By ARIANA FIGUEROA&nbsp;&nbsp; <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>

WASHINGTON — Following the Supreme Court’s summer ruling against 40 million federal student loan borrowers who would have qualified for debt relief, the Biden administration crafted a year-long delay in repayments.

The policy, known as an on-ramp, is set to begin next month.

Additionally, hours after the Supreme Court’s decision, the Department of Education unveiled a new repayment plan for those with federal student loans, known as Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE.&nbsp; The new income-driven repayment plan calculates payments based on a borrower’s income and family size and forgives balances after a set number of years.

It’s estimated by the administration that more than 20 million borrowers will benefit. Borrowers can apply&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://studentaid.gov/announcements-events/save-plan">here.</a>&nbsp;A campaign is being launched to publicize the new program, by the Department of Education in collaboration with groups like the Student Debt Crisis Center, UnidosUS and the NAACP.

“This plan is a game changer for millions of Americans, many of whom are putting off having children, buying their first home, or even starting a business because they can’t get out from under their student loans,” said White House Domestic Policy Advisor Neera Tanden on a call with reporters on Monday. “Student loans will be manageable.”

Last year, the Biden administration rolled out a debt forgiveness plan for borrowers with federal student loans that would have been a one-time cancellation of up to $10,000. Borrowers who had received Pell Grants — federal aid to help low-income students pay for higher education — could qualify for an additional $10,000 in forgiveness.

<a target="_blank" href="https://newhampshirebulletin.com/2023/06/30/us-supreme-court-rules-against-biden-administration-student-loan-debt-relief-plan/">The conservative bloc of the Supreme Court on June 30&nbsp;</a>ruled that the Biden administration did not have the legal authority to enact that one-time student debt relief program. The case was filed by Republican attorneys general of Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina, and they argued the Biden administration overstepped its reach.

Following that decision from the court, the Biden administration initiated rulemaking through the Higher Education Act to try again to enact debt relief, and finalized a rule for the new repayment plan known as SAVE.

Here are some questions and answers about the on-ramp policy and SAVE plan.

Federal student loan repayments are set to resume in October, but while borrowers have a year of leniency to begin repayments, interest will continue to accrue starting in September. The on-ramp program starts Oct. 1 and will extend until Sept. 30 of next year.

“Financially vulnerable borrowers who miss monthly payments during this period are not considered delinquent, reported to credit bureaus, placed in default, or referred to debt collection agencies,” according to a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/30/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-new-actions-to-provide-debt-relief-and-support-for-student-loan-borrowers/">fact sheet</a>&nbsp;released by the White House.

The Department of Education did not respond to questions from States Newsroom asking how the agency would prevent loan servicers from reporting borrowers to credit bureau or debt collectors.

How is the on-ramp policy different from the pause on federal student loan repayments?

The pause on federal student loan repayments was first put in place by the Trump administration in 2020 at the start of the coronavirus pandemic, and has been extended several times.

The pause meant those with federal student loans did not have to repay, and no interest accrued. With this new policy, interest will still accrue, but borrowers have a year before having to start paying back their loans.

What does a final rule for the SAVE plan mean?

<a target="_blank" href="https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2021/idrfactsheetfinal.pdf">This is an income-driven repayment plan</a>&nbsp;that the Department of Education said will cut borrowers’ monthly payments in half. The&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/biden-harris-administration-launches-most-affordable-repayment-plan-ever-transforming-income-driven-repayment-cutting-undergraduate-payments-half-and-preventing-unpaid-interest-accumulation?utm_content=&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_name=&amp;utm_source=govdelivery&amp;utm_term=">official launch&nbsp;</a>of the application was Tuesday.

“This is a giant step forward in decreasing the burden of crushing debt that rests on so many borrowers’ shoulders,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. “Low-income students, whose burdens will be cut in half, and most other students, who will never pay more than 5% of their income, will breathe a sigh of relief across every corner of America.

“While there will be those that will challenge this in court, the administration has carefully crossed the legal t’s and dotted the legal i’s. The fight to cancel student debt is far from over, but this is a massive step in the right direction. President Biden deserves accolades and support for this action.”

A borrower could save more than $1,000 per year on payments, compared to other income-driven repayment plans. And, depending on income levels, it will allow more than 1 million additional borrowers to make $0 monthly payments without their interest accruing, the Department of Education estimates.

Borrowers with undergraduate loans will pay 5% of their discretionary income, rather than the 10% required under previous income repayment plans. Borrowers with undergraduate and graduate loans will pay a weighted average between 5% and 10% of their incomes.

The White House said a borrower’s monthly payment will be based on their discretionary income, defined in the plan as the difference between their adjusted gross income and 225% of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services poverty guideline amount for the family size. Borrowers who earn a minimum wage of $15 an hour will not have to make a monthly payment.

According to the Department of Education, that means borrowers will not owe loan payments if they are a single person earning $32,800 or less or a family of four earning $67,500 or less, though the amounts are higher in Alaska and Hawaii.

The plan also forgives loan balances after as little as 10 years of payment, rather than 20 years under previous income repayment plans. The plan also does not charge borrowers with unpaid monthly interest, as long as those borrowers are making their monthly payments.

Who qualifies for the SAVE student loan repayment plan?&nbsp;

Most federal student loan borrowers are going to qualify for this plan. However, those with Direct PLUS loans to parents and certain other loans will not qualify for it; the list can be found&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://studentaid.gov/announcements-events/save-plan">here.</a>

Borrowers signed up for the current Revised Pay as You Earn (REPAYE) plan will automatically be enrolled in SAVE.

How is SAVE different from previous federal student loan repayment plans?

With this plan, if your calculated payment ends up to be less than the amount of interest that accrues every month, that remaining interest will be forgiven. The previous plan did not have that element, so borrowers were continuing to see their balances grow.

By ARIANA FIGUEROA&nbsp;&nbsp; <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>WASHINGTON — Following the Supreme Court’s summer ruling against 40 million federal student loan borrowers who would have qualified for debt relief, the Biden administration crafted a year-long delay in repayments.The policy, known as an on-ramp, is set to begin next month.Additionally, hours after the Supreme Court’s decision, the Department of Education unveiled a new repayment plan for those with federal student loans, known as Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE.&nbsp; The new income-driven repayment plan calculates payments based on a borrower’s income and family size and forgives balances after a set number of years.It’s estimated by the administration that more than 20 million borrowers will benefit. Borrowers can apply&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://studentaid.gov/announcements-events/save-plan">here.</a>&nbsp;A campaign is being launched to publicize the new program, by the Department of Education in collaboration with groups like the Student Debt Crisis Center, UnidosUS and the NAACP.“This plan is a game changer for millions of Americans, many of whom are putting off having children, buying their first home, or even starting a business because they can’t get out from under their student loans,” said White House Domestic Policy Advisor Neera Tanden on a call with reporters on Monday. “Student loans will be manageable.”Last year, the Biden administration rolled out a debt forgiveness plan for borrowers with federal student loans that would have been a one-time cancellation of up to $10,000. Borrowers who had received Pell Grants — federal aid to help low-income students pay for higher education — could qualify for an additional $10,000 in forgiveness.<a target="_blank" href="https://newhampshirebulletin.com/2023/06/30/us-supreme-court-rules-against-biden-administration-student-loan-debt-relief-plan/">The conservative bloc of the Supreme Court on June 30&nbsp;</a>ruled that the Biden administration did not have the legal authority to enact that one-time student debt relief program. The case was filed by Republican attorneys general of Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina, and they argued the Biden administration overstepped its reach.Following that decision from the court, the Biden administration initiated rulemaking through the Higher Education Act to try again to enact debt relief, and finalized a rule for the new repayment plan known as SAVE.Here are some questions and answers about the on-ramp policy and SAVE plan.When does the on-ramp program start?Federal student loan repayments are set to resume in October, but while borrowers have a year of leniency to begin repayments, interest will continue to accrue starting in September. The on-ramp program starts Oct. 1 and will extend until Sept. 30 of next year.“Financially vulnerable borrowers who miss monthly payments during this period are not considered delinquent, reported to credit bureaus, placed in default, or referred to debt collection agencies,” according to a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/30/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-new-actions-to-provide-debt-relief-and-support-for-student-loan-borrowers/">fact sheet</a>&nbsp;released by the White House.The Department of Education did not respond to questions from States Newsroom asking how the agency would prevent loan servicers from reporting borrowers to credit bureau or debt collectors.How is the on-ramp policy different from the pause on federal student loan repayments?The pause on federal student loan repayments was first put in place by the Trump administration in 2020 at the start of the coronavirus pandemic, and has been extended several times.The pause meant those with federal student loans did not have to repay, and no interest accrued. With this new policy, interest will still accrue, but borrowers have a year before having to start paying back their loans.What does a final rule for the SAVE plan mean?<a target="_blank" href="https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2021/idrfactsheetfinal.pdf">This is an income-driven repayment plan</a>&nbsp;that the Department of Education said will cut borrowers’ monthly payments in half. The&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/biden-harris-administration-launches-most-affordable-repayment-plan-ever-transforming-income-driven-repayment-cutting-undergraduate-payments-half-and-preventing-unpaid-interest-accumulation?utm_content=&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_name=&amp;utm_source=govdelivery&amp;utm_term=">official launch&nbsp;</a>of the application was Tuesday.“This is a giant step forward in decreasing the burden of crushing debt that rests on so many borrowers’ shoulders,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. “Low-income students, whose burdens will be cut in half, and most other students, who will never pay more than 5% of their income, will breathe a sigh of relief across every corner of America.“While there will be those that will challenge this in court, the administration has carefully crossed the legal t’s and dotted the legal i’s. The fight to cancel student debt is far from over, but this is a massive step in the right direction. President Biden deserves accolades and support for this action.”A borrower could save more than $1,000 per year on payments, compared to other income-driven repayment plans. And, depending on income levels, it will allow more than 1 million additional borrowers to make $0 monthly payments without their interest accruing, the Department of Education estimates.How does the SAVE plan work?Borrowers with undergraduate loans will pay 5% of their discretionary income, rather than the 10% required under previous income repayment plans. Borrowers with undergraduate and graduate loans will pay a weighted average between 5% and 10% of their incomes.The White House said a borrower’s monthly payment will be based on their discretionary income, defined in the plan as the difference between their adjusted gross income and 225% of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services poverty guideline amount for the family size. Borrowers who earn a minimum wage of $15 an hour will not have to make a monthly payment.According to the Department of Education, that means borrowers will not owe loan payments if they are a single person earning $32,800 or less or a family of four earning $67,500 or less, though the amounts are higher in Alaska and Hawaii.The plan also forgives loan balances after as little as 10 years of payment, rather than 20 years under previous income repayment plans. The plan also does not charge borrowers with unpaid monthly interest, as long as those borrowers are making their monthly payments.Who qualifies for the SAVE student loan repayment plan?&nbsp;Most federal student loan borrowers are going to qualify for this plan. However, those with Direct PLUS loans to parents and certain other loans will not qualify for it; the list can be found&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://studentaid.gov/announcements-events/save-plan">here.</a>Borrowers signed up for the current Revised Pay as You Earn (REPAYE) plan will automatically be enrolled in SAVE.How is SAVE different from previous federal student loan repayment plans?With this plan, if your calculated payment ends up to be less than the amount of interest that accrues every month, that remaining interest will be forgiven. The previous plan did not have that element, so borrowers were continuing to see their balances grow.

Here’s what to know about new federal policies for repaying student loans

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/kevinhardy/">KEVIN HARDY</a>

<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>

More than a dozen states considered bills following the Eras Tour problems

There’s no question what motivated state Rep. Kelly Moller to push for changes in Minnesota law on concert ticket sales.

“Really, it was the Taylor Swift debacle for me,” she said.

A self-professed Swiftie, the Democrat found herself among millions of other Americans unable to buy tickets last year to Swift’s Eras Tour.

She preregistered for tickets, but never received a code to buy them. And on the day sales went live online, she sat by as friends with codes got bumped out of the ticket queue for no apparent reason.&nbsp;Then Ticketmaster’s website crashed.

The ordeal convinced her that the concert ticket industry warrants more government oversight.

“I do think a lot of that is better served at the federal level, but that said, there are things we can do at the state level,” she said.

<a target="_blank" href="https://www.house.mn.gov/members/profile/news/15511/36550">Moller introduced a bill this year</a>&nbsp;that would force ticket sellers to disclose the full cost of tickets, including fees, up front to buyers in her state. It also would ban speculative ticketing — a practice in which resale companies sell tickets they don’t yet own.

The bill stalled, but Moller expects it to be reconsidered next year. It is part of a wave of legislation considered in more than a dozen states this year following the unprecedented disaster in the run-up to Swift’s Eras Tour,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/17/business/taylor-swift-eras-tour-two-billion/index.html#:~:text=That%20comes%20to%20%242.2%20billion,at%20New%20York%20University%20Steinhardt.">which is on pace to be the highest-grossing tour in history</a>.

Swift and her legions of fans were&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://apnews.com/article/entertainment-music-taylor-swift-af5d58d2a8c6def368ded1bd2ddd8a6f">outraged when Ticketmaster’s website crashed</a>&nbsp;last November as it faced unprecedented demand from fans, bots and ticket resellers ahead of her tour.&nbsp;Social media blew up over the fiasco, and news organizations published story after story. It sparked bipartisan legislative proposals in Congress, though no bill has become law yet.

That’s led state legislatures to step in: Lawmakers of both parties across the country introduced new bills this year to regulate concert and live event ticket purchasing.

It’s a rare bipartisan issue in statehouses. But lawmakers are learning how complicated — and controversial — the world of online ticketing is. In several states, legislators are caught in the middle between companies like Ticketmaster and secondary sellers such as StubHub.

“There are a lot of issues that beg for a national focus, a national solution. But because of the political dynamics in Washington, D.C., we haven’t gotten very many solutions. … So states believe they have to act,” said California state Sen. Bill Dodd, a Democrat.

Dodd sponsored&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB478">a bill</a>&nbsp;this year that would ban so-called junk fees on tickets — fees tacked onto the base price that lawmakers view as deceptive. The proposal targets other services, including hotel and resort fees, but Dodd said concerts were a major driver. President Joe Biden called out junk fees in his State of the Union address in February and has&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/15/president-biden-recognizes-actions-by-private-sector-ticketing-and-travel-companies-to-eliminate-hidden-junk-fees-and-provide-millions-of-customers-with-transparent-pricing/">publicly praised</a>&nbsp;companies that have committed to transparent pricing, such as Airbnb and Live Nation, Ticketmaster’s parent company.

Dodd said he isn’t hostile to ticket marketplaces such as Ticketmaster and StubHub. He uses those sites to buy tickets to concerts and basketball games. But, he said, consumers should know the full price up front. The White House estimates&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/blog/2022/10/26/the-presidents-initiative-on-junk-fees-and-related-pricing-practices/">junk fees cost Americans more than $65 billion per year.</a>

“It’s outrageous,” he said, “and I think Californians are sick and tired of dishonest fees being tacked onto just anything.”

Dodd’s bill, which was backed by California Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta, passed the state Senate and is pending in the Assembly. It is one of several ticketing bills considered by Golden State lawmakers this session.

The state Senate unanimously passed a proposal from Republican state Sen. Scott Wilk that he said targets the “stranglehold” some companies have over sales. The bill would prohibit exclusivity clauses in contracts between a primary ticket seller such as Ticketmaster and an entertainment venue in California. Wilk said in his news release it would allow artists to work with other ticket sellers without the fear of retaliation from large ticket sellers — and ultimately reduce fees for consumers. It’s<a target="_blank" href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billStatusClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB829">&nbsp;in committee</a>&nbsp;in the Assembly.

Earlier this year, the Colorado legislature passed a bill that would have required sellers to fully disclose the total cost of event tickets, prohibited vendors from raising prices during the buying process and banned speculative ticketing.

But Democratic Gov. Jared Polis&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y1saLSg0xKpn47feQXIcCKXAOOh6f04I/view">vetoed the act</a>&nbsp;in June, saying it could prevent competition and “risk upsetting the successful entertainment ecosystem in Colorado.”

Chris Castle, an entertainment lawyer who tracks ticket legislation across the country, said the Colorado veto illustrates the industry’s ability to sway public officials.

Polis referenced concerns he heard from the National Consumers League and the Consumer Federation of America. Both of those consumer advocacy groups have received funding from secondary ticket marketplaces such as StubHub, the music publication Pitchfork&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://pitchfork.com/thepitch/consumer-groups-take-money-from-ticketing-industry/">reported</a>.

“It’d be easy enough to say, ‘Well, I heard from the stakeholders, and I thought these guys had the better argument.’ But he didn’t say that,” Castle said of Polis. “He starts talking about these groups. And sure enough, it turns out, they’re all on the take.”

Conor Cahill, the governor’s spokesperson,&nbsp;did not answer questions about the influence of ticket marketplaces on the veto, but said Polis will apply a “consumer-first lens” to future legislation on the issue.

The National Consumers League has no problem being associated with groups like StubHub, said John Breyault, the organization’s vice president of public policy, telecommunications and fraud. He said the group shares a common belief with resellers that the marketplace needs more competition, not less. But it still disagrees on some specific issues, he said.

“There are problems at every level of the industry including in the secondary market that we are trying to address through both our advocacy at the state level and our advocacy at the federal level,” Breyault said.

Bills in several states backed by StubHub aim to protect so-called transferability of tickets — that is, the customers’ right to pass on or resell tickets they purchase.

Six states — Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, New York, Utah and Virginia — currently&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.protectticketrights.com/the-issues">protect the right of fans to transfer or sell tickets</a>. Without that right, some advocates say Ticketmaster’s terms and conditions can ban transferring tickets or require that they be resold on their own platform.

StubHub makes no secret of its efforts to educate and persuade state lawmakers.

“The states are really where it’s at in a lot of ways,” said Laura Dooley, the company’s head of global government relations.&nbsp;“Our industry right now is almost exclusively regulated at the state level.”

This year, the company has tracked nearly 70 ticketing bills proposed across 25 states. Dooley said many state lawmakers introduce new regulations with good intentions, but don’t always understand the industry.

As an example, she pointed to state efforts to ban bots — software that can bypass security measures in online ticketing systems and buy tickets in bulk faster than humans.

Ticketmaster cited bots as a major cause of the Eras Tour fiasco. Bots are banned by federal law, though that regulation only has been enforced once since 2016,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2021/01/ftc-brings-first-ever-cases-under-bots-act">according to the Federal Trade Commission</a>. Dooley said StubHub isn’t opposed to state bot bans, but does push legislators to consider enforcement measures in crafting their bills. That’s because regulators need cooperation from the industry and access to ticketing software to monitor for bots, Dooley said.

Dooley contends some lawmakers’ proposed solutions don’t target root causes, including the unique way live event tickets are sold, generally through exclusive deals with one retail platform.

“When you have millions and millions of people wanting to buy a product and they’re being asked to buy that product at the same time on the same day through an exclusive retail provider — in this case Ticketmaster and in many cases Ticketmaster — that system is going to be overloaded, right? And it’s going to be a frustrating experience,” Dooley said.

Ticketmaster did not respond to multiple requests for comment for this story.

Brian Hess, executive director of the nonprofit fan advocacy organization&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.sportsfans.org/">Sports Fans Coalition</a>, pointed out thatlawmakers have a variety of interests to consider: the primary ticket markets like Ticketmaster, the artists, the consumer, and secondary markets like StubHub.

“Ticketing fights are far more contentious than anyone anticipates,” he said. “Each side of the market likes to blame the other side, and consumers are stuck in the middle.”

The Sports Fans Coalition is in part funded by secondary marketplaces like StubHub and lobbies on ticket legislation across the country.

Hess said federal regulators should not have allowed&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/25/the-live-nation-and-ticketmaster-monopoly-of-live-entertainment.html">the 2010 merger</a>&nbsp;of Live Nation, an event promoter and venue operator, with Ticketmaster, a ticket provider.

“They are the monopoly in the industry,” he said. “They were the ones that botched Taylor Swift’s tickets, and they’re the ones that continue to have ticket sale problems when they launch new shows.”

Texas Republican state Rep. Kronda Thimesch said she saw firsthand how bots can distort the marketplace and prevent customers from purchasing tickets.

That’s what she blamed for her own daughter’s unsuccessful attempts to buy Swift tickets last year.

“Fans then have to resort to paying hundreds, if not thousands, over face value to resellers in order to see their favorite artist,” she said.

That’s why she introduced a bill banning ticket-buying bots in Texas, which was signed into law by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott.

Thimesch noted that ticket issues aren’t just a problem for Swift fans — country star Zach Bryan named his December live album&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.tennessean.com/story/entertainment/music/2022/12/28/zach-bryan-drops-live-album-all-my-homies-hate-ticketmaster/69761475007/">“All My Homies Hate Ticketmaster.”</a>&nbsp;Thimesch said she is open to exploring more ticketing legislation when the Texas legislature reconvenes.

More than 1,500 miles away, Massachusetts Democratic state Sen. John Velis has a similar outlook. He’s interested in diving deep into the world of ticketing. But he’s starting off small.

“I think the art, if you will, of legislating is you kind of go little by little,” he said. “I think ticket pricing is a great and very logical place to start.”

Velis introduced a bill that would require upfront transparent ticket pricing and ban “dynamic pricing,” a practice in which sellers adjust prices based on demand. While he’s interested in eventually exploring ride shares or other services, his legislation is so far focused on concert and live event tickets, he said.

Before the Eras Tour mess, Velis said he got interested in the issue after hearing constituents and co-workers complain about exorbitant fees on live event tickets. Tickets advertised for $100 can sometimes end up costing double that once all the fees are tacked on, he said.

“I just thought to myself, ‘That is so incredibly wrong,’” he said. “If someone wants to spend their hard-earned money at $10,000 a ticket to go see Taylor Swift or Jay-Z or the Boston Celtics, giddy up. But I just want that consumer to know going into that initial transaction that they’re going to be spending $10,000.”

Velis said his bill should receive a hearing soon in the state Senate.

Jurisdictional bounds are likely to prove complicated, he acknowledged. After all, consumers often buy tickets for events in other states. But he said his bill is solely aimed at protecting consumers — a notion he says is hard to oppose.

“In my experience, this is without a doubt a bipartisan issue,” he said. “I’ve experienced nobody raising a concern from a partisan politics standpoint.”

<a target="_blank" href="https://stateline.org/">Stateline</a>&nbsp;is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions:&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="mailto:info@stateline.org">info@stateline.org</a>. Follow Stateline on&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://facebook.com/statelinenewsroom">Facebook</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/stateline_news">Twitter</a>.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/9/1693768918136.png" alt="-Taylor Swift performs during The Eras Tour at Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City.&nbsp;The ticketing fiasco before the tour has prompted lawmakers across the country to consider new laws on live event ticketing " />
 <figcaption>-Taylor Swift performs during The Eras Tour at Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City.&nbsp;The ticketing fiasco before the tour has prompted lawmakers across the country to consider new laws on live event ticketing </figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/kevinhardy/">KEVIN HARDY</a><a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a><h2>More than a dozen states considered bills following the Eras Tour problems</h2>There’s no question what motivated state Rep. Kelly Moller to push for changes in Minnesota law on concert ticket sales.“Really, it was the Taylor Swift debacle for me,” she said.A self-professed Swiftie, the Democrat found herself among millions of other Americans unable to buy tickets last year to Swift’s Eras Tour.She preregistered for tickets, but never received a code to buy them. And on the day sales went live online, she sat by as friends with codes got bumped out of the ticket queue for no apparent reason.&nbsp;Then Ticketmaster’s website crashed.The ordeal convinced her that the concert ticket industry warrants more government oversight.“I do think a lot of that is better served at the federal level, but that said, there are things we can do at the state level,” she said.<a target="_blank" href="https://www.house.mn.gov/members/profile/news/15511/36550">Moller introduced a bill this year</a>&nbsp;that would force ticket sellers to disclose the full cost of tickets, including fees, up front to buyers in her state. It also would ban speculative ticketing — a practice in which resale companies sell tickets they don’t yet own.The bill stalled, but Moller expects it to be reconsidered next year. It is part of a wave of legislation considered in more than a dozen states this year following the unprecedented disaster in the run-up to Swift’s Eras Tour,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/17/business/taylor-swift-eras-tour-two-billion/index.html#:~:text=That%20comes%20to%20%242.2%20billion,at%20New%20York%20University%20Steinhardt.">which is on pace to be the highest-grossing tour in history</a>.Swift and her legions of fans were&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://apnews.com/article/entertainment-music-taylor-swift-af5d58d2a8c6def368ded1bd2ddd8a6f">outraged when Ticketmaster’s website crashed</a>&nbsp;last November as it faced unprecedented demand from fans, bots and ticket resellers ahead of her tour.&nbsp;Social media blew up over the fiasco, and news organizations published story after story. It sparked bipartisan legislative proposals in Congress, though no bill has become law yet.That’s led state legislatures to step in: Lawmakers of both parties across the country introduced new bills this year to regulate concert and live event ticket purchasing.It’s a rare bipartisan issue in statehouses. But lawmakers are learning how complicated — and controversial — the world of online ticketing is. In several states, legislators are caught in the middle between companies like Ticketmaster and secondary sellers such as StubHub.“There are a lot of issues that beg for a national focus, a national solution. But because of the political dynamics in Washington, D.C., we haven’t gotten very many solutions. … So states believe they have to act,” said California state Sen. Bill Dodd, a Democrat.Dodd sponsored&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB478">a bill</a>&nbsp;this year that would ban so-called junk fees on tickets — fees tacked onto the base price that lawmakers view as deceptive. The proposal targets other services, including hotel and resort fees, but Dodd said concerts were a major driver. President Joe Biden called out junk fees in his State of the Union address in February and has&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/06/15/president-biden-recognizes-actions-by-private-sector-ticketing-and-travel-companies-to-eliminate-hidden-junk-fees-and-provide-millions-of-customers-with-transparent-pricing/">publicly praised</a>&nbsp;companies that have committed to transparent pricing, such as Airbnb and Live Nation, Ticketmaster’s parent company.Dodd said he isn’t hostile to ticket marketplaces such as Ticketmaster and StubHub. He uses those sites to buy tickets to concerts and basketball games. But, he said, consumers should know the full price up front. The White House estimates&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/blog/2022/10/26/the-presidents-initiative-on-junk-fees-and-related-pricing-practices/">junk fees cost Americans more than $65 billion per year.</a>“It’s outrageous,” he said, “and I think Californians are sick and tired of dishonest fees being tacked onto just anything.”Dodd’s bill, which was backed by California Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta, passed the state Senate and is pending in the Assembly. It is one of several ticketing bills considered by Golden State lawmakers this session.The state Senate unanimously passed a proposal from Republican state Sen. Scott Wilk that he said targets the “stranglehold” some companies have over sales. The bill would prohibit exclusivity clauses in contracts between a primary ticket seller such as Ticketmaster and an entertainment venue in California. Wilk said in his news release it would allow artists to work with other ticket sellers without the fear of retaliation from large ticket sellers — and ultimately reduce fees for consumers. It’s<a target="_blank" href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billStatusClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB829">&nbsp;in committee</a>&nbsp;in the Assembly.<h2>‘The states are where it’s at’</h2>Earlier this year, the Colorado legislature passed a bill that would have required sellers to fully disclose the total cost of event tickets, prohibited vendors from raising prices during the buying process and banned speculative ticketing.But Democratic Gov. Jared Polis&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y1saLSg0xKpn47feQXIcCKXAOOh6f04I/view">vetoed the act</a>&nbsp;in June, saying it could prevent competition and “risk upsetting the successful entertainment ecosystem in Colorado.”Chris Castle, an entertainment lawyer who tracks ticket legislation across the country, said the Colorado veto illustrates the industry’s ability to sway public officials.Polis referenced concerns he heard from the National Consumers League and the Consumer Federation of America. Both of those consumer advocacy groups have received funding from secondary ticket marketplaces such as StubHub, the music publication Pitchfork&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://pitchfork.com/thepitch/consumer-groups-take-money-from-ticketing-industry/">reported</a>.“It’d be easy enough to say, ‘Well, I heard from the stakeholders, and I thought these guys had the better argument.’ But he didn’t say that,” Castle said of Polis. “He starts talking about these groups. And sure enough, it turns out, they’re all on the take.”Conor Cahill, the governor’s spokesperson,&nbsp;did not answer questions about the influence of ticket marketplaces on the veto, but said Polis will apply a “consumer-first lens” to future legislation on the issue.The National Consumers League has no problem being associated with groups like StubHub, said John Breyault, the organization’s vice president of public policy, telecommunications and fraud. He said the group shares a common belief with resellers that the marketplace needs more competition, not less. But it still disagrees on some specific issues, he said.“There are problems at every level of the industry including in the secondary market that we are trying to address through both our advocacy at the state level and our advocacy at the federal level,” Breyault said.Bills in several states backed by StubHub aim to protect so-called transferability of tickets — that is, the customers’ right to pass on or resell tickets they purchase.Six states — Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, New York, Utah and Virginia — currently&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.protectticketrights.com/the-issues">protect the right of fans to transfer or sell tickets</a>. Without that right, some advocates say Ticketmaster’s terms and conditions can ban transferring tickets or require that they be resold on their own platform.StubHub makes no secret of its efforts to educate and persuade state lawmakers.“The states are really where it’s at in a lot of ways,” said Laura Dooley, the company’s head of global government relations.&nbsp;“Our industry right now is almost exclusively regulated at the state level.”This year, the company has tracked nearly 70 ticketing bills proposed across 25 states. Dooley said many state lawmakers introduce new regulations with good intentions, but don’t always understand the industry.As an example, she pointed to state efforts to ban bots — software that can bypass security measures in online ticketing systems and buy tickets in bulk faster than humans.Ticketmaster cited bots as a major cause of the Eras Tour fiasco. Bots are banned by federal law, though that regulation only has been enforced once since 2016,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2021/01/ftc-brings-first-ever-cases-under-bots-act">according to the Federal Trade Commission</a>. Dooley said StubHub isn’t opposed to state bot bans, but does push legislators to consider enforcement measures in crafting their bills. That’s because regulators need cooperation from the industry and access to ticketing software to monitor for bots, Dooley said.Dooley contends some lawmakers’ proposed solutions don’t target root causes, including the unique way live event tickets are sold, generally through exclusive deals with one retail platform.“When you have millions and millions of people wanting to buy a product and they’re being asked to buy that product at the same time on the same day through an exclusive retail provider — in this case Ticketmaster and in many cases Ticketmaster — that system is going to be overloaded, right? And it’s going to be a frustrating experience,” Dooley said.Ticketmaster did not respond to multiple requests for comment for this story.Brian Hess, executive director of the nonprofit fan advocacy organization&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.sportsfans.org/">Sports Fans Coalition</a>, pointed out thatlawmakers have a variety of interests to consider: the primary ticket markets like Ticketmaster, the artists, the consumer, and secondary markets like StubHub.“Ticketing fights are far more contentious than anyone anticipates,” he said. “Each side of the market likes to blame the other side, and consumers are stuck in the middle.”The Sports Fans Coalition is in part funded by secondary marketplaces like StubHub and lobbies on ticket legislation across the country.Hess said federal regulators should not have allowed&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/25/the-live-nation-and-ticketmaster-monopoly-of-live-entertainment.html">the 2010 merger</a>&nbsp;of Live Nation, an event promoter and venue operator, with Ticketmaster, a ticket provider.“They are the monopoly in the industry,” he said. “They were the ones that botched Taylor Swift’s tickets, and they’re the ones that continue to have ticket sale problems when they launch new shows.”<h2>A bipartisan focus</h2>Texas Republican state Rep. Kronda Thimesch said she saw firsthand how bots can distort the marketplace and prevent customers from purchasing tickets.That’s what she blamed for her own daughter’s unsuccessful attempts to buy Swift tickets last year.“Fans then have to resort to paying hundreds, if not thousands, over face value to resellers in order to see their favorite artist,” she said.That’s why she introduced a bill banning ticket-buying bots in Texas, which was signed into law by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott.Thimesch noted that ticket issues aren’t just a problem for Swift fans — country star Zach Bryan named his December live album&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.tennessean.com/story/entertainment/music/2022/12/28/zach-bryan-drops-live-album-all-my-homies-hate-ticketmaster/69761475007/">“All My Homies Hate Ticketmaster.”</a>&nbsp;Thimesch said she is open to exploring more ticketing legislation when the Texas legislature reconvenes.More than 1,500 miles away, Massachusetts Democratic state Sen. John Velis has a similar outlook. He’s interested in diving deep into the world of ticketing. But he’s starting off small.“I think the art, if you will, of legislating is you kind of go little by little,” he said. “I think ticket pricing is a great and very logical place to start.”Velis introduced a bill that would require upfront transparent ticket pricing and ban “dynamic pricing,” a practice in which sellers adjust prices based on demand. While he’s interested in eventually exploring ride shares or other services, his legislation is so far focused on concert and live event tickets, he said.Before the Eras Tour mess, Velis said he got interested in the issue after hearing constituents and co-workers complain about exorbitant fees on live event tickets. Tickets advertised for $100 can sometimes end up costing double that once all the fees are tacked on, he said.“I just thought to myself, ‘That is so incredibly wrong,’” he said. “If someone wants to spend their hard-earned money at $10,000 a ticket to go see Taylor Swift or Jay-Z or the Boston Celtics, giddy up. But I just want that consumer to know going into that initial transaction that they’re going to be spending $10,000.”Velis said his bill should receive a hearing soon in the state Senate.Jurisdictional bounds are likely to prove complicated, he acknowledged. After all, consumers often buy tickets for events in other states. But he said his bill is solely aimed at protecting consumers — a notion he says is hard to oppose.“In my experience, this is without a doubt a bipartisan issue,” he said. “I’ve experienced nobody raising a concern from a partisan politics standpoint.”<a target="_blank" href="https://stateline.org/">Stateline</a>&nbsp;is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions:&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="mailto:info@stateline.org">info@stateline.org</a>. Follow Stateline on&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://facebook.com/statelinenewsroom">Facebook</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/stateline_news">Twitter</a>.

Seeing ‘Red’ after Taylor Swift debacle, states weigh concert ticket rules

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/author/madysonfitzgerald/">MADYSON FITZGERALD</a>

Select U.S. restaurants have begun serving laboratory-grown chicken, spurring long wait times for reservations by diners curious to taste it.

In June, the U.S. Department of Agriculture gave final approval for a few California-based companies to begin selling lab-produced chicken across the country.

While it may be years before lab-grown meat is available at grocery stores, several states are tightening rules on labeling the new food, which is produced by growing cells&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://sentientmedia.org/lab-grown-meat/">acquired</a>&nbsp;from living animals into muscle tissue.

Consumers interested in sustainable foods that avoid the slaughter of animals are driving the growing industry. But, pushed by the cattle and poultry industries, more states are defining what can be sold to consumers as “meat” and are requiring prominent labels on products cultured in labs.

Under a USDA agreement,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/upside-foods-granted-usda-label-approval-for-cultivated-meat-and-moves-one-step-closer-to-commercialization-301851062.html">UPSIDE Foods</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.goodmeat.co/all-news/good-meat-receives-first-ever-usda-label-approval-for-cultivated-meat">GOOD Meat</a>, as well as the latter’s manufacturing partner JOINN Biologics, will sell their products with the label “cell-cultivated chicken,” while the department develops further labeling rules.

Some states are imposing their own additional requirements.

Texas passed the most recent&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/pdf/SB00664F.pdf#navpanes=0">bill</a>, signed into law by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott in May. Starting Sept. 1, cultivated products in Texas must include the term “cell-cultured,” “lab-grown” or similar wording on packaging near the name of the product, in type at least the same size as the text around it.

The Texas Farm Bureau, an advocacy group of farmers and ranchers, had listed the bill as one of its legislative&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://texasfarmbureau.org/advocacy/priority-issues/">priorities</a>&nbsp;this year.

In 2018, Missouri became&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://agriculture.mo.gov/animals/meat.php">the first state</a>&nbsp;to pass&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=265.494&amp;bid=35134&amp;hl=">legislation</a>&nbsp;requiring different labeling for traditional meat versus products not derived from livestock or poultry.

Such products marketed in Missouri as meat without the words “plant-based,” “veggie,” “lab-grown,” “lab-created” or a similar phrase before or after the product’s name may be referred to a county prosecutor and the attorney general for potential violations, according to a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://agriculture.mo.gov/animals/pdf/missouri-meat-advertising-guidance.pdf">memorandum</a>&nbsp;from the state. The products also must state that they are “made from plants,” “grown in a lab” or a comparable disclosure.

Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming enacted similar legislation the following year.

In 2020, Oklahoma enacted a law giving state officials the authority to enforce meat labeling practices.

This year, Iowa considered a bill to prohibit lab-grown proteins in public schools, but it didn’t pass. A Michigan labeling measure remains in committee.

Kentucky’s 2019&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/recorddocuments/bill/19RS/hb311/bill.pdf">law</a>&nbsp;deems a food misbranded if it is labeled as meat but contains cultured animal tissue.

The cattle industry in Kentucky is extremely important to the economy, said state Rep. Michael Meredith, a Republican who sponsored the measure. People are interested in knowing about the origin and makeup of their food now more than ever before, he said, and legislators wanted to ensure labels are clear.

“I think the public is very skeptical of the product,” Meredith said. “I have talked with people — and I come from a fairly rural area — and folks are just appalled, and it’s not even funny.”

He added, “I think it’s going be really, really hard to push something like this in rural America as a market.”

But the cell-cultured meat industry has made significant strides in recent years. As of 2022, the global number of cultivated meat companies rose to 156, with headquarters in 26 countries, according to the Good Food Institute’s State of the Industry&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://gfi.org/resource/cultivated-meat-eggs-and-dairy-state-of-the-industry-report/">report</a>. The nonprofit, which advocates in favor of protein alternatives and prefers the term “cultivated” meat, found that all-time investments in the industry had reached $2.8 billion globally last year.

The institute argues that U.S. state legislatures are taking steps to undermine the market through “label censorship,” which it calls&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://gfi.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/GFI_fact-sheet_Label-Censorship-Overview_2022.pdf">unconstitutional and unnecessary</a>.

“It’s always been our position that state label censorship through legislative efforts were kind of a ‘solution in search of a problem,’” said Laura Braden, associate director of regulatory affairs and an attorney at the Good Food Institute. “Consumer choice rather than label censorship should determine winners and losers in the marketplace.”

Still, legislators in states such as Wyoming, where the law requires labels on lab-grown meat to include “containing cell cultured product” or similar wording, say they want labels clearly understood by the public.

“It never hurts to have our Department of Agriculture doing this work alongside the USDA,” Wyoming Republican state Sen. Brian Boner said. “We’re just going to have a more robust system where folks will know exactly what they’re purchasing when it comes to meat products.”

The Missouri law prompted a lawsuit arguing the state made “a brazen attempt to stifle the growing grocery category of plant-based meats,” according to a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.aclu-mo.org/en/news/lawsuit-raises-stakes-food-fight-over-term-meat">statement</a>&nbsp;from the ACLU of Missouri, which is part of the lawsuit. Including the Animal Legal Defense Fund, the Good Food Institute and Tofurky, a plant-based protein company, a coalition of organizations challenged the law for violating the First Amendment.

“I don’t think this was about consumer confusion,” said Amanda Howell, a managing attorney at Animal Legal Defense Fund. “I don’t think this is about ensuring clear and non-misleading labels. I think this was about taking First Amendment rights away from companies and making them call themselves things that you know would be unintelligible to consumers. And if a consumer can’t tell what a product is, they’re not going to buy it.”

Howell said states are acting now because they sense the growing market possibilities.

“These are very animal agriculture-heavy states, their GDP relies on those animal producers, and they feel beholden to their constituents to pass these laws designed to attack plant and cell-cultured meats.”

Mike Badger, executive director of the American Pastured Poultry Producers Association, said poultry producers have long been expecting the approval of cell-cultivated chicken.

The association represents independent farms that market directly to consumers, unlike poultry giants like Tyson Foods, which has been&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.tysonfoods.com/news/news-releases/2018/1/tyson-foods-invests-cultured-meat-stake-memphis-meats">investing</a>&nbsp;in lab-grown meat companies for a few years. While the traditional poultry farm community isn’t overly concerned about the possibility of competition, Badger said, there are still ethical concerns for consumers choosing cell-cultivated chicken.

“I think the really big question here is this: What’s driving the demand to create this new lab-grown protein?” Badger asked. “Is it only the fact that people think it’s more ethical than having a living chicken that dies for your table? And if that’s the case, how are the ethics of all the other stuff coming into it?”

Backers of cultivated meat argue it is better for the environment. Traditional meat is one of the top contributors to the average U.S. household’s carbon footprint, according to the latest&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter02.pdf">report</a>&nbsp;from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In 2019, a sizable portion of the Earth’s greenhouse gas emissions came from the global agriculture industry.

A 2021&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8367411/">article</a>&nbsp;by university researchers in India published in the Journal of Animal Science and Technology suggests lab-grown meat could fulfill the increasing demand for meat using fewer natural resources.

But Badger cited an April&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.04.21.537778v1.full">preprint</a>&nbsp;by researchers at the University of California, Davis that found lab-grown meat’s environmental impact could be higher than retail beef based on current production methods.

“It’s very early in the whole process,” Badger said, “and there’s a lot of questions to be sorted out.”

This article first appeared in&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://stateline.org/2023/08/31/was-that-chicken-cutlet-grown-in-a-lab-these-states-want-you-to-know/">Stateline</a>,&nbsp;a sister&nbsp;site of the Nebraska Examiner in the States Newsroom network.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1687363360861.png" alt="A prepared dish of Good Meat's cultivated chicken is shown at the Eat Just office in Alameda, Calif., Wednesday, June 14, 2023. The Agriculture Department issued final approvals Wednesday, June 21 to California firms Upside Foods and Good Meat to sell the products, known as “lab grown” or “cultivated” meat. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)" />
 <figcaption>A prepared dish of Good Meat's cultivated chicken is shown at the Eat Just office in Alameda, Calif., Wednesday, June 14, 2023. The Agriculture Department issued final approvals Wednesday, June 21 to California firms Upside Foods and Good Meat to sell the products, known as “lab grown” or “cultivated” meat. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/author/madysonfitzgerald/">MADYSON FITZGERALD</a>Select U.S. restaurants have begun serving laboratory-grown chicken, spurring long wait times for reservations by diners curious to taste it.In June, the U.S. Department of Agriculture gave final approval for a few California-based companies to begin selling lab-produced chicken across the country.While it may be years before lab-grown meat is available at grocery stores, several states are tightening rules on labeling the new food, which is produced by growing cells&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://sentientmedia.org/lab-grown-meat/">acquired</a>&nbsp;from living animals into muscle tissue.Consumers interested in sustainable foods that avoid the slaughter of animals are driving the growing industry. But, pushed by the cattle and poultry industries, more states are defining what can be sold to consumers as “meat” and are requiring prominent labels on products cultured in labs.Under a USDA agreement,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/upside-foods-granted-usda-label-approval-for-cultivated-meat-and-moves-one-step-closer-to-commercialization-301851062.html">UPSIDE Foods</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.goodmeat.co/all-news/good-meat-receives-first-ever-usda-label-approval-for-cultivated-meat">GOOD Meat</a>, as well as the latter’s manufacturing partner JOINN Biologics, will sell their products with the label “cell-cultivated chicken,” while the department develops further labeling rules.<h2>State-level requirements</h2>Some states are imposing their own additional requirements.Texas passed the most recent&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/pdf/SB00664F.pdf#navpanes=0">bill</a>, signed into law by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott in May. Starting Sept. 1, cultivated products in Texas must include the term “cell-cultured,” “lab-grown” or similar wording on packaging near the name of the product, in type at least the same size as the text around it.The Texas Farm Bureau, an advocacy group of farmers and ranchers, had listed the bill as one of its legislative&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://texasfarmbureau.org/advocacy/priority-issues/">priorities</a>&nbsp;this year.In 2018, Missouri became&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://agriculture.mo.gov/animals/meat.php">the first state</a>&nbsp;to pass&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=265.494&amp;bid=35134&amp;hl=">legislation</a>&nbsp;requiring different labeling for traditional meat versus products not derived from livestock or poultry.Such products marketed in Missouri as meat without the words “plant-based,” “veggie,” “lab-grown,” “lab-created” or a similar phrase before or after the product’s name may be referred to a county prosecutor and the attorney general for potential violations, according to a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://agriculture.mo.gov/animals/pdf/missouri-meat-advertising-guidance.pdf">memorandum</a>&nbsp;from the state. The products also must state that they are “made from plants,” “grown in a lab” or a comparable disclosure.Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota and Wyoming enacted similar legislation the following year.In 2020, Oklahoma enacted a law giving state officials the authority to enforce meat labeling practices.<h2>‘Public is very skeptical’</h2>This year, Iowa considered a bill to prohibit lab-grown proteins in public schools, but it didn’t pass. A Michigan labeling measure remains in committee.Kentucky’s 2019&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/recorddocuments/bill/19RS/hb311/bill.pdf">law</a>&nbsp;deems a food misbranded if it is labeled as meat but contains cultured animal tissue.The cattle industry in Kentucky is extremely important to the economy, said state Rep. Michael Meredith, a Republican who sponsored the measure. People are interested in knowing about the origin and makeup of their food now more than ever before, he said, and legislators wanted to ensure labels are clear.“I think the public is very skeptical of the product,” Meredith said. “I have talked with people — and I come from a fairly rural area — and folks are just appalled, and it’s not even funny.”He added, “I think it’s going be really, really hard to push something like this in rural America as a market.”But the cell-cultured meat industry has made significant strides in recent years. As of 2022, the global number of cultivated meat companies rose to 156, with headquarters in 26 countries, according to the Good Food Institute’s State of the Industry&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://gfi.org/resource/cultivated-meat-eggs-and-dairy-state-of-the-industry-report/">report</a>. The nonprofit, which advocates in favor of protein alternatives and prefers the term “cultivated” meat, found that all-time investments in the industry had reached $2.8 billion globally last year.The institute argues that U.S. state legislatures are taking steps to undermine the market through “label censorship,” which it calls&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://gfi.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/GFI_fact-sheet_Label-Censorship-Overview_2022.pdf">unconstitutional and unnecessary</a>.“It’s always been our position that state label censorship through legislative efforts were kind of a ‘solution in search of a problem,’” said Laura Braden, associate director of regulatory affairs and an attorney at the Good Food Institute. “Consumer choice rather than label censorship should determine winners and losers in the marketplace.”<h2>‘Brazen attempt to stifle’&nbsp;</h2>Still, legislators in states such as Wyoming, where the law requires labels on lab-grown meat to include “containing cell cultured product” or similar wording, say they want labels clearly understood by the public.“It never hurts to have our Department of Agriculture doing this work alongside the USDA,” Wyoming Republican state Sen. Brian Boner said. “We’re just going to have a more robust system where folks will know exactly what they’re purchasing when it comes to meat products.”But such measures have met resistance.The Missouri law prompted a lawsuit arguing the state made “a brazen attempt to stifle the growing grocery category of plant-based meats,” according to a&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.aclu-mo.org/en/news/lawsuit-raises-stakes-food-fight-over-term-meat">statement</a>&nbsp;from the ACLU of Missouri, which is part of the lawsuit. Including the Animal Legal Defense Fund, the Good Food Institute and Tofurky, a plant-based protein company, a coalition of organizations challenged the law for violating the First Amendment.“I don’t think this was about consumer confusion,” said Amanda Howell, a managing attorney at Animal Legal Defense Fund. “I don’t think this is about ensuring clear and non-misleading labels. I think this was about taking First Amendment rights away from companies and making them call themselves things that you know would be unintelligible to consumers. And if a consumer can’t tell what a product is, they’re not going to buy it.”Howell said states are acting now because they sense the growing market possibilities.“These are very animal agriculture-heavy states, their GDP relies on those animal producers, and they feel beholden to their constituents to pass these laws designed to attack plant and cell-cultured meats.”<h2>Environmental arguments</h2>Mike Badger, executive director of the American Pastured Poultry Producers Association, said poultry producers have long been expecting the approval of cell-cultivated chicken.The association represents independent farms that market directly to consumers, unlike poultry giants like Tyson Foods, which has been&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.tysonfoods.com/news/news-releases/2018/1/tyson-foods-invests-cultured-meat-stake-memphis-meats">investing</a>&nbsp;in lab-grown meat companies for a few years. While the traditional poultry farm community isn’t overly concerned about the possibility of competition, Badger said, there are still ethical concerns for consumers choosing cell-cultivated chicken.“I think the really big question here is this: What’s driving the demand to create this new lab-grown protein?” Badger asked. “Is it only the fact that people think it’s more ethical than having a living chicken that dies for your table? And if that’s the case, how are the ethics of all the other stuff coming into it?”Backers of cultivated meat argue it is better for the environment. Traditional meat is one of the top contributors to the average U.S. household’s carbon footprint, according to the latest&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter02.pdf">report</a>&nbsp;from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In 2019, a sizable portion of the Earth’s greenhouse gas emissions came from the global agriculture industry.A 2021&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8367411/">article</a>&nbsp;by university researchers in India published in the Journal of Animal Science and Technology suggests lab-grown meat could fulfill the increasing demand for meat using fewer natural resources.But Badger cited an April&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.04.21.537778v1.full">preprint</a>&nbsp;by researchers at the University of California, Davis that found lab-grown meat’s environmental impact could be higher than retail beef based on current production methods.“It’s very early in the whole process,” Badger said, “and there’s a lot of questions to be sorted out.”This article first appeared in&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://stateline.org/2023/08/31/was-that-chicken-cutlet-grown-in-a-lab-these-states-want-you-to-know/">Stateline</a>,&nbsp;a sister&nbsp;site of the Nebraska Examiner in the States Newsroom network.

Was that chicken cutlet grown in a lab? These states want you to know.

Lincoln, September 3, 2023- The Nebraska Public Service Commission has been notified by Windstream that 911 service disrupted by an incident at a Windstream Data Center in Lincoln has been restored.

The outage affected some 911 centers in Southeast Nebraska who through their local/regionalnetwork have contracted with Windstream to provide service.

“The Commission works closely with the local 911 centers,” said Director David Sankey, State911 Department. “Any investigation will look into what led to this disruption in 911 service andwill focus on available backup systems and identifying solutions moving forward to mitigatefuture issues.”

Saturday night (9/2), the Commission indicated 911 centers in a number of counties in SoutheastNebraska may have been impacted by the disruption in service.

Information provided by Windstream indicates that around 6:30 p.m. Saturday, they madenotification of a disruption in service due to a fire at their Lincoln facility. According toWindstream 911 service in four counties, Adams, Gage, Otoe, and Saunders County was down.Other counties in the Southeast region may have experienced some disruptions in service due tothe incident. Windstream technicians worked through the night and restored service to thoseimpacted early Sunday morning.

Questions regarding the outage should be directed to Windstream at 501-580-4759

Public Service CommissionLincoln, September 3, 2023- The Nebraska Public Service Commission has been notified by Windstream that 911 service disrupted by an incident at a Windstream Data Center in Lincoln has been restored.The outage affected some 911 centers in Southeast Nebraska who through their local/regionalnetwork have contracted with Windstream to provide service.“The Commission works closely with the local 911 centers,” said Director David Sankey, State911 Department. “Any investigation will look into what led to this disruption in 911 service andwill focus on available backup systems and identifying solutions moving forward to mitigatefuture issues.”Saturday night (9/2), the Commission indicated 911 centers in a number of counties in SoutheastNebraska may have been impacted by the disruption in service.Information provided by Windstream indicates that around 6:30 p.m. Saturday, they madenotification of a disruption in service due to a fire at their Lincoln facility. According toWindstream 911 service in four counties, Adams, Gage, Otoe, and Saunders County was down.Other counties in the Southeast region may have experienced some disruptions in service due tothe incident. Windstream technicians worked through the night and restored service to thoseimpacted early Sunday morning.Questions regarding the outage should be directed to Windstream at 501-580-4759

SERVICE RESTORED TO 911 CENTERS IMPACTED BY WINDSTREAM OUTAGE

Labor Day is an opportunity to acknowledge and show appreciation for the contributions of the American workforce. Unfortunately, American workers don’t have much to celebrate this Labor Day. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1.2 million workers have been unemployed for 27 weeks or more. Some 5.2 million workers across the United States are “not in the labor force who currently want a job.” Real wages have decreased 4 percent since President Biden took office, overall prices are up over 16 percent, and interest rates are soaring. This is the reality families everywhere are faced with as the Biden administration touts “Bidenomics.” No wonder a recent CNN poll found the majority of Americans are feeling pessimistic about the economy.&nbsp;

Despite the challenges we face, there are policies we can enact to empower American workers and job creators. Whether it’s leaning in on a strong, strategic trade agenda or implementing broad-based, pro-growth tax policy, we can and should take steps to make Americans feel optimistic about our economy.&nbsp;

The Biden administration has been content to take a back seat on trade. Just look at how long it has taken for them to enter formal dispute resolution proceedings with Mexico over Mexico’s unscientific ban on U.S. biotech corn. This is one of the most clear-cut violations of the United-States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), yet it’s been nearly three years since Mexico announced their intent to ban biotech corn. USMCA contains strong mechanisms to hold our trading partners accountable, and domestic corn producers should not have had to wait this long for the administration to stand with them and demand accountability.&nbsp;

The administration’s lack of enthusiasm for trade doesn’t stop at failure to enforce existing trade agreements – they’ve completely abandoned any effort to negotiate real, enforceable trade agreements, opting instead to pursue loose “dialogues” and “frameworks.” Trade policy has the potential to lower costs for consumers, support domestic jobs, and ensure America dominates the global economy. As I say often: there’s no treading water on trade. You’re either moving ahead or you’re falling behind, and right now the United States has fallen behind.&nbsp;

There’s also much more we can do through our tax code to support workers and job creators. Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), Republicans lowered tax rates for families through a doubled standard deduction and enacted a more pro-family tax code by doubling the child tax credit. These reforms – paired with tax incentives for small businesses like full expensing of new capital expenditures and a 20% deduction for small business income – helped ensure tax reform benefited almost every American, not just favored industries like recent Biden administration tax policies have.

Tax reform works, which is why I am working hard to make the policies that benefited families and small businesses permanent. Unfortunately, Democrats refuse to come to the table to find a compromise on provisions like the child tax credit – opting instead to pursue expensive and inflationary proposals that would only make the economy more challenging for families who can least afford the additional burden. Still, the House Ways and Means Committee, of which I am a member, is working on economic policies to ensure hardworking Americans can keep more of their pay – and foster growth and innovation across our economy.&nbsp;

While many workers understandably feel discouraged this Labor Day, I will keep fighting for pro-growth, pro-America tax and trade policies to get our country back on track.&nbsp;

Adrian SmithLabor Day is an opportunity to acknowledge and show appreciation for the contributions of the American workforce. Unfortunately, American workers don’t have much to celebrate this Labor Day. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1.2 million workers have been unemployed for 27 weeks or more. Some 5.2 million workers across the United States are “not in the labor force who currently want a job.” Real wages have decreased 4 percent since President Biden took office, overall prices are up over 16 percent, and interest rates are soaring. This is the reality families everywhere are faced with as the Biden administration touts “Bidenomics.” No wonder a recent CNN poll found the majority of Americans are feeling pessimistic about the economy.&nbsp;Despite the challenges we face, there are policies we can enact to empower American workers and job creators. Whether it’s leaning in on a strong, strategic trade agenda or implementing broad-based, pro-growth tax policy, we can and should take steps to make Americans feel optimistic about our economy.&nbsp;The Biden administration has been content to take a back seat on trade. Just look at how long it has taken for them to enter formal dispute resolution proceedings with Mexico over Mexico’s unscientific ban on U.S. biotech corn. This is one of the most clear-cut violations of the United-States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), yet it’s been nearly three years since Mexico announced their intent to ban biotech corn. USMCA contains strong mechanisms to hold our trading partners accountable, and domestic corn producers should not have had to wait this long for the administration to stand with them and demand accountability.&nbsp;The administration’s lack of enthusiasm for trade doesn’t stop at failure to enforce existing trade agreements – they’ve completely abandoned any effort to negotiate real, enforceable trade agreements, opting instead to pursue loose “dialogues” and “frameworks.” Trade policy has the potential to lower costs for consumers, support domestic jobs, and ensure America dominates the global economy. As I say often: there’s no treading water on trade. You’re either moving ahead or you’re falling behind, and right now the United States has fallen behind.&nbsp;There’s also much more we can do through our tax code to support workers and job creators. Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), Republicans lowered tax rates for families through a doubled standard deduction and enacted a more pro-family tax code by doubling the child tax credit. These reforms – paired with tax incentives for small businesses like full expensing of new capital expenditures and a 20% deduction for small business income – helped ensure tax reform benefited almost every American, not just favored industries like recent Biden administration tax policies have.Tax reform works, which is why I am working hard to make the policies that benefited families and small businesses permanent. Unfortunately, Democrats refuse to come to the table to find a compromise on provisions like the child tax credit – opting instead to pursue expensive and inflationary proposals that would only make the economy more challenging for families who can least afford the additional burden. Still, the House Ways and Means Committee, of which I am a member, is working on economic policies to ensure hardworking Americans can keep more of their pay – and foster growth and innovation across our economy.&nbsp;While many workers understandably feel discouraged this Labor Day, I will keep fighting for pro-growth, pro-America tax and trade policies to get our country back on track.&nbsp;

Empowering Workers and Job Creators This Labor Day

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Steve Harwell, the longtime frontman of the Grammy-nominated&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/28dcd9f7453f48388318514f52c6281a" target="_blank">pop rock band Smash Mouth</a>&nbsp;has died. He was 56.

The band’s manager, Robert Hayes, said Harwell “passed peacefully and comfortably” Monday morning surrounded by family and friends at his home in Boise, Idaho. The cause of death was acute liver failure, Hayes said in a statement.

Smash Mouth was known for hits including “All star” and “Then the morning comes.”

"Steve Harwell was a true American Original. A larger than life character who shot up into the sky like a Roman candle,” Hayes said. “Steve should be remembered for his unwavering focus and impassioned determination to reach the heights of pop stardom.”

Born in California in 1967, Harwell performed in a rap group called F.O.S. (Freedom of Speech) before forming Smash Mouth in 1994. The band released&nbsp;<a href="https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/?tab_active=default-award&amp;se=smash+mouth#search_section" target="_blank">two platinum albums</a>&nbsp;on Interscope Records, the ska-fueled 1997’s “Fush Yu Mang” and 1999’s “Astro Lounge.” The second album featured some of the band’s biggest hits, including the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grammy.com/artists/smash-mouth/15922" target="_blank">Grammy-nominated</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/?tab_active=default-award&amp;se=smash+mouth#search_section" target="_blank">platinum single “All Star,”</a>&nbsp;which appeared in the movie “Shrek” alongside their cover of the Monkees’ “I’m a Believer.”

Humor was a driving force behind Smash Mouth’s success, and at the forefront was Harwell’s playful alt-rock voice and persona. He made a cameo in 2001 comedy film “Rat Race,” and had a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eater.com/2019/4/1/18290400/guy-fieri-smash-mouth" target="_blank">well-documented friendship</a>&nbsp;with the Food Network chef and host Guy Fieri.

“His only tools were his irrepressible charm and charisma, his fearlessly reckless ambition, and his king-size cajones,” Hayes said. “Steve lived a 100% full-throttle life. Burning brightly across the universe before burning out.”

“He will be greatly missed by those who knew and loved him,” he said.

Harwell left Smash Mouth in 2021 and the band continued to tour with Zach Goode as the singer. The band&nbsp;<a href="https://www.billboard.com/music/rock/smash-mouth-singer-steve-harwell-retires-health-issues-9644066/" target="_blank">released a statement</a>&nbsp;at the time saying Harwell had been diagnosed with cardiomyopathy eight years earlier and had suffered “nonstop serious medical setbacks including heart failure as well as acute Wernicke Encephalopathy.”

Hayes had released a statement on Sunday saying Harwell was in hospice care.

Harwell will be cremated in Boise and buried in San Jose, California, alongside his mother, Hayes said.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Steve Harwell, the longtime frontman of the Grammy-nominated&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/28dcd9f7453f48388318514f52c6281a" target="_blank">pop rock band Smash Mouth</a>&nbsp;has died. He was 56.The band’s manager, Robert Hayes, said Harwell “passed peacefully and comfortably” Monday morning surrounded by family and friends at his home in Boise, Idaho. The cause of death was acute liver failure, Hayes said in a statement.Smash Mouth was known for hits including “All star” and “Then the morning comes.”"Steve Harwell was a true American Original. A larger than life character who shot up into the sky like a Roman candle,” Hayes said. “Steve should be remembered for his unwavering focus and impassioned determination to reach the heights of pop stardom.”Born in California in 1967, Harwell performed in a rap group called F.O.S. (Freedom of Speech) before forming Smash Mouth in 1994. The band released&nbsp;<a href="https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/?tab_active=default-award&amp;se=smash+mouth#search_section" target="_blank">two platinum albums</a>&nbsp;on Interscope Records, the ska-fueled 1997’s “Fush Yu Mang” and 1999’s “Astro Lounge.” The second album featured some of the band’s biggest hits, including the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.grammy.com/artists/smash-mouth/15922" target="_blank">Grammy-nominated</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/?tab_active=default-award&amp;se=smash+mouth#search_section" target="_blank">platinum single “All Star,”</a>&nbsp;which appeared in the movie “Shrek” alongside their cover of the Monkees’ “I’m a Believer.”Humor was a driving force behind Smash Mouth’s success, and at the forefront was Harwell’s playful alt-rock voice and persona. He made a cameo in 2001 comedy film “Rat Race,” and had a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.eater.com/2019/4/1/18290400/guy-fieri-smash-mouth" target="_blank">well-documented friendship</a>&nbsp;with the Food Network chef and host Guy Fieri.“His only tools were his irrepressible charm and charisma, his fearlessly reckless ambition, and his king-size cajones,” Hayes said. “Steve lived a 100% full-throttle life. Burning brightly across the universe before burning out.”“He will be greatly missed by those who knew and loved him,” he said.Harwell left Smash Mouth in 2021 and the band continued to tour with Zach Goode as the singer. The band&nbsp;<a href="https://www.billboard.com/music/rock/smash-mouth-singer-steve-harwell-retires-health-issues-9644066/" target="_blank">released a statement</a>&nbsp;at the time saying Harwell had been diagnosed with cardiomyopathy eight years earlier and had suffered “nonstop serious medical setbacks including heart failure as well as acute Wernicke Encephalopathy.”Hayes had released a statement on Sunday saying Harwell was in hospice care.Harwell will be cremated in Boise and buried in San Jose, California, alongside his mother, Hayes said.

Smash Mouth frontman Steve Harwell dies at 56

AUSTIN (AP) —A federal judge has struck down a Texas law requiring age verification and health warnings to view pornographic websites and blocked the state attorney general's office from enforcing it.

In a ruling Thursday, U.S. District Judge David Ezra agreed with claims that&nbsp;<a href="https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/pdf/HB01181F.pdf#navpanes=0">House Bill 1181</a>, which was signed into law by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott in June, violates free speech rights and is overbroad and vague.

The state attorney general's office, which is defending the law, immediately filed notice of appeal to the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

The lawsuit was filed Aug. 4 by the Free Speech Coalition, a trade association for the adult entertainment industry and a person identified as Jane Doe and described as an adult entertainer on various adult sites, including Pornhub.

Judge Ezra also said the law, which was to take effect Friday, raises privacy concerns because a permissible age verification is using a traceable government-issued identification and the government has access to and is not required to delete the data.

“People will be particularly concerned about accessing controversial speech when the state government can log and track that access,” Ezra wrote. “By verifying information through government identification, the law will allow the government to peer into the most intimate and personal aspects of people’s lives.”

Ezra said Texas has a legitimate goal of protecting children from online sexual material, but noted other measures, including blocking and filtering software, exist.

“These methods are more effective and less restrictive in terms of protecting minors from adult content,” Ezra wrote.

The judge also found the law unconstitutionally compels speech by requiring adult sites to post health warnings they dispute — that pornography is addictive, impairs mental development and increases the demand for prostitution, child exploitation and child sexual abuse images.

“The disclosures state scientific findings as a matter of fact, when in reality, they range from heavily contested to unsupported by the evidence,” Ezra wrote.

The Texas law is one of several similar laws&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/porn-age-verification-utah-8f8f4960ad1ec4afc5d59fd7d34c3b9d">passed in other states</a>, including Arkansas, Mississippi, Utah and Louisiana.

The Texas law carried fines of up to $10,000 per violation that could be raised to up to $250,000 per violation by a minor.

AUSTIN (AP) —A federal judge has struck down a Texas law requiring age verification and health warnings to view pornographic websites and blocked the state attorney general's office from enforcing it.In a ruling Thursday, U.S. District Judge David Ezra agreed with claims that&nbsp;<a href="https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/pdf/HB01181F.pdf#navpanes=0">House Bill 1181</a>, which was signed into law by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott in June, violates free speech rights and is overbroad and vague.The state attorney general's office, which is defending the law, immediately filed notice of appeal to the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans.The lawsuit was filed Aug. 4 by the Free Speech Coalition, a trade association for the adult entertainment industry and a person identified as Jane Doe and described as an adult entertainer on various adult sites, including Pornhub.Judge Ezra also said the law, which was to take effect Friday, raises privacy concerns because a permissible age verification is using a traceable government-issued identification and the government has access to and is not required to delete the data.“People will be particularly concerned about accessing controversial speech when the state government can log and track that access,” Ezra wrote. “By verifying information through government identification, the law will allow the government to peer into the most intimate and personal aspects of people’s lives.”Ezra said Texas has a legitimate goal of protecting children from online sexual material, but noted other measures, including blocking and filtering software, exist.“These methods are more effective and less restrictive in terms of protecting minors from adult content,” Ezra wrote.The judge also found the law unconstitutionally compels speech by requiring adult sites to post health warnings they dispute — that pornography is addictive, impairs mental development and increases the demand for prostitution, child exploitation and child sexual abuse images.“The disclosures state scientific findings as a matter of fact, when in reality, they range from heavily contested to unsupported by the evidence,” Ezra wrote.The Texas law is one of several similar laws&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/porn-age-verification-utah-8f8f4960ad1ec4afc5d59fd7d34c3b9d">passed in other states</a>, including Arkansas, Mississippi, Utah and Louisiana.The Texas law carried fines of up to $10,000 per violation that could be raised to up to $250,000 per violation by a minor.

Judge strikes down law requiring age verification to view porn websites

LINCOLN, NE –&nbsp;Governor Jim Pillen will lead a delegation to South Korea and Japan aimed at growing trade opportunities that will benefit Nebraska. The group will have multiple stops scheduled in both countries during the week-long visit, starting Monday, September 4. Other members of the team include Nebraska Department of Agriculture Director Sherry Vinton, ag-related businesses, and representatives from state government.

“South Korea and Japan are tremendous consumers of Nebraska agriculture products,” said Governor Pillen. “This visit will strengthen our already well-established partnerships.”

The trade mission will include visits to hydrogen facilities, engineering corporations, and meetings with South Korean and Japanese officials.

Earlier this summer, a delegation of Nebraska businesses leaders and officials went to Vietnam for Gov. Pillen’s first trade mission. The focus of the trip was threefold – agriculture, manufacturing, and increasing educational exchanges between Nebraska and Vietnam.

LINCOLN, NE –&nbsp;Governor Jim Pillen will lead a delegation to South Korea and Japan aimed at growing trade opportunities that will benefit Nebraska. The group will have multiple stops scheduled in both countries during the week-long visit, starting Monday, September 4. Other members of the team include Nebraska Department of Agriculture Director Sherry Vinton, ag-related businesses, and representatives from state government.“South Korea and Japan are tremendous consumers of Nebraska agriculture products,” said Governor Pillen. “This visit will strengthen our already well-established partnerships.”The trade mission will include visits to hydrogen facilities, engineering corporations, and meetings with South Korean and Japanese officials.Earlier this summer, a delegation of Nebraska businesses leaders and officials went to Vietnam for Gov. Pillen’s first trade mission. The focus of the trip was threefold – agriculture, manufacturing, and increasing educational exchanges between Nebraska and Vietnam.

Governor Pillen Leads Delegation on Trade Mission to South Korea and Japan

By JENNIFER SHUTT&nbsp;&nbsp; <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration is gearing up for a fall vaccination campaign that not only includes updated COVID-19 boosters, but the annual flu shot and the newly approved RSV vaccine.

“We’re going to be encouraging Americans to get their COVID-19 vaccine in addition to their annual flu shot, as well as the immunizations for RSV for people who are over the age of 60 as well as for infants,” one official said. Respiratory syncytial virus, known as RSV, usually causes mild, cold-like symptoms but can also be serious, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says.

During a roughly 24-minute call, four officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration spoke to reporters on background to discuss the plans for the fall’s vaccine campaign.

The officials declined to say how many Americans the Biden administration is targeting for updated COVID-19 shots heading into cold and flu season.

“We can’t speculate or predict where it will ultimately land. But our goal is for that number of uptake to be as high as possible,” the same official said.

The Biden administration, the official said, hopes to provide access for uninsured and underinsured people to get the booster once the updated COVID-19 vaccine is approved.

A second official said an updated COVID-19 vaccine from one pharmaceutical company shows some promise against the EG.5 variant that makes up an increasing number of new cases, though the official said there needs to be more data about the updated vaccines’ impact on the BA.2.86 variant.

“One of the manufacturers has already made it clear that when testing their vaccine against the EG.5 variant that it looks like the neutralization is robust,” the second official said. “So I think that’s a good harbinger.”

On the BA.2.86 variant, the second official said that “it’s too early to know for sure about BA.2.86 in terms of the exact data.”

“But I think we feel comfortable in saying that it’s likely that the vaccine will help protect against the severe outcomes that would occur,” the second official said. “So we’ll obviously have more data that will come in in the next few weeks. But for right now, I think we believe that the booster will be helpful against the severe outcomes that might occur.”

Once the FDA approves one or several updated COVID-19 vaccines this fall, the first official said the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices plans to meet quickly to make its recommendations for clinicians.

“Our intention, certainly as we look into mid-September, is to have the ACIP meeting and as close as possible succession to FDA action,” the first official said, adding that CDC and FDA are “joined at the hip on this.”

The first official noted that ACIP recommendations help to “guide clinicians as to … who would best benefit from COVID-19 vaccines.”

Getting the updated COVID-19 vaccine into nursing homes and long-term-care facilities will be a priority for the Biden administration, according to the first official.

“We are focused on getting older individuals their vaccines, partly because they have been a higher proportion of hospitalizations throughout the pandemic,” the first official said.

“CDC has been working very closely with the associations and the provider groups that provide vaccinations in facilities like long-term care and assisted living,” the first official said. “We’re also focusing a lot of our outreach on both the individuals who live there, the owners and operators, and the providers who work in those facilities to make sure they know when the vaccines are coming out, how to access them, how to administer them, etc.”

Once approved, the updated mRNA COVID-19 vaccines for people aged 12 and older will be fully licensed this fall, though the vaccines for people 11 and younger will still be under the emergency use authorization, according to the second official.

The protein-based COVID-19 vaccine from Novavax will also remain under the emergency use authorization framework, according to the second official.

So some of the updated vaccines may come with a cost, unlike during the pandemic when all the COVID-19 vaccines were free.

Moderna, for example, announced earlier this year that it would increase the price of its COVID-19 vaccine from $30 to $130,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/moderna-plan-hike-covid-vaccine-price-130-dose-rebuked-us-senate-hearing">leading to a bipartisan condemnation of the decision at a U.S. Senate hearing.&nbsp;</a>

Testing and treatments will also remain available during the upcoming cold and flu season, the first official said.

“What we know about treatments is that they can reduce the risk of severe illness, hospitalization and death,” the first official said. “CDCs goal is to protect against respiratory diseases this fall and winter.”

By JENNIFER SHUTT&nbsp;&nbsp; <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2023/03/30/u-s-judge-rules-insurers-dont-have-to-cover-many-free-preventive-health-services/">States Newsroom</a>WASHINGTON — The Biden administration is gearing up for a fall vaccination campaign that not only includes updated COVID-19 boosters, but the annual flu shot and the newly approved RSV vaccine.“We’re going to be encouraging Americans to get their COVID-19 vaccine in addition to their annual flu shot, as well as the immunizations for RSV for people who are over the age of 60 as well as for infants,” one official said. Respiratory syncytial virus, known as RSV, usually causes mild, cold-like symptoms but can also be serious, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says.During a roughly 24-minute call, four officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration spoke to reporters on background to discuss the plans for the fall’s vaccine campaign.The officials declined to say how many Americans the Biden administration is targeting for updated COVID-19 shots heading into cold and flu season.“We can’t speculate or predict where it will ultimately land. But our goal is for that number of uptake to be as high as possible,” the same official said.The Biden administration, the official said, hopes to provide access for uninsured and underinsured people to get the booster once the updated COVID-19 vaccine is approved.A second official said an updated COVID-19 vaccine from one pharmaceutical company shows some promise against the EG.5 variant that makes up an increasing number of new cases, though the official said there needs to be more data about the updated vaccines’ impact on the BA.2.86 variant.“One of the manufacturers has already made it clear that when testing their vaccine against the EG.5 variant that it looks like the neutralization is robust,” the second official said. “So I think that’s a good harbinger.”On the BA.2.86 variant, the second official said that “it’s too early to know for sure about BA.2.86 in terms of the exact data.”“But I think we feel comfortable in saying that it’s likely that the vaccine will help protect against the severe outcomes that would occur,” the second official said. “So we’ll obviously have more data that will come in in the next few weeks. But for right now, I think we believe that the booster will be helpful against the severe outcomes that might occur.”Once the FDA approves one or several updated COVID-19 vaccines this fall, the first official said the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices plans to meet quickly to make its recommendations for clinicians.“Our intention, certainly as we look into mid-September, is to have the ACIP meeting and as close as possible succession to FDA action,” the first official said, adding that CDC and FDA are “joined at the hip on this.”The first official noted that ACIP recommendations help to “guide clinicians as to … who would best benefit from COVID-19 vaccines.”Getting the updated COVID-19 vaccine into nursing homes and long-term-care facilities will be a priority for the Biden administration, according to the first official.“We are focused on getting older individuals their vaccines, partly because they have been a higher proportion of hospitalizations throughout the pandemic,” the first official said.“CDC has been working very closely with the associations and the provider groups that provide vaccinations in facilities like long-term care and assisted living,” the first official said. “We’re also focusing a lot of our outreach on both the individuals who live there, the owners and operators, and the providers who work in those facilities to make sure they know when the vaccines are coming out, how to access them, how to administer them, etc.”Once approved, the updated mRNA COVID-19 vaccines for people aged 12 and older will be fully licensed this fall, though the vaccines for people 11 and younger will still be under the emergency use authorization, according to the second official.The protein-based COVID-19 vaccine from Novavax will also remain under the emergency use authorization framework, according to the second official.So some of the updated vaccines may come with a cost, unlike during the pandemic when all the COVID-19 vaccines were free.Moderna, for example, announced earlier this year that it would increase the price of its COVID-19 vaccine from $30 to $130,&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/moderna-plan-hike-covid-vaccine-price-130-dose-rebuked-us-senate-hearing">leading to a bipartisan condemnation of the decision at a U.S. Senate hearing.&nbsp;</a>Testing and treatments will also remain available during the upcoming cold and flu season, the first official said.“What we know about treatments is that they can reduce the risk of severe illness, hospitalization and death,” the first official said. “CDCs goal is to protect against respiratory diseases this fall and winter.”COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths have begun to increase, according to CDC&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home">data</a>.Between Aug. 6 and Aug. 12 the number of hospital admissions increased by nearly 22% bringing the total weekly admissions to 12,600. That’s the highest it’s been since mid-April, according to CDC&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#trends_weeklyhospitaladmissions_select_00">data</a>.The number of deaths increased by slightly more than 8% during the same time frame to about 251 a week, though that still remains much lower than during the pandemic, according to CDC&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#trends_weeklydeaths_select_00">data</a>.