LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — Prairie fires pushed by tinder-dry conditions and winds topping 60 mph led to evacuations in eastern Nebraska and western Iowa and destroyed homes and injured two firefighters south of Nebraska’s capital city of Lincoln, officials said.

At least two grassland fires were first reported Sunday afternoon south of Lincoln and spread quickly as winds began to pick up and push the fires north, the Lancaster County Sheriff’s Office reported.

The nearly 300 residents of Hallam, about 20 miles (32 kilometers) south of Lincoln, were ordered to evacuate their homes, and rural residents of southern Lancaster County and northern Gage County were urged to evacuate because of the fires.

Officials also asked farmers to turn on irrigation pivots or other water sources to help combat the fires, which were contained by Sunday evening, with the help of rain showers that moved into the area. Officials said three homes and several outbuildings were destroyed in Lancaster County.

Two firefighters also were injured, one seriously. Officials had not released their names or updated their medical conditions by early Monday morning.

In southwestern Lancaster County, residents made plans to move cattle and other valuables to Christopher Smith’s farm south of the fires.

“Everybody’s just trying to help out,” Smith said. Meanwhile, one farm’s owner worked to spray down the home’s back porch with water and set up sprinklers in case the fire got close.

Fires near Wisner in northeastern Nebraska and Harrison and Montgomery counties in western Iowa also forced brief evacuations, but there were no reports of injuries or homes damaged there.

Rain moving across the region Monday with a cold front from the north was expected to help lower the risk of fires in the area.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/8/1661272858055.jpg" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>By THE ASSOCIATED PRESSLINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — Prairie fires pushed by tinder-dry conditions and winds topping 60 mph led to evacuations in eastern Nebraska and western Iowa and destroyed homes and injured two firefighters south of Nebraska’s capital city of Lincoln, officials said.At least two grassland fires were first reported Sunday afternoon south of Lincoln and spread quickly as winds began to pick up and push the fires north, the Lancaster County Sheriff’s Office reported.The nearly 300 residents of Hallam, about 20 miles (32 kilometers) south of Lincoln, were ordered to evacuate their homes, and rural residents of southern Lancaster County and northern Gage County were urged to evacuate because of the fires.Officials also asked farmers to turn on irrigation pivots or other water sources to help combat the fires, which were contained by Sunday evening, with the help of rain showers that moved into the area. Officials said three homes and several outbuildings were destroyed in Lancaster County.Two firefighters also were injured, one seriously. Officials had not released their names or updated their medical conditions by early Monday morning.In southwestern Lancaster County, residents made plans to move cattle and other valuables to Christopher Smith’s farm south of the fires.“Everybody’s just trying to help out,” Smith said. Meanwhile, one farm’s owner worked to spray down the home’s back porch with water and set up sprinklers in case the fire got close.Fires near Wisner in northeastern Nebraska and Harrison and Montgomery counties in western Iowa also forced brief evacuations, but there were no reports of injuries or homes damaged there.Rain moving across the region Monday with a cold front from the north was expected to help lower the risk of fires in the area.

Fires in Nebraska, Iowa spur evacuations, destroy homes

By CINDY GONZALEZ <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/small-nebraska-towns-get-spiffed-up-with-federal-funding-boost/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — Five Nebraska towns, 
including two with only 100 or so residents apiece, have been awarded a 
total of about $2 million to develop projects ranging from sprucing up 
Main Street to building a center for seniors.

The funds announced by the Nebraska 
Department of Economic Development come from the federal U.S. Department
 of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant 
program.

Leaders in Wood River, Nebraska — 
population about 1,300 — plan to use their $433,000 award to further 
redevelop an old nursing home facility. They hope the new multi-use 
center will help draw more families to the Hall County community.

More specifically, the CDBG grant is 
to be used to build a senior center in a part of the 25,000-square-foot 
structure that had sat vacant a few years.&nbsp; A previous federal grant 
allowed the community to convert part of the same complex into a child 
care center.

That child care program served more 
than 100 kids this past summer, said Mayor Greg Cramer, and has a 
waiting list that includes families outside of town.

He said future plans call for a 
library and food bank to help fill out the property that was originally 
built in the 1970s. Cramer credits a local nonprofit and its volunteers 
for pushing a vision of growth.

“We want to keep the projects rolling,” he said.

In the city of Ainsworth, population 
about 1,600, a $433,000 award aims to improve Main Street from where it 
intersects with Nebraska Highway 20 north to the Wastewater Treatment 
Plant.

In Bartlett, which has just over 100 residents, $420,479 will go to improve Randolph Street from Fourth to Fifth Streets.

In Filley, which has 120 or so 
residents, a $315,000 is to improve infrastructure on Livingston, Gage, 
Lancaster and Johnson Streets.

Wayne, population of about 6,000, is 
to receive $433,000 to expand its trail system from residential areas to
 a major retail corridor. The project will create nearly a mile-long, 
six-foot-wide concrete trail parallel to Highway 35 on the west end of 
town. The new trail is to be accessible for users who are mobility constrained.

State economic development officials 
say the CDBG monies are intended to help communities with projects that 
enhance public health, well-being and economic vitality.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666625875511.png" alt="Wood River, Nebraska, is renovating an old nursing home in hopes of growing population and business. (Courtesy of Mayor Greg Cramer)" />
 <figcaption>Wood River, Nebraska, is renovating an old nursing home in hopes of growing population and business. (Courtesy of Mayor Greg Cramer)</figcaption>
 </figure>By CINDY GONZALEZ <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/small-nebraska-towns-get-spiffed-up-with-federal-funding-boost/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — Five Nebraska towns, 
including two with only 100 or so residents apiece, have been awarded a 
total of about $2 million to develop projects ranging from sprucing up 
Main Street to building a center for seniors.The funds announced by the Nebraska 
Department of Economic Development come from the federal U.S. Department
 of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant 
program.<h2>New purpose for old nursing home</h2>Leaders in Wood River, Nebraska — 
population about 1,300 — plan to use their $433,000 award to further 
redevelop an old nursing home facility. They hope the new multi-use 
center will help draw more families to the Hall County community.More specifically, the CDBG grant is 
to be used to build a senior center in a part of the 25,000-square-foot 
structure that had sat vacant a few years.&nbsp; A previous federal grant 
allowed the community to convert part of the same complex into a child 
care center.That child care program served more 
than 100 kids this past summer, said Mayor Greg Cramer, and has a 
waiting list that includes families outside of town.He said future plans call for a 
library and food bank to help fill out the property that was originally 
built in the 1970s. Cramer credits a local nonprofit and its volunteers 
for pushing a vision of growth.“We want to keep the projects rolling,” he said.<h2>Small town boost</h2>Other grantees:In the city of Ainsworth, population 
about 1,600, a $433,000 award aims to improve Main Street from where it 
intersects with Nebraska Highway 20 north to the Wastewater Treatment 
Plant.In Bartlett, which has just over 100 residents, $420,479 will go to improve Randolph Street from Fourth to Fifth Streets.In Filley, which has 120 or so 
residents, a $315,000 is to improve infrastructure on Livingston, Gage, 
Lancaster and Johnson Streets.Wayne, population of about 6,000, is 
to receive $433,000 to expand its trail system from residential areas to
 a major retail corridor. The project will create nearly a mile-long, 
six-foot-wide concrete trail parallel to Highway 35 on the west end of 
town. The new trail is to be accessible for users who are mobility constrained.State economic development officials 
say the CDBG monies are intended to help communities with projects that 
enhance public health, well-being and economic vitality.

Small Nebraska towns get spiffed up with federal funding boost

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — Residents in a rural area south of Lincoln were ordered to evacuate their homes Sunday afternoon because of wind-driven grass fires in the area.

Anyone living in an area between Cortland and Firth in southern Lancaster and northern Gage counties was urged to evacuate because of the fires.

The Nebraska State Patrol was helping notify residents in the area about the evacuation order.

Officials asked farmers who live in the area to turn on irrigation pivots or other water sources to help combat the blaze.

At one farm in southwestern Lancaster County, residents and neighbors were making a plan to move cattle and other valuables to Christopher Smith's farm a few miles to the south.

“Everybody’s just trying to help out,” Smith said. Meanwhile, the farm's owner was working to spray down the home’s back porch with water and set up sprinklers in case the fire got close.

<a href="https://northplattepost.com/posts/2ddcec21-000f-4ace-b19e-4250120d6629">&nbsp;&nbsp;Download The Post app for iOs or Android</a>

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666620140810.jpeg" alt="Photo: Lancaster County Sheriff's Office" />
 <figcaption>Photo: Lancaster County Sheriff's Office</figcaption>
 </figure>By THE ASSOCIATED PRESSLINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — Residents in a rural area south of Lincoln were ordered to evacuate their homes Sunday afternoon because of wind-driven grass fires in the area.Anyone living in an area between Cortland and Firth in southern Lancaster and northern Gage counties was urged to evacuate because of the fires.The Nebraska State Patrol was helping notify residents in the area about the evacuation order.Officials asked farmers who live in the area to turn on irrigation pivots or other water sources to help combat the blaze.At one farm in southwestern Lancaster County, residents and neighbors were making a plan to move cattle and other valuables to Christopher Smith's farm a few miles to the south.“Everybody’s just trying to help out,” Smith said. Meanwhile, the farm's owner was working to spray down the home’s back porch with water and set up sprinklers in case the fire got close.<a href="https://northplattepost.com/posts/2ddcec21-000f-4ace-b19e-4250120d6629">&nbsp;&nbsp;Download The Post app for iOs or Android</a><figure>
 <img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/7qM0af3RgV8QomY0VxZPdAOBVkRI8ohKInFyFmFbKjPo45_0K2Q1Tvl54WrKTOwr37u-kolbt4agB1NSVmQCGuRQw8zQyPYUQ6eMbQfBo5W9zmvCj6ivOar-LOsn28eMukshwjQeW-N3L47EH-LfJEcjgEwm2R0NE38zzxbMKatnZeGUC731JjK-" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>

Grass fires in rural area south of Lincoln prompt evacuation

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court late Friday issued an administrative stay temporarily blocking President Joe Biden's plan to cancel billions of dollars in federal student loans, throwing the program into limbo just days after people began applying for loan forgiveness.

The White House responded to the court's ruling. "The temporary order does not prevent borrowers from applying for student debt relief at&nbsp;<a href="https://studentaid.gov/">studentaid.gov</a>&nbsp;and in the section on student loan debt relief, click “Apply Now.”&nbsp;

"We encourage eligible borrowers to join the nearly 22 million Americans whose information the Department of Education already has. It also does not prevent us from reviewing these applications and preparing them for transmission to loan servicers," according to a statement from Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. "It is also important to note that the order does not reverse the trial court’s dismissal of the case, or suggest that the case has merit.&nbsp; It merely prevents debt from being discharged until the court makes a decision." "We will continue to move full speed ahead in our preparations in compliance with this order. And, the Administration will continue to fight Republican&nbsp;officials suing to block our efforts to provide relief to working families."

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued the stay while it considers a motion from Nebraska, Kansas and four other Republican-led states to block the program. The stay ordered the Biden administration not to act on the program while it considers the appeal.

It’s unclear what the decision means for the 22 million borrowers who already applied for the relief. The Biden administration had promised not to clear any debt before Oct. 23 as it battled the legal challenges, but the soonest it was expected to begin erasing debt was mid-November.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666046738612.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court late Friday issued an administrative stay temporarily blocking President Joe Biden's plan to cancel billions of dollars in federal student loans, throwing the program into limbo just days after people began applying for loan forgiveness.The White House responded to the court's ruling. "The temporary order does not prevent borrowers from applying for student debt relief at&nbsp;<a href="https://studentaid.gov/">studentaid.gov</a>&nbsp;and in the section on student loan debt relief, click “Apply Now.”&nbsp; "We encourage eligible borrowers to join the nearly 22 million Americans whose information the Department of Education already has. It also does not prevent us from reviewing these applications and preparing them for transmission to loan servicers," according to a statement from Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. "It is also important to note that the order does not reverse the trial court’s dismissal of the case, or suggest that the case has merit.&nbsp; It merely prevents debt from being discharged until the court makes a decision." "We will continue to move full speed ahead in our preparations in compliance with this order. And, the Administration will continue to fight Republican&nbsp;officials suing to block our efforts to provide relief to working families."The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued the stay while it considers a motion from Nebraska, Kansas and four other Republican-led states to block the program. The stay ordered the Biden administration not to act on the program while it considers the appeal.It’s unclear what the decision means for the 22 million borrowers who already applied for the relief. The Biden administration had promised not to clear any debt before Oct. 23 as it battled the legal challenges, but the soonest it was expected to begin erasing debt was mid-November.

White House: 22 million have applied for student loan forgiveness

WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service announced today that the 
amount individuals can contribute to their 401(k) plans in 2023 has 
increased to $22,500, up from $20,500 for 2022. The IRS today also 
issued technical guidance regarding all of the cost-of-living 
adjustments affecting dollar limitations for pension plans and other 
retirement-related items for tax year 2023 in <a href="https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-22-55.pdf">Notice 2022-55</a>PDF, posted today on IRS.gov.

The contribution limit for employees who participate in 401(k), 
403(b), most 457 plans, and the federal government's Thrift Savings Plan
 is increased to $22,500, up from $20,500.

The limit on annual contributions to an IRA increased to $6,500, up 
from $6,000. The IRA catch-up contribution limit for individuals aged 50
 and over is not subject to an annual cost-of-living adjustment and 
remains $1,000.

The catch-up contribution limit for employees aged 50 and over who 
participate in 401(k), 403(b), most 457 plans, and the federal 
government's Thrift Savings Plan is increased to $7,500, up from $6,500.
 Therefore, participants in 401(k), 403(b), most 457 plans, and the 
federal government's Thrift Savings Plan who are 50 and older can 
contribute up to $30,000, starting in 2023. The catch-up contribution 
limit for employees aged 50 and over who participate in SIMPLE plans is 
increased to $3,500, up from $3,000.

The income ranges for determining eligibility to make deductible 
contributions to traditional Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs), 
to contribute to Roth IRAs, and to claim the Saver's Credit all 
increased for 2023.

Taxpayers can deduct contributions to a traditional IRA if they meet 
certain conditions. If during the year either the taxpayer or the 
taxpayer's spouse was covered by a retirement plan at work, the 
deduction may be reduced, or phased out, until it is eliminated, 
depending on filing status and income. (If neither the taxpayer nor the 
spouse is covered by a retirement plan at work, the phase-outs of the 
deduction do not apply.) Here are the phase-out ranges for 2023:

The income phase-out range for taxpayers making contributions to
 a Roth IRA is increased to between $138,000 and $153,000 for singles 
and heads of household, up from between $129,000 and $144,000. For 
married couples filing jointly, the income phase-out range is increased 
to between $218,000 and $228,000, up from between $204,000 and $214,000.
 The phase-out range for a married individual filing a separate return 
who makes contributions to a Roth IRA is not subject to an annual 
cost-of-living adjustment and remains between $0 and $10,000.

The income limit for the Saver's Credit (also known as the Retirement
 Savings Contributions Credit) for low- and moderate-income workers is 
$73,000 for married couples filing jointly, up from $68,000; $54,750 for
 heads of household, up from $51,000; and $36,500 for singles and 
married individuals filing separately, up from $34,000.

The amount individuals can contribute to their SIMPLE retirement accounts is increased to $15,500, up from $14,000.

Details on these and other retirement-related cost-of-living adjustments for 2023 are in <a href="https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-22-55.pdf">Notice 2022-55</a>PDF, available on IRS.gov.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2020/9/1599869632873.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>IRSWASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service announced today that the 
amount individuals can contribute to their 401(k) plans in 2023 has 
increased to $22,500, up from $20,500 for 2022. The IRS today also 
issued technical guidance regarding all of the cost-of-living 
adjustments affecting dollar limitations for pension plans and other 
retirement-related items for tax year 2023 in <a href="https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-22-55.pdf">Notice 2022-55</a>PDF, posted today on IRS.gov.<h2>Highlights of changes for 2023</h2>The contribution limit for employees who participate in 401(k), 
403(b), most 457 plans, and the federal government's Thrift Savings Plan
 is increased to $22,500, up from $20,500.The limit on annual contributions to an IRA increased to $6,500, up 
from $6,000. The IRA catch-up contribution limit for individuals aged 50
 and over is not subject to an annual cost-of-living adjustment and 
remains $1,000.The catch-up contribution limit for employees aged 50 and over who 
participate in 401(k), 403(b), most 457 plans, and the federal 
government's Thrift Savings Plan is increased to $7,500, up from $6,500.
 Therefore, participants in 401(k), 403(b), most 457 plans, and the 
federal government's Thrift Savings Plan who are 50 and older can 
contribute up to $30,000, starting in 2023. The catch-up contribution 
limit for employees aged 50 and over who participate in SIMPLE plans is 
increased to $3,500, up from $3,000.The income ranges for determining eligibility to make deductible 
contributions to traditional Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs), 
to contribute to Roth IRAs, and to claim the Saver's Credit all 
increased for 2023.Taxpayers can deduct contributions to a traditional IRA if they meet 
certain conditions. If during the year either the taxpayer or the 
taxpayer's spouse was covered by a retirement plan at work, the 
deduction may be reduced, or phased out, until it is eliminated, 
depending on filing status and income. (If neither the taxpayer nor the 
spouse is covered by a retirement plan at work, the phase-outs of the 
deduction do not apply.) Here are the phase-out ranges for 2023:<ul>
 <li>For single taxpayers covered by a workplace retirement plan, the
 phase-out range is increased to between $73,000 and $83,000, up from 
between $68,000 and $78,000.</li><li>For married couples filing jointly, if the spouse making the IRA 
contribution is covered by a workplace retirement plan, the phase-out 
range is increased to between $116,000 and $136,000, up from between 
$109,000 and $129,000.</li><li>For an IRA contributor who is not covered by a workplace retirement
 plan and is married to someone who is covered, the phase-out range is 
increased to between $218,000 and $228,000, up from between $204,000 and
 $214,000.</li><li>For a married individual filing a separate return who is covered by
 a workplace retirement plan, the phase-out range is not subject to an 
annual cost-of-living adjustment and remains between $0 and $10,000.</li>
 </ul>The income phase-out range for taxpayers making contributions to
 a Roth IRA is increased to between $138,000 and $153,000 for singles 
and heads of household, up from between $129,000 and $144,000. For 
married couples filing jointly, the income phase-out range is increased 
to between $218,000 and $228,000, up from between $204,000 and $214,000.
 The phase-out range for a married individual filing a separate return 
who makes contributions to a Roth IRA is not subject to an annual 
cost-of-living adjustment and remains between $0 and $10,000.The income limit for the Saver's Credit (also known as the Retirement
 Savings Contributions Credit) for low- and moderate-income workers is 
$73,000 for married couples filing jointly, up from $68,000; $54,750 for
 heads of household, up from $51,000; and $36,500 for singles and 
married individuals filing separately, up from $34,000.The amount individuals can contribute to their SIMPLE retirement accounts is increased to $15,500, up from $14,000.Details on these and other retirement-related cost-of-living adjustments for 2023 are in <a href="https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-22-55.pdf">Notice 2022-55</a>PDF, available on IRS.gov.

401(k), IRA contribution limits increase for 2023

One of scammers' favorite tactics is impersonating a person or 
organization you know and trust. That's the premise of this new text 
message scam, which has been popping up in recent <a href="https://www.bbb.org/scamtracker/" target="_blank">BBB Scam Tracker</a> reports. This time, con artists are impersonating your bank.

You receive a text message that looks like a fraud alert from your 
bank. It claims there is some unusual activity in your account. It may 
read: "Bank Fraud Alert – Did you approve a transaction for $1,000? 
Reply YES or NO." If you reply to the text, the scammer now knows they 
have an active number – and a person to scam.

The scam doesn't end there. The scammer will call you to follow up, 
and the number will appear in the caller ID as coming from your bank. 
When you answer, the caller claims to be a bank representative who can 
help stop the fraudulent charges. To do so, you need to send money to 
yourself using Zelle or another <a href="https://www.bbb.org/article/scams/13038-how-to-avoid-digital-wallet-scams-on-paypal-venmo-and-other-services" target="_blank">digital wallet app</a>.
 The caller walks you through the process of connecting the app to your 
bank account. Then, they ask you to verify the connection by sharing the
 code your bank sent.

Don't do it! If you give the scammer your verification code, the 
scammer can set up an account with your phone number and email – but 
their bank account information. If that happens, when you send money to 
"yourself," you're actually sending money to the scammer. Disputing the 
charges will be difficult because the scammer has tricked you into 
approving the transaction. Sending money through a digital wallet app is
 like using cash, making it very hard to get your money back.

One consumer reported this experience to <a href="https://www.bbb.org/scamtracker/" target="_blank">BBB Scam Tracker</a>:
 "I received two texts stating it was the Wells Fargo Fraud Department 
wanting to know if I had made a Zelle transfer… I responded no and 
immediately got another text stating, 'Thank you, no further action is 
needed, a representative will call you from 800-869-3556.' Within a few 
minutes, I got a call from an individual stating they were with the 
Wells Fargo fraud department. The caller ID on my phone said Wells 
Fargo, and the person said they could reverse the transaction if I sign 
into my online account and open the Zelle app. I did this and the caller
 asked if I saw my name. I told him I saw my name in two places. It 
looked like I would be sending money to myself. The caller said 
everything was fine and the money would come back to my account. After 
the call ended, I got two texts stating funds for $2,500 and $1,000 
would be deposited in my Wells Fargo account. I went back into my 
account and there was no evidence of any deposits. What I did see was 
$3,500 taken out of my account and a zero account balance."

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2020/1/1579883951052.jpeg" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>BBBOne of scammers' favorite tactics is impersonating a person or 
organization you know and trust. That's the premise of this new text 
message scam, which has been popping up in recent <a href="https://www.bbb.org/scamtracker/" target="_blank">BBB Scam Tracker</a> reports. This time, con artists are impersonating your bank.<h2>How the scam works&nbsp;</h2>You receive a text message that looks like a fraud alert from your 
bank. It claims there is some unusual activity in your account. It may 
read: "Bank Fraud Alert – Did you approve a transaction for $1,000? 
Reply YES or NO." If you reply to the text, the scammer now knows they 
have an active number – and a person to scam.The scam doesn't end there. The scammer will call you to follow up, 
and the number will appear in the caller ID as coming from your bank. 
When you answer, the caller claims to be a bank representative who can 
help stop the fraudulent charges. To do so, you need to send money to 
yourself using Zelle or another <a href="https://www.bbb.org/article/scams/13038-how-to-avoid-digital-wallet-scams-on-paypal-venmo-and-other-services" target="_blank">digital wallet app</a>.
 The caller walks you through the process of connecting the app to your 
bank account. Then, they ask you to verify the connection by sharing the
 code your bank sent.Don't do it! If you give the scammer your verification code, the 
scammer can set up an account with your phone number and email – but 
their bank account information. If that happens, when you send money to 
"yourself," you're actually sending money to the scammer. Disputing the 
charges will be difficult because the scammer has tricked you into 
approving the transaction. Sending money through a digital wallet app is
 like using cash, making it very hard to get your money back.One consumer reported this experience to <a href="https://www.bbb.org/scamtracker/" target="_blank">BBB Scam Tracker</a>:
 "I received two texts stating it was the Wells Fargo Fraud Department 
wanting to know if I had made a Zelle transfer… I responded no and 
immediately got another text stating, 'Thank you, no further action is 
needed, a representative will call you from 800-869-3556.' Within a few 
minutes, I got a call from an individual stating they were with the 
Wells Fargo fraud department. The caller ID on my phone said Wells 
Fargo, and the person said they could reverse the transaction if I sign 
into my online account and open the Zelle app. I did this and the caller
 asked if I saw my name. I told him I saw my name in two places. It 
looked like I would be sending money to myself. The caller said 
everything was fine and the money would come back to my account. After 
the call ended, I got two texts stating funds for $2,500 and $1,000 
would be deposited in my Wells Fargo account. I went back into my 
account and there was no evidence of any deposits. What I did see was 
$3,500 taken out of my account and a zero account balance."<h2>How to avoid bank fraud scams</h2><ul>
 <li>Understand your bank's policies. Know that your bank will never ask you to send money to yourself. If someone tries to convince you otherwise, it's a scam. </li><li>Watch out for fake caller IDs. Scammers can <a href="https://www.bbb.org/article/news-releases/16670-a-new-kind-of-phone-scam-neighbor-spoofing" target="_blank">spoof</a>
 caller ID names and numbers to make you think you are receiving a call 
from a reputable source. If you weren't expecting to be contacted by 
your bank, it's best to avoid answering. Instead, call the number on the
 back of your ATM card to confirm that there is an issue. </li><li>Never share one-time passcodes. Scammers can use one-time passcodes from your bank or any other company&nbsp;to access your accounts and change information. Don't share them with anyone, no exceptions. </li><li>Contact your bank if you suspect a scam. If you receive an unsolicited call, text, or email that you suspect is a scam, contact your bank immediately and let them know. </li><li>Don't reply to suspicious texts. Ignore any 
instructions to reply yes or no if you receive an unsolicited, 
suspicious text message. If you reply to a scammer, they could save your
 number as "active" and target you with future scams.</li>
 </ul>

Scam: Responding to phony bank text message could cost you thousands

By DAM HEE KIM, ANJANA SASARLA and SCOTT SHACKELFORD <a href="https://theconversation.com/experts-grade-facebook-tiktok-twitter-youtube-on-readiness-to-handle-midterm-election-misinformation-191249">The Conversation</a>

The 2016 U.S. election was a wake-up call about the dangers of 
political misinformation on social media. With two more election cycles 
rife with misinformation under their belts, social media companies have 
experience identifying and countering misinformation. However, the 
nature of the threat misinformation poses to society continues to shift 
in form and targets. The big lie about the 2020 presidential election 
has become a major theme, and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/12/business/media/midterms-foreign-language-misinformation.html">immigrant communities are increasingly in the crosshairs</a> of disinformation campaigns – deliberate efforts to spread misinformation.

Social media companies have announced plans to deal with misinformation in the 2022 midterm elections, but the companies <a href="https://techpolicy.press/looking-to-the-midterms-the-state-of-platform-policies-on-u-s-political-speech/">vary in their approaches and effectiveness</a>. We asked experts on social media to grade how ready Facebook, TikTok, Twitter and YouTube are to handle the task.

Dam Hee Kim, Assistant Professor of Communication, University of Arizona

Social media are <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/">important sources of news for most Americans</a> in 2022, but they also could be a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820943878">fertile ground for spreading misinformation</a>.
 Major social media platforms announced plans for dealing with 
misinformation in the 2022 U.S. midterm elections, but experts noted 
that they are <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/23/technology/midterms-misinformation-tiktok-facebook.html">not very different from their 2020 plans</a>.

One important consideration: Users are not constrained to using just one platform. One company’s intervention may backfire and <a href="https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/twitter-flagged-donald-trumps-tweets-with-election-misinformation-they-continued-to-spread-both-on-and-off-the-platform/">promote cross-platform diffusion of misinformation</a>. Major social media platforms may need to coordinate efforts to combat misinformation.

Facebook was largely blamed for its failure to combat misinformation 
during the 2016 presidential election campaign. Although engagement – 
likes, shares and comments – with misinformation on Facebook peaked with
 160 million per month during the 2016 presidential election, the level 
in July 2018, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168019848554">60 million per month</a>, was still at high levels.

More recent evidence shows that Facebook’s approach still needs work 
when it comes to managing accounts that spread misinformation, flagging 
misinformation posts and reducing the reach of those accounts and posts.
 In April 2020, fact-checkers notified Facebook about 59 accounts that 
spread misinformation about COVID-19. As of November 2021, <a href="https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/november-2021/">31 of them were still active</a>. Also, Chinese state-run Facebook accounts have been <a href="https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/april-2022/">spreading misinformation about the war in Ukraine</a> in English to their hundreds of millions of followers.

While Twitter has generally not been treated as the biggest culprit 
of misinformation since 2016, it is unclear if its misinformation 
measures are sufficient. In fact, shares of misinformation on Twitter 
increased from about 3 million per month during the 2016 presidential 
election <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168019848554">to about 5 million per month in July 2018</a>.

This pattern seems to have continued as over 300,000 Tweets – excluding retweets – included links that were <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">flagged as false after fact checks</a>
 between April 2019 and February 2021. Fewer than 3% of these tweets 
were presented with warning labels or pop-up boxes. Among tweets that 
shared the same link to misinformation, only a minority displayed these 
warnings, suggesting that the process of putting warnings on 
misinformation is not automatic, uniform or efficient. Twitter did 
announce that it <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/23/technology/midterms-misinformation-tiktok-facebook.html">redesigned labels</a> to hinder further interactions and facilitate clicks for additional information.

As the fastest-growing social media platform, TikTok has two notable characteristics: Its predominantly young adult user base <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/">regularly consumes news on the platform</a>,
 and its short videos often come with attention-grabbing images and 
sounds. While these videos are more difficult to review than text-based 
content, they are more likely to be recalled, evoke emotion and persuade
 people.

TikTok’s approach to misinformation needs major improvements. A 
search for prominent news topics in September 2022 turned up 
user-generated videos, <a href="https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/september-2022/">20% of which included misinformation</a>,
 and videos containing misinformation were often in the first five 
results. When neutral phrases were used as search terms, for example 
“2022 elections,” TikTok’s search bar suggested more phrases that were 
charged, for example “January 6 FBI.” Also, TikTok presents reliable 
sources <a href="https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/march-2022/">alongside accounts that spread misinformation</a>.

Between April 2019 and February 2021, 170 YouTube videos were flagged
 as false by a fact-checking organization. Just over half of them were <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">presented with “learn more” information panels</a>, though without being flagged as false. YouTube seems to have added information panels mostly <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">by automatically detecting certain keywords</a> involving controversial topics like COVID-19, not necessarily after checking the content of the video for misinformation.

YouTube could recommend more content by reliable sources to mitigate 
the challenge of reviewing all uploaded videos for misinformation. One 
experiment collected the list of recommended videos after a user with an
 empty viewing history watched one video that was marked as false after 
fact checks. Of the recommended videos, 18.4% <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">were misleading or hyperpartisan</a> and three of the top 10 recommended channels had <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">a mixed or low factual reporting score</a> from <a href="https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/">Media Bias/Fact Check</a>.

Anjana Susarla, Professor of Information Systems, Michigan State University

A major concern for misinformation researchers as the 2022 midterms 
approach is the prevalence of false narratives about the 2020 election. A
 team of misinformation experts at the <a href="https://shorensteincenter.org/programs/technology-social-change/">Technology and Social Change</a> project studied a group of <a href="https://mediamanipulation.org/research/deplatforming-index-research-brief">online influencers</a> across platforms who amassed large followings from the “<a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-capitol-siege-ivanka-trump-biden-presidential-56da6a3963ee91021b4a52a0b4b00e62">big lie</a>,”
 the false claim that there was widespread election fraud in the 2020 
election. The Washington Post published an analysis on Sept. 20, 2022, 
that found that most of the 77 accounts the newspaper identified as the 
biggest spreaders of disinformation about the 2020 election <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/20/social-media-influencers-election-fraud/">were still active </a> on all four social media platforms.

Overall, I believe that none of the platforms have addressed these issues very effectively. 

Meta, Facebook’s parent company, exempts politicians from 
fact-checking rules. They also do not ban political ads, unlike Twitter 
or TikTok. Meta has not released any policies publicly about how its 
rules specifically protect against misinformation, which has left <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/05/19/facebook-midterm-misinformation-strategy/">observers questioning its readiness</a> to deal with disinformation during the midterms.

Of particular concern are politicians benefiting from microtargeting –
 targeting narrow demographics – through election misinformation, such 
as a congressional candidate <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/05/19/facebook-midterm-misinformation-strategy/">who ran an ad campaign on Facebook</a> alleging a cover-up of “ballot harvesting” during the 2020 election. Election disinformation <a href="https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/23329139/latino-voters-misinformation-2022">targeted at minority communities</a>,
 especially Hispanic and Latino communities, on messaging apps such as 
WhatsApp is another major enforcement challenge for Meta when the 
company’s content moderation resources are primarily allocated to 
English-language media.

Twitter does not allow political advertising and has made the most 
effort at reducing election-related misinformation. Twitter has 
highlighted its <a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/09/19/election-misinformation-social-media-big-lie-report">use of “prebunking</a>,” the process of <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/misinformation-desk/202108/what-is-prebunking">educating people about disinformation tactics</a>, as an effective way of reducing the spread of misinformation.

However, Twitter has also been inconsistent in enforcing its 
policies. For example, Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake asked 
her followers on Twitter if they would be <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/22/midterms-elections-social-media-civil-rights/">willing to monitor the polls</a> for cases of voter fraud, which led civil rights advocates to warn of potential intimidation at polling stations.

TikTok does not allow political advertising, which makes 
microtargeting from election-related misinformation less of a problem on
 this platform. Many researchers have highlighted <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/14/business/media/on-tiktok-election-misinformation.html">TikTok’s lack of transparency</a>,
 unlike platforms such as Twitter and Facebook that have been more 
amenable to efforts from researchers, including sharing data. TikTok’s 
stated content moderation approach has been that “questionable content” 
will not be amplified through recommendations.

However, video and audio content may be harder to moderate than 
textual content. The danger on platforms such as TikTok is that once a 
misleading video is taken down by the platform, a manipulated and 
republished version could easily circulate on the platform. Facebook, 
for example, employs AI-assisted methods to <a href="https://ai.facebook.com/blog/heres-how-were-using-ai-to-help-detect-misinformation/">detect what it calls “near-duplications</a>
 of known misinformation at scale.” TikTok has not released details of 
how it will address near-duplications of election-related 
misinformation.

Internationally, TikTok has faced immense criticism for its inability
 to tamp down election-related misinformation. TikTok accounts <a href="https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/campaigns/tiktok-german-election-2021/">impersonated prominent political figures</a> during Germany’s last national election.

YouTube’s policy is to remove “violative” narratives and terminate channels that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/20/social-media-influencers-election-fraud/">receive three strikes in a 90-day period</a>.
 While this may be effective in controlling some types of 
misinformation, YouTube has been vulnerable to fairly insidious 
election-related content, including disinformation about ballot 
trafficking. A disinformation movie titled “<a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/09/19/election-misinformation-social-media-big-lie-report">2000 mules</a>” is still circulating on the platform.

Observers have faulted YouTube for not doing enough internationally 
to address election-related misinformation. In Brazil, for example, <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/brazils-far-right-plots-its-own-january-6-insurrection/">sharing YouTube videos on the messaging app Telegram</a>
 has become a popular way to spread misinformation related to elections.
 This suggests that YouTube may be vulnerable to organized 
election-related disinformation in the U.S. as well.

Scott Shackelford, Professor of Business Law and Ethics, Indiana University

Many of the threats to American democracy have stemmed from internal 
divisions fed by inequality, injustice and racism. These fissures have 
been, from time to time, purposefully widened and deepened by foreign 
nations wishing to distract and destabilize the U.S. government. The 
advent of cyberspace has put the disinformation process into overdrive, 
both speeding the viral spread of stories across national boundaries and
 platforms and causing a proliferation in the types of traditional and 
social media willing to run with fake stories. Some social media 
networks have proved more able than others at meeting the moment. 

Despite moves to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/meta-says-removes-china-based-propaganda-operation-targeting-us-midterms-2022-09-27/">limit</a>
 the spread of Chinese propaganda on Facebook, there seems to be a 
bipartisan consensus that Facebook has not learned its lessons from the 
2016 election cycle. Indeed, it still allows political ads, including 
one from Republican congressional candidate Joe Kent <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/05/19/facebook-midterm-misinformation-strategy/">claiming “rampant voter fraud</a>” in the 2020 elections.

Though it has taken some steps toward transparency, as seen in its <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilybaker-white/2022/08/17/midterms-research-facebook-political-ads/?sh=6f2258df7974">Ad Library</a>, it has a long way to go to win back consumer confidence and uphold its <a href="https://theconversation.com/facebooks-social-responsibility-should-include-privacy-protection-94549">social responsibility</a>.

Twitter came out before other leading social media firms in banning 
political ads on its platform, though it has faced criticism for 
inconsistent enforcement. The Indiana University Observatory on Social 
Media, for example, has a tool called <a href="https://hoaxy.osome.iu.edu/#query=2022%20elections&amp;sort=mixed&amp;type=Twitter&amp;lang=">Hoaxy</a> that enables real-time searches for a wide array of disinformation.

The * for this grade lies in the concern for Twitter’s future efforts to fight disinformation <a href="https://theconversation.com/elon-musk-is-wrong-research-shows-content-rules-on-twitter-help-preserve-free-speech-from-bots-and-other-manipulation-182317">given its potential acquisition by Elon Musk</a>, who has been <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-free-speech-twitter-global-censorship/">vocal</a> about his desire to permit uninhibited speech.

The fact that TikTok does not allow political advertising on the 
surface bodes well for its ability to root out disinformation, but it 
has been apparent that its ability to do so in practice <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/14/business/media/on-tiktok-election-misinformation.html">is very limited</a>. AI-enabled deep fakes in particular are <a href="https://theconversation.com/celebrity-deepfakes-are-all-over-tiktok-heres-why-theyre-becoming-common-and-how-you-can-spot-them-187079">a growing problem on TikTok</a>, something that the other social media networks have been able to monitor to greater effect.

Its <a href="https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/our-commitment-to-election-integrity">efforts</a> at standing up an <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/17/tiktok-launches-an-in-app-u-s-midterms-elections-center-shares-plan-to-fight-misinformation/">election center</a>,
 ban deep fakes and flag disinformation are welcome but are reactive and
 coming too late, with voting already underway in some states.

Google has <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/01/tech/google-youtube-election-misinformation/index.html">announced</a>
 new steps to crack down on misinformation across its platforms, 
including YouTube, such as by highlighting local and regional 
journalism, but as we’re seeing in the “Stop the Steal” narrative from 
the <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/youtube-meta-pushing-bolsonaro-stop-050000780.html">Brazilian election</a>, so far misinformation continues to flow freely.

Dam Hee Kim&nbsp; is an Assistant Professor of Communication at the University of Arizona. Anjana Susarla is a Professor of Information Systems at Michigan State University. Scott Shackelford is a Professor of Business Law and Ethics at Indiana University.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666032519814.jpg" alt="Image courtesy of Pixabay" />
 <figcaption>Image courtesy of Pixabay</figcaption>
 </figure>By DAM HEE KIM, ANJANA SASARLA and SCOTT SHACKELFORD <a href="https://theconversation.com/experts-grade-facebook-tiktok-twitter-youtube-on-readiness-to-handle-midterm-election-misinformation-191249">The Conversation</a>The 2016 U.S. election was a wake-up call about the dangers of 
political misinformation on social media. With two more election cycles 
rife with misinformation under their belts, social media companies have 
experience identifying and countering misinformation. However, the 
nature of the threat misinformation poses to society continues to shift 
in form and targets. The big lie about the 2020 presidential election 
has become a major theme, and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/12/business/media/midterms-foreign-language-misinformation.html">immigrant communities are increasingly in the crosshairs</a> of disinformation campaigns – deliberate efforts to spread misinformation.Social media companies have announced plans to deal with misinformation in the 2022 midterm elections, but the companies <a href="https://techpolicy.press/looking-to-the-midterms-the-state-of-platform-policies-on-u-s-political-speech/">vary in their approaches and effectiveness</a>. We asked experts on social media to grade how ready Facebook, TikTok, Twitter and YouTube are to handle the task.
<h2>2022 is looking like 2020</h2>Dam Hee Kim, Assistant Professor of Communication, University of ArizonaSocial media are <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/">important sources of news for most Americans</a> in 2022, but they also could be a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820943878">fertile ground for spreading misinformation</a>.
 Major social media platforms announced plans for dealing with 
misinformation in the 2022 U.S. midterm elections, but experts noted 
that they are <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/23/technology/midterms-misinformation-tiktok-facebook.html">not very different from their 2020 plans</a>.One important consideration: Users are not constrained to using just one platform. One company’s intervention may backfire and <a href="https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/twitter-flagged-donald-trumps-tweets-with-election-misinformation-they-continued-to-spread-both-on-and-off-the-platform/">promote cross-platform diffusion of misinformation</a>. Major social media platforms may need to coordinate efforts to combat misinformation. Facebook/Meta: CFacebook was largely blamed for its failure to combat misinformation 
during the 2016 presidential election campaign. Although engagement – 
likes, shares and comments – with misinformation on Facebook peaked with
 160 million per month during the 2016 presidential election, the level 
in July 2018, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168019848554">60 million per month</a>, was still at high levels. More recent evidence shows that Facebook’s approach still needs work 
when it comes to managing accounts that spread misinformation, flagging 
misinformation posts and reducing the reach of those accounts and posts.
 In April 2020, fact-checkers notified Facebook about 59 accounts that 
spread misinformation about COVID-19. As of November 2021, <a href="https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/november-2021/">31 of them were still active</a>. Also, Chinese state-run Facebook accounts have been <a href="https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/april-2022/">spreading misinformation about the war in Ukraine</a> in English to their hundreds of millions of followers.Twitter: BWhile Twitter has generally not been treated as the biggest culprit 
of misinformation since 2016, it is unclear if its misinformation 
measures are sufficient. In fact, shares of misinformation on Twitter 
increased from about 3 million per month during the 2016 presidential 
election <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168019848554">to about 5 million per month in July 2018</a>. This pattern seems to have continued as over 300,000 Tweets – excluding retweets – included links that were <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">flagged as false after fact checks</a>
 between April 2019 and February 2021. Fewer than 3% of these tweets 
were presented with warning labels or pop-up boxes. Among tweets that 
shared the same link to misinformation, only a minority displayed these 
warnings, suggesting that the process of putting warnings on 
misinformation is not automatic, uniform or efficient. Twitter did 
announce that it <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/23/technology/midterms-misinformation-tiktok-facebook.html">redesigned labels</a> to hinder further interactions and facilitate clicks for additional information.TikTok: DAs the fastest-growing social media platform, TikTok has two notable characteristics: Its predominantly young adult user base <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/">regularly consumes news on the platform</a>,
 and its short videos often come with attention-grabbing images and 
sounds. While these videos are more difficult to review than text-based 
content, they are more likely to be recalled, evoke emotion and persuade
 people. TikTok’s approach to misinformation needs major improvements. A 
search for prominent news topics in September 2022 turned up 
user-generated videos, <a href="https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/september-2022/">20% of which included misinformation</a>,
 and videos containing misinformation were often in the first five 
results. When neutral phrases were used as search terms, for example 
“2022 elections,” TikTok’s search bar suggested more phrases that were 
charged, for example “January 6 FBI.” Also, TikTok presents reliable 
sources <a href="https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/march-2022/">alongside accounts that spread misinformation</a>.YouTube: B-Between April 2019 and February 2021, 170 YouTube videos were flagged
 as false by a fact-checking organization. Just over half of them were <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">presented with “learn more” information panels</a>, though without being flagged as false. YouTube seems to have added information panels mostly <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">by automatically detecting certain keywords</a> involving controversial topics like COVID-19, not necessarily after checking the content of the video for misinformation. YouTube could recommend more content by reliable sources to mitigate 
the challenge of reviewing all uploaded videos for misinformation. One 
experiment collected the list of recommended videos after a user with an
 empty viewing history watched one video that was marked as false after 
fact checks. Of the recommended videos, 18.4% <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">were misleading or hyperpartisan</a> and three of the top 10 recommended channels had <a href="https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03662191/document">a mixed or low factual reporting score</a> from <a href="https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/">Media Bias/Fact Check</a>.<figure>
 <iframe width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/z3N5y7OLhmE"></iframe>
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure><h2>The big lie</h2>Anjana Susarla, Professor of Information Systems, Michigan State UniversityA major concern for misinformation researchers as the 2022 midterms 
approach is the prevalence of false narratives about the 2020 election. A
 team of misinformation experts at the <a href="https://shorensteincenter.org/programs/technology-social-change/">Technology and Social Change</a> project studied a group of <a href="https://mediamanipulation.org/research/deplatforming-index-research-brief">online influencers</a> across platforms who amassed large followings from the “<a href="https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-capitol-siege-ivanka-trump-biden-presidential-56da6a3963ee91021b4a52a0b4b00e62">big lie</a>,”
 the false claim that there was widespread election fraud in the 2020 
election. The Washington Post published an analysis on Sept. 20, 2022, 
that found that most of the 77 accounts the newspaper identified as the 
biggest spreaders of disinformation about the 2020 election <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/20/social-media-influencers-election-fraud/">were still active </a> on all four social media platforms. Overall, I believe that none of the platforms have addressed these issues very effectively. Facebook/Meta: B-Meta, Facebook’s parent company, exempts politicians from 
fact-checking rules. They also do not ban political ads, unlike Twitter 
or TikTok. Meta has not released any policies publicly about how its 
rules specifically protect against misinformation, which has left <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/05/19/facebook-midterm-misinformation-strategy/">observers questioning its readiness</a> to deal with disinformation during the midterms. Of particular concern are politicians benefiting from microtargeting –
 targeting narrow demographics – through election misinformation, such 
as a congressional candidate <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/05/19/facebook-midterm-misinformation-strategy/">who ran an ad campaign on Facebook</a> alleging a cover-up of “ballot harvesting” during the 2020 election. Election disinformation <a href="https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/23329139/latino-voters-misinformation-2022">targeted at minority communities</a>,
 especially Hispanic and Latino communities, on messaging apps such as 
WhatsApp is another major enforcement challenge for Meta when the 
company’s content moderation resources are primarily allocated to 
English-language media. Twitter: BTwitter does not allow political advertising and has made the most 
effort at reducing election-related misinformation. Twitter has 
highlighted its <a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/09/19/election-misinformation-social-media-big-lie-report">use of “prebunking</a>,” the process of <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/misinformation-desk/202108/what-is-prebunking">educating people about disinformation tactics</a>, as an effective way of reducing the spread of misinformation. However, Twitter has also been inconsistent in enforcing its 
policies. For example, Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake asked 
her followers on Twitter if they would be <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/22/midterms-elections-social-media-civil-rights/">willing to monitor the polls</a> for cases of voter fraud, which led civil rights advocates to warn of potential intimidation at polling stations.TikTok: DTikTok does not allow political advertising, which makes 
microtargeting from election-related misinformation less of a problem on
 this platform. Many researchers have highlighted <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/14/business/media/on-tiktok-election-misinformation.html">TikTok’s lack of transparency</a>,
 unlike platforms such as Twitter and Facebook that have been more 
amenable to efforts from researchers, including sharing data. TikTok’s 
stated content moderation approach has been that “questionable content” 
will not be amplified through recommendations. However, video and audio content may be harder to moderate than 
textual content. The danger on platforms such as TikTok is that once a 
misleading video is taken down by the platform, a manipulated and 
republished version could easily circulate on the platform. Facebook, 
for example, employs AI-assisted methods to <a href="https://ai.facebook.com/blog/heres-how-were-using-ai-to-help-detect-misinformation/">detect what it calls “near-duplications</a>
 of known misinformation at scale.” TikTok has not released details of 
how it will address near-duplications of election-related 
misinformation. Internationally, TikTok has faced immense criticism for its inability
 to tamp down election-related misinformation. TikTok accounts <a href="https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/campaigns/tiktok-german-election-2021/">impersonated prominent political figures</a> during Germany’s last national election. YouTube: B-YouTube’s policy is to remove “violative” narratives and terminate channels that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/20/social-media-influencers-election-fraud/">receive three strikes in a 90-day period</a>.
 While this may be effective in controlling some types of 
misinformation, YouTube has been vulnerable to fairly insidious 
election-related content, including disinformation about ballot 
trafficking. A disinformation movie titled “<a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/09/19/election-misinformation-social-media-big-lie-report">2000 mules</a>” is still circulating on the platform. Observers have faulted YouTube for not doing enough internationally 
to address election-related misinformation. In Brazil, for example, <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/brazils-far-right-plots-its-own-january-6-insurrection/">sharing YouTube videos on the messaging app Telegram</a>
 has become a popular way to spread misinformation related to elections.
 This suggests that YouTube may be vulnerable to organized 
election-related disinformation in the U.S. as well. <h2>A range of readiness</h2>Scott Shackelford, Professor of Business Law and Ethics, Indiana UniversityMany of the threats to American democracy have stemmed from internal 
divisions fed by inequality, injustice and racism. These fissures have 
been, from time to time, purposefully widened and deepened by foreign 
nations wishing to distract and destabilize the U.S. government. The 
advent of cyberspace has put the disinformation process into overdrive, 
both speeding the viral spread of stories across national boundaries and
 platforms and causing a proliferation in the types of traditional and 
social media willing to run with fake stories. Some social media 
networks have proved more able than others at meeting the moment. <h2>Facebook/Meta: C</h2>Despite moves to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/meta-says-removes-china-based-propaganda-operation-targeting-us-midterms-2022-09-27/">limit</a>
 the spread of Chinese propaganda on Facebook, there seems to be a 
bipartisan consensus that Facebook has not learned its lessons from the 
2016 election cycle. Indeed, it still allows political ads, including 
one from Republican congressional candidate Joe Kent <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/05/19/facebook-midterm-misinformation-strategy/">claiming “rampant voter fraud</a>” in the 2020 elections. Though it has taken some steps toward transparency, as seen in its <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilybaker-white/2022/08/17/midterms-research-facebook-political-ads/?sh=6f2258df7974">Ad Library</a>, it has a long way to go to win back consumer confidence and uphold its <a href="https://theconversation.com/facebooks-social-responsibility-should-include-privacy-protection-94549">social responsibility</a>.<h2>Twitter: B*</h2>Twitter came out before other leading social media firms in banning 
political ads on its platform, though it has faced criticism for 
inconsistent enforcement. The Indiana University Observatory on Social 
Media, for example, has a tool called <a href="https://hoaxy.osome.iu.edu/#query=2022%20elections&amp;sort=mixed&amp;type=Twitter&amp;lang=">Hoaxy</a> that enables real-time searches for a wide array of disinformation. The * for this grade lies in the concern for Twitter’s future efforts to fight disinformation <a href="https://theconversation.com/elon-musk-is-wrong-research-shows-content-rules-on-twitter-help-preserve-free-speech-from-bots-and-other-manipulation-182317">given its potential acquisition by Elon Musk</a>, who has been <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-free-speech-twitter-global-censorship/">vocal</a> about his desire to permit uninhibited speech.<h2>TikTok: F</h2>The fact that TikTok does not allow political advertising on the 
surface bodes well for its ability to root out disinformation, but it 
has been apparent that its ability to do so in practice <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/14/business/media/on-tiktok-election-misinformation.html">is very limited</a>. AI-enabled deep fakes in particular are <a href="https://theconversation.com/celebrity-deepfakes-are-all-over-tiktok-heres-why-theyre-becoming-common-and-how-you-can-spot-them-187079">a growing problem on TikTok</a>, something that the other social media networks have been able to monitor to greater effect.Its <a href="https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/our-commitment-to-election-integrity">efforts</a> at standing up an <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/17/tiktok-launches-an-in-app-u-s-midterms-elections-center-shares-plan-to-fight-misinformation/">election center</a>,
 ban deep fakes and flag disinformation are welcome but are reactive and
 coming too late, with voting already underway in some states.<h2>YouTube: C+</h2>Google has <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/01/tech/google-youtube-election-misinformation/index.html">announced</a>
 new steps to crack down on misinformation across its platforms, 
including YouTube, such as by highlighting local and regional 
journalism, but as we’re seeing in the “Stop the Steal” narrative from 
the <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/youtube-meta-pushing-bolsonaro-stop-050000780.html">Brazilian election</a>, so far misinformation continues to flow freely.Dam Hee Kim&nbsp; is an Assistant Professor of Communication at the University of Arizona. Anjana Susarla is a Professor of Information Systems at Michigan State University. Scott Shackelford is a Professor of Business Law and Ethics at Indiana University.<div><iframe src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/191249/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important" referrerpolicy="no-referrer-when-downgrade"></iframe></div>

Are the social media giants prepared for midterm misinformation?

By LILY O'SHEA-BECKER <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2022/10/21/why-me-university-of-kansas-physicist-thought-800000-macarthur-genius-grant-was-a-prank/">Kansas Reflector</a>

LAWRENCE
 — The MacArthur Foundation has named a physicist and assistant 
professor at the University of Kansas a 2022 fellow and awarded him the 
reputable “genius grant.”

The MacArthur Foundation recognized 
Steven Prohira for his creative work in the advancement of detecting 
ultra-high energy neutrino particles. According to the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.macfound.org/fellows/class-of-2022/steven-prohira#searchresults">MacArthur Foundation</a>,
 Prohira’s work includes expertise in theory, engineering and 
experimental design. The $800,000 grant, which is awarded to 20 to 30 
innovators across the country annually, is described by the MacArthur 
Foundation as a no-strings-attached investment in the fellows’ 
potentials.

“I thought it was totally a prank,” 
Prohira said about his phone call from the MacArthur Foundation. 
“There’s no way. I didn’t believe it at all. … Then once I did believe 
it, just immense gratitude and sort of feelings of, ‘Why me?’ ”

Prohira and his colleagues have 
developed a radar echo telescope, with the end-goal of using radio waves
 to detect neutrino particles of energy higher than has ever been 
recorded. Neutrinos are elusive fundamental subatomic particles that 
move throughout the universe. Neutrino particles are building blocks of 
nature, along with other fundamental particles, such as electrons.

While neutrino particles are 
extremely common, with tens of billions passing through a human body 
every second, they are extremely difficult to detect.

“I think what’s exciting about it is 
that neutrinos sort of give us this glimpse into something that’s beyond
 our current models of physics,” Prohira said.

Because there is a lack of 
information concerning ultra-high energy neutrino particles, detecting 
them would provide new knowledge of nature and the universe.

The highest energy neutrino particles
 recorded to date were detected in the South Pole by the IceCube 
Neutrino Observatory at about a mile below the ice.

The interaction of neutrino particles
 passing through ice creates charged particles. The charged particles 
ionize the ice, allowing the IceCube experiment to detect optical light.

Prohira’s approach is different. 
Through prototype studies with the radar echo telescope, Prohira and his
 colleagues have proven that bouncing radio waves off ionization 
deposits works to detect particles. While the primary particle used for 
the study was not a neutrino particle and plastic was used in place of 
ice, Prohira plans to test this process with ice in 2023.

Prohira is not sure how he will use his grant.

“I have a lot of ideas, but it’s like
 asking what you do if you won the lottery. I’ve never thought about it.
 It doesn’t fit into my research plans. It doesn’t fit into my life 
plans. So I have ideas, but nothing concrete yet,” Prohira said.

Prohira said the most pressing matter
 concerning his work is testing the radar echo telescope with ice. A 
field test is planned for January at KU, and Prohira hopes to deploy to 
the polar regions, either Greenland or Antarctica, next year.

Initially, Prohira planned on 
pursuing a career in art, with interests in drawing and woodblock 
prints. He received his undergraduate degree in fine arts from Gonzaga 
University in 2009.

“My artwork started to revolve around
 trying to get a viewer to ask scientific questions,” he said. “So I was
 interested in making pieces that looked a little bit weird or unusual 
that people would ask, ‘How does that work?’ And they weren’t very good,
 so I found that I was most interested in actually studying what was 
going on underneath what I was doing.”

While enrolled in KU’s master of fine
 arts program, Prohira began to take electives in the physics and 
astronomy program, eventually changing his degree. By 2016 he earned his
 master’s degree and in 2018 he graduated KU with a doctoral degree.

“We’re tremendously proud of 
professor Prohira’s achievements that led to this exciting recognition,”
 said chancellor Douglas A. Girod <a target="_blank" href="https://news.ku.edu/2022/10/13/ku-physicist-named-class-2022-macarthur-fellows">in a statement</a>.
 “It will be thrilling to see what he discovers next as he continues on 
his path of discovery that is illuminating fresh, new ideas about the 
cosmos and is pushing out the limits of our knowledge.”

“I’m also on several other 
experiments that are trying to detect neutrinos in different ways, too, 
and so the field in general is really exciting, because there’s lots of 
challenges to detecting these things and those challenges require 
creative solutions,” Prohira said.

Prohira is a member of the Payload 
for Ultrahigh Energy Observations team. The team is part of a NASA 
experiment, which uses a stratospheric balloon to experiment with radio 
waves and ultra-high energy neutrinos.

“I want to stress, these awards are 
for individual creativity, which is really great, but in science nothing
 is done alone, so my work is hugely collaborative. I have a great group
 of people that I work on the radar echo telescope (with),” Prohira 
said.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666377978353.png" alt="Steven Prohira, a physicist and assistant professor at the University of Kansas, received an $800,000 grant from the MacArthur Foundation for his work in detecting ultra-high energy neutrino particles. (Lily O’Shea Becker for Kansas Reflector)" />
 <figcaption>Steven Prohira, a physicist and assistant professor at the University of Kansas, received an $800,000 grant from the MacArthur Foundation for his work in detecting ultra-high energy neutrino particles. (Lily O’Shea Becker for Kansas Reflector)</figcaption>
 </figure>By LILY O'SHEA-BECKER <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/2022/10/21/why-me-university-of-kansas-physicist-thought-800000-macarthur-genius-grant-was-a-prank/">Kansas Reflector</a>LAWRENCE
 — The MacArthur Foundation has named a physicist and assistant 
professor at the University of Kansas a 2022 fellow and awarded him the 
reputable “genius grant.”The MacArthur Foundation recognized 
Steven Prohira for his creative work in the advancement of detecting 
ultra-high energy neutrino particles. According to the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.macfound.org/fellows/class-of-2022/steven-prohira#searchresults">MacArthur Foundation</a>,
 Prohira’s work includes expertise in theory, engineering and 
experimental design. The $800,000 grant, which is awarded to 20 to 30 
innovators across the country annually, is described by the MacArthur 
Foundation as a no-strings-attached investment in the fellows’ 
potentials.“I thought it was totally a prank,” 
Prohira said about his phone call from the MacArthur Foundation. 
“There’s no way. I didn’t believe it at all. … Then once I did believe 
it, just immense gratitude and sort of feelings of, ‘Why me?’ ”Prohira and his colleagues have 
developed a radar echo telescope, with the end-goal of using radio waves
 to detect neutrino particles of energy higher than has ever been 
recorded. Neutrinos are elusive fundamental subatomic particles that 
move throughout the universe. Neutrino particles are building blocks of 
nature, along with other fundamental particles, such as electrons.While neutrino particles are 
extremely common, with tens of billions passing through a human body 
every second, they are extremely difficult to detect.“I think what’s exciting about it is 
that neutrinos sort of give us this glimpse into something that’s beyond
 our current models of physics,” Prohira said.Because there is a lack of 
information concerning ultra-high energy neutrino particles, detecting 
them would provide new knowledge of nature and the universe.The highest energy neutrino particles
 recorded to date were detected in the South Pole by the IceCube 
Neutrino Observatory at about a mile below the ice.The interaction of neutrino particles
 passing through ice creates charged particles. The charged particles 
ionize the ice, allowing the IceCube experiment to detect optical light.Prohira’s approach is different. 
Through prototype studies with the radar echo telescope, Prohira and his
 colleagues have proven that bouncing radio waves off ionization 
deposits works to detect particles. While the primary particle used for 
the study was not a neutrino particle and plastic was used in place of 
ice, Prohira plans to test this process with ice in 2023.Prohira is not sure how he will use his grant.“I have a lot of ideas, but it’s like
 asking what you do if you won the lottery. I’ve never thought about it.
 It doesn’t fit into my research plans. It doesn’t fit into my life 
plans. So I have ideas, but nothing concrete yet,” Prohira said.Prohira said the most pressing matter
 concerning his work is testing the radar echo telescope with ice. A 
field test is planned for January at KU, and Prohira hopes to deploy to 
the polar regions, either Greenland or Antarctica, next year.Initially, Prohira planned on 
pursuing a career in art, with interests in drawing and woodblock 
prints. He received his undergraduate degree in fine arts from Gonzaga 
University in 2009.“My artwork started to revolve around
 trying to get a viewer to ask scientific questions,” he said. “So I was
 interested in making pieces that looked a little bit weird or unusual 
that people would ask, ‘How does that work?’ And they weren’t very good,
 so I found that I was most interested in actually studying what was 
going on underneath what I was doing.”While enrolled in KU’s master of fine
 arts program, Prohira began to take electives in the physics and 
astronomy program, eventually changing his degree. By 2016 he earned his
 master’s degree and in 2018 he graduated KU with a doctoral degree.“We’re tremendously proud of 
professor Prohira’s achievements that led to this exciting recognition,”
 said chancellor Douglas A. Girod <a target="_blank" href="https://news.ku.edu/2022/10/13/ku-physicist-named-class-2022-macarthur-fellows">in a statement</a>.
 “It will be thrilling to see what he discovers next as he continues on 
his path of discovery that is illuminating fresh, new ideas about the 
cosmos and is pushing out the limits of our knowledge.”“I’m also on several other 
experiments that are trying to detect neutrinos in different ways, too, 
and so the field in general is really exciting, because there’s lots of 
challenges to detecting these things and those challenges require 
creative solutions,” Prohira said.Prohira is a member of the Payload 
for Ultrahigh Energy Observations team. The team is part of a NASA 
experiment, which uses a stratospheric balloon to experiment with radio 
waves and ultra-high energy neutrinos.“I want to stress, these awards are 
for individual creativity, which is really great, but in science nothing
 is done alone, so my work is hugely collaborative. I have a great group
 of people that I work on the radar echo telescope (with),” Prohira 
said.

‘Why me?’: KU physicist thought $800K grant was a prank

WASHINGTON (AP) — The worst-of-the-worst nursing homes will face tougher penalties if conditions don't improve at their facilities, the Biden administration announced Friday.

The intensified scrutiny on some nursing homes,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/number-of-nursing-facility-residents/?currentTimeframe=0&amp;sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D">where more than a million people are housed,</a>&nbsp;comes nearly two years after COVID-19 exposed subpar care and extreme staffing shortages that had long festered in the facilities.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/over-200000-residents-and-staff-in-long-term-care-facilities-have-died-from-covid-19/">Nursing home residents have been significantly more likely</a>&nbsp;to die from COVID-19;&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/over-200000-residents-and-staff-in-long-term-care-facilities-have-died-from-covid-19/">as of February, more than 200,000 nursing home staffers or residents had died from the virus</a>.

President Joe Biden had promised during his State of the Union address in February&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/state-of-the-union-address-joe-biden-coronavirus-pandemic-business-health-0a102fed5d75affdd130164f4beba97d">to overhaul the nation's nursing home system but some</a>&nbsp;of those initiatives have yet to be implemented fully.

The new guidelines announced Friday will apply to less than 0.5% of the nation's nursing homes. The facilities are already designated as a “special focus facility” because of a previous violation and are on a watchlist of sorts that requires the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare to monitor them more regularly.

Starting Friday, those nursing homes will lose federal funding if they receive more than one dangerous violation — rule-breaking that put residents at risk for harm. They will also be monitored for a minimum of three years. CMS will also consider staffing levels at the nursing homes when adding facilities to its watchlist. Currently, 88 nursing homes are on the list.

“Let us be clear: We are cracking down on enforcement of our nation’s poorest-performing nursing homes,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra.

The agency is studying staffing ratios at nursing homes, with the aim of implementing requirements. The study is expected to be completed next year.

The administration also announced $80 million worth of grants that will be given to health care organizations, trade groups or labor unions to train and hire nursing staff. Organizations have until Jan. 6 to apply for the money.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/6/1656451712383.png" alt="“Let us be clear: We are cracking down on enforcement of our nation’s poorest-performing nursing homes,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra." />
 <figcaption>“Let us be clear: We are cracking down on enforcement of our nation’s poorest-performing nursing homes,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra.</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The worst-of-the-worst nursing homes will face tougher penalties if conditions don't improve at their facilities, the Biden administration announced Friday.The intensified scrutiny on some nursing homes,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/number-of-nursing-facility-residents/?currentTimeframe=0&amp;sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D">where more than a million people are housed,</a>&nbsp;comes nearly two years after COVID-19 exposed subpar care and extreme staffing shortages that had long festered in the facilities.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/over-200000-residents-and-staff-in-long-term-care-facilities-have-died-from-covid-19/">Nursing home residents have been significantly more likely</a>&nbsp;to die from COVID-19;&nbsp;<a href="https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/over-200000-residents-and-staff-in-long-term-care-facilities-have-died-from-covid-19/">as of February, more than 200,000 nursing home staffers or residents had died from the virus</a>.President Joe Biden had promised during his State of the Union address in February&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/state-of-the-union-address-joe-biden-coronavirus-pandemic-business-health-0a102fed5d75affdd130164f4beba97d">to overhaul the nation's nursing home system but some</a>&nbsp;of those initiatives have yet to be implemented fully.The new guidelines announced Friday will apply to less than 0.5% of the nation's nursing homes. The facilities are already designated as a “special focus facility” because of a previous violation and are on a watchlist of sorts that requires the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare to monitor them more regularly.Starting Friday, those nursing homes will lose federal funding if they receive more than one dangerous violation — rule-breaking that put residents at risk for harm. They will also be monitored for a minimum of three years. CMS will also consider staffing levels at the nursing homes when adding facilities to its watchlist. Currently, 88 nursing homes are on the list.“Let us be clear: We are cracking down on enforcement of our nation’s poorest-performing nursing homes,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra.The agency is studying staffing ratios at nursing homes, with the aim of implementing requirements. The study is expected to be completed next year.The administration also announced $80 million worth of grants that will be given to health care organizations, trade groups or labor unions to train and hire nursing staff. Organizations have until Jan. 6 to apply for the money.

Failing US nursing homes to face tougher federal penalties

HUTCHINSON, Kan. — Creighton University economist Ernie Goss said that when it comes to what the Federal Reserve says it is going to do next month, believe them.

"They're going to raise rates," Goss said. "That's an economic headwind. We're going to see unemployment rates rise, instead of coming down. We're going to see employment growth coming down, instead of increasing. We're going to see the economy slow down. It's a stagflation for sure. That's higher inflation at a time that the economy is either not growing or in a recession."

Goss remains skeptical that the economic brakes being applied can result in a soft landing for the U.S.

"Here's the scary part, the Federal Reserve, normally, they get it wrong most times," Goss said. "They go too far almost every time. When we get into an inflationary territory, they attempt to bring us in for a soft landing by raising rates. They generally go too far and it's not a soft landing. It's a bumpy landing."

Nonetheless, Goss is not sure that the news will be all bad after the bumps.

"I think it's not going to be quite as grim as most economists," Goss said. "Almost 100% of economists are saying recession next year. I think we could avoid a recession, but it's going to be slow to no growth."

Goss issues two surveys monthly of the Midwest region, including Kansas.

By NICK GOSNELL Hutch PostHUTCHINSON, Kan. — Creighton University economist Ernie Goss said that when it comes to what the Federal Reserve says it is going to do next month, believe them."They're going to raise rates," Goss said. "That's an economic headwind. We're going to see unemployment rates rise, instead of coming down. We're going to see employment growth coming down, instead of increasing. We're going to see the economy slow down. It's a stagflation for sure. That's higher inflation at a time that the economy is either not growing or in a recession."Goss remains skeptical that the economic brakes being applied can result in a soft landing for the U.S."Here's the scary part, the Federal Reserve, normally, they get it wrong most times," Goss said. "They go too far almost every time. When we get into an inflationary territory, they attempt to bring us in for a soft landing by raising rates. They generally go too far and it's not a soft landing. It's a bumpy landing."Nonetheless, Goss is not sure that the news will be all bad after the bumps."I think it's not going to be quite as grim as most economists," Goss said. "Almost 100% of economists are saying recession next year. I think we could avoid a recession, but it's going to be slow to no growth."Goss issues two surveys monthly of the Midwest region, including Kansas.

Creighton Economist: Slowdown coming, likely bumpy landing

By COLIN DAYAN <a href="https://theconversation.com/pit-bulls-went-from-americas-best-friend-to-public-enemy-now-theyre-slowly-coming-full-circle-192483">The Conversation</a>

As recently as 50 years ago, the pit bull was America’s favorite dog.
 Pit bulls were everywhere. They were popular in advertising and used to
 promote the joys of pet-and-human friendship. <a href="https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/lifestyle/high-fidelity-nipper-the-rca-dog/">Nipper on the RCA Victor label</a>, <a href="https://www.kennel.com/our-gang-the-little-rascals-and-petey-the-pit-bull/">Pete the Pup</a> in the “Our Gang” comedy short films, and the flag-wrapped dog on a <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WW1_poster_featuring_a_pit_bull.jpg">classic World War I poster</a> all were pit bulls.

With <a href="https://www.metlifepetinsurance.com/blog/breed-spotlights/national-pitbull-awareness-day/">National Pit Bull Awareness Day</a> celebrated on Oct. 26, it’s a fitting time to ask how these dogs came to be seen as a dangerous threat.

Starting around 1990, multiple features of American life converged to
 inspire widespread bans that made pit bulls outlaws, called “<a href="https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-11-13-mn-62013-story.html">four-legged guns</a>” or “<a href="https://www.deseret.com/1995/12/26/19211866/pit-bulls-are-lethal-ban-them">lethal weapons</a>.”
 The drivers included some dog attacks, excessive parental caution, 
fearful insurance companies and a tie to the sport of dog fighting.

As a professor of <a href="http://colindayan.com/">humanities and law</a>,
 I have studied the legal history of slaves, vagrants, criminals, terror
 suspects and others deemed threats to civilized society. For my books “<a href="https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691157870/the-law-is-a-white-dog">The Law is a White Dog</a>” and “<a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/with-dogs-at-the-edge-of-life/9780231167123">With Dogs at the Edge of Life</a>,” I explored human-dog relationships and how laws and regulations can deny equal protection to entire classes of beings.

In my experience with these dogs – including nearly 12 years living 
with Stella, the daughter of champion fighting dogs – I have learned 
that pit bulls are not inherently dangerous. Like other dogs, they can 
become dangerous in certain situations, and at the hands of certain 
owners. But in my view, there is no defensible rationale for condemning 
not only all pit bulls, but any dog with a single pit bull gene, as <a href="https://www.forallanimals.org/pit-bull-terriers-breed-discriminatory-legislation-faqs/">some laws do</a>.

I see such action as canine profiling, which recalls another legal fiction: the <a href="https://www.amacad.org/publication/one-drop-one-hate">taint or stain of blood</a> that ordained human degradation and race hatred in the United States.

The pit bull is strong. Its jaw grip is almost impossible to break. Bred over centuries to <a href="https://www.tuftsyourdog.com/dogtrainingandbehavior/dear-doctor-pit-bulls-and-locking-jaws/">bite and hold large animals</a> like bears and bulls around the face and head, it’s known as a “game dog.” Its bravery and strength <a href="https://pets.webmd.com/dogs/features/pit-bulls-safety">won’t allow it to give up</a>, no matter how long the struggle. It loves with the same strength; its loyalty remains <a href="https://www.aspca.org/about-us/aspca-policy-and-position-statements/position-statement-pit-bulls">the stuff of legend</a>.

For decades pit bulls’ tenacity encouraged the sport of dogfighting, 
with the dogs “pitted” against each other. Fights often went to the 
death, and winning animals earned huge sums for those who bet on them.  

But betting on dogs is not a high-class sport. Dogs are not horses; 
they cost little to acquire and maintain. Pit bulls easily and quickly 
became associated with the poor, and <a href="https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/32171-25-1-third-articlepdf">especially with Black men</a>, in a narrative that connected pit bulls with gang violence and crime.

That’s how prejudice works: The one-on-one <a href="https://drexel.edu/%7E/media/Files/law/law%20review/v10-3/Saucier%2010%20Drexel%20L%20Rev%20673.ashx">lamination of the pit bull onto the African American male</a> reduced people to their accessories.

Dogfighting was <a href="https://www.animallaw.info/article/detailed-discussion-dog-fighting">outlawed in all 50 states by 1976</a>, although illegal businesses persisted. Coverage of the practice spawned <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/article/pit-bull-ban-aggressive-dog-breed-bronwen-dickey">broad assertions</a>
 about the dogs that did the fighting. As breed bans proliferated, legal
 rulings proclaimed these dogs “dangerous to the safety or health of the
 community” and judged that “<a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/166/698/">public interests demand that the worthless shall be exterminated</a>.”

In 1987 Sports Illustrated put a pit bull, teeth bared, on its cover,
 with the headline “Beware of this Dog,” which it characterized as <a href="https://vault.si.com/vault/1987/07/27/the-pit-bull-friend-and-killer-is-the-pit-bull-a-fine-animal-as-its-admirers-claim-or-is-it-a-vicious-dog-unfit-for-society">born with “a will to kill</a>.”
 Time magazine published “Time Bombs on Legs” featuring this “vicious 
hound of the Baskervilles” that “seized small children like rag dolls 
and mauled them to death in <a href="https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,965065,00.html">a frenzy of bloodletting</a>.”

If a dog has “vicious propensities,” the owner is assumed to share in
 this projected violence, both legally and generally in public 
perception. And once deemed “contraband,” both property and people are 
at risk.  

This was evident in the much-publicized 2007 <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/306009/the-lost-dogs-by-jim-gorant/">indictment of Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick</a> for running a dogfighting business called Bad Newz Kennels in Virginia. Even the <a href="https://www.humanesociety.org/">Humane Society of the United States</a> and <a href="https://www.peta.org/">People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals</a>
 – two of the nation’s leading animal welfare advocacy groups – argued 
that the 47 pit bulls recovered from the facility should be killed 
because they <a href="https://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-95941sy0aug03-story.html">posed a threat to people and other animals</a>.

If not for the intervention of <a href="https://bestfriends.org/">Best Friends Animal Society</a>, Vick’s dogs would have been euthanized. As the film “<a href="http://www.championsdocumentary.com/the-dogs">Champions</a>” recounts, a <a href="https://www.animallaw.info/article/lessons-learned-acting-guardianspecial-master-bad-newz-kennels-case">court-appointed special master</a> determined each dog’s fate. Ultimately, nearly all of the dogs were successfully placed in <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/12/21/michael-vick-dog-survivor-frodo-dies/">sanctuaries or adoptive homes</a>.

Pit bulls still suffer more than any other dogs from the fact that 
they are a type of dog, not a distinct breed. Once recognized by the 
American Kennel Club as an <a href="https://www.akc.org/dog-breeds/american-staffordshire-terrier/">American Staffordshire terrier</a>, popularly known as an Amstaff, and registered with the United Kennel Club and the American Dog Breeders Association as an <a href="https://www.ukcdogs.com/american-pit-bull-terrier">American pit bull terrier</a>, now any dog characterized as a “pit bull type” can be <a href="https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/dayan-dead-dogs/">considered an outlaw</a> in many communities.

For example, in its 2012 <a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/md-court-of-appeals/1599539.html">Tracey v. Solesky ruling</a>,
 the Maryland Court of Appeals modified the state’s common law in cases 
involving dog injuries. Any dog containing pit bull genes was 
“inherently dangerous” as a matter of law.

This subjected owners and landlords to what the courts call “<a href="https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/strict+liability">strict liability</a>.”
 As the court declared: “When an attack involves pit bulls, it is no 
longer necessary to prove that the particular pit bull or pit bulls are 
dangerous.”

Dissenting from the ruling, Judge Clayton Greene recognized the 
absurdity of the majority opinion’s “unworkable rule”: “How much ‘pit 
bull,’” he asked, “must there be in a dog to bring it within the strict 
liability edict?”

It’s equally unanswerable how to tell when a dog is a pit bull mix. 
From the shape of its head? Its stance? The way it looks at you?

Conundrums like these call into question statistics that show pit bulls to be <a href="https://www.coloradoinjurylaw.com/dog-bite-statistics/">more dangerous than other breeds</a>. These figures vary a great deal depending on their sources.

Any statistics about pit bull attacks depend on the definition of a 
pit bull – yet it’s really hard to get good dog bite data that <a href="https://www.avma.org/javma-news/2017-11-15/dangerous-dog-debate">accurately IDs the breed</a>.

Over the past decade, awareness has grown that breed-specific legislation <a href="https://www.avma.org/resources/pet-owners/why-breed-specific-legislation-not-answer">does not make the public safer</a> but does <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/09/01/pitbull-ban-lawsuit-prince-georges/">penalize responsible owners and their dogs</a>. Currently 21 states prohibit local government from enforcing breed-specific legislation or <a href="https://wagwalking.com/daily/what-states-allow-pit-bulls">naming specific breeds in dangerous dog laws</a>. Maryland passed a law reversing the Tracey ruling in 2014. Yet 15 states still <a href="https://dogsandclogs.com/states-with-pitbull-bans/#15_states_with_Pit_Bull_bans">allow local communities to enact breed-specific bans</a>.

Pit bulls demand a great deal more from humans than some dogs, but 
alongside their bracing way of being in the world, we humans learn 
another way of thinking and loving. Compared with many other breeds, 
they offer a more demanding but always affecting communion.

Colin Dayan is a Professor of English, Robert Penn Warren Professor in the Humanities, and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666455734752.jpg" alt="Image courtesy of Pixabay" />
 <figcaption>Image courtesy of Pixabay</figcaption>
 </figure>By COLIN DAYAN <a href="https://theconversation.com/pit-bulls-went-from-americas-best-friend-to-public-enemy-now-theyre-slowly-coming-full-circle-192483">The Conversation</a>As recently as 50 years ago, the pit bull was America’s favorite dog.
 Pit bulls were everywhere. They were popular in advertising and used to
 promote the joys of pet-and-human friendship. <a href="https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/lifestyle/high-fidelity-nipper-the-rca-dog/">Nipper on the RCA Victor label</a>, <a href="https://www.kennel.com/our-gang-the-little-rascals-and-petey-the-pit-bull/">Pete the Pup</a> in the “Our Gang” comedy short films, and the flag-wrapped dog on a <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WW1_poster_featuring_a_pit_bull.jpg">classic World War I poster</a> all were pit bulls.With <a href="https://www.metlifepetinsurance.com/blog/breed-spotlights/national-pitbull-awareness-day/">National Pit Bull Awareness Day</a> celebrated on Oct. 26, it’s a fitting time to ask how these dogs came to be seen as a dangerous threat. Starting around 1990, multiple features of American life converged to
 inspire widespread bans that made pit bulls outlaws, called “<a href="https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-11-13-mn-62013-story.html">four-legged guns</a>” or “<a href="https://www.deseret.com/1995/12/26/19211866/pit-bulls-are-lethal-ban-them">lethal weapons</a>.”
 The drivers included some dog attacks, excessive parental caution, 
fearful insurance companies and a tie to the sport of dog fighting.As a professor of <a href="http://colindayan.com/">humanities and law</a>,
 I have studied the legal history of slaves, vagrants, criminals, terror
 suspects and others deemed threats to civilized society. For my books “<a href="https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691157870/the-law-is-a-white-dog">The Law is a White Dog</a>” and “<a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/with-dogs-at-the-edge-of-life/9780231167123">With Dogs at the Edge of Life</a>,” I explored human-dog relationships and how laws and regulations can deny equal protection to entire classes of beings. <figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666455864151.png" alt=" Stella, a pit bull owned by author Colin Dayan. Colin Dayan, CC BY-ND " />
 <figcaption> Stella, a pit bull owned by author Colin Dayan. Colin Dayan, CC BY-ND </figcaption>
 </figure>In my experience with these dogs – including nearly 12 years living 
with Stella, the daughter of champion fighting dogs – I have learned 
that pit bulls are not inherently dangerous. Like other dogs, they can 
become dangerous in certain situations, and at the hands of certain 
owners. But in my view, there is no defensible rationale for condemning 
not only all pit bulls, but any dog with a single pit bull gene, as <a href="https://www.forallanimals.org/pit-bull-terriers-breed-discriminatory-legislation-faqs/">some laws do</a>. I see such action as canine profiling, which recalls another legal fiction: the <a href="https://www.amacad.org/publication/one-drop-one-hate">taint or stain of blood</a> that ordained human degradation and race hatred in the United States. <figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666455907786.png" alt=" English artist Francis Barraud (1856-1924) painted his brother’s dog Nipper listening to the horn of an early phonograph in 1898. Victor Talking Machine Co. began using the symbol in its trademark, His Master’s Voice, in 1900. Wikipedia " />
 <figcaption> English artist Francis Barraud (1856-1924) painted his brother’s dog Nipper listening to the horn of an early phonograph in 1898. Victor Talking Machine Co. began using the symbol in its trademark, His Master’s Voice, in 1900. Wikipedia </figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Bred to fight</h2>The pit bull is strong. Its jaw grip is almost impossible to break. Bred over centuries to <a href="https://www.tuftsyourdog.com/dogtrainingandbehavior/dear-doctor-pit-bulls-and-locking-jaws/">bite and hold large animals</a> like bears and bulls around the face and head, it’s known as a “game dog.” Its bravery and strength <a href="https://pets.webmd.com/dogs/features/pit-bulls-safety">won’t allow it to give up</a>, no matter how long the struggle. It loves with the same strength; its loyalty remains <a href="https://www.aspca.org/about-us/aspca-policy-and-position-statements/position-statement-pit-bulls">the stuff of legend</a>. For decades pit bulls’ tenacity encouraged the sport of dogfighting, 
with the dogs “pitted” against each other. Fights often went to the 
death, and winning animals earned huge sums for those who bet on them. But betting on dogs is not a high-class sport. Dogs are not horses; 
they cost little to acquire and maintain. Pit bulls easily and quickly 
became associated with the poor, and <a href="https://law.lclark.edu/live/files/32171-25-1-third-articlepdf">especially with Black men</a>, in a narrative that connected pit bulls with gang violence and crime.That’s how prejudice works: The one-on-one <a href="https://drexel.edu/%7E/media/Files/law/law%20review/v10-3/Saucier%2010%20Drexel%20L%20Rev%20673.ashx">lamination of the pit bull onto the African American male</a> reduced people to their accessories. <figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666455968529.jpg" alt="Image courtesy of Pixabay" />
 <figcaption>Image courtesy of Pixabay</figcaption>
 </figure>Dogfighting was <a href="https://www.animallaw.info/article/detailed-discussion-dog-fighting">outlawed in all 50 states by 1976</a>, although illegal businesses persisted. Coverage of the practice spawned <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/article/pit-bull-ban-aggressive-dog-breed-bronwen-dickey">broad assertions</a>
 about the dogs that did the fighting. As breed bans proliferated, legal
 rulings proclaimed these dogs “dangerous to the safety or health of the
 community” and judged that “<a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/166/698/">public interests demand that the worthless shall be exterminated</a>.”In 1987 Sports Illustrated put a pit bull, teeth bared, on its cover,
 with the headline “Beware of this Dog,” which it characterized as <a href="https://vault.si.com/vault/1987/07/27/the-pit-bull-friend-and-killer-is-the-pit-bull-a-fine-animal-as-its-admirers-claim-or-is-it-a-vicious-dog-unfit-for-society">born with “a will to kill</a>.”
 Time magazine published “Time Bombs on Legs” featuring this “vicious 
hound of the Baskervilles” that “seized small children like rag dolls 
and mauled them to death in <a href="https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,965065,00.html">a frenzy of bloodletting</a>.”<h2>Presumed vicious</h2>If a dog has “vicious propensities,” the owner is assumed to share in
 this projected violence, both legally and generally in public 
perception. And once deemed “contraband,” both property and people are 
at risk. This was evident in the much-publicized 2007 <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/306009/the-lost-dogs-by-jim-gorant/">indictment of Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick</a> for running a dogfighting business called Bad Newz Kennels in Virginia. Even the <a href="https://www.humanesociety.org/">Humane Society of the United States</a> and <a href="https://www.peta.org/">People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals</a>
 – two of the nation’s leading animal welfare advocacy groups – argued 
that the 47 pit bulls recovered from the facility should be killed 
because they <a href="https://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-95941sy0aug03-story.html">posed a threat to people and other animals</a>.If not for the intervention of <a href="https://bestfriends.org/">Best Friends Animal Society</a>, Vick’s dogs would have been euthanized. As the film “<a href="http://www.championsdocumentary.com/the-dogs">Champions</a>” recounts, a <a href="https://www.animallaw.info/article/lessons-learned-acting-guardianspecial-master-bad-newz-kennels-case">court-appointed special master</a> determined each dog’s fate. Ultimately, nearly all of the dogs were successfully placed in <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/12/21/michael-vick-dog-survivor-frodo-dies/">sanctuaries or adoptive homes</a>.<figure>
 <iframe width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5GmJNTRhafI"></iframe>
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Debating breed bans</h2>Pit bulls still suffer more than any other dogs from the fact that 
they are a type of dog, not a distinct breed. Once recognized by the 
American Kennel Club as an <a href="https://www.akc.org/dog-breeds/american-staffordshire-terrier/">American Staffordshire terrier</a>, popularly known as an Amstaff, and registered with the United Kennel Club and the American Dog Breeders Association as an <a href="https://www.ukcdogs.com/american-pit-bull-terrier">American pit bull terrier</a>, now any dog characterized as a “pit bull type” can be <a href="https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/dayan-dead-dogs/">considered an outlaw</a> in many communities. For example, in its 2012 <a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/md-court-of-appeals/1599539.html">Tracey v. Solesky ruling</a>,
 the Maryland Court of Appeals modified the state’s common law in cases 
involving dog injuries. Any dog containing pit bull genes was 
“inherently dangerous” as a matter of law. This subjected owners and landlords to what the courts call “<a href="https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/strict+liability">strict liability</a>.”
 As the court declared: “When an attack involves pit bulls, it is no 
longer necessary to prove that the particular pit bull or pit bulls are 
dangerous.” Dissenting from the ruling, Judge Clayton Greene recognized the 
absurdity of the majority opinion’s “unworkable rule”: “How much ‘pit 
bull,’” he asked, “must there be in a dog to bring it within the strict 
liability edict?”It’s equally unanswerable how to tell when a dog is a pit bull mix. 
From the shape of its head? Its stance? The way it looks at you?Conundrums like these call into question statistics that show pit bulls to be <a href="https://www.coloradoinjurylaw.com/dog-bite-statistics/">more dangerous than other breeds</a>. These figures vary a great deal depending on their sources. Any statistics about pit bull attacks depend on the definition of a 
pit bull – yet it’s really hard to get good dog bite data that <a href="https://www.avma.org/javma-news/2017-11-15/dangerous-dog-debate">accurately IDs the breed</a>. <figure>
 <iframe width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4uEpEAD23Dc"></iframe>
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>Over the past decade, awareness has grown that breed-specific legislation <a href="https://www.avma.org/resources/pet-owners/why-breed-specific-legislation-not-answer">does not make the public safer</a> but does <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/09/01/pitbull-ban-lawsuit-prince-georges/">penalize responsible owners and their dogs</a>. Currently 21 states prohibit local government from enforcing breed-specific legislation or <a href="https://wagwalking.com/daily/what-states-allow-pit-bulls">naming specific breeds in dangerous dog laws</a>. Maryland passed a law reversing the Tracey ruling in 2014. Yet 15 states still <a href="https://dogsandclogs.com/states-with-pitbull-bans/#15_states_with_Pit_Bull_bans">allow local communities to enact breed-specific bans</a>. Pit bulls demand a great deal more from humans than some dogs, but 
alongside their bracing way of being in the world, we humans learn 
another way of thinking and loving. Compared with many other breeds, 
they offer a more demanding but always affecting communion.Colin Dayan is a Professor of English, Robert Penn Warren Professor in the Humanities, and Professor of Law at Vanderbilt University.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666456414214.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure><div><iframe src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/192483/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important" referrerpolicy="no-referrer-when-downgrade"></iframe></div>

🎥 Pit bulls: Coming full circle from 'public enemy' status

ST. LOUIS (AP) — A federal appeals court late Friday issued an administrative stay temporarily blocking President Joe Biden's plan to cancel billions of dollars in federal student loans.

(Click below to&nbsp; watch the President deliver remarks Friday on student debt relief)

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued the stay while it considers a motion from six Republican-led states to block the loan cancellation program. The stay ordered the Biden administration not to act on the program while it considers the appeal.

The order came just days after people began applying for loan forgiveness.

The crucial question now is whether the issue will be resolved before Jan. 1, when payments on federal student loans are expected to restart after being paused during the pandemic. Millions of Americans were expected to get their debt canceled entirely under Biden’s plan, but they now face uncertainty about whether they will need to start making payments in January.

Biden has said his previous extension of the payment pause would be the final one, but economists worry that many Americans may not have regained financial footing after the upheaval of the pandemic. If borrowers who were expecting debt cancellation are asked to make payments in January, there’s fear that many could fall behind on the bills and default on their loans.

A notice of appeal to the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was filed late Thursday, hours after&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-education-lawsuits-st-louis-missouri-a54a892e45f80c5329d45b8fe587f267">U.S. District Judge Henry Autrey in St. Louis ruled</a>&nbsp;that since the states of Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas and South Carolina failed to establish standing, “the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/st-louis-missouri-kansas-nebraska-education-1818db4383863111b0263125d2eed73c">Court lacks jurisdiction</a>&nbsp;to hear this case.”

Separately, the six states also asked the district court for an injunction prohibiting the administration from implementing the debt cancellation plan until the appeals process plays out.

Speaking at Delaware State University, a historically Black university where the majority of students receive federal Pell Grants,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-dover-delaware-pell-grant-business-6519cd6cb024f81012359bc47a174ee6">Biden on Friday said</a>&nbsp;nearly 22 million people have applied for the loan relief in the week since his administration made its online application available.

The plan, announced in August, would cancel $10,000 in student loan debt for those making less than $125,000 or households with less than $250,000 in income. Pell Grant recipients, who typically demonstrate more financial need, will get an additional $10,000 in debt forgiven.

The Congressional Budget Office has said the program will cost about $400 billion over the next three decades. James Campbell, an attorney for the Nebraska attorney general’s office, told Autrey at an Oct. 12 hearing that the administration is acting outside its authorities in a way that will cost states millions of dollars.

The cancellation applies to federal student loans used to attend undergraduate and graduate school, along with Parent Plus loans. Current college students qualify if their loans were disbursed before July 1. The plan makes 43 million borrowers eligible for some debt forgiveness, with 20 million who could get their debt erased entirely, according to the administration.

The announcement immediately became a major political issue ahead of the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/2022-midterm-elections">November midterm elections</a>.

Conservative attorneys, Republican lawmakers and business-oriented groups have asserted that Biden overstepped his authority in taking such sweeping action without the assent of Congress. They called it an unfair government giveaway for relatively affluent people at the expense of taxpayers who didn’t pursue higher education.

Many Democratic lawmakers facing tough reelection contests have distanced themselves from the plan.

Biden on Friday blasted Republicans who have criticized his relief program, saying “their outrage is wrong and it’s hypocritical.” He noted that some Republican officials had debt and pandemic relief loans forgiven.

<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-health-lawsuits-covid-missouri-862d783188de45b698c54b00820d3616">The six states sued in September</a>. Lawyers for the administration countered that the Department of Education has “broad authority to manage the federal student financial aid programs.” A court filing stated that the 2003 Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act, or HEROES Act, allows the secretary of education to waive or modify terms of federal student loans in times of war or national emergency.

“COVID-19 is such an emergency,” the filing stated.

The HEROES Act was enacted after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to help members of the military. The Justice Department says the law allows Biden to reduce or erase student loan debt during a national emergency. Republicans argue the administration is misinterpreting the law, in part because the pandemic no longer qualifies as a national emergency.

Justice Department attorney Brian Netter told Autrey at the Oct. 12 hearing that fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic is still rippling. He said student loan defaults have skyrocketed over the past 2 1/2 years.

Other lawsuits also have sought to stop the program. Earlier Thursday, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett&nbsp;<a href="https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/justice-barrett-rejects-appeal-over-biden-student-debt-plan/">rejected an appeal</a>&nbsp;from a Wisconsin taxpayers group seeking to stop the debt cancellation program.

Barrett, who oversees emergency appeals from Wisconsin and neighboring states, did not comment in turning away the appeal from the Brown County Taxpayers Association. The group wrote in its Supreme Court filing that it needed an emergency order because the administration could begin canceling outstanding student debt as soon as Sunday.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666387946952.png" alt="Speaking at Delaware State University, a historically Black university where the majority of students receive federal Pell Grants,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-dover-delaware-pell-grant-business-6519cd6cb024f81012359bc47a174ee6">Biden on Friday said</a>&nbsp;nearly 22 million people have applied for the loan relief in the week since his administration made its online application available.- White House photo" />
 <figcaption>Speaking at Delaware State University, a historically Black university where the majority of students receive federal Pell Grants,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-dover-delaware-pell-grant-business-6519cd6cb024f81012359bc47a174ee6">Biden on Friday said</a>&nbsp;nearly 22 million people have applied for the loan relief in the week since his administration made its online application available.- White House photo</figcaption>
 </figure>ST. LOUIS (AP) — A federal appeals court late Friday issued an administrative stay temporarily blocking President Joe Biden's plan to cancel billions of dollars in federal student loans.(Click below to&nbsp; watch the President deliver remarks Friday on student debt relief)<div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sI6G66PtJZY?start=138" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued the stay while it considers a motion from six Republican-led states to block the loan cancellation program. The stay ordered the Biden administration not to act on the program while it considers the appeal.The order came just days after people began applying for loan forgiveness.It’s unclear what the decision means for the 22 million borrowers who already applied for the relief. The Biden administration had promised not to clear any debt before Oct. 23 as it battled the legal challenges, but the soonest it was expected to begin erasing debt was mid-November.The crucial question now is whether the issue will be resolved before Jan. 1, when payments on federal student loans are expected to restart after being paused during the pandemic. Millions of Americans were expected to get their debt canceled entirely under Biden’s plan, but they now face uncertainty about whether they will need to start making payments in January.Biden has said his previous extension of the payment pause would be the final one, but economists worry that many Americans may not have regained financial footing after the upheaval of the pandemic. If borrowers who were expecting debt cancellation are asked to make payments in January, there’s fear that many could fall behind on the bills and default on their loans.A notice of appeal to the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was filed late Thursday, hours after&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-education-lawsuits-st-louis-missouri-a54a892e45f80c5329d45b8fe587f267">U.S. District Judge Henry Autrey in St. Louis ruled</a>&nbsp;that since the states of Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas and South Carolina failed to establish standing, “the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/st-louis-missouri-kansas-nebraska-education-1818db4383863111b0263125d2eed73c">Court lacks jurisdiction</a>&nbsp;to hear this case.”Separately, the six states also asked the district court for an injunction prohibiting the administration from implementing the debt cancellation plan until the appeals process plays out.Speaking at Delaware State University, a historically Black university where the majority of students receive federal Pell Grants,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-dover-delaware-pell-grant-business-6519cd6cb024f81012359bc47a174ee6">Biden on Friday said</a>&nbsp;nearly 22 million people have applied for the loan relief in the week since his administration made its online application available.The plan, announced in August, would cancel $10,000 in student loan debt for those making less than $125,000 or households with less than $250,000 in income. Pell Grant recipients, who typically demonstrate more financial need, will get an additional $10,000 in debt forgiven.The Congressional Budget Office has said the program will cost about $400 billion over the next three decades. James Campbell, an attorney for the Nebraska attorney general’s office, told Autrey at an Oct. 12 hearing that the administration is acting outside its authorities in a way that will cost states millions of dollars.The cancellation applies to federal student loans used to attend undergraduate and graduate school, along with Parent Plus loans. Current college students qualify if their loans were disbursed before July 1. The plan makes 43 million borrowers eligible for some debt forgiveness, with 20 million who could get their debt erased entirely, according to the administration.The announcement immediately became a major political issue ahead of the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/2022-midterm-elections">November midterm elections</a>.Conservative attorneys, Republican lawmakers and business-oriented groups have asserted that Biden overstepped his authority in taking such sweeping action without the assent of Congress. They called it an unfair government giveaway for relatively affluent people at the expense of taxpayers who didn’t pursue higher education.Many Democratic lawmakers facing tough reelection contests have distanced themselves from the plan.Biden on Friday blasted Republicans who have criticized his relief program, saying “their outrage is wrong and it’s hypocritical.” He noted that some Republican officials had debt and pandemic relief loans forgiven.<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-health-lawsuits-covid-missouri-862d783188de45b698c54b00820d3616">The six states sued in September</a>. Lawyers for the administration countered that the Department of Education has “broad authority to manage the federal student financial aid programs.” A court filing stated that the 2003 Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act, or HEROES Act, allows the secretary of education to waive or modify terms of federal student loans in times of war or national emergency.“COVID-19 is such an emergency,” the filing stated.The HEROES Act was enacted after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to help members of the military. The Justice Department says the law allows Biden to reduce or erase student loan debt during a national emergency. Republicans argue the administration is misinterpreting the law, in part because the pandemic no longer qualifies as a national emergency.Justice Department attorney Brian Netter told Autrey at the Oct. 12 hearing that fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic is still rippling. He said student loan defaults have skyrocketed over the past 2 1/2 years.Other lawsuits also have sought to stop the program. Earlier Thursday, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett&nbsp;<a href="https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/justice-barrett-rejects-appeal-over-biden-student-debt-plan/">rejected an appeal</a>&nbsp;from a Wisconsin taxpayers group seeking to stop the debt cancellation program.Barrett, who oversees emergency appeals from Wisconsin and neighboring states, did not comment in turning away the appeal from the Brown County Taxpayers Association. The group wrote in its Supreme Court filing that it needed an emergency order because the administration could begin canceling outstanding student debt as soon as Sunday.

🎥Court temporarily blocks Biden's student loan forgiveness

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House committee investigating the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/capitol-siege">Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol</a>&nbsp;formally issued an&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump">extraordinary subpoena to Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;on Friday, demanding testimony from the former president who lawmakers say “personally orchestrated” a multi-part effort to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/new-mexico-election-security-besieged-county-5e084e84cf25f96364f5afa445968455">overturn the results of the 2020 election</a>.

<a href="https://january6th.house.gov/sites/democrats.january6th.house.gov/files/20221021%20J6%20Cmte%20Subpeona%20to%20Donald%20Trump.pdf">CLICK HERE to read</a> the subpoena

<a href="https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/27/27b7896f-01c5-4609-93c7-742e5cb22e96/830-am-final-january-6th-committee-letter14446.pdf?utm_medium=email_hf&amp;utm_source=ncl__&amp;utm_campaign=20221014___sa&amp;utm_content=__6167&amp;_nlid=test123&amp;_nhids=TEST">CLICK here to read</a>&nbsp;the letter Trump sent to the Jan. 6 committee

The nine-member panel issued&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-congress-donald-trump-government-and-politics-subpoenas-02c10c186a0c92667ebe805f9ffe0b52">a letter to Trump's lawyers</a>&nbsp;saying he must testify, either at the Capitol or by videoconference, “beginning on or about” Nov. 14 and continuing for multiple days if necessary.

The letter also outlined a sweeping request for documents, including personal communications between Trump and members of Congress as well as extremist groups. Those are to be turned in by Nov. 4, although the committee's deadlines are generally subject to negotiation.

“We recognize that a subpoena to a former president is a significant and historic action," Chairman Bennie Thompson and Vice Chair Liz Cheney wrote in the letter to Trump. “We do not take this action lightly.”

The panel rooted its action in history, listing past presidents from John Quincy Adams to Gerald Ford, who testified before Congress after leaving office — and noted that even sitting presidents have responded to congressional subpoenas.

It is unclear how Trump and his legal team will respond. He could comply or negotiate with the committee, announce he will defy the subpoena or ignore it altogether. He could also go to court and try to stop it.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1666385163554.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — The House committee investigating the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/capitol-siege">Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol</a>&nbsp;formally issued an&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump">extraordinary subpoena to Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;on Friday, demanding testimony from the former president who lawmakers say “personally orchestrated” a multi-part effort to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/new-mexico-election-security-besieged-county-5e084e84cf25f96364f5afa445968455">overturn the results of the 2020 election</a>.<a href="https://january6th.house.gov/sites/democrats.january6th.house.gov/files/20221021%20J6%20Cmte%20Subpeona%20to%20Donald%20Trump.pdf">CLICK HERE to read</a> the subpoena<a href="https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/27/27b7896f-01c5-4609-93c7-742e5cb22e96/830-am-final-january-6th-committee-letter14446.pdf?utm_medium=email_hf&amp;utm_source=ncl__&amp;utm_campaign=20221014___sa&amp;utm_content=__6167&amp;_nlid=test123&amp;_nhids=TEST">CLICK here to read</a>&nbsp;the letter Trump sent to the Jan. 6 committeeThe nine-member panel issued&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-congress-donald-trump-government-and-politics-subpoenas-02c10c186a0c92667ebe805f9ffe0b52">a letter to Trump's lawyers</a>&nbsp;saying he must testify, either at the Capitol or by videoconference, “beginning on or about” Nov. 14 and continuing for multiple days if necessary.The letter also outlined a sweeping request for documents, including personal communications between Trump and members of Congress as well as extremist groups. Those are to be turned in by Nov. 4, although the committee's deadlines are generally subject to negotiation.“We recognize that a subpoena to a former president is a significant and historic action," Chairman Bennie Thompson and Vice Chair Liz Cheney wrote in the letter to Trump. “We do not take this action lightly.”The panel rooted its action in history, listing past presidents from John Quincy Adams to Gerald Ford, who testified before Congress after leaving office — and noted that even sitting presidents have responded to congressional subpoenas.It is unclear how Trump and his legal team will respond. He could comply or negotiate with the committee, announce he will defy the subpoena or ignore it altogether. He could also go to court and try to stop it.“We understand that, once again, flouting norms and appropriate and customary process, the Committee has publicly released a copy of its subpoena," David Warrington, a partner with the Dhillon Law Group, which is representing Trump, said in a statement late Friday. "As with any similar matter, we will review and analyze it, and will respond as appropriate to this unprecedented action.”<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1665779973146.png" alt="Former President Trump as shown from Dec. 2, 2020, in the Jan. 6 committee hearing video on Oct. 13." />
 <figcaption>Former President Trump as shown from Dec. 2, 2020, in the Jan. 6 committee hearing video on Oct. 13.</figcaption>
 </figure>The subpoena is the latest and most striking escalation in the House committee’s 15-month investigation of the deadly Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, bringing members of the panel into direct conflict with the man they have investigated from afar through the testimony of aides, allies and associates.In the letter, the committee wrote about the “overwhelming evidence” it has assembled, showing Trump “personally orchestrated” an effort to overturn his defeat in the 2020 election, including by spreading false allegations of widespread voter fraud, “attempting to corrupt” the Justice Department and pressuring state officials, members of Congress and his own vice president to change the results.“In short, you were at the center of the first and only effort by any U.S. President to overturn an election and obstruct the peaceful transition of power, ultimately culminating in a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-government-and-politics-prisons-journalists-d9d80376eb250f3d4a2855882d96cbdd">bloody attack on our own Capitol</a>&nbsp;and on the Congress itself,” Thompson and Cheney said.Lawmakers say key details about what Trump was doing and saying during the siege remain unknown. According to the committee, the only person who can fill the gaps is Trump himself.The panel — comprised of seven Democrats and two Republicans — approved the subpoena for Trump in a surprise vote last week. Every member voted in support.The subpoena calls for testimony about Trump's dealings with several former aides and associates who have asserted their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination to the committee, including Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, John Eastman, Jeffrey Clark and Kelli Ward.“These Fifth Amendment assertions — made by persons with whom you interacted — related directly to you and your conduct," the subpoena letter reads. "They provide specific examples where your truthful testimony under oath with be important.”The committee also made 19 requests for documents and communication — including for any messages Trump sent on the encrypted messaging app Signal “or any other means” to members of Congress and others about the stunning events of the Capitol attack.The scope of the committee's request is expansive — pursuing documents from Sept. 1, 2020, two months before the election, to the present on the president’s communications with the groups like the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys — as the panel looks to compile a historical record of the run-up to the Capitol attack and then the aftermath.But there remains little legal advantage for Trump to cooperate with the committee as he&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-donald-trump-georgia-crime-congress-e285497c6a96f82ed08a0d561316029c">already faces other civil and criminal legal battles</a>&nbsp;in various jurisdictions, including over his family business in New York and the handling of presidential records at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.It’s possible his lawyers could simply run out the clock on the subpoena if they go to court to try to squash it as the committee is required to finish its work by the end of the year.“It seems improbable to me that this could be litigated to conclusion in the time remaining to the Committee in this Congress,” Peter Keisler, who served as acting attorney general under President George W. Bush, told The Associated Press.There is ample precedent for Congress to seek testimony from a former president. Over the past century and a half, at least six current and former presidents have testified on Capitol Hill, including John Tyler and Quincy Adams after both were subpoenaed in 1848.This could be Trump’s chance to respond directly to the committee, to tell his version of events, but it’s unlikely the defeated president would take it. He has ridiculed the panel and its work, preferring to share his views on his own terms. And testifying under oath could create legal exposure in the several other investigations he is caught up in.If Trump refuses to comply with the subpoena, the panel will have to weigh the practical and political implications of holding him in contempt of Congress.“That’s a bridge we cross if we have to get there,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a Republican member of the committee, told ABC on Sunday. “He’s made it clear he has nothing to hide, is what he says. So, he should come in.”If the full House voted to recommend a contempt charge against Trump, the Justice Department would then review the case and decide on any further steps.Other witnesses have faced legal consequences for defying the committee, including close Trump ally&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-steve-bannon-congress-donald-trump-sentencing-36d412eba9e1609a030859852378ae3d">Steve Bannon, who was convicted of contempt in July and was sentenced Friday to four months behind bars.</a>&nbsp;But holding a former president in contempt would be another matter.The subpoena to Trump comes as the committee is looking to wrap up its investigative work and compile a final, comprehensive report that will be published by the end of the year. Investigators have interviewed more than 1,000 witnesses, including many of Trump’s top White House aides, and obtained tens of thousands of pages of documents since the committee was formed in July 2021.But the panel is authorized only through this Congress, which ends on Jan. 3. That means members have only a few short months — amid a hectic lame-duck legislative period after the midterm elections — to refine their historical record of the worst attack on the Capitol in two centuries. Whether that will include the testimony from the 45th president of the United States remains to be seen.The committee ended its subpoena to Trump by quoting one of his predecessors: "President (Theodore) Roosevelt explained during his congressional testimony, ‘an ex-President is merely a citizen of the United States, like any other citizen, and it is his plain duty to try to help this committee or respond to its invitation.’”