<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/07/16/southeast-community-college-president-board-member-push-back-on-criticism/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — The president of Southeast Community College and a member of its elected board are pushing back on criticism from 23 state legislators about the college’s proposed tax rate increase.

The senators, in a letter released last week, called on the college board to reconsider a preliminary decision to raise the college’s tax levy from 9.37 cents per $100 valuation to 11.25 cents, the maximum allowed under state statute.

That, the senators said, would raise local taxes to support SCC up to 40%, if combined with recent increases in property valuation. The senators said, that runs counter to the Legislature’s goal of reducing taxes.

While it might not result in a tax increase, because property taxes paid to community colleges are 100% refundable via a state income tax credit, the lawmakers pointed out that not all taxpayers take advantage of the credit.

Both SCC President Paul Illich and Arlyn Uhrmacher of Lincoln, the vice chair of the SCC Board, pushed back on lawmakers’ criticism in separate interviews Friday, saying that the issue is complicated and a new law impacts community colleges very differently, and that the tax rate hike was necessary to sustain the college into the future.

Illich, speaking by phone while on vacation, said SCC has kept its tax rate low in recent years but, because of the passage of a new law that will shift community colleges off the property tax rolls, the college needed to increase its “baseline” rate to avoid a steep tuition increase and a shortage of funds for programs and staff salaries.

SCC, unlike some other community colleges, had unused taxing authority, and this year is the last time the college can capture it before the transition, Illich said.

“We have a skilled workforce crisis in Nebraska, and community colleges are posed to address that. And we have to set our taxing authority appropriately,” he said.

Uhrbacher was more blunt, saying the SCC Board is adhering to a law passed by state legislators this spring that allows community colleges to raise their tax levy to the top rate prior to the state taking over funding of community colleges.

“We aren’t doing anything that was not written into that bill. We’re not trying to pull the wool over their eyes,” Uhrmacher said. “If they didn’t realize what they passed, shame on them.”

This spring, as part of Legislative Bill 243, which was aimed at reducing property taxes, state lawmakers decided to shift the funding of community colleges off property taxes and onto the state, which gets most of its revenue from sales and income taxes.

It was hailed as a structural change that would ensure a reduction in local property taxes of perhaps 5-6%, according to the Platte Institute, an Omaha-based think tank.

Next year is the last year that community colleges can levy property taxes for operating expenses. After that, state funding increases are capped at no more than 3.5% a year — so the “baseline” set this year is important, the SCC officials said.

In June, the SCC board voted 10-0, with one abstention, on a preliminary basis to raise its tax rate to the maximum. A final vote will come in September.

The preliminary vote prompted criticism from the Platte Institute, a free-market think tank that advocates for lower taxes, and then generated the critical letter from the state senators.

Norfolk Sen. Rob Dover, who led drafting of the letter, did not immediately respond Friday to a request for comment.

But the letter stated that SCC’s action “piles on taxes at a time when people cannot afford it.”

The letter stated it was disingenuous to say that while taxpayers may see a huge increase on their tax bills next year, that eventually they’ll see a tax break when funding for community colleges shifts to the state.

Illich and Uhrmacher said shifting community colleges off the property tax rolls is a big change that requires a transition and time.

SCC conducted a “needs study” to ensure that the baseline set will be enough to finance the college’s expenses into the future. The college, Illich said, has the highest number of full-time instructors among community colleges and recently inked a contract that provides a 5% increase for staff.

Plus, he said, there has been a recent push to “modernize” the three main campuses in Lincoln, Beatrice and Milford. That modernization includes a new health sciences building in Lincoln, a diesel mechanics training center in Milford and an “academic excellence” building in Beatrice.

Uhrbacher said the needs study indicated that unless the SCC board raised its tax rate, the college would be required to cut staff and programs and raise tuition.

He said the board plans to hold at least 15 meetings in its 15-county service area, beginning later this month, to explain its reasoning.

“We will listen to what people have to say,” Uhrmacher said, and then decide whether or not to change their decision.

“It might be the same decision. It might not be the same decision,” he said.

Illich said the issue is complicated. LB 234 impacted the state’s community colleges very differently, he said. Some will see automatic increases in funding via the bill; others, like SCC, were well below their taxing authority limit and needed to make adjustments so that, once state funding takes over, they can sustain their operations.

“We just landed at a spot where some had to do things differently than the others,” Illich said.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/7/1689603893192.jpeg" alt="&nbsp;Community college provide instruction in many trades, including home construction, as these students at Omaha-based Metropolitan Community College are doing. (Courtesy of Arch Icon Development)

" />
 <figcaption>&nbsp;Community college provide instruction in many trades, including home construction, as these students at Omaha-based Metropolitan Community College are doing. (Courtesy of Arch Icon Development)

</figcaption>
 </figure>By Paul Hammel<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/07/16/southeast-community-college-president-board-member-push-back-on-criticism/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — The president of Southeast Community College and a member of its elected board are pushing back on criticism from 23 state legislators about the college’s proposed tax rate increase.The senators, in a letter released last week, called on the college board to reconsider a preliminary decision to raise the college’s tax levy from 9.37 cents per $100 valuation to 11.25 cents, the maximum allowed under state statute.That, the senators said, would raise local taxes to support SCC up to 40%, if combined with recent increases in property valuation. The senators said, that runs counter to the Legislature’s goal of reducing taxes.While it might not result in a tax increase, because property taxes paid to community colleges are 100% refundable via a state income tax credit, the lawmakers pointed out that not all taxpayers take advantage of the credit.Both SCC President Paul Illich and Arlyn Uhrmacher of Lincoln, the vice chair of the SCC Board, pushed back on lawmakers’ criticism in separate interviews Friday, saying that the issue is complicated and a new law impacts community colleges very differently, and that the tax rate hike was necessary to sustain the college into the future.Illich, speaking by phone while on vacation, said SCC has kept its tax rate low in recent years but, because of the passage of a new law that will shift community colleges off the property tax rolls, the college needed to increase its “baseline” rate to avoid a steep tuition increase and a shortage of funds for programs and staff salaries.SCC, unlike some other community colleges, had unused taxing authority, and this year is the last time the college can capture it before the transition, Illich said.“We have a skilled workforce crisis in Nebraska, and community colleges are posed to address that. And we have to set our taxing authority appropriately,” he said.<h2>Not ‘pulling the wool’ over anyone</h2>Uhrbacher was more blunt, saying the SCC Board is adhering to a law passed by state legislators this spring that allows community colleges to raise their tax levy to the top rate prior to the state taking over funding of community colleges.“We aren’t doing anything that was not written into that bill. We’re not trying to pull the wool over their eyes,” Uhrmacher said. “If they didn’t realize what they passed, shame on them.”This spring, as part of Legislative Bill 243, which was aimed at reducing property taxes, state lawmakers decided to shift the funding of community colleges off property taxes and onto the state, which gets most of its revenue from sales and income taxes.It was hailed as a structural change that would ensure a reduction in local property taxes of perhaps 5-6%, according to the Platte Institute, an Omaha-based think tank.Next year is the last year that community colleges can levy property taxes for operating expenses. After that, state funding increases are capped at no more than 3.5% a year — so the “baseline” set this year is important, the SCC officials said.<h2>Approved 10-0 with one abstention</h2>In June, the SCC board voted 10-0, with one abstention, on a preliminary basis to raise its tax rate to the maximum. A final vote will come in September.The preliminary vote prompted criticism from the Platte Institute, a free-market think tank that advocates for lower taxes, and then generated the critical letter from the state senators.Norfolk Sen. Rob Dover, who led drafting of the letter, did not immediately respond Friday to a request for comment.But the letter stated that SCC’s action “piles on taxes at a time when people cannot afford it.”The letter stated it was disingenuous to say that while taxpayers may see a huge increase on their tax bills next year, that eventually they’ll see a tax break when funding for community colleges shifts to the state.Illich and Uhrmacher said shifting community colleges off the property tax rolls is a big change that requires a transition and time.SCC conducted a “needs study” to ensure that the baseline set will be enough to finance the college’s expenses into the future. The college, Illich said, has the highest number of full-time instructors among community colleges and recently inked a contract that provides a 5% increase for staff.<h2>Modernization</h2>Plus, he said, there has been a recent push to “modernize” the three main campuses in Lincoln, Beatrice and Milford. That modernization includes a new health sciences building in Lincoln, a diesel mechanics training center in Milford and an “academic excellence” building in Beatrice.Uhrbacher said the needs study indicated that unless the SCC board raised its tax rate, the college would be required to cut staff and programs and raise tuition.He said the board plans to hold at least 15 meetings in its 15-county service area, beginning later this month, to explain its reasoning.“We will listen to what people have to say,” Uhrmacher said, and then decide whether or not to change their decision.“It might be the same decision. It might not be the same decision,” he said.Illich said the issue is complicated. LB 234 impacted the state’s community colleges very differently, he said. Some will see automatic increases in funding via the bill; others, like SCC, were well below their taxing authority limit and needed to make adjustments so that, once state funding takes over, they can sustain their operations.“We just landed at a spot where some had to do things differently than the others,” Illich said.

Southeast Community College president, board member push back on criticism

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/07/17/fundraising-ramps-up-for-nebraskas-2024-senate-house-races/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

OMAHA — The next general election is more than a year away, but all five of Nebraska’s congressional incumbents and at least one challenger are raising campaign cash like it’s 2024.

Combined they raised more than $2.5 million in the second quarter.

Money could matter more in 2024 because the price of advertising could be higher because of the rare occurrence of having two Senate races simultaneously.&nbsp;

Sen. Deb Fischer’s seat is open in 2024 for a standard six-year term.&nbsp;

For the state’s second Senate seat, state law requires that an election also be held next year to determine who will finish out the final two years of Sen. Ben Sasse’s term after he resigned to lead the University of Florida. Gov. Jim Pillen appointed former Gov.&nbsp; Pete Ricketts, a fellow Republican, to the seat in January.

Nebraska also might draw added advertising attention next year because of the presidential election. That’s because the state awards two Electoral College votes to the winner of the statewide popular vote for president and a single vote for winners in the three congressional districts.

Bacon, facing competitive race, raises most

This quarter, U.S. Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., led the delegation in fundraising, collecting $717,000. He represents the Omaha-based 2nd Congressional District, the state’s most competitive.

Like most incumbents, much of Bacon’s money came from industry political action committees. The top industries backing him included investments, insurance and defense. He raised about $287,000 this quarter from individuals, federal filings show.

Bacon’s campaign listed about $862,000 in cash on hand.

Bacon’s first announced opponent, Democratic State Sen. Tony Vargas of Omaha, kicked off his campaign after the June 30 filing deadline for second-quarter fundraising. His campaign said he raised $250,000 July 5-6.

Fischer, a Republican, posted an unusually large haul, at $612,000 for the quarter. Her campaign listed $2.1 million in cash on hand, with no announced opponents for her re-election bid.&nbsp;

The last time Fischer raised that much was the second quarter of 2012, when the then-state senator won a contested GOP primary over both a current and a former state attorney general. In recent years, Senate incumbents in Nebraska have raised about $6 million per election cycle.

Fischer, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, received significant backing from the American Israeli Political Action Committee, one of the largest pro-Israel PACs.

In a statement from her campaign, Fischer thanked backers for her “strongest non-election year quarter” and credited the rise to “widespread support from people who know how effective I am.”&nbsp;

Ricketts, a Republican coming off two terms as governor and a previous bid for Senate that he lost in 2006, continued raising money like an incumbent.

His donations from individuals totaled $317,000 from April 1 through June 30. He also received $487,000 from authorized committees.

Of that $487,000, most came from two sources: About $180,000 came from Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn’s Victory Committee. Another $247,000 of it came from Ricketts’ state campaign funds.&nbsp;The senator’s filing shows more than $1 million in cash on hand.

Ricketts’ fundraising forms show support from both sides of the Republican divide over former President Donald Trump. His parents, Joe and Marlene Ricketts, have backed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Pete Ricketts has not yet taken sides in the 2024 presidential race.

Ricketts received the $3,300 maximum for both the 2024 GOP primary and general election from Trump-backer Linda McMahon, whose family owns a wrestling and entertainment company.

He also got $1,000 from former Vice President Mike Pence’s former chief of staff, Marc Short, who has criticized some of Trump’s actions on and after Jan. 6, 2021. Ricketts has described Pence as a friend from their time serving as governors.

Ricketts said last month at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln that he has been encouraged by the support he’s receiving statewide.&nbsp;

Ricketts has one announced opponent, John Glen Weaver, who lost a 2022 GOP primary bid against U.S. Rep. Mike Flood.

Weaver clarified Friday that he had not yet raised $5,000, the threshold to require a candidate to file a federal fundraising report.&nbsp;

“I am just gearing up in Q3 now,” he wrote.

Flood’s finances rebound after two elections

Flood, R-Neb., the delegation’s other newcomer, saw his fundraising bounce back after two costly elections last year. He beat former State Sen. Patty Pansing Brooks in both&nbsp; a special election and a general election.

Flood raised $309,000 in the second quarter this year. He listed $243,000 in cash on hand. His campaign is paying off $160,000 in debt from the two 2022 races.&nbsp;

He received the maximum $3,300 donations for the primary and general elections from emerging GOP donor Shawn Peed, the son of Sandhills Publishing owner Tom Peed, a major donor.

Tom Peed long backed former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, a nine-term congressman for the Lincoln area who&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2022/03/26/fortenberry-resigns-two-days-after-jury-finds-him-guilty-of-lying-to-federal-investigators/">resigned in 2022</a>&nbsp;after being convicted of three fundraising-related felonies.

Rep. Adrian Smith, representing the state’s most conservative district, the largely rural 3rd District, raised $301,000. He listed more than $1 million in cash on hand. He has no known opponents yet for 2024. In previous years, he has used much of his campaign contributions to support other GOP House candidates.

Smith, who serves on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, has the usual donations from Nebraska’s current and former business titans, including Ken Stinson, who led Kiewit Co.&nbsp;

The Nebraska Democratic Party has pledged to recruit candidates for each of the Senate and House races.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/5/1683126071138.jpg" alt="Money - Photo on File" />
 <figcaption>Money - Photo on File</figcaption>
 </figure>By Aaron Sanderford<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/07/17/fundraising-ramps-up-for-nebraskas-2024-senate-house-races/">Nebraska Examiner</a>OMAHA — The next general election is more than a year away, but all five of Nebraska’s congressional incumbents and at least one challenger are raising campaign cash like it’s 2024.Combined they raised more than $2.5 million in the second quarter.Money could matter more in 2024 because the price of advertising could be higher because of the rare occurrence of having two Senate races simultaneously.&nbsp;Sen. Deb Fischer’s seat is open in 2024 for a standard six-year term.&nbsp;For the state’s second Senate seat, state law requires that an election also be held next year to determine who will finish out the final two years of Sen. Ben Sasse’s term after he resigned to lead the University of Florida. Gov. Jim Pillen appointed former Gov.&nbsp; Pete Ricketts, a fellow Republican, to the seat in January.Nebraska also might draw added advertising attention next year because of the presidential election. That’s because the state awards two Electoral College votes to the winner of the statewide popular vote for president and a single vote for winners in the three congressional districts.<h2>Bacon, facing competitive race, raises most</h2>This quarter, U.S. Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., led the delegation in fundraising, collecting $717,000. He represents the Omaha-based 2nd Congressional District, the state’s most competitive.Like most incumbents, much of Bacon’s money came from industry political action committees. The top industries backing him included investments, insurance and defense. He raised about $287,000 this quarter from individuals, federal filings show.Bacon’s campaign listed about $862,000 in cash on hand.Bacon’s first announced opponent, Democratic State Sen. Tony Vargas of Omaha, kicked off his campaign after the June 30 filing deadline for second-quarter fundraising. His campaign said he raised $250,000 July 5-6.<h2>Fischer raising more earlier</h2>Fischer, a Republican, posted an unusually large haul, at $612,000 for the quarter. Her campaign listed $2.1 million in cash on hand, with no announced opponents for her re-election bid.&nbsp;The last time Fischer raised that much was the second quarter of 2012, when the then-state senator won a contested GOP primary over both a current and a former state attorney general. In recent years, Senate incumbents in Nebraska have raised about $6 million per election cycle.Fischer, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, received significant backing from the American Israeli Political Action Committee, one of the largest pro-Israel PACs.In a statement from her campaign, Fischer thanked backers for her “strongest non-election year quarter” and credited the rise to “widespread support from people who know how effective I am.”&nbsp;<h2>Ricketts raising like former governor</h2>Ricketts, a Republican coming off two terms as governor and a previous bid for Senate that he lost in 2006, continued raising money like an incumbent.His donations from individuals totaled $317,000 from April 1 through June 30. He also received $487,000 from authorized committees.Of that $487,000, most came from two sources: About $180,000 came from Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn’s Victory Committee. Another $247,000 of it came from Ricketts’ state campaign funds.&nbsp;The senator’s filing shows more than $1 million in cash on hand.Ricketts’ fundraising forms show support from both sides of the Republican divide over former President Donald Trump. His parents, Joe and Marlene Ricketts, have backed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. Pete Ricketts has not yet taken sides in the 2024 presidential race.Ricketts received the $3,300 maximum for both the 2024 GOP primary and general election from Trump-backer Linda McMahon, whose family owns a wrestling and entertainment company.He also got $1,000 from former Vice President Mike Pence’s former chief of staff, Marc Short, who has criticized some of Trump’s actions on and after Jan. 6, 2021. Ricketts has described Pence as a friend from their time serving as governors.Ricketts said last month at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln that he has been encouraged by the support he’s receiving statewide.&nbsp;Ricketts has one announced opponent, John Glen Weaver, who lost a 2022 GOP primary bid against U.S. Rep. Mike Flood.Weaver clarified Friday that he had not yet raised $5,000, the threshold to require a candidate to file a federal fundraising report.&nbsp;“I am just gearing up in Q3 now,” he wrote.<h2>Flood’s finances rebound after two elections</h2>Flood, R-Neb., the delegation’s other newcomer, saw his fundraising bounce back after two costly elections last year. He beat former State Sen. Patty Pansing Brooks in both&nbsp; a special election and a general election.Flood raised $309,000 in the second quarter this year. He listed $243,000 in cash on hand. His campaign is paying off $160,000 in debt from the two 2022 races.&nbsp;He received the maximum $3,300 donations for the primary and general elections from emerging GOP donor Shawn Peed, the son of Sandhills Publishing owner Tom Peed, a major donor.Tom Peed long backed former Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, a nine-term congressman for the Lincoln area who&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2022/03/26/fortenberry-resigns-two-days-after-jury-finds-him-guilty-of-lying-to-federal-investigators/">resigned in 2022</a>&nbsp;after being convicted of three fundraising-related felonies.<h2>Smith raises business bucks</h2>Rep. Adrian Smith, representing the state’s most conservative district, the largely rural 3rd District, raised $301,000. He listed more than $1 million in cash on hand. He has no known opponents yet for 2024. In previous years, he has used much of his campaign contributions to support other GOP House candidates.Smith, who serves on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, has the usual donations from Nebraska’s current and former business titans, including Ken Stinson, who led Kiewit Co.&nbsp;The Nebraska Democratic Party has pledged to recruit candidates for each of the Senate and House races.

Fundraising ramps up for Nebraska’s 2024 U.S. Senate, House races 

KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Russian President Vladimir Putin said in an interview published Sunday that Russia has a “sufficient stockpile” of cluster munitions, and warned that Russia “reserves the right to take reciprocal action” if Ukraine uses the controversial weapons.

In his first comments on the delivery of cluster munitions to Ukraine from the U.S., Putin said that Russia has not used cluster bombs in its war in Ukraine so far. The use of cluster bombs by both Russia and Ukraine has been widely documented, including by&nbsp;<a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/interactive/ap-russia-war-crimes-ukraine/">The Associated Press</a>&nbsp;and international humanitarian organizations, and cluster rounds have been found in the aftermath of Russian strikes.

“Until now, we have not done this, we have not used it, and we have not had such a need,” he said,

Rossiya TV reporter Pavel Zarubin published excerpts of the interview to his Telegram channel Sunday ahead of a scheduled broadcast Sunday night.

The Pentagon said Thursday that cluster munitions&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/cluster-bombs-ukraine-biden-russia-unexploded-ordnance-cc16c482d86b34102ffeac6ee682a524">provided by the United States</a>&nbsp;had arrived in Ukraine.

The munitions, which are bombs that open in the air and release scores of smaller bomblets, are seen by the U.S. as a way to get Kyiv critically needed ammunition to help bolster its offensive and push through Russian front lines. U.S. leaders debated&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-cluster-munition-war-7332fa86b3c52d1ea8d63f92a7d5c2cb">the thorny issue</a>&nbsp;for months, before President Joe Biden made the final decision last week.

Cluster bombs have long been criticized by humanitarian groups, and some U.S. allies, because those used in previous conflicts have had a high “dud rate,” meaning that they often leave behind unexploded bomblets that can harm civilians long after a battle has ended.

Proponents argue that Russia has already been using cluster munitions in Ukraine and that the weapons the U.S. is providing have been improved to leave behind far fewer unexploded rounds. Ukraine has promised to use them only away from densely populated areas.

The Ukrainian military said in a regular update Sunday morning that over the previous 24 hours Russia had launched two Iranian-made Shahed exploding drones, two cruise missiles and two anti-aircraft guided missiles, in addition to 40 airstrikes and 46 attacks from multiple rocket launchers.

The Ukrainian General Staff wrote that Russia continues to concentrate on offensive operations in Ukraine’s industrial east. Donetsk regional Gov. Pavlo Kyrylenko said Sunday that two residents of the region were killed on Saturday, and one other person was wounded.

Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Maliar said Sunday that fighting in eastern Ukraine had “somewhat intensified,”&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-counteroffensive-explainer-ff774fce8608b464a406ae087b1a3607">amid a slow counteroffensive</a>&nbsp;in which Ukraine has made small territorial gains.

Writing on Telegram, she said that Russia had been “actively attacking” in the direction of Kupiansk in the northeastern Kharkiv region for two consecutive days, and that Ukrainian forces were “on the defensive” in the area.

“There are fierce battles, the positions of both sides change dynamically several times a day,” she wrote.

Maliar wrote that Ukrainian troops were trying to hold on to their positions on the northern flank around the destroyed city of Bakhmut, but reported that Ukrainian forces were “advancing daily” on the southern flank. Ukraine has been trying to encircle the city since losing control of it to Russia in May.

Putin claimed that the Ukrainian counteroffensive had been futile, in another excerpt published by Zarubin.

“All attempts by the enemy to break through our defenses (...) they were unsuccessful during the entire offensive. The enemy is having no success!” Putin said.

Elsewhere in the country, two boys, aged eight and 10, were wounded when an explosive device left by Russian forces detonated in the southern region of Kherson on Sunday, according to the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office.

Regional Gov. Oleksandr Prokudin said that Russia had launched 69 shelling attacks against Kherson region. A 59-year-old man died on Saturday when attempting to disarm a round in the regional capital, also called Kherson.

Yurii Malashko, governor of the neighboring, partly occupied, Zaporizhzhia region, said Russia had attacked 13 populated areas in the region, wounding seven people in the town of Stepnohirsk.

Moscow-installed authorities in Russian-occupied Crimea on Sunday reported “a massive and prolonged” drone attack overnight targeting Sevastopol, the peninsula’s largest port, which hosts Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. According to Moscow-installed Sevastopol governor Mikhail Razvozhaev, air defense shot down all of the drones and there was no damage.

Vyacheslav Gladkov, the governor of Russia’s Belgorod region, said that a woman was killed Sunday by shelling in the town of Shebekino near the border with Ukraine.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/9/1663760963726.jpeg" alt="Image from a video released by the Russian Presidential Press Service&nbsp; via AP)" />
 <figcaption>Image from a video released by the Russian Presidential Press Service&nbsp; via AP)</figcaption>
 </figure>KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Russian President Vladimir Putin said in an interview published Sunday that Russia has a “sufficient stockpile” of cluster munitions, and warned that Russia “reserves the right to take reciprocal action” if Ukraine uses the controversial weapons.In his first comments on the delivery of cluster munitions to Ukraine from the U.S., Putin said that Russia has not used cluster bombs in its war in Ukraine so far. The use of cluster bombs by both Russia and Ukraine has been widely documented, including by&nbsp;<a href="https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/interactive/ap-russia-war-crimes-ukraine/">The Associated Press</a>&nbsp;and international humanitarian organizations, and cluster rounds have been found in the aftermath of Russian strikes.“Until now, we have not done this, we have not used it, and we have not had such a need,” he said,Rossiya TV reporter Pavel Zarubin published excerpts of the interview to his Telegram channel Sunday ahead of a scheduled broadcast Sunday night.The Pentagon said Thursday that cluster munitions&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/cluster-bombs-ukraine-biden-russia-unexploded-ordnance-cc16c482d86b34102ffeac6ee682a524">provided by the United States</a>&nbsp;had arrived in Ukraine.The munitions, which are bombs that open in the air and release scores of smaller bomblets, are seen by the U.S. as a way to get Kyiv critically needed ammunition to help bolster its offensive and push through Russian front lines. U.S. leaders debated&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-cluster-munition-war-7332fa86b3c52d1ea8d63f92a7d5c2cb">the thorny issue</a>&nbsp;for months, before President Joe Biden made the final decision last week.Cluster bombs have long been criticized by humanitarian groups, and some U.S. allies, because those used in previous conflicts have had a high “dud rate,” meaning that they often leave behind unexploded bomblets that can harm civilians long after a battle has ended.Proponents argue that Russia has already been using cluster munitions in Ukraine and that the weapons the U.S. is providing have been improved to leave behind far fewer unexploded rounds. Ukraine has promised to use them only away from densely populated areas.The Ukrainian military said in a regular update Sunday morning that over the previous 24 hours Russia had launched two Iranian-made Shahed exploding drones, two cruise missiles and two anti-aircraft guided missiles, in addition to 40 airstrikes and 46 attacks from multiple rocket launchers.The Ukrainian General Staff wrote that Russia continues to concentrate on offensive operations in Ukraine’s industrial east. Donetsk regional Gov. Pavlo Kyrylenko said Sunday that two residents of the region were killed on Saturday, and one other person was wounded.Ukrainian Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Maliar said Sunday that fighting in eastern Ukraine had “somewhat intensified,”&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-counteroffensive-explainer-ff774fce8608b464a406ae087b1a3607">amid a slow counteroffensive</a>&nbsp;in which Ukraine has made small territorial gains.Writing on Telegram, she said that Russia had been “actively attacking” in the direction of Kupiansk in the northeastern Kharkiv region for two consecutive days, and that Ukrainian forces were “on the defensive” in the area.“There are fierce battles, the positions of both sides change dynamically several times a day,” she wrote.Maliar wrote that Ukrainian troops were trying to hold on to their positions on the northern flank around the destroyed city of Bakhmut, but reported that Ukrainian forces were “advancing daily” on the southern flank. Ukraine has been trying to encircle the city since losing control of it to Russia in May.Putin claimed that the Ukrainian counteroffensive had been futile, in another excerpt published by Zarubin.“All attempts by the enemy to break through our defenses (...) they were unsuccessful during the entire offensive. The enemy is having no success!” Putin said.Elsewhere in the country, two boys, aged eight and 10, were wounded when an explosive device left by Russian forces detonated in the southern region of Kherson on Sunday, according to the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office.Regional Gov. Oleksandr Prokudin said that Russia had launched 69 shelling attacks against Kherson region. A 59-year-old man died on Saturday when attempting to disarm a round in the regional capital, also called Kherson.Yurii Malashko, governor of the neighboring, partly occupied, Zaporizhzhia region, said Russia had attacked 13 populated areas in the region, wounding seven people in the town of Stepnohirsk.Moscow-installed authorities in Russian-occupied Crimea on Sunday reported “a massive and prolonged” drone attack overnight targeting Sevastopol, the peninsula’s largest port, which hosts Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. According to Moscow-installed Sevastopol governor Mikhail Razvozhaev, air defense shot down all of the drones and there was no damage.Vyacheslav Gladkov, the governor of Russia’s Belgorod region, said that a woman was killed Sunday by shelling in the town of Shebekino near the border with Ukraine.

Putin issues threat as U.S. cluster bombs arrive in Ukraine

Tesla says its first production Cybertruck electric pickup has rolled off the assembly line, nearly two years behind the original schedule.

The company tweeted a photo on Saturday showing scores of workers in helmets and yellow vests surrounding the truck.

“First Cybertruck built at Giga Texas!” Tesla tweeted, including a cowboy hat-wearing emoji. Owner Elon Musk retweeted the post.

Musk unveiled the truck in late 2019, and Tesla had said production would start in late 2021, although the company has since cautioned that production would begin slowly and in smaller numbers than Tesla’s other vehicles.

With its wedge shape and stainless-steel body — which Tesla calls the exoskeleton — the Cybertruck looks nothing like a traditional pickup. Some analysts have panned it as a niche product that won’t have broad appeal.

Musk said in April that the company expected to deliver the first truck probably in the July-through-September quarter. He said that as with other new products, production would start slowly and then speed up.

“It takes time to get the manufacturing line going,” he said, “and this is really a very radical product. It’s not made in the way that other cars are made. So let’s see.”

The truck’s 2019 unveiling&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-news-ap-top-news-transportation-technology-ca-state-wire-technology-37812aba4d1645bca8039ad3b96bf8c5" target="_blank">veered off course</a>&nbsp;when a window that was touted as unbreakable was spider-cracked when hit by a big metal ball, which prompted an expletive from Musk.

Tesla originally said it would make three versions of the truck, ranging from about $40,000 to $70,000. Later the company removed prices from the page where customers can decide whether to plunk down $100 and place an order.

Competitors have rushed into the electric truck market, including the Ford F-150 Lightning and Rivian Automotive’s R1T. Both look like conventional pickups.

Tesla is scheduled to report second-quarter financial results on July 19.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/7/1689507399739.jpeg" alt="FILE - The Tesla Cybertruck is unveiled at Tesla’s design studio Thursday, Nov. 21, 2019, in Hawthorne, Calif. On Saturday, July 15, 2023, Tesla said its first production Cybertruck electric pickup has rolled off the assembly line in Texas, nearly two years behind the original schedule. (AP Photo/Ringo H.W. Chiu, File)" />
 <figcaption>FILE - The Tesla Cybertruck is unveiled at Tesla’s design studio Thursday, Nov. 21, 2019, in Hawthorne, Calif. On Saturday, July 15, 2023, Tesla said its first production Cybertruck electric pickup has rolled off the assembly line in Texas, nearly two years behind the original schedule. (AP Photo/Ringo H.W. Chiu, File)</figcaption>
 </figure>BY THE ASSOCIATED PRESSTesla says its first production Cybertruck electric pickup has rolled off the assembly line, nearly two years behind the original schedule.The company tweeted a photo on Saturday showing scores of workers in helmets and yellow vests surrounding the truck.“First Cybertruck built at Giga Texas!” Tesla tweeted, including a cowboy hat-wearing emoji. Owner Elon Musk retweeted the post.Musk unveiled the truck in late 2019, and Tesla had said production would start in late 2021, although the company has since cautioned that production would begin slowly and in smaller numbers than Tesla’s other vehicles.With its wedge shape and stainless-steel body — which Tesla calls the exoskeleton — the Cybertruck looks nothing like a traditional pickup. Some analysts have panned it as a niche product that won’t have broad appeal.Musk said in April that the company expected to deliver the first truck probably in the July-through-September quarter. He said that as with other new products, production would start slowly and then speed up.“It takes time to get the manufacturing line going,” he said, “and this is really a very radical product. It’s not made in the way that other cars are made. So let’s see.”The truck’s 2019 unveiling&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-news-ap-top-news-transportation-technology-ca-state-wire-technology-37812aba4d1645bca8039ad3b96bf8c5" target="_blank">veered off course</a>&nbsp;when a window that was touted as unbreakable was spider-cracked when hit by a big metal ball, which prompted an expletive from Musk.Tesla originally said it would make three versions of the truck, ranging from about $40,000 to $70,000. Later the company removed prices from the page where customers can decide whether to plunk down $100 and place an order.Competitors have rushed into the electric truck market, including the Ford F-150 Lightning and Rivian Automotive’s R1T. Both look like conventional pickups.Tesla is scheduled to report second-quarter financial results on July 19.

Tesla’s 1st electric pickup has rolled off the assembly line, company says

HAMPTON, Ga. (AP) — Authorities in Georgia hunted Saturday for a man who remained at large hours after he was suspected of gunning down three men and a woman in a suburban neighborhood south of Atlanta.

Andre Longmore, 40, is believed to be armed and dangerous, Hampton Police Chief James Turner said during a news conference. The shootings happened late Saturday morning in a subdivision in Hampton, a city of roughly 8,500 people.

Officials released few details about the killings. Turner said detectives were investigating at least four crime scenes near one another in the same neighborhood. He said Longmore is a Hampton resident, but declined to discuss a possible motive.

The suspect remained at large more than five hours after the killings, and authorities vowed to keep searching until he was in custody.

“We’ve done an exhaustive search in the general area and we’re now widening that a little bit,” Turner told reporters.

Investigators were also on the lookout for a Black GMC Acadia SUV that they believe Longmore might be driving.

Longmore doesn’t appear to have a listed phone number and The Associated Press could not immediately find a family member or attorney who could speak on his behalf.

Authorities didn’t release the victims’ names, saying they were working to notify their families.

Henry County Sheriff Reginald Scandrett said his office is offering a $10,000 reward for information that leads to Longmore’s arrest and prosecution.

He also addressed Longmore directly, saying: “Wherever you are, we will hunt you down in whatever hole you may be residing in and bring you into custody. Period.”

Located about 30 miles (48 kilometers) south of Atlanta, Hampton is home to the Atlanta Motor Speedway, Georgia’s racetrack for NASCAR events.

Law enforcement agencies throughout the Atlanta area and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation are assisting in the manhunt and investigation.

The shootings marked the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mass-shootings-list-us-killings-3561c0404a9f23a2510859174ff67847" target="_blank">31st mass killing of 2023</a>, taking the lives of at least 153 people this year, according to a database maintained by The Associated Press and USA Today in a partnership with Northeastern University.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1655290279721.png" alt="Police Lights - Stock Photo" />
 <figcaption>Police Lights - Stock Photo</figcaption>
 </figure>HAMPTON, Ga. (AP) — Authorities in Georgia hunted Saturday for a man who remained at large hours after he was suspected of gunning down three men and a woman in a suburban neighborhood south of Atlanta.Andre Longmore, 40, is believed to be armed and dangerous, Hampton Police Chief James Turner said during a news conference. The shootings happened late Saturday morning in a subdivision in Hampton, a city of roughly 8,500 people.Officials released few details about the killings. Turner said detectives were investigating at least four crime scenes near one another in the same neighborhood. He said Longmore is a Hampton resident, but declined to discuss a possible motive.The suspect remained at large more than five hours after the killings, and authorities vowed to keep searching until he was in custody.“We’ve done an exhaustive search in the general area and we’re now widening that a little bit,” Turner told reporters.Investigators were also on the lookout for a Black GMC Acadia SUV that they believe Longmore might be driving.Longmore doesn’t appear to have a listed phone number and The Associated Press could not immediately find a family member or attorney who could speak on his behalf.Authorities didn’t release the victims’ names, saying they were working to notify their families.Henry County Sheriff Reginald Scandrett said his office is offering a $10,000 reward for information that leads to Longmore’s arrest and prosecution.He also addressed Longmore directly, saying: “Wherever you are, we will hunt you down in whatever hole you may be residing in and bring you into custody. Period.”Located about 30 miles (48 kilometers) south of Atlanta, Hampton is home to the Atlanta Motor Speedway, Georgia’s racetrack for NASCAR events.Law enforcement agencies throughout the Atlanta area and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation are assisting in the manhunt and investigation.The shootings marked the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mass-shootings-list-us-killings-3561c0404a9f23a2510859174ff67847" target="_blank">31st mass killing of 2023</a>, taking the lives of at least 153 people this year, according to a database maintained by The Associated Press and USA Today in a partnership with Northeastern University.

Authorities search for man suspected of killing 4 people in Georgia

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/07/14/defense-bill-that-targets-abortion-access-trans-health-racial-equity-passes-u-s-house/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

The U.S. House on Friday approved an annual defense authorization bill loaded with GOP rollbacks of Pentagon policies on abortion and transgender health care, as well as efforts to boost racial equity.

Republican amendments targeting social policy issues turned a typically bipartisan measure preserving the nation’s military security into another front for the culture wars, similar to those that have gripped many state legislatures. The bill&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023328">passed 219-210</a>, with mostly GOP support.

Four Republicans and four Democrats crossed party lines to vote with the majority of the other party. Five members did not vote.

The four Republicans who voted against the bill are all members of the conference’s right wing: Andy Biggs and Eli Crane of Arizona, Ken Buck of Colorado and Thomas Massie of Kentucky.

The Democrats who voted yes all hail from swing or Republican districts: Donald G. Davis of North Carolina, Jared Golden of Maine, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington and Gabe Vasquez of New Mexico.

Republicans approved dozens of contentious amendments, including to block funding to reimburse service members’ travel for an abortion. The bill would also disallow military health care professionals from performing transition-related health care for transgender service members, and eliminate Pentagon positions related to diversity, equity and inclusion.

In a triumphant Friday morning news conference, members of the far-right House Freedom Caucus said their successful amendments were part of a drive to remove the Biden administration’s insertion of social policy into the Defense Department.

“We’re talking about going from crazy to normal,” Scott Perry, the Pennsylvania Republican who chairs the group, said.

“To save America, conservatives need to hold the line,” Colorado Republican Lauren Boebert said. “We need to continue to push back against the Biden administration’s woke agenda. We saw many victories yesterday doing exactly that.”

But many Democrats took to the House floor to complain that Republicans’ focus on social issues weakened the bill’s military substance by hurting recruitment and troop cohesion. The amendments sent an unwelcome message to people of color, women and LGBTQ+ people serving in the military, they said.

“They are putting culture wars over national security,” Rep. Elissa Slotkin, a Michigan Democrat, said during debate Thursday on an abortion-related amendment.

The bill had seemed likely to attract overwhelming bipartisan support before Thursday, when Republicans successfully added amendments on abortion and more, prompting Democratic leaders to declare they would not support the package.

It is highly unlikely the bill will pass the Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate with the divisive social policy measures attached.

The defense bill, which Congress has passed annually for more than six decades, sets policy and authorizes funding levels for the Defense Department.

The fiscal 2024 bill would authorize $886.3 billion for defense programs, including a 5.2% pay raise for service members and an increase to housing allowances, and make other national security policy updates that the House Armed Services Committee nearly unanimously approved on a bipartisan 58-1 vote last month.

Support across the aisle, including from the many lawmakers with military installations in their districts, has been a hallmark of the annual defense authorization bill.

In the previous three years, the legislation received votes from at least 295 House members. The last time it passed the House with only one party’s support was 2019, when all Republicans voted against it in a House controlled by Democrats.

President Joe Biden’s administration strongly supported the bill as it passed out of committee, according to a July 10&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/H.R.-2670-NDAA.pdf">statement of administration policy</a>&nbsp;from the White House.

After lawmakers added several noncontroversial amendments Wednesday and early Thursday, key Democrats, including Armed Services Committee ranking member Adam Smith of Washington, said they were poised to support the bill, predicting that more than 300 colleagues of both parties would join them.

But Smith — who wound up voting against the defense measure — warned on Wednesday he might oppose it if Republicans attached some “extreme right-wing” amendments they were proposing.

Thursday, Smith said the base bill had demonstrated a commitment to national defense and to service members.

But “that bill no longer exists,” he said.

“What was once an example of compromise and functioning government has become an ode to bigotry and ignorance,” Smith said in a statement.

The House rejected other controversial amendments, including several meant to reduce military aid to Ukraine in that country’s war with Russia.

Tom Cole, an Oklahoma Republican who chairs the powerful House Rules Committee, noted before debate on the most contentious amendments began Thursday that he opposed some of the amendments Democrats objected to and predicted they would not pass, leaving “95% of the bill … exactly what came out of the House Armed Serviced Committee.”

He urged critics to focus on the national defense core of the bill.

“We’re gonna have all the theatrics and all the flailing of arms – that’s part of the process, too,” Cole said. “But at the end of the day, almost all this bill is supported by the majority of both sides of the aisle.”

The House Freedom Caucus extracted major gains from House Speaker Kevin McCarthy at the beginning of this Congress and said Friday they would continue to use that leverage after their success with the Pentagon bill.

Boebert and U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican, credited Alabama Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/swelling-crowd-top-military-nominees-blocked-us-senate-vote-tuberville">ongoing blockade of Defense Department nominees</a>&nbsp;over the Pentagon’s abortion policy for inspiring the House members.

“I do not believe we would have achieved the Republican unity in the House, but for the courage of Senator Tuberville,” Gaetz said.

The House&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023300?Page=3">adopted, 221-213</a>, an amendment from Texas Republican Ronny Jackson that would block funding for a Defense Department policy to reimburse service members for travel expenses related to seeking an abortion.

“This illegal, Biden-endorsed policy has no place in our military,” Jackson said. “Taxpayer money provided to DOD is intended to provide for our national defense and our national security, not to promote and support the Biden administration’s radical and immoral pro-abortion agenda.”

Jackson called the policy an effort to sidestep the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last year in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that removed the federal right to an abortion. The ruling allowed states to set their abortion policies, spurring many led by Republicans to enact severe restrictions on the procedure.

Since the Dobbs decision and subsequent state restrictions, active military members serving in states with strict abortion restrictions must travel to seek reproductive services. The Defense Department policy was meant to help address that.

Jackson’s amendment would make it more difficult for some service members to get an abortion, Texas Democrat Veronica Escobar said.

“My colleagues want to ensure that the enlisted women of the United States military and their family members who live in Republican states where abortion has been banned are forced to carry a pregnancy to term even in the case of rape and incest,” she said.

Two Republicans, Pennsylvania’s Brian Fitzpatrick and California’s John Duarte, voted against the amendment. Henry Cuellar, an anti-abortion Democrat from Texas, voted in favor. Six members did not vote.

Nearly along party lines, the House also approved amendments from Republicans Matt Rosendale of Montana and Ralph Norman of South Carolina to block funding for health care for transgender service members.

Both made it clear that they thought transgender people should not serve in the military.

“The question that must be asked is whether having trans individuals makes the United States a more lethal force and whether it helps recruit the best and most effective talent for the United States military,” Rosendale said. “And the answer to that is a clear and resounding no.”

“If you don’t know if you’re a man or a woman, you shouldn’t be going to war,” Norman said.

“The ignorance contained in these comments is really breathtaking,” Smith said of Rosendale.

“No matter how capable, no matter how qualified you are, we’re going to make it impossible for you to serve, primarily because of the colossal ignorance that a lot of people have about what transgender means,” he said.

Trans people have served in the military “for years,” said Sara Jacobs, a California Democrat with a trans brother.

“It’s mind boggling that we would want to deter and discriminate against a group of people who have proven their patriotism and deep commitment to our country,” Jacobs said. “We’re facing steep military recruitment and retention challenges. This amendment will worsen this crisis by pushing transgender service members out of the military. And that’s because gender-affirming care is necessary and medically backed.”

<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023301?Page=3">Both</a>&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023302?Page=3">votes</a>&nbsp;were again nearly party line, with the exceptions of Duarte voting with Democrats and Cuellar with Republicans. Seven members didn’t vote on the Rosendale amendment and eight didn’t vote on the Norman amendment.

The House also adopted an amendment from Boebert that would prohibit the Department of Defense Education Activity, a school system for children of service members in the United States and 11 foreign countries, from keeping in its libraries pornography or books that “espouse radical gender ideology.”

All Republicans present&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023314?Page=2">voted in favor</a>, as did Cuellar and Davis.

Norman offered an amendment to eliminate any positions in the Pentagon or service branches that promote diversity, equity and inclusion, a trend in the private workforce to hire and retain employees of diverse racial, gender and sexual orientation backgrounds.

The measure was adopted&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023312?Page=2">214-213</a>. All Democrats present and Republicans Fitzpatrick, Don Bacon of Nebraska, Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon and Michael R. Turner of Ohio voted against.

Texas Republican Chip Roy authored another amendment to ensure the Pentagon does not create any such position. That measure was&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023308?Page=3">adopted 217-212</a>, with Chavez-DeRemer and Fitzpatrick joining all Democrats in voting no.

Roy also brought an amendment to ban Department of Defense Education Activity schools from teaching certain curricula on race in the U.S., including that founding documents were racist.

Nine Democrats — Cuellar, Davis, Jared Golden of Maine, Willy Nickel of North Carolina, Chris Pappas of New Hampshire, Gluesenkamp Perez and Kim Schrier of Washington and Jake Auchincloss and Seth Moulton of Massachusetts — joined all Republicans in favor of the amendment. Democrat Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania voted present.

The chamber rejected an amendment from Virginia Republican Bob Good to block any funding to implement the recommendations of a commission Congress created in 2020 to propose new names for military bases named after Confederate figures.

The amendment&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023316">failed 177-253</a>, with 41 Republicans crossing party lines to vote with every Democrat present.

“These monuments are supposed to reflect our values,” Smith said. “This is not a value we should be reflecting. And oh, by the way, this is why we still need diversity, equity and inclusion programs, to try to educate people on these very fundamental facts that they ought to know.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/6/1686594265729.jpg" alt="Stock Photo" />
 <figcaption>Stock Photo</figcaption>
 </figure>By Jacob Fischler<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/07/14/defense-bill-that-targets-abortion-access-trans-health-racial-equity-passes-u-s-house/">Nebraska Examiner</a>The U.S. House on Friday approved an annual defense authorization bill loaded with GOP rollbacks of Pentagon policies on abortion and transgender health care, as well as efforts to boost racial equity.Republican amendments targeting social policy issues turned a typically bipartisan measure preserving the nation’s military security into another front for the culture wars, similar to those that have gripped many state legislatures. The bill&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023328">passed 219-210</a>, with mostly GOP support.Four Republicans and four Democrats crossed party lines to vote with the majority of the other party. Five members did not vote.The four Republicans who voted against the bill are all members of the conference’s right wing: Andy Biggs and Eli Crane of Arizona, Ken Buck of Colorado and Thomas Massie of Kentucky.The Democrats who voted yes all hail from swing or Republican districts: Donald G. Davis of North Carolina, Jared Golden of Maine, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington and Gabe Vasquez of New Mexico.Republicans approved dozens of contentious amendments, including to block funding to reimburse service members’ travel for an abortion. The bill would also disallow military health care professionals from performing transition-related health care for transgender service members, and eliminate Pentagon positions related to diversity, equity and inclusion.In a triumphant Friday morning news conference, members of the far-right House Freedom Caucus said their successful amendments were part of a drive to remove the Biden administration’s insertion of social policy into the Defense Department.“We’re talking about going from crazy to normal,” Scott Perry, the Pennsylvania Republican who chairs the group, said.“To save America, conservatives need to hold the line,” Colorado Republican Lauren Boebert said. “We need to continue to push back against the Biden administration’s woke agenda. We saw many victories yesterday doing exactly that.”But many Democrats took to the House floor to complain that Republicans’ focus on social issues weakened the bill’s military substance by hurting recruitment and troop cohesion. The amendments sent an unwelcome message to people of color, women and LGBTQ+ people serving in the military, they said.“They are putting culture wars over national security,” Rep. Elissa Slotkin, a Michigan Democrat, said during debate Thursday on an abortion-related amendment.The bill had seemed likely to attract overwhelming bipartisan support before Thursday, when Republicans successfully added amendments on abortion and more, prompting Democratic leaders to declare they would not support the package.It is highly unlikely the bill will pass the Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate with the divisive social policy measures attached.The defense bill, which Congress has passed annually for more than six decades, sets policy and authorizes funding levels for the Defense Department.The fiscal 2024 bill would authorize $886.3 billion for defense programs, including a 5.2% pay raise for service members and an increase to housing allowances, and make other national security policy updates that the House Armed Services Committee nearly unanimously approved on a bipartisan 58-1 vote last month.<h2>Bipartisan background</h2>Support across the aisle, including from the many lawmakers with military installations in their districts, has been a hallmark of the annual defense authorization bill.In the previous three years, the legislation received votes from at least 295 House members. The last time it passed the House with only one party’s support was 2019, when all Republicans voted against it in a House controlled by Democrats.President Joe Biden’s administration strongly supported the bill as it passed out of committee, according to a July 10&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/H.R.-2670-NDAA.pdf">statement of administration policy</a>&nbsp;from the White House.After lawmakers added several noncontroversial amendments Wednesday and early Thursday, key Democrats, including Armed Services Committee ranking member Adam Smith of Washington, said they were poised to support the bill, predicting that more than 300 colleagues of both parties would join them.But Smith — who wound up voting against the defense measure — warned on Wednesday he might oppose it if Republicans attached some “extreme right-wing” amendments they were proposing.Thursday, Smith said the base bill had demonstrated a commitment to national defense and to service members.But “that bill no longer exists,” he said.“What was once an example of compromise and functioning government has become an ode to bigotry and ignorance,” Smith said in a statement.<h2>‘All the theatrics’</h2>The House rejected other controversial amendments, including several meant to reduce military aid to Ukraine in that country’s war with Russia.Tom Cole, an Oklahoma Republican who chairs the powerful House Rules Committee, noted before debate on the most contentious amendments began Thursday that he opposed some of the amendments Democrats objected to and predicted they would not pass, leaving “95% of the bill … exactly what came out of the House Armed Serviced Committee.”He urged critics to focus on the national defense core of the bill.“We’re gonna have all the theatrics and all the flailing of arms – that’s part of the process, too,” Cole said. “But at the end of the day, almost all this bill is supported by the majority of both sides of the aisle.”The House Freedom Caucus extracted major gains from House Speaker Kevin McCarthy at the beginning of this Congress and said Friday they would continue to use that leverage after their success with the Pentagon bill.Boebert and U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican, credited Alabama Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/swelling-crowd-top-military-nominees-blocked-us-senate-vote-tuberville">ongoing blockade of Defense Department nominees</a>&nbsp;over the Pentagon’s abortion policy for inspiring the House members.“I do not believe we would have achieved the Republican unity in the House, but for the courage of Senator Tuberville,” Gaetz said.<h2>DOD abortion policy</h2>The House&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023300?Page=3">adopted, 221-213</a>, an amendment from Texas Republican Ronny Jackson that would block funding for a Defense Department policy to reimburse service members for travel expenses related to seeking an abortion.“This illegal, Biden-endorsed policy has no place in our military,” Jackson said. “Taxpayer money provided to DOD is intended to provide for our national defense and our national security, not to promote and support the Biden administration’s radical and immoral pro-abortion agenda.”Jackson called the policy an effort to sidestep the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last year in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that removed the federal right to an abortion. The ruling allowed states to set their abortion policies, spurring many led by Republicans to enact severe restrictions on the procedure.Since the Dobbs decision and subsequent state restrictions, active military members serving in states with strict abortion restrictions must travel to seek reproductive services. The Defense Department policy was meant to help address that.Jackson’s amendment would make it more difficult for some service members to get an abortion, Texas Democrat Veronica Escobar said.“My colleagues want to ensure that the enlisted women of the United States military and their family members who live in Republican states where abortion has been banned are forced to carry a pregnancy to term even in the case of rape and incest,” she said.Two Republicans, Pennsylvania’s Brian Fitzpatrick and California’s John Duarte, voted against the amendment. Henry Cuellar, an anti-abortion Democrat from Texas, voted in favor. Six members did not vote.<h2>Trans health care</h2>Nearly along party lines, the House also approved amendments from Republicans Matt Rosendale of Montana and Ralph Norman of South Carolina to block funding for health care for transgender service members.Both made it clear that they thought transgender people should not serve in the military.“The question that must be asked is whether having trans individuals makes the United States a more lethal force and whether it helps recruit the best and most effective talent for the United States military,” Rosendale said. “And the answer to that is a clear and resounding no.”“If you don’t know if you’re a man or a woman, you shouldn’t be going to war,” Norman said.Democrats objected to both.“The ignorance contained in these comments is really breathtaking,” Smith said of Rosendale.“No matter how capable, no matter how qualified you are, we’re going to make it impossible for you to serve, primarily because of the colossal ignorance that a lot of people have about what transgender means,” he said.Trans people have served in the military “for years,” said Sara Jacobs, a California Democrat with a trans brother.“It’s mind boggling that we would want to deter and discriminate against a group of people who have proven their patriotism and deep commitment to our country,” Jacobs said. “We’re facing steep military recruitment and retention challenges. This amendment will worsen this crisis by pushing transgender service members out of the military. And that’s because gender-affirming care is necessary and medically backed.”<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023301?Page=3">Both</a>&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023302?Page=3">votes</a>&nbsp;were again nearly party line, with the exceptions of Duarte voting with Democrats and Cuellar with Republicans. Seven members didn’t vote on the Rosendale amendment and eight didn’t vote on the Norman amendment.The House also adopted an amendment from Boebert that would prohibit the Department of Defense Education Activity, a school system for children of service members in the United States and 11 foreign countries, from keeping in its libraries pornography or books that “espouse radical gender ideology.”All Republicans present&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023314?Page=2">voted in favor</a>, as did Cuellar and Davis.<h2>Diversity, equity and inclusion</h2>Norman offered an amendment to eliminate any positions in the Pentagon or service branches that promote diversity, equity and inclusion, a trend in the private workforce to hire and retain employees of diverse racial, gender and sexual orientation backgrounds.The measure was adopted&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023312?Page=2">214-213</a>. All Democrats present and Republicans Fitzpatrick, Don Bacon of Nebraska, Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon and Michael R. Turner of Ohio voted against.Texas Republican Chip Roy authored another amendment to ensure the Pentagon does not create any such position. That measure was&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023308?Page=3">adopted 217-212</a>, with Chavez-DeRemer and Fitzpatrick joining all Democrats in voting no.Roy also brought an amendment to ban Department of Defense Education Activity schools from teaching certain curricula on race in the U.S., including that founding documents were racist.Nine Democrats — Cuellar, Davis, Jared Golden of Maine, Willy Nickel of North Carolina, Chris Pappas of New Hampshire, Gluesenkamp Perez and Kim Schrier of Washington and Jake Auchincloss and Seth Moulton of Massachusetts — joined all Republicans in favor of the amendment. Democrat Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania voted present.The chamber rejected an amendment from Virginia Republican Bob Good to block any funding to implement the recommendations of a commission Congress created in 2020 to propose new names for military bases named after Confederate figures.The amendment&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2023316">failed 177-253</a>, with 41 Republicans crossing party lines to vote with every Democrat present.“These monuments are supposed to reflect our values,” Smith said. “This is not a value we should be reflecting. And oh, by the way, this is why we still need diversity, equity and inclusion programs, to try to educate people on these very fundamental facts that they ought to know.”

Defense bill that targets abortion access, trans health, racial equity passes U.S. House

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/07/13/the-future-of-ai-big-tech-acknowledges-the-need-for-regulation-but-for-whom/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

Technocrats are voicing concern about the safety of artificial intelligence. Should we let them take charge of figuring out how to regulate it?

Alarmism in online articles generates sensational news and keeps the marketing machine running. The more hype, the more clicks, the more visits, the more money. Unfortunately, online news surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) has not been spared by this trend.

Artificial intelligence refers to the ability of machines to perform tasks that would typically require human intelligence, such as learning, problem-solving and decision-making. AI is achieved using algorithms and sophisticated computer programs that can analyze data, recognize patterns and make predictions or recommendations based on that data. The most apt example of what AI can do is provide chatbots that answer questions as a natural person would.

Many have made doom-filled predictions of AI, including cheating students asking chatbots to write their essays, scammers using voice cloning to rip off grandmas by pretending to be their granddaughters, AI taking away jobs from hardworking Americans, feeding people wrong information, and creating too much economic inequality.

This bolsters the “sky is falling” media outlets that survive on clickbait fostering a public dialogue based not one well-reasoned and calm opinions but on emotional volatility. People at the highest echelons of tech are not immune from alarmism.

In June, many of the biggest household names in technology, one being Bill Gates, signed a statement stating that machine learning and artificial intelligence can be as harmful as global warming or a nuclear disaster.

During his testimony before Congress, Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI but not a signer to the statement, confidently expressed the need to regulate this technology for the betterment of society. Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, echoed this sentiment in a “Good Morning America” statement.

Their clarion call for tech leaders is that a new regulatory apparatus must be developed to ensure that such technology is developed safely and responsibly to minimize harm.

The idea that big technology companies, like OpenAI and Apple, might be in the best position to determine how AI technology should be regulated is akin to having Wall Street regulate itself. One does not have to ask a chat box if such a scenario can produce stunningly disastrous results. It is findable in history books under the 2008 Mortgage Crisis.

This is not to say there’s no place for global or national AI regulation. Such rules are essential to establish broad ethical boundaries, protect fundamental rights and prevent harmful uses of AI. But do we want those that make these products and services to be at the forefront of helping Congress make laws that control those same products and services, even if the intention is for the greater good?

The answer is and will always be always no. This is a classic case of rent-seeking, where big tech companies try to create barriers to entry for competitors by promoting regulations that they themselves can easily comply with due to their vast resources with a vested interest in maintaining their dominance. While most tech CEOs do prioritize the responsible and positive use of their technology, it is important to acknowledge that this can still be viewed as rent-seeking behavior if lawmaking is involved.

Time Magazine has already uncovered that Open AI sought to downplay the dangers of its specific technology to the European Union while proclaiming the dangers of AI generally.

In the end, it is clear that we are entering a brave new world when it comes to AI. But the real story might be &nbsp;tech leaders promising to protect us from the unintended consequences of this powerful technology they make readily available while making others pay to play. That is not hyperbole.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/9/1664289554228.jpg" alt="Keyboard - Stock photo&nbsp;" />
 <figcaption>Keyboard - Stock photo&nbsp;</figcaption>
 </figure>By Lance Pounds<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2023/07/13/the-future-of-ai-big-tech-acknowledges-the-need-for-regulation-but-for-whom/">Nebraska Examiner</a>Technocrats are voicing concern about the safety of artificial intelligence. Should we let them take charge of figuring out how to regulate it?Alarmism in online articles generates sensational news and keeps the marketing machine running. The more hype, the more clicks, the more visits, the more money. Unfortunately, online news surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) has not been spared by this trend.Artificial intelligence refers to the ability of machines to perform tasks that would typically require human intelligence, such as learning, problem-solving and decision-making. AI is achieved using algorithms and sophisticated computer programs that can analyze data, recognize patterns and make predictions or recommendations based on that data. The most apt example of what AI can do is provide chatbots that answer questions as a natural person would.Many have made doom-filled predictions of AI, including cheating students asking chatbots to write their essays, scammers using voice cloning to rip off grandmas by pretending to be their granddaughters, AI taking away jobs from hardworking Americans, feeding people wrong information, and creating too much economic inequality.This bolsters the “sky is falling” media outlets that survive on clickbait fostering a public dialogue based not one well-reasoned and calm opinions but on emotional volatility. People at the highest echelons of tech are not immune from alarmism.In June, many of the biggest household names in technology, one being Bill Gates, signed a statement stating that machine learning and artificial intelligence can be as harmful as global warming or a nuclear disaster.During his testimony before Congress, Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI but not a signer to the statement, confidently expressed the need to regulate this technology for the betterment of society. Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple, echoed this sentiment in a “Good Morning America” statement.Their clarion call for tech leaders is that a new regulatory apparatus must be developed to ensure that such technology is developed safely and responsibly to minimize harm.The idea that big technology companies, like OpenAI and Apple, might be in the best position to determine how AI technology should be regulated is akin to having Wall Street regulate itself. One does not have to ask a chat box if such a scenario can produce stunningly disastrous results. It is findable in history books under the 2008 Mortgage Crisis.This is not to say there’s no place for global or national AI regulation. Such rules are essential to establish broad ethical boundaries, protect fundamental rights and prevent harmful uses of AI. But do we want those that make these products and services to be at the forefront of helping Congress make laws that control those same products and services, even if the intention is for the greater good?The answer is and will always be always no. This is a classic case of rent-seeking, where big tech companies try to create barriers to entry for competitors by promoting regulations that they themselves can easily comply with due to their vast resources with a vested interest in maintaining their dominance. While most tech CEOs do prioritize the responsible and positive use of their technology, it is important to acknowledge that this can still be viewed as rent-seeking behavior if lawmaking is involved.Time Magazine has already uncovered that Open AI sought to downplay the dangers of its specific technology to the European Union while proclaiming the dangers of AI generally.In the end, it is clear that we are entering a brave new world when it comes to AI. But the real story might be &nbsp;tech leaders promising to protect us from the unintended consequences of this powerful technology they make readily available while making others pay to play. That is not hyperbole.

The future of AI: Big Tech acknowledges the need for regulation, but for whom?

FARGO, N.D. (AP) — A gunman opened fire on police and firefighters “for no known reason” as they responded to a traffic crash in North Dakota, killing one officer and wounding two others before another officer killed him, Fargo’s police chief said Saturday.

A 25-year-old woman was also injured in the shooting Friday afternoon, but authorities did not say who shot her. The gunman did not hit any firefighters, Chief David Zibolski said, but a fire truck was struck by gunfire.

Zibolski identified the shooter as Mohamad Barakat, 37, of Fargo, but provided few details about him or the shooting, citing officials’ desire to protect the investigation. He said he was confident authorities would eventually determine the motive.

“The first thing we always want to know in a situation like this is, ‘Why?’” he said. “Why would somebody do this? What happened?”

Authorities were investigating what Zibolski called a “routine traffic accident” on a busy Fargo street when Barakat opened fire. He did not appear to have been involved in the crash police were working, Zibolski said.

Among the drivers who witnessed what happened was Chenoa Peterson. She told The Associated Press on Saturday that the shooter appeared to have ambushed the officers. The gunman was at the rear of a car in a bank parking lot near the traffic crash when he fired on an officer not more than 20 feet (6 meters) away, she said.

“He was holding up the trunk of the car with his arm, and then I see the gun come up, and he set it on his shoulder and just pointed it directly at an officer in front of him,” Peterson said. “It was like 10 shots right away.”

The police weren’t looking in the direction of the gunman when he began shooting, she said.

Peterson’s 22-year-old daughter was with her and said the suspect exchanged simultaneous gunfire with police.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2023/7/1689506226415.jpeg" alt="The intersection of 25 Street South and 9th Avenue South are seen on Saturday, July 15, 2023, in Fargo N.D., where one police officer was fatally shot and two others were wounded a day earlier. Authorities said the suspect was also killed in the shooting, and a civilian was injured. (AP Photo/Ann Arbor Miller)ASSOCICATED&nbsp; PRESS" />
 <figcaption>The intersection of 25 Street South and 9th Avenue South are seen on Saturday, July 15, 2023, in Fargo N.D., where one police officer was fatally shot and two others were wounded a day earlier. Authorities said the suspect was also killed in the shooting, and a civilian was injured. (AP Photo/Ann Arbor Miller)ASSOCICATED&nbsp; PRESS</figcaption>
 </figure>BY JACK DURAFARGO, N.D. (AP) — A gunman opened fire on police and firefighters “for no known reason” as they responded to a traffic crash in North Dakota, killing one officer and wounding two others before another officer killed him, Fargo’s police chief said Saturday.A 25-year-old woman was also injured in the shooting Friday afternoon, but authorities did not say who shot her. The gunman did not hit any firefighters, Chief David Zibolski said, but a fire truck was struck by gunfire.Zibolski identified the shooter as Mohamad Barakat, 37, of Fargo, but provided few details about him or the shooting, citing officials’ desire to protect the investigation. He said he was confident authorities would eventually determine the motive.“The first thing we always want to know in a situation like this is, ‘Why?’” he said. “Why would somebody do this? What happened?”Authorities were investigating what Zibolski called a “routine traffic accident” on a busy Fargo street when Barakat opened fire. He did not appear to have been involved in the crash police were working, Zibolski said.Among the drivers who witnessed what happened was Chenoa Peterson. She told The Associated Press on Saturday that the shooter appeared to have ambushed the officers. The gunman was at the rear of a car in a bank parking lot near the traffic crash when he fired on an officer not more than 20 feet (6 meters) away, she said.“He was holding up the trunk of the car with his arm, and then I see the gun come up, and he set it on his shoulder and just pointed it directly at an officer in front of him,” Peterson said. “It was like 10 shots right away.”The police weren’t looking in the direction of the gunman when he began shooting, she said.Peterson’s 22-year-old daughter was with her and said the suspect exchanged simultaneous gunfire with police.“I saw them firing at each other both at once,” Katriel Peterson said. “But soon as the shooter took a break the cop came walking towards him letting off round after round. There was already an officer down. And a family hiding just on the other side of the vehicle next to the shooter.”Asked if the shooting was a planned ambush of police, Zibolski told reporters: “The investigation into that is still ongoing.” He said he believed police had previously had some sort of contact with Barakat “but not anything significant.” He did not know what type of gun Barakat used.He said the state Bureau of Criminal Investigation and the FBI were investigating.Zibolski said officer Jake Wallin, a military veteran, was killed, and officers Andrew Dotas and Tyler Hawes were wounded. Officer Zach Robinson shot and killed the suspect, Zibolski said.Peterson, who said she has a bachelor’s degree in nursing, said her first instinct was to get out of her car and help. But her 22-year-old daughter, who was in the passenger seat, yelled that they had to take cover, so she drove around to the back of the bank.At the time of the shooting, Wallin, 23, of St. Michael, Minnesota, was in the field as an officer in training, having become a Fargo police officer less than three months earlier. Wallin previously served in the Minnesota Army National Guard and was deployed to Afghanistan, Zibolski said.“He served his country, came back here and wanted nothing more but to serve in a position with purpose and meaning – his exact words — and he did that,” Zibolski said.In video played at a Saturday news conference showing Wallin training with fellow recruits, he spoke of his desire to pursue a career in law enforcement.“Throughout my entire life, I’ve always wanted to work in some sort of position that had purpose behind my job and police officer is always what kind of came to me,” Wallin said. “I don’t want to be sitting in an office wondering why I’m here every day. I want to be out, I want to be doing something that I can tell myself at the end of the day I made a difference somehow.”For nine hours after the shooting, police had called it only a “critical incident.” Early details emerged from people who said they witnessed the shooting or heard gunshots. Shortly after the shooting, officers converged on a residential area about 2 miles (3.2 kilometers) away and evacuated residents of an apartment building while gathering what they said was related evidence.On Saturday, investigators were still at the apartment building, going back and forth from the third floor, where police tape hung across a hallway. Few residents were around and an FBI truck was out front.