(Radio Iowa) - The Board of Regents approved today U-I Healthcare's plans to buy Mission Cancer Plus Blood's more than 20 community clinics across Iowa. 

During a special meeting, U-I Vice President Denise Jamieson says cancer rates in Iowa are the second highest in the nation, and access to cancer care across the state is insufficient to meet the needs of Iowans. She says this is particularly true in rural Iowa. 

U-I Healthcare will pay 280 million dollars to purchase Mission's assets. Jamieson says the merger will improve access to clinical care for patients in Iowa, and expand access to community based clinical research trials. They also believe that it will increase the likelihood that cancer physicians stay in Iowa to practice.

(Radio Iowa) - The Board of Regents approved today U-I Healthcare's plans to buy Mission Cancer Plus Blood's more than 20 community clinics across Iowa. During a special meeting, U-I Vice President Denise Jamieson says cancer rates in Iowa are the second highest in the nation, and access to cancer care across the state is insufficient to meet the needs of Iowans. She says this is particularly true in rural Iowa. U-I Healthcare will pay 280 million dollars to purchase Mission's assets. Jamieson says the merger will improve access to clinical care for patients in Iowa, and expand access to community based clinical research trials. They also believe that it will increase the likelihood that cancer physicians stay in Iowa to practice.

Regents Approve U-I Purchase Of Cancer Clinics

Reports from the University of Illinois says the ag sector is closely watching the fertilizer markets this week because of the ongoing war in the Middle East. Following months of tight supplies, global nitrogen values started rising last week. The story of the week was Iran’s attack on Israel. The Middle East is an important area for fertilizer production in general, but it’s especially important for nitrogen. 

“When you look at the attack on Israel, Iran didn’t impact any shipping lanes, it didn’t have any impact on fertilizer production, yet prices moved higher,” says Josh Linville of StoneX. He also says the attack on Israel may have forced the market to finally admit that supplies are tight, and it’s manifesting in higher prices. Urea prices are one example of moving higher, up 10 percent as of last week. Linville advises farmers to contact their fertilizer retailers as soon as possible.

Reports from the University of Illinois says the ag sector is closely watching the fertilizer markets this week because of the ongoing war in the Middle East. Following months of tight supplies, global nitrogen values started rising last week. The story of the week was Iran’s attack on Israel. The Middle East is an important area for fertilizer production in general, but it’s especially important for nitrogen. “When you look at the attack on Israel, Iran didn’t impact any shipping lanes, it didn’t have any impact on fertilizer production, yet prices moved higher,” says Josh Linville of StoneX. He also says the attack on Israel may have forced the market to finally admit that supplies are tight, and it’s manifesting in higher prices. Urea prices are one example of moving higher, up 10 percent as of last week. Linville advises farmers to contact their fertilizer retailers as soon as possible.

Middle East conflict affecting fertilizer markets

A new scam invoking the name of the Missouri State Highway Patrol preys on victims of traffic accidents. 

Seargent Shane Hux with Troop H says it’s important to know that the highway patrol will never call you to ask for money. 

"And even later on what we're seeing with the most recent scam is people are calling after they have been involved in a motor vehicle crash, and they are calling the victims and requesting money for the motor vehicle crash," Hux tells KFEQ/St. Joseph Post. "And again, obviously that is a scam." 

Hux says if you receive one of these calls, it is best to ask the person who they are with and then request a call-back number 

"And then call the agency or the company that they are representing just to get verification," Hux explains. "If it's a law enforcement agency, just say ok I just need your name, a good callback number for you, and then do some research yourself and check it out to make sure that it is legit." 

Hux says most of the time when you ask for that information, the scammer will hang up.  Hux also says it’s important to remember the highway patrol will never ask for money from anyone.  

Hux stresses the importance of being aware of these types of scam calls 

"If something doesn't seem right or too good to be true, it probably is, just do your research and notify the local jurisdiction law enforcement for clarification on that," Hux says. 

By MATT PIKE St. Joseph Post A new scam invoking the name of the Missouri State Highway Patrol preys on victims of traffic accidents. Seargent Shane Hux with Troop H says it’s important to know that the highway patrol will never call you to ask for money. "And even later on what we're seeing with the most recent scam is people are calling after they have been involved in a motor vehicle crash, and they are calling the victims and requesting money for the motor vehicle crash," Hux tells KFEQ/St. Joseph Post. "And again, obviously that is a scam." Hux says if you receive one of these calls, it is best to ask the person who they are with and then request a call-back number "And then call the agency or the company that they are representing just to get verification," Hux explains. "If it's a law enforcement agency, just say ok I just need your name, a good callback number for you, and then do some research yourself and check it out to make sure that it is legit." Hux says most of the time when you ask for that information, the scammer will hang up. Hux also says it’s important to remember the highway patrol will never ask for money from anyone. Hux stresses the importance of being aware of these types of scam calls "If something doesn't seem right or too good to be true, it probably is, just do your research and notify the local jurisdiction law enforcement for clarification on that," Hux says.

Missouri Highway Patrol warns of scam using its name

The organization’s leadership says neither legislative efforts to cut Planned Parenthood off from Medicaid funding nor next month’s vote on an abortion-rights amendment were factors in the consolidation

BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/">ANNA SPOERRE</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>

Three Planned Parenthood clinics in eastern and southern Missouri will shut their doors next month, though the organization’s leaders insist the moves will ultimately expand access to reproductive health care.&nbsp;

As part of the consolidation effort, Planned Parenthood Great Rivers will be expanding telehealth services and hours at its remaining St. Louis clinics.&nbsp;

The moves come as the state has successfully implemented&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/04/24/bill-medicaid-reimbursements-planned-parenthood-governor/">legislation cutting Planned Parenthood clinics off from Medicaid funding,</a>&nbsp;though the organization’s leadership says the closures are not related to the new law.&nbsp;

They are also taking place as&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/25/amendment-3-challenges-abortion-missouri-legislation/">Missourians are set to vote on whether to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution,&nbsp;</a>a decision that could radically expand access to reproductive health care around the state.

On Nov. 1, the Florissant health center in North St. Louis County and the South Grand Health Center just south of downtown St. Louis will close.&nbsp;

On Jan. 1, the health center in Joplin will also close. No staff members are being laid off as part of the restructuring, Planned Parenthood said in a press release.

Richard Muniz, interim president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, said patient care can be transferred to other Planned Parenthood locations. He said the goal is to increase virtual care access and get patients in touch with providers sooner, and then into appointments more quickly.

“The operational changes we’re announcing will ensure that we’re here for our patients not just today, tomorrow, but for the next 90 years,” Muniz said in a statement. “Our patients are our top priority, and despite repeated attacks from politicians, our commitment never waivers. We’re going to be here for them no matter what.”

For Joplin patients, transportation will be provided to the Springfield clinic 75 miles away for those who need it. Planned Parenthood will also refer patients to the&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/08/19/kansas-planned-parenthood-abortion-access/">Pittsburg, Kansas, clinic about 30 miles away&nbsp;</a>that opened earlier this year.

Munuiz said the decision on which clinics to close was data-driven. Many Planned Parenthood patients travel to more than one health center, he said, often picking the one with the soonest availability rather than closest locations.

Two of the remaining St. Louis area clinics — the West County location in Manchester and the St. Peters location — will expand services beginning Nov. 1 to include a Title X family planning program for those who are uninsured or underinsured.&nbsp;

The clinics in St. Peters will begin seeing patients five days a week, including one Saturday a month, and the Central West End clinic, near downtown St. Louis, will increase appointment availability for health needs including STI testing and treatment, cancer screenings and wellness exams.&nbsp;

Muniz said the changes are meant to “ensure long-term sustainability in the face of repeated attacks from politicians on sexual and reproductive health care — including seven consecutive years of trying to deny reimbursement for the lifesaving services we provide to Missourians who use Medicaid.”

Lawmakers this year passed a bill, which was signed into law by Gov. Mike Parson,<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-governor-bill-medicaid-planned-parenthood/">&nbsp;ending Medicaid reimbursements to Planned Parenthood.</a>&nbsp;This means clinics won’t be compensated for patients they serve who are on Medicaid.&nbsp;

Fights over the legislation earlier this year emphasized Missouri’s<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/03/28/missouri-looks-to-mirror-arkansas-law-that-forced-planned-parenthood-to-turn-away-patients/">&nbsp;reproductive health care</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://powertodecide.org/what-we-do/contraceptive-deserts" target="_blank">contraceptive deserts.&nbsp;</a>

Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, like Planned Parenthood Great Plains on the western side of the state, has continued seeing patients on Medicaid despite the new law thanks to donor support, Muniz said. A lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood claiming the new law is unconstitutional is ongoing.

The decision to consolidate had nothing to do directly with the new legislation, Muniz said. Planned Parenthood Great Rivers serves about 9,000 patients a year on Medicaid.&nbsp;

The main catalysts, he said, were changes to the health care system because of COVID, and increased requests from patients to access care from home via telehealth options.&nbsp;

“Our mission is to center the needs of our patients at the core of all of our decision-making,” he said. “Which is why we are making necessary service changes to adapt to their needs.”&nbsp;

Asked if the consolidation was a cost-saving measure, Muniz said the focus was long-term stability for patients.

<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/13/missouri-abortion-rights-campaign-doubles-fundraising-fairness-project/">Missouri’s reproductive rights amendment,&nbsp;</a>which will appear on the ballot as Amendment 3 , was not a consideration in the decision, Muniz said. He declined to say which Missouri Planned Parenthood locations may initially start providing abortion services again if Amendment 3 passes.&nbsp;

“We expect amendment 3 to pass, and when it does pass, what abortion access will look like in the state of Missouri is going to be dependent on litigation and what restrictions courts will block from remaining in effect,” he said.&nbsp;

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/10/1728400594576.png" alt=" The Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Louis on June 24, 2022 (Tessa Weinberg/Missouri Independent)." />
 <figcaption> The Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Louis on June 24, 2022 (Tessa Weinberg/Missouri Independent).</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>The organization’s leadership says neither legislative efforts to cut Planned Parenthood off from Medicaid funding nor next month’s vote on an abortion-rights amendment were factors in the consolidation</h2>BY:&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/author/annaspoerre/">ANNA SPOERRE</a> <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-senate-committee-advances-bill-to-ban-texting-while-driving/">Missouri Independent</a>Three Planned Parenthood clinics in eastern and southern Missouri will shut their doors next month, though the organization’s leaders insist the moves will ultimately expand access to reproductive health care.&nbsp;As part of the consolidation effort, Planned Parenthood Great Rivers will be expanding telehealth services and hours at its remaining St. Louis clinics.&nbsp;The moves come as the state has successfully implemented&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/04/24/bill-medicaid-reimbursements-planned-parenthood-governor/">legislation cutting Planned Parenthood clinics off from Medicaid funding,</a>&nbsp;though the organization’s leadership says the closures are not related to the new law.&nbsp;They are also taking place as&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/25/amendment-3-challenges-abortion-missouri-legislation/">Missourians are set to vote on whether to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution,&nbsp;</a>a decision that could radically expand access to reproductive health care around the state.On Nov. 1, the Florissant health center in North St. Louis County and the South Grand Health Center just south of downtown St. Louis will close.&nbsp;On Jan. 1, the health center in Joplin will also close. No staff members are being laid off as part of the restructuring, Planned Parenthood said in a press release.Richard Muniz, interim president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, said patient care can be transferred to other Planned Parenthood locations. He said the goal is to increase virtual care access and get patients in touch with providers sooner, and then into appointments more quickly.“The operational changes we’re announcing will ensure that we’re here for our patients not just today, tomorrow, but for the next 90 years,” Muniz said in a statement. “Our patients are our top priority, and despite repeated attacks from politicians, our commitment never waivers. We’re going to be here for them no matter what.”For Joplin patients, transportation will be provided to the Springfield clinic 75 miles away for those who need it. Planned Parenthood will also refer patients to the&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/08/19/kansas-planned-parenthood-abortion-access/">Pittsburg, Kansas, clinic about 30 miles away&nbsp;</a>that opened earlier this year.Munuiz said the decision on which clinics to close was data-driven. Many Planned Parenthood patients travel to more than one health center, he said, often picking the one with the soonest availability rather than closest locations.Two of the remaining St. Louis area clinics — the West County location in Manchester and the St. Peters location — will expand services beginning Nov. 1 to include a Title X family planning program for those who are uninsured or underinsured.&nbsp;The clinics in St. Peters will begin seeing patients five days a week, including one Saturday a month, and the Central West End clinic, near downtown St. Louis, will increase appointment availability for health needs including STI testing and treatment, cancer screenings and wellness exams.&nbsp;Muniz said the changes are meant to “ensure long-term sustainability in the face of repeated attacks from politicians on sexual and reproductive health care — including seven consecutive years of trying to deny reimbursement for the lifesaving services we provide to Missourians who use Medicaid.”Lawmakers this year passed a bill, which was signed into law by Gov. Mike Parson,<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/briefs/missouri-governor-bill-medicaid-planned-parenthood/">&nbsp;ending Medicaid reimbursements to Planned Parenthood.</a>&nbsp;This means clinics won’t be compensated for patients they serve who are on Medicaid.&nbsp;Fights over the legislation earlier this year emphasized Missouri’s<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/03/28/missouri-looks-to-mirror-arkansas-law-that-forced-planned-parenthood-to-turn-away-patients/">&nbsp;reproductive health care</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://powertodecide.org/what-we-do/contraceptive-deserts" target="_blank">contraceptive deserts.&nbsp;</a>Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, like Planned Parenthood Great Plains on the western side of the state, has continued seeing patients on Medicaid despite the new law thanks to donor support, Muniz said. A lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood claiming the new law is unconstitutional is ongoing.The decision to consolidate had nothing to do directly with the new legislation, Muniz said. Planned Parenthood Great Rivers serves about 9,000 patients a year on Medicaid.&nbsp;The main catalysts, he said, were changes to the health care system because of COVID, and increased requests from patients to access care from home via telehealth options.&nbsp;“Our mission is to center the needs of our patients at the core of all of our decision-making,” he said. “Which is why we are making necessary service changes to adapt to their needs.”&nbsp;Asked if the consolidation was a cost-saving measure, Muniz said the focus was long-term stability for patients.<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/13/missouri-abortion-rights-campaign-doubles-fundraising-fairness-project/">Missouri’s reproductive rights amendment,&nbsp;</a>which will appear on the ballot as Amendment 3 , was not a consideration in the decision, Muniz said. He declined to say which Missouri Planned Parenthood locations may initially start providing abortion services again if Amendment 3 passes.&nbsp;“We expect amendment 3 to pass, and when it does pass, what abortion access will look like in the state of Missouri is going to be dependent on litigation and what restrictions courts will block from remaining in effect,” he said.&nbsp;

Planned Parenthood will close 3 of its Missouri clinics, expand telehealth services

A third-party candidate is fighting for recognition in the
Missouri United States Senate race.

Jared Young of Webb City calls himself an independent, though
officially listed as the Better Party candidate attempting to unseat incumbent
Republican Sen. Josh Hawley.

Young says he has had to answer one question in particular
during the campaign.

“The question of why run? I feel the same way as most voters
and that’s incredibly frustrated and discouraged by what the two-party system
is producing right now,” Young tells KFEQ/St. Joseph Post in an in-studio
interview. “We feel like nothing is getting done. We can’t make any progress,
even on issues where there’s broad consensus among voters. We’re getting
stopped from finding solutions, because of partisan gamesmanship and partisan
warfare.”

Young is 38, a Joplin business owner, with a law degree from
Harvard. Young has the endorsement of former Republican Missouri US Sen. John
Danforth.

Young sees immigration is a big issue in this campaign.

“I think most voters agree on two things about immigration.
One, we need a secure border. And two, we need legal immigrants. They’re an
incredibly important part of our economy and an incredibly important part of
our culture,” Young says. “And so, it shouldn’t be hard to craft policy that
acknowledges both of those truths. But again, because of partisan games, we
can’t make progress on it, even though most people agree.”

The growing national debt is another big issue for Young, who
says it is being ignored by Democrats and Republicans, because of short-term
political thinking. Young says the debt will hinder economic growth if not
addressed. Young says that if not addressed, the growing federal debt will
weigh down the economy. He claims Democrats and Republicans in Washington
refuse to tackle the debt, because that would require hard decisions.

Young says his polling disclosed that 43% of Missouri voters consider
themselves independent with 70% of Missouri voters willing to consider an
independent or third-party candidate.

“So, there’s a path there. In 2024, people are so tired,
especially in Missouri, are just tired of the status quo. And so, people are
open to it,” according to Young. “As I cross the state, I’ve been working on
this for a year now and talking to hundreds and thousands of people across the
state, and I get so many people excited about the idea. They feel like it makes
sense. And so, the challenge in 2024 is not convincing people that this is a
good idea. The challenge is just getting in front of four million voters and
making sure four million voters are aware that they have a viable third
option.” 

Young is one of four candidates challenging the re-election of
Hawley. Also in the race are Democrat Lucas Kunce, Libertarian W. C. Young, and
Green Party candidate Nathan Kline.

You can follow Brent on X @GBrentKFEQ and St. Joseph Post @StJosephPost.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/10/1728403583837.jpeg" alt="U.S. Senate candidate Jared Young/Photo by Matt Pike" />
 <figcaption>U.S. Senate candidate Jared Young/Photo by Matt Pike</figcaption>
 </figure>By BRENT MARTINSt. Joseph PostA third-party candidate is fighting for recognition in the
Missouri United States Senate race.Jared Young of Webb City calls himself an independent, though
officially listed as the Better Party candidate attempting to unseat incumbent
Republican Sen. Josh Hawley.Young says he has had to answer one question in particular
during the campaign.“The question of why run? I feel the same way as most voters
and that’s incredibly frustrated and discouraged by what the two-party system
is producing right now,” Young tells KFEQ/St. Joseph Post in an in-studio
interview. “We feel like nothing is getting done. We can’t make any progress,
even on issues where there’s broad consensus among voters. We’re getting
stopped from finding solutions, because of partisan gamesmanship and partisan
warfare.”Young is 38, a Joplin business owner, with a law degree from
Harvard. Young has the endorsement of former Republican Missouri US Sen. John
Danforth.Young sees immigration is a big issue in this campaign.“I think most voters agree on two things about immigration.
One, we need a secure border. And two, we need legal immigrants. They’re an
incredibly important part of our economy and an incredibly important part of
our culture,” Young says. “And so, it shouldn’t be hard to craft policy that
acknowledges both of those truths. But again, because of partisan games, we
can’t make progress on it, even though most people agree.”The growing national debt is another big issue for Young, who
says it is being ignored by Democrats and Republicans, because of short-term
political thinking. Young says the debt will hinder economic growth if not
addressed. Young says that if not addressed, the growing federal debt will
weigh down the economy. He claims Democrats and Republicans in Washington
refuse to tackle the debt, because that would require hard decisions.Young says his polling disclosed that 43% of Missouri voters consider
themselves independent with 70% of Missouri voters willing to consider an
independent or third-party candidate.“So, there’s a path there. In 2024, people are so tired,
especially in Missouri, are just tired of the status quo. And so, people are
open to it,” according to Young. “As I cross the state, I’ve been working on
this for a year now and talking to hundreds and thousands of people across the
state, and I get so many people excited about the idea. They feel like it makes
sense. And so, the challenge in 2024 is not convincing people that this is a
good idea. The challenge is just getting in front of four million voters and
making sure four million voters are aware that they have a viable third
option.” Young is one of four candidates challenging the re-election of
Hawley. Also in the race are Democrat Lucas Kunce, Libertarian W. C. Young, and
Green Party candidate Nathan Kline.You can follow Brent on X @GBrentKFEQ and St. Joseph Post @StJosephPost.

3rd party Senate candidate believes there's a path to victory

The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $88,000 in refunds to consumers who bought Chinese-made measuring cups marketed as “Made in USA” by Instant Brands, the maker of Pyrex-brand kitchen and home products, according to a media release.

The FTC&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/ftc-order-requires-pyrex-glass-manufacturer-pay-falsely-claiming-chinese-products-were-made-usa">took action against Instant Brands</a>&nbsp;in 2023 charging that the company claimed that all its popular glass measuring cups were made in the United States, despite some measuring cups actually being imported from China. All told, more than 110,000 units of Chinese-made measuring cup sets were sold to U.S. consumers while being marketed as “Made in USA.” Instant Brands agreed to a settlement with the FTC that stopped the company from making deceptive claims about products being “Made in USA” and required them to pay a monetary judgment.

The FTC is sending checks to 10,259 consumers. Recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. Consumers who have questions about their payment should contact the refund administrator, Simpluris, at 833-244-7320, or visit the FTC website to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/recent-ftc-cases-resulting-refunds/refund-programs-frequently-asked-questions">view frequently asked questions</a>&nbsp;about the refund process. The Commission never requires people to pay money or provide account information to get a refund.

The Commission’s&nbsp;<a href="https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/federal.trade.commission/viz/Refunds_15797958402020/RefundsbyCase">interactive dashboards for refund data</a>&nbsp;provide a state-by-state breakdown of refunds in FTC cases. In 2023,&nbsp;FTC actions led to $330 million in refunds to consumers across the country.

The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consumer-protection">protect and educate consumers</a>. &nbsp;The FTC will never demand money, make threats, tell you to transfer money, or promise you a prize. Learn more about consumer topics at&nbsp;<a href="https://consumer.ftc.gov/">consumer.ftc.gov</a>, or report fraud, scams, and bad business practices at&nbsp;<a href="https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/">ReportFraud.ftc.gov</a>. Follow the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/stay-connected/social-media">FTC on social media</a>, read&nbsp;<a href="https://consumer.ftc.gov/consumer-alerts">consumer alerts</a>&nbsp;and the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog">business blog</a>, and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/stay-connected">sign up to get the latest FTC news and alerts</a>.

The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $88,000 in refunds to consumers who bought Chinese-made measuring cups marketed as “Made in USA” by Instant Brands, the maker of Pyrex-brand kitchen and home products, according to a media release.The FTC&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/ftc-order-requires-pyrex-glass-manufacturer-pay-falsely-claiming-chinese-products-were-made-usa">took action against Instant Brands</a>&nbsp;in 2023 charging that the company claimed that all its popular glass measuring cups were made in the United States, despite some measuring cups actually being imported from China. All told, more than 110,000 units of Chinese-made measuring cup sets were sold to U.S. consumers while being marketed as “Made in USA.” Instant Brands agreed to a settlement with the FTC that stopped the company from making deceptive claims about products being “Made in USA” and required them to pay a monetary judgment.The FTC is sending checks to 10,259 consumers. Recipients should cash their checks within 90 days, as indicated on the check. Consumers who have questions about their payment should contact the refund administrator, Simpluris, at 833-244-7320, or visit the FTC website to&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/recent-ftc-cases-resulting-refunds/refund-programs-frequently-asked-questions">view frequently asked questions</a>&nbsp;about the refund process. The Commission never requires people to pay money or provide account information to get a refund.The Commission’s&nbsp;<a href="https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/federal.trade.commission/viz/Refunds_15797958402020/RefundsbyCase">interactive dashboards for refund data</a>&nbsp;provide a state-by-state breakdown of refunds in FTC cases. In 2023,&nbsp;FTC actions led to $330 million in refunds to consumers across the country.The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consumer-protection">protect and educate consumers</a>. &nbsp;The FTC will never demand money, make threats, tell you to transfer money, or promise you a prize. Learn more about consumer topics at&nbsp;<a href="https://consumer.ftc.gov/">consumer.ftc.gov</a>, or report fraud, scams, and bad business practices at&nbsp;<a href="https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/">ReportFraud.ftc.gov</a>. Follow the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/stay-connected/social-media">FTC on social media</a>, read&nbsp;<a href="https://consumer.ftc.gov/consumer-alerts">consumer alerts</a>&nbsp;and the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/blog">business blog</a>, and&nbsp;<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/stay-connected">sign up to get the latest FTC news and alerts</a>.

Pyrex refund for glass products falsely advertised as ‘Made in USA’

(Radio Iowa) - An expert from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources says peak viewing for the fall colors in northern Iowa will likely start late this week and run through October 20th. 

Peak viewing across central Iowa is usually a week or so behind, and may run through the third to fourth week in October, while southern Iowa may see good color into November. D-N-R forester Joe Herring, who's based in Iowa Falls, says maples steal the show, with bright reds, yellows and oranges, while oaks bring color later in the season when many other trees have lost their leaves. 

Herring says this latest stretch of dry weather should -not- dim the fall color show, in fact, he says the dry weather may help improve the autumn colors.

(Radio Iowa) - An expert from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources says peak viewing for the fall colors in northern Iowa will likely start late this week and run through October 20th. Peak viewing across central Iowa is usually a week or so behind, and may run through the third to fourth week in October, while southern Iowa may see good color into November. D-N-R forester Joe Herring, who's based in Iowa Falls, says maples steal the show, with bright reds, yellows and oranges, while oaks bring color later in the season when many other trees have lost their leaves. Herring says this latest stretch of dry weather should -not- dim the fall color show, in fact, he says the dry weather may help improve the autumn colors.

With the on-again, off-again drought, when will fall colors peak in Iowa?

Justices reject Kimberly Younger’s claim that her rights were violated when the judge in her original trial allowed a defendant to testify remotely via videoconference

By ALLISON KITE <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/">Kansas Reflector</a>

The Kansas Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a woman who orchestrated the murder of a couple working at a traveling carnival during a stop in Barton County.

Kimberly Younger had claimed that her Constitutional rights were violated in the original trial when a witness was allowed to testify remotely via videoconference. Both the U.S. and Kansas constitutions guarantee defendants’ rights to confront witnesses to criminal cases.

In oral arguments before the&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/tag/kansas-supreme-court/">Kansas Supreme Court</a>, Younger’s defense attorney, Clayton Jay Perkins, said Younger had been “convicted of capital murder without having killed anyone.”

“Her conviction rests on the troubling foundation of the credibility of co-defendants,” Perkins said, “including the actual killers that received reduced or lesser convictions and had incentives to place culpability on Miss Younger — and whose testimony was propped up by numerous Constitutional and legal errors.”

Attorneys for Younger declined to comment, saying Younger had not signed a release allowing them to speak with media.&nbsp;

Younger was convicted in 2021 and sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for her role in the murders of Alfred and Pauline Carpenter, an elderly couple from Wichita that sold merchandise from a camper at county fairs.&nbsp;

Younger — who also used the names Myrna Khan, Jenna Roberts and Tiffany Jones — is in her 50s and worked as a truck driver and ticket seller at the carnival, which in the summer of 2018, stopped at the Barton County Fair.&nbsp;

At the carnival, Younger shared a unit in the bunkhouse with her significant other — and possible husband —&nbsp;Michael Fowler. Younger was known to Fowler as Jenna.&nbsp;

The court ruling outlines an elaborate story she told police about how a competing carnival owner with mafia ties instructed her and others to kill the Carpenters and dispose of their bodies in Arkansas.&nbsp;

Fellow employees Rusty Frasier and Christine Tenney were given instructions by Younger to help Fowler with the killing.&nbsp;&nbsp;

<a href="https://kscourts.gov/KSCourts/media/KsCourts/Opinions/124601.pdf?ext=.pdf" target="_blank">According to the Kansas Supreme Court ruling</a>, in July 2018, Younger asked Alfred Carpenter out of the camper to talk about buying his&nbsp;business as he and Pauline Carpenter were preparing to retire. The plan was for&nbsp;Fowler to then slit his throat. Carpenter fought back, and Frasier rushed in and stabbed him. Then, Fowler shot Alfred Carpenter and entered the trailer and shot Pauline.&nbsp;

The group then drove the trailer with the bodies for more than six hours to Van Buren, Arkansas, and stayed with Fowler’s daughter and son-in-law. They then drove to Ozark National Forest where Fowler’s son-in-law and his other daughter’s boyfriend helped them put the bodies in a ravine and cover them with a mattress, rocks and dirt.&nbsp;

During the Van Buren police’s investigation, Younger initially identified herself as Tiffany Jones. When she became “belligerent,” she was arrested and put in the police car where she was recorded without her knowledge and made incriminating statements.&nbsp;

At the police station, the gun used to kill the Carpenters was found in her backpack. While she was interviewed, “the others started cooperating with law enforcement almost immediately,” the Supreme Court ruling says.

First, Younger denied the murders, but “she eventually told an elaborate version of what had happened, blaming the events on a crime syndicate.” She was charged in December&nbsp;2018.

Fowler, Frasier and Tenney all pleaded guilty to various charges and testified against her at trial.&nbsp;

At trial in September 2021, Younger claimed another traveling carnival owner, Frank Zaitshik, “ran a criminal enterprise, paid her to transport drugs and guns around the country, and hired bodyguards to shadow Fowler and protect him from a supposed hitman.” She said Zaitshik put the group up to the murders.

Zaitshik was called as a witness and allowed —&nbsp;over Younger’s objections — to testify remotely via videoconference because of his concerns about COVID-19. He said that “he had no connections with criminal enterprises, he had no idea who Fowler or Younger …&nbsp;were, he had never directed anyone to commit murders, and he did not have Italian ancestry.”&nbsp;

Younger’s counsel claimed the judge’s decision to allow Zaitshik to testify remotely violated her right to confront witnesses, guaranteed by both the U.S. and Kansas constitutions.

But the justices cited case law saying the “right to a face-to-face confrontation with an adversarial witness is not absolute and is subject to narrow exceptions when necessary to further important public policies.”

The witness’ underlying health issues and concern about contracting COVID-19, the justices said, “suffice to allow an at-risk witness to testify remotely.”&nbsp;

Younger’s lawyers also attempted to have her conviction overturned on the grounds that she made incriminating statements before being informed of her right to remain silent and to request counsel.&nbsp;

But the court found Younger had made incriminating statements voluntarily while in the back of the police car. They found that despite requesting counsel at the police station, she voluntarily re-initiated an interrogation with police, who had stopped questioning her while they waited for an attorney.&nbsp;

“She repeatedly said she wanted to talk,” the ruling says. “She even showed impatience at delays in the interview when she outright asked whether they even wanted to hear what she had to say. There is little indication of coercive conduct by the police.”&nbsp;

Younger’s attorneys also sought, unsuccessfully, to suppress evidence found in Younger’s backpack, which she gave written consent for police to search.&nbsp;

While the Kansas Supreme Court upheld Younger’s convictions, it overturned portions of the restitution she was ordered to pay, finding that the court didn’t have enough evidence to justify the claim. It remanded the restitution issue back to the trial court for correction.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/10/1728381811046.png" alt="Kimberly Younger-photo Kanas Dept. of Corrections" />
 <figcaption>Kimberly Younger-photo Kanas Dept. of Corrections</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>Justices reject Kimberly Younger’s claim that her rights were violated when the judge in her original trial allowed a defendant to testify remotely via videoconference</h2>By ALLISON KITE <a href="https://kansasreflector.com/">Kansas Reflector</a>The Kansas Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a woman who orchestrated the murder of a couple working at a traveling carnival during a stop in Barton County.Kimberly Younger had claimed that her Constitutional rights were violated in the original trial when a witness was allowed to testify remotely via videoconference. Both the U.S. and Kansas constitutions guarantee defendants’ rights to confront witnesses to criminal cases.In oral arguments before the&nbsp;<a href="https://kansasreflector.com/tag/kansas-supreme-court/">Kansas Supreme Court</a>, Younger’s defense attorney, Clayton Jay Perkins, said Younger had been “convicted of capital murder without having killed anyone.”“Her conviction rests on the troubling foundation of the credibility of co-defendants,” Perkins said, “including the actual killers that received reduced or lesser convictions and had incentives to place culpability on Miss Younger — and whose testimony was propped up by numerous Constitutional and legal errors.”Attorneys for Younger declined to comment, saying Younger had not signed a release allowing them to speak with media.&nbsp;Younger was convicted in 2021 and sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for her role in the murders of Alfred and Pauline Carpenter, an elderly couple from Wichita that sold merchandise from a camper at county fairs.&nbsp;Younger — who also used the names Myrna Khan, Jenna Roberts and Tiffany Jones — is in her 50s and worked as a truck driver and ticket seller at the carnival, which in the summer of 2018, stopped at the Barton County Fair.&nbsp;At the carnival, Younger shared a unit in the bunkhouse with her significant other — and possible husband —&nbsp;Michael Fowler. Younger was known to Fowler as Jenna.&nbsp;The court ruling outlines an elaborate story she told police about how a competing carnival owner with mafia ties instructed her and others to kill the Carpenters and dispose of their bodies in Arkansas.&nbsp;Fellow employees Rusty Frasier and Christine Tenney were given instructions by Younger to help Fowler with the killing.&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="https://kscourts.gov/KSCourts/media/KsCourts/Opinions/124601.pdf?ext=.pdf" target="_blank">According to the Kansas Supreme Court ruling</a>, in July 2018, Younger asked Alfred Carpenter out of the camper to talk about buying his&nbsp;business as he and Pauline Carpenter were preparing to retire. The plan was for&nbsp;Fowler to then slit his throat. Carpenter fought back, and Frasier rushed in and stabbed him. Then, Fowler shot Alfred Carpenter and entered the trailer and shot Pauline.&nbsp;The group then drove the trailer with the bodies for more than six hours to Van Buren, Arkansas, and stayed with Fowler’s daughter and son-in-law. They then drove to Ozark National Forest where Fowler’s son-in-law and his other daughter’s boyfriend helped them put the bodies in a ravine and cover them with a mattress, rocks and dirt.&nbsp;During the Van Buren police’s investigation, Younger initially identified herself as Tiffany Jones. When she became “belligerent,” she was arrested and put in the police car where she was recorded without her knowledge and made incriminating statements.&nbsp;At the police station, the gun used to kill the Carpenters was found in her backpack. While she was interviewed, “the others started cooperating with law enforcement almost immediately,” the Supreme Court ruling says.First, Younger denied the murders, but “she eventually told an elaborate version of what had happened, blaming the events on a crime syndicate.” She was charged in December&nbsp;2018.Fowler, Frasier and Tenney all pleaded guilty to various charges and testified against her at trial.&nbsp;At trial in September 2021, Younger claimed another traveling carnival owner, Frank Zaitshik, “ran a criminal enterprise, paid her to transport drugs and guns around the country, and hired bodyguards to shadow Fowler and protect him from a supposed hitman.” She said Zaitshik put the group up to the murders.Zaitshik was called as a witness and allowed —&nbsp;over Younger’s objections — to testify remotely via videoconference because of his concerns about COVID-19. He said that “he had no connections with criminal enterprises, he had no idea who Fowler or Younger …&nbsp;were, he had never directed anyone to commit murders, and he did not have Italian ancestry.”&nbsp;Younger’s counsel claimed the judge’s decision to allow Zaitshik to testify remotely violated her right to confront witnesses, guaranteed by both the U.S. and Kansas constitutions.But the justices cited case law saying the “right to a face-to-face confrontation with an adversarial witness is not absolute and is subject to narrow exceptions when necessary to further important public policies.”The witness’ underlying health issues and concern about contracting COVID-19, the justices said, “suffice to allow an at-risk witness to testify remotely.”&nbsp;Younger’s lawyers also attempted to have her conviction overturned on the grounds that she made incriminating statements before being informed of her right to remain silent and to request counsel.&nbsp;But the court found Younger had made incriminating statements voluntarily while in the back of the police car. They found that despite requesting counsel at the police station, she voluntarily re-initiated an interrogation with police, who had stopped questioning her while they waited for an attorney.&nbsp;“She repeatedly said she wanted to talk,” the ruling says. “She even showed impatience at delays in the interview when she outright asked whether they even wanted to hear what she had to say. There is little indication of coercive conduct by the police.”&nbsp;Younger’s attorneys also sought, unsuccessfully, to suppress evidence found in Younger’s backpack, which she gave written consent for police to search.&nbsp;While the Kansas Supreme Court upheld Younger’s convictions, it overturned portions of the restitution she was ordered to pay, finding that the court didn’t have enough evidence to justify the claim. It remanded the restitution issue back to the trial court for correction.

Kan. court upholds woman’s conviction in 2018 county fair murders

In a 13-day trial, Circuit Court Judge Craig Carter narrows in on key arguments

BY:&nbsp;ANNELISE HANSHAW&nbsp; <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2022/09/21/missouri-judge-once-again-delays-decision-on-closing-agape-boarding-school/">Missouri Independent</a>

A ruling on Missouri’s restrictions on gender-affirming care is likely to come by the end of the year, with the trial complete and attorneys’ reports due within 30 days.

After a&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/20/lawsuit-seeking-to-block-missouri-ban-on-gender-affirming-care-for-minors-heads-to-trial/">13-day trial</a>&nbsp;ended last week, Wright County Circuit Court Judge Craig Carter waived closing statements and asked instead for plaintiffs and defendants to submit statements of facts and findings. Both sides presented thick stacks of evidence, with seven approximately five-inch binders sitting on Carter’s bench throughout proceedings.

Without a jury, Carter — who was assigned to preside over the Cole County case — will rule on the constitutionality of the law.

Carter’s questions at the start of the trial sounded like someone becoming familiar with the subject, asking what a nonbinary gender identity means and clarifying definitions.

But in the trial’s final days, his inquiries were more frequent and challenging for witnesses, digging into the arguments and searching for the point in which gender-affirming medication for minors switches from unlawful to lawful.

The trial comes after transgender minors, their families and health care providers challenged the constitutionality of a 2023 law restricting physicians from prescribing gender-affirming medical care to minors. It also bars Missouri Medicaid from covering gender-affirming treatment for adults and restricts prisoners from getting the care in state prisons.

Carter asked many of the questions to the state’s expert witness,&nbsp;<a href="https://divinity.duke.edu/faculty/farr-curlin" target="_blank">Dr. Farr Curlin</a>, a professor at Duke who specializes in medical ethics.

“So tell me your thoughts on the intersection,” Carter asked during Curlin’s testimony last Wednesday. “The state has an interest in preventing people from making life-altering mistakes, and plaintiffs have the right to seek (desired medical care).”

Curlin said the problem lies in children’s inability to consent. Typically, parents consent for their child, whereas a minor’s agreement is labeled assent.

“The norm should be the same norm that is practiced throughout pediatric ethics and it is: Is this intervention in the medical best interest of the child?” Curlin said.

A large piece of the case is whether there is medical consensus on the efficacy of medical transition.

Large medical organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics, a group founded in 1930 with 67,000 member physicians, support gender-affirming care for minors.&nbsp;Other organizations outside the medical mainstream — like the 700-member American College of Pediatricians which was formed in 2002 — are outspoken against the treatment.

Plaintiffs’ experts reviewed research showing positive effects of medical transition, and people who have benefited from gender-affirming care in Missouri as minors testified. The attorney general’s office, which was defending the law, tried to diminish the testimony of these experts by claiming that because most provide gender-affirming care —either by writing letters of support as a mental health provider or prescribing medication — they financially benefit from ensuring it remains legal.&nbsp;

Plaintiffs waved off these concerns.&nbsp;

“Only to the state of Missouri, and without any sense of irony, is actually having experience and expertise a conflict,” Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, an attorney with Lambda Legal, told reporters.

The state’s expert witnesses included physicians who are outspoken about their disapproval of gender-affirming care, though many had never treated a minor for gender dysphoria. During the testimony of Alabama-based plastic surgeon Dr. Patrick Lappert, attorneys showed images of gender-affirming surgeries and detailed the process and risks of infection.

In 2022, a federal court in North Carolina ruled that state health plans excluding gender-affirming care violated the Equal Protection Clause. In that case, the judge tossed out parts of the testimony of&nbsp; Lappert and Dr. Stephen Levine, who also testified last week as an expert for the state of Missouri.

Tom Bastian, spokesman for the ACLU of Missouri, told The Independent in emailed answers the case’s attorneys oversaw that the state’s argument is not sufficient to justify the law. Specifically, he pointed to what he deemed a lack of expertise among the state’s expert witnesses.

“None of the state’s purported expert witnesses practice in this field, except for one, and the one who does agrees that medical interventions for gender dysphoria can be appropriate for some patients,” Bastian wrote. “Plaintiffs’ doctors, their experts and every major medical organization in the United States all agree that, in certain cases, gender-affirming medical care can be medically necessary to treat gender dysphoria in adolescents and adults.”

Another expert called by the Missouri attorney general’s office last week was John Michael Bailey. He received skepticism from Carter after it was revealed that he&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/10/02/credibility-of-states-expert-witnesses-questioned-in-missouri-transgender-health-care-trial/">believes convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky</a>&nbsp;is innocent. Bailey has been criticized for a retracted research article on gender dysphoria in adolescents and was the subject of an&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2011/03/03/134240092/univ-president-calls-after-class-sex-display-extremely-poor-judgment" target="_blank">investigation by Northwestern University after he demonstrated a sex toy</a>&nbsp;in an extracurricular lecture.

The Independent sent questions to the attorney general’s office, including asking about criticism of its expert witnesses, but did not receive a response.

Four people who had once identified as transgender but stopped treatment, known as “detransitioners,” also testified last about their regrets. Only one of the four received medical care in Missouri, and he was an adult when he began his transition.

“The adults that were in the room that should have been protecting them failed to do so,” Attorney General Andrew Bailey said in a&nbsp;<a href="https://x.com/AGAndrewBailey/status/1839345434386743313" target="_blank">podcast</a>&nbsp;late last month before the trial began.

The state also introduced academic articles describing the evidence behind gender-affirming care for minors as “too limited,” both in cross-examination and through their witnesses’ testimony.

Carter asked if the law could be peeled back if research showed treatments’ success. The state’s restrictions on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors is set to expire in August of 2027 — though lawmakers have publicly discussed removing the sunset clause.

“Are you saying the kids don’t have a choice until we get further evidence showing the efficacy of these treatments?” Carter asked Curlin, the Duke medical professor. “If the studies show that this treatment is efficacious, then where do we wind up?”

“It’s not just, is it efficacious?” Curlin said. “Is it efficacious, and is it reliable enough and substantial enough to warrant the risks that these treatments bring?”

“What if the drug companies come out tomorrow and say, ‘You can take this drug, and it is absolutely reversible,” Carter asked.

Curlin said the “treatments are absolutely counter to the well-working of this patient’s health.” The medications and surgeries are not ethical in a body that is functioning well, he said.

The state repeatedly presented talk therapy as an option to treat gender dysphoria, which is distress arising from one’s body not matching gender identity.

Plaintiffs said therapy alone will not treat many cases of gender dysphoria, making medication medically necessary.

On the first day of the trial, a young man testifying under the name John Doe told the court that therapy was not enough for him. His first therapist said he was “going through a phase,” and his dysphoria only worsened.

A second, affirming therapist helped him as he began to dress more like himself at the age of 7, he said. His fear only worsened as puberty approached, and he attributes his thriving social life and success in college to his access to medication.

“It felt like once I started to receive (testosterone) shots, my overall was uphill from there,” he said. “The confidence I gained from having my body reflect who I am and what I was feeling was impactful throughout my entire life.”

Doe’s mother also testified later in the trial.

Carter noted there was “heartfelt testimony on both sides” from parents, asking about the issue of parental rights when the state withholds a type of care from their child. He discussed the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fda.gov/patients/learn-about-expanded-access-and-other-treatment-options/right-try" target="_blank">Right to Try Act</a>, which allows patients to access experimental medications for life-threatening conditions.

He also looked at the release of the COVID-19 vaccine, which had an&nbsp;<a href="https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-319" target="_blank">accelerated clinical trial phase</a>&nbsp;in order to give the public access sooner. The vaccine could potentially serve as a precedent of giving access to a medication without longitudinal testing.

Carter’s ruling is unlikely to be the last, with similar cases in other states appealing&nbsp;<a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-takes-up-challenge-to-ban-on-gender-affirming-care/" target="_blank">all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court</a>. He noted the likelihood of an appeal, saying he would accept exhibits to add to the case’s file for future courts to look at, though they would not determine his ruling.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/9/1727446832059.png" alt=" Judge Craig Carter, a Wright County judge serving in Cole County for Missouri’s gender-affirming care trial, listens to a nurse practitioner testify Thursday afternoon (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent)." />
 <figcaption> Judge Craig Carter, a Wright County judge serving in Cole County for Missouri’s gender-affirming care trial, listens to a nurse practitioner testify Thursday afternoon (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).</figcaption>
 </figure><h2>In a 13-day trial, Circuit Court Judge Craig Carter narrows in on key arguments</h2>BY:&nbsp;ANNELISE HANSHAW&nbsp; <a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2022/09/21/missouri-judge-once-again-delays-decision-on-closing-agape-boarding-school/">Missouri Independent</a>A ruling on Missouri’s restrictions on gender-affirming care is likely to come by the end of the year, with the trial complete and attorneys’ reports due within 30 days.After a&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/09/20/lawsuit-seeking-to-block-missouri-ban-on-gender-affirming-care-for-minors-heads-to-trial/">13-day trial</a>&nbsp;ended last week, Wright County Circuit Court Judge Craig Carter waived closing statements and asked instead for plaintiffs and defendants to submit statements of facts and findings. Both sides presented thick stacks of evidence, with seven approximately five-inch binders sitting on Carter’s bench throughout proceedings.Without a jury, Carter — who was assigned to preside over the Cole County case — will rule on the constitutionality of the law.Carter’s questions at the start of the trial sounded like someone becoming familiar with the subject, asking what a nonbinary gender identity means and clarifying definitions.But in the trial’s final days, his inquiries were more frequent and challenging for witnesses, digging into the arguments and searching for the point in which gender-affirming medication for minors switches from unlawful to lawful.The trial comes after transgender minors, their families and health care providers challenged the constitutionality of a 2023 law restricting physicians from prescribing gender-affirming medical care to minors. It also bars Missouri Medicaid from covering gender-affirming treatment for adults and restricts prisoners from getting the care in state prisons.Carter asked many of the questions to the state’s expert witness,&nbsp;<a href="https://divinity.duke.edu/faculty/farr-curlin" target="_blank">Dr. Farr Curlin</a>, a professor at Duke who specializes in medical ethics.“So tell me your thoughts on the intersection,” Carter asked during Curlin’s testimony last Wednesday. “The state has an interest in preventing people from making life-altering mistakes, and plaintiffs have the right to seek (desired medical care).”Curlin said the problem lies in children’s inability to consent. Typically, parents consent for their child, whereas a minor’s agreement is labeled assent.“The norm should be the same norm that is practiced throughout pediatric ethics and it is: Is this intervention in the medical best interest of the child?” Curlin said.A large piece of the case is whether there is medical consensus on the efficacy of medical transition.Large medical organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics, a group founded in 1930 with 67,000 member physicians, support gender-affirming care for minors.&nbsp;Other organizations outside the medical mainstream — like the 700-member American College of Pediatricians which was formed in 2002 — are outspoken against the treatment.Plaintiffs’ experts reviewed research showing positive effects of medical transition, and people who have benefited from gender-affirming care in Missouri as minors testified. The attorney general’s office, which was defending the law, tried to diminish the testimony of these experts by claiming that because most provide gender-affirming care —either by writing letters of support as a mental health provider or prescribing medication — they financially benefit from ensuring it remains legal.&nbsp;Plaintiffs waved off these concerns.&nbsp;“Only to the state of Missouri, and without any sense of irony, is actually having experience and expertise a conflict,” Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, an attorney with Lambda Legal, told reporters.The state’s expert witnesses included physicians who are outspoken about their disapproval of gender-affirming care, though many had never treated a minor for gender dysphoria. During the testimony of Alabama-based plastic surgeon Dr. Patrick Lappert, attorneys showed images of gender-affirming surgeries and detailed the process and risks of infection.In 2022, a federal court in North Carolina ruled that state health plans excluding gender-affirming care violated the Equal Protection Clause. In that case, the judge tossed out parts of the testimony of&nbsp; Lappert and Dr. Stephen Levine, who also testified last week as an expert for the state of Missouri.Tom Bastian, spokesman for the ACLU of Missouri, told The Independent in emailed answers the case’s attorneys oversaw that the state’s argument is not sufficient to justify the law. Specifically, he pointed to what he deemed a lack of expertise among the state’s expert witnesses.“None of the state’s purported expert witnesses practice in this field, except for one, and the one who does agrees that medical interventions for gender dysphoria can be appropriate for some patients,” Bastian wrote. “Plaintiffs’ doctors, their experts and every major medical organization in the United States all agree that, in certain cases, gender-affirming medical care can be medically necessary to treat gender dysphoria in adolescents and adults.”Another expert called by the Missouri attorney general’s office last week was John Michael Bailey. He received skepticism from Carter after it was revealed that he&nbsp;<a href="https://missouriindependent.com/2024/10/02/credibility-of-states-expert-witnesses-questioned-in-missouri-transgender-health-care-trial/">believes convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky</a>&nbsp;is innocent. Bailey has been criticized for a retracted research article on gender dysphoria in adolescents and was the subject of an&nbsp;<a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2011/03/03/134240092/univ-president-calls-after-class-sex-display-extremely-poor-judgment" target="_blank">investigation by Northwestern University after he demonstrated a sex toy</a>&nbsp;in an extracurricular lecture.The Independent sent questions to the attorney general’s office, including asking about criticism of its expert witnesses, but did not receive a response.Four people who had once identified as transgender but stopped treatment, known as “detransitioners,” also testified last about their regrets. Only one of the four received medical care in Missouri, and he was an adult when he began his transition.“The adults that were in the room that should have been protecting them failed to do so,” Attorney General Andrew Bailey said in a&nbsp;<a href="https://x.com/AGAndrewBailey/status/1839345434386743313" target="_blank">podcast</a>&nbsp;late last month before the trial began.The state also introduced academic articles describing the evidence behind gender-affirming care for minors as “too limited,” both in cross-examination and through their witnesses’ testimony.Carter asked if the law could be peeled back if research showed treatments’ success. The state’s restrictions on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors is set to expire in August of 2027 — though lawmakers have publicly discussed removing the sunset clause.“Are you saying the kids don’t have a choice until we get further evidence showing the efficacy of these treatments?” Carter asked Curlin, the Duke medical professor. “If the studies show that this treatment is efficacious, then where do we wind up?”“It’s not just, is it efficacious?” Curlin said. “Is it efficacious, and is it reliable enough and substantial enough to warrant the risks that these treatments bring?”“What if the drug companies come out tomorrow and say, ‘You can take this drug, and it is absolutely reversible,” Carter asked.Curlin said the “treatments are absolutely counter to the well-working of this patient’s health.” The medications and surgeries are not ethical in a body that is functioning well, he said.The state repeatedly presented talk therapy as an option to treat gender dysphoria, which is distress arising from one’s body not matching gender identity.Plaintiffs said therapy alone will not treat many cases of gender dysphoria, making medication medically necessary.On the first day of the trial, a young man testifying under the name John Doe told the court that therapy was not enough for him. His first therapist said he was “going through a phase,” and his dysphoria only worsened.A second, affirming therapist helped him as he began to dress more like himself at the age of 7, he said. His fear only worsened as puberty approached, and he attributes his thriving social life and success in college to his access to medication.“It felt like once I started to receive (testosterone) shots, my overall was uphill from there,” he said. “The confidence I gained from having my body reflect who I am and what I was feeling was impactful throughout my entire life.”Doe’s mother also testified later in the trial.Carter noted there was “heartfelt testimony on both sides” from parents, asking about the issue of parental rights when the state withholds a type of care from their child. He discussed the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fda.gov/patients/learn-about-expanded-access-and-other-treatment-options/right-try" target="_blank">Right to Try Act</a>, which allows patients to access experimental medications for life-threatening conditions.He also looked at the release of the COVID-19 vaccine, which had an&nbsp;<a href="https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-319" target="_blank">accelerated clinical trial phase</a>&nbsp;in order to give the public access sooner. The vaccine could potentially serve as a precedent of giving access to a medication without longitudinal testing.Carter’s ruling is unlikely to be the last, with similar cases in other states appealing&nbsp;<a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-takes-up-challenge-to-ban-on-gender-affirming-care/" target="_blank">all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court</a>. He noted the likelihood of an appeal, saying he would accept exhibits to add to the case’s file for future courts to look at, though they would not determine his ruling.

Ruling on Missouri transgender health care restrictions expected by end of year

Washington, D.C.&nbsp;– U.S. Senator Roger&nbsp;Marshall, joined Senator James Lankford (R-OK) in a letter to President Joe Biden calling out the Administration’s reliance on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to address the border crisis which has diminished FEMA’s readiness for disaster relief, including hurricane response, according to a media release from Marshall's office.

“Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas stated: ‘We are expecting another hurricane hitting—we do not have the funds, FEMA does not have the funds, to make it through the season.’…Your Administration has spent over $650 million on FEMA’s border-related programs in FY2024. Since taking office, the Biden-Harris Administration has spent around $1.5 billion on FEMA’s border-related programs. We are concerned that your Administration’s reliance on FEMA to address the ongoing border crisis, under Vice President Harris as ‘border czar,’ has diminished FEMA’s readiness for disaster relief, including hurricane response,”&nbsp;the Senators wrote in the letter.&nbsp;

“FEMA’s continued entanglement in DHS’s efforts to respond to the border crisis could impact its readiness and emergency response mission. Rather than ensuring FEMA is ready to respond to hurricanes and other emergencies, FEMA has been pulled into a border crisis mission. FEMA’s mission is ‘helping people before, during, and after disasters,’ not helping DHS clean up the impact of your Administration’s reckless border policies. We are very concerned that FEMA’s role at the border has impacted its readiness and preparation efforts for Hurricane Helene and its response efforts,”&nbsp;the Senators continued.&nbsp;

We write today to raise our concerns on the impact of the ongoing border crisis on Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) readiness. Yesterday, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas stated: “We are expecting another hurricane hitting—we do not have the funds, FEMA does not have the funds, to make it through the season.” Similarly, you indicated this week that you are considering requesting that Congress convene a special session to consider supplemental funding for FEMA. Congress has appropriated over $30 billion to FEMA for FY2024. Your Administration has spent over $650 million on FEMA’s border-related programs in FY2024. Since taking office, the Biden-Harris Administration has spent around $1.5 billion on FEMA’s border-related programs. We are concerned that your Administration’s reliance on FEMA to address the ongoing border crisis, under Vice President Harris as “border czar,” has diminished FEMA’s readiness for disaster relief, including hurricane response.

On the first day of the Biden-Harris Administration, you took decisive action to open the border and invite the chaos we have seen over the past 3.5 years. You ended Remain in Mexico, stopped deporting illegal immigrants, and terminated border wall construction. Over 8.4 million migrants have been encountered since you took those actions to open the border. US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) set multiple records for the most encounters in a single day and in a single month during your Administration. We have repeatedly asked you, your Cabinet, and officials across the Federal government what the plan is for addressing this historic border crisis. By March 2021, FEMA was already mobilized to address the surge of unaccompanied minors after your Administration exempted them from the Title 42 order. As your Administration began planning for the end of the Title 42 order, we learned that you had placed a senior FEMA official as the senior coordinating official for your response to impending surge.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Since the end of the Title 42 order, FEMA has continued to play a role in addressing the ongoing border crisis through the Emergency Food and Shelter Program (EFSP) and through the Shelter and Services Program (SSP). These programs have supported the US Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) “Plan for Southwest Border Security and Preparedness,” which calls for FEMA to “bolster[…] the capacity of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to receive noncitizens after they have been processed by CBP and are awaiting the results of their immigration removal proceedings. And ... coordination with and support for state, local, and community leaders to help mitigate increased impacts to their communities.” Oversight from the DHS Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found that some illegal aliens who were ineligible for EFSP and SSP funding ended up receiving benefits funded by these programs. All told, FEMA has received $1.7 billion for its southern border response efforts. Emblematic of this Administration’s approach, one FEMA official informed my Subcommittee staff during a site visit that the Biden-Harris border crisis is like a hurricane: “FEMA can buy its way out of the border crisis if Congress allocates it enough money.”&nbsp;&nbsp;

Each year under your Administration, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and DHS have regularly requested that Congress cut detention beds and funding for border enforcement measures. Those same budget requests asked Congress to continue funding FEMA’s border-related work. FEMA’s efforts responding to the border crisis could have been much more limited if your Administration would have instead used your authorities to secure the border.&nbsp;

FEMA’s continued entanglement in DHS’s efforts to respond to the border crisis could impact its readiness and emergency response mission. Rather than ensuring FEMA is ready to respond to hurricanes and other emergencies, FEMA has been pulled into a border crisis mission. FEMA’s mission is “helping people before, during, and after disasters,” not helping DHS clean up the impact of your Administration’s reckless border policies. We are very concerned that FEMA’s role at the border has impacted its readiness and preparation efforts for Hurricane Helene and its response efforts. To better understand the impact of FEMA’s border efforts on its hurricane response mission, we ask the following questions:&nbsp;

1. &nbsp; &nbsp; Since January 20, 2021, how many FEMA full-time employees (FTEs) have been detailed or transferred to border-related mission duties? How many FEMA FTEs have joined a border-related volunteer force or related opportunity from DHS?&nbsp;

2. &nbsp; &nbsp; Since January 20, 2021, how much money has FEMA reprogrammed to support its border-related mission duties? Please share a copy of each border-related reprogramming request.&nbsp;

3. &nbsp; &nbsp; Has the Administration conducted any strategic planning or assessment on the impact of FEMA’s engagement at the southern border? If so, please share a copy of such strategic plan or assessment. If not, why not?&nbsp;

4. &nbsp; &nbsp; The DHS OIG found that FEMA funds related to southern border programs have gone to ineligible illegal aliens. What is FEMA’s plan for recovering those funds?

Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to receiving your response by not later than October 18, 2024.

Washington, D.C.&nbsp;– U.S. Senator Roger&nbsp;Marshall, joined Senator James Lankford (R-OK) in a letter to President Joe Biden calling out the Administration’s reliance on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to address the border crisis which has diminished FEMA’s readiness for disaster relief, including hurricane response, according to a media release from Marshall's office.<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2024/10/1728335149953.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>“Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas stated: ‘We are expecting another hurricane hitting—we do not have the funds, FEMA does not have the funds, to make it through the season.’…Your Administration has spent over $650 million on FEMA’s border-related programs in FY2024. Since taking office, the Biden-Harris Administration has spent around $1.5 billion on FEMA’s border-related programs. We are concerned that your Administration’s reliance on FEMA to address the ongoing border crisis, under Vice President Harris as ‘border czar,’ has diminished FEMA’s readiness for disaster relief, including hurricane response,”&nbsp;the Senators wrote in the letter.&nbsp;“FEMA’s continued entanglement in DHS’s efforts to respond to the border crisis could impact its readiness and emergency response mission. Rather than ensuring FEMA is ready to respond to hurricanes and other emergencies, FEMA has been pulled into a border crisis mission. FEMA’s mission is ‘helping people before, during, and after disasters,’ not helping DHS clean up the impact of your Administration’s reckless border policies. We are very concerned that FEMA’s role at the border has impacted its readiness and preparation efforts for Hurricane Helene and its response efforts,”&nbsp;the Senators continued.&nbsp;Read the entire letter belowDear President Biden:We write today to raise our concerns on the impact of the ongoing border crisis on Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) readiness. Yesterday, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas stated: “We are expecting another hurricane hitting—we do not have the funds, FEMA does not have the funds, to make it through the season.” Similarly, you indicated this week that you are considering requesting that Congress convene a special session to consider supplemental funding for FEMA. Congress has appropriated over $30 billion to FEMA for FY2024. Your Administration has spent over $650 million on FEMA’s border-related programs in FY2024. Since taking office, the Biden-Harris Administration has spent around $1.5 billion on FEMA’s border-related programs. We are concerned that your Administration’s reliance on FEMA to address the ongoing border crisis, under Vice President Harris as “border czar,” has diminished FEMA’s readiness for disaster relief, including hurricane response.On the first day of the Biden-Harris Administration, you took decisive action to open the border and invite the chaos we have seen over the past 3.5 years. You ended Remain in Mexico, stopped deporting illegal immigrants, and terminated border wall construction. Over 8.4 million migrants have been encountered since you took those actions to open the border. US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) set multiple records for the most encounters in a single day and in a single month during your Administration. We have repeatedly asked you, your Cabinet, and officials across the Federal government what the plan is for addressing this historic border crisis. By March 2021, FEMA was already mobilized to address the surge of unaccompanied minors after your Administration exempted them from the Title 42 order. As your Administration began planning for the end of the Title 42 order, we learned that you had placed a senior FEMA official as the senior coordinating official for your response to impending surge.&nbsp;&nbsp;Since the end of the Title 42 order, FEMA has continued to play a role in addressing the ongoing border crisis through the Emergency Food and Shelter Program (EFSP) and through the Shelter and Services Program (SSP). These programs have supported the US Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) “Plan for Southwest Border Security and Preparedness,” which calls for FEMA to “bolster[…] the capacity of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to receive noncitizens after they have been processed by CBP and are awaiting the results of their immigration removal proceedings. And ... coordination with and support for state, local, and community leaders to help mitigate increased impacts to their communities.” Oversight from the DHS Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found that some illegal aliens who were ineligible for EFSP and SSP funding ended up receiving benefits funded by these programs. All told, FEMA has received $1.7 billion for its southern border response efforts. Emblematic of this Administration’s approach, one FEMA official informed my Subcommittee staff during a site visit that the Biden-Harris border crisis is like a hurricane: “FEMA can buy its way out of the border crisis if Congress allocates it enough money.”&nbsp;&nbsp;Each year under your Administration, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and DHS have regularly requested that Congress cut detention beds and funding for border enforcement measures. Those same budget requests asked Congress to continue funding FEMA’s border-related work. FEMA’s efforts responding to the border crisis could have been much more limited if your Administration would have instead used your authorities to secure the border.&nbsp;FEMA’s continued entanglement in DHS’s efforts to respond to the border crisis could impact its readiness and emergency response mission. Rather than ensuring FEMA is ready to respond to hurricanes and other emergencies, FEMA has been pulled into a border crisis mission. FEMA’s mission is “helping people before, during, and after disasters,” not helping DHS clean up the impact of your Administration’s reckless border policies. We are very concerned that FEMA’s role at the border has impacted its readiness and preparation efforts for Hurricane Helene and its response efforts. To better understand the impact of FEMA’s border efforts on its hurricane response mission, we ask the following questions:&nbsp;1. &nbsp; &nbsp; Since January 20, 2021, how many FEMA full-time employees (FTEs) have been detailed or transferred to border-related mission duties? How many FEMA FTEs have joined a border-related volunteer force or related opportunity from DHS?&nbsp;2. &nbsp; &nbsp; Since January 20, 2021, how much money has FEMA reprogrammed to support its border-related mission duties? Please share a copy of each border-related reprogramming request.&nbsp;3. &nbsp; &nbsp; Has the Administration conducted any strategic planning or assessment on the impact of FEMA’s engagement at the southern border? If so, please share a copy of such strategic plan or assessment. If not, why not?&nbsp;4. &nbsp; &nbsp; The DHS OIG found that FEMA funds related to southern border programs have gone to ineligible illegal aliens. What is FEMA’s plan for recovering those funds?Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to receiving your response by not later than October 18, 2024.

Kan. U.S. Senator slams Biden for using disaster relief funds for migrant shelters

(Radio Iowa) - Iowans might spot a few tractors in school parking lots this week as part of National 4-H Week. 

Emily Saveraid is executive director of the Iowa 4-H Foundation, which she says has more than a hundred years of history in the Hawkeye State. 

The organization now reaches more than 120-thousand young people in Iowa every year, and she says it's grown well beyond just appealing to farm kids, offering them the skills they need to be successful as they move forward for whatever's next. She says 4-H is empowering Iowa's youth to reach their full potential and creating a real impact on the state.

(Radio Iowa) - Iowans might spot a few tractors in school parking lots this week as part of National 4-H Week. Emily Saveraid is executive director of the Iowa 4-H Foundation, which she says has more than a hundred years of history in the Hawkeye State. The organization now reaches more than 120-thousand young people in Iowa every year, and she says it's grown well beyond just appealing to farm kids, offering them the skills they need to be successful as they move forward for whatever's next. She says 4-H is empowering Iowa's youth to reach their full potential and creating a real impact on the state.

After a century in Iowa, 4-H is still helping young people grow

OLYMPIA, Wash. - Mega Millions, the lottery game that has produced a record six jackpot wins exceeding $1 billion, is getting ready for a “mega” overhaul with plans to be bigger and better than ever when the new and improved game launches in April 2025, according to a media lease. 

Among the enhancements, players will benefit from:

“We are creating a game that both our existing players and people new to Mega Millions will love and get excited about playing,” said Joshua Johnston, Lead Director of the Mega Millions Consortium. “We expect more billion-dollar jackpots than ever before, meaning creating more billionaires and many more millionaires as the jackpots climb, plus this game will continue the important legacy of supporting great causes everywhere Mega Millions is played.

”When the new and improved game launches next April, tickets will cost $5 per play. This is only the game’s second price adjustment since the first ticket was sold more than 20 years ago and the first change since the current game matrix was adopted in 2017.Since Mega Millions launched in 2002, it has produced six winners of billion-dollar jackpots. Since the last change in 2017 more than 1,200 players have become millionaires, an average of 3 millionaires per week.Mega Millions is a national game with tickets sold in 45 states, Washington, D.C. and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Drawings are conducted at 11 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesdays and Fridays in Atlanta, Georgia. Lottery profits support a wide variety of good causes and are allocated differently in each jurisdiction.

<figure>
 <img src="https://media.eaglewebservices.com/public/2021/5/1620755777014.png" alt="" />
 <figcaption></figcaption>
 </figure>OLYMPIA, Wash. - Mega Millions, the lottery game that has produced a record six jackpot wins exceeding $1 billion, is getting ready for a “mega” overhaul with plans to be bigger and better than ever when the new and improved game launches in April 2025, according to a media lease. Among the enhancements, players will benefit from:<ul>
 <li>Improved odds to win the jackpot</li><li>Bigger jackpots more frequently</li><li>Larger starting jackpots</li><li>Faster growing jackpots</li><li>A built-in multiplier on every play, automatically improving every non-jackpot win by 2X, 3X, 4X, 5X or 10X – up to $10 million for matching the five white balls</li><li>No breakeven prizes, meaning when a player wins, they’ll always win more than the cost of the ticket</li>
 </ul>“We are creating a game that both our existing players and people new to Mega Millions will love and get excited about playing,” said Joshua Johnston, Lead Director of the Mega Millions Consortium. “We expect more billion-dollar jackpots than ever before, meaning creating more billionaires and many more millionaires as the jackpots climb, plus this game will continue the important legacy of supporting great causes everywhere Mega Millions is played.”When the new and improved game launches next April, tickets will cost $5 per play. This is only the game’s second price adjustment since the first ticket was sold more than 20 years ago and the first change since the current game matrix was adopted in 2017.Since Mega Millions launched in 2002, it has produced six winners of billion-dollar jackpots. Since the last change in 2017 more than 1,200 players have become millionaires, an average of 3 millionaires per week.Mega Millions is a national game with tickets sold in 45 states, Washington, D.C. and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Drawings are conducted at 11 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesdays and Fridays in Atlanta, Georgia. Lottery profits support a wide variety of good causes and are allocated differently in each jurisdiction.

Price to purchase a Mega Millions ticket is going up

Work will soon begin on renovations at Krug Park with a groundbreaking ceremony set to be held later this week.  

St. Joseph District One councilmember Madison Davis says this project is one that has been in the works for quite a while now 

"To revitalize Krug Park to a place where it was once before, and maybe even set it up for a better future than what we have currently," Davis tells host of the KFEQ Hotline Barry Birr. "I think Krug Park is many things for many different people and everyone seems to enjoy it, whether they live in St. Joseph or don't live in St. Joseph they have a Krug Park memory." 

Davis says the main focus of this project is to bring things in Krug Park back to where they are usable. 

"Where we have restrooms that work, where we electricity at the state, where some of those sidewalk connections are made that are making it easier to access the bowl, or castle, or those kinds of places," Davis explains. "To make improvements to the children's circus area, to bring back those great slides that so many people have talked about, that I have never actually tried, so I'm excited for that." 

Davis says the goal is to repair and replace what is already at Krug Park to continue setting a positive trajectory.   

The groundbreaking ceremony will be held on Thursday at the Krug Park amphitheater at 4pm. 

By MATT PIKE St. Joseph Post Work will soon begin on renovations at Krug Park with a groundbreaking ceremony set to be held later this week. St. Joseph District One councilmember Madison Davis says this project is one that has been in the works for quite a while now "To revitalize Krug Park to a place where it was once before, and maybe even set it up for a better future than what we have currently," Davis tells host of the KFEQ Hotline Barry Birr. "I think Krug Park is many things for many different people and everyone seems to enjoy it, whether they live in St. Joseph or don't live in St. Joseph they have a Krug Park memory." Davis says the main focus of this project is to bring things in Krug Park back to where they are usable. "Where we have restrooms that work, where we electricity at the state, where some of those sidewalk connections are made that are making it easier to access the bowl, or castle, or those kinds of places," Davis explains. "To make improvements to the children's circus area, to bring back those great slides that so many people have talked about, that I have never actually tried, so I'm excited for that." Davis says the goal is to repair and replace what is already at Krug Park to continue setting a positive trajectory. The groundbreaking ceremony will be held on Thursday at the Krug Park amphitheater at 4pm.

City breaks ground on Krug Park improvements on Thursday

On this episode of Forward Ever: Leading in Challenging Times, host Gary Shorman speaks with&nbsp;American Red Cross communication manager Logan Wright.

<div><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dobDNgOSMGA?si=lCBhPu7U5MDOzuTO" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>On this episode of Forward Ever: Leading in Challenging Times, host Gary Shorman speaks with&nbsp;American Red Cross communication manager Logan Wright.

🎤Forward Ever: American Red Cross communication manager Logan Wright

Northern Missouri Congressman Sam
Graves claims the Biden Administration is subverting a United States Supreme
Court ruling as it implements new rules regulating the country’s waterways.

Graves, a Republican, accuses the
administration of refusing to follow the Supreme Court ruling on Waters of the
United States.

“In my opinion, they are not.
They are ignoring the Supreme Court,” Graves tells KFEQ/St. Joseph Post. “The administration
needs to listen to what the Supreme Court said when it comes to WOTUS. What they’re
proposing is, the administration, it’s a taking. You’re taking the use of that
property from individuals.”

Graves claims the EPA has refused
to turn over guidance documents on how to rule on WOTUS in wake of the Supreme
Court decision. Graves says the administration needs to fall in line with the
Sackett v. EPA ruling that the federal government can only regulate wetlands
with a “continuous surface connection” to a body of water, such as a river or
lake.

Graves says how the EPA responds
will have real consequences for individuals.

“You hear all of this talk, too,
about how WOTUS exempts farmers out,” Graves says. “That is simply not the case,
because we’re seeing farmers being cited all over the country and fined all
over the country. It’s based on a subjective, many subjective definitions of
various aspects of Waters of the U.S., of WOTUS. It’s very frustrating that we
continue to have to deal with this.”

Graves says he assumed the issue
was decided when the Supreme Court ruled on WOTUS, ending a back-and-forth that
began during the presidency of Barack Obama. The EPA first proposed WOTUS
during the Obama Administration. The proposed rule was immediately challenged
in court and never went into effect.

“The Trump Administration
reversed many of the things that the Obama Administration did when it came to WOTUS,”
Graves says. “And then, what happen was the Biden Administration came right
back along and then reversed many of the things that the Trump Administration
did.”

Graves claims the EPA has not
only refused to abide by the Supreme Court decision, but has refused to release
its documentation pertaining to the re-writing of WOTUS.

By BRENT MARTINSt. Joseph PostNorthern Missouri Congressman Sam
Graves claims the Biden Administration is subverting a United States Supreme
Court ruling as it implements new rules regulating the country’s waterways.Graves, a Republican, accuses the
administration of refusing to follow the Supreme Court ruling on Waters of the
United States.“In my opinion, they are not.
They are ignoring the Supreme Court,” Graves tells KFEQ/St. Joseph Post. “The administration
needs to listen to what the Supreme Court said when it comes to WOTUS. What they’re
proposing is, the administration, it’s a taking. You’re taking the use of that
property from individuals.”Graves claims the EPA has refused
to turn over guidance documents on how to rule on WOTUS in wake of the Supreme
Court decision. Graves says the administration needs to fall in line with the
Sackett v. EPA ruling that the federal government can only regulate wetlands
with a “continuous surface connection” to a body of water, such as a river or
lake.Graves says how the EPA responds
will have real consequences for individuals.“You hear all of this talk, too,
about how WOTUS exempts farmers out,” Graves says. “That is simply not the case,
because we’re seeing farmers being cited all over the country and fined all
over the country. It’s based on a subjective, many subjective definitions of
various aspects of Waters of the U.S., of WOTUS. It’s very frustrating that we
continue to have to deal with this.”Graves says he assumed the issue
was decided when the Supreme Court ruled on WOTUS, ending a back-and-forth that
began during the presidency of Barack Obama. The EPA first proposed WOTUS
during the Obama Administration. The proposed rule was immediately challenged
in court and never went into effect.“The Trump Administration
reversed many of the things that the Obama Administration did when it came to WOTUS,”
Graves says. “And then, what happen was the Biden Administration came right
back along and then reversed many of the things that the Trump Administration
did.”Graves claims the EPA has not
only refused to abide by the Supreme Court decision, but has refused to release
its documentation pertaining to the re-writing of WOTUS.You can follow Brent on X @GBrentKFEQ and St. Joseph Post @StJosephPost.

Graves accuses Biden Adm. of not following Supreme Court WOTUS ruling

(Radio Iowa) - Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Mike Naig says his department is beginning work to restore seven abandoned coal strip mine sites in south-central and southeast Iowa.

 Naig says there is debris that's left over, rock piles and often times they've dug out an area the last place that they mined coal leaving a large hole that fills with water. Naig says this is NOT the same as cleaning up a superfund toxic waste site as it is more about moving dirt and rock to restoring the landscape, and then restore the soil health. The program is spending 10 million dollars for these seven projects that will take around one year to complete. 

Here are the projects: Pella North and Pella South (Dutch Hollow), Marion County: 162 acres; Kuiper, Marion County: 81.2 acres; Bos, Wapello County: 34.6 acres; Eden, Van Buren County:14 acres; Pedrick, Van Buren County: 14 acres; Vanderzyl, Marion County: 57 acres; Vanderzyl East, Marion County: 29.5 acres.

(Radio Iowa) - Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Mike Naig says his department is beginning work to restore seven abandoned coal strip mine sites in south-central and southeast Iowa. Naig says there is debris that's left over, rock piles and often times they've dug out an area the last place that they mined coal leaving a large hole that fills with water. Naig says this is NOT the same as cleaning up a superfund toxic waste site as it is more about moving dirt and rock to restoring the landscape, and then restore the soil health. The program is spending 10 million dollars for these seven projects that will take around one year to complete. Here are the projects: Pella North and Pella South (Dutch Hollow), Marion County: 162 acres; Kuiper, Marion County: 81.2 acres; Bos, Wapello County: 34.6 acres; Eden, Van Buren County:14 acres; Pedrick, Van Buren County: 14 acres; Vanderzyl, Marion County: 57 acres; Vanderzyl East, Marion County: 29.5 acres.

Seven Mine Sites To Be Restored

The legislation that would set food and farm policy for the next five years is in limbo, waiting for lawmakers to decide its fate after the election. The latest deadline for the Farm Bill passed unceremoniously at midnight on Sept. 30th, without a push from lawmakers to pass a new bill or an extension. Congress will have to scramble in the lame-duck session set to begin Nov. 12 to come up with some agreement before benefits run out at the end of the year — which if allowed to happen eventually would have major consequences. 

The legislation that would set food and farm policy for the next five years is in limbo, waiting for lawmakers to decide its fate after the election. The latest deadline for the Farm Bill passed unceremoniously at midnight on Sept. 30th, without a push from lawmakers to pass a new bill or an extension. Congress will have to scramble in the lame-duck session set to begin Nov. 12 to come up with some agreement before benefits run out at the end of the year — which if allowed to happen eventually would have major consequences.

Lame duck session seen as last chance to save farm bill

In a victory for the U.S. pork industry, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit based in San Francisco rejected a lawsuit from several activist groups who sought to impose sweeping changes to the Environmental Protection Agency’s concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) rules. Last month, The National Pork Producers Council participated in oral arguments before the Ninth Circuit, successfully urging the court to reject the lawsuit. At that hearing, the Ninth Circuit expressed frustration and concerns with Food &amp; Water Watch’s approach and candor.

In a victory for the U.S. pork industry, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit based in San Francisco rejected a lawsuit from several activist groups who sought to impose sweeping changes to the Environmental Protection Agency’s concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) rules. Last month, The National Pork Producers Council participated in oral arguments before the Ninth Circuit, successfully urging the court to reject the lawsuit. At that hearing, the Ninth Circuit expressed frustration and concerns with Food &amp; Water Watch’s approach and candor.In its decision, the court made clear that EPA’s preferred approach to regulating livestock production to study water quality issues is the appropriate path for EPA and does not warrant throwing out decades of established law. NPPC stated that the lawsuit sought to use the court to upend livestock production across the country. By attacking core notions of due process and fundamental civil rights, animals rights activists sought to put pork producers around the country out of business.&nbsp;-NAFB

Kbct