WASHINGTON (AP) — Millions of Social Security recipients will get an 8.7% boost in their benefits in 2023.

That’s a historic increase and welcome news for American retirees and others — but it’s tempered by the fact that it’s fueled by record high inflation that’s raised the cost of everyday living.

The cost-of living adjustment means the average recipient will receive more than $140 extra a month beginning in January, according to estimates released Thursday by the Social Security Administration.

The boost in benefits will be coupled with a 3% drop in Medicare Part B premiums, meaning retirees will get the full impact of the jump in Social Security benefits.

The Social Security Administration's Acting Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi said combined with Medicare premiums going down in 2023, the Social Security benefit increase, “will give seniors more peace of mind and breathing room.”

"This year’s substantial Social Security cost-of-living adjustment is the first time in over a decade that Medicare premiums are not rising and shows that we can provide more support to older Americans who count on the benefits they have earned,” she said.

On Thursday morning, the U.S. government announced the increase for the more than 65 million Social Security beneficiaries will get every month.&nbsp;

WHAT DO BENEFICIARIES HAVE TO DO TO GET IT?

No, but it’s likely the heftiest in 40 years, which is longer than the vast majority of Social Security beneficiaries have been getting payments. In 1981, the increase was 11.2%.

January. They’re also permanent, and they compound. That means the following year’s percentage increase, whatever it ends up being, will be on top of the new, larger payment beneficiaries get after this most recent raise.

5.9%, which itself was the biggest in nearly four decades.

Since 2000, it’s averaged 2.3% as inflation remained remarkably tame through all kinds of economic swings. During some of the toughest years in that stretch, the bigger worry for the economy was actually that inflation was running too low.

Since the 2008 financial crisis, the U.S. government has announced zero increases to Social Security benefits three times because inflation was so weak.

SO THE INCREASE IS TO MAKE UP FOR INFLATION?

That's the intent. As Americans have become painfully aware over the past year, each $1 doesn't go as far at the grocery store as it used to.

HAS SOCIAL SECURITY ALWAYS GIVEN SUCH INCREASES?

No. The first American to get a monthly retirement check from Social Security, Ida May Fuller from Ludlow, Vermont, got the same $22.54 monthly benefit for 10 years.

Automatic annual cost-of-living adjustments didn't begin for Social Security until 1975, after a law passed in 1972 requiring them.

It's tied to a measure of inflation called the CPI-W index, which tracks what kinds of prices are being paid by urban wage earners and clerical workers.

More specifically, the increase is based on how much the CPI-W increases from the summer of one year to the next.

IS THAT THE INFLATION MEASURE EVERYONE FOLLOWS?

No. People generally pay more attention to a much broader measure of inflation, the CPI-U index, which covers all urban consumers. That covers 93% of the total U.S. population.

The CPI-W, meanwhile, covers only about 29% of the U.S. population. It has been around longer than the CPI-U, which the government began compiling only after the legislation that required Social Security's annual increases be linked to inflation.

Yes, and some critics have argued for years that Social Security should change to a different measure, one that’s pegged to older people in particular.

Another experimental index, called CPI-E, is supposed to offer a better reflection of how Americans aged 62 and above spend their money. It has historically shown higher rates of inflation for older Americans than the CPI-U or CPI-W, but it has not taken hold. Neither have other measures compiled by organizations outside the government that hope to show how inflation affects older Americans specifically.

Recently, the CPI-E has shown a bit milder inflation than CPI-W or CPI-U.

To calculate the CPI-E, the government pulls from the same survey data used to measure the broad CPI-U. But there are relatively few older households in that data set, meaning it may not be the most accurate.

All indexes give just a rough approximation of what inflation really is. But the more pressing challenge may be that if the government switched to a different index, one that showed higher inflation for older Americans, Social Security would have to pay out higher benefits.

That in turn would mean a faster drain on Social Security's trust fund, which looks to run empty in a little more than a decade at its current pace.

HOW IS THE SIZE SET FOR SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS?

Through a complicated formula that takes into account several factors, including how much a worker made in their 35 highest-earning years. Generally, those who made more money and those who wait longer to start getting Social Security get larger benefits, up to a point.

This year, the maximum allowed benefit for someone who retired at full retirement age is $3,345 monthly.

WILL RICH PEOPLE GET THE SAME BOOST IN SOCIAL SECURITY?

Yes. Everyone gets the same percentage increase, whether they have millions of dollars in retirement savings or are just scraping by.

IF THE INCREASE IS BASED ON INFLATION IN URBAN AREAS, WILL PEOPLE IN RURAL AREAS GET THE SAME BOOST?

“The COLA doesn't take into account where you live or your actual spending patterns,” said William Arnone, CEO of the National Academy of Social Insurance. "For some people, it's an overstatement of cost of living for, say, small towns in the Midwest versus urban areas like New York, D.C. or Chicago. With many older people choosing to live in suburban areas or rural areas, some will benefit more” than others from the same-sized increase.

It's great news for every beneficiary and for the businesses around them that could see more in sales.

But it also means the Social Security system is paying out more, which can add more strain on its trust fund.

One year of big increases driven by inflation won't drain the system by itself, but it's already long been heading toward an unsustainable future. The latest annual trustees report for Social Security said its trust funds that pay out retirement and survivors and disability benefits will be able to pay scheduled benefits on a timely basis until 2035. After that, incoming cash from taxes will be enough to pay 80% of scheduled benefits.

It will put&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/inflation-business-government-and-politics-4727d63afa3667d5c792a288f63b4ac2">more cash in the hands of people</a>&nbsp;who mostly really need it, and they're very likely to use it. That will feed more fuel into the economy, which could keep upward pressure on inflation.

Social Security's boost, though, will have a smaller impact on the economy than past stimulus packages provided by Washington, snarls in supply chains caused by worldwide shutdowns of businesses or other factors that economists say are behind the worst inflation in decades.

The risk of a recession seems to grow by the day, but many economists expect inflation to come down as interest-rate hikes take effect and supply chains continue to improve.

Economists at Deutsche Bank, for example, expect inflation to ease from 8.2% this past August to 7.2% in the last three months of this year. In 2023, they see it dropping to 3.9% in the second half of the year.

This is key for many Social Security beneficiaries. That would mean the COLA they receive this upcoming year would be bigger than the inflation they're feeling at the moment. That would help make up for this past year, where actual inflation far outstripped the cost-of-living increase they got in January 2022.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Millions of Social Security recipients will get an 8.7% boost in their benefits in 2023.That’s a historic increase and welcome news for American retirees and others — but it’s tempered by the fact that it’s fueled by record high inflation that’s raised the cost of everyday living.The cost-of living adjustment means the average recipient will receive more than $140 extra a month beginning in January, according to estimates released Thursday by the Social Security Administration.The boost in benefits will be coupled with a 3% drop in Medicare Part B premiums, meaning retirees will get the full impact of the jump in Social Security benefits.The Social Security Administration's Acting Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi said combined with Medicare premiums going down in 2023, the Social Security benefit increase, “will give seniors more peace of mind and breathing room.”"This year’s substantial Social Security cost-of-living adjustment is the first time in over a decade that Medicare premiums are not rising and shows that we can provide more support to older Americans who count on the benefits they have earned,” she said.Here’s a look at what’s happenedWHAT’S THE BIG DEAL?On Thursday morning, the U.S. government announced the increase for the more than 65 million Social Security beneficiaries will get every month.&nbsp;WHAT DO BENEFICIARIES HAVE TO DO TO GET IT?Nothing.WILL THIS BE THE BIGGEST INCREASE EVER?No, but it’s likely the heftiest in 40 years, which is longer than the vast majority of Social Security beneficiaries have been getting payments. In 1981, the increase was 11.2%.WHEN WILL THE BIGGER PAYMENTS BEGIN?January. They’re also permanent, and they compound. That means the following year’s percentage increase, whatever it ends up being, will be on top of the new, larger payment beneficiaries get after this most recent raise.HOW BIG WAS THIS PAST YEAR’S INCREASE?5.9%, which itself was the biggest in nearly four decades.WHAT'S THE TYPICAL INCREASE?Since 2000, it’s averaged 2.3% as inflation remained remarkably tame through all kinds of economic swings. During some of the toughest years in that stretch, the bigger worry for the economy was actually that inflation was running too low.Since the 2008 financial crisis, the U.S. government has announced zero increases to Social Security benefits three times because inflation was so weak.SO THE INCREASE IS TO MAKE UP FOR INFLATION?That's the intent. As Americans have become painfully aware over the past year, each $1 doesn't go as far at the grocery store as it used to.HAS SOCIAL SECURITY ALWAYS GIVEN SUCH INCREASES?No. The first American to get a monthly retirement check from Social Security, Ida May Fuller from Ludlow, Vermont, got the same $22.54 monthly benefit for 10 years.Automatic annual cost-of-living adjustments didn't begin for Social Security until 1975, after a law passed in 1972 requiring them.HOW IS THE SIZE OF THE INCREASE SET?It's tied to a measure of inflation called the CPI-W index, which tracks what kinds of prices are being paid by urban wage earners and clerical workers.More specifically, the increase is based on how much the CPI-W increases from the summer of one year to the next.IS THAT THE INFLATION MEASURE EVERYONE FOLLOWS?No. People generally pay more attention to a much broader measure of inflation, the CPI-U index, which covers all urban consumers. That covers 93% of the total U.S. population.The CPI-W, meanwhile, covers only about 29% of the U.S. population. It has been around longer than the CPI-U, which the government began compiling only after the legislation that required Social Security's annual increases be linked to inflation.IS THAT WEIRD?Yes, and some critics have argued for years that Social Security should change to a different measure, one that’s pegged to older people in particular.Another experimental index, called CPI-E, is supposed to offer a better reflection of how Americans aged 62 and above spend their money. It has historically shown higher rates of inflation for older Americans than the CPI-U or CPI-W, but it has not taken hold. Neither have other measures compiled by organizations outside the government that hope to show how inflation affects older Americans specifically.Recently, the CPI-E has shown a bit milder inflation than CPI-W or CPI-U.WHY NOT USE ONE OF THOSE OTHER INDEXES?To calculate the CPI-E, the government pulls from the same survey data used to measure the broad CPI-U. But there are relatively few older households in that data set, meaning it may not be the most accurate.All indexes give just a rough approximation of what inflation really is. But the more pressing challenge may be that if the government switched to a different index, one that showed higher inflation for older Americans, Social Security would have to pay out higher benefits.That in turn would mean a faster drain on Social Security's trust fund, which looks to run empty in a little more than a decade at its current pace.HOW IS THE SIZE SET FOR SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS?Through a complicated formula that takes into account several factors, including how much a worker made in their 35 highest-earning years. Generally, those who made more money and those who wait longer to start getting Social Security get larger benefits, up to a point.This year, the maximum allowed benefit for someone who retired at full retirement age is $3,345 monthly.WILL RICH PEOPLE GET THE SAME BOOST IN SOCIAL SECURITY?Yes. Everyone gets the same percentage increase, whether they have millions of dollars in retirement savings or are just scraping by.IF THE INCREASE IS BASED ON INFLATION IN URBAN AREAS, WILL PEOPLE IN RURAL AREAS GET THE SAME BOOST?Yes.“The COLA doesn't take into account where you live or your actual spending patterns,” said William Arnone, CEO of the National Academy of Social Insurance. "For some people, it's an overstatement of cost of living for, say, small towns in the Midwest versus urban areas like New York, D.C. or Chicago. With many older people choosing to live in suburban areas or rural areas, some will benefit more” than others from the same-sized increase.IS THE INCREASE BAD NEWS FOR ANYONE?It's great news for every beneficiary and for the businesses around them that could see more in sales.But it also means the Social Security system is paying out more, which can add more strain on its trust fund.One year of big increases driven by inflation won't drain the system by itself, but it's already long been heading toward an unsustainable future. The latest annual trustees report for Social Security said its trust funds that pay out retirement and survivors and disability benefits will be able to pay scheduled benefits on a timely basis until 2035. After that, incoming cash from taxes will be enough to pay 80% of scheduled benefits.WILL THIS MAKE INFLATION WORSE?It will put&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/inflation-business-government-and-politics-4727d63afa3667d5c792a288f63b4ac2">more cash in the hands of people</a>&nbsp;who mostly really need it, and they're very likely to use it. That will feed more fuel into the economy, which could keep upward pressure on inflation.Social Security's boost, though, will have a smaller impact on the economy than past stimulus packages provided by Washington, snarls in supply chains caused by worldwide shutdowns of businesses or other factors that economists say are behind the worst inflation in decades.SO EVERYTHING'S GOING TERRIBLY?The risk of a recession seems to grow by the day, but many economists expect inflation to come down as interest-rate hikes take effect and supply chains continue to improve.Economists at Deutsche Bank, for example, expect inflation to ease from 8.2% this past August to 7.2% in the last three months of this year. In 2023, they see it dropping to 3.9% in the second half of the year.This is key for many Social Security beneficiaries. That would mean the COLA they receive this upcoming year would be bigger than the inflation they're feeling at the moment. That would help make up for this past year, where actual inflation far outstripped the cost-of-living increase they got in January 2022.

Social Security benefits to jump by 8.7%, largest in 40 years

LEADVILLE, Colo. (AP) — President Joe Biden designated the first national monument of his administration at Camp Hale, a World War II-era training site in this state, as he called for protecting “treasured lands” that tell the story of America.

(Click below to watch the President's comments)

The announcement is a boost to Colorado’s senior Democratic senator, Michael Bennet, who has for years advocated for the designation and is in a competitive re-election bid this November. The location is an alpine training site where U.S. soldiers prepared for battles in the Italian Alps during World War II.

“We’re doing it not just for today, but for all the ages,” Biden said, standing amid the rugged, sun-drenched backdrop flanked by mountains as far as the eye could see. The remote site was located off a winding road past an abandoned mine and an old mountain home. “It’s for the people of Colorado, but it also goes well beyond the people of Colorado. It’s for all the people across America and the world.”

The proclamation formally establishes the Camp Hale – Continental Divide National Monument, spanning more than 53,800 acres that will be protected and managed by the U.S. Forest Service. Many members of the 10th Mountain Division who trained at Camp Hale returned to Colorado after the war and helped create the state’s lucrative ski industry, and the site is now used for outdoor activities such as hiking and camping, and is home to rare wildlife.

“Soldiers in Camp Hale learned to scale rock, ski and survive, preparing for the war they were about to fight,” said Biden, who for Wednesday's announcement was joined by two veterans from the 10th Mountain Division. He praised the troops' “skill, strength and stamina that could've been only gained in a place like this.”

While most national monuments protect extraordinary natural landscapes, there are at least 12 other military sites designated as national monuments by other presidents.

Biden on Wednesday called his designation a permanent one that none of his future successors can overturn, although previous presidents have reduced the size of national monuments. The issue of whether a president can eliminate a national monument has not been resolved in court.

Donald Trump shrank two national monuments in southern Utah, a decision that tribes and environmental groups challenged in court. Those cases had been pending when Biden restored full protections for the monuments and expanded one of its boundaries. Biden also restored protections for an area off the New England coast that Trump had opened to commercial fishing.

In a separate move, the Biden administration also announced Wednesday it is pausing new mining and oil and gas drilling on 225,000 acres of public land in the Thompson Divide, a natural gas-rich area not far from Camp Hale.

Citing a need to protect wildlife, the Interior Department said it is initiating a review of a proposed 20-year withdrawal of the area from new leasing. Preexisting natural gas leases that account for less than 1% of active federal leases in Colorado won’t be affected.

Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert, whose western Colorado district is home to the new restrictions, condemned the move as a “land grab” that would prevent domestic energy production.

The president's stop in Colorado Wednesday is part of a three-state swing out West this week. Later Wednesday, Biden heads to California, where he will hold a pair of events promoting two of his&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/inflation-biden-us-supreme-court-politics-technology-ed99c35508a1930a5c7df52a02c22f8e">most significant legislative achievements</a>&nbsp;and headline a fundraiser for the House Democrats' campaign arm.

Finally, Biden will stop in Oregon. where his party is in danger of losing the governor's race, to rally Democrats. Early voting starts in Oregon and Colorado next week and is already underway in California.

He is notably staying away from states where his presence could hurt Democrats; on this trip he’s skipping Nevada and Arizona, where incumbent Democratic senators are battling tough reelection bids.

Democratic candidates have been far more likely to appear with Biden if it's an official White House event, and that was the approach in Colorado, where Bennet stood alongside the president to tout the designation.

“You have excellent taste, Mr. President, for your administration’s first national monument designation,” Bennet said Wednesday. “Your designation means more Americans will come to appreciate the extraordinary history of this place — a history that goes back to before when Colorado was a state.”

Meanwhile, Bennet’s opponent, Republican Joe O’Dea, dismissed Biden’s visit as “a political stunt.”

“It’s not changing our economy. It’s not changing the price of gas,” O’Dea said in an interview of the Camp Hale designation. He added that while “Camp Hale’s a special place,” its preservation should have come through Congress. O’Dea called Biden’s unilateral action a "usurpation of power." A far more sweeping conservation bill has been stalled in Congress due to opposition from Republicans.

O'Dea, a businessman with a moderate profile, has mounted a competitive bid against Bennet, who has served in the Senate since 2009. National Republicans believe he is among the party's best recruits this cycle.

Still, the race still remains somewhat of a reach for Republicans, who see better offensive opportunities in states like Nevada, Georgia and Arizona. Still, the Senate Leadership Fund, the primary super PAC dedicated to electing Republicans to the Senate, made its first investment of the cycle in Colorado last week by sending $1.25 million to O'Dea's super PAC.

LEADVILLE, Colo. (AP) — President Joe Biden designated the first national monument of his administration at Camp Hale, a World War II-era training site in this state, as he called for protecting “treasured lands” that tell the story of America.(Click below to watch the President's comments)<div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SYWE0-PMRpQ?start=3" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>The announcement is a boost to Colorado’s senior Democratic senator, Michael Bennet, who has for years advocated for the designation and is in a competitive re-election bid this November. The location is an alpine training site where U.S. soldiers prepared for battles in the Italian Alps during World War II.“We’re doing it not just for today, but for all the ages,” Biden said, standing amid the rugged, sun-drenched backdrop flanked by mountains as far as the eye could see. The remote site was located off a winding road past an abandoned mine and an old mountain home. “It’s for the people of Colorado, but it also goes well beyond the people of Colorado. It’s for all the people across America and the world.”The proclamation formally establishes the Camp Hale – Continental Divide National Monument, spanning more than 53,800 acres that will be protected and managed by the U.S. Forest Service. Many members of the 10th Mountain Division who trained at Camp Hale returned to Colorado after the war and helped create the state’s lucrative ski industry, and the site is now used for outdoor activities such as hiking and camping, and is home to rare wildlife.“Soldiers in Camp Hale learned to scale rock, ski and survive, preparing for the war they were about to fight,” said Biden, who for Wednesday's announcement was joined by two veterans from the 10th Mountain Division. He praised the troops' “skill, strength and stamina that could've been only gained in a place like this.”While most national monuments protect extraordinary natural landscapes, there are at least 12 other military sites designated as national monuments by other presidents.Biden on Wednesday called his designation a permanent one that none of his future successors can overturn, although previous presidents have reduced the size of national monuments. The issue of whether a president can eliminate a national monument has not been resolved in court.Donald Trump shrank two national monuments in southern Utah, a decision that tribes and environmental groups challenged in court. Those cases had been pending when Biden restored full protections for the monuments and expanded one of its boundaries. Biden also restored protections for an area off the New England coast that Trump had opened to commercial fishing.In a separate move, the Biden administration also announced Wednesday it is pausing new mining and oil and gas drilling on 225,000 acres of public land in the Thompson Divide, a natural gas-rich area not far from Camp Hale.Citing a need to protect wildlife, the Interior Department said it is initiating a review of a proposed 20-year withdrawal of the area from new leasing. Preexisting natural gas leases that account for less than 1% of active federal leases in Colorado won’t be affected.Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert, whose western Colorado district is home to the new restrictions, condemned the move as a “land grab” that would prevent domestic energy production.The president's stop in Colorado Wednesday is part of a three-state swing out West this week. Later Wednesday, Biden heads to California, where he will hold a pair of events promoting two of his&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/inflation-biden-us-supreme-court-politics-technology-ed99c35508a1930a5c7df52a02c22f8e">most significant legislative achievements</a>&nbsp;and headline a fundraiser for the House Democrats' campaign arm.Finally, Biden will stop in Oregon. where his party is in danger of losing the governor's race, to rally Democrats. Early voting starts in Oregon and Colorado next week and is already underway in California.He is notably staying away from states where his presence could hurt Democrats; on this trip he’s skipping Nevada and Arizona, where incumbent Democratic senators are battling tough reelection bids.Democratic candidates have been far more likely to appear with Biden if it's an official White House event, and that was the approach in Colorado, where Bennet stood alongside the president to tout the designation.“You have excellent taste, Mr. President, for your administration’s first national monument designation,” Bennet said Wednesday. “Your designation means more Americans will come to appreciate the extraordinary history of this place — a history that goes back to before when Colorado was a state.”Meanwhile, Bennet’s opponent, Republican Joe O’Dea, dismissed Biden’s visit as “a political stunt.”“It’s not changing our economy. It’s not changing the price of gas,” O’Dea said in an interview of the Camp Hale designation. He added that while “Camp Hale’s a special place,” its preservation should have come through Congress. O’Dea called Biden’s unilateral action a "usurpation of power." A far more sweeping conservation bill has been stalled in Congress due to opposition from Republicans.O'Dea, a businessman with a moderate profile, has mounted a competitive bid against Bennet, who has served in the Senate since 2009. National Republicans believe he is among the party's best recruits this cycle.Still, the race still remains somewhat of a reach for Republicans, who see better offensive opportunities in states like Nevada, Georgia and Arizona. Still, the Senate Leadership Fund, the primary super PAC dedicated to electing Republicans to the Senate, made its first investment of the cycle in Colorado last week by sending $1.25 million to O'Dea's super PAC.

🎥 Biden designates his 1st new national monument

By JAMES DETERT <a href="https://theconversation.com/quiet-quitting-and-the-great-resignation-have-a-common-cause-dissatisfied-workers-feel-they-cant-speak-up-in-the-workplace-190390">The Conversation</a>

U.S. workers have been at the forefront of three big trends in recent months. 

First there was the “great resignation,” in which <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-resignation-is-a-trend-that-began-before-the-pandemic-and-bosses-need-to-get-used-to-it-170197">record numbers of workers were quitting</a> their jobs. That coincided with a <a href="https://theconversation.com/america-is-in-the-middle-of-a-labor-mobilization-moment-with-self-organizers-at-starbucks-amazon-trader-joes-and-chipotle-behind-the-union-drive-189826">flurry of unionizing efforts</a> at major U.S. companies, including Starbucks and Apple. Most recently, you’ve probably heard about “<a href="https://theconversation.com/thinking-about-quiet-quitting-heres-why-and-how-you-should-talk-to-your-boss-instead-189499">quiet quitting</a>,” an often-misunderstood phrase that can mean either doing your job’s bare minimum or just not striving to overachieve.

As a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=paxuQXkAAAAJ&amp;hl=en&amp;oi=ao">management professor</a>
 who has studied worker behavior for over two decades, I believe these 
are all reactions to the same problem: Workers are dissatisfied in their
 current jobs and feel they can’t speak up, whether about organizational
 problems, unethical behavior or even just to contribute their knowledge
 and creative ideas. So in response, they generally either leave or 
decrease their effort while suffering in silence.

It doesn’t have to be this way; but it’s also not easy to change. Put
 simply, it will take courageous action from not only workers but 
lawmakers and companies as well.

The problem of ‘organizational silence’

Workplace courage is actually the <a href="https://jimdetert.com">main focus of my research</a>.
 That is, how often do workers speak up when they see a problem or have 
an improvement or innovation to suggest? In our field, we call the 
failure to speak up “<a href="https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61967925">organizational silence</a>,” and my colleagues and I found it everywhere we looked in America’s workplaces.

An <a href="https://workplacecai.com/survey/">online survey</a> I’ve 
been conducting since 2018 suggests workers stand up to their boss or 
other higher-ups about illegal, unethical, hurtful or otherwise 
inappropriate behavior roughly one-third of the time. The frequency 
isn’t much higher when the questions involve speaking up about less 
thorny issues, such as operational problems or ways to improve the 
organization. The numbers are similar even when the other person is a 
colleague who has no power over them.

Colleagues who study whistleblowing likewise find that only a fraction of people who see serious wrongdoing <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-0849-1">take sufficient action</a> to get it stopped, while others have documented how rarely workers say anything <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000296">when they witness microaggressions</a>.

My own small experiment related to this is illustrative. In my 
“Defining Moments” class, I teach students how to speak up competently 
in challenging situations. During the course, I record individual 
simulations in which students pitch suggestions for improving an 
unidentified organization’s diversity and inclusion efforts to two 
actors playing the role of senior executives. I instruct the male actor 
to express at least three microaggressions, such as “Sweetie, you take 
the notes,” toward his female peer during their short interaction with 
each student.

About half the students – who range in age from about 25 to 50 – 
never say a peep in response to the offensive comments. As for the rest,
 they react to only about half the microagressions they hear, and 
typically it’s in the form of helping the victim – “I’ll take the notes”
 – rather than confronting the remark itself.

These findings, collectively, demonstrate the significant problems 
that occur – and are likely to fester – when people stay silent. They 
also contribute to massive <a href="https://www.gallup.com/workplace/391922/employee-engagement-slump-continues.aspx">employee disengagement</a> and leave a whole lot of people feeling inauthentic and impotent at work – or just <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.3.314">regretful over their failures to act</a>.

It’s not, for the most part, that people don’t recognize the problems they could or should respond to.

On the survey that immediately followed my microaggression 
simulation, for example, more than three times as many participants 
noticed the first problematic comment than spoke up about it. Managers I
 work with in all sorts of consulting engagements readily admit to a gap
 between what “should” and “would” be done in situations in which 
something difficult needs to be said to a boss, a peer or even a 
subordinate. Asked to explain the gap, I hear the same response that 
research consistently documents: People are afraid to initiate those 
conversations. 

In part, this is the nature of working in America today. About <a href="https://www.betterteam.com/at-will-employment">three-quarters of all U.S. workers</a> are “at will,” meaning they can be fired for nearly any reason – or none at all. This is why you <a href="https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/er-doctor-who-criticized-bellingham-hospitals-coronavirus-protections-has-been-fired/">hear stories</a> of people <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/30/business/employee-fired-nursing-homes-new-york-times.html?referringSource=articleShare">being fired</a>
 for speaking up about issues that seem pretty important or reasonable. 
And for what it’s worth, there is no free speech in the workplace, as 
the First Amendment <a href="https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/employee-free-speech-in-the-workplace.aspx">does not apply to “private actors</a>.”

As I describe in my 2021 book “<a href="https://store.hbr.org/product/choosing-courage-the-everyday-guide-to-being-brave-at-work/10411">Choosing Courage</a>,” there are four common fears that keep people from speaking up or being completely honest when they do:

Even if you haven’t recently experienced any of these negative 
consequences, you probably still have a set of internalized beliefs 
about the dangers of speaking up that, as my research with management 
scholar Amy Edmondson showed, leads toward <a href="https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61967925">self-censoring</a> in situations where it might actually be safe to speak up.

While I believe workers bear some responsibility when they don’t 
speak up, companies and other organizations are also at fault for 
creating cultures and conditions that don’t encourage honesty.

For example, there are systemic barriers to giving workers more of a voice – such as the <a href="https://www.uschamber.com/employment-law/unions/union-membership-drops-to-previous-low-in-2021">steady decline of union membership</a> since the 1950s and the lack of a sufficient <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/06/23/the-social-safety-net-the-gaps-that-covid-19-spotlights/">safety net</a> that decouples necessities like health care and a secure retirement from a specific employer.

Traditionally, unions have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_01225">sheltered workers</a>
 from some of the adverse consequences listed above, such as by 
preventing those who speak up about an ethical lapse from being 
arbitrarily fired or otherwise punished.

As I see it, there is a mixture of ways to turn this around. 
Lawmakers could strengthen laws intended to support workers who wish to 
form a union – particularly helpful at a time of <a href="https://theconversation.com/america-is-in-the-middle-of-a-labor-mobilization-moment-with-self-organizers-at-starbucks-amazon-trader-joes-and-chipotle-behind-the-union-drive-189826">labor revival</a> and fierce <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/starbucks-dials-up-anti-union-heat-by-accusing-nlrb-of-collusion">anti-union pushback</a> from some employers.

Corporate, nonprofit and government leaders could do more to actually
 encourage their workers to raise their voices by consistently 
soliciting their input and celebrating rather than punishing them for 
offering it. Incidentally, if leaders did more to create these 
conditions, employees would likely see less need for a union.

For workers who fear repercussions, there are skills they can learn 
to help them speak up more effectively and minimize the negative 
consequences of doing so. Sometimes merely changing the framing makes a 
significant difference – for example, asking managers to address a 
safety issue because it’s an opportunity to improve efficiency – can 
resonate better than pointing to the moral reasons to take action.

None of these steps are easy. They will require more courageous 
action by members of each of these groups. But I believe finding ways to
 help workers speak their minds about issues like safety, misconduct and
 performance is critically important because what happens in these 
instances shapes the places where people spend the majority of their 
waking hours – and whether they even want to be there.

James Detert is a Professor of Business Administration at the University of Virginia.

By JAMES DETERT <a href="https://theconversation.com/quiet-quitting-and-the-great-resignation-have-a-common-cause-dissatisfied-workers-feel-they-cant-speak-up-in-the-workplace-190390">The Conversation</a>U.S. workers have been at the forefront of three big trends in recent months. First there was the “great resignation,” in which <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-great-resignation-is-a-trend-that-began-before-the-pandemic-and-bosses-need-to-get-used-to-it-170197">record numbers of workers were quitting</a> their jobs. That coincided with a <a href="https://theconversation.com/america-is-in-the-middle-of-a-labor-mobilization-moment-with-self-organizers-at-starbucks-amazon-trader-joes-and-chipotle-behind-the-union-drive-189826">flurry of unionizing efforts</a> at major U.S. companies, including Starbucks and Apple. Most recently, you’ve probably heard about “<a href="https://theconversation.com/thinking-about-quiet-quitting-heres-why-and-how-you-should-talk-to-your-boss-instead-189499">quiet quitting</a>,” an often-misunderstood phrase that can mean either doing your job’s bare minimum or just not striving to overachieve.As a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=paxuQXkAAAAJ&amp;hl=en&amp;oi=ao">management professor</a>
 who has studied worker behavior for over two decades, I believe these 
are all reactions to the same problem: Workers are dissatisfied in their
 current jobs and feel they can’t speak up, whether about organizational
 problems, unethical behavior or even just to contribute their knowledge
 and creative ideas. So in response, they generally either leave or 
decrease their effort while suffering in silence. It doesn’t have to be this way; but it’s also not easy to change. Put
 simply, it will take courageous action from not only workers but 
lawmakers and companies as well.<h2>The problem of ‘organizational silence’</h2>Workplace courage is actually the <a href="https://jimdetert.com">main focus of my research</a>.
 That is, how often do workers speak up when they see a problem or have 
an improvement or innovation to suggest? In our field, we call the 
failure to speak up “<a href="https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61967925">organizational silence</a>,” and my colleagues and I found it everywhere we looked in America’s workplaces. An <a href="https://workplacecai.com/survey/">online survey</a> I’ve 
been conducting since 2018 suggests workers stand up to their boss or 
other higher-ups about illegal, unethical, hurtful or otherwise 
inappropriate behavior roughly one-third of the time. The frequency 
isn’t much higher when the questions involve speaking up about less 
thorny issues, such as operational problems or ways to improve the 
organization. The numbers are similar even when the other person is a 
colleague who has no power over them. Colleagues who study whistleblowing likewise find that only a fraction of people who see serious wrongdoing <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-0849-1">take sufficient action</a> to get it stopped, while others have documented how rarely workers say anything <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000296">when they witness microaggressions</a>. My own small experiment related to this is illustrative. In my 
“Defining Moments” class, I teach students how to speak up competently 
in challenging situations. During the course, I record individual 
simulations in which students pitch suggestions for improving an 
unidentified organization’s diversity and inclusion efforts to two 
actors playing the role of senior executives. I instruct the male actor 
to express at least three microaggressions, such as “Sweetie, you take 
the notes,” toward his female peer during their short interaction with 
each student.About half the students – who range in age from about 25 to 50 – 
never say a peep in response to the offensive comments. As for the rest,
 they react to only about half the microagressions they hear, and 
typically it’s in the form of helping the victim – “I’ll take the notes”
 – rather than confronting the remark itself.These findings, collectively, demonstrate the significant problems 
that occur – and are likely to fester – when people stay silent. They 
also contribute to massive <a href="https://www.gallup.com/workplace/391922/employee-engagement-slump-continues.aspx">employee disengagement</a> and leave a whole lot of people feeling inauthentic and impotent at work – or just <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.3.314">regretful over their failures to act</a>.<h2>The four fears</h2>It’s not, for the most part, that people don’t recognize the problems they could or should respond to.On the survey that immediately followed my microaggression 
simulation, for example, more than three times as many participants 
noticed the first problematic comment than spoke up about it. Managers I
 work with in all sorts of consulting engagements readily admit to a gap
 between what “should” and “would” be done in situations in which 
something difficult needs to be said to a boss, a peer or even a 
subordinate. Asked to explain the gap, I hear the same response that 
research consistently documents: People are afraid to initiate those 
conversations. In part, this is the nature of working in America today. About <a href="https://www.betterteam.com/at-will-employment">three-quarters of all U.S. workers</a> are “at will,” meaning they can be fired for nearly any reason – or none at all. This is why you <a href="https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/health/er-doctor-who-criticized-bellingham-hospitals-coronavirus-protections-has-been-fired/">hear stories</a> of people <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/30/business/employee-fired-nursing-homes-new-york-times.html?referringSource=articleShare">being fired</a>
 for speaking up about issues that seem pretty important or reasonable. 
And for what it’s worth, there is no free speech in the workplace, as 
the First Amendment <a href="https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/employee-free-speech-in-the-workplace.aspx">does not apply to “private actors</a>.”As I describe in my 2021 book “<a href="https://store.hbr.org/product/choosing-courage-the-everyday-guide-to-being-brave-at-work/10411">Choosing Courage</a>,” there are four common fears that keep people from speaking up or being completely honest when they do: <ol>
 <li>Economic or career consequences – push your boss
 to be more flexible about work hours or where you work from and you 
might find yourself off the promotion track or even told to find a new 
job.</li><li>Social exclusion – confront your peers about 
missed deadlines or their comments toward those of another race or 
gender and you might be eating lunch alone.</li><li>Psychological pain – offer a novel improvement idea that gets harshly shot down and you might start doubting yourself.</li><li>Physical harm – stand up to a customer or 
co-worker who is violating a policy or speaking inappropriately and you 
might get punched or threatened with a weapon.</li>
 </ol>Even if you haven’t recently experienced any of these negative 
consequences, you probably still have a set of internalized beliefs 
about the dangers of speaking up that, as my research with management 
scholar Amy Edmondson showed, leads toward <a href="https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.61967925">self-censoring</a> in situations where it might actually be safe to speak up.<h2>A way forward</h2>While I believe workers bear some responsibility when they don’t 
speak up, companies and other organizations are also at fault for 
creating cultures and conditions that don’t encourage honesty.For example, there are systemic barriers to giving workers more of a voice – such as the <a href="https://www.uschamber.com/employment-law/unions/union-membership-drops-to-previous-low-in-2021">steady decline of union membership</a> since the 1950s and the lack of a sufficient <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/06/23/the-social-safety-net-the-gaps-that-covid-19-spotlights/">safety net</a> that decouples necessities like health care and a secure retirement from a specific employer.Traditionally, unions have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_01225">sheltered workers</a>
 from some of the adverse consequences listed above, such as by 
preventing those who speak up about an ethical lapse from being 
arbitrarily fired or otherwise punished. As I see it, there is a mixture of ways to turn this around. 
Lawmakers could strengthen laws intended to support workers who wish to 
form a union – particularly helpful at a time of <a href="https://theconversation.com/america-is-in-the-middle-of-a-labor-mobilization-moment-with-self-organizers-at-starbucks-amazon-trader-joes-and-chipotle-behind-the-union-drive-189826">labor revival</a> and fierce <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/starbucks-dials-up-anti-union-heat-by-accusing-nlrb-of-collusion">anti-union pushback</a> from some employers. Corporate, nonprofit and government leaders could do more to actually
 encourage their workers to raise their voices by consistently 
soliciting their input and celebrating rather than punishing them for 
offering it. Incidentally, if leaders did more to create these 
conditions, employees would likely see less need for a union.For workers who fear repercussions, there are skills they can learn 
to help them speak up more effectively and minimize the negative 
consequences of doing so. Sometimes merely changing the framing makes a 
significant difference – for example, asking managers to address a 
safety issue because it’s an opportunity to improve efficiency – can 
resonate better than pointing to the moral reasons to take action.None of these steps are easy. They will require more courageous 
action by members of each of these groups. But I believe finding ways to
 help workers speak their minds about issues like safety, misconduct and
 performance is critically important because what happens in these 
instances shapes the places where people spend the majority of their 
waking hours – and whether they even want to be there.James Detert is a Professor of Business Administration at the University of Virginia.<div><iframe src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/190390/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important" referrerpolicy="no-referrer-when-downgrade"></iframe></div>

Quiet quitting, great resignation? They share a common cause

SEDGWICK COUNTY — A Kansas man has been sentenced to prison for a fatal hit-and-run accident in 2020.

On Tuesday, Judge Bruce Brown sentenced Jeffrey Jack to just over 2 and one half years in prison, according to the Sedgwick County District attorney's office.

On November 3, 2020, Kaminsky was crossing the road to his home and was struck by a southbound white pick-up truck on North Parkridge in Wichita, according to Officer Kevin Wheeler. The driver, later identified as Jack did not stop and fled. Police believed alcohol was a factor in the case. 

Police later found Jack's damaged truck in a nearby neighborhood and ultimately made an arrest.&nbsp; Earlier this year, he pled guilty to leaving the scene of an accident.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1665571242846.png" alt="Jack-photo Sedgwick County" />
 <figcaption>Jack-photo Sedgwick County</figcaption>
 </figure>SEDGWICK COUNTY — A Kansas man has been sentenced to prison for a fatal hit-and-run accident in 2020.On Tuesday, Judge Bruce Brown sentenced Jeffrey Jack to just over 2 and one half years in prison, according to the Sedgwick County District attorney's office.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">WANTED! Law enforcement needs your help locating Jeffrey T. Jack, wanted on a felony arrest warrant for failure to stop at a fatality accident that occurred on November 3rd, 2020 in the 1600 block of Parkwood. <a href="https://t.co/GT9oBV3XC5">pic.twitter.com/GT9oBV3XC5</a>&mdash; Crime Stoppers ICT (@crimestoppers) <a href="https://twitter.com/crimestoppers/status/1519706195585642499?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 28, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>On November 3, 2020, Kaminsky was crossing the road to his home and was struck by a southbound white pick-up truck on North Parkridge in Wichita, according to Officer Kevin Wheeler. The driver, later identified as Jack did not stop and fled. Police believed alcohol was a factor in the case. Police later found Jack's damaged truck in a nearby neighborhood and ultimately made an arrest.&nbsp; Earlier this year, he pled guilty to leaving the scene of an accident..

Kan. man sentenced for crash that killed 80-year-old pedestrian

Acting United States Attorney Steven Russell announced that Darnell L. Polite, 43, of Omaha, Nebraska, was sentenced today in federal court in Omaha for possessing with intent to distribute methamphetamine.&nbsp; United States District Court Judge Brian C. Buescher sentenced Polite to 180 months’ imprisonment.&nbsp; Following his release, Polite will begin a 5-year term of supervised release. There is no parole in the federal system.&nbsp;&nbsp;

On April 8, 2021, Omaha Police Officers responded to an apartment in Omaha for a drug overdose.&nbsp; On arrival, officers observed three parties in the living room unresponsive and being treated by Omaha Fire Department Medics. Omaha Fire Department was able to administer Narcan to two of the victims who then became conscious. A third victim was taken to the hospital and revived.

The victims identified Polite’s apartment as where they bought the illegal drugs.&nbsp; A state of Nebraska court authorized search warrant was obtained. During the search, officers located 3.38 pounds of marijuana, 10.23 ounces of methamphetamine, 23 grams of suspected fentanyl, and a Sig Sauer 9mm handgun later verified to have been stolen out of Carter Lake. Also, in the apartment was $2,300, multiple clear baggies, and digital scales.&nbsp;

This case was investigated by the Omaha Police Department.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2019/6/1559657144941.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>By UNITED STATES ATTORNEYActing United States Attorney Steven Russell announced that Darnell L. Polite, 43, of Omaha, Nebraska, was sentenced today in federal court in Omaha for possessing with intent to distribute methamphetamine.&nbsp; United States District Court Judge Brian C. Buescher sentenced Polite to 180 months’ imprisonment.&nbsp; Following his release, Polite will begin a 5-year term of supervised release. There is no parole in the federal system.&nbsp;&nbsp;On April 8, 2021, Omaha Police Officers responded to an apartment in Omaha for a drug overdose.&nbsp; On arrival, officers observed three parties in the living room unresponsive and being treated by Omaha Fire Department Medics. Omaha Fire Department was able to administer Narcan to two of the victims who then became conscious. A third victim was taken to the hospital and revived.The victims identified Polite’s apartment as where they bought the illegal drugs.&nbsp; A state of Nebraska court authorized search warrant was obtained. During the search, officers located 3.38 pounds of marijuana, 10.23 ounces of methamphetamine, 23 grams of suspected fentanyl, and a Sig Sauer 9mm handgun later verified to have been stolen out of Carter Lake. Also, in the apartment was $2,300, multiple clear baggies, and digital scales.&nbsp;This case was investigated by the Omaha Police Department.

Omaha man sentenced for drug trafficking that caused overdoses

ST. LOUIS (AP) — A federal judge in St. Louis is weighing the fate of the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loan-forgiveness-biden-plan-d9c8e18774a744187c9af634bf4eb728">Biden administration's plan to forgive student loan debt</a>&nbsp;for tens of millions of Americans following a court hearing on Wednesday.

It's unclear when U.S. District Judge Henry Autrey will rule on the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-health-lawsuits-covid-missouri-862d783188de45b698c54b00820d3616">lawsuit filed by six Republican-led states</a>&nbsp;that seeks an injunction to halt the student loan forgiveness plan. Whatever he decides, an appeal is likely.

Democratic President Joe Biden announced in August that his administration would cancel up to $20,000 in education debt for huge numbers of borrowers. The announcement immediately became a major political issue ahead of the November midterms.

The proposal prompted a lawsuit filed in September by Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas and South Carolina. Other lawsuits followed,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-education-lawsuits-personal-taxes-small-948e5c9ee802bc865f66c2ab28328035">including one filed Monday</a>&nbsp;by the Job Creators Network Foundation alleging that the administration violated federal procedures by failing to seek public input on the program.

In the lawsuit brought by the states, a court filing on behalf of the administration said the Department of Education has “broad authority to manage the federal student financial aid programs.” It stated that the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003, 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 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 that the administration is acting outside its authorities in a way that will costs states millions of dollars.

“What they're trying to do is go around Congress, and this they cannot do,” Campbell said.

The plan 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 administration faced threats of legal challenges to its plans almost immediately. Conservative attorneys, Republican lawmakers and business-oriented groups asserted that Biden was overstepping 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.

Meanwhile, many Democratic lawmakers facing tough reelection contests distanced themselves from the student loan plan.

The HEROES Act is a post-Sept. 11, 2001, law meant 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 because, in part, the pandemic no longer qualifies as a national emergency.

But attorney Brian Netter of the U.S. Department of Justice said the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic is still rippling. He said student loan defaults have skyrocketed over the past two-and-a-half years.

“This (the HEROES Act) is a statute about emergencies — about national emergencies,” Netter said.

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. Administration officials said applications for debt relief will be available in October.

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.

Autrey did not give an indication when he will rule on the injunction request.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/8/1661367707782.png" alt="Many Democratic lawmakers facing tough reelection contests have distanced themselves from Biden's student loan plan-White House photo" />
 <figcaption>Many Democratic lawmakers facing tough reelection contests have distanced themselves from Biden's student loan plan-White House photo</figcaption>
 </figure>ST. LOUIS (AP) — A federal judge in St. Louis is weighing the fate of the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/student-loan-forgiveness-biden-plan-d9c8e18774a744187c9af634bf4eb728">Biden administration's plan to forgive student loan debt</a>&nbsp;for tens of millions of Americans following a court hearing on Wednesday.It's unclear when U.S. District Judge Henry Autrey will rule on the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-health-lawsuits-covid-missouri-862d783188de45b698c54b00820d3616">lawsuit filed by six Republican-led states</a>&nbsp;that seeks an injunction to halt the student loan forgiveness plan. Whatever he decides, an appeal is likely.Democratic President Joe Biden announced in August that his administration would cancel up to $20,000 in education debt for huge numbers of borrowers. The announcement immediately became a major political issue ahead of the November midterms.The proposal prompted a lawsuit filed in September by Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas and South Carolina. Other lawsuits followed,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-education-lawsuits-personal-taxes-small-948e5c9ee802bc865f66c2ab28328035">including one filed Monday</a>&nbsp;by the Job Creators Network Foundation alleging that the administration violated federal procedures by failing to seek public input on the program.In the lawsuit brought by the states, a court filing on behalf of the administration said the Department of Education has “broad authority to manage the federal student financial aid programs.” It stated that the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003, 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 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 that the administration is acting outside its authorities in a way that will costs states millions of dollars.“What they're trying to do is go around Congress, and this they cannot do,” Campbell said.The plan 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 administration faced threats of legal challenges to its plans almost immediately. Conservative attorneys, Republican lawmakers and business-oriented groups asserted that Biden was overstepping 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.Meanwhile, many Democratic lawmakers facing tough reelection contests distanced themselves from the student loan plan.The HEROES Act is a post-Sept. 11, 2001, law meant 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 because, in part, the pandemic no longer qualifies as a national emergency.But attorney Brian Netter of the U.S. Department of Justice said the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic is still rippling. He said student loan defaults have skyrocketed over the past two-and-a-half years.“This (the HEROES Act) is a statute about emergencies — about national emergencies,” Netter said.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. Administration officials said applications for debt relief will be available in October.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.Autrey did not give an indication when he will rule on the injunction request.

Federal judge weighs effort to halt student loan forgiveness

NEW YORK (AP) — Tens of millions of older Americans are about to get what may be the biggest raise of their lifetimes.

On Thursday, the U.S. government is set to announce how big a percentage increase Social Security beneficiaries will see in monthly payments this upcoming year. It’s virtually certain to be the largest in four decades. It’s all part of an annual ritual where Washington adjusts Social Security benefits to keep up with inflation, or at least with one narrow measure of it.

Plenty of controversy accompanies the move, known as a cost-of-living adjustment or COLA. Critics say the data the government uses to set the increase doesn’t reflect what older Americans are actually spending, and thus the inflation they’re actually feeling. The increase is also one-size-fits-all, which means beneficiaries get the same raise regardless of where they live or how big a nest egg they may have.

The U.S. government is about to announce an increase to how much the more than 65 million Social Security beneficiaries will get every month. Some estimates say the boost may be as big as 9%.

NEW YORK (AP) — Tens of millions of older Americans are about to get what may be the biggest raise of their lifetimes.On Thursday, the U.S. government is set to announce how big a percentage increase Social Security beneficiaries will see in monthly payments this upcoming year. It’s virtually certain to be the largest in four decades. It’s all part of an annual ritual where Washington adjusts Social Security benefits to keep up with inflation, or at least with one narrow measure of it.Plenty of controversy accompanies the move, known as a cost-of-living adjustment or COLA. Critics say the data the government uses to set the increase doesn’t reflect what older Americans are actually spending, and thus the inflation they’re actually feeling. The increase is also one-size-fits-all, which means beneficiaries get the same raise regardless of where they live or how big a nest egg they may have.Here’s a look at what’s happening:WHAT’S THE BIG DEAL?The U.S. government is about to announce an increase to how much the more than 65 million Social Security beneficiaries will get every month. Some estimates say the boost may be as big as 9%.WHAT DO BENEFICIARIES HAVE TO DO TO GET IT?Nothing.WILL THIS BE THE BIGGEST INCREASE EVER?No, but it’s likely the heftiest in 40 years, which is longer than the vast majority of Social Security beneficiaries have been getting payments. In 1981, the increase was 11.2%.WHEN WILL THE BIGGER PAYMENTS BEGIN?January. They’re also permanent, and they compound. That means the following year’s percentage increase, whatever it ends up being, will be on top of the new, larger payment beneficiaries get after this most recent raise.HOW BIG WAS THIS PAST YEAR’S INCREASE?5.9%, which itself was the biggest in nearly four decades.WHAT'S THE TYPICAL INCREASE?Since 2000, it’s averaged 2.3% as inflation remained remarkably tame through all kinds of economic swings. During some of the toughest years in that stretch, the bigger worry for the economy was actually that inflation was running too low.Since the 2008 financial crisis, the U.S. government has announced zero increases to Social Security benefits three times because inflation was so weak.SO THE INCREASE IS TO MAKE UP FOR INFLATION?That's the intent. As Americans have become painfully aware over the past year, each $1 doesn't go as far at the grocery store as it used to.HAS SOCIAL SECURITY ALWAYS GIVEN SUCH INCREASES?No. The first American to get a monthly retirement check from Social Security, Ida May Fuller from Ludlow, Vermont, got the same $22.54 monthly benefit for 10 years.Automatic annual cost-of-living adjustments didn't begin for Social Security until 1975, after a law passed in 1972 requiring them.HOW IS THE SIZE OF THE INCREASE SET?It's tied to a measure of inflation called the CPI-W index, which tracks what kinds of prices are being paid by urban wage earners and clerical workers.More specifically, the increase is based on how much the CPI-W increases from the summer of one year to the next.IS THAT THE INFLATION MEASURE EVERYONE FOLLOWS?No. People generally pay more attention to a much broader measure of inflation, the CPI-U index, which covers all urban consumers. That covers 93% of the total U.S. population.The CPI-W, meanwhile, covers only about 29% of the U.S. population. It has been around longer than the CPI-U, which the government began compiling only after the legislation that required Social Security's annual increases be linked to inflation.IS THAT WEIRD?Yes, and some critics have argued for years that Social Security should change to a different measure, one that’s pegged to older people in particular.Another experimental index, called CPI-E, is supposed to offer a better reflection of how Americans aged 62 and above spend their money. It has historically shown higher rates of inflation for older Americans than the CPI-U or CPI-W, but it has not taken hold. Neither have other measures compiled by organizations outside the government that hope to show how inflation affects older Americans specifically.Recently, the CPI-E has shown a bit milder inflation than CPI-W or CPI-U.WHY NOT USE ONE OF THOSE OTHER INDEXES?To calculate the CPI-E, the government pulls from the same survey data used to measure the broad CPI-U. But there are relatively few older households in that data set, meaning it may not be the most accurate.All indexes give just a rough approximation of what inflation really is. But the more pressing challenge may be that if the government switched to a different index, one that showed higher inflation for older Americans, Social Security would have to pay out higher benefits.That in turn would mean a faster drain on Social Security's trust fund, which looks to run empty in a little more than a decade at its current pace.HOW IS THE SIZE SET FOR SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS?Through a complicated formula that takes into account several factors, including how much a worker made in their 35 highest-earning years. Generally, those who made more money and those who wait longer to start getting Social Security get larger benefits, up to a point.This year, the maximum allowed benefit for someone who retired at full retirement age is $3,345 monthly.WILL RICH PEOPLE GET THE SAME BOOST IN SOCIAL SECURITY?Yes. Everyone gets the same percentage increase, whether they have millions of dollars in retirement savings or are just scraping by.IF THE INCREASE IS BASED ON INFLATION IN URBAN AREAS, WILL PEOPLE IN RURAL AREAS GET THE SAME BOOST?Yes.“The COLA doesn't take into account where you live or your actual spending patterns,” said William Arnone, CEO of the National Academy of Social Insurance. "For some people, it's an overstatement of cost of living for, say, small towns in the Midwest versus urban areas like New York, D.C. or Chicago. With many older people choosing to live in suburban areas or rural areas, some will benefit more” than others from the same-sized increase.IS THE INCREASE BAD NEWS FOR ANYONE?It's great news for every beneficiary and for the businesses around them that could see more in sales.But it also means the Social Security system is paying out more, which can add more strain on its trust fund.One year of big increases driven by inflation won't drain the system by itself, but it's already long been heading toward an unsustainable future. The latest annual trustees report for Social Security said its trust funds that pay out retirement and survivors and disability benefits will be able to pay scheduled benefits on a timely basis until 2035. After that, incoming cash from taxes will be enough to pay 80% of scheduled benefits.WILL THIS MAKE INFLATION WORSE?It will put&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/inflation-business-government-and-politics-4727d63afa3667d5c792a288f63b4ac2">more cash in the hands of people</a>&nbsp;who mostly really need it, and they're very likely to use it. That will feed more fuel into the economy, which could keep upward pressure on inflation.Social Security's boost, though, will have a smaller impact on the economy than past stimulus packages provided by Washington, snarls in supply chains caused by worldwide shutdowns of businesses or other factors that economists say are behind the worst inflation in decades.SO EVERYTHING'S GOING TERRIBLY?The risk of a recession seems to grow by the day, but many economists expect inflation to come down as interest-rate hikes take effect and supply chains continue to improve.Economists at Deutsche Bank, for example, expect inflation to ease from 8.2% this past August to 7.2% in the last three months of this year. In 2023, they see it dropping to 3.9% in the second half of the year.This is key for many Social Security beneficiaries. That would mean the COLA they receive this upcoming year would be bigger than the inflation they're feeling at the moment. That would help make up for this past year, where actual inflation far outstripped the cost-of-living increase they got in January 2022.

US set to announce huge jump in Social Security payments

WASHINGTON (AP) —The U.S. on Wednesday authorized updated COVID-19 boosters for children as young as 5, seeking to expand protection ahead of an expected winter wave.

<a href="https://apnews.com/article/covid-vaccine-omicron-booster-shot-227514678d25a99b65b7ee092735fb03">Tweaked boosters</a>&nbsp;rolled out for Americans 12 and older last month, doses modified to target&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/covid-science-health-pandemics-flu-c92b8653683afbac3d81eebff8f5d29d">today’s most common and contagious omicron relative</a>. While there wasn't a big rush, federal health officials are urging that people seek the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/health-covid-centers-for-disease-control-and-prevention-government-politics-551906ac80381a5e9aaf8383ea32ccab">extra protection ahead of holiday gatherings</a>.

Now the Food and Drug Administration has given a green light for elementary school-age kids to get the updated booster doses, too -- one made by Pfizer for 5- to 11-year-olds, and a version from rival Moderna for those as young as 6.

There’s one more step before parents can bring their kids in for the new shot: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which recommends how vaccines are used, must sign off.

Americans&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-science-health-covid-infectious-diseases-8ab56452a9490de2819c73bd302feccc">may be tired of repeated calls to get boosted</a>&nbsp;against COVID-19 but experts say the updated shots have an advantage: They contain half the recipe that targeted the original coronavirus strain and half protection against the dominant BA.4 and BA.5 omicron versions.

These combination or “bivalent” boosters are designed to broaden immune defenses so that people are better protected against serious illness whether they encounter an omicron relative in the coming months -- or a different mutant that’s more like the original virus.

“We want to have the best of both worlds,” Pfizer’s Dr. Bill Gruber, a pediatrician, told The Associated Press. He hopes the updated shots will “re-energize interest in protecting children for the winter.”

The updated boosters are “extremely important” for keeping kids healthy and in school, said Dr. Jason Newland, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Washington University in St. Louis.

Parents should know “there is no concern from the safety perspective with the bivalent vaccines, whether Moderna or Pfizer,” Newland added.

Only people who’ve gotten their initial vaccinations -- with any of the original-formula versions -- qualify for an updated booster. That means about three-fourths of Americans 12 and older are eligible. As of last weekend, only at least 13 million had gotten an updated booster, White House COVID-19 coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha estimated Tuesday.

To pediatricians’ chagrin, getting children their first vaccinations has been tougher. Less than a third of 5- to 11-year-olds have had their two primary doses and thus would qualify for the new booster.

This age group will get kid-size doses of the updated booster — and they can receive it at least two months after their last dose, whether that was a primary vaccination or an earlier booster, the FDA said.

Pfizer said it could ship up to 6 million kid-sized doses within a week of authorization, in addition to ongoing adult-dose shipments.

Until now, Moderna’s updated booster was cleared only for adults. Wednesday's FDA action authorized the booster for teens as well as children as young as age 6.

As for even younger tots, first vaccinations didn’t open for the under-5 age group until mid-June -- and it will be several more months before regulators decide if they’ll also need a booster using the updated recipe.

Exactly how much protection does an updated COVID-19 booster shot offer? That’s hard to know. Pfizer and Moderna are starting studies in young children.

But the FDA cleared the COVID-19 booster tweaks without requiring human test results -- just like it approves yearly changes to flu vaccines. That’s partly because both companies already had studied experimental shots tweaked to target prior COVID-19 variants, including an earlier omicron version, and found they safely revved up virus-fighting antibodies.

“It's clearly a better vaccine, an important upgrade from what we had before,” Jha said earlier this week.

Jha urged adults to get their updated shot in October — like they get flu vaccinations — or at least well before holiday gatherings with high-risk family and friends. People who've recently had COVID-19 still need the booster but can wait about three months, he added.

WASHINGTON (AP) —The U.S. on Wednesday authorized updated COVID-19 boosters for children as young as 5, seeking to expand protection ahead of an expected winter wave.<a href="https://apnews.com/article/covid-vaccine-omicron-booster-shot-227514678d25a99b65b7ee092735fb03">Tweaked boosters</a>&nbsp;rolled out for Americans 12 and older last month, doses modified to target&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/covid-science-health-pandemics-flu-c92b8653683afbac3d81eebff8f5d29d">today’s most common and contagious omicron relative</a>. While there wasn't a big rush, federal health officials are urging that people seek the&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/health-covid-centers-for-disease-control-and-prevention-government-politics-551906ac80381a5e9aaf8383ea32ccab">extra protection ahead of holiday gatherings</a>.Now the Food and Drug Administration has given a green light for elementary school-age kids to get the updated booster doses, too -- one made by Pfizer for 5- to 11-year-olds, and a version from rival Moderna for those as young as 6.There’s one more step before parents can bring their kids in for the new shot: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which recommends how vaccines are used, must sign off.Americans&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-science-health-covid-infectious-diseases-8ab56452a9490de2819c73bd302feccc">may be tired of repeated calls to get boosted</a>&nbsp;against COVID-19 but experts say the updated shots have an advantage: They contain half the recipe that targeted the original coronavirus strain and half protection against the dominant BA.4 and BA.5 omicron versions.These combination or “bivalent” boosters are designed to broaden immune defenses so that people are better protected against serious illness whether they encounter an omicron relative in the coming months -- or a different mutant that’s more like the original virus.“We want to have the best of both worlds,” Pfizer’s Dr. Bill Gruber, a pediatrician, told The Associated Press. He hopes the updated shots will “re-energize interest in protecting children for the winter.”The updated boosters are “extremely important” for keeping kids healthy and in school, said Dr. Jason Newland, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Washington University in St. Louis.Parents should know “there is no concern from the safety perspective with the bivalent vaccines, whether Moderna or Pfizer,” Newland added.Only people who’ve gotten their initial vaccinations -- with any of the original-formula versions -- qualify for an updated booster. That means about three-fourths of Americans 12 and older are eligible. As of last weekend, only at least 13 million had gotten an updated booster, White House COVID-19 coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha estimated Tuesday.To pediatricians’ chagrin, getting children their first vaccinations has been tougher. Less than a third of 5- to 11-year-olds have had their two primary doses and thus would qualify for the new booster.This age group will get kid-size doses of the updated booster — and they can receive it at least two months after their last dose, whether that was a primary vaccination or an earlier booster, the FDA said.Pfizer said it could ship up to 6 million kid-sized doses within a week of authorization, in addition to ongoing adult-dose shipments.Until now, Moderna’s updated booster was cleared only for adults. Wednesday's FDA action authorized the booster for teens as well as children as young as age 6.As for even younger tots, first vaccinations didn’t open for the under-5 age group until mid-June -- and it will be several more months before regulators decide if they’ll also need a booster using the updated recipe.Exactly how much protection does an updated COVID-19 booster shot offer? That’s hard to know. Pfizer and Moderna are starting studies in young children.But the FDA cleared the COVID-19 booster tweaks without requiring human test results -- just like it approves yearly changes to flu vaccines. That’s partly because both companies already had studied experimental shots tweaked to target prior COVID-19 variants, including an earlier omicron version, and found they safely revved up virus-fighting antibodies.“It's clearly a better vaccine, an important upgrade from what we had before,” Jha said earlier this week.Jha urged adults to get their updated shot in October — like they get flu vaccinations — or at least well before holiday gatherings with high-risk family and friends. People who've recently had COVID-19 still need the booster but can wait about three months, he added.___

FDA authorizes omicron booster shots for children as young as 5

By AARON SANDERFORD <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/mcconnell-tells-cnn-he-wants-ricketts-to-replace-sen-sasse/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

OMAHA
 — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has a Republican favorite to 
replace U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse if the University of Florida taps the 
Nebraskan to lead its flagship university: Gov. Pete Ricketts.

Kentucky’s McConnell told CNN <a target="_blank" href="https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/10/11/politics/mitch-mcconnell-interview-midterm-cliffhanger/index.html">for a story published</a> Tuesday that he urged Ricketts to run for the seat.&nbsp;

“I’ve 
talked to Governor Ricketts,” CNN quoted McConnell as saying. “We’re 
hoping that he ends up in the Senate. Exactly how that happens under 
Nebraska law is yet to be determined.”

McConnell and the National Republican Senatorial Committee like when 
wealthy, well-known candidates run in red states because they typically 
need less national fundraising help.

Sasse is the lone finalist for the presidency of the University of 
Florida in Gainesville. He visited campus this week for sessions with 
students, faculty and staff.

Hundreds of student protesters disrupted his meetings Monday, but he 
is expected to return to campus Nov. 1 for his final interview with 
Florida’s GOP-appointed Board of Trustees.

Sasse 
sources have said they expect him to resign his seat in late November or
 early December if he gets the job. Under Nebraska law, the governor has
 45 days to appoint a successor.&nbsp;

Ricketts 
has said publicly that he would not appoint himself to the seat. He said
 if he is interested in the position, he would leave the decision to the
 next governor.&nbsp;

That 
appointee would serve until at least January 2025. Primary and general 
elections to fill the remaining two years of Sasse’s term would be held 
in 2024.&nbsp;

That would 
stack the May and November 2024 elections in Nebraska with a 
presidential race and a pair of Senate races, because Sen. Deb Fischer’s
 seat is set to be on the ballot again that year.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/10/1665581349196.png" alt="Gov. Pete Ricketts joined investors in Sustainable Beef for a ceremonial ground-breaking of their beef processing facility in North Platte. (Courtesy of the Governor’s Office)" />
 <figcaption>Gov. Pete Ricketts joined investors in Sustainable Beef for a ceremonial ground-breaking of their beef processing facility in North Platte. (Courtesy of the Governor’s Office)</figcaption>
 </figure>By AARON SANDERFORD <a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/briefs/mcconnell-tells-cnn-he-wants-ricketts-to-replace-sen-sasse/">Nebraska Examiner</a>OMAHA
 — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has a Republican favorite to 
replace U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse if the University of Florida taps the 
Nebraskan to lead its flagship university: Gov. Pete Ricketts.Kentucky’s McConnell told CNN <a target="_blank" href="https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/10/11/politics/mitch-mcconnell-interview-midterm-cliffhanger/index.html">for a story published</a> Tuesday that he urged Ricketts to run for the seat.&nbsp;“I’ve 
talked to Governor Ricketts,” CNN quoted McConnell as saying. “We’re 
hoping that he ends up in the Senate. Exactly how that happens under 
Nebraska law is yet to be determined.”McConnell and the National Republican Senatorial Committee like when 
wealthy, well-known candidates run in red states because they typically 
need less national fundraising help.Sasse is the lone finalist for the presidency of the University of 
Florida in Gainesville. He visited campus this week for sessions with 
students, faculty and staff.Hundreds of student protesters disrupted his meetings Monday, but he 
is expected to return to campus Nov. 1 for his final interview with 
Florida’s GOP-appointed Board of Trustees.Sasse 
sources have said they expect him to resign his seat in late November or
 early December if he gets the job. Under Nebraska law, the governor has
 45 days to appoint a successor.&nbsp;Ricketts 
has said publicly that he would not appoint himself to the seat. He said
 if he is interested in the position, he would leave the decision to the
 next governor.&nbsp;That 
appointee would serve until at least January 2025. Primary and general 
elections to fill the remaining two years of Sasse’s term would be held 
in 2024.&nbsp;That would 
stack the May and November 2024 elections in Nebraska with a 
presidential race and a pair of Senate races, because Sen. Deb Fischer’s
 seat is set to be on the ballot again that year.

McConnell tells CNN he wants Ricketts to replace Sen. Sasse

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden is reevaluating America's relationship with Saudi Arabia as the Riyadh-led OPEC+ alliance moves to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-inflation-health-germany-elections-d873521f8b165774de3902439dd5a6ee">cut oil production</a>&nbsp;and Democratic lawmakers call for a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-middle-east-business-saudi-arabia-jamal-khashoggi-6a5e19fb72f176c320bf727591f46d4b">freeze on cooperation</a>&nbsp;with the Saudis.

John Kirby, the strategic communications coordinator for the National Security Council at the White House, said Tuesday that Biden believes “it’s time to take another look at this relationship and make sure that it’s serving our national security interests.”

Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Rep. Ro Khanna of California on Tuesday introduced legislation that would immediately pause all U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia for one year. This pause would also halt sales of spare and repair parts, support services and logistical support.

But it remains to be seen how far Biden is willing to go in showing his displeasure with the Saudis, a vital but complicated ally in the Middle East. Biden came into office vowing to recalibrate the U.S. relationship because of Saudi Arabia's human rights record but then paid&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-israel-middle-east-saudi-arabia-83c27ca7357e41efedaa2318da59d0ab">a visit to the kingdom earlier this year.</a>

Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Tuesday the White House has no timeline for its review nor has the president appointed an adviser to serve as point person.

Meanwhile, officials underscore the central role that Saudi Arabia plays in addressing broader national security concerns in the Middle East.

Blumenthal and Khanna unveiled their legislation one day after Sen. Robert Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat, said it was unacceptable that OPEC+ had moved to cut oil production and effectively bolster Russian coffers as Moscow prosecutes its war on Ukraine. Menendez promised to use his position as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to block any future arms sales to the Saudis.

At the White House, Kirby said, “We’re going to take a look at this relationship seriously as well as taking seriously the concerns of members of Congress.”

Menendez did not warn the White House before announcing his intention to block future Saudi arms sales, Kirby said.

OPEC+, which includes Russia as well as Saudi Arabia, announced last week it would cut production by 2 million barrels a day, which will help prop up oil prices that are allowing Russian President Vladimir Putin to keep paying for his eight-month invasion of Ukraine. The production cut also hurts U.S.-led efforts to make the war financially unsustainable for Russia, threatens a global economy already destabilized by the Ukraine conflict and risks saddling Biden and Democrats with newly rising gasoline prices just ahead of the U.S. midterm elections.

Biden and European leaders have urged more oil production to ease gasoline prices and punish Moscow for its aggression in Ukraine. Putin has been accused of using energy as a weapon against countries opposing Russia's invasion.

“They are certainly aligning themselves with Russia," Jean-Pierre said. "This is not a time to be aligning with Russia”

As for the Saudis, Sen. Blumenthal said, “We cannot continue selling highly sensitive arms technology to a nation aligned with an abhorrent terrorist adversary.”

However, the White House takes note that its weapon sales to Riyadh serve, in part, as an important counterweight in the region to Iran, which is quickly moving toward becoming a nuclear power.

“There’s 70,000 Americans living in Saudi Arabia right now, not to mention all the other troops we have throughout the region,” Kirby said. "So, it’s not only in our interest that missile defense in the region become more integrated and cooperative. It’s in the interest of our allies and partners in that part of the world as well."

Still, the pressure is mounting for Biden. As a candidate for the White House, he vowed that Saudi rulers would “pay the price” under his watch for the 2018 killing of U.S.-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a critic of the kingdom's leadership. Biden said that he'd look to make the oil-rich country a “pariah."

But in July, amid rising prices at the pump around the globe, Biden decided to pay a visit to Saudi Arabia. During the visit, he met with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, who he once shunned as a killer for the death of Khashoggi. The U.S. intelligence community determined that the crown prince, often referred to by his initials MBS,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-saudi-crown-prince-khashoggi-killing-26c37f6d603737de7509f5ee09ae7f9d">likely approved the killing of Khashoggi</a>&nbsp;inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. MBS denies he was involved.

The Saudis have also drawn international criticism for airstrikes killing civilians in the years-long war between the kingdom and Houthi rebels in Yemen — as well as for embargoes that exacerbated hunger and pushed Yemen to the brink of famine.

“Saudi Arabia’s disastrous decision to slash oil production by two million barrels a day makes it clear that Riyadh is seeking to harm the U.S. and reaffirms the need to reassess the U.S.-Saudi relationship," Rep. Khanna said. “There is no reason for the U.S. to kowtow to a regime that has massacred countless civilians in Yemen, hacked to death a Washington-based journalist and is now extorting Americans at the pump.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/7/1657900907332.png" alt="Follow the subdued airport greeting in July, a fist bump between President Biden and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at Al Salam Royal Palace in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.-photo courtesy CSPAN" />
 <figcaption>Follow the subdued airport greeting in July, a fist bump between President Biden and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at Al Salam Royal Palace in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.-photo courtesy CSPAN</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden is reevaluating America's relationship with Saudi Arabia as the Riyadh-led OPEC+ alliance moves to&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-inflation-health-germany-elections-d873521f8b165774de3902439dd5a6ee">cut oil production</a>&nbsp;and Democratic lawmakers call for a&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-middle-east-business-saudi-arabia-jamal-khashoggi-6a5e19fb72f176c320bf727591f46d4b">freeze on cooperation</a>&nbsp;with the Saudis.John Kirby, the strategic communications coordinator for the National Security Council at the White House, said Tuesday that Biden believes “it’s time to take another look at this relationship and make sure that it’s serving our national security interests.”Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Rep. Ro Khanna of California on Tuesday introduced legislation that would immediately pause all U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia for one year. This pause would also halt sales of spare and repair parts, support services and logistical support.But it remains to be seen how far Biden is willing to go in showing his displeasure with the Saudis, a vital but complicated ally in the Middle East. Biden came into office vowing to recalibrate the U.S. relationship because of Saudi Arabia's human rights record but then paid&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/biden-israel-middle-east-saudi-arabia-83c27ca7357e41efedaa2318da59d0ab">a visit to the kingdom earlier this year.</a>Press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Tuesday the White House has no timeline for its review nor has the president appointed an adviser to serve as point person.Meanwhile, officials underscore the central role that Saudi Arabia plays in addressing broader national security concerns in the Middle East.Blumenthal and Khanna unveiled their legislation one day after Sen. Robert Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat, said it was unacceptable that OPEC+ had moved to cut oil production and effectively bolster Russian coffers as Moscow prosecutes its war on Ukraine. Menendez promised to use his position as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to block any future arms sales to the Saudis.At the White House, Kirby said, “We’re going to take a look at this relationship seriously as well as taking seriously the concerns of members of Congress.”Menendez did not warn the White House before announcing his intention to block future Saudi arms sales, Kirby said.OPEC+, which includes Russia as well as Saudi Arabia, announced last week it would cut production by 2 million barrels a day, which will help prop up oil prices that are allowing Russian President Vladimir Putin to keep paying for his eight-month invasion of Ukraine. The production cut also hurts U.S.-led efforts to make the war financially unsustainable for Russia, threatens a global economy already destabilized by the Ukraine conflict and risks saddling Biden and Democrats with newly rising gasoline prices just ahead of the U.S. midterm elections.Biden and European leaders have urged more oil production to ease gasoline prices and punish Moscow for its aggression in Ukraine. Putin has been accused of using energy as a weapon against countries opposing Russia's invasion.“They are certainly aligning themselves with Russia," Jean-Pierre said. "This is not a time to be aligning with Russia”As for the Saudis, Sen. Blumenthal said, “We cannot continue selling highly sensitive arms technology to a nation aligned with an abhorrent terrorist adversary.”However, the White House takes note that its weapon sales to Riyadh serve, in part, as an important counterweight in the region to Iran, which is quickly moving toward becoming a nuclear power.“There’s 70,000 Americans living in Saudi Arabia right now, not to mention all the other troops we have throughout the region,” Kirby said. "So, it’s not only in our interest that missile defense in the region become more integrated and cooperative. It’s in the interest of our allies and partners in that part of the world as well."Still, the pressure is mounting for Biden. As a candidate for the White House, he vowed that Saudi rulers would “pay the price” under his watch for the 2018 killing of U.S.-based journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a critic of the kingdom's leadership. Biden said that he'd look to make the oil-rich country a “pariah."But in July, amid rising prices at the pump around the globe, Biden decided to pay a visit to Saudi Arabia. During the visit, he met with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, who he once shunned as a killer for the death of Khashoggi. The U.S. intelligence community determined that the crown prince, often referred to by his initials MBS,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/us-saudi-crown-prince-khashoggi-killing-26c37f6d603737de7509f5ee09ae7f9d">likely approved the killing of Khashoggi</a>&nbsp;inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. MBS denies he was involved.The Saudis have also drawn international criticism for airstrikes killing civilians in the years-long war between the kingdom and Houthi rebels in Yemen — as well as for embargoes that exacerbated hunger and pushed Yemen to the brink of famine.“Saudi Arabia’s disastrous decision to slash oil production by two million barrels a day makes it clear that Riyadh is seeking to harm the U.S. and reaffirms the need to reassess the U.S.-Saudi relationship," Rep. Khanna said. “There is no reason for the U.S. to kowtow to a regime that has massacred countless civilians in Yemen, hacked to death a Washington-based journalist and is now extorting Americans at the pump.”

Biden reevaluating US-Saudi relationship after oil production cuts

WASHINGTON (AP) — A lawyer for former president Donald Trump who signed a letter stating that a&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763.48.0_1.pdf">“diligent search”</a>&nbsp;for classified records had been conducted and that all such documents had been given back to the government has spoken with the FBI, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Christina Bobb told federal investigators during the interview that she had not drafted the letter but that another Trump lawyer who she said actually prepared it had asked her to sign it in her role as a designated custodian of Trump's records, said the person, who insisted on anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.

The process is of interest to investigators because the Justice Department says the letter was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mar-a-lago-government-and-politics-1fef158c3a66bfc0ba6224570753ba47">untrue in asserting that all classified records sought by the government</a>&nbsp;had been located and returned. Though the letter, and 38 documents bearing classification markings, were presented to FBI and Justice Department officials during a June 3 visit to Mar-a-Lago, agents returned to the Florida estate&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-mar-a-lago-fbi-search-99097089194e736315c366a0e8fbafee">with a search warrant on Aug. 8 and seized about 100 additional classified records.</a>

According to an August&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763.48.0_1.pdf">court filing,</a>&nbsp;the signed certification letter was presented to investigators who visited Mar-a-Lago on June 3 to collect additional classified material from the home. The Justice Department had weeks earlier issued a subpoena for the records after it says it developed evidence that more classified documents remained at the estate beyond those contained in 15 boxes recovered in January by the National Archives and Records Administration.

The letter produced for investigators asserted that, in response to the subpoena, “a diligent search was conducted of the boxes that were moved from the White House to Florida" and that “any and all responsive documents accompany this certification.” The letter also included the caveat that the statements in it were true “based upon the information that has been provided to me.”

At the time,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-mar-a-lago-criminal-investigations-government-and-politics-4ee554f467252929f96c70d42a93a05d">the FBI was presented with an envelope</a>&nbsp;containing 38 documents with classification markings, including at the top-secret level. But agents began to suspect that they had not received the entire stash of records, and returned two months later with a warrant.

Bobb told the FBI that the letter was actually drafted and prepared by another of Trump's lawyers, M. Evan Corcoran, and that he had asked her to sign it in her capacity as custodian of the records, according to the person.

Corcoran did not immediately return an email and phone message on Tuesday. Spokespeople for the FBI and Justice Department declined to comment, and Bobb did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment.

The interview was first reported by NBC News. The person familiar with it said it was a voluntary discussion with investigators and did not take place before a grand jury, and that she is not regarded as a target of the investigation.

The Justice Department has said that, beyond investigating possible crimes in the retention of the documents themselves, it is also investigating whether anyone sought to obstruct its probe. It is not clear if anyone will be charged.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2022/8/1661941600753.jpeg" alt="This image contained in a court filing by the Department of Justice on Aug. 30, 2022, and redacted by in part by the FBI, shows a photo of documents seized during the Aug. 8 search by the FBI of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. The Justice Department says it has uncovered efforts to obstruct its investigation into the discovery of classified records at former President Donald Trump's Florida estate. (Department of Justice via AP)" />
 <figcaption>This image contained in a court filing by the Department of Justice on Aug. 30, 2022, and redacted by in part by the FBI, shows a photo of documents seized during the Aug. 8 search by the FBI of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. The Justice Department says it has uncovered efforts to obstruct its investigation into the discovery of classified records at former President Donald Trump's Florida estate. (Department of Justice via AP)</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON (AP) — A lawyer for former president Donald Trump who signed a letter stating that a&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763.48.0_1.pdf">“diligent search”</a>&nbsp;for classified records had been conducted and that all such documents had been given back to the government has spoken with the FBI, according to a person familiar with the matter.Christina Bobb told federal investigators during the interview that she had not drafted the letter but that another Trump lawyer who she said actually prepared it had asked her to sign it in her role as a designated custodian of Trump's records, said the person, who insisted on anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.The process is of interest to investigators because the Justice Department says the letter was&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/mar-a-lago-government-and-politics-1fef158c3a66bfc0ba6224570753ba47">untrue in asserting that all classified records sought by the government</a>&nbsp;had been located and returned. Though the letter, and 38 documents bearing classification markings, were presented to FBI and Justice Department officials during a June 3 visit to Mar-a-Lago, agents returned to the Florida estate&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-mar-a-lago-fbi-search-99097089194e736315c366a0e8fbafee">with a search warrant on Aug. 8 and seized about 100 additional classified records.</a>According to an August&nbsp;<a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763/gov.uscourts.flsd.618763.48.0_1.pdf">court filing,</a>&nbsp;the signed certification letter was presented to investigators who visited Mar-a-Lago on June 3 to collect additional classified material from the home. The Justice Department had weeks earlier issued a subpoena for the records after it says it developed evidence that more classified documents remained at the estate beyond those contained in 15 boxes recovered in January by the National Archives and Records Administration.The letter produced for investigators asserted that, in response to the subpoena, “a diligent search was conducted of the boxes that were moved from the White House to Florida" and that “any and all responsive documents accompany this certification.” The letter also included the caveat that the statements in it were true “based upon the information that has been provided to me.”At the time,&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-mar-a-lago-criminal-investigations-government-and-politics-4ee554f467252929f96c70d42a93a05d">the FBI was presented with an envelope</a>&nbsp;containing 38 documents with classification markings, including at the top-secret level. But agents began to suspect that they had not received the entire stash of records, and returned two months later with a warrant.Bobb told the FBI that the letter was actually drafted and prepared by another of Trump's lawyers, M. Evan Corcoran, and that he had asked her to sign it in her capacity as custodian of the records, according to the person.Corcoran did not immediately return an email and phone message on Tuesday. Spokespeople for the FBI and Justice Department declined to comment, and Bobb did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment.The interview was first reported by NBC News. The person familiar with it said it was a voluntary discussion with investigators and did not take place before a grand jury, and that she is not regarded as a target of the investigation.The Justice Department has said that, beyond investigating possible crimes in the retention of the documents themselves, it is also investigating whether anyone sought to obstruct its probe. It is not clear if anyone will be charged.---------------

Trump lawyer who vouched for documents meets with FBI

NEW YORK (AP) — Angela Lansbury, the scene-stealing British actor who kicked up her heels in the Broadway musicals “Mame” and “Gypsy” and solved endless murders as crime novelist Jessica Fletcher in the long-running TV series “Murder, She Wrote,” has died. She was 96.

NEW YORK (AP) — Angela Lansbury, the scene-stealing British actor who kicked up her heels in the Broadway musicals “Mame” and “Gypsy” and solved endless murders as crime novelist Jessica Fletcher in the long-running TV series “Murder, She Wrote,” has died. She was 96.Lansbury died Tuesday at her home in Los Angeles, according to a statement from her three children. She died five days shy of her 97th birthday.Lansbury won five Tony Awards for her Broadway performances and a lifetime achievement award. She earned Academy Award nominations as supporting actress for two of her first three films, “Gaslight” (1945) and “The Picture of Dorian Gray” (1946), and was nominated again in 1962 for “The Manchurian Candidate” and her deadly portrayal of a Communist agent and the title character’s mother.Her mature demeanor prompted producers to cast her much older than her actual age. In 1948, when she was 23, her hair was streaked with gray so she could play a fortyish newspaper publisher with a yen for Spencer Tracy in “State of the Union.”Her stardom came in middle age when she became the hit of the New York theater, winning Tony Awards for “Mame” (1966), “Dear World” (1969), “Gypsy” (1975) and “Sweeney Todd” (1979).She was back on Broadway and got another Tony nomination in 2007 in Terrence McNally’s “Deuce,” playing a scrappy, brash former tennis star, reflecting with another ex-star as she watches a modern-day match from the stands. In 2009 she collected her fifth Tony, for best featured actress in a revival of Noel Coward’s “Blithe Spirit” and in 2015 won an Olivier Award in the role.Broadway royalty paid their respects. Audra McDonald tweeted: “She was an icon, a legend, a gem, and about the nicest lady you’d ever want to meet.” Leslie Uggams on Twitter wrote: “Dame Angela was so sweet to me when I made my Broadway debut. She was a key person in welcoming me to the community. She truly lived, lived, lived!”But Lansbury’s widest fame began in 1984 when she launched “Murder, She Wrote” on CBS. Based loosely on Agatha Christie’s Miss Marple stories, the series centered on Jessica Fletcher, a middle-aged widow and former substitute school teacher living in the seaside village of Cabot Cove, Maine. She had achieved notice as a mystery novelist and amateur sleuth.The actor found the first series season exhausting.“I was shocked when I learned that had to work 12-15 hours a day, relentlessly, day in, day out,” she recalled. “I had to lay down the law at one point and say `Look, I can’t do these shows in seven days; it will have to be eight days.‘”CBS and the production company, Universal Studio, agreed, especially since “Murder, She Wrote” had become a Sunday night hit. Despite the long days — she left her home at Brentwood in West Los Angeles at 6 a.m. and returned after dark — and reams of dialogue to memorize, Lansbury maintained a steady pace. She was pleased that Jessica Fletcher served as an inspiration for older women.“Women in motion pictures have always had a difficult time being role models for other women,” she observed. “They’ve always been considered glamorous in their jobs.”In the series’ first season, Jessica wore clothes that were almost frumpy. Then she acquired smartness, Lansbury reasoning that, as a successful woman, Jessica should dress the part.“Murder, She Wrote” stayed high in the ratings through its 11th year. Then CBS, seeking a younger audience for Sunday night, shifted the series to a less favorable midweek slot. Lansbury protested vigorously to no avail. As expected, the ratings plummeted and the show was canceled. For consolation, CBS contracted for two-hour movies of “Murder, She Wrote” and other specials starring Lansbury.“Murder, She Wrote” and other television work brought her 18 Emmy nominations but she never won one. She holds the record for the most Golden Globe nominations and wins for best actress in a television drama series and the most Emmy nominations for lead actress in a drama series.In a 2008 Associated Press interview, Lansbury said she still welcomed the right script but did not want to play “old, decrepit women,” she said. “I want women my age to be represented the way they are, which is vital, productive members of society.”“I’m astonished at the amount of stuff I managed to pack into the years that I have been in the business. And I’m still here!”She was given the name Angela Brigid Lansbury when she was born in London on Oct. 16, 1925. Her family was distinguished: a grandfather who was the fiery head of the Labour Party; her father the owner of a veneer factory; her mother a successful actor, Moyna MacGill.“I was terribly shy, absolutely incapable of coming out of my shell,” Lansbury remembered of her youth. “It took me years to get over that.”The Depression forced her father’s factory into bankruptcy, and for a few years the family lived on money her mother had saved from her theater career. Angela suffered a shattering blow when her beloved father died in 1935. The tragedy forced her to become self-reliant — “almost a surrogate husband to my mother.”When England was threatened with German bombings in 1940, Moyna Lansbury struggled through red tape and won passage to America for her family. With the help of two sponsoring families, they settled in New York and lived on $150 a month. To add to their income, Angela at 16 landed a nightclub job in Montreal doing impersonations and songs.“The only thing I ever had confidence in is my ability to perform,” she said. “That has been the grace note in my sonata of life, the thing that has absolutely seen me through thick and thin.”Moyna moved the family to Hollywood, hoping to find acting work. Failing that, she and Angela wrapped packages and sold clothing at a department store. An actor friend suggested Angela would be ideal for the role of Sybil Vane in “The Picture of Dorian Gray,” which was being prepared at MGM. She tested, and studio boss Louis B. Mayer ordered: “Sign that girl!”She was just 19 when her first film, “Gaslight,” earned her an Oscar nomination, but MGM didn’t know what to do with the new contract player. She appeared as Elizabeth Taylor’s older sister in “National Velvet,” Judy Garland’s nemesis in “The Harvey Girls,” Walter Pidgeon’s spiteful wife in “If Winter Comes,” Queen Anne in “The Three Musketeers.”Tired of playing roles twice her own age, she left MGM to freelance but the results were much the same: the mother of Warren Beatty in “All Fall Down,” of Elvis Presley in “Blue Hawaii,” of Carroll Baker in “Harlow,” and of Laurence Harvey in “The Manchurian Candidate,” in which she unforgettably manipulates her son and helps set off a killing spree.In the mid-1940s, Lansbury had a disastrous nine-month marriage to Richard Cromwell, a soulful young star of the 1930s. In 1949, she married Peter Shaw, a Briton who had been under an acting contract to MGM, then became a studio executive and agent. He assumed the role of Lansbury’s manager. They had two children, Peter and Deirdre; he had a son David by a previous marriage.The 1950s were a troubled time for the Shaws. Angela’s career slowed down; her mother died after a battle with cancer; Peter underwent a hip operation; the children were on drugs; the family house in Malibu burned to the ground.Lansbury later said of the fire: “It’s like cutting off a branch, a big, luscious branch of your life and sealing it off with a sealer so it doesn’t bleed, That’s what you do. That’s how the human mind deals with those things. You have to pick up the pieces and go on.”Weary of 20 years of typecasting, Lansbury tried her luck on Broadway. Her first two shows — “Anyone Can Whistle” and “Hotel Paradiso” (with Bert Lahr) — flopped.Then came “Mame.” Rosalind Russell declined to repeat her classic role as Patrick Dennis’s dizzy aunt in a musical version. So did Mary Martin and Ethel Merman. Others considered: Bette Davis, Lauren Bacall, Judy Garland, Beatrice Lillie, Judy Garland. Composer Jerry Herman chose Lansbury.The opening on May 24, 1966, was a sensation. One critic wondered that “the movies’ worn, plump old harridan with a snakepit for a mouth” could turn out to be “the liveliest dame to kick up her heels since Carol Channing in ‘Hello, Dolly.‘”After her “Sweeney Todd” triumph, Lansbury returned to Hollywood to try television. She was offered a sitcom with Charles Durning or “Murder, She Wrote.” The producers had wanted Jean Stapleton, who declined. Lansbury accepted.During the series’ long run, she managed to star in TV movies, to be host of Emmy and Tony shows and even to provide the voice for a Disney animated feature. She played Mrs. Potts in “Beauty and the Beast” and sang the title song. “This was really a breakthrough for me,” she said of her young following. “It acquainted me with a generation that I possibly couldn’t have contacted.”In 2000, Lansbury withdrew from a planned Broadway musical, “The Visit,” because she needed to help her husband recover from heart surgery. “The kind of commitment required of an artist carrying a multimillion-dollar production has to be 100%,” she said in a letter to the producers.Her husband died in 2003.She was back on Broadway in 2012 in a revival of “The Best Man,” sharing a stage with James Earl Jones, John Larroquette, Candice Bergen, Eric McCormack, Michael McKean and Kerry Butler. She also recently co-starred in Emma Thompson’s “Nanny McPhee” and with Jim Carrey in “Mr. Popper’s Penguins.”At the 2022 Tony Awards, Len Cariou — her “Sweeney Todd” co-star — accepted the lifetime Tony given to Lansbury. “There is no one with whom I’d rather run a cutthroat business with,” Cariou said.In 1990, Lansbury philosophized: “I have sometimes drawn back from my career. To what? Home. Home is the counterweight to the work.”In addition to her three children, Anthony, Deirdre and David, she is survived by three grandchildren, Peter, Katherine and Ian, plus five great grandchildren and her brother, producer Edgar Lansbury.