Buffalo County - One dead following Sunday's accident on I-80 outside of Kearney.

According to the Nebraska State Patrol, at approximately 3:15 pm Sunday, a semi was parked on the eastbound shoulder of Interstate 80 near mile marker 282. A Kia sedan was traveling eastbound when it lost control and struck the semi trailer on the shoulder. 

The driver of the Kia, identified as Mollie Quick, 20, of Waukee, Iowa, was pronounced deceased at the scene. The driver of the semi was not injured.

Nebraska State PatrolBuffalo County - One dead following Sunday's accident on I-80 outside of Kearney.According to the Nebraska State Patrol, at approximately 3:15 pm Sunday, a semi was parked on the eastbound shoulder of Interstate 80 near mile marker 282. A Kia sedan was traveling eastbound when it lost control and struck the semi trailer on the shoulder. The driver of the Kia, identified as Mollie Quick, 20, of Waukee, Iowa, was pronounced deceased at the scene. The driver of the semi was not injured.

One dead following Sunday's accident on I-80 outside of Kearney

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — The Nebraska Supreme Court has upheld the murder conviction and life sentence of a woman in the 2017 death and dismemberment of a Nebraska hardware store clerk.

Bailey Boswell, 30, was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/nebraska-lexington-crime-d16bca8562c0af3f96f701659586f699">convicted in 2020</a>&nbsp;of first-degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder and improper disposal of human remains in the death of 24-year-old Sydney Loofe. Boswell's co-defendant and boyfriend at the time of the killing, 58-year-old Aubrey Trail, was convicted of the same charges in 2019 and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ne-state-wire-nebraska-943ce9626cb625d1cabcd8894b22ad01">sentenced to death</a>&nbsp;in 2021.

Prosecutors said Boswell and Trail had been planning to kill someone before Boswell met Loofe on the dating app Tinder. Boswell made plans for a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/general-news-d26b8a401f2d4154a43a5e3a033d4f3c">date with Loofe</a>, a cashier at a Menards store in Lincoln, to lure her to the apartment where she was strangled.

The FBI and other law enforcement spent three weeks searching for Loofe before her dismembered remains were found in December 2017. Loofe's body was found cut into 14 pieces and left in garbage bags in ditches along rural roads in southeastern Nebraska.

In her appeal, Boswell challenged the admission of evidence by prosecutors in her trial, including photographs of Loofe’s dismembered body, arguing the gruesome photos served only to turn the jury against her. Boswell also objected to the the testimony of several women who said Trail and Boswell had talked of occult fantasies and had expressed a desire to sexually torture and kill women.

Boswell's defense attorney argued at her trial that she was forced by Trail to go along with the killing and dismemberment of Loofe.

Justice Stephanie Stacy wrote for the high court's unanimous ruling Friday that “there is no merit to any of Boswell’s assigned errors regarding the trial court’s evidentiary rulings.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/5/1715616393143.jpeg" alt="Bailey Boswell walks into the courtroom for the sentencing hearing of the 2017 murder of Sydney Loofe, Monday, Nov. 8, 2021, in Wilber, Neb. The Nebraska Supreme Court has upheld the murder conviction and life sentence of Boswell, Friday, May 10, 2024, in the 2017 death and dismemberment of a Nebraska hardware store clerk.(Justin Wan/Lincoln Journal Star via AP, File)" />
 <figcaption>Bailey Boswell walks into the courtroom for the sentencing hearing of the 2017 murder of Sydney Loofe, Monday, Nov. 8, 2021, in Wilber, Neb. The Nebraska Supreme Court has upheld the murder conviction and life sentence of Boswell, Friday, May 10, 2024, in the 2017 death and dismemberment of a Nebraska hardware store clerk.(Justin Wan/Lincoln Journal Star via AP, File)</figcaption>
 </figure>OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — The Nebraska Supreme Court has upheld the murder conviction and life sentence of a woman in the 2017 death and dismemberment of a Nebraska hardware store clerk.Bailey Boswell, 30, was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/nebraska-lexington-crime-d16bca8562c0af3f96f701659586f699">convicted in 2020</a>&nbsp;of first-degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder and improper disposal of human remains in the death of 24-year-old Sydney Loofe. Boswell's co-defendant and boyfriend at the time of the killing, 58-year-old Aubrey Trail, was convicted of the same charges in 2019 and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/ne-state-wire-nebraska-943ce9626cb625d1cabcd8894b22ad01">sentenced to death</a>&nbsp;in 2021.Prosecutors said Boswell and Trail had been planning to kill someone before Boswell met Loofe on the dating app Tinder. Boswell made plans for a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/general-news-d26b8a401f2d4154a43a5e3a033d4f3c">date with Loofe</a>, a cashier at a Menards store in Lincoln, to lure her to the apartment where she was strangled.The FBI and other law enforcement spent three weeks searching for Loofe before her dismembered remains were found in December 2017. Loofe's body was found cut into 14 pieces and left in garbage bags in ditches along rural roads in southeastern Nebraska.In her appeal, Boswell challenged the admission of evidence by prosecutors in her trial, including photographs of Loofe’s dismembered body, arguing the gruesome photos served only to turn the jury against her. Boswell also objected to the the testimony of several women who said Trail and Boswell had talked of occult fantasies and had expressed a desire to sexually torture and kill women.Boswell's defense attorney argued at her trial that she was forced by Trail to go along with the killing and dismemberment of Loofe.Justice Stephanie Stacy wrote for the high court's unanimous ruling Friday that “there is no merit to any of Boswell’s assigned errors regarding the trial court’s evidentiary rulings.”

Court upholds a Nebraska woman's murder conviction, life sentence in dismemberment killing

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/05/13/rural-county-board-acts-to-prevent-duplicated-broadband-efforts/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — A rural Nebraska county board has voted to do something a state commission had declined to do, which is to prevent a duplication of taxpayer funds to deploy broadband internet.

The decision by the Gage County Board came after two state senators urged board members to avoid a waste of taxpayer funds by allowing two government grants to be used to service the same area, just outside of Beatrice, with high-speed internet service.

The senators, Bruce Bostelman of Brainard and Myron Dorn of Adams (who represents Gage County), told the county board it didn’t make sense to subsidize a broadband project that’s already been subsidized by taxpayer funds. They said such funding should focus on areas that either have no broadband service or have inadequate internet, rather than to “overbuild” where one project is already well underway.

“When we start using funds to overbuild, we’re taking away funds from somewhere else,” said Bostelman, who chairs the Legislature’s committee that oversees telecommunications issues and has pushed more aggressive moves to deploy broadband.

“This is a waste of taxpayer dollars,” said Gage County Commissioner Emily Haxby, who had tried, unsuccessfully, to convince the Nebraska Public Service Commission to resolve the overbuild.

The May 1 decision by the Gage County Board, on a 5-2 vote, means that a $535,000 state Broadband Bridge Act grant to Pinpoint Communications will likely be rescinded and the funds reallocated to other areas of the state.&nbsp;

A representative for Pinpoint Communications said Saturday that the Cambridge-based firm is considering its options in appealing or overturning the decision.&nbsp;

Technically, the Gage County Board voted to deny the use of its county right of way to deploy fiber internet lines, but the issue and debate extended far beyond that subject into how best to utilize the millions of dollars of federal and state funds being devoted to expand high-speed internet into areas that don’t have it now.

The so-called “overbuild” occurred after Gage County had already launched an innovative program, using $4 million of its federal American Rescue Plan Act allocation, to pay the internet firm NextLink Internet to expand broadband to 95 unserved and underserved rural areas of the southeast Nebraska county.

But a second company, Pinpoint, that had been building a high-speed internet network in Beatrice had obtained a $535,000 state grant through the Nebraska Public Service Commission to expand services into the same area.

The issue of the overlapping grants was&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/04/18/sleuthing-discovers-thousands-of-locations-missed-as-unserved-by-broadband-on-federal-map/">first reported</a>&nbsp;by the Examiner.

At the May 1 meeting, Pinpoint was seeking approval of a “utility permit” to use county right-of-way to begin construction of its fiber optic lines. Meanwhile, county board members were told that NextLink, the firm hired by the county, had already laid its lines to the 23 locations under contention.

Haxby, a county board member who had led the county’s broadband project, had questioned the overlap of grants to officials with the Public Service Commission, to no avail.

In March, the PSC&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/03/04/watchdog-challenges-535500-award-for-broadband-development-as-overlapping-local-effort/">rejected an appeal</a>&nbsp;by NextLink to reconsider its grant to Pinpoint, saying the request for reconsideration had been filed a day late.&nbsp;

PSC Chairman Dan Watermeier stated in a March press release that NextLink failed to follow the procedures to appeal, a process that is “not only set forth in statute but is also well defined by the Commission,” and thus Pinpoint’s $535,000 grant would be approved.

But in order to fulfill the grant requirements, Pinpoint needed the utility permit from Gage County to use right-of-way, and on May 1, that permit was denied.

It marked the first time in five years, commissioners were told, that a usually routinely approved utility permit had been denied.

At the meeting, Tom Shoemaker, Pinpoint’s president, and its attorney Andy Pollock urged the county board to issue the “simple” permit and not get intertwined with whether or not the PSC had acted appropriately to award the overlapping grant.

Pollock said the only question that needed to be answered to issue the permit was whether it would be used for “a public use,” and that clearly was the case.

“The issue here is not to correct or second guess the Public Service Commission,” the attorney said. That, he added, would be a question for the Nebraska Supreme Court, not the Gage County Board.

Haxby and Loel Brooks, a Lincoln attorney who has consulted with the county board on broadband issues, said the commissioners have the discretion to reject a utility permit. They added that a condition of the Broadband Bridge Act is that grants not be awarded in areas that are already getting government assistance.

Brooks said the PSC has a lot of issues before it, but he could not say exactly why the state commission didn’t act to eliminate the overbuild.

Haxby said she had told PSC officials about the overlapping grants well before its deadline for appeal, but a formal appeal, by NextLink, was a day late.

Still, she said, it would be a waste of taxpayer funds to finance two broadband projects in the same area, and the correct course of action was to reject the utility permit, so the $535,000 grant could be redeployed elsewhere in Nebraska where it was needed.

Bostelman said that there was a limited amount of money to expand broadband in the state and that the PSC had “failed” to prevent the overbuild.

“We have to make sure every dollar is used in the best place we can,” he said.

Pollock said Saturday that Pinpoint was considering its options to seek to overturn or appeal the action by the Gage County Board.

Paul Hammel<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/05/13/rural-county-board-acts-to-prevent-duplicated-broadband-efforts/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — A rural Nebraska county board has voted to do something a state commission had declined to do, which is to prevent a duplication of taxpayer funds to deploy broadband internet.The decision by the Gage County Board came after two state senators urged board members to avoid a waste of taxpayer funds by allowing two government grants to be used to service the same area, just outside of Beatrice, with high-speed internet service.The senators, Bruce Bostelman of Brainard and Myron Dorn of Adams (who represents Gage County), told the county board it didn’t make sense to subsidize a broadband project that’s already been subsidized by taxpayer funds. They said such funding should focus on areas that either have no broadband service or have inadequate internet, rather than to “overbuild” where one project is already well underway.“When we start using funds to overbuild, we’re taking away funds from somewhere else,” said Bostelman, who chairs the Legislature’s committee that oversees telecommunications issues and has pushed more aggressive moves to deploy broadband.<h2>Company considering its options</h2>“This is a waste of taxpayer dollars,” said Gage County Commissioner Emily Haxby, who had tried, unsuccessfully, to convince the Nebraska Public Service Commission to resolve the overbuild.The May 1 decision by the Gage County Board, on a 5-2 vote, means that a $535,000 state Broadband Bridge Act grant to Pinpoint Communications will likely be rescinded and the funds reallocated to other areas of the state.&nbsp;A representative for Pinpoint Communications said Saturday that the Cambridge-based firm is considering its options in appealing or overturning the decision.&nbsp;Technically, the Gage County Board voted to deny the use of its county right of way to deploy fiber internet lines, but the issue and debate extended far beyond that subject into how best to utilize the millions of dollars of federal and state funds being devoted to expand high-speed internet into areas that don’t have it now.The so-called “overbuild” occurred after Gage County had already launched an innovative program, using $4 million of its federal American Rescue Plan Act allocation, to pay the internet firm NextLink Internet to expand broadband to 95 unserved and underserved rural areas of the southeast Nebraska county.But a second company, Pinpoint, that had been building a high-speed internet network in Beatrice had obtained a $535,000 state grant through the Nebraska Public Service Commission to expand services into the same area.The issue of the overlapping grants was&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/04/18/sleuthing-discovers-thousands-of-locations-missed-as-unserved-by-broadband-on-federal-map/">first reported</a>&nbsp;by the Examiner.At the May 1 meeting, Pinpoint was seeking approval of a “utility permit” to use county right-of-way to begin construction of its fiber optic lines. Meanwhile, county board members were told that NextLink, the firm hired by the county, had already laid its lines to the 23 locations under contention.Haxby, a county board member who had led the county’s broadband project, had questioned the overlap of grants to officials with the Public Service Commission, to no avail.In March, the PSC&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/03/04/watchdog-challenges-535500-award-for-broadband-development-as-overlapping-local-effort/">rejected an appeal</a>&nbsp;by NextLink to reconsider its grant to Pinpoint, saying the request for reconsideration had been filed a day late.&nbsp;PSC Chairman Dan Watermeier stated in a March press release that NextLink failed to follow the procedures to appeal, a process that is “not only set forth in statute but is also well defined by the Commission,” and thus Pinpoint’s $535,000 grant would be approved.But in order to fulfill the grant requirements, Pinpoint needed the utility permit from Gage County to use right-of-way, and on May 1, that permit was denied.It marked the first time in five years, commissioners were told, that a usually routinely approved utility permit had been denied.At the meeting, Tom Shoemaker, Pinpoint’s president, and its attorney Andy Pollock urged the county board to issue the “simple” permit and not get intertwined with whether or not the PSC had acted appropriately to award the overlapping grant.Pollock said the only question that needed to be answered to issue the permit was whether it would be used for “a public use,” and that clearly was the case.“The issue here is not to correct or second guess the Public Service Commission,” the attorney said. That, he added, would be a question for the Nebraska Supreme Court, not the Gage County Board.<h2>County board urged to deny permit</h2>Haxby and Loel Brooks, a Lincoln attorney who has consulted with the county board on broadband issues, said the commissioners have the discretion to reject a utility permit. They added that a condition of the Broadband Bridge Act is that grants not be awarded in areas that are already getting government assistance.Brooks said the PSC has a lot of issues before it, but he could not say exactly why the state commission didn’t act to eliminate the overbuild.Haxby said she had told PSC officials about the overlapping grants well before its deadline for appeal, but a formal appeal, by NextLink, was a day late.Still, she said, it would be a waste of taxpayer funds to finance two broadband projects in the same area, and the correct course of action was to reject the utility permit, so the $535,000 grant could be redeployed elsewhere in Nebraska where it was needed.Bostelman said that there was a limited amount of money to expand broadband in the state and that the PSC had “failed” to prevent the overbuild.“We have to make sure every dollar is used in the best place we can,” he said.Pollock said Saturday that Pinpoint was considering its options to seek to overturn or appeal the action by the Gage County Board.

Rural county board acts to prevent duplicated broadband efforts

WASHINGTON (AP) — For&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/mike-johnson/">Mike Johnson</a>&nbsp;it was effectively a Day 1 priority.

It's well past time, the newly elected House speaker said in October, to establish a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/federal-debt-congress-commission-social-security-medicare-28f30761a7338e415b9ac4c92a096460">bipartisan commission</a>&nbsp;to tackle the federal government's growing $34.6 trillion in debt. "The consequences if we don’t act now are unbearable,” he said,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/speaker-mccarthy-debt-social-security-medicare-acc8aa14cb1958581c52efa9fd6cd05f">echoing warnings</a>&nbsp;from his predecessor and other House Republicans.

More than six months later, the proposal appears all but dead, extinguished by vocal opposition from both the right and the left.

The collapse underscores an unyielding dynamic in Washington, with lawmakers in both parties loath to consider the unpopular tradeoffs that would be necessary to stem the nation's swelling tide of red ink — particularly in an election year. Facing the reality that any fiscal commission would almost certainly suggest that Americans pay more or get less from their government, lawmakers have time and again done what they do so well: punt the problem to the next Congress. And they seem poised to do so again.

Many Democrats and left-leaning advocacy groups oppose the commission because they fear it would recommend cuts to Social Security benefits. Some Republicans and right-leaning groups are against it as well, fearing the panel would recommend tax increases. They’ve labeled the commission a “tax trap.”

“I’m disappointed that we haven’t got as much momentum as I thought we would,” said Rep. Jodey Arrington, the Republican chairman of the House Budget Committee. “The speaker supported it, endorsed it from the outset. But I think there are some outside groups that have weighed in, that have said that this is a backdoor way to raise taxes, and it scared some of my Republican colleagues.”

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., sponsor of the debt commission bill in the Senate, was even more pessimistic.

“No one seems to care,” Manchin said. “It’s a shame, $34.6 trillion in debt. No one cares about it.”

The debt commission legislation, modeled after previous efforts, would create a 16-member panel to recommend steps that could be taken to balance the federal budget at the earliest reasonable date and improve the long-term fiscal health of Medicare and Social Security. The commission would have 16 members — 12 from Congress, evenly divided by party, and four outside experts without voting power. The GOP-controlled House Budget Committee advanced the bill in a 22-12 vote.

The fiscal realities that would face any commission are well documented and center to a large extent on Social Security and Medicare, which consume an ever-growing share of the federal budget, and interest payments on the nation's debt.

For Social Security, the reserves for the The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund will&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/social-security-medicare-entitlements-treasury-35a2913a3f21a3b0ff40f2c88cbf9cbc">run out</a>&nbsp;in 2033. At that point, the program will have enough tax revenue coming in to pay about 79% of scheduled benefits. For Medicare, the trust fund covering inpatient hospital stays, hospice care and stays at skilled nursing facilities has sufficient funds to pay full benefits until 2036. At that point, 11% spending cuts would be required to match incoming revenue.

The last fiscal commission over a decade ago — chaired by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson — recommended $4 trillion in deficit reduction over the course of a decade through a combination of tax increases and painful spending cuts. But the 11-7 vote in favor of the package was not enough to force Congress to consider it back in 2010.

Supporters of a new debt panel noted that they modeled their bill on something that has succeeded in the past — commissions to consolidate the nation's military bases. The new commission would work under a similar structure with the legislation requiring each chamber to vote on its final proposal expeditiously.

Still, Democratic lawmakers and the White House are skeptical of forming a debt commission. Shalanda Young, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, told lawmakers in a recent hearing that the administration was concerned that the one thing on the table for the commission would be Social Security benefit cuts, not asking high-income Americans to pay higher taxes.

“It will be borne on the backs of those who paid into the system and rely on this program to retire in peace,” Young said.

More than 100 Democratic lawmakers also signed onto a letter opposing the commission back in January as powerful groups such as the AFL-CIO and AARP voiced their concerns.

When Republican-aligned groups also came out against the bill, including Americans for Tax Reform and the Club for Growth, prospects for moving ahead dampened considerably. Their opposition weakened GOP leadership’s leverage in attaching the commission to an annual spending bill or other must-pass measure.

“There’s no guarantee about the outcome. I think that’s what scares more people, and this town likes to know what the outcome is,” said the House bill’s author, Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich.

Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said any mechanism that allows for tax increases undermines former President Donald Trump and other Republicans running for office on a platform of cutting taxes. He said the focus must be strictly on spending reductions, and “tax increases are what politicians do instead of making decisions and hard choices.”

“The modern Republican Party is not going to put tax increases on the table as if they were part of the solution to anything,” Norquist said. “Tax increases solve no problem.”

That approach also makes Democrats such as Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas wary of a commission.

“We cannot solve our problems by cutting entirely. It’s got to be with some additional revenue. Unless revenues are very much on the table, I’m not for anything. It has to be both,” Doggett said.

As bleak as things look for the bill now, Rep. Scott Peters, D-Calif., said getting legislation through Congress is often a long game. Getting a House committee to approve the commission was an important step, he said. “We’re as far along as we’ve ever been.”

Supporters said they will continue pushing for getting a commission approved by the end of this Congress. Manchin mentioned the possibility of attaching it to legislation in a lame-duck session after the election and before the new Congress is sworn into office.

“We’re in that classic position where everybody hates us,” said Peters, one of three Democrats who voted for the bill in committee and is a co-sponsor. “We must be doing the right thing.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/4/1712802529718.png" alt="File photo House Speaker Mike Johnson -image courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>File photo House Speaker Mike Johnson -image courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — For&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/mike-johnson/">Mike Johnson</a>&nbsp;it was effectively a Day 1 priority.It's well past time, the newly elected House speaker said in October, to establish a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/federal-debt-congress-commission-social-security-medicare-28f30761a7338e415b9ac4c92a096460">bipartisan commission</a>&nbsp;to tackle the federal government's growing $34.6 trillion in debt. "The consequences if we don’t act now are unbearable,” he said,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/speaker-mccarthy-debt-social-security-medicare-acc8aa14cb1958581c52efa9fd6cd05f">echoing warnings</a>&nbsp;from his predecessor and other House Republicans.More than six months later, the proposal appears all but dead, extinguished by vocal opposition from both the right and the left.The collapse underscores an unyielding dynamic in Washington, with lawmakers in both parties loath to consider the unpopular tradeoffs that would be necessary to stem the nation's swelling tide of red ink — particularly in an election year. Facing the reality that any fiscal commission would almost certainly suggest that Americans pay more or get less from their government, lawmakers have time and again done what they do so well: punt the problem to the next Congress. And they seem poised to do so again.Many Democrats and left-leaning advocacy groups oppose the commission because they fear it would recommend cuts to Social Security benefits. Some Republicans and right-leaning groups are against it as well, fearing the panel would recommend tax increases. They’ve labeled the commission a “tax trap.”“I’m disappointed that we haven’t got as much momentum as I thought we would,” said Rep. Jodey Arrington, the Republican chairman of the House Budget Committee. “The speaker supported it, endorsed it from the outset. But I think there are some outside groups that have weighed in, that have said that this is a backdoor way to raise taxes, and it scared some of my Republican colleagues.”Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., sponsor of the debt commission bill in the Senate, was even more pessimistic.“No one seems to care,” Manchin said. “It’s a shame, $34.6 trillion in debt. No one cares about it.”The debt commission legislation, modeled after previous efforts, would create a 16-member panel to recommend steps that could be taken to balance the federal budget at the earliest reasonable date and improve the long-term fiscal health of Medicare and Social Security. The commission would have 16 members — 12 from Congress, evenly divided by party, and four outside experts without voting power. The GOP-controlled House Budget Committee advanced the bill in a 22-12 vote.The fiscal realities that would face any commission are well documented and center to a large extent on Social Security and Medicare, which consume an ever-growing share of the federal budget, and interest payments on the nation's debt.For Social Security, the reserves for the The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund will&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/social-security-medicare-entitlements-treasury-35a2913a3f21a3b0ff40f2c88cbf9cbc">run out</a>&nbsp;in 2033. At that point, the program will have enough tax revenue coming in to pay about 79% of scheduled benefits. For Medicare, the trust fund covering inpatient hospital stays, hospice care and stays at skilled nursing facilities has sufficient funds to pay full benefits until 2036. At that point, 11% spending cuts would be required to match incoming revenue.The last fiscal commission over a decade ago — chaired by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson — recommended $4 trillion in deficit reduction over the course of a decade through a combination of tax increases and painful spending cuts. But the 11-7 vote in favor of the package was not enough to force Congress to consider it back in 2010.Supporters of a new debt panel noted that they modeled their bill on something that has succeeded in the past — commissions to consolidate the nation's military bases. The new commission would work under a similar structure with the legislation requiring each chamber to vote on its final proposal expeditiously.Still, Democratic lawmakers and the White House are skeptical of forming a debt commission. Shalanda Young, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, told lawmakers in a recent hearing that the administration was concerned that the one thing on the table for the commission would be Social Security benefit cuts, not asking high-income Americans to pay higher taxes.“It will be borne on the backs of those who paid into the system and rely on this program to retire in peace,” Young said.More than 100 Democratic lawmakers also signed onto a letter opposing the commission back in January as powerful groups such as the AFL-CIO and AARP voiced their concerns.When Republican-aligned groups also came out against the bill, including Americans for Tax Reform and the Club for Growth, prospects for moving ahead dampened considerably. Their opposition weakened GOP leadership’s leverage in attaching the commission to an annual spending bill or other must-pass measure.“There’s no guarantee about the outcome. I think that’s what scares more people, and this town likes to know what the outcome is,” said the House bill’s author, Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich.Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said any mechanism that allows for tax increases undermines former President Donald Trump and other Republicans running for office on a platform of cutting taxes. He said the focus must be strictly on spending reductions, and “tax increases are what politicians do instead of making decisions and hard choices.”“The modern Republican Party is not going to put tax increases on the table as if they were part of the solution to anything,” Norquist said. “Tax increases solve no problem.”That approach also makes Democrats such as Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas wary of a commission.“We cannot solve our problems by cutting entirely. It’s got to be with some additional revenue. Unless revenues are very much on the table, I’m not for anything. It has to be both,” Doggett said.As bleak as things look for the bill now, Rep. Scott Peters, D-Calif., said getting legislation through Congress is often a long game. Getting a House committee to approve the commission was an important step, he said. “We’re as far along as we’ve ever been.”Supporters said they will continue pushing for getting a commission approved by the end of this Congress. Manchin mentioned the possibility of attaching it to legislation in a lame-duck session after the election and before the new Congress is sworn into office.“We’re in that classic position where everybody hates us,” said Peters, one of three Democrats who voted for the bill in committee and is a co-sponsor. “We must be doing the right thing.”

Senator: America's debt tops $34 trillion and no one seems to care

JERUSALEM —U.S. warships faced terrorist additional threats in and adjacent to the Red Sea over the past three days.

Just after 3:30a.m. Sunday, U.S. forces successfully destroyed one uncrewed aerial system or drone launched&nbsp;by Iranian-backed Houthis over the Gulf of Aden from Houthi controlled areas&nbsp;in Yemen, according to the&nbsp; U.S. Central Command.

Just before&nbsp;<a href="https://twitter.com/CENTCOM/status/1789482421194215829?t=285">4:45</a> a.m. Saturday, U.S. forces successfully destroyed three drones&nbsp; launched by Iranian-backed Houthis over the Red Sea from Houthi controlled areas in Yemen.

At approximately <a href="https://twitter.com/CENTCOM/status/1789482421194215829?t=525">8:45</a> p.m. Friday, the terrorists launched a drone over the Gulf of Aden.&nbsp;A coalition aircraft successfully engaged the UAS.

 There were no injuries or damages reported by U.S., coalition, or merchant vessels from these attacks.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/12/1703990687604.png" alt="File photo U.S. Central Command" />
 <figcaption>File photo U.S. Central Command</figcaption>
 </figure>JERUSALEM —U.S. warships faced terrorist additional threats in and adjacent to the Red Sea over the past three days.Just after 3:30a.m. Sunday, U.S. forces successfully destroyed one uncrewed aerial system or drone launched&nbsp;by Iranian-backed Houthis over the Gulf of Aden from Houthi controlled areas&nbsp;in Yemen, according to the&nbsp; U.S. Central Command.Just before&nbsp;<a href="https://twitter.com/CENTCOM/status/1789482421194215829?t=285">4:45</a> a.m. Saturday, U.S. forces successfully destroyed three drones&nbsp; launched by Iranian-backed Houthis over the Red Sea from Houthi controlled areas in Yemen.At approximately <a href="https://twitter.com/CENTCOM/status/1789482421194215829?t=525">8:45</a> p.m. Friday, the terrorists launched a drone over the Gulf of Aden.&nbsp;A coalition aircraft successfully engaged the UAS. There were no injuries or damages reported by U.S., coalition, or merchant vessels from these attacks.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Terrorists continue attacks on U.S. forces in the Red Sea

KANSAS CITY(AP) — The first-ever tornado emergency in Michigan was issued Tuesday, one of many called across the country in recent weeks as severe weather tears through states in the Plains and Midwest. As massive storms barrel East, homes and property have been destroyed and thousands of people have gone without power.

The National Weather Service&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-midwest-storms-michigan-tornadoes-1ac4133f09069997f926e434a28c75ac">called an emergency for areas of Michigan on Tuesday evening</a>&nbsp;amid forecasts of a damaging tornado and hail. At the time, other spots in Michigan and portions of Illinois, Kentucky and Missouri were also under a tornado watch. Tuesday's severe weather followed an ugly twister that battered a small Oklahoma town and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tornadoes-storms-weather-oklahoma-kansas-b8def43f7b0402d12911573ea5b4233b">killed at least one person a day earlier</a>.

Tornado emergencies were also called in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tornado-nebraska-midwest-iowa-missouri-kansas-491cd033f91eb27f4139bf5582e57903">Nebraska and Iowa late last month.</a>&nbsp;During those storms, tornadoes flattened homes in suburban Omaha, Nebraska, and northeast, a small city of Minden, Iowa, also sustained damage.

Tuesday marked the 6th emergency issued in the U.S. this year. There were 15 issued in 2023.

Here’s what to know about a tornado emergency:

A tornado emergency is the weather service’s highest alert level. One is issued when a few criteria are met during a rare weather situation.

“Language like that gets people out of their chairs and into basements and storm shelters,” said Kevin Laws, a National Weather Service science and operations officer in Birmingham, Alabama. “It spurs a different kind of reaction and action that you need to really save your life in those kind of events.”

There has to be an imminent or ongoing severe threat to human life and catastrophic damage. A damaging tornado also has to be confirmed visually or with radar imagery.

“You generally reserve that designation for the worst of the worst,” Laws said.

HOW IS IT DIFFERENT FROM A TORNADO WATCH OR WARNING?

When the NWS Storm Prediction Center issues a tornado watch for an area, it means tornado development is possible and people in the area should be prepared to respond quickly if a warning gets issued. It's a “heads up,” Laws said, roughly up to 10 hours in advance of the storm.

The watch area typically covers a lot of ground, such as several counties or even multiple states, the weather service said.

When a tornado warning is issued by local forecast offices, the weather radar indicates a tornado is coming, or it’s been seen already. People in the area need to act because there is “imminent danger to life and property,” according to the NWS. This could mean moving to a substantial shelter on the lowest floor possible, and quickly avoiding windows.

Warnings typically encompass a much smaller area, such as the size of a city or small county, that may be hit by a tornado.

The tornado emergency designation first came about when a large and destructive tornado hit Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on May 3, 1999, per the weather service.

It was called because the storm was expected to be too severe for the tornado warning, already in effect, to be considered sufficient language to alert people.

The “emergency” name was not yet formalized, but was used again during a storm impacting Greensburg, Kansas, on May 4, 2007.

Five tornado emergencies were issued in Tennessee and Alabama during the Super Tuesday tornado outbreak on February 5, 2008, according to the weather service. When one wasn't issued in Arkansas during similarly dangerous weather, the designation was codified and became recognized officially.

According to Laws, 296 emergencies have been called since 1999 (both before and after the designation was formalized).

WHAT SHOULD YOU DO IF A TORNADO EMERGENCY IS ISSUED IN YOUR AREA?

People should call friends and family to ensure loved ones are keeping watch on the weather.

"Don't ever try to get in the car and outrun it... You need to shelter in place," Laws said. “You've got to have a plan ahead of time.

“Don’t wait until that last ten minutes, because you feel panicked and you don’t know where the tornado is and where it’s coming from."

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/4/1714172157352.png" alt="View of the April 26 tornado as seen by theNebraska Dept. of Transportation camera" />
 <figcaption>View of the April 26 tornado as seen by theNebraska Dept. of Transportation camera</figcaption>
 </figure>KANSAS CITY(AP) — The first-ever tornado emergency in Michigan was issued Tuesday, one of many called across the country in recent weeks as severe weather tears through states in the Plains and Midwest. As massive storms barrel East, homes and property have been destroyed and thousands of people have gone without power.The National Weather Service&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-midwest-storms-michigan-tornadoes-1ac4133f09069997f926e434a28c75ac">called an emergency for areas of Michigan on Tuesday evening</a>&nbsp;amid forecasts of a damaging tornado and hail. At the time, other spots in Michigan and portions of Illinois, Kentucky and Missouri were also under a tornado watch. Tuesday's severe weather followed an ugly twister that battered a small Oklahoma town and&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tornadoes-storms-weather-oklahoma-kansas-b8def43f7b0402d12911573ea5b4233b">killed at least one person a day earlier</a>.Tornado emergencies were also called in&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/tornado-nebraska-midwest-iowa-missouri-kansas-491cd033f91eb27f4139bf5582e57903">Nebraska and Iowa late last month.</a>&nbsp;During those storms, tornadoes flattened homes in suburban Omaha, Nebraska, and northeast, a small city of Minden, Iowa, also sustained damage.Tuesday marked the 6th emergency issued in the U.S. this year. There were 15 issued in 2023.Here’s what to know about a tornado emergency:WHAT IS A TORNADO EMERGENCY?A tornado emergency is the weather service’s highest alert level. One is issued when a few criteria are met during a rare weather situation.“Language like that gets people out of their chairs and into basements and storm shelters,” said Kevin Laws, a National Weather Service science and operations officer in Birmingham, Alabama. “It spurs a different kind of reaction and action that you need to really save your life in those kind of events.”There has to be an imminent or ongoing severe threat to human life and catastrophic damage. A damaging tornado also has to be confirmed visually or with radar imagery.“You generally reserve that designation for the worst of the worst,” Laws said.HOW IS IT DIFFERENT FROM A TORNADO WATCH OR WARNING?When the NWS Storm Prediction Center issues a tornado watch for an area, it means tornado development is possible and people in the area should be prepared to respond quickly if a warning gets issued. It's a “heads up,” Laws said, roughly up to 10 hours in advance of the storm.The watch area typically covers a lot of ground, such as several counties or even multiple states, the weather service said.When a tornado warning is issued by local forecast offices, the weather radar indicates a tornado is coming, or it’s been seen already. People in the area need to act because there is “imminent danger to life and property,” according to the NWS. This could mean moving to a substantial shelter on the lowest floor possible, and quickly avoiding windows.Warnings typically encompass a much smaller area, such as the size of a city or small county, that may be hit by a tornado.WHEN WAS THE FIRST EMERGENCY ISSUED?The tornado emergency designation first came about when a large and destructive tornado hit Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, on May 3, 1999, per the weather service.It was called because the storm was expected to be too severe for the tornado warning, already in effect, to be considered sufficient language to alert people.The “emergency” name was not yet formalized, but was used again during a storm impacting Greensburg, Kansas, on May 4, 2007.Five tornado emergencies were issued in Tennessee and Alabama during the Super Tuesday tornado outbreak on February 5, 2008, according to the weather service. When one wasn't issued in Arkansas during similarly dangerous weather, the designation was codified and became recognized officially.According to Laws, 296 emergencies have been called since 1999 (both before and after the designation was formalized).WHAT SHOULD YOU DO IF A TORNADO EMERGENCY IS ISSUED IN YOUR AREA?People should call friends and family to ensure loved ones are keeping watch on the weather."Don't ever try to get in the car and outrun it... You need to shelter in place," Laws said. “You've got to have a plan ahead of time.“Don’t wait until that last ten minutes, because you feel panicked and you don’t know where the tornado is and where it’s coming from."

The difference between a tornado emergency, watch and warning

&nbsp; LINCOLN, Neb. (May 10, 2024) —Nebraska Tourism is teaming up with Werner Park, home of the Omaha Storm Chasers, for a special Nebraska Passport Night, celebrating 15 years of the beloved program. This July 1 event promises to be the ultimate summer gathering for Passport fans. Werner Park, a featured stop on the 2024 Passport, provides a prime spot for travelers to mingle with other Passporters while getting their book stamped. Fun swag and giveaways from Passport stops and sponsors will also be available at booths throughout the park.

"We're excited to partner with Werner Park for this milestone event," said Madison Johnson, Nebraska Passport coordinator of Nebraska Tourism. "Nebraska Passport Night is the culmination of 15 years of celebrating our state's hidden gems."

Tickets for Passport Night at Werner Park, where the Omaha Storm Chasers will face the Iowa Cubs, are available now, get your tickets&nbsp;<a href="https://visitnebraska.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=30cc1cad235a879fac111c22b&amp;id=d0677c9bf3&amp;e=65d6a9d786" target="_blank">here</a>&nbsp;for a special Passport section experience or explore more seating options&nbsp;<a href="https://visitnebraska.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=30cc1cad235a879fac111c22b&amp;id=d1dc66d237&amp;e=65d6a9d786" target="_blank">here</a>. Don't miss this chance to experience Nebraska's magic in one unforgettable evening.

To learn more about the Omaha Storm Chasers, visit&nbsp;<a href="https://visitnebraska.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=30cc1cad235a879fac111c22b&amp;id=3f189404ce&amp;e=65d6a9d786" target="_blank">https://www.milb.com/omaha</a>. And to learn more about the Nebraska Passport, head to&nbsp;<a>NebraskaPassport.com</a>.&nbsp;&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/5/1715358257088.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>Nebraska Tourism&nbsp; LINCOLN, Neb. (May 10, 2024) —Nebraska Tourism is teaming up with Werner Park, home of the Omaha Storm Chasers, for a special Nebraska Passport Night, celebrating 15 years of the beloved program. This July 1 event promises to be the ultimate summer gathering for Passport fans. Werner Park, a featured stop on the 2024 Passport, provides a prime spot for travelers to mingle with other Passporters while getting their book stamped. Fun swag and giveaways from Passport stops and sponsors will also be available at booths throughout the park."We're excited to partner with Werner Park for this milestone event," said Madison Johnson, Nebraska Passport coordinator of Nebraska Tourism. "Nebraska Passport Night is the culmination of 15 years of celebrating our state's hidden gems."Tickets for Passport Night at Werner Park, where the Omaha Storm Chasers will face the Iowa Cubs, are available now, get your tickets&nbsp;<a href="https://visitnebraska.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=30cc1cad235a879fac111c22b&amp;id=d0677c9bf3&amp;e=65d6a9d786" target="_blank">here</a>&nbsp;for a special Passport section experience or explore more seating options&nbsp;<a href="https://visitnebraska.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=30cc1cad235a879fac111c22b&amp;id=d1dc66d237&amp;e=65d6a9d786" target="_blank">here</a>. Don't miss this chance to experience Nebraska's magic in one unforgettable evening. To learn more about the Omaha Storm Chasers, visit&nbsp;<a href="https://visitnebraska.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=30cc1cad235a879fac111c22b&amp;id=3f189404ce&amp;e=65d6a9d786" target="_blank">https://www.milb.com/omaha</a>. And to learn more about the Nebraska Passport, head to&nbsp;<a>NebraskaPassport.com</a>.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Save the Date for Nebraska Passport Night at Werner Park

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/jacob-fischler/">JACOB FISCHLER</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/09/21/kansas-board-of-regents-sculpts-plan-for-boosting-state-aid-to-public-higher-education/?emci=78717300-c858-ee11-9937-00224832eb73&amp;emdi=fc107f78-2659-ee11-9937-00224832eb73&amp;ceid=115039">Kansas Reflector</a>

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/biden-administration-greatly-ease-marijuana-regulations-11">proposed loosening</a>&nbsp;the illegal status of marijuana at the federal level – but that doesn’t mean the federal government now condones recreational or medicinal use in the many states that have legalized the drug.

Moving marijuana from the government’s list of the most dangerous and least useful substances to a less serious category was a clear signal that the federal government, at least under President Joe Biden’s administration, wants to ease restrictions on a drug that’s been legal in an increasing number of states for more than a decade.

For years, the federal government has not pursued enforcement of state-legal marijuana operations, and the recent move appears to solidify that approach.

But it didn’t solve the many thorny issues that have resulted from a split between what is legal in dozens of states and what the federal government allows.

It’s unclear exactly what the rescheduling will mean. The Justice Department has not made public the text of Garland’s proposal — a DOJ spokesman declined States Newsroom’s request this week for a copy and state regulators say it has not been shared with them.

Even if the proposal were public, it would be expected to go through changes over months of rulemaking.

Here are some questions covering what is known at this early stage about what rescheduling would and would not do.

Even in states that have legalized recreational use, the federal government would likely still consider the state system as illegal under federal law.

Other Schedule III drugs, including Tylenol with codeine and anabolic steroids, are tightly regulated and available only by prescription at pharmacies.

State-legal medicinal marijuana dispensaries do not fit that description and recreational-use dispensaries are even further from what the Food and Drug Administration requires of Schedule III drugs.

“This does not make marijuana state operations legal,” Shawn Hauser, a partner at Denver-based marijuana law firm Vicente LLP, said on a May 3 webinar. “They are not selling FDA-approved drugs and they are not licensed or meet the control requirements for Schedule III. So cannabis and state-legal dispensaries will remain in violation of federal law.”

Q: What is the difference between Schedule I and Schedule III?

A: Among the most significant is the recognition that the drug may have some medicinal value.

Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, the Drug Enforcement Administration has five levels of drug classifications.

Schedule I is the most restricted level, comprising the drugs most ripe for abuse that have no medicinal value. Other drugs on the list include heroin and LSD.

Because the definition of Schedule I substances includes no medicinal use, it is illegal to even study substances on the list.

Schedule III is the strictest level that acknowledges some medicinal value, making some hopeful that research on the drug could be improved.

“Moving cannabis to Schedule III would be a big step for recognition of the medical uses of cannabis, what voters here recognized by a wide margin in 1998,” the Washington state Liquor and Cannabis Board said in a May 1 statement. “And it would say very clearly that the federal government no longer considers cannabis among the most dangerous drugs.”

A: Until they have more details, state regulators cannot do much, Amanda Borup, the senior policy analyst for the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission, said in an interview.

“We really have to wait and see what they release,” she said, referring to the DEA’s rulemaking.

Other states are considering what the impacts might be.

The statement from Washington’s Liquor and Cannabis Board said rescheduling would “hopefully” ease restrictions on cannabis research, while it is “possible” the move would allow state-legal businesses to take advantage of tax deductions available to other industries.

A: Marijuana advocates have had trouble providing evidence of any marijuana benefits because research has been restricted, which in turn made it more difficult to show that the restrictions should be lifted.

It could also help establish industry guidelines for ancillary issues. For example, the restrictions on research contribute to a lack of&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://rollcall.com/2019/09/16/as-states-legalize-marijuana-pesticides-may-be-a-blind-spot/">data on what pesticides are safe</a>&nbsp;for use in marijuana cultivation.

Q: How does this affect policy on taxes, banking and criminal justice?

A: On its own, rescheduling likely won’t address several complaints marijuana industry members and advocates have about federal prohibition.

Some are hopeful, though, that the signal from the Biden administration will spur momentum toward other changes.

Most businesses can deduct their costs from their income and pay taxes on their net income. Marijuana businesses cannot take that deduction, known as 280E, according to the Marijuana Policy Project, an advocacy group.

Schedule I status also makes access to the U.S. banking system difficult.

Others complain that making marijuana legal in some states has not been fair to the communities of color that saw the most active enforcement.

Rescheduling would not fix those issues on its own, but advocates are hopeful it is a sign of momentum toward full legalization.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Democratic Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Ron Wyden of Oregon&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-senate-dems-launch-renewed-push-full-marijuana-legalization">reintroduced a bill</a>&nbsp;last week to de-schdule the drug altogether. The measure includes expanding the 280E tax break and several provisions meant to address social justice.

Q: Could Trump reverse this if he wins in November?

A: Probably, though there’s no indication that’s on his agenda.

It’s unclear what the status of the rescheduling will be when the next Inauguration Day arrives on Jan. 20.

If former President Donald Trump wins back the presidency and the rescheduling is still pending, he could direct the DEA and DOJ to scrap the change.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/10/1698531124512.png" alt="(Rebecca Rivas/Missouri Independent)." />
 <figcaption>(Rebecca Rivas/Missouri Independent).</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/author/jacob-fischler/">JACOB FISCHLER</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/09/21/kansas-board-of-regents-sculpts-plan-for-boosting-state-aid-to-public-higher-education/?emci=78717300-c858-ee11-9937-00224832eb73&amp;emdi=fc107f78-2659-ee11-9937-00224832eb73&amp;ceid=115039">Kansas Reflector</a>U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/biden-administration-greatly-ease-marijuana-regulations-11">proposed loosening</a>&nbsp;the illegal status of marijuana at the federal level – but that doesn’t mean the federal government now condones recreational or medicinal use in the many states that have legalized the drug.Moving marijuana from the government’s list of the most dangerous and least useful substances to a less serious category was a clear signal that the federal government, at least under President Joe Biden’s administration, wants to ease restrictions on a drug that’s been legal in an increasing number of states for more than a decade.For years, the federal government has not pursued enforcement of state-legal marijuana operations, and the recent move appears to solidify that approach.But it didn’t solve the many thorny issues that have resulted from a split between what is legal in dozens of states and what the federal government allows.It’s unclear exactly what the rescheduling will mean. The Justice Department has not made public the text of Garland’s proposal — a DOJ spokesman declined States Newsroom’s request this week for a copy and state regulators say it has not been shared with them.Even if the proposal were public, it would be expected to go through changes over months of rulemaking.Here are some questions covering what is known at this early stage about what rescheduling would and would not do.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/8/1692273868300.png" alt="(Rebecca Rivas/Missouri Independent)." />
 <figcaption>(Rebecca Rivas/Missouri Independent).</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Q: Is weed legal now?</h2>A: No.Even in states that have legalized recreational use, the federal government would likely still consider the state system as illegal under federal law.Other Schedule III drugs, including Tylenol with codeine and anabolic steroids, are tightly regulated and available only by prescription at pharmacies.State-legal medicinal marijuana dispensaries do not fit that description and recreational-use dispensaries are even further from what the Food and Drug Administration requires of Schedule III drugs.“This does not make marijuana state operations legal,” Shawn Hauser, a partner at Denver-based marijuana law firm Vicente LLP, said on a May 3 webinar. “They are not selling FDA-approved drugs and they are not licensed or meet the control requirements for Schedule III. So cannabis and state-legal dispensaries will remain in violation of federal law.”<h2>Q: What is the difference between Schedule I and Schedule III?</h2>A: Among the most significant is the recognition that the drug may have some medicinal value.Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, the Drug Enforcement Administration has five levels of drug classifications.Schedule I is the most restricted level, comprising the drugs most ripe for abuse that have no medicinal value. Other drugs on the list include heroin and LSD.Because the definition of Schedule I substances includes no medicinal use, it is illegal to even study substances on the list.Schedule III is the strictest level that acknowledges some medicinal value, making some hopeful that research on the drug could be improved.“Moving cannabis to Schedule III would be a big step for recognition of the medical uses of cannabis, what voters here recognized by a wide margin in 1998,” the Washington state Liquor and Cannabis Board said in a May 1 statement. “And it would say very clearly that the federal government no longer considers cannabis among the most dangerous drugs.”<h2>Q: How are states preparing?</h2>A: Until they have more details, state regulators cannot do much, Amanda Borup, the senior policy analyst for the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission, said in an interview.“We really have to wait and see what they release,” she said, referring to the DEA’s rulemaking.Other states are considering what the impacts might be.The statement from Washington’s Liquor and Cannabis Board said rescheduling would “hopefully” ease restrictions on cannabis research, while it is “possible” the move would allow state-legal businesses to take advantage of tax deductions available to other industries.<h2>Q: Why does research matter?</h2>A: Marijuana advocates have had trouble providing evidence of any marijuana benefits because research has been restricted, which in turn made it more difficult to show that the restrictions should be lifted.It could also help establish industry guidelines for ancillary issues. For example, the restrictions on research contribute to a lack of&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://rollcall.com/2019/09/16/as-states-legalize-marijuana-pesticides-may-be-a-blind-spot/">data on what pesticides are safe</a>&nbsp;for use in marijuana cultivation.<h2>Q: How does this affect policy on taxes, banking and criminal justice?</h2>A: On its own, rescheduling likely won’t address several complaints marijuana industry members and advocates have about federal prohibition.Some are hopeful, though, that the signal from the Biden administration will spur momentum toward other changes.Most businesses can deduct their costs from their income and pay taxes on their net income. Marijuana businesses cannot take that deduction, known as 280E, according to the Marijuana Policy Project, an advocacy group.Schedule I status also makes access to the U.S. banking system difficult.Others complain that making marijuana legal in some states has not been fair to the communities of color that saw the most active enforcement.Rescheduling would not fix those issues on its own, but advocates are hopeful it is a sign of momentum toward full legalization.Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Democratic Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Ron Wyden of Oregon&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/us-senate-dems-launch-renewed-push-full-marijuana-legalization">reintroduced a bill</a>&nbsp;last week to de-schdule the drug altogether. The measure includes expanding the 280E tax break and several provisions meant to address social justice.<h2>Q: Could Trump reverse this if he wins in November?</h2>A: Probably, though there’s no indication that’s on his agenda.It’s unclear what the status of the rescheduling will be when the next Inauguration Day arrives on Jan. 20.If former President Donald Trump wins back the presidency and the rescheduling is still pending, he could direct the DEA and DOJ to scrap the change.Trump has not commented on the issue.

Still much unknown on how marijuana policies would change in states under Biden plan

Nebraska Commission of Law Enforcement &amp; Criminal Justice

&nbsp;(LINCOLN, NEB.) — Nebraska Backs the Blue! The Nebraska Crime Commission will share that message with law enforcement officers from across the entire country with a unique campaign set for National Police Week gatherings in Washington D.C.&nbsp;

“From the extraordinary public support of our police agencies across Nebraska to the generous recruiting incentives in place, we’re working to get the word out nationally that Nebraska is a great place to serve as a police officer,” said Bryan Tuma, Director of the Nebraska Crime Commission. “Police Week brings officers from across the nation to Washington D.C. so we’re going to showcase why current officers should consider continuing their career in Nebraska.”&nbsp;

The effort is not specific to any one Nebraska law enforcement agency but aims to spread the word that all Nebraska agencies have much to offer to potential candidates. Among the incentives available to Nebraska police officers are:&nbsp;

• 100% Tuition Waiver for sworn officers and their dependents. This waiver applies to any state university, college, of community college.&nbsp;

• Cash Incentives: New hires are eligible to receive up to a $7,500 bonus upon Nebraska certification. Nebraska also offers retention bonuses on the first, third, and fifth year of employment.&nbsp;

In addition to those benefits, Nebraskans offer unmatched support for law enforcement. In a time when many states have seen a decline in public support for police officers, Nebraska has remained committed to public safety by working to recruit new officers to serve in communities across the state.&nbsp;

“Those who choose to pursue a career in law enforcement are answering a call that comes from deep within,” said Governor Jim Pillen. “It is almost undeniable. They know they are meant to do something noble and important in public service. The opportunities to make a difference – in communities large and small – are everywhere here in Nebraska.”&nbsp;

During Police Week, the Nebraska Crime Commission will highlight Nebraska’s support to police officers with a moving digital billboard. The billboard will focus on the area around National Police Week Tent City, which is a festival and expo space hosting thousands of officers and their families.&nbsp;

“While respect for law enforcement has deteriorated in large urban centers, Nebraska has continued our tradition of supporting the men and woman who wear the uniform and keep our communities safe each and every day,” said Rep. Mike Flood. “The Nebraska Crime Commission is doing great work so that Nebraska gets the message out to the entire country that we back the blue and want more peace officers here in the Good Life.”

Earlier this year, a loose coalition of law enforcement leaders and public officials launched “Nebraska Backs the Blue.” Click here to learn more.&nbsp;

Nebraska Commission of Law Enforcement &amp; Criminal Justice&nbsp;(LINCOLN, NEB.) — Nebraska Backs the Blue! The Nebraska Crime Commission will share that message with law enforcement officers from across the entire country with a unique campaign set for National Police Week gatherings in Washington D.C.&nbsp;“From the extraordinary public support of our police agencies across Nebraska to the generous recruiting incentives in place, we’re working to get the word out nationally that Nebraska is a great place to serve as a police officer,” said Bryan Tuma, Director of the Nebraska Crime Commission. “Police Week brings officers from across the nation to Washington D.C. so we’re going to showcase why current officers should consider continuing their career in Nebraska.”&nbsp;The effort is not specific to any one Nebraska law enforcement agency but aims to spread the word that all Nebraska agencies have much to offer to potential candidates. Among the incentives available to Nebraska police officers are:&nbsp;• 100% Tuition Waiver for sworn officers and their dependents. This waiver applies to any state university, college, of community college.&nbsp;• Cash Incentives: New hires are eligible to receive up to a $7,500 bonus upon Nebraska certification. Nebraska also offers retention bonuses on the first, third, and fifth year of employment.&nbsp;In addition to those benefits, Nebraskans offer unmatched support for law enforcement. In a time when many states have seen a decline in public support for police officers, Nebraska has remained committed to public safety by working to recruit new officers to serve in communities across the state.&nbsp;“Those who choose to pursue a career in law enforcement are answering a call that comes from deep within,” said Governor Jim Pillen. “It is almost undeniable. They know they are meant to do something noble and important in public service. The opportunities to make a difference – in communities large and small – are everywhere here in Nebraska.”&nbsp;During Police Week, the Nebraska Crime Commission will highlight Nebraska’s support to police officers with a moving digital billboard. The billboard will focus on the area around National Police Week Tent City, which is a festival and expo space hosting thousands of officers and their families.&nbsp;“While respect for law enforcement has deteriorated in large urban centers, Nebraska has continued our tradition of supporting the men and woman who wear the uniform and keep our communities safe each and every day,” said Rep. Mike Flood. “The Nebraska Crime Commission is doing great work so that Nebraska gets the message out to the entire country that we back the blue and want more peace officers here in the Good Life.”Earlier this year, a loose coalition of law enforcement leaders and public officials launched “Nebraska Backs the Blue.” Click here to learn more.&nbsp;

Nebraska to Send Strong Message During Police Week 

NEW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump's defense attorney on Thursday&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/stormy-daniels-donald-trump-trial-takeaways-f34f094124fc7ec455d6a73cbb6eec21">accused Stormy Daniels</a>&nbsp;of slowly altering the details of an alleged 2006 sexual encounter with Trump, trying to persuade jurors that a key prosecution witness in the former president's hush money trial cannot be believed.

“You made all this up, right?” attorney Susan Necheles asked. “No,” Daniels shot back.

<a href="https://pdfs.nycourts.gov/PeopleVs.DTrump-71543/transcripts/5-09-2024/00004.html">Click here to read the transcript </a>of Stormy Daniels' testimony Day 2

<a href="https://pdfs.nycourts.gov/PeopleVs.DTrump-71543/transcripts/5-7-2024/00054.html">Click here to read</a>&nbsp;the transcript of Stormy Daniels' testimony Day 1

As the jury looked on, the two women traded barbs over what Necheles said were inconsistencies in Daniels' description of the encounter with Trump in a hotel room. He denies the whole story.

But despite all the talk over what may have happened in that hotel room, despite the discomfiting testimony by the adult film actor that she consented to sex in part because of a “power imbalance," the case against Trump doesn’t rise or fall on whether her account is true or even believable. It’s a trial about money changing hands — business transactions — and whether those payments were made to illegally influence the 2016 election.

Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying internal Trump Organization business records. The charges stem from paperwork such as invoices and checks that were deemed legal expenses in company records. Prosecutors say those payments largely were reimbursements to Trump attorney Michael Cohen, who paid Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet.

The testimony over the past three weeks has seesawed between bookkeepers and bankers relaying the nuts and bolts of check-paying procedures and wire transfers to unflattering, seamy stories about Trump and the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-national-enquirer-catch-kill-57f0c462af437fb07967a041b6f66022">tabloid world machinations</a>&nbsp;meant to keep them secret.

This criminal case could be the only one&nbsp;<a href="https://projects.apnews.com/features/2023/trump-investigations-civil-criminal-tracker/index.html">against the presumptive Republican presidential nominee</a>&nbsp;to go to trial before voters decide in November whether to send him back to the White House. Trump has pleaded not guilty and casts himself as the victim of a politically tainted justice system working to deny him another term.

Meanwhile,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-trial-hush-money-gag-order-d853768fff5fafbdee55623579889140">as the threat of jail looms</a>&nbsp;over Trump following his repeated gag order violations, his attorneys are fighting Judge Juan M. Merchan's order and seeking a fast decision in an appeals court. If the court refuses to lift the gag order, Trump’s lawyers want permission to take their appeal to the state’s high court.

At the same time, they also asked Merchan to modify the order so that Trump could publicly respond to Daniels’ testimony. Merchan denied the request, as well as two requests for a mistrial.

“My concern is not just with protecting Ms. Daniels or a witness who has already testified. My concern is with protecting the integrity of these proceedings as a whole,” Merchan said.

Trump fumed outside the courtroom at the end of the day.

“I’m innocent,” he said. “I’m being held in this court with a corrupt judge who’s totally conflicted.”

At the time of the payment to Daniels, Trump and his campaign were reeling from the October 2016 publication of the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-access-hollywood-hush-money-new-york-2c52279a45ede2a111ff1fe447d2fdac">never-before-seen 2005 “Access Hollywood” footage</a>&nbsp;in which he boasted about grabbing women’s genitals without their permission.

Prosecutors have argued that the political firestorm over the “Access Hollywood” tape hastened Cohen’s payment to keep Daniels from going public with her claims that could further hurt Trump in the eyes of female voters.

The tape rattled the Republican National Committee leadership, and “there were conversations about how it would be possible to replace him as the candidate if it came to that," according to testimony from Madeleine Westerhout, a Trump aide who was working at the RNC when the recording leaked.

Daniels was on the stand for 7 1/2 hours over two days. During questioning from prosecutors, she relayed in graphic detail what she said happened during their encounter, after the two met at a celebrity golf outing at Lake Tahoe where sponsors included the adult film studio where she worked.

Trump scowled and shook his head through much of Daniels’ description, including how she found him sitting on the hotel bed in his underwear after she returned from the bathroom and that he did not use a condom. At one point, the judge told defense lawyers during a sidebar conversation — out of earshot of the jury and the public — that he could hear Trump “cursing audibly.”

Trump’s lawyers have sought to paint Daniels as a liar and extortionist who’s trying to take down Trump after drawing money and fame from her story about him. And they say the hush money payments were an effort to protect his reputation and family — not his campaign — by shielding them from embarrassing stories about his personal life.

On Thursday, Necheles grilled Daniels on her description of the encounter in which she described fear and discomfort even as she consented to sex. She testified earlier this week that while she wasn’t physically menaced, she felt a “power imbalance” as Trump, in his hotel bedroom, stood between her and the door and propositioned her.

As for whether she felt compelled to have sex with him, she reiterated Thursday that he didn’t drug her or physically threaten her. But, she said, “My own insecurities, in that moment, kept me from saying no.”

Necheles suggested that her work in porn meant her story about being shocked and frightened by Trump’s alleged sexual advances was not believable.

“You’ve acted and had sex in over 200 porn movies, right?” Necheles asked. “And there are naked men and women having sex, including yourself, in those movies?”

Necheles continued: “But according to you, seeing a man sitting on a bed in a T-shirt and boxers was so upsetting that you got lightheaded.”

The experience with Trump was different from porn for a number of reasons, Daniels explained, including the fact that Trump was more than twice her age, larger than she and that she was not expecting to find him undressed when she emerged from the bathroom.

“I came out of a bathroom seeing an older man that I wasn’t expecting to be there,” she said.

Necheles pressed her on why she accepted the payout to keep quiet instead of going public.

“Why didn’t you do that?” she asked, wondering why Daniels didn’t hold a news conference as she had planned.

“Because we were running out of time,” Daniels said.

Did she mean, Necheles asked, that she was running out of time to use the claim to make money?

“To get the story out,” Daniels countered. The negotiations were happening in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign.

She testified that she never spoke with Trump about payment, and said she had no knowledge of whether Trump was aware of or involved in the transaction.

“You have no personal knowledge about his involvement in that transaction or what he did or didn’t do,” Necheles asked.

“Not directly, no,” Daniels responded.

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger later asked Daniels: “Have you been telling lies about Mr. Trump or the truth about Mr. Trump?”

“The truth,” said Daniels, who also said that although she has made money since her story emerged, she also has had to spend a lot to hire security, move homes and take other precautions, and she still owes Trump hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorneys fees.

“On balance, has publicly telling the truth about Mr. Trump been a net positive or net negative in your life?” Hoffinger asked.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/5/1715113495617.png" alt="-Photo of Trump and Stormy Daniels entered into evidence released by the New York State Court System&nbsp;" />
 <figcaption>-Photo of Trump and Stormy Daniels entered into evidence released by the New York State Court System&nbsp;</figcaption>
 </figure>NEW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump's defense attorney on Thursday&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/stormy-daniels-donald-trump-trial-takeaways-f34f094124fc7ec455d6a73cbb6eec21">accused Stormy Daniels</a>&nbsp;of slowly altering the details of an alleged 2006 sexual encounter with Trump, trying to persuade jurors that a key prosecution witness in the former president's hush money trial cannot be believed.“You made all this up, right?” attorney Susan Necheles asked. “No,” Daniels shot back.<a href="https://pdfs.nycourts.gov/PeopleVs.DTrump-71543/transcripts/5-09-2024/00004.html">Click here to read the transcript </a>of Stormy Daniels' testimony Day 2<a href="https://pdfs.nycourts.gov/PeopleVs.DTrump-71543/transcripts/5-7-2024/00054.html">Click here to read</a>&nbsp;the transcript of Stormy Daniels' testimony Day 1<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/5/1715384676922.png" alt="On Friday night, the New York State Courts released day two of Stormy Daniels' testimony from the historic Trump trial&nbsp;&nbsp;" />
 <figcaption>On Friday night, the New York State Courts released day two of Stormy Daniels' testimony from the historic Trump trial&nbsp;&nbsp;</figcaption>
 </figure>As the jury looked on, the two women traded barbs over what Necheles said were inconsistencies in Daniels' description of the encounter with Trump in a hotel room. He denies the whole story.But despite all the talk over what may have happened in that hotel room, despite the discomfiting testimony by the adult film actor that she consented to sex in part because of a “power imbalance," the case against Trump doesn’t rise or fall on whether her account is true or even believable. It’s a trial about money changing hands — business transactions — and whether those payments were made to illegally influence the 2016 election.Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying internal Trump Organization business records. The charges stem from paperwork such as invoices and checks that were deemed legal expenses in company records. Prosecutors say those payments largely were reimbursements to Trump attorney Michael Cohen, who paid Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet.The testimony over the past three weeks has seesawed between bookkeepers and bankers relaying the nuts and bolts of check-paying procedures and wire transfers to unflattering, seamy stories about Trump and the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-national-enquirer-catch-kill-57f0c462af437fb07967a041b6f66022">tabloid world machinations</a>&nbsp;meant to keep them secret.This criminal case could be the only one&nbsp;<a href="https://projects.apnews.com/features/2023/trump-investigations-civil-criminal-tracker/index.html">against the presumptive Republican presidential nominee</a>&nbsp;to go to trial before voters decide in November whether to send him back to the White House. Trump has pleaded not guilty and casts himself as the victim of a politically tainted justice system working to deny him another term.Meanwhile,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-trial-hush-money-gag-order-d853768fff5fafbdee55623579889140">as the threat of jail looms</a>&nbsp;over Trump following his repeated gag order violations, his attorneys are fighting Judge Juan M. Merchan's order and seeking a fast decision in an appeals court. If the court refuses to lift the gag order, Trump’s lawyers want permission to take their appeal to the state’s high court.At the same time, they also asked Merchan to modify the order so that Trump could publicly respond to Daniels’ testimony. Merchan denied the request, as well as two requests for a mistrial.“My concern is not just with protecting Ms. Daniels or a witness who has already testified. My concern is with protecting the integrity of these proceedings as a whole,” Merchan said.Trump fumed outside the courtroom at the end of the day.“I’m innocent,” he said. “I’m being held in this court with a corrupt judge who’s totally conflicted.”At the time of the payment to Daniels, Trump and his campaign were reeling from the October 2016 publication of the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-access-hollywood-hush-money-new-york-2c52279a45ede2a111ff1fe447d2fdac">never-before-seen 2005 “Access Hollywood” footage</a>&nbsp;in which he boasted about grabbing women’s genitals without their permission.Prosecutors have argued that the political firestorm over the “Access Hollywood” tape hastened Cohen’s payment to keep Daniels from going public with her claims that could further hurt Trump in the eyes of female voters.The tape rattled the Republican National Committee leadership, and “there were conversations about how it would be possible to replace him as the candidate if it came to that," according to testimony from Madeleine Westerhout, a Trump aide who was working at the RNC when the recording leaked.Daniels was on the stand for 7 1/2 hours over two days. During questioning from prosecutors, she relayed in graphic detail what she said happened during their encounter, after the two met at a celebrity golf outing at Lake Tahoe where sponsors included the adult film studio where she worked.Trump scowled and shook his head through much of Daniels’ description, including how she found him sitting on the hotel bed in his underwear after she returned from the bathroom and that he did not use a condom. At one point, the judge told defense lawyers during a sidebar conversation — out of earshot of the jury and the public — that he could hear Trump “cursing audibly.”Trump’s lawyers have sought to paint Daniels as a liar and extortionist who’s trying to take down Trump after drawing money and fame from her story about him. And they say the hush money payments were an effort to protect his reputation and family — not his campaign — by shielding them from embarrassing stories about his personal life.On Thursday, Necheles grilled Daniels on her description of the encounter in which she described fear and discomfort even as she consented to sex. She testified earlier this week that while she wasn’t physically menaced, she felt a “power imbalance” as Trump, in his hotel bedroom, stood between her and the door and propositioned her.As for whether she felt compelled to have sex with him, she reiterated Thursday that he didn’t drug her or physically threaten her. But, she said, “My own insecurities, in that moment, kept me from saying no.”Necheles suggested that her work in porn meant her story about being shocked and frightened by Trump’s alleged sexual advances was not believable.“You’ve acted and had sex in over 200 porn movies, right?” Necheles asked. “And there are naked men and women having sex, including yourself, in those movies?”Necheles continued: “But according to you, seeing a man sitting on a bed in a T-shirt and boxers was so upsetting that you got lightheaded.”The experience with Trump was different from porn for a number of reasons, Daniels explained, including the fact that Trump was more than twice her age, larger than she and that she was not expecting to find him undressed when she emerged from the bathroom.“I came out of a bathroom seeing an older man that I wasn’t expecting to be there,” she said.Necheles pressed her on why she accepted the payout to keep quiet instead of going public.“Why didn’t you do that?” she asked, wondering why Daniels didn’t hold a news conference as she had planned.“Because we were running out of time,” Daniels said.Did she mean, Necheles asked, that she was running out of time to use the claim to make money?“To get the story out,” Daniels countered. The negotiations were happening in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign.She testified that she never spoke with Trump about payment, and said she had no knowledge of whether Trump was aware of or involved in the transaction.“You have no personal knowledge about his involvement in that transaction or what he did or didn’t do,” Necheles asked.“Not directly, no,” Daniels responded.Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger later asked Daniels: “Have you been telling lies about Mr. Trump or the truth about Mr. Trump?”“The truth,” said Daniels, who also said that although she has made money since her story emerged, she also has had to spend a lot to hire security, move homes and take other precautions, and she still owes Trump hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorneys fees.“On balance, has publicly telling the truth about Mr. Trump been a net positive or net negative in your life?” Hoffinger asked.“Negative,” Daniels replied quietly.