LINCOLN, NEB.)&nbsp;— In honor of Purple Heart Day, the Nebraska State Capitol will be illuminated in purple light on August 7, weather permitting. In addition, a proclamation recognizing Purple Heart Day in Nebraska will be signed by Governor Pillen on August 19.

“Everyone who answers the call to protect our nation sacrifices something, but for some that sacrifice is a physical, perhaps even mortal, wound,” said Nebraska Department of Veterans’ Affairs (NDVA) Director John Hilgert. “Purple Heart Day reminds us all of the very real, very serious dangers our servicemembers face. Today is about honoring their sacrifices and cherishing what we have because of it.”

First observed in 2014, Purple Heart Day is meant to honor and recognize the more than 1.8 million service members who have been awarded the Purple Heart. Originally created by George Washington as the Badge of Military Merit, the Purple Heart is the United States’ oldest military award. It is awarded to service members who are wounded or killed while serving in the U.S. Armed Forces.

NDVA’s mission is to honor Nebraska veterans and their families by providing excellent service, assistance, and care. Its state service office helps veterans identify and access federal benefits, such as disability compensation and healthcare through the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and state benefits, such as Nebraska Veterans Aid funds, tuition waivers, and more. Its four state veterans’ homes offer high quality assisted living and skilled nursing care to veterans and eligible family members across the state. And its cemetery system ensures eligible veterans receive an honorable final resting place maintained to the highest national standards. To learn more about NDVA and how it serves Nebraska’s veterans and their families, please visit&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://veterans.nebraska.gov/">veterans.nebraska.gov</a>.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/8/1722527823035.png" alt="The Nebraska State Capitol lit purple for Purple Heart Day in 2022. (Courtesy Photo)" />
 <figcaption>The Nebraska State Capitol lit purple for Purple Heart Day in 2022. (Courtesy Photo)</figcaption>
 </figure>Holden ArmstrongLINCOLN, NEB.)&nbsp;— In honor of Purple Heart Day, the Nebraska State Capitol will be illuminated in purple light on August 7, weather permitting. In addition, a proclamation recognizing Purple Heart Day in Nebraska will be signed by Governor Pillen on August 19.“Everyone who answers the call to protect our nation sacrifices something, but for some that sacrifice is a physical, perhaps even mortal, wound,” said Nebraska Department of Veterans’ Affairs (NDVA) Director John Hilgert. “Purple Heart Day reminds us all of the very real, very serious dangers our servicemembers face. Today is about honoring their sacrifices and cherishing what we have because of it.”First observed in 2014, Purple Heart Day is meant to honor and recognize the more than 1.8 million service members who have been awarded the Purple Heart. Originally created by George Washington as the Badge of Military Merit, the Purple Heart is the United States’ oldest military award. It is awarded to service members who are wounded or killed while serving in the U.S. Armed Forces.NDVA’s mission is to honor Nebraska veterans and their families by providing excellent service, assistance, and care. Its state service office helps veterans identify and access federal benefits, such as disability compensation and healthcare through the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and state benefits, such as Nebraska Veterans Aid funds, tuition waivers, and more. Its four state veterans’ homes offer high quality assisted living and skilled nursing care to veterans and eligible family members across the state. And its cemetery system ensures eligible veterans receive an honorable final resting place maintained to the highest national standards. To learn more about NDVA and how it serves Nebraska’s veterans and their families, please visit&nbsp;<a target="_blank" href="https://veterans.nebraska.gov/">veterans.nebraska.gov</a>.

Nebraska State Capitol to Shine Purple on Purple Heart Day

LINCOLN, NE –&nbsp;Lieutenant Governor Joe Kelly is touting the many opportunities that he and trade mission delegates had to promote Nebraska products and continued market growth during a recent week and a half long visit to Indonesia. The 20-plus member team took part in a full slate of meetings, events and activities geared primarily at showcasing Nebraska agricultural commodities including beef, pork, soybeans, corn and grains. The delegation included representatives from the Nebraska Department of Agriculture (NDA), the Nebraska Department of Economic Development (DED), the University of Nebraska, and several Nebraska agricultural business sector representatives.

“Importers are very interested to know about how our products are grown and raised. They value family connections and sustainability – all things that are important in Nebraska agriculture – and makes our state a standout in the food products we have to offer,” said Lt. Gov. Kelly. With that in mind, he and Director Sherry Vinton from the Nebraska Department of Agriculture spoke frequently about the quality of family farming operations and the pride that goes into raising the best Nebraska products possible.

“This was a remarkable trade mission, and it will reap rewards for Nebraska’s ag producers,” said NDA Director Vinton. “Our delegation was warmly received and all of the face-to-face meetings with new and existing distributors and sales representatives will prove invaluable.”

Indonesia is Southeast Asia’s largest economy, the world’s fourth-most populous country, and offers substantial market opportunities for Nebraska products. Indonesia is one of the top 10 export markets for Nebraska at $139 million and has a rapidly rising GDP and growing population. Top exports from Nebraska include soybeans/soybean meal, corn, wheat and beef.

&nbsp;The group’s robust 10-day itinerary included meetings with the U.S Grains Council, beef import associations and visits to a feed mill, a fueling station that utilizes ethanol and a tempeh factory. Tempeh is a very popular dish in Indonesia and representatives of the Nebraska Soybean Board said they were excited to explore opportunities to increase exports.&nbsp;&nbsp;

“Indonesia is a top consumer of soybean meal in the world, but the U.S. has a very small market share, so we were able to have great conversations about market opportunities for them to purchase soybean meal from Nebraska,” said Wesley Wach of the Nebraska Soybean Board. “Nebraska and Indonesia have an encouraging future when it comes to soybeans.”

Additional opportunities for networking included the Indo Livestock Expo and Forum, which is the country’s leading livestock, feed and dairy industry event and the Jakarta International Expo for Food. Following that event, members of the delegation met with the new United States Ambassador to Indonesia, Kamala Sharon Lakhdhir. Discussions focused on strengthening Indonesia’s relationship with Nebraska, opportunities that exist with soybean meal, pork, and beef markets, and doing more to accommodate halal certification requirements.

A visit to the Istiqlal Mosque in Jakarta provided Lt. Gov. Kelly and participants another important opportunity to discuss halal certification standards, which ensures that food products raised and processed in Nebraska are acceptable for consumption by Muslims. More than 87% of Indonesia’s population identifies as Muslim, so the ability to provide certified halal food and other products is key to that global market.

Another highlight was a visit to the Southeast Asian Food Science and Technology (SEAFAST) Center at IPB University, a state-run agricultural school. There, the focus turned to opportunities involving student exchange programs and collaborating on research in plant and animal sciences.

At the SEAFAST Center, Dr. Chris Calkins, who is a world-renowned, emeritus meat science professor from the University of Nebraska, conducted a five-hour workshop for more than 70 culinary students. As part of the presentation, he shared the difference that makes Nebraska beef a desired menu item – a corn diet.

“Planting the seeds of understanding and appreciation in future culinary leaders has high potential for long-term payback,” said Dr. Calkins.

Dr. Jessie Morrill, assistant professor of meat biochemistry at the University of Nebraska, made similar observations. &nbsp;

“Nebraska farmers and ranchers excel in the production of high-quality protein foods, which are in high demand in Indonesia,” said Dr. Morrill. “Marketing these products to Indonesia can provide significant benefits to our producers and will also help increase dietary protein accessibility in Indonesia.”

“It was exciting to be a part of the educational efforts aimed at teaching Indonesian chefs and distributors the story behind what makes Nebraska beef so exceptional,” said Grant Potadle, founder of York Creek Red Angus in Herman, NE. “Creating that demand inside, out in the marketplace, accompanied by laying a foundation for future relationships will be highly impactful in the long-term.”

Lt. Gov. Kelly showed off his culinary skills at a beef preparation demonstration at the Grand Indonesia Ranch Market, a grocery market chain. Near the end of their visit, delegation participants went to Cinema XXI, the largest movie chain in Indonesia which imports Preferred Popcorn from Chapman, NE.

Lt. Gov. Kelly said all aspects of the trade mission were productive, with plenty of opportunities for Nebraska, considering Indonesia’s growing population of 270 million people.

“Nebraska helps to feed the world and their customers are demanding higher quality meat products, which is where we fit right in,” said Lt. Gov. Kelly.

The trade mission took place from July 15 – 24.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/8/1722519699304.jpeg" alt="Lt. Gov. Kelly meets with the new U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia, Kamala Sharon Lakhdhir (Courtesy of Governor's office)" />
 <figcaption>Lt. Gov. Kelly meets with the new U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia, Kamala Sharon Lakhdhir (Courtesy of Governor's office)</figcaption>
 </figure>Office of Governor Jim PillenLINCOLN, NE –&nbsp;Lieutenant Governor Joe Kelly is touting the many opportunities that he and trade mission delegates had to promote Nebraska products and continued market growth during a recent week and a half long visit to Indonesia. The 20-plus member team took part in a full slate of meetings, events and activities geared primarily at showcasing Nebraska agricultural commodities including beef, pork, soybeans, corn and grains. The delegation included representatives from the Nebraska Department of Agriculture (NDA), the Nebraska Department of Economic Development (DED), the University of Nebraska, and several Nebraska agricultural business sector representatives.“Importers are very interested to know about how our products are grown and raised. They value family connections and sustainability – all things that are important in Nebraska agriculture – and makes our state a standout in the food products we have to offer,” said Lt. Gov. Kelly. With that in mind, he and Director Sherry Vinton from the Nebraska Department of Agriculture spoke frequently about the quality of family farming operations and the pride that goes into raising the best Nebraska products possible.“This was a remarkable trade mission, and it will reap rewards for Nebraska’s ag producers,” said NDA Director Vinton. “Our delegation was warmly received and all of the face-to-face meetings with new and existing distributors and sales representatives will prove invaluable.”Indonesia is Southeast Asia’s largest economy, the world’s fourth-most populous country, and offers substantial market opportunities for Nebraska products. Indonesia is one of the top 10 export markets for Nebraska at $139 million and has a rapidly rising GDP and growing population. Top exports from Nebraska include soybeans/soybean meal, corn, wheat and beef.&nbsp;The group’s robust 10-day itinerary included meetings with the U.S Grains Council, beef import associations and visits to a feed mill, a fueling station that utilizes ethanol and a tempeh factory. Tempeh is a very popular dish in Indonesia and representatives of the Nebraska Soybean Board said they were excited to explore opportunities to increase exports.&nbsp;&nbsp;“Indonesia is a top consumer of soybean meal in the world, but the U.S. has a very small market share, so we were able to have great conversations about market opportunities for them to purchase soybean meal from Nebraska,” said Wesley Wach of the Nebraska Soybean Board. “Nebraska and Indonesia have an encouraging future when it comes to soybeans.”Additional opportunities for networking included the Indo Livestock Expo and Forum, which is the country’s leading livestock, feed and dairy industry event and the Jakarta International Expo for Food. Following that event, members of the delegation met with the new United States Ambassador to Indonesia, Kamala Sharon Lakhdhir. Discussions focused on strengthening Indonesia’s relationship with Nebraska, opportunities that exist with soybean meal, pork, and beef markets, and doing more to accommodate halal certification requirements.A visit to the Istiqlal Mosque in Jakarta provided Lt. Gov. Kelly and participants another important opportunity to discuss halal certification standards, which ensures that food products raised and processed in Nebraska are acceptable for consumption by Muslims. More than 87% of Indonesia’s population identifies as Muslim, so the ability to provide certified halal food and other products is key to that global market.Another highlight was a visit to the Southeast Asian Food Science and Technology (SEAFAST) Center at IPB University, a state-run agricultural school. There, the focus turned to opportunities involving student exchange programs and collaborating on research in plant and animal sciences.At the SEAFAST Center, Dr. Chris Calkins, who is a world-renowned, emeritus meat science professor from the University of Nebraska, conducted a five-hour workshop for more than 70 culinary students. As part of the presentation, he shared the difference that makes Nebraska beef a desired menu item – a corn diet.“Planting the seeds of understanding and appreciation in future culinary leaders has high potential for long-term payback,” said Dr. Calkins.Dr. Jessie Morrill, assistant professor of meat biochemistry at the University of Nebraska, made similar observations. &nbsp;“Nebraska farmers and ranchers excel in the production of high-quality protein foods, which are in high demand in Indonesia,” said Dr. Morrill. “Marketing these products to Indonesia can provide significant benefits to our producers and will also help increase dietary protein accessibility in Indonesia.”“It was exciting to be a part of the educational efforts aimed at teaching Indonesian chefs and distributors the story behind what makes Nebraska beef so exceptional,” said Grant Potadle, founder of York Creek Red Angus in Herman, NE. “Creating that demand inside, out in the marketplace, accompanied by laying a foundation for future relationships will be highly impactful in the long-term.”Lt. Gov. Kelly showed off his culinary skills at a beef preparation demonstration at the Grand Indonesia Ranch Market, a grocery market chain. Near the end of their visit, delegation participants went to Cinema XXI, the largest movie chain in Indonesia which imports Preferred Popcorn from Chapman, NE.Lt. Gov. Kelly said all aspects of the trade mission were productive, with plenty of opportunities for Nebraska, considering Indonesia’s growing population of 270 million people.“Nebraska helps to feed the world and their customers are demanding higher quality meat products, which is where we fit right in,” said Lt. Gov. Kelly.The trade mission took place from July 15 – 24.

Lt. Governor Kelly & Delegation Tout Opportunities from Trade Mission

HOUSTON— Vice President Kamala Harris has responded to former President Donald Trump's statement about her race as the 'same old show.'

Harris was speaking at the Sigma Gamma Rho Sorority Inc. in Houston.

In Chicago before the National Association of Black Journalists, Trump&nbsp;suggested Harris&nbsp;had misled voters about&nbsp;her race&nbsp;

Trump answered questions from three reporters: Kadia Goba of Semafor, Rachel Scott of ABC News and Harris Faulkner of Fox News.

HOUSTON— Vice President Kamala Harris has responded to former President Donald Trump's statement about her race as the 'same old show.'<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">VP <a href="https://twitter.com/KamalaHarris?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@KamalaHarris</a> reacts to former President Trump: &quot;The American people deserve a leader who tells the truth, a leader who does not respond with hostility and anger when confronted with the facts. We deserve a leader who understands that our differences do not divide us.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/1tqNGPIpLo">pic.twitter.com/1tqNGPIpLo</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1818817157704061039?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 1, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Harris was speaking at the Sigma Gamma Rho Sorority Inc. in Houston.In Chicago before the National Association of Black Journalists, Trump&nbsp;suggested Harris&nbsp;had misled voters about&nbsp;her race&nbsp;<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Former President Trump on Vice President Kamala Harris: &quot;She was Indian all the way and then all of a sudden she made a turn and she went, she became a Black person. I think somebody should look into that.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/RpEuRq6p5m">pic.twitter.com/RpEuRq6p5m</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1818717916285509891?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 31, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Trump answered questions from three reporters: Kadia Goba of Semafor, Rachel Scott of ABC News and Harris Faulkner of Fox News.

🎥Vice President Harris blasts Trump’s claim that she 'became Black'

WASHINGTON —Former President Donald Trump spoke and was interviewed&nbsp; Wednesday in Chicago at a gathering for the National Association of Black Journalists.

Trump answered questions from three reporters: Kadia Goba of Semafor, Rachel Scott of ABC News and Harris Faulkner of Fox News. 

Vice President Kamala Harris, the likely Democratic nominee was not scheduled to address the convention. 

A person familiar with her schedule said the Harris campaign was unable to find a time to appear at NABJ in person and claimed the organization turned down an offer for her to appear virtually.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1722460473060.png" alt="Image from CSPAN video" />
 <figcaption>Image from CSPAN video</figcaption>
 </figure>WASHINGTON —Former President Donald Trump spoke and was interviewed&nbsp; Wednesday in Chicago at a gathering for the National Association of Black Journalists.<div><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Former President Trump on Vice President Kamala Harris: &quot;She was Indian all the way and then all of a sudden she made a turn and she went, she became a Black person. I think somebody should look into that.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/RpEuRq6p5m">pic.twitter.com/RpEuRq6p5m</a>&mdash; CSPAN (@cspan) <a href="https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1818717916285509891?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 31, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Trump answered questions from three reporters: Kadia Goba of Semafor, Rachel Scott of ABC News and Harris Faulkner of Fox News. Vice President Kamala Harris, the likely Democratic nominee was not scheduled to address the convention. A person familiar with her schedule said the Harris campaign was unable to find a time to appear at NABJ in person and claimed the organization turned down an offer for her to appear virtually.

🎥Trump answers whether Kamala Harris is a DEI hire

Office of U.S. Senator Deb Fischer

WASHINGTON –&nbsp;At a hearing yesterday,&nbsp;U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the top Republican on the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, pressed defense experts on nuclear modernization and workforce challenges.

Senator Fischer questioned Commission on the National Defense Strategy (NDS)&nbsp;Chair Jane M. Harman and Vice Chair Eric S. Edelman on the Commission’s 2024 report, which evaluated the Biden administration’s 2022 National Defense Strategy. The report found that the federal government has not integrated national security priorities across departments, fully informed the American people about the threats we face or made sufficient progress in reforming acquisition and research practices.

During the hearing, Senator Fischer referenced her provision in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would require the Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy promoting a skilled manufacturing and vocational trade workforce. The provision was introduced as part of Senator Fischer’s bipartisan Restoring American Deterrence Act, a bill to overhaul America’s nuclear preparedness.

On the Role Nuclear Modernization Plays in the NDS Commission’s Proposal:

Senator Fischer:&nbsp;Mr. Ambassador, nuclear deterrence is the foundation,&nbsp;it is the bedrock on which our national security rests. And I understand that the Commission did not seek to replicate the&nbsp;work that came out of&nbsp;the&nbsp;Strategic&nbsp;Posture&nbsp;Commission, but it does highlight the importance of deterrence, strategic deterrence, in view of China’s development, Russia’s aggression, on and on. As you considered the strategic elements of the national security policy for us, can you explain to this committee the role that nuclear modernization plays in the NDS Commission’s proposed Multiple Theater Force Construct?

NDS Commission&nbsp;Vice Chair Eric S. Edelman:&nbsp;Nuclear deterrence, Senator Fischer, you know, is the fundament on which everything else is built, in terms of our national security. It’s operating every day. It’s&nbsp;not visible to American citizens, but the fact of our nuclear deterrent force, all three legs of the triad being available, is the most powerful deterrent that we have to conflict. It’s not sufficient, but it is the absolute basis.

And we really, I think, agreed with the conclusion our colleagues on the&nbsp;Strategic&nbsp;Posture&nbsp;Commission reached, which is that we have to move forward with alacrity on all the elements of modernization of the nuclear triad. That’s the GBSD/Sentinel program. That is the B-21. That is the&nbsp;Ohio Replacement Class. All of those things have to be accomplished, and there are problems. 

And one of the reasons we highlighted education is that some of the problems that GBSD are running into has to do with lack of skilled workers to be able to pour the kinds of special reinforced concrete that you need for the new silos for missiles, the new control systems for missiles. We lack welders in the submarine industrial bases, as Senator Wicker knows well. 

So, there’s a lot that has to be done across the board in order to move forward with nuclear modernization, but it is absolutely fundamental to our ability to deter aggression against our allies, and of course, against the homeland.

On the Barriers the NDS Commission’s Proposal Faces:

Senator Fischer:&nbsp;Thank you, and&nbsp;Representative, I really appreciated your comments on the workforce and the need we have for that, for national strategy. And to be able to work with Senator King, on a bill that we introduced, that we were able to get some of those important factors into the NDAA so that we can address them and hopefully continue to grow what we need and meet those needs quickly. Ambassador, based on the&nbsp;Commission’s work, what do you think are the biggest barriers that we are going to face as a country to achieving that Multiple Theater Force Construct? And Representative, I’d like to hear your opinion on that as well.

NDS Commission&nbsp;Vice Chair Eric S. Edelman:&nbsp;Well, Senator Fischer,&nbsp;to your question, the force right now is too small, and so we have to grow the force. And that’s in the face of the recruiting challenges that we’ve highlighted in the report that the Army, in particular, but also the Navy and the Air Force have faced.

Senator Fischer:&nbsp;I’m going to interrupt you. Why is it too small? Can you explain in this setting the threats that we are facing when we look at the adversaries that we face, and how that has changed over the last decade?

NDS Commission&nbsp;Vice Chair Eric S. Edelman:&nbsp;It’s too small in part because the department was sizing itself for one conflict. But if you have to be present in three theaters, as we are now, we’ve got conflicts in two theaters now. If we have a third conflict in the third theater, it’s going to require, you know, more, a lot more, forces. People talk,&nbsp;for instance,&nbsp;about the Indo-Pacific being largely a Navy and Air Force fight. That’s correct. But the logistics that support the Navy and the Air Force will largely be manned by the Army. And so, we have to have an&nbsp;Army that is sufficiently large that it can operate in all of these places, potentially simultaneously.

Because honestly, it is very hard to imagine today a conflict in the Indo-Pacific that doesn’t become a global conflict very quickly. Someone asked earlier in the hearing about cooperation between Russia and China. The last time I testified before this committee was two years ago about the so-called three-body problem: Russia, China, being both nuclear peers of the United States. And, you know, one of the criticisms that was leveled at my colleague, Frank Miller, and me was that, you know, well, there’s no evidence that Russia and China are collaborating in the nuclear era. 

Well, we just saw them flying strategic bombers together, you know, up near Alaska. So, I don’t know what more evidence you want that they’re beginning to collaborate in that strategic area.

NDS Commission&nbsp;Chair Jane M. Harman:&nbsp;If I could just add a few things. First of all, on the nuclear triad and the Nuclear Posture Review, Senator Kyl is a dear friend of ours. He did great service in the Senate and writing that report, and we talked about whether we should, in some ways, overlap some of his recommendations, but we decided they were so good, they should stand alone. So, it’s not that we don’t care. It’s just that we recognize good work.

And add to that, though, that our nuclear agreements that were so important over recent years, especially the heroic work that President Reagan did, don’t include China. And a number of them have lapsed, and that is a truly dangerous situation, especially when rogue states like North Korea and Iran are part of the nuclear game now. And there could be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East or in Asia also. So, just would point that out. In terms of workforce, why is it small? Well, one thing we have not done, and we mentioned this, is embrace the tech sector adequately. Future&nbsp;wars are not going to be fought the old way with vulnerable big platforms. 

They’re going to be fought with more software—less hardware, more software. Not to diminish hardware, but we need both. In fact, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was at the Aspen&nbsp;Security&nbsp;Forum last week—some of us were there,&nbsp;Senator Sullivan was there—and he said DoD is not a hardware department. 

Right,&nbsp;it’s not, or if it is, it should not be a hardware department. So not only do we need more people, but we need different skills. And we need people who understand the tech base. And in fact, we have said that the business model of the Pentagon ought to move to embrace the business model of the tech sector, where failure sometimes is important so that you can improve things. And just one comment to a prior question. We,&nbsp;some of us,&nbsp;were in Ukraine looking at how they produce goods, including drones and tanks, and they have been much more innovative than we have. And there are lessons to learn there. Thank you.

Office of U.S. Senator Deb FischerWASHINGTON –&nbsp;At a hearing yesterday,&nbsp;U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the top Republican on the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, pressed defense experts on nuclear modernization and workforce challenges.Senator Fischer questioned Commission on the National Defense Strategy (NDS)&nbsp;Chair Jane M. Harman and Vice Chair Eric S. Edelman on the Commission’s 2024 report, which evaluated the Biden administration’s 2022 National Defense Strategy. The report found that the federal government has not integrated national security priorities across departments, fully informed the American people about the threats we face or made sufficient progress in reforming acquisition and research practices.During the hearing, Senator Fischer referenced her provision in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would require the Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy promoting a skilled manufacturing and vocational trade workforce. The provision was introduced as part of Senator Fischer’s bipartisan Restoring American Deterrence Act, a bill to overhaul America’s nuclear preparedness.On the Role Nuclear Modernization Plays in the NDS Commission’s Proposal:Senator Fischer:&nbsp;Mr. Ambassador, nuclear deterrence is the foundation,&nbsp;it is the bedrock on which our national security rests. And I understand that the Commission did not seek to replicate the&nbsp;work that came out of&nbsp;the&nbsp;Strategic&nbsp;Posture&nbsp;Commission, but it does highlight the importance of deterrence, strategic deterrence, in view of China’s development, Russia’s aggression, on and on. As you considered the strategic elements of the national security policy for us, can you explain to this committee the role that nuclear modernization plays in the NDS Commission’s proposed Multiple Theater Force Construct?NDS Commission&nbsp;Vice Chair Eric S. Edelman:&nbsp;Nuclear deterrence, Senator Fischer, you know, is the fundament on which everything else is built, in terms of our national security. It’s operating every day. It’s&nbsp;not visible to American citizens, but the fact of our nuclear deterrent force, all three legs of the triad being available, is the most powerful deterrent that we have to conflict. It’s not sufficient, but it is the absolute basis. And we really, I think, agreed with the conclusion our colleagues on the&nbsp;Strategic&nbsp;Posture&nbsp;Commission reached, which is that we have to move forward with alacrity on all the elements of modernization of the nuclear triad. That’s the GBSD/Sentinel program. That is the B-21. That is the&nbsp;Ohio Replacement Class. All of those things have to be accomplished, and there are problems. And one of the reasons we highlighted education is that some of the problems that GBSD are running into has to do with lack of skilled workers to be able to pour the kinds of special reinforced concrete that you need for the new silos for missiles, the new control systems for missiles. We lack welders in the submarine industrial bases, as Senator Wicker knows well. So, there’s a lot that has to be done across the board in order to move forward with nuclear modernization, but it is absolutely fundamental to our ability to deter aggression against our allies, and of course, against the homeland.On the Barriers the NDS Commission’s Proposal Faces:Senator Fischer:&nbsp;Thank you, and&nbsp;Representative, I really appreciated your comments on the workforce and the need we have for that, for national strategy. And to be able to work with Senator King, on a bill that we introduced, that we were able to get some of those important factors into the NDAA so that we can address them and hopefully continue to grow what we need and meet those needs quickly. Ambassador, based on the&nbsp;Commission’s work, what do you think are the biggest barriers that we are going to face as a country to achieving that Multiple Theater Force Construct? And Representative, I’d like to hear your opinion on that as well.NDS Commission&nbsp;Vice Chair Eric S. Edelman:&nbsp;Well, Senator Fischer,&nbsp;to your question, the force right now is too small, and so we have to grow the force. And that’s in the face of the recruiting challenges that we’ve highlighted in the report that the Army, in particular, but also the Navy and the Air Force have faced.Senator Fischer:&nbsp;I’m going to interrupt you. Why is it too small? Can you explain in this setting the threats that we are facing when we look at the adversaries that we face, and how that has changed over the last decade?NDS Commission&nbsp;Vice Chair Eric S. Edelman:&nbsp;It’s too small in part because the department was sizing itself for one conflict. But if you have to be present in three theaters, as we are now, we’ve got conflicts in two theaters now. If we have a third conflict in the third theater, it’s going to require, you know, more, a lot more, forces. People talk,&nbsp;for instance,&nbsp;about the Indo-Pacific being largely a Navy and Air Force fight. That’s correct. But the logistics that support the Navy and the Air Force will largely be manned by the Army. And so, we have to have an&nbsp;Army that is sufficiently large that it can operate in all of these places, potentially simultaneously. Because honestly, it is very hard to imagine today a conflict in the Indo-Pacific that doesn’t become a global conflict very quickly. Someone asked earlier in the hearing about cooperation between Russia and China. The last time I testified before this committee was two years ago about the so-called three-body problem: Russia, China, being both nuclear peers of the United States. And, you know, one of the criticisms that was leveled at my colleague, Frank Miller, and me was that, you know, well, there’s no evidence that Russia and China are collaborating in the nuclear era. Well, we just saw them flying strategic bombers together, you know, up near Alaska. So, I don’t know what more evidence you want that they’re beginning to collaborate in that strategic area.NDS Commission&nbsp;Chair Jane M. Harman:&nbsp;If I could just add a few things. First of all, on the nuclear triad and the Nuclear Posture Review, Senator Kyl is a dear friend of ours. He did great service in the Senate and writing that report, and we talked about whether we should, in some ways, overlap some of his recommendations, but we decided they were so good, they should stand alone. So, it’s not that we don’t care. It’s just that we recognize good work. And add to that, though, that our nuclear agreements that were so important over recent years, especially the heroic work that President Reagan did, don’t include China. And a number of them have lapsed, and that is a truly dangerous situation, especially when rogue states like North Korea and Iran are part of the nuclear game now. And there could be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East or in Asia also. So, just would point that out. In terms of workforce, why is it small? Well, one thing we have not done, and we mentioned this, is embrace the tech sector adequately. Future&nbsp;wars are not going to be fought the old way with vulnerable big platforms. They’re going to be fought with more software—less hardware, more software. Not to diminish hardware, but we need both. In fact, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was at the Aspen&nbsp;Security&nbsp;Forum last week—some of us were there,&nbsp;Senator Sullivan was there—and he said DoD is not a hardware department. Right,&nbsp;it’s not, or if it is, it should not be a hardware department. So not only do we need more people, but we need different skills. And we need people who understand the tech base. And in fact, we have said that the business model of the Pentagon ought to move to embrace the business model of the tech sector, where failure sometimes is important so that you can improve things. And just one comment to a prior question. We,&nbsp;some of us,&nbsp;were in Ukraine looking at how they produce goods, including drones and tanks, and they have been much more innovative than we have. And there are lessons to learn there. Thank you.

Fischer Presses Defense Experts on Nuclear Workforce Challenges

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jaredstrong/">JARED STRONG</a>&nbsp;

Federal health officials are encouraging farm workers who tend livestock and poultry to get vaccinated for seasonal influenza to help prevent a bird flu mutation that might spark a pandemic in people.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Tuesday it would devote up to $5 million to pay for the vaccinations, and that it will rely on states to implement the initiative.

There are 14 known human infections of highly pathogenic avian influenza that resulted from contact with infected dairy cattle and poultry in the United States, and all but one has happened in the past four months.

The virus has been circulated by wild birds for more than two years and has sporadically transmitted to domestic birds. A variation of the virus has been infecting U.S. dairy cattle since December, and four people who worked closely with infected cattle also became ill.

In recent weeks, nine people in Colorado who were tasked with culling infected poultry contracted the virus.

The CDC has maintained that the virus’ risk to humans is low — those who have been infected so far had minor symptoms of respiratory illness or pinkeye, or both.

It has not been shown to transmit between people, but the virus has the potential to rapidly gain that ability if it infects someone who also has a seasonal flu virus.

“Such dual infections, while rare, could potentially result in an exchange of genetic material between two different influenza viruses,” Dr. Nirav Shah, principal deputy director for the CDC, said in a call with reporters Tuesday.

Shah said that “reassortment” process could pose a “significant public health concern” if bird flu gains the ability to spread person-to-person the way seasonal flu does, potentially resulting in a virus that spreads easily and causes severe symptoms.

Shah said the CDC will devote up to $10 million for farm workers’ health related to avian flu. Half will be spent educating and training farm workers about how to avoid being infected.

The other half will pay for seasonal flu vaccines for an estimated 200,000 farm workers who tend livestock and poultry. The CDC hopes to vaccinate all of them but acknowledges that less than half of the general population typically gets a flu shot.

How the voluntary vaccination effort will proceed is unclear. State health officials are expected to implement them, most immediately in the 13 states that have confirmed infections among cows.

That includes Iowa, where 13 dairy herds have been infected. However, no new infections have been reported in the state in the past month.

A spokesperson for the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services — which presumably would coordinate with the CDC — did not immediately respond to a request to comment for this article.

The vaccine will not protect the workers from contracting bird flu, Shah said, nor will it guarantee they won’t be infected by seasonal flu. But he said it’s an important component of the public health response to the new virus’ threat.

“The risk here is a theoretical but important risk,” Shah said.

The confirmations of new bird flu infections among cattle have waned significantly in most states, except for in Colorado. In the past 30 days, two-thirds of the nation’s 32 newly infected herds were in that state, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data.

Some of that might be due to Colorado’s&nbsp;<a href="https://coloradonewsline.com/briefs/colorado-requiring-dairy-products-to-be-regularly-tested-for-bird-flu-amid-outbreak/" target="_blank">robust testing protocols</a>, but it’s also “a quirk of history and geography,” said Eric Deeble, deputy under secretary for marketing and regulatory programs for the USDA.

The state has far fewer dairy farms than the leading milk-producing states, but most of them are concentrated in one county.

“They are all in very close proximity to one another, and so there is a lot of sharing of equipment, a lot of sharing of personnel and a lot of movement on and off farms to adjacent farms,” Deeble said.

The USDA has identified the movement of equipment and people between dairy farms as a primary vector for virus transmissions from herd to herd and from herd to flock.

The virus has been identified in 172 dairy herds in the United States this year. Fifty of them are in Colorado. In Texas, where the infections originated, the virus was confirmed in 22 herds, although there were many that went untested because they recovered before bird flu&nbsp;<a href="https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2024/04/17/two-veterinarians-hundreds-of-miles-apart-solved-a-cow-sickness-whodunit/" target="_blank">was identified</a>&nbsp;as the culprit.

This story was originally published by the&nbsp;<a href="https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2024/07/30/worried-about-bird-flu-mutation-feds-seek-livestock-worker-vaccinations/" target="_blank">Iowa Capital Dispatch</a>, a States Newsroom affiliate.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1722448527185.png" alt="Cow Photo courtesy of Iowa State Dairy Association)." />
 <figcaption>Cow Photo courtesy of Iowa State Dairy Association).</figcaption>
 </figure>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/jaredstrong/">JARED STRONG</a>&nbsp;Federal health officials are encouraging farm workers who tend livestock and poultry to get vaccinated for seasonal influenza to help prevent a bird flu mutation that might spark a pandemic in people.The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Tuesday it would devote up to $5 million to pay for the vaccinations, and that it will rely on states to implement the initiative.There are 14 known human infections of highly pathogenic avian influenza that resulted from contact with infected dairy cattle and poultry in the United States, and all but one has happened in the past four months.The virus has been circulated by wild birds for more than two years and has sporadically transmitted to domestic birds. A variation of the virus has been infecting U.S. dairy cattle since December, and four people who worked closely with infected cattle also became ill.In recent weeks, nine people in Colorado who were tasked with culling infected poultry contracted the virus.The CDC has maintained that the virus’ risk to humans is low — those who have been infected so far had minor symptoms of respiratory illness or pinkeye, or both.It has not been shown to transmit between people, but the virus has the potential to rapidly gain that ability if it infects someone who also has a seasonal flu virus.“Such dual infections, while rare, could potentially result in an exchange of genetic material between two different influenza viruses,” Dr. Nirav Shah, principal deputy director for the CDC, said in a call with reporters Tuesday.Shah said that “reassortment” process could pose a “significant public health concern” if bird flu gains the ability to spread person-to-person the way seasonal flu does, potentially resulting in a virus that spreads easily and causes severe symptoms.<h2>A new vaccination campaign</h2>Shah said the CDC will devote up to $10 million for farm workers’ health related to avian flu. Half will be spent educating and training farm workers about how to avoid being infected.The other half will pay for seasonal flu vaccines for an estimated 200,000 farm workers who tend livestock and poultry. The CDC hopes to vaccinate all of them but acknowledges that less than half of the general population typically gets a flu shot.How the voluntary vaccination effort will proceed is unclear. State health officials are expected to implement them, most immediately in the 13 states that have confirmed infections among cows.That includes Iowa, where 13 dairy herds have been infected. However, no new infections have been reported in the state in the past month.A spokesperson for the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services — which presumably would coordinate with the CDC — did not immediately respond to a request to comment for this article.The vaccine will not protect the workers from contracting bird flu, Shah said, nor will it guarantee they won’t be infected by seasonal flu. But he said it’s an important component of the public health response to the new virus’ threat.“The risk here is a theoretical but important risk,” Shah said.<h2>Colorado has most recent infections</h2>The confirmations of new bird flu infections among cattle have waned significantly in most states, except for in Colorado. In the past 30 days, two-thirds of the nation’s 32 newly infected herds were in that state, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data.Some of that might be due to Colorado’s&nbsp;<a href="https://coloradonewsline.com/briefs/colorado-requiring-dairy-products-to-be-regularly-tested-for-bird-flu-amid-outbreak/" target="_blank">robust testing protocols</a>, but it’s also “a quirk of history and geography,” said Eric Deeble, deputy under secretary for marketing and regulatory programs for the USDA.The state has far fewer dairy farms than the leading milk-producing states, but most of them are concentrated in one county.“They are all in very close proximity to one another, and so there is a lot of sharing of equipment, a lot of sharing of personnel and a lot of movement on and off farms to adjacent farms,” Deeble said.The USDA has identified the movement of equipment and people between dairy farms as a primary vector for virus transmissions from herd to herd and from herd to flock.The virus has been identified in 172 dairy herds in the United States this year. Fifty of them are in Colorado. In Texas, where the infections originated, the virus was confirmed in 22 herds, although there were many that went untested because they recovered before bird flu&nbsp;<a href="https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2024/04/17/two-veterinarians-hundreds-of-miles-apart-solved-a-cow-sickness-whodunit/" target="_blank">was identified</a>&nbsp;as the culprit.This story was originally published by the&nbsp;<a href="https://iowacapitaldispatch.com/2024/07/30/worried-about-bird-flu-mutation-feds-seek-livestock-worker-vaccinations/" target="_blank">Iowa Capital Dispatch</a>, a States Newsroom affiliate.&nbsp;

Worried about bird flu mutation, feds seek livestock worker vaccinations

An elderly woman from Alliance, aged 63, has been detained after a probe carried out by the WING Drug Task Force in June.

Vanadelle Buckingham, also known by the aliases Cynthia Hunziger and Cynthia Tschacher, is accused of selling hydrocodone pills to a confidential informant on several days in 2023. Investigators sent the pills to the NSP Crime lab, who confirmed the pills to be schedule 2 drugs, and a warrant for her arrest was issued last week.

She was booked into the Box Butte County Detention Center Monday, and is facing two Class 2 Felony charges of Distribution of an Exceptionally Hazardous Drug.

An elderly woman from Alliance, aged 63, has been detained after a probe carried out by the WING Drug Task Force in June.Vanadelle Buckingham, also known by the aliases Cynthia Hunziger and Cynthia Tschacher, is accused of selling hydrocodone pills to a confidential informant on several days in 2023. Investigators sent the pills to the NSP Crime lab, who confirmed the pills to be schedule 2 drugs, and a warrant for her arrest was issued last week.She was booked into the Box Butte County Detention Center Monday, and is facing two Class 2 Felony charges of Distribution of an Exceptionally Hazardous Drug.

Alliance Woman Detained In Drug Arrrest

WASHINGTON —NRRM, LLC, which does business as CarShield,&nbsp;along with American Auto Shield, LLC (AAS), the administrator of its&nbsp;vehicle service contracts (VSCs),&nbsp;will pay $10 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that its advertisements and telemarketing for VSC are deceptive and misleading, and that many purchasers found that many repairs were not “covered,” despite making payments of up to $120 per month. The FTC also alleges CarShield’s celebrity and consumer endorsers made false statements in its ads, according to a media release from the FTC.

The stipulated order settling the Commission’s complaint also bars&nbsp;CarShield and AAS from making deceptive and misleading statements in the future and requires them to ensure their endorsers’ testimonials are truthful, accurate, and not deceptive.

“For many consumers, a personal vehicle is one of their most valuable assets and a vital lifeline for getting to work, taking their kids to school, and obtaining medical care. Instead of delivering the ‘peace of mind’ promised by its advertisements, CarShield left many consumers with a financial headache,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Worse still, CarShield used trusted personalities to deliver its empty promises. The FTC will hold advertisers accountable for using false or deceptive claims to exploit consumers’ financial anxieties.”

NRRM is a Missouri-based company that advertises VSCs to consumers throughout the United Sates. AAS, based in Lakewood, Colorado, designs and administers the VSCs.

<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/NRRM-dba-Carshield-Complaint.pdf">According to the FTC’s complaint</a>, CarShield advertises and sells VSCs costing approximately $80 to $120 a month. CarShield’s ads for VSCs often feature celebrities such as sports commentator Chris Berman and actor Ice-T. These endorsers try to assure consumers that buying a CarShield service plan will provide them with “peace of mind” and “protection” from the cost and inconvenience of vehicle breakdowns, which will inevitably occur.

The complaint alleges many ads claim that all repairs or repairs to “covered” systems, such as the engine and transmission, will be covered and use language that makes consumers believe CarShield will pay for all necessary repairs. For example, one ad that ran 18,000 times on television stated, “With CarShield’s administrators, they make sure you don’t get stuck with expensive car repair bills like this.” It also touts CarShield VSCs as “your best line of defense against expensive breakdowns.”

The company sells its plans using telemarketers who answer inbound calls and make outbound calls responding to consumers, including those who made web inquiries. Using scripted statements written by CarShield and cleared by AAS, the telemarketers pitch the VSCs and tell consumers that, whether they use a dealer or local mechanic for the repair work, “there is just a $100 deductible for any covered repair.”&nbsp;

However, consumers do not always get what they think they bought when signing up for the VSCs. Instead, the complaint alleges that CarShield’s ads deceptively represent that: 1) all repairs or repairs to “covered” vehicle systems will be paid for under the plans; 2) consumers will receive a rental car at no cost when their car breaks down; and 3)&nbsp;consumers can use the repair facility of their choice for repairs.

Specifically, many consumers could not use the repair facility of their choice, as many do not accept the VSCs. Many consumers also find that repairs they thought were covered are not. In fact, none of CarShield’s VSCs covers all repairs or even repairs to “covered” vehicle systems. Instead, the plans contain myriad exclusions.&nbsp;Consumers with denied claims receive no rental car, while many consumers with “approved” claims must pay a portion of their rental car costs.

In addition, while CarShield’s celebrity endorsers said they had signed up and used the company’s VSCs, in many cases this was not true.&nbsp;They were not “real” customers and had never saved money&nbsp;by using an AAS VSC. Finally, many CarShield ads deceptively feature consumer endorsers who claim to have saved a specific amount of money using their plans but have not in fact saved that amount.

<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/NRRM-dba-Carshield-MotiontoApprovedStipulatedOrder.pdf">The proposed order</a>&nbsp;settling the complaint addresses the defendants’ alleged violations of the FTC Act. First, it prohibits CarShield from making the misrepresentations described in the complaint, along with any other misrepresentations related to any good or service. It also prohibits&nbsp;CarShield and AAS&nbsp;from failing to make required disclosures and from violating the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule.

Next, the order bars CarShield from misrepresenting any endorser’s ownership, use of, or experience with any product or service and requires AAS to inform third-party marketers of the order and to review and monitor their advertising and marketing. The order also imposes standard reporting and compliance provision that will remain in place for up to 10 years.

Finally, the order imposes a $10 million monetary judgment against&nbsp;CarShield and AAS,&nbsp;which will be used to provide refunds to defrauded consumers. The full amount of the judgment must be paid to the FTC within seven days of when the court enters the order.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint and proposed order was 5-0. FTC staff filed the complaint and proposed order in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.&nbsp;The case was brought by the agency’s East Central Region. The FTC thanks the Missouri Attorney General’s Office for its help in bringing this case.

WASHINGTON —NRRM, LLC, which does business as CarShield,&nbsp;along with American Auto Shield, LLC (AAS), the administrator of its&nbsp;vehicle service contracts (VSCs),&nbsp;will pay $10 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that its advertisements and telemarketing for VSC are deceptive and misleading, and that many purchasers found that many repairs were not “covered,” despite making payments of up to $120 per month. The FTC also alleges CarShield’s celebrity and consumer endorsers made false statements in its ads, according to a media release from the FTC.The stipulated order settling the Commission’s complaint also bars&nbsp;CarShield and AAS from making deceptive and misleading statements in the future and requires them to ensure their endorsers’ testimonials are truthful, accurate, and not deceptive.“For many consumers, a personal vehicle is one of their most valuable assets and a vital lifeline for getting to work, taking their kids to school, and obtaining medical care. Instead of delivering the ‘peace of mind’ promised by its advertisements, CarShield left many consumers with a financial headache,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Worse still, CarShield used trusted personalities to deliver its empty promises. The FTC will hold advertisers accountable for using false or deceptive claims to exploit consumers’ financial anxieties.”NRRM is a Missouri-based company that advertises VSCs to consumers throughout the United Sates. AAS, based in Lakewood, Colorado, designs and administers the VSCs.<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/NRRM-dba-Carshield-Complaint.pdf">According to the FTC’s complaint</a>, CarShield advertises and sells VSCs costing approximately $80 to $120 a month. CarShield’s ads for VSCs often feature celebrities such as sports commentator Chris Berman and actor Ice-T. These endorsers try to assure consumers that buying a CarShield service plan will provide them with “peace of mind” and “protection” from the cost and inconvenience of vehicle breakdowns, which will inevitably occur.The complaint alleges many ads claim that all repairs or repairs to “covered” systems, such as the engine and transmission, will be covered and use language that makes consumers believe CarShield will pay for all necessary repairs. For example, one ad that ran 18,000 times on television stated, “With CarShield’s administrators, they make sure you don’t get stuck with expensive car repair bills like this.” It also touts CarShield VSCs as “your best line of defense against expensive breakdowns.”The company sells its plans using telemarketers who answer inbound calls and make outbound calls responding to consumers, including those who made web inquiries. Using scripted statements written by CarShield and cleared by AAS, the telemarketers pitch the VSCs and tell consumers that, whether they use a dealer or local mechanic for the repair work, “there is just a $100 deductible for any covered repair.”&nbsp;However, consumers do not always get what they think they bought when signing up for the VSCs. Instead, the complaint alleges that CarShield’s ads deceptively represent that: 1) all repairs or repairs to “covered” vehicle systems will be paid for under the plans; 2) consumers will receive a rental car at no cost when their car breaks down; and 3)&nbsp;consumers can use the repair facility of their choice for repairs.Specifically, many consumers could not use the repair facility of their choice, as many do not accept the VSCs. Many consumers also find that repairs they thought were covered are not. In fact, none of CarShield’s VSCs covers all repairs or even repairs to “covered” vehicle systems. Instead, the plans contain myriad exclusions.&nbsp;Consumers with denied claims receive no rental car, while many consumers with “approved” claims must pay a portion of their rental car costs.In addition, while CarShield’s celebrity endorsers said they had signed up and used the company’s VSCs, in many cases this was not true.&nbsp;They were not “real” customers and had never saved money&nbsp;by using an AAS VSC. Finally, many CarShield ads deceptively feature consumer endorsers who claim to have saved a specific amount of money using their plans but have not in fact saved that amount.<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/NRRM-dba-Carshield-MotiontoApprovedStipulatedOrder.pdf">The proposed order</a>&nbsp;settling the complaint addresses the defendants’ alleged violations of the FTC Act. First, it prohibits CarShield from making the misrepresentations described in the complaint, along with any other misrepresentations related to any good or service. It also prohibits&nbsp;CarShield and AAS&nbsp;from failing to make required disclosures and from violating the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule.Next, the order bars CarShield from misrepresenting any endorser’s ownership, use of, or experience with any product or service and requires AAS to inform third-party marketers of the order and to review and monitor their advertising and marketing. The order also imposes standard reporting and compliance provision that will remain in place for up to 10 years.Finally, the order imposes a $10 million monetary judgment against&nbsp;CarShield and AAS,&nbsp;which will be used to provide refunds to defrauded consumers. The full amount of the judgment must be paid to the FTC within seven days of when the court enters the order.The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint and proposed order was 5-0. FTC staff filed the complaint and proposed order in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.&nbsp;The case was brought by the agency’s East Central Region. The FTC thanks the Missouri Attorney General’s Office for its help in bringing this case.

CarShield to pay $10M to settle deceptive advertising charges

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/30/business-local-officials-line-up-to-oppose-nebraska-gov-pillens-property-tax-plan/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN — Dozens of statewide business, municipal and county leaders lined up Tuesday to testify against Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen’s core property tax proposal.

For more than 10 hours, the Legislature’s Revenue Committee listened to varying perspectives about&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58119" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 1</a>, which Pillen says would reduce the average Nebraskan’s property tax bill by up to 50%. State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Elkhorn, the committee chair, introduced the bill&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/25/lawmakers-introduce-gov-pillens-property-tax-plan-which-would-require-legislation-in-2025/">on Pillen’s behalf</a>&nbsp;and presided over the committee hearing.

“There’s not just one key to solving this problem,” Pillen told the committee. “I think it has to be addressed from a multitude of different perspectives.”

Over the summer, Pillen had suggested the state should take over about 80% of the property tax portion of local K-12 school districts’ budgets.

However, as introduced, LB 1 doesn’t include that plan. It instead seeks to carve out more than $2 billion in tax credits targeted to replace school taxes. Those credits would be returned to counties and distributed to taxpayers, based on their portion of property valuations.

Funding sources include new sales taxes on more than 100 currently tax-exempt goods and services and increased or new taxes on seven “sin” items: soft drinks and candy, cigarettes, vapes, spirits, consumable hemp, keno and games of skill.

LB 1 would also restrict municipal and county governments from increasing their annual property tax collections by the greater of 0% (in deflationary times) or the consumer price index. They could skirt those limits if approved by a public vote or in cases of, emergencies, local growth or if needed to fill&nbsp; vacant law enforcement, firefighting or correctional officer positions.

Kirk Anderson, president of the Nebraska Beverage Association, focused his criticism at Pillen for labeling soft drinks and candy as a “sin” and passing judgment on the people who buy them.

Anderson noted that Pillen has said “food” would not be taxed, yet soft drinks or candy could open the door to a standard in choosing what foods can be taxed in a complicated tax code.

“Using similar logic, if our governor was really concerned about the health of Nebraskans, it would be more appropriate to consider limiting through taxation the consumption of all processed meats, like bacon, ham and salami, that are classified as a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/cancer-carcinogenicity-of-the-consumption-of-red-meat-and-processed-meat" target="_blank">Group 1 carcinogen</a>,” Anderson said.

Pillen’s family owns a major hog operation in Nebraska and stands to benefit from LB 1, Anderson said, yet it is “one of the few select industries that won’t be targeted by his taxes.”

Cody Schmick, owner-operator of Kinkaider Brewing in Lincoln, said an increased “sin” tax on spirits, increasing from $3.75 to $14.50 per gallon, would kill off the industry “before we get started.”

Todd Roe, founder of Lazy RW Distillery in Moorefield, said the proposed 287% increase would “drown us” and the distillery “will be done” within three years if LB 1 is passed. He said that his distillery prepares about 250 gallons of spirits each month but that customers may shop in a different state if the tax is added on.

“No matter how loyal they say they are,” Roe said of his customers, “everybody’s loyal when you’re sitting in Hy-Vee giving out free shots.”

Opponents raised concerns about nearly every one of more than 100 goods and services that would be newly taxed under LB 1, in addition to the “sin” taxes.

The statewide sales tax rate is 5.5 cents per dollar purchase plus local sales taxes, which can be between 0.5 cents and 2 cents.

All goods and services would be taxed under that system, except for four items: agricultural and manufacturing machinery and equipment, which would be taxed at 2 cents, and carpentry services and electricians’ services, at 4 cents. These items would be exempt from local sales taxes.

Pillen’s staff has told the Nebraska Examiner that machinery and equipment are still intended to be taxed at a 4-cent rate, as previously planned, although that would require an amendment to the bill.

Mark McHargue of the Nebraska Farm Bureau and Heath Mello of the Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce said even at those lower rates, taxing business or agricultural “inputs” would be bad tax policy. Mello is a former state senator.

Multiple testifiers described the proposed changes as a “tax pyramid scheme” that would decrease transparency as taxes are passed on after multiple taxed stages of production.

Linehan asked McHargue and Mello for their definition of “inputs.” McHargue described inputs as raw materials used to produce an end product, which is taxed. Mello’s definition also included legal and accounting services, which Linehan said might be more broadly tax write-offs.

Bryan Slone, president of the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce, said the state can’t tax its way out of its decades-long property tax problem and that it must grow its economy.

“This bill will fall specifically on young people who don’t own property yet,” Slone said. “I will be a benefactor, and a lot of my age group will be benefactors, so we need to be very careful in how we tax people.”

Andy Marsh of Keystone Properties in the Grand Island and Hastings areas pushed back on criticism that renters wouldn’t benefit from the property tax savings. He said the “writing is on the wall” for how tenants would benefit.

However, Lynn Fisher and Arla Meyer, both of the Nebraska Realtors Association, said the increased taxes on various goods or services could result in net tax increases for property owners, which would be passed on to particularly low-income renters in less expensive housing.

“Now is not the time to make buying or homeownership more expensive or difficult,” Meyer said.

Dave Nabity of Omaha said something needed to be done to fix property taxes and said people would have to be “financially nuts” to want to retire in Nebraska, rather than in other states.

“Our national reputation stinks, folks,” Nabity said. “We don’t have the Ozarks. We don’t have the lakes. We don’t have the beaches. We don’t have the mountains.… We don’t have the warm weather.”

Craig Bolz of Palmyra asked for significant tax relief and spending controls. He urged taxing all sales so the consumer can decide what to purchase, adding: “How much fairer can you get than sales taxes?”

“We all know that at the end of the day, taxes are all smoke and mirrors,” Bolz said.

Rachel Gibson of Omaha said a shift to sales tax from property taxes needs to be “equitable.”

With property taxes, Gibson said, she would know what’s coming and be able to plan accordingly, compared to dealing with unexpected sales taxes on purchases, such as home maintenance, car repairs or veterinary visits.

“We have wiggle room, and we love it here and we’re happy to pay in taxes,” Gibson said. “I’m worried about the people who don’t have the wiggle room and don’t have insurance.”

‘Solving’ vs. ‘prolonging’ a crisis

State Treasurer Tom Briese, who worked on various tax relief proposals in his seven years as a state senator, spoke in favor of the proposal. He described it as a “game changer” and “a different animal.”

“LB 1 creates a stark choice here between solving the crisis vs. prolonging the crisis,” Briese told the committee. He served in the Legislature from 2017 until last Oct. 31.

Briese said he calls “baloney” on critics who said the bill’s impact on Nebraskans would increase or shift taxes. He sees LB 1 as “much-needed, revenue-neutral, textbook tax reform.”

Ernie Goss, an economist from Creighton University, said he did an analysis of LB 1 and projects the broadening of Nebraska’s sales tax base will stimulate growth. He said property taxes are a greater detriment to growing Nebraska.

Rebecca Firestone, executive director of the Lincoln-based think tank OpenSky Policy Institute, said her organization’s analysis highlights the regressive nature of sales taxes on low-income Nebraskans.&nbsp;

Under that analysis, household incomes for Nebraskans making less than $30,000 would see about 11.24% of their budgets going to taxes, and a 0.27% increase in taxes overall. Nebraskans in the top 20% bracket, above $141,700, would pay about 8.84% of their income on taxes, and 0.04% less in overall taxes if LB 1 passed.

Jon Cannon, executive director for the Nebraska Association of County Officials, and Lynn Rex, executive director of the League of Nebraska Municipalities, expressed caution about the property tax collection caps included in the bill.&nbsp;

Cannon said they could become a “floor” instead of a “ceiling” as county spending is largely focused on roads, bridges, law enforcement, jails, courts, elections and administration of the state’s tax system. He quipped that officials aren’t using “gold plates” on roads or “mixing diamond dust” with gravel to raise costs.

Rex and Cannon said inflation isn’t accurate when considering “basket of goods” counties and municipalities are purchasing.

“We don’t get fire trucks at Wal-Mart,” Rex said. “We don’t buy police cars at Target.”

Douglas County Attorney Don Klein and Douglas County Public Defender Tom Riley encouraged the committee to include their offices’ spending as a broader exemption of public health and safety.

LB 1 allows local governments to ask voters to approve bonds or other increases above the built-in restrictions. Such votes could only be considered during regularly scheduled elections.&nbsp;

Cannon said elections would be too soon in May and too late in November for his members, who start budgeting in the summer.

The committee took no immediate action on LB 1.

Revenue Committee hearings will continue through Saturday before members work through the 67 bills and constitutional amendments introduced by senators. In total, 105 bills and constitutional amendments were introduced, which Speaker John Arch said was a record number for a special session.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1722443035681.jpeg" alt="State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Elkhorn, chair of the Legislature’s Revenue Committee, presides over a committee hearing on her Legislative Bill 1 on Tuesday, July 30, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption>State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Elkhorn, chair of the Legislature’s Revenue Committee, presides over a committee hearing on her Legislative Bill 1 on Tuesday, July 30, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>Zach Wendling<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/30/business-local-officials-line-up-to-oppose-nebraska-gov-pillens-property-tax-plan/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN — Dozens of statewide business, municipal and county leaders lined up Tuesday to testify against Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen’s core property tax proposal.For more than 10 hours, the Legislature’s Revenue Committee listened to varying perspectives about&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58119" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 1</a>, which Pillen says would reduce the average Nebraskan’s property tax bill by up to 50%. State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Elkhorn, the committee chair, introduced the bill&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/25/lawmakers-introduce-gov-pillens-property-tax-plan-which-would-require-legislation-in-2025/">on Pillen’s behalf</a>&nbsp;and presided over the committee hearing.“There’s not just one key to solving this problem,” Pillen told the committee. “I think it has to be addressed from a multitude of different perspectives.”Over the summer, Pillen had suggested the state should take over about 80% of the property tax portion of local K-12 school districts’ budgets.However, as introduced, LB 1 doesn’t include that plan. It instead seeks to carve out more than $2 billion in tax credits targeted to replace school taxes. Those credits would be returned to counties and distributed to taxpayers, based on their portion of property valuations.Funding sources include new sales taxes on more than 100 currently tax-exempt goods and services and increased or new taxes on seven “sin” items: soft drinks and candy, cigarettes, vapes, spirits, consumable hemp, keno and games of skill.LB 1 would also restrict municipal and county governments from increasing their annual property tax collections by the greater of 0% (in deflationary times) or the consumer price index. They could skirt those limits if approved by a public vote or in cases of, emergencies, local growth or if needed to fill&nbsp; vacant law enforcement, firefighting or correctional officer positions.<h2>What is a ‘sin’?</h2>Kirk Anderson, president of the Nebraska Beverage Association, focused his criticism at Pillen for labeling soft drinks and candy as a “sin” and passing judgment on the people who buy them.Anderson noted that Pillen has said “food” would not be taxed, yet soft drinks or candy could open the door to a standard in choosing what foods can be taxed in a complicated tax code.“Using similar logic, if our governor was really concerned about the health of Nebraskans, it would be more appropriate to consider limiting through taxation the consumption of all processed meats, like bacon, ham and salami, that are classified as a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/cancer-carcinogenicity-of-the-consumption-of-red-meat-and-processed-meat" target="_blank">Group 1 carcinogen</a>,” Anderson said.Pillen’s family owns a major hog operation in Nebraska and stands to benefit from LB 1, Anderson said, yet it is “one of the few select industries that won’t be targeted by his taxes.”Cody Schmick, owner-operator of Kinkaider Brewing in Lincoln, said an increased “sin” tax on spirits, increasing from $3.75 to $14.50 per gallon, would kill off the industry “before we get started.”Todd Roe, founder of Lazy RW Distillery in Moorefield, said the proposed 287% increase would “drown us” and the distillery “will be done” within three years if LB 1 is passed. He said that his distillery prepares about 250 gallons of spirits each month but that customers may shop in a different state if the tax is added on.“No matter how loyal they say they are,” Roe said of his customers, “everybody’s loyal when you’re sitting in Hy-Vee giving out free shots.”Opponents raised concerns about nearly every one of more than 100 goods and services that would be newly taxed under LB 1, in addition to the “sin” taxes.<h2>Business ‘inputs’</h2>The statewide sales tax rate is 5.5 cents per dollar purchase plus local sales taxes, which can be between 0.5 cents and 2 cents.All goods and services would be taxed under that system, except for four items: agricultural and manufacturing machinery and equipment, which would be taxed at 2 cents, and carpentry services and electricians’ services, at 4 cents. These items would be exempt from local sales taxes.Pillen’s staff has told the Nebraska Examiner that machinery and equipment are still intended to be taxed at a 4-cent rate, as previously planned, although that would require an amendment to the bill.Mark McHargue of the Nebraska Farm Bureau and Heath Mello of the Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce said even at those lower rates, taxing business or agricultural “inputs” would be bad tax policy. Mello is a former state senator.Multiple testifiers described the proposed changes as a “tax pyramid scheme” that would decrease transparency as taxes are passed on after multiple taxed stages of production.Linehan asked McHargue and Mello for their definition of “inputs.” McHargue described inputs as raw materials used to produce an end product, which is taxed. Mello’s definition also included legal and accounting services, which Linehan said might be more broadly tax write-offs.Bryan Slone, president of the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce, said the state can’t tax its way out of its decades-long property tax problem and that it must grow its economy.“This bill will fall specifically on young people who don’t own property yet,” Slone said. “I will be a benefactor, and a lot of my age group will be benefactors, so we need to be very careful in how we tax people.”<h2>Passing on savings to tenants</h2>Andy Marsh of Keystone Properties in the Grand Island and Hastings areas pushed back on criticism that renters wouldn’t benefit from the property tax savings. He said the “writing is on the wall” for how tenants would benefit.However, Lynn Fisher and Arla Meyer, both of the Nebraska Realtors Association, said the increased taxes on various goods or services could result in net tax increases for property owners, which would be passed on to particularly low-income renters in less expensive housing.“Now is not the time to make buying or homeownership more expensive or difficult,” Meyer said.Dave Nabity of Omaha said something needed to be done to fix property taxes and said people would have to be “financially nuts” to want to retire in Nebraska, rather than in other states.“Our national reputation stinks, folks,” Nabity said. “We don’t have the Ozarks. We don’t have the lakes. We don’t have the beaches. We don’t have the mountains.… We don’t have the warm weather.”<h2>‘We have wiggle room’</h2>Craig Bolz of Palmyra asked for significant tax relief and spending controls. He urged taxing all sales so the consumer can decide what to purchase, adding: “How much fairer can you get than sales taxes?”“We all know that at the end of the day, taxes are all smoke and mirrors,” Bolz said.Rachel Gibson of Omaha said a shift to sales tax from property taxes needs to be “equitable.”With property taxes, Gibson said, she would know what’s coming and be able to plan accordingly, compared to dealing with unexpected sales taxes on purchases, such as home maintenance, car repairs or veterinary visits.“We have wiggle room, and we love it here and we’re happy to pay in taxes,” Gibson said. “I’m worried about the people who don’t have the wiggle room and don’t have insurance.”<h2>‘Solving’ vs. ‘prolonging’ a crisis</h2>State Treasurer Tom Briese, who worked on various tax relief proposals in his seven years as a state senator, spoke in favor of the proposal. He described it as a “game changer” and “a different animal.”“LB 1 creates a stark choice here between solving the crisis vs. prolonging the crisis,” Briese told the committee. He served in the Legislature from 2017 until last Oct. 31.Briese said he calls “baloney” on critics who said the bill’s impact on Nebraskans would increase or shift taxes. He sees LB 1 as “much-needed, revenue-neutral, textbook tax reform.”Ernie Goss, an economist from Creighton University, said he did an analysis of LB 1 and projects the broadening of Nebraska’s sales tax base will stimulate growth. He said property taxes are a greater detriment to growing Nebraska.Rebecca Firestone, executive director of the Lincoln-based think tank OpenSky Policy Institute, said her organization’s analysis highlights the regressive nature of sales taxes on low-income Nebraskans.&nbsp;Under that analysis, household incomes for Nebraskans making less than $30,000 would see about 11.24% of their budgets going to taxes, and a 0.27% increase in taxes overall. Nebraskans in the top 20% bracket, above $141,700, would pay about 8.84% of their income on taxes, and 0.04% less in overall taxes if LB 1 passed.<h2>County and municipal governments</h2>Jon Cannon, executive director for the Nebraska Association of County Officials, and Lynn Rex, executive director of the League of Nebraska Municipalities, expressed caution about the property tax collection caps included in the bill.&nbsp;Cannon said they could become a “floor” instead of a “ceiling” as county spending is largely focused on roads, bridges, law enforcement, jails, courts, elections and administration of the state’s tax system. He quipped that officials aren’t using “gold plates” on roads or “mixing diamond dust” with gravel to raise costs.Rex and Cannon said inflation isn’t accurate when considering “basket of goods” counties and municipalities are purchasing.“We don’t get fire trucks at Wal-Mart,” Rex said. “We don’t buy police cars at Target.”Douglas County Attorney Don Klein and Douglas County Public Defender Tom Riley encouraged the committee to include their offices’ spending as a broader exemption of public health and safety.LB 1 allows local governments to ask voters to approve bonds or other increases above the built-in restrictions. Such votes could only be considered during regularly scheduled elections.&nbsp;Cannon said elections would be too soon in May and too late in November for his members, who start budgeting in the summer.The committee took no immediate action on LB 1.Revenue Committee hearings will continue through Saturday before members work through the 67 bills and constitutional amendments introduced by senators. In total, 105 bills and constitutional amendments were introduced, which Speaker John Arch said was a record number for a special session.

Business, local officials line up to oppose Nebraska Gov. Pillen’s property tax plan

Lincoln, Neb. —Whenever the topic of biosecurity comes up, it's no surprise that many people might find their attention waning due to the complexity of the issue or because they don’t feel they have experienced a biosecurity problem. The reality is that every producer has encountered some sort of biosecurity risk or event at one point or another and may not have been fully aware or didn’t consider the “biosecurity” aspect of the matter.

In recent months, our friends in the dairy industry have been facing a major biosecurity issue with an H5N1 bird flu outbreak. This outbreak is zoonotic, meaning the disease can spread between species. To date, no cases have been reported in the national beef cattle herd, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen. This event should prompt many producers to think about biosecurity and the biosecurity risks related to their operations.

The overall goal of biosecurity is to protect animals from disease by minimizing the movement of biologic organisms (such as viruses, bacteria, or parasites) within and/or onto an operation. The key principles to achieve this are physical separation of sick or suspected sick animals, cleaning to remove any contamination, and disinfecting to kill any remaining pathogens.

Producers should practice these basic biosecurity guidelines by developing and implementing a daily biosecurity protocol to protect their operations from outbreaks of sickness and disease. The Beef Quality Assurance program has developed a simple template for producers to use in creating this basic daily biosecurity plan. This plan can be found under the templates section at&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bqa.org/">www.bqa.org</a>.

At the end of the day, a disease outbreak can financially cripple an operation if animal performance is greatly reduced or, worse, if the outbreak results in the death of animals.

Beyond basic biosecurity, the National BQA program has recently been discussing enhanced biosecurity plans. Enhanced biosecurity plans go several steps beyond basic biosecurity measures. They are intended for use in the event of a foreign animal disease outbreak.

The beef industry’s main foreign animal disease concern is foot and mouth disease. Foot and mouth disease was eradicated from the U.S. in 1929. However, it is still active in other countries and is easily spread. It is considered the most contagious animal disease known.

It's important to note that foot and mouth disease is not a food safety risk or public health concern. Beef products remain safe to eat. However, public perception would be detrimental. Additionally, one case of foot and mouth disease found in the U.S. would shut down the U.S. beef export market and cut profits for all cattle producers, crippling the U.S. beef industry. To put real financial numbers to that, the U.S. exported over $10 billion of beef and beef products in 2023. Exports add about $425 of value per fed steer or heifer (including meat cuts and offal), which is nearly 20% of the value for every fed carcass.

Because of the financial implications of a foreign animal disease, producers should strongly consider developing an enhanced biosecurity plan or a Secure Beef Supply plan. Developing this plan does not necessarily mean you have to begin implementing it immediately. It only needs to be implemented for the continuity of business in the event of a foreign animal disease outbreak. Some beef packers may also require the implementation of a Secure Beef Supply plan to ensure consumers that they are procuring a supply of safe, wholesome, and healthy cattle. Additionally, the Nebraska Department of Agriculture will require the implementation of a Secure Beef Supply plan during an outbreak of a foreign animal disease to receive a livestock movement permit. This permit will be required by the State for all operations within a containment zone during a foreign animal disease outbreak.

If you would like to know more about developing a Secure Beef Supply plan, visit Secure Beef Supply. You can also contact Nebraska BQA at nebraskabqa@unl.edu or call 308.633.0158 for help developing a plan.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1722437360031.png" alt="Practicing biosecurity takes a few extra minutes, but is important for protecting U.S. agriculture. Photo courtesy of National BQA Program..png" />
 <figcaption>Practicing biosecurity takes a few extra minutes, but is important for protecting U.S. agriculture. Photo courtesy of National BQA Program..png</figcaption>
 </figure>Jesse FultonLincoln, Neb. —Whenever the topic of biosecurity comes up, it's no surprise that many people might find their attention waning due to the complexity of the issue or because they don’t feel they have experienced a biosecurity problem. The reality is that every producer has encountered some sort of biosecurity risk or event at one point or another and may not have been fully aware or didn’t consider the “biosecurity” aspect of the matter.In recent months, our friends in the dairy industry have been facing a major biosecurity issue with an H5N1 bird flu outbreak. This outbreak is zoonotic, meaning the disease can spread between species. To date, no cases have been reported in the national beef cattle herd, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen. This event should prompt many producers to think about biosecurity and the biosecurity risks related to their operations.The overall goal of biosecurity is to protect animals from disease by minimizing the movement of biologic organisms (such as viruses, bacteria, or parasites) within and/or onto an operation. The key principles to achieve this are physical separation of sick or suspected sick animals, cleaning to remove any contamination, and disinfecting to kill any remaining pathogens.Producers should practice these basic biosecurity guidelines by developing and implementing a daily biosecurity protocol to protect their operations from outbreaks of sickness and disease. The Beef Quality Assurance program has developed a simple template for producers to use in creating this basic daily biosecurity plan. This plan can be found under the templates section at&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bqa.org/">www.bqa.org</a>.At the end of the day, a disease outbreak can financially cripple an operation if animal performance is greatly reduced or, worse, if the outbreak results in the death of animals.Beyond basic biosecurity, the National BQA program has recently been discussing enhanced biosecurity plans. Enhanced biosecurity plans go several steps beyond basic biosecurity measures. They are intended for use in the event of a foreign animal disease outbreak.The beef industry’s main foreign animal disease concern is foot and mouth disease. Foot and mouth disease was eradicated from the U.S. in 1929. However, it is still active in other countries and is easily spread. It is considered the most contagious animal disease known.It's important to note that foot and mouth disease is not a food safety risk or public health concern. Beef products remain safe to eat. However, public perception would be detrimental. Additionally, one case of foot and mouth disease found in the U.S. would shut down the U.S. beef export market and cut profits for all cattle producers, crippling the U.S. beef industry. To put real financial numbers to that, the U.S. exported over $10 billion of beef and beef products in 2023. Exports add about $425 of value per fed steer or heifer (including meat cuts and offal), which is nearly 20% of the value for every fed carcass.Because of the financial implications of a foreign animal disease, producers should strongly consider developing an enhanced biosecurity plan or a Secure Beef Supply plan. Developing this plan does not necessarily mean you have to begin implementing it immediately. It only needs to be implemented for the continuity of business in the event of a foreign animal disease outbreak. Some beef packers may also require the implementation of a Secure Beef Supply plan to ensure consumers that they are procuring a supply of safe, wholesome, and healthy cattle. Additionally, the Nebraska Department of Agriculture will require the implementation of a Secure Beef Supply plan during an outbreak of a foreign animal disease to receive a livestock movement permit. This permit will be required by the State for all operations within a containment zone during a foreign animal disease outbreak.If you would like to know more about developing a Secure Beef Supply plan, visit Secure Beef Supply. You can also contact Nebraska BQA at nebraskabqa@unl.edu or call 308.633.0158 for help developing a plan.

Biosecurity Basics and Beyond: Ensuring Your Operation's Future

LINCOLN, NE&nbsp;– Governor Jim Pillen testified before the Legislature’s Revenue Committee on LB1, the property tax reduction bill introduced on his behalf by Sen. Lou Ann Linehan, chair of the committee. In three years, this bill aims to slash property taxes by an average of 50 percent for Nebraskans, based on the comprehensive proposal dubbed&nbsp;<a href="https://governor.nebraska.gov/nebraska-property-tax-plan" target="_blank">The&nbsp;</a><a href="https://governor.nebraska.gov/nebraska-property-tax-plan" target="_blank">Nebraska Plan</a>.

“Since the last legislative session, I have toured the state and held 26 townhalls to hear directly from Nebraskans. The message is clear, Nebraskans are struggling to balance a check book and continue to afford these tax increases,” said Gov. Pillen. “LB 1 represents transformational tax reform for all Nebraskans.”

The plan outlines five components necessary for achieving significant and sustainable property tax relief:

Gov. Pillen encouraged skeptics and opponents of the legislation to focus on the facts, rather than listening to paid lobbyists and special interest groups.

“They have called this plan a tax increase, which is simply not true,” said Gov. Pillen. “LB1 will reduce the total amount of tax collected by nearly $1 billion. It will get Nebraska in the game and make us competitive with other states. Otherwise, we face the prospect of chasing people out of the state and discouraging others from moving here in the first place. Our future depends on Nebraska’s continued growth.”

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1722431465077.jpeg" alt="(Courtesy of Governor Jim Pillen's office)" />
 <figcaption>(Courtesy of Governor Jim Pillen's office)</figcaption>
 </figure>Office of Governor Jim PillenLINCOLN, NE&nbsp;– Governor Jim Pillen testified before the Legislature’s Revenue Committee on LB1, the property tax reduction bill introduced on his behalf by Sen. Lou Ann Linehan, chair of the committee. In three years, this bill aims to slash property taxes by an average of 50 percent for Nebraskans, based on the comprehensive proposal dubbed&nbsp;<a href="https://governor.nebraska.gov/nebraska-property-tax-plan" target="_blank">The&nbsp;</a><a href="https://governor.nebraska.gov/nebraska-property-tax-plan" target="_blank">Nebraska Plan</a>.“Since the last legislative session, I have toured the state and held 26 townhalls to hear directly from Nebraskans. The message is clear, Nebraskans are struggling to balance a check book and continue to afford these tax increases,” said Gov. Pillen. “LB 1 represents transformational tax reform for all Nebraskans.”The plan outlines five components necessary for achieving significant and sustainable property tax relief:<ul>
 <li>Controls on local spending through a hard cap of 0% or CPI, whichever is greater. Exceptions are in place to protect investments in public safety and criminal justice. It also allows flexibility to accommodate new growth and permit an override of the cap by the approval of 60% of voters.</li>
 </ul><ul>
 <li>Implements a new tax credit fund that will be applied against school taxes paid. When fully enacted, it will eliminate general fund taxing authority for school districts from the current $1.05 down to $0.0 in 2026. This proposal also allows for local controls, including leaving education decisions to superintendents and school boards and provides allowances for collecting property taxes to support school infrastructure.</li>
 </ul><ul>
 <li>Repurposes existing property tax programs to provide direct relief to homeowners and property owners by front loading credits instead of forcing taxpayers to claim them during the filing process.</li>
 </ul><ul>
 <li>Broadens the sales tax base through the elimination of over 100 sales tax exemptions currently in place. Many of these changes will bring Nebraska better in line with what is assessed by other states. A series of ’<a href="https://governor.nebraska.gov/press/governor-jim-pillen-issues-%E2%80%98statement-principles%E2%80%99-ahead-special-legislative-session" target="_blank">principles</a>’ previously outlined by Gov. Pillen would place limits on what is taxed and ensures there is no double taxing of any product or service.</li>
 </ul><ul>
 <li>Cuts waste in state government and diverts those savings to the property tax plan. To date, $400 million in savings has been identified, and the state will continue to tap into federal funding where appropriate, to further ease the burden on state funding.</li>
 </ul>Gov. Pillen encouraged skeptics and opponents of the legislation to focus on the facts, rather than listening to paid lobbyists and special interest groups.“They have called this plan a tax increase, which is simply not true,” said Gov. Pillen. “LB1 will reduce the total amount of tax collected by nearly $1 billion. It will get Nebraska in the game and make us competitive with other states. Otherwise, we face the prospect of chasing people out of the state and discouraging others from moving here in the first place. Our future depends on Nebraska’s continued growth.”

Gov. Pillen Testifies Before Revenue Committee on Nebraska Plan for Property Tax Reform

<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/29/longtime-nebraska-homeowners-would-get-targeted-relief-under-new-legislative-bills/">Nebraska Examiner</a>

LINCOLN —&nbsp;Three legislative bills introduced Monday would extend significant property tax relief to Nebraska homeowners based on how long they have owned a home in the state.

<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58245" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 75</a>, from State Sen. Mike McDonnell of Omaha, would exempt qualified Nebraska homeowners from paying any property taxes after 40 years of ownership in the state.&nbsp;

“I think you should be able to sit on your porch one day of your life and say, ‘I truly own my home, and I’m no longer a partner in paying rent to the government in the form of property tax,’” McDonnell told the Nebraska Examiner on Monday.

Another McDonnell bill,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58244" target="_blank">LB 77</a>, would offer property tax relief for the portion of property taxes paid to the local school district, which is&nbsp;about 60% of annual property tax bills. Homeowners who have lived in the same house at least 10 years would be eligible.

McDonnell said that in 1965, voters decided to stop funding the government with state-level property taxes. Now, he said, Gov. Jim Pillen has tasked lawmakers to look at getting rid of most or all local K-12 school district taxes.

“Is that an overnight deal? No,” McDonnell said. “Is it a two-year, four-year, six-year [plan] — I don’t know — but that’s why we’re here now in this special session to try and figure it out.”

The state would replace the loss in local political subdivisions’ revenue, similar to the current system for homestead exemptions.&nbsp; Qualified owners would need to refile for the relief in years divisible by five.

<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58147" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 79</a>, from State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln, would similarly extend homestead exemptions. Based on household income, Nebraska residents could get a greater percentage of relief if they have lived in their home for two decades or more.

After 20 years, they could claim an additional 2.5% in relief from their qualifying bracket. After 25 years, it would be an additional 5% in relief. Relief couldn’t exceed 100%.

State Sen. Julie Slama of Dunbar dropped a package of 16 constitutional amendments Monday, which voters could consider this November together or individually.&nbsp;

Eight amendments would limit the taxing and spending authority of local governments as well as the state. The other eight allow private lawsuits to be filed to enforce the respective provisions.

“You need to have teeth because, otherwise, what’s the remediation for taxpayers?” Slama said.

Slama said the package of legislation is based on the&nbsp;<a href="https://tax.colorado.gov/TABOR" target="_blank">Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights</a>&nbsp;in Colorado, passed decades ago to lock in controls for tax growth.

She said she preferred “one bill, one hearing and one message to give to taxpayers” but decided to “play it safe” given the Nebraska Constitution’s&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/articles.php?article=III-14" target="_blank">single-subject requirement</a>&nbsp;for ballot measures.&nbsp;

The Nebraska Supreme Court has taken a stricter view of what constitutes a “single subject” for proposed laws or amendments&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/articles.php?article=III-2" target="_blank">on the ballot</a>&nbsp;compared to laws&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/26/nebraska-supreme-court-upholds-legislation-combining-abortion-and-trans-health-care-for-minors/">passed by the Legislature</a>.

Slama has pushed for hard spending controls. She said the hard caps proposed by the governor on&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/25/lawmakers-introduce-gov-pillens-property-tax-plan-which-would-require-legislation-in-2025/">limiting annual property tax collection growth</a>&nbsp;“can be easily worked around” and could get in the way of union negotiations for local law enforcement, firefighters and corrections officers.

“I think the only way to really put it in stone to get long-term relief is to put it in our state constitution, very clearly defined principles that need to be adhered to,” Slama said.

She said Colorado has sustained “pretty explosive growth” during the decades since it passed its bill of rights.

Under Slama’s proposals, the following limits would require voter approval during a statewide general election to:

Two other major proposals, from State Sens. Justin Wayne and Terrell McKinney, both of Omaha, would legalize, regulate and tax cannabis for adults ages 21 and older.

<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58095" target="_blank">LB 52</a>, by Wayne, would set a regulatory framework for how cannabis could be grown, refined, manufactured, distributed, tested and sold, overseen by a commission the tax commissioner appoints.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/7/1722354367926.jpeg" alt=" State Sen. Mike McDonnell of Omaha. Feb. 27, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)" />
 <figcaption> State Sen. Mike McDonnell of Omaha. Feb. 27, 2024. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)</figcaption>
 </figure>Zach Wendling<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/29/longtime-nebraska-homeowners-would-get-targeted-relief-under-new-legislative-bills/">Nebraska Examiner</a>LINCOLN —&nbsp;Three legislative bills introduced Monday would extend significant property tax relief to Nebraska homeowners based on how long they have owned a home in the state.<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58245" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 75</a>, from State Sen. Mike McDonnell of Omaha, would exempt qualified Nebraska homeowners from paying any property taxes after 40 years of ownership in the state.&nbsp;“I think you should be able to sit on your porch one day of your life and say, ‘I truly own my home, and I’m no longer a partner in paying rent to the government in the form of property tax,’” McDonnell told the Nebraska Examiner on Monday.Another McDonnell bill,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58244" target="_blank">LB 77</a>, would offer property tax relief for the portion of property taxes paid to the local school district, which is&nbsp;about 60% of annual property tax bills. Homeowners who have lived in the same house at least 10 years would be eligible.McDonnell said that in 1965, voters decided to stop funding the government with state-level property taxes. Now, he said, Gov. Jim Pillen has tasked lawmakers to look at getting rid of most or all local K-12 school district taxes.“Is that an overnight deal? No,” McDonnell said. “Is it a two-year, four-year, six-year [plan] — I don’t know — but that’s why we’re here now in this special session to try and figure it out.”The state would replace the loss in local political subdivisions’ revenue, similar to the current system for homestead exemptions.&nbsp; Qualified owners would need to refile for the relief in years divisible by five.<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58147" target="_blank">Legislative Bill 79</a>, from State Sen. Jane Raybould of Lincoln, would similarly extend homestead exemptions. Based on household income, Nebraska residents could get a greater percentage of relief if they have lived in their home for two decades or more.After 20 years, they could claim an additional 2.5% in relief from their qualifying bracket. After 25 years, it would be an additional 5% in relief. Relief couldn’t exceed 100%.<h2>‘Taxpayer Bill of Rights’</h2>State Sen. Julie Slama of Dunbar dropped a package of 16 constitutional amendments Monday, which voters could consider this November together or individually.&nbsp;Eight amendments would limit the taxing and spending authority of local governments as well as the state. The other eight allow private lawsuits to be filed to enforce the respective provisions.“You need to have teeth because, otherwise, what’s the remediation for taxpayers?” Slama said.Slama said the package of legislation is based on the&nbsp;<a href="https://tax.colorado.gov/TABOR" target="_blank">Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights</a>&nbsp;in Colorado, passed decades ago to lock in controls for tax growth.She said she preferred “one bill, one hearing and one message to give to taxpayers” but decided to “play it safe” given the Nebraska Constitution’s&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/articles.php?article=III-14" target="_blank">single-subject requirement</a>&nbsp;for ballot measures.&nbsp;The Nebraska Supreme Court has taken a stricter view of what constitutes a “single subject” for proposed laws or amendments&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/articles.php?article=III-2" target="_blank">on the ballot</a>&nbsp;compared to laws&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/26/nebraska-supreme-court-upholds-legislation-combining-abortion-and-trans-health-care-for-minors/">passed by the Legislature</a>.Slama has pushed for hard spending controls. She said the hard caps proposed by the governor on&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/07/25/lawmakers-introduce-gov-pillens-property-tax-plan-which-would-require-legislation-in-2025/">limiting annual property tax collection growth</a>&nbsp;“can be easily worked around” and could get in the way of union negotiations for local law enforcement, firefighters and corrections officers.“I think the only way to really put it in stone to get long-term relief is to put it in our state constitution, very clearly defined principles that need to be adhered to,” Slama said.She said Colorado has sustained “pretty explosive growth” during the decades since it passed its bill of rights.Under Slama’s proposals, the following limits would require voter approval during a statewide general election to:<ul>
 <li>Levy any new tax (<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/108/PDF/Intro/LR12CA_S1.pdf" target="_blank">Legislative Resolution 12CA</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/108/PDF/Intro/LR7CA_S1.pdf" target="_blank">LR 7CA</a>).</li><li>Increase any tax rate (<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58192" target="_blank">LR 13CA</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58187" target="_blank">LR 8CA</a>).</li><li>Extend any expiring tax (<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58193" target="_blank">LR 14CA</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58188" target="_blank">LR 9CA</a>).</li><li>Implement a change to tax policy that results in net tax revenue (<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58194" target="_blank">LR 15CA</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58189" target="_blank">LR 10CA</a>).</li><li>Create a multiple fiscal-year direct or indirect debt, or other financial obligation, if the political subdivision didn’t have adequate cash reserves to cover those future payments in all future fiscal years (<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58200" target="_blank">LR 16CA</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58190" target="_blank">LR 11CA</a>).</li><li>Maintain a reserve of at least 3% of fiscal year spending, excluding bonded debt service, to use for declared emergencies only (<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58201" target="_blank">LR 17CA</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58202" target="_blank">LR18CA</a>).</li><li>Set a maximum annual percentage increase in state spending each fiscal year to the rate of inflation plus the percentage change in the state’s population from the prior fiscal year (<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58204" target="_blank">LR 20 CA</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58203" target="_blank">LR 19CA</a>).</li><li>Set a maximum annual percentage increase in local political subdivision’s spending each fiscal year to the rate of inflation plus the percentage change from the political subdivision’s population in the prior fiscal year (<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58206" target="_blank">LR 22CA</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58205" target="_blank">LR 21CA</a>).</li>
 </ul><h2>Cannabis regulation and taxation</h2>Two other major proposals, from State Sens. Justin Wayne and Terrell McKinney, both of Omaha, would legalize, regulate and tax cannabis for adults ages 21 and older.<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58095" target="_blank">LB 52</a>, by Wayne, would set a regulatory framework for how cannabis could be grown, refined, manufactured, distributed, tested and sold, overseen by a commission the tax commissioner appoints.&nbsp;The bill would earmark 20% of licenses for people in areas “disproportionately harmed by cannabis prohibition.” It would tax growers 25% when they sell it to a distributor or retailer and impose a 25% tax on retail sales. It would establish procedures to let people have previous cannabis-related convictions expunged or cleared from their records.McKinney introduced similar provisions in 2023, through&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=50704" target="_blank">LB 634</a>.<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58065" target="_blank">LB 71</a>, by McKinney, would create a regulatory regime for cannabis in Nebraska.&nbsp;It would impose a 16% tax on grown cannabis to a manufacturer or store and a 16% sales tax on cannabis sales to customers. It shares essentially the same fee structure as Wayne’s LB 52.&nbsp;It also offers similar incentives for applicants from areas disproportionately impacted by cannabis enforcement.<h2>Political subdivision measure reintroduced</h2>As promised, Wayne also&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/24/pillen-vetoes-nebraska-child-sexual-assault-and-abuse-proposal/">reintroduced</a>&nbsp;a version of legislation that Pillen vetoed this spring that would allow lawsuits against political subdivisions for alleged negligence in certain cases of&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/25/we-were-so-close-nebraska-mother-responds-to-veto-of-child-sexual-assault-and-abuse-bill/">child sexual assault and child abuse</a>.Wayne’s&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58098" target="_blank">LB 57</a>&nbsp;includes broader reforms. That includes punitive damages and allowing other lawsuits if&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskaexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/N00007360PUB.pdf">alleged governmental negligence</a>&nbsp;was the proximate cause of someone’s death, such as state prisoners.Another Wayne bill,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58110" target="_blank">LB 67</a>, would eliminate local tax rate authority for natural resources districts and have the state take over funding for the NRDs. It is modeled after the way the state took over responsibility to fund community colleges in 2023 and what the governor has said his three-year plan is for K-12 school districts.In total,&nbsp;<a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/search_by_date.php?SessionDay=2024&amp;special=1" target="_blank">81 bills and 24 constitutional amendments</a>&nbsp;were introduced for the special session, the most proposed during any special session since the Unicameral formed in 1937.Wayne led the way with 24 bills, followed by Slama with 16 pieces of legislation; State Sens. Carol Blood of Bellevue and McDonnell, at eight each; and State Sens. Eliot Bostar of Lincoln and Kathleen Kauth of Omaha, at five each.<h2>Among other bills introduced</h2>Among other bills introduced Monday, the third and final day of bill introductions for the Legislature’s special session on property tax relief:<ul>
 <li><a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58150" target="_blank">LB 36</a>, from State Sen. Carol Blood of Bellevue, proposes a minimum 1.25% tax on the sale or transfer of mansions valued at more than $800,000, with a higher tax on mansions worth more than $2.5 million. If the transferee or purchaser resides in Nebraska for three subsequent tax years, the tax would be returned to them through an income tax credit.</li><li><a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58048" target="_blank">LB 40</a>, from State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward, would require multinational corporations to declare all global profits on Nebraska tax returns. However, they would continue to pay the Nebraska portion of taxes.</li><li><a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58265" target="_blank">LB 49</a>, from Wayne, would reestablish aid to municipalities, and his LB 53 would reimburse local costs for county jails.</li><li><a href="https://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=58266" target="_blank">LB 56</a>, also from Wayne, would limit legislative salaries for local legislative bodies, like boards, commissions or councils. Part-time officials could receive no more than twice a lawmaker’s salary (up to $24,000). Full-time officials could receive up to three times that amount (up to $36,000).</li>
 </ul>