Mariah Carey denies AI allegations in special video for fansTimberwolves push back start time vs. Spurs because of issue with game court
Ohio State-Indiana game leaves FOX viewers raging about 'stingy' broadcastSome Atlantic City casino workers call on union boss to resign for opposing a smoking ban
Miller puts up 24, SMU downs Longwood 98-82
Oldacre, a 6-foot-6 backup center, converted all six of her field goal attempts and 9 of 10 free throws. She also had seven rebounds and three of the Longhorns' 21 steals. Madison Booker had 14 points, seven rebounds, seven assists and three steals for Texas (13-1). Starting center Taylor Jones had 11 points, nine rebounds and three blocks. Kade Hackerott led Texas Rio Grande Valley (6-7) with seven points. The Vaqueros shot 27% from the field and committed 37 turnovers. Texas converted the turnovers into 47 points. Texas Rio Grande Valley: The Vaqueros average 16 turnovers a game but matched that by midway through the second quarter. They committed 13 while falling behind 24-5 after the first quarter. Texas: Aaliyah Moore's physical health is something to watch. Moore, a starting power forward, missed her first game this season on Sunday while resting because of tendinitis in her right knee. Moore played with that condition last season but it has been a struggle for her. Texas has only two centers and two power forwards on its roster. After Texas Rio Grande Valley sliced a 19-point deficit to 10 with less than four minutes remaining in the second quarter, Texas finished the half with a 13-1 push, eight from Oldacre, during the final 2:36. The Longhorns outscored the Vaqueros 54-12 in the paint and it could have been worse. The Longhorns missed 12 layups. Texas Rio Grande Valley is at Southeastern Louisiana on Thursday, and Texas is at No. 9 Oklahoma on Thursday. Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP women’s college basketball: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-womens-college-basketball-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/womens-college-basketball
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Junior Kyla Oldacre matched her career best with 21 points on near perfect shooting, and No. 5 Texas routed Texas Rio Grande Valley 94-35 on Sunday. Oldacre, a 6-foot-6 backup center, converted all six of her field goal attempts and 9 of 10 free throws. She also had seven rebounds and three of the Longhorns' 21 steals. Madison Booker had 14 points, seven rebounds, seven assists and three steals for Texas (13-1). Starting center Taylor Jones had 11 points, nine rebounds and three blocks. Kade Hackerott led Texas Rio Grande Valley (6-7) with seven points. The Vaqueros shot 27% from the field and committed 37 turnovers. Texas converted the turnovers into 47 points. Texas Rio Grande Valley: The Vaqueros average 16 turnovers a game but matched that by midway through the second quarter. They committed 13 while falling behind 24-5 after the first quarter. Texas: Aaliyah Moore's physical health is something to watch. Moore, a starting power forward, missed her first game this season on Sunday while resting because of tendinitis in her right knee. Moore played with that condition last season but it has been a struggle for her. Texas has only two centers and two power forwards on its roster. After Texas Rio Grande Valley sliced a 19-point deficit to 10 with less than four minutes remaining in the second quarter, Texas finished the half with a 13-1 push, eight from Oldacre, during the final 2:36. The Longhorns outscored the Vaqueros 54-12 in the paint and it could have been worse. The Longhorns missed 12 layups. Texas Rio Grande Valley is at Southeastern Louisiana on Thursday, and Texas is at No. 9 Oklahoma on Thursday. Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here . AP women’s college basketball: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-womens-college-basketball-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/womens-college-basketballMONTPELIER — The drumbeat for a municipal tax rate increase that is in line with the current rate of inflation just got a little bit louder in Montpelier where city councilors are struggling with what amounts to a $460,000 problem. That’s the bad news. The good news, which may not be as good as it sounded in the moment Wednesday night, was that latest draft of the budget for the Montpelier Roxbury Public School District estimates Montpelier’s homestead tax rate would drop 1.62% — about 2 cents — after spiking last year. Fraser — and later Finance Director Sarah LaCroix — acknowledged that number was subject to change even as Superintendent Libby Bonesteel was across town warning school directors it was based on the fiscal equivalent of “quicksand.” Bonesteel explained there is reason to believe some of the preliminary numbers used to generate what may be an overly rosy projection with respect to the education tax rate are unreliable and, she said, it wouldn’t take much to turn what looks like a slight rate reduction into 6% increase. “We feel like we’re standing on quicksand right now,” Bonesteel told board members contemplating whether to make adjustments to a budget proposal that currently calls for spending nearly $32.4 million, an increase of about $1.8 million, or a little over 5.8%. The board made no decisions and neither did the council, though there appears to be a growing sense that the $19.2 million municipal budget recommended by Fraser last week will be altered next year. Fraser acknowledged as much during a self-described “rant” that spanned 10 minutes and framed the hour-long discussion that followed. It’s one during which Montpelier’s veteran manager sought to debunk the narrative he is “playing games” with the budget and “push back” on the suggestion the city is administratively “top heavy.” Fraser said the budget he recommended is what is required to provide the services, through its strategic plan, has indicated it wants. “If you want to do what you want to do, this is what it (costs),” he said before launching into a protracted defense of his administrative team. “I appreciate that we have difficult decisions to make, but I want to push back ... about this notion that we have ... all these people in their ivory towers doing nothing,” Fraser said, praising in some detail the work his multi-tasking department heads do on behalf of the city. “Every one of them is delivering services to our public, and if you were to change their titles the work they’re doing still needs to be (done),” he said. Fraser echoed that sentiment more than once before he was finished, noting that further staff cuts to a budget that already reflects a net reduction in employees would come at a cost. “If we reduce people we’re going to have to decide what work we’re not going to do,” he said. Flash forward an hour and Liberty Street resident Dave Bellini lamented the council hadn’t made more progress on that front. “You’re dancing around the issue,” Bellini complained. “You have to look at ‘necessary’ versus ‘nice-to-have.’” Fire, police and public works all got a thumb’s up from Bellini, who argued a communications specialist didn’t “pass the straight-faced test” in a community of 8,000 people. “Get real,” he said. “This is a small corner store that you’re managing here. This is not Walmart or something.” Bellini said limiting the tax rate increase to the rate of inflation — 3.5% — was reasonable and, he said he believed necessary. “I’m fed up with the taxes,” he said. “Last year, the taxpayers got kicked in the teeth. Enough!” Bellini’s comments served as a bookend to Fraser’s pre-buttal and capped a council conversation that featured a mix of frustration and confusion. The latter was supplied by Councilor Sal Alfano who mistakenly believed the council previously voted to ask Fraser to prepare a budget that would require an inflation-based tax increase of 3.5%. Though that was the suggestion of Councilor Tim Heney, and others voiced support for it at the time, Fraser noted, the council never voted. “If there had been a motion made and passed that’s what you would have got,” he said, recalling a conversation that was more brainstorming than directive. Absent clear direction, Fraser recommended a budget he said limited the increase as much as possible, while still meeting the goals outlined in the council-approved strategic plan. Heney suggested Wednesday night the plan, which in his view is little more than a too-long list of “bullet points,” is treated by staff as council priorities, which becomes a problem when budget season rolls around. “Not every service that we provide is essential for a community our size,” he said, adding: “We provide a lot of good services to people, but it’s OK to review that and determine when we’re over the top.” Heney said he would like to explore the city’s information technology contract and is intrigued by the possibility of facilitating the Montpelier Senior Activity Center’s possible shift to a stand-alone non-profit. Others, like Alfano and Councilor Adriene Gil, said they were uncomfortable recommending specific reductions and believed that should be left to those who know more about how the city functions. According to Fraser, limiting the tax increase to 3.5% would require cutting an additional $460,000, identifying that much new revenue, or some combination of the two. For the second straight week he dangled the prospect of enacting a 1% tax on sales, while being careful to note he wasn’t recommending it and suggested most other alternatives would require additional layoffs. “We are in an impossible situation. I don’t think we can reduce the tax rate significantly without affecting something we do,” he said. “That’s not a threat, that’s just a fact. So the question is which area do you want to choose?” If Fraser was expecting an answer in real time he didn’t get one and councilors agreed to resume their budget discussion on Jan. 8. In order to meet the Town Meeting Day warning requirements, the budget must be adopted on Jan. 22. david.delcore @timesargus.com
Carter's single White House term still stirs controversy after more than 40 years22yo star’s ‘sick act’ while 80yo boyfriend in hospital bedATLANTIC CITY, N.J. (AP) — Workers pushing for an end to smoking in Atlantic City casinos say the main employee union has been won over by tobacco companies seeking allies in the fight against smoking restrictions. An official of a union involved in the anti-smoking push on Monday called for the head of the Atlantic City casino workers' union, Donna DeCaprio, to resign for failing to protect her members from the dangers of secondhand smoke. DeCaprio is president of Local 54 of the Unite Here union, which opposes a smoking ban on the grounds that so much business would be lost by smokers taking their money elsewhere that it could cause one or more casinos to shut down, costing thousands of workers their jobs. “She should be ashamed of herself,” said Ray Jensen, assistant director of United Auto Workers Region 9, which represents dealers at three Atlantic City casinos and is part of a lawsuit seeking to have the courts force an end to smoking in the gambling halls. “She should hand in her union card.” DeCaprio said her union supports the health and safety of its members, adding improvements to the workplace environment need to be made. “A balance needs to be reached that will both protect worker health and preserve good jobs,” she said. “We are protecting our members against multiple casino closures and job losses. The UAW is eager to sacrifice the entire casino industry and put 25,000 good jobs with benefits at risk.” DeCaprio said between 50% and 72% of all in-person casino revenue in Atlantic City comes from smoking sections, which occupy only 25% of the casino floor. She said her union “and the vast majority of the labor movement” support a proposal that would improve ventilation in casinos and prevent any employee from being assigned to work in a smoking section against their will. Whether to ban smoking is one of the most controversial issues not only in Atlantic City casinos but in other states where workers have expressed concern about secondhand smoke. They are waging similar campaigns in Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Kansas and Virginia. Workers have been pushing for four years to end an exemption in New Jersey’s clean air law that allows smoking inside the nine casinos. They say they or their co-workers are becoming ill with cancer, heart disease and other conditions related to exposure to second-hand smoke. Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, has said he will sign a bill to end casino smoking if it reaches his desk. The casinos, joined by Local 54, oppose that effort, saying it will cost Atlantic City thousands of jobs and lead to decreased tax revenue for state programs for senior citizens and the disabled. On Monday, the workers group that calls itself CEASE (Casino Employees Against Smoking’s Effects) filed an appeal of a court ruling in August that allowed smoking to continue in the nine casinos. The Casino Association of New Jersey declined to comment Monday. Attorney Nancy Erika Smith said as far back as 1993, tobacco companies targeted labor unions in the hospitality industry as potential allies to work against smoking bans in the restaurant and hospitality industries. That effort included the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union, a precursor of the Unite Here union. “HERE and the related AFL-CIO affiliates are critical allies which should be cultivated as supporters of the effort to prevent smoking bans,” a public relations firm wrote in a memo to Philip Morris Companies that was made public during several states' litigation against tobacco companies. The memo said having HERE “as an ally in this effort would be a very powerful voice.” As far back as 2001, HERE was part of a 12-member coalition including labor unions advocating for improved indoor ventilation instead of government-imposed smoking bans, according to another document cited in Monday's appeal. The anti-smoking campaigners cite a 2022 report by Las Vegas-based C3 Gaming, a consulting firm, showing that casinos that went smoke-free "appear to be performing better than their counterparts that continue to allow smoking.” Follow Wayne Parry on X at www.twitter.com/WayneParryAC Get any of our free daily email newsletters — news headlines, opinion, e-edition, obituaries and more.
By Stephanie Lai and Hadriana Lowenkron, Bloomberg News Donald Trump says he is selecting venture capitalist David Sacks of Craft Ventures LLC to serve as his artificial intelligence and crypto czar, a newly created position that underscores the president-elect’s intent to boost two rapidly developing industries. “David will guide policy for the Administration in Artificial Intelligence and Cryptocurrency, two areas critical to the future of American competitiveness. David will focus on making America the clear global leader in both areas,” Trump said Thursday in a post on his Truth Social network. Trump said that Sacks would also lead the Presidential Council of Advisors for Science and Technology. In Sacks, Trump is tapping one of his most prominent Silicon Valley supporters and fundraisers for a prime position in his administration. Sacks played a key role in bolstering Trump’s fundraising among technology industry donors, including co-hosting an event at his San Francisco home in June, with tickets at $300,000 a head. He is also closely associated with Vice President-elect JD Vance, the investor-turned-Ohio senator. Sacks is a venture capitalist and part of Silicon Valley’s “PayPal Mafia.” He first made his name in the technology industry during a stint as the chief operating officer of PayPal, the payments company whose founders in the late 1990s included billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk and investor Peter Thiel. After it was sold to eBay, Sacks turned to Hollywood, where he produced the 2005 satire Thank You for Smoking. Back in Silicon Valley, he founded workplace communications company Yammer, which was bought by Microsoft Corp. in 2012 for $1.2 billion. He founded his own venture capital firm, Craft Ventures, in 2017 and has invested in Musk-owned businesses, including SpaceX. Sacks said on a recent episode of his All-In podcast that a “key man” clause in the agreements of his venture firm’s legal documents would likely prevent him from taking a full-time position, but he might consider an advisory role in the new administration. A Craft spokeswoman said Sacks would not be leaving Craft. In his post, Trump said Sacks “will safeguard Free Speech online, and steer us away from Big Tech bias and censorship.” Protecting free speech is a keen interest of Sacks. He regularly speaks about “woke” interests that try to muzzle unpopular opinions and positions. The new post is expected to help spearhead the crypto industry deregulation Trump promised on the campaign trail. The role is expected to provide cryptocurrency advocates a direct line to the White House and serve as a liaison between Trump, Congress and the federal agencies that interface with digital assets, including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Trump heavily campaigned on supporting crypto, after previously disparaging digital assets during his first White House term, saying their “value is highly volatile and based on thin air.” The president-elect on Thursday said Sacks would “work on a legal framework so the Crypto industry has the clarity it has been asking for, and can thrive in the U.S.” During the campaign, Trump spoke at a Bitcoin conference, accepted crypto campaign donations and met with executives from Bitcoin mining companies and crypto exchanges multiple times. Trump’s desire to give priority to the digital asset industry is also reflected in his close allies and cabinet selections, including his Commerce secretary pick, Howard Lutnick, and Treasury secretary nominee Scott Bessent. On the AI front, Sacks would help Trump put his imprint on an emerging technology whose popular use has exploded in recent years. Sacks is poised to be at the front lines in determining how the federal government both adopts AI and regulates its use as advances in the technology and adoption by consumers pose a wide array of benefits as well as risks touching on national security, privacy, jobs and other areas. The president-elect has expressed both awe at the power of AI technology as well as concern over the potential harms from its use. During his first term, he signed executive orders that sought to maintain US leadership in the field and directed the federal government to prioritize AI in research and development spending. As AI has become more mainstream in recent years and with Congress slow to act, President Joe Biden has sought to fill that void. Biden signed an executive order in 2023 that establishes security and privacy protections and requires developers to safety-test new models, casting the sweeping regulatory order as necessary to safeguard consumers. A number of technology giants have also agreed to adopt a set of voluntary safeguards which call for them to test AI systems for discriminatory tendencies or security flaws and to share those results. Trump has vowed to repeal Biden’s order. The Republican Party’s 2024 platform dismissed Biden’s executive order as one that “hinders AI Innovation, and imposes Radical Leftwing ideas on the development of this technology.” Sacks can be expected to work closely with Musk, the world’s richest person and one of the president-elect’s most prominent supporters. Musk is also a player in the AI space with his company xAI and a chatbot named Grok — efforts which pit him against Silicon Valley’s giants — and he stands to wield significant influence within the incoming administration. The appointment won’t require Sacks to divest or publicly disclose his assets. Like Musk, Sacks will be a special government employee. He can serve a maximum of 130 days per year, with or without compensation. However, conflict of interest rules apply to special government employees, meaning Sacks will have to recuse himself from matters that could impact his holdings. Sacks’s Craft Ventures is known more for enterprise software investing than for crypto, but it has made a few crypto investments, including BitGo and Bitwise. Still, Sacks has firm opinions on the sector. Speaking last month on All-In, Sacks praised a bill on crypto regulation that had passed in the U.S. House but not the Senate earlier this year. The Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act would regulate certain types of digital assets as a commodity, regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. “The crypto industry basically wants a really clear line for knowing when they’re a commodity and they want commodities to be governed, like all other commodities, by the CFTC,” he said on the November podcast. He also disparaged some of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s positions on crypto under its chair, Gary Gensler. “The days of Gensler terrifying crypto companies,” he said. “Those days are about to be over.” Earlier this week, Trump nominated crypto advocate Paul Atkins to lead the SEC. With assistance from Zoe Ma, Bill Allison, Sarah McBride, Anne VanderMey and stacy-marie ishmael. ©2024 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.Conservative Texas lawmakers and power brokers in recent years have criticized university professors for being “woke” activists who indoctrinate college students with far-left teachings and ideas. Now, as state lawmakers head back to the Capitol for the 2025 legislative session, they could limit the influence faculty have over campus culture and curriculum. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick wants lawmakers to recommend potential changes to the roles of faculty senates, which traditionally take the lead on developing curriculum — and ensuring professors have the academic freedom to teach and research their subject areas without fear of political interference. But conservatives say university curriculum has been infused with ideologies that have helped take higher education in Texas in an overly liberal direction. “If we’re going to refocus our universities on their mission of open inquiry and freedom of speech, we’ve got to take a look at the curriculum and who’s controlling it,” Sherry Sylvester, a fellow at the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation, told state senators in November. Some Texas professors, though, fear the Republican-controlled Legislature could undermine a long-standing balance of power at universities that’s meant to protect higher education from politicization. Their concerns are that without a proper voice on campus, and a guarantee that faculty have control over their teaching and research, faculty might leave Texas or be less likely to take a job at a Texas university, research would be imperiled, and there would be no checks and balances on university leadership. “There’s very clearly an ideological based attack against higher education and more specifically against faculty,” said Michael Harris, a professor of higher education at Southern Methodist University, a private institution in Dallas. “A place where faculty are most noticeable is a faculty senate.” Here’s a look at faculty senates in Texas and the role they play in higher education. Faculty senates are made up of professors from across a university. The body approves academic policies, curriculum design, faculty hiring and evaluation, and other issues that impact the academic mission. They also relay university-wide news and plans back to their colleagues.. The senates often meet monthly and invite guests from the administration to speak directly to faculty on university issues. “They provide a critical advisory voice on so many things we do on campus,” Texas A&M University President Mark Welsh recently told reporters. “The faculty senate does work that is fundamentally important to what we do as a university.” Faculty at many Texas universities elect a professor in their specific college to serve as a representative on the senate. Faculty will typically elect a chair or co-chairs for a one or two year term. Other faculty members can serve on specific committees that provide recommendations to leadership on specific issues, such as budget, research or facility planning. Faculty say that it’s vital that they have a voice in the decision making processes and that university boards of regents listen to those on the ground when making decisions that impact their work. “At a Fortune 500 company, you wouldn’t want the CEO to make every single decision,” said Harris, the SMU professor. “They don’t have time. People close to the product line or business aspect are best able to do that. The same thing is true here. You want your faculty who teach undergrads to make policy (about undergrads). They know the issues there better.” Bill Carroll served as president of the University of Texas at Arlington’s faculty senate four years ago. He said administrators often haven’t taught in a classroom in years and rely on current faculty to share their experiences that can help shape decision-making. “The faculty senate can provide that input and that information to administration so they can understand how the faculty are perceiving things and understand what faculty needs to do their job in an effective way,” he said. Public universities and university systems are overseen by boards of regents, who are appointed by the governor. Those boards hire university presidents, who serve as a CEO of the institution. While there is nothing in state law that specifies how faculty senates should be organized or function, many universities have adopted rules based on the American Association of University Professors’ guidance that faculty have academic freedom in the classroom and in research. They also rely on the 1966 Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities to guide how boards, presidents and faculty senates interact to operate the university. This statement was developed by national organizations that represent faculty, university presidents and governing boards. The statement spells out who should handle each sector of university operations. “It’s not something that was just drawn up by faculty saying, ‘Here is our best practice, deal with it,’” said Joey Velasco, president of the Texas Council of Faculty Senates who also teaches at Sul Ross State University in Far West Texas. “It really was a joint effort.” Faculty should be responsible for curriculum, methods of instruction and research, the statement reads. If the governing board or university president ultimately makes a decision that goes against the faculty’s wishes, that statement urges the board or president to communicate those reasons with the faculty. “It’s through open dialogue and mutual respect and a shared vision that faculty, administrators and governing boards can ensure their institutions continue to thrive,” Velasco said. Faculty senates found themselves in Patrick’s crosshairs three years ago when he boldly declared he wanted to end tenure for new faculty hires at Texas’ public universities. It was a radical legislative priority condemned by faculty groups across the country. At the time, Patrick was honest about his motivations: he was angry at The Faculty Council at the University of Texas at Austin. The elected group of faculty had passed a nonbinding resolution reaffirming their right to teach critical race theory in the college classroom after the state banned its teaching in K-12 schools. In the statement, faculty at UT-Austin said they will “stand firm against any and all encroachment on faculty authority including by the legislature or the Board of Regents.” Patrick called the professors “Loony Marxists” on social media and accused them of poisoning the minds of college students with such teaching. Ending tenure would make it easier to terminate or punish faculty who were teaching these ideas. Patrick ultimately was unable to outright ban tenure at Texas’ public universities. But Harris said it’s clear that the Faculty Council “poked the bear.” “I do wonder, were it not for that, would it have been as much on the radar,” Harris said, though he feels like the wave of similar actions at universities in other states, such as Florida , would’ve led Texas to take similar routes. Faculty senates largely garner the most attention outside the university when they issue a vote of no confidence in a school leader. These votes are non binding, but are meant as a way for faculty to express their discontent with the direction a president is taking the school. Sometimes, they can lead to the resignation of a university leader. Other times, they’re completely ignored. Last year, most faculty members at West Texas A&M University in Canyon said they lost confidence in the president for a variety of issues, including his decision to cancel a student drag show on campus. Nothing happened after the vote and Walter Wendler remained president. At Stephen F. Austin State University in Nacogdoches, faculty took a vote of no confidence in the leadership of former President Scott Gordon after he accepted an $85,000 pay bump amid a COVID-19 budget shortfall. In that case, the board of regents stood behind Gordon despite the no confidence vote. Still, he stepped down six months later. Nationally, a Chronicle of Higher Education analysis found that a president ends up leaving office within a year of a no-confidence vote about half of the time. This spring, more than 600 faculty at UT-Austin signed a letter stating they had no confidence in President Jay Hartzell’s leadership after police arrested a swath of pro-Palestinian demonstrators protesting the war in Gaza. However, that letter came from the UT-Austin chapter of the American Association of University Professors, not the Faculty Council. Across the country, other states have sought to curtail the power and freedoms of faculty. The Arizona Legislature passed a law that would reduce the power of faculty senates. The bill eliminated language in the state that says the faculty “shall participate in” or “share responsibility” for academic and personnel decisions. Instead, professors could only “consult with” university leaders on decisions. Arizona’s Democratic governor vetoed the bill. When Florida passed a higher education bill that banned diversity, equity and inclusion programs at public institutions last year, it also included language that said public university presidents and administrators are not bound by faculty recommendations or opinions in hiring decisions. In Texas, at a November state Senate Higher Education Subcommittee meeting, Sylvestor, with the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation, suggested that the Legislature require all faculty senate votes to be public, all meetings be open to the public and live streamed, and all curriculum changes made public. Many faculty senates at Texas universities already livestream their meetings and post agendas and minutes online. Velasco with the Texas Council for Faculty Senates said many votes are taken publicly, too. But there are instances when private voting is better, he said, such as when faculty vote whether to award tenure. This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.