). Projected net benefits of $157 billion to $444 billion annually from 2027 through 2055 are expected to be realized from reduced costs offsetting minor particulate matter emission increases.

Supporters hailed the new rule for economic relief and scientific balance. Implications include curtailed federal greenhouse gas regulation, boosted fossil fuel use, and legal challenges, potentially reshaping U.S. environmental policy amid global energy debates.

Dr. David R. Legates is a retired Professor from the University of Delaware and is the Director of Research and Education at the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation. 

Government Policies & the Soaring Cost of Delaware Homeownership

By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware 

The government is preventing many Delawareans from owning a home.  You may not realize it, but government fees, taxes and policies serve to increase not only the cost of purchasing a home, but also the cost of keeping one.

While re-assessment has been in the news and all of our mailboxes recently, there are many other factors that affect the cost of homeownership and purchase.

One significant factor begins with the requirement to pay impact fees. New Castle County is considering raising those fees by about 33%. These fees are intended to reimburse the county government for the cost of infrastructure that might be required when new homes are built, such as fire, law enforcement and emergency medical services. But, the County faces a housing shortage, and when the ordinance to raise those fees came to former New Castle County Executive, now Governor Meyer, he vetoed it, citing the severe need for more housing in New Castle County and the cost of acquiring a home. And, the reality is that these fees are reflected in the cost of a new home, making the reality of homeownership more expensive.  Mike Rieman, President of the Delaware Home Builders Association, is widely quoted as saying that “Even lumping impact fees into a 30-year mortgage will make a house less affordable because for every $1,000 increase, nearly 400 Delaware families become unqualified for a mortgage on that home.” Interest rates have remained high for some time, but are gradually coming down, so there is now more consumer interest in purchasing homes, but this increase would take that dream back out of reach.

We also have the highest real estate transfer tax in the country.  That means that if you purchase an average priced home costing $384,079, you will pay an additional $15,363 dollars to buy that home, or split that cost with the seller, depending on how you and the seller structure your settlement costs.  Either way, the cost is added to the transaction and the government gets the money. And, it is a lot of money.  New Castle County’s estimate in the 2025 budget is about $35 million.  Sussex County collected a remarkable $63 million in 2022, and approximately $53 million in 2024, according to county records.

Regulations add expense. The Cato Institute reported that the likelihood of approval to build is better for smaller projects, so companies scale back the size to improve the chances of approval. Cato reports that there is growing evidence that relaxing land-use regulations is the most effective way to expand housing supply and increase affordability.

Regulation affects the bottom line, which also affects the capacity of companies to build to meet housing needs.  Again, Cato cited research that found, as between more regulated San Francisco and less regulated Atlanta, there was a 12% reduction in revenue per firm. That means smaller, leaner firms that cannot offer the benefits of lower prices due to the economy of scale. At a time when, whatever we think about the idea, the theory is that concentrated living is better because it reduces commuting for work, shopping and recreation, perhaps we should reconsider our policies regarding scale of projects and regulatory restrictions.

The recent re-assessment and school tax increases got the attention of a lot of people, and therefore the attention of our elected officials.  Comparisons were made between the increase in spending in our school systems and the decrease in student performance – almost a directly inverse correlation.

As we at A Better Delaware have said many times, the government’s appetite for revenue is voracious, and never satisfied.  I waited tables for 10 years in the summer. I decided I should write a book called “The Other Side of the Plate”, because the perspective is so different there. Well, legislators and regulators live on the other side of your checkbook, and they have a different perspective on how much you need your money, as opposed to them.   And remember that “highest in the nation” real estate transfer tax? It was increased at a time when the state revenue was down, and promises were made it would be retracted when times got better. But, when, during the pandemic we had billions of dollars in surplus and some in the General Assembly encouraged a reduction, it was not passed.

There are common sense ways to reduce the cost of housing and make it accessible to more of our neighbors.  Reduce the transfer tax. Relieve builders and investors of regulatory restrictions. Encourage multi-unit /multi-function development, such as communities of condominiums and townhomes, with shopping, medical services and recreation in the community. No one thinks we should not support the increased need for services when new homes are built, but those fees should be fairly imposed and directly related to the impact of the increased demand.

It felt good to be heard when we raised heck about the increase in school taxes and county taxes related to the increased assessed value of our homes.  Now you need to let your elected officials know how you feel about the impact government policies are having on you and your neighbors when it comes to affordable housing.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

Rethinking Taxes, Spending, and Education in Delaware

 By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware

There has been a lot of coverage and comment recently on the significant increases in property and school taxes. The significance of the increase was largely due to an irresponsible delay in property reassessment for over 40 years, resulting in discrepancies and unfairness in the amounts paid by property owners.

Assessments are taxes, and we have a lot of them in Delaware. Our legislature’s appetite is voracious.  The growth in spending, and the increase in the rate of growth, when looked at over the span of the last 25 years, is alarming. The numbers below are from state government sources.

It was in 2001 when Delaware’s budget first approximated $1 billion.  By 2009, that number had grown to $3.63 billion.  In 2020, it was $4.4 billion, and in 2025, it is $6.5 billion.  The pace at which we are spending is increasing.

Now, maybe you don’t mind paying taxes. After all, if the funds are helping people who need it, if the money is being spent efficiently and effectively, then there is reason to support the expenditures.  I wish we could say it was so.

This year, in order to ease the burden of managing the spending of your money, the State has decided to just give every student a free lunch, not limiting that service to those who have a need.  There is so much inaccuracy in managing the money in the unemployment program, they cannot accurately audit the funds to determine if the people we are paying truly qualify and if we are paying them the right amount. And, in education, students continue to test in the bottom of the nation.

The disappointing results in student performance continue despite the fact that spending on education has increased significantly. We are in the top tier of all states in spending on education. In fact, fully one third of our state budget is spent on public education. But we are 46^th in student performance. Not effective spending at all.

Where does this money for our budget come from?   On average, over the years, about 40% comes from individual income taxes, 40% from licenses, 15% from gross receipts taxes and the balance from miscellaneous sources.  Our personal income tax rate is in the top 10 in the nation, and our corporate tax rate is as well.

If more spending does not improve our education system, do our tax and spending policies make our economy better? It does not appear so.  According to USA Facts, Delaware’s annualized Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth was 1.7% over 5 years, placing Delaware 46^th out of our 50 states. And, according to the US Bureau of Economic Analysis, Delaware’s economy grew 0% in the first quarter of 2025.

What should be done to improve results and lower the tax burden on Delaware citizens? First, eliminate the gross receipts tax. After all, ultimately you pay it in the prices you pay for the items you buy. Gross receipts taxes are a tax on the sale of items in grocery and hardware stores, mom and pop bakeries and taco stands.  It is a double tax that hits small business especially hard, because it taxes the money made on sales before the business owner takes out supplies, wages, and rent. Then, after the owner takes home a little money, that is taxed as income.  Most states have eliminated this type of tax.  Delaware should too.

We should demand that our education system start producing the product it promises – learning. Delaware should adopt the policy that Mississippi and other states have and require third graders be able to read at grade level before being passed to fourth grade. Mississippi, which had been at the bottom of the rankings for 30 years, is now ranked 21 among states for student performance. The difference in only six years? Their students can read. Every student, teacher, and parent was invested in a result that changed students’ lives – getting them to read well enough to be promoted. Now they can read, those students can learn!! We are graduating students in Delaware that truly cannot read. It is not fair to them, their families or the rest of us that we are failing them so badly.

And we should work to encourage a vigorous business climate in Delaware. Bring in good businesses with good paying jobs. Know that it will be difficult until we improve our education results, as the people who bring their companies to Delaware want their children to be able to learn. We should adopt tax policies that encourage young entrepreneurs to open and grow businesses and offer expanded learning and training opportunities for the trades and technology.

Delaware has been considered a leader since this country’s inception. The truth is tarnished, but the spark is not expired. We all have reason to be invested in Delaware’s success in the future – for our families and those who will come after us. Let us be committed – now – to A Better Delaware.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

Reforming Delaware’s Health Care: Costs, Competition, and Common-Sense Solutions

 By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware

Everyone is concerned about the cost of health care in Delaware. The patients and their families who owe medical debt, the legislators in the General Assembly, the hospitals that are accruing increasing mountains of unpaid costs for medical services and the Governor.  Numerous efforts have been undertaken to address the issue, and in truth, most of them are misguided and are likely to be ineffective and unsustainable.

The General Assembly passed the Diamond State Hospital Cost Review Board (HB 350), which establishes a government board to review hospital spending and budgets to determine if they think the hospital could or should align the facility’s priorities differently to cut costs.  Christiana Care has sued to prevent the bill from taking effect, and although members of the panel have been appointed, implementation is already in turmoil.

Recently the Chair of the Board resigned, expressing that he felt the Governor exerted inappropriate influence over the Board’s actions.  The Governor has expressed that he is skeptical that the Board will be effective in cutting hospital costs (a position that we at A Better Delaware share and advocated for prior to the bill being passed). At the very same meeting of the Appropriations Committee that the Board appropriated $700,00.00 to get under way, the same Committee voted to expand the procedures for which the State would pay for their insured to receive, and to eliminate the co-pays for those services by those patients.  The contradiction seemed lost on the members of the Committee who voted to support both provisions.

The Governor partnered with a non-profit, Undue Medical Debt, and provided an initial sum of $500,000.00 to that organization to pay off what even the organization describes as debt that would likely go uncollected, according to CEO Allison Sesso.  Governor Meyer claims it will eliminate $50 million of medical debt for 17,000 Delaware families. If this debt is likely uncollectable, we are essentially using taxpayer dollars to subsidize (further) the hospitals in Delaware.

Behind all these efforts are real people who are not getting the best quality and more effective health care delivery available.  The most significant indicator of that is the time patients wait in the emergency room. Delaware has horrible wait times in the ER, as anyone who has had to visit one knows.  In fact, we are among the worst in the nation, with an average of 3 hours and 31 minutes wait.  It used to be worse, but hospitals have expanded emergency care beyond their four corners and opened remote emergency services at walk in care facilities.  Recently, a trip of an acquaintance to one of these remote ERs resulted in them being called back before their check-in was completed. There was only one other person in the waiting room. So, take her 5 minutes, say, and average it to get 3 hours and 31 minutes and you get an idea of how long your wait in Delaware can be.

And, how long you wait in an emergency room matters. A study by the Office of National Statistics in England found that if you wait 3 hours in an ER, you have a 10% greater chance of dying in the next 30 days than if you only waited 2 hours. And, if you wait 6 hours, which occurs, regrettably, on a regular basis across our state and the country, you have a 60% greater chance of dying in the next 30 days than if you waited only 2 hours.

There are better ways to address both access to care and quality of care. We have said it many times – more competition.  Eliminate the certificate of need as most states have now done. That law puts representatives of facilities already in business providing health care in Delaware in charge of decisions whether other facilities can enter the state to do business or whether new services, equipment or facilities can be offered by others already doing business in the state.  Study after study, since the early 90s support that the quality of care and the access to care improve when the number of services offered and the number of facilities offering those services are increased.

Let’s bring common sense back to the analysis of this, and other, issues. Let’s learn from the experience of other hospitals and health care systems. And let’s look at the long term, sustainable solutions that will give all of us better access to quality health care.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

Construction Provides a Good Career Job

By: Edward J. Capodanno, Guest Contributor

It has become painfully obvious that the world has more diverse needs than colleges are intended to meet and the opportunities to have a fulfilling, exciting and diverse career are many and varied.  We are proud to say a career in construction is one of the smartest and most rewarding career choices a person can make.  For those interested in a career in construction, they should know they will start making a good income on day one avoiding student loan debt. Over the course of their career, they can be in the field, in an office, working as part of a team or supervising. The industry provides a direct pathway to personal prosperity and the ability to earn a high-quality living.

Nationally the average age of a construction worker is 47 and for every five people leaving the industry, just one is entering. At this rate, and over the next three years, the shortage of new workers could stall Delaware’s economic growth, which is now restarting.

As an improving economy – supported by a renewed focus on thoughtful economic development – creates new opportunities in Delaware, the need for vocationally trained and certified, skilled workers become even more important. The Delaware Department of Labor has identified our industry as the third fastest growing job growth industry over the next 5 years.

There are several opportunities to attract more individuals to enter the construction industry. First is an apprenticeship program, which is a structured training program that combines on-the-job experience with related classroom instruction to prepare individuals for skilled careers. It’s a way to earn a wage while learning a trade, leading to a nationally recognized credential upon completion that is recognized across the country, demonstrating mastery of the trade. Apprenticeships can lead to higher-paying jobs and further career advancement opportunities.

The impediment preventing the increase in the number of apprentices is that the Department of Labor requires ratios of apprentices to journeyperson. The current ratios are preventing companies from hiring apprentices due to either not having enough journeypersons to meet the ratio or they are currently at the ratio number and can’t hire anyone because it puts them over the limit and brings fines from the Department of Labor.  In such cases, they must wait till current apprentice’s graduate before they can add additional ones.  Reducing the ratio to 1 apprenticeship to 1 journeyperson will allow contractors to hire young entry level tradespeople that will fulfill their workforce needs while at the same time providing those individuals with a well-paying job with a solid career path that will provide for them and their family.

Finally, the other opportunity to increase our pool of potential workers is to create a career pathway in every traditional high school so that students are exposed to the construction trades. The shop classes that all of us were familiar with were replaced in the 1990’s by other career opportunities and this has hampered our industry’s ability to attract students. They are never exposed to the trades and not given the opportunity to see the career path they could have. Imagine allowing students in the traditional high schools who don’t have college aspirations, the ability to learn about the construction trades and the impact it would have on our industries ability to find workers. It would be a win win situation for all as young men and women would enter our industry thus reducing our workforce shortage and affording them a career path that would sustain them for life. We need the political will and foresight to make this happen and help the 3rd fastest growth industry with the opportunity to promote its career path to all high school students throughout the First State.

The construction industry is committed to developing the construction workforce of tomorrow.  And remember, construction is one of the few industries where the vast majority of the work must be performed on-site and cannot be offshored.  So, as your student, friend or family member explores careers that interest them, let them know that through a career in construction they can make a good living while performing valuable work. You won’t be disappointed.

Edward J. Capodanno, recently retired after 32 years as president of Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) of Delaware. Before coming to ABC Delaware, he was the vice president of Marketing and Rehabilitation for Goodwill Industries of Delaware from 1988-1993.

Should Teachers Be Allowed to Choose Their Evaluations?

By Tanya Hettler, Ph.D., Guest Contributor

A bill sponsored by Sen. Laura Sturgeon, Senate Bill 165, titled “An Act to Amend Title 14 of the Delaware Code Relating to Student Improvement Component,” has just passed in the Delaware General Assembly.

The bill requires the Delaware Department of Education to pilot a new method of teacher evaluation that allows teachers to choose how they are evaluated and considers factors that may negatively affect student performance, such as student absences, noncompliance, or a lack of parental involvement. In practice, this could allow poor test scores to be excluded entirely from a teacher’s evaluation-regardless of classroom instruction-raising concerns about accountability and transparency.

As is often the case, this bill is misleadingly framed as a “student improvement” measure when it is actually about making teacher evaluations easier and thus will not lead to student improvement. Instead of overlooking student absences and behavior problems, shouldn’t schools and teachers be working to decrease these kinds of disruptive behaviors and increase parental involvement?

Over the past four years, Delaware lawmakers have passed four Science of Reading (SoR) bills. The Science of Reading (SoR) involves direct and explicit instruction in phonics along with four other essentials that have been proven effective in teaching literacy.

The first of these bills, SB 4, passed in 2021, yet does not require SoR to be fully implemented until the 2027-2028 school year. This delay means another six years of students who have not learned to read. This is unacceptable.

States that hold students, teachers and families accountable for literacy have far better literacy scores than Delaware, which continues to obscure poor literacy results and is attempting to reduce accountability even further through SB 165.

While the rest of the country works effectively to implement SoR in their schools so students can learn to read, Delaware seems more focused on decreasing accountability and unconcerned with being among the bottom five states in the country in academic performance, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Delaware’s public school students are suffering because their teachers and schools are not being held accountable for teaching them basic reading and math. Only 41% of Delaware students can read at grade level and only 31% can do math at grade level. Delaware teachers should not have even less accountability as proposed in SB 165. In what other profession are employees allowed to choose their evaluations? None. SB 165 focuses on what makes life easier for adults in our schools rather than what is best for the children.

Delaware must immediately require teachers to be trained in the SoR and require that it be implemented to teach literacy in all districts when school starts again in September 2025. There are districts in the state that have not even begun SoR professional learning. Some superintendents do not even seem aware that a law requires SoR to be taught or that SoR is entirely backed by scientific and classroom evidence.

When it comes to evaluating teachers, we should continue to use the statewide Smarter Balanced assessment (or choose another statewide assessment) to compare student performance at the beginning and end of each grade.

Additionally, schools should be held accountable for implementing effective policies to reduce absenteeism and for improving communication with families, such as those implemented in West Seaford Elementary School, rather than ignoring these issues.

Delaware’s legislature should also reverse SB 85, a bill about student discipline, which has led to significant increases in student misbehavior and general chaos in Delaware schools, as reported in a survey conducted by the Delaware State Education Association.

SB 165 will be a disaster for Delaware’s students. The last thing that our schools need is another excuse for poor academic performance. Instead, Delaware must enforce its Science of Reading laws so that students can learn to read, and schools must implement effective strategies to reduce absenteeism and behavioral problems.

Tanya Hettler, Ph.D., is head of the Center for Education Policy at the Caesar Rodney Institute.

Delaware’s Progressive Policies Create An Economic Mirage*

By: Charlie Copeland, Guest Contributor

For two decades, Delaware has been a laboratory for progressive economic policy. From expanded social programs to aggressive minimum wage hikes, from increased business regulations to generous unemployment benefits, our state has faithfully implemented the liberal playbook. The results are now clear: these well-intentioned policies have created an economic mirage that appears successful on paper, while systematically excluding tens of thousands of Delawareans from productive economic participation and ultimately leading to an income tax increase.

Delaware politicians celebrate the state’s 3.6% unemployment rate and rising wages as evidence that progressive policies work. But the real story lies in what they don’t mention: our labor force participation rate has collapsed from 65.7% in 2005 to just 59.0% today. If Delaware had maintained its 2005 participation levels, our unemployment rate would actually be 10.3%.

This represents roughly 45,000 to 50,000 working-age Delawareans who have simply stopped looking for work. They haven’t disappeared—they’ve been absorbed into an expanding web of government dependency programs that progressive policymakers have steadily enlarged over the past two decades.

The wage growth story reveals the fundamental flaw in progressive economic thinking. Yes, employed workers saw 47% wage increases from 2014 to 2025, but according to the Federal Reserve, real per capita income for all Delawareans grew by only 1.4% annually, well below historical standards. Progressive policies created artificial wage floors and benefits that priced many workers out of the job market entirely, while those who remained employed benefited from an increasingly exclusive economy.

This is the expected result of progressive economic policies. When the government makes it costly to hire workers through mandates, regulations, and payroll taxes, businesses tend to hire fewer employees while paying their existing staff more. When social programs offer attractive alternatives to working, sensible people opt not to work. The outcome is exactly what we observe in Delaware: higher wages for fewer workers and a growing number of residents dependent on government support. The increase in Delawareans relying on assistance is reflected in state spending, which has risen by an average of 7.15% since 2018—nearly double the inflation rate of 3.73% during the same period.

In 2005, Delaware still maintained some of its traditional pro-business orientation. Today, after years of progressive governance, we’ve become another high-cost, high-regulation state that drives out working family jobs while creating lucrative opportunities for college-educated professionals who can navigate the regulatory maze.

The policy mechanisms are clear. Generous unemployment benefits reduce incentives to find work quickly. Expansive disability programs provide alternatives to employment. High minimum wages price out entry-level workers. Progressive housing policies have made Delaware’s housing market expensive, forcing working families to choose between unaffordable rents and government housing assistance.

A few targeted policy reforms can start reversing this damage. For example, Delaware could forgive 1% of the state’s share of the real estate transfer tax for individual home buyers—not LLCs or business entities—purchasing property in low-income census blocks. This would help working families build wealth through homeownership in areas where economic stability is most needed, while discouraging reliance on government assistance.

Charlie Copeland is the board chair of Associates International. He sits on the Board of Governor’s at the Delaware State Chamber of Commerce and serves as the chair of the Center for Economic and Fiscal Policy at the Caesar Rodney Institute.

*This article was first published in the Delaware Business Times on July 2, 2025, and is reprinted here with permission from the author.

Delaware’s Expanding Budget and the Need for Fiscal Responsibility

 By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware

The members of the General Assembly have recently interjected the State into areas where it dared not go previously.  They voted to override county zoning decisions and municipal restrictions on certain business activities. They took over the oversight of hospital budgets, complaining about the costs the state incurs for healthcare and yet, at the same time, expanded the medical services that were covered by the state insurance plan.

Repeatedly, governors and legislators have voted to increase spending on education. In fact, at an incredible pace. Yet, despite the fact that we have enacted continued and consistent increases in spending, they have led only to a consistent and persistent decline in student performance.  Perhaps you remember the term “direct and inverse correlation” from school? We are in the top ten in terms of spending and the bottom three or four in student performance. The state should try programs that have been proven to work to elevate student performance and achievement in other states, with as challenging a history as we have established in the past 10 years. Mandate that a child must read at third grade level in order to be promoted to fourth grade.  Allow parents to more easily see how their child’s school ranks and the proficiency of the students attending by requiring the State Department of Education to make it very clear where to find it on the Department’s website. Give parents the authority to place their child in the school of their choice.

Recently the General Assembly approved a stopgap measure, a one-time allocation, to help families struggling to pay the utility bills. Well, not all of them – estimates are the funds will help about 2% of those who are currently struggling. The state’s insistence on shutting down Delaware’s capacity to generate power and to promote costly and less reliable alternative energy sources is driving, and keeping, prices higher.

Our state government could adopt policies that lower energy costs, improve student performance and allow more families to succeed without government handouts that are literally too little and too late. The legislature could eliminate laws that limit competition in healthcare, which increases costs and restricts access to quality health care.  State government is costing more than it should and all of Delaware would benefit from cost-effective and common-sense policies.

Since its inception, A Better Delaware has advocated that Delaware establish the position of Inspector General. We applaud the General Assembly for finally (after it was first proposed more than a decade ago) passing a law that establishes the Office of Inspector General. That office is designed to help identify fraud, waste, and mismanagement in state government, the agencies, the legislature and all aspects of government action.  The person who is selected must be independent, guided by only the best interest of Delawareans, and not be held hostage by political views of anyone in the General Assembly or the Governor’s Office.

Perhaps the work of the Inspector General will lead to savings, and recommendations about improvements and policies that will help save taxpayers money. Perhaps, the work of that office will bring a sense of responsibility to a state government that consistently spends our money without truly determining how, accompanied with common sense policies, it can best work to enhance the lives of Delawareans. We have high hopes and expectations of what can be – our objective everyday – A Better Delaware.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.

Impact of Government Policies on Delaware Utility Costs

 By: Jane Brady, Chair, A Better Delaware

Sometimes politicians just don’t get that the tax revenue that they spend on government projects is our money. Recently, the budget for the next fiscal year was passed in the General Assembly. One of the provisions would direct $6.5 million to help pay the utility bills or provide energy efficient upgrades to residents who are not able to pay their energy bills.  Governor Meyer touted the benefit to those individuals while reportedly proclaiming that it would help those individuals “without shifting any of the cost burden onto customers “.

That $6.5 million came from somewhere, and that somewhere is from us. $6.5 million is $6.50 for every Individual who lives in Delaware, not all of whom pay taxes, but most of whom consume public utility services. While we at A Better Delaware think it is appropriate to help those who truly cannot keep the heat or air conditioning on and suffer from health or other conditions that make the situation dangerous, it is not accurate or fair to say that it’s not costing “customers “any money.

Many of us complained in January about the high cost of our utility bills. If you think you’re paying a lot for electricity, you are right, but the cost is not entirely reflected in your bill.

Legislation that has passed over the last two sessions, in particular, has increased the cost of construction of single-family and multi-family residential homes and the cost of the construction of commercial buildings, spent your tax dollars to support individuals who buy all electric or hybrid vehicles, and mandates the purchase of a certain number of electric school buses each year.

The construction of new residential homes now requires that electric vehicle charging infrastructure be included in that construction, and the General Assembly has given city and county government the authority to enforce those requirements. The cost of construction obviously is higher, which means the cost of buying a new home or condominium is higher, and the construction of an apartment building is more costly, so the rent is higher. You are paying for that infrastructure whether you have an electric vehicle or not.

The construction of commercial buildings now must include installation of a roof that is able to support solar energy infrastructure. That means that the cost of the construction of those buildings goes up, the companies either building or renting those buildings will have to pay more and the cost will be shared by you as a customer. You are paying for that infrastructure.

The cost of an all-electric or hybrid vehicle is in general, much more expensive than a gas-powered vehicle, so in a competitive market, the lower priced vehicle is favored, especially for those in a lower economic situation.  In order to provide incentives to consumers to purchase those vehicles, the government provides subsidies to those consumers. Purely at the state level (because there have been federal subsidies as well), a purchaser of an all-electric vehicle is entitled to up to $2500 toward the cost as an incentive and the purchaser of a hybrid vehicle is entitled to up to $1000. That money is coming from the state coffers. You are paying for that rebate.

We at A Better Delaware have written extensively about the intrusion of government into private businesses. It is a trend that continued in this session of the General Assembly. Legislation was passed this session that would cap or limit the amount of money that a Delmarva Power could spend on capital expenses – that is improvement of their buildings, infrastructure, transmission, trucks, and all of the attendant capital expenses required for them to do their job well. The bill further provides greater oversight in order, according to the General Assembly to “challenge unnecessary rate hikes “.

Government does not know how to run a business. Indeed, if government were a business, it would have a very poor credit rating and be unable to raise the money in a capital market that it takes from us as taxpayers to do the things it has chosen to do. For government to intrude into the future planning of infrastructure needs of a business and the capital required to both maintain and improve that infrastructure is poorly considered. Indeed, it will create an administrative quagmire and will stifle innovation.

Finally, looking forward, the General Assembly has expressed a clear preference for offshore wind power generation, and voted to override a county decision regarding zoning that would affect a particular project because they disagreed with the impact it would have on that preference.  That particular project won’t bring any energy to Delaware as a practical matter, but focusing on offshore wind as a source of energy is fraught with hazard. Offshore wind can be as much as four times as expensive as energy from coal or natural gas. It is intermittent and unreliable and must have backup sources to avoid brownouts, blackouts and breakdowns in service.  More choices and many diverse options for energy without the detrimental impact that offshore wind has on the environment are available, including nuclear and natural gas.

There are a lot of reasons why your utility bills are higher, and not all of them are evident in your bill. Delaware’s public policies are costing each one of us a great deal every month. Our leadership will choose the policies they prefer because majority does rule, but they should not pretend that the cost of those policies does not exist.  Governor Meyer, you can’t spend $6.5 million of State money and claim that it will not cost the customers anything. We are all customers of Delaware‘s government, and we are paying that bill.

Jane Brady serves as Chair of A Better Delaware. She previously served as Attorney General of Delaware and as a Judge of the Delaware Superior Court.