Iowa House passes bill that would expand all of Highway 30 to four lanes
- By cigaretteman
- Off Topic
- 19 Replies
Iowa’s state transportation commission would be required to prioritize making all of U.S. Highway 30 four lanes under a bill passed by the Iowa House on Thursday.
Lawmakers passed House File 2569 by a vote of 87-4. The bill would require the Iowa Transportation Commission to include in its long-range planning plans to make the entire length of Highway 30 four lanes — including a 40-mile stretch between DeWitt and Lisbon, just east of Cedar Rapids, and between Carroll and Ogden in western Iowa.
Economic developers, business leaders and government officials in Clinton County have advocated for the better part of two decades for the state to modify and expand Highway 30 between DeWitt and Lisbon to four lanes.
Representatives with the U.S. Highway 30 Coalition have told lawmakers such a project would spur rural business development, foster population growth, improve roadway safety, lessen congestion on Interstate 80 and match the majority of Highway 30’s cross-state footprint.
Instead of a four-lane layout, the Iowa Department of Transportation’s five-year highway plan calls for changing the current two-lane layout of Highway 30 from Lisbon to Stanwood to a “super-two" configuration that would enable the construction of wider lanes, a hard shoulder and occasional turning and passing lanes.
Work is scheduled to begin for the fiscal year that starts July 1 and ends June 30, 2025, with pavement improvement from east of Lisbon to west of Mechanicsville. Property acquisition for the section of highway west of Mechanicsville to west of Stanwood is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2025 and construction in FY 2026.
Meanwhile, work is ongoing to finish four-lane construction in Benton County, which is slated to be completed this year, according to the DOT.
Stuart Anderson, director of transportation development for the Iowa DOT, said the DOT decided against a four-lane layout in favor of the “super two” alternative due to cost savings. He said the DOT estimated it would cost 15 to 20 percent of the cost of upgrading to a four-lane highway and wouldn’t require nearly as much property acquisition.
The bill was amended to state the Iowa DOT would not use eminent domain to acquire land necessary to expand two-lane sections of U.S. 30 to four lanes until it has expended “all reasonable alternatives, if the land is a part of century farm or residential real estate property.”
Traffic moves along Highway 30 just east of the L Avenue interchange in Tama in 2015. Iowa’s state transportation commission would be required to prioritize making all of U.S. Highway 30 four lanes under a bill passed by the Iowa House on Thursday. (Jim Slosiarek/The Gazette)
A study conducted by Iowa engineering firm Snyder and Associates, and paid for by the Highway 30 Coalition, estimated it would cost more than $636 million to expand a 45-mile stretch of the highway to four lanes between Carroll and Ogden and a 44-mile stretch from Lisbon to DeWitt over a 10-year period, and the estimated financial benefit to the state would be more than $770 million.
Roughly 160 miles of the 331-mile-long highway in Iowa is four lanes. The study did not include the cost to expand the stretch of highway west of Carroll.
U.S. Route 30 — often called the Lincoln Highway — spans cost-to-coast from Atlantic City, N.J., to Astoria, Ore.
A fiscal analysis of the bill by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency estimates the full expansion of Highway 30 would cost $1.5 billion throughout the course of construction. Federal funding could cover up to 80 percent of the total cost, but will depend on future budgeting decisions made by the state transportation commission.
LSA estimates two lanes will need to be added to approximately 120 miles at an estimated cost of $6.7 million per mile. Four-lane bypasses would need to be constructed for approximately 39.5 miles, costing an estimated $10 million per mile, along with 16 interchanges costing approximately $16.1 million each.
Annual maintenance costs for the full 120 miles is estimated to be approximately $1.7 million per year.
“There is over half a million people living along the (highway) corridor, and it’s actually the only corridor outside Interstate 80 that is growing,” said Rep. Tom Determann, R-Camanche, the bill’s lead sponsor. “Highway 30 has always been recommended as a four-lane corridor; 160 miles of if is four lanes and so we need to finish it.”
Determann said a four-lane divided highway is 60 percent safer than a two-lane highway.
Communities in northern Iowa lobbied for years to make U.S. Highway 20 a four-lane expressway from Sioux City to Dubuque. The first four-lane stretch of Highway 20 was completed in 1958 and the last in 2018 — 60 years later.
Determann said the state has seen economic growth along Highway 20 and is looking to see the same development along Highway 30.
"It’s a win for rural Iowa,“ he told The Gazette, noting the highway spans 12 counties and 39 cities.
Rep. Adam Zabner, D-Iowa City, who voted against the measure, said while he would like to see the highway expanded, he’s “concerned about the potential politicization of what should be routine infrastructure spending.”
The bill now heads to the Iowa Senate, where Determann said a subcommittee is scheduled to consider the bill next week.
Sen. Chris Cournoyer, R-LeClaire, introduced companion legislation in the Senate last year, but it failed to advance out of the chamber.
Cournoyer’s district includes Clinton County.
Determann said he hopes to push the bill through the Senate before a March 15 legislative deadline.
www.thegazette.com
Lawmakers passed House File 2569 by a vote of 87-4. The bill would require the Iowa Transportation Commission to include in its long-range planning plans to make the entire length of Highway 30 four lanes — including a 40-mile stretch between DeWitt and Lisbon, just east of Cedar Rapids, and between Carroll and Ogden in western Iowa.
Economic developers, business leaders and government officials in Clinton County have advocated for the better part of two decades for the state to modify and expand Highway 30 between DeWitt and Lisbon to four lanes.
Representatives with the U.S. Highway 30 Coalition have told lawmakers such a project would spur rural business development, foster population growth, improve roadway safety, lessen congestion on Interstate 80 and match the majority of Highway 30’s cross-state footprint.
Instead of a four-lane layout, the Iowa Department of Transportation’s five-year highway plan calls for changing the current two-lane layout of Highway 30 from Lisbon to Stanwood to a “super-two" configuration that would enable the construction of wider lanes, a hard shoulder and occasional turning and passing lanes.
Work is scheduled to begin for the fiscal year that starts July 1 and ends June 30, 2025, with pavement improvement from east of Lisbon to west of Mechanicsville. Property acquisition for the section of highway west of Mechanicsville to west of Stanwood is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2025 and construction in FY 2026.
Meanwhile, work is ongoing to finish four-lane construction in Benton County, which is slated to be completed this year, according to the DOT.
Stuart Anderson, director of transportation development for the Iowa DOT, said the DOT decided against a four-lane layout in favor of the “super two” alternative due to cost savings. He said the DOT estimated it would cost 15 to 20 percent of the cost of upgrading to a four-lane highway and wouldn’t require nearly as much property acquisition.
The bill was amended to state the Iowa DOT would not use eminent domain to acquire land necessary to expand two-lane sections of U.S. 30 to four lanes until it has expended “all reasonable alternatives, if the land is a part of century farm or residential real estate property.”
A study conducted by Iowa engineering firm Snyder and Associates, and paid for by the Highway 30 Coalition, estimated it would cost more than $636 million to expand a 45-mile stretch of the highway to four lanes between Carroll and Ogden and a 44-mile stretch from Lisbon to DeWitt over a 10-year period, and the estimated financial benefit to the state would be more than $770 million.
Roughly 160 miles of the 331-mile-long highway in Iowa is four lanes. The study did not include the cost to expand the stretch of highway west of Carroll.
U.S. Route 30 — often called the Lincoln Highway — spans cost-to-coast from Atlantic City, N.J., to Astoria, Ore.
A fiscal analysis of the bill by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency estimates the full expansion of Highway 30 would cost $1.5 billion throughout the course of construction. Federal funding could cover up to 80 percent of the total cost, but will depend on future budgeting decisions made by the state transportation commission.
LSA estimates two lanes will need to be added to approximately 120 miles at an estimated cost of $6.7 million per mile. Four-lane bypasses would need to be constructed for approximately 39.5 miles, costing an estimated $10 million per mile, along with 16 interchanges costing approximately $16.1 million each.
Annual maintenance costs for the full 120 miles is estimated to be approximately $1.7 million per year.
“There is over half a million people living along the (highway) corridor, and it’s actually the only corridor outside Interstate 80 that is growing,” said Rep. Tom Determann, R-Camanche, the bill’s lead sponsor. “Highway 30 has always been recommended as a four-lane corridor; 160 miles of if is four lanes and so we need to finish it.”
Determann said a four-lane divided highway is 60 percent safer than a two-lane highway.
Communities in northern Iowa lobbied for years to make U.S. Highway 20 a four-lane expressway from Sioux City to Dubuque. The first four-lane stretch of Highway 20 was completed in 1958 and the last in 2018 — 60 years later.
Determann said the state has seen economic growth along Highway 20 and is looking to see the same development along Highway 30.
"It’s a win for rural Iowa,“ he told The Gazette, noting the highway spans 12 counties and 39 cities.
Rep. Adam Zabner, D-Iowa City, who voted against the measure, said while he would like to see the highway expanded, he’s “concerned about the potential politicization of what should be routine infrastructure spending.”
The bill now heads to the Iowa Senate, where Determann said a subcommittee is scheduled to consider the bill next week.
Sen. Chris Cournoyer, R-LeClaire, introduced companion legislation in the Senate last year, but it failed to advance out of the chamber.
Cournoyer’s district includes Clinton County.
Determann said he hopes to push the bill through the Senate before a March 15 legislative deadline.
Iowa House passes bill to expand all of Highway 30 to four lanes
The bill would require the Iowa Transportation Commission to include in its long-range planning plans to make the entire length of Highway 30 four lanes — including a 40-mile stretch between DeWitt and Lisbon, just east of Cedar Rapids, and between Carroll and Ogden in western Iowa.
www.thegazette.com
Iowa WBB 2024 Bracketology
- By RossWB
- The Press Box
- 3 Replies
March is almost upon us so it's certainly time to start paying closer attention to the Bracketology predictions.
2/20: ESPN has Iowa back as a #1 seed after some shake-ups in the Pac-12.
This mock bracket has LSU as the 4-seed in Iowa's region, which would set up a potential National Championship Game rematch in the Sweet 16. The winner of that game would likely get either 2-seed NC State or 3-seed Colorado in the Elite 8. And whoever emerges from that bracket would likely get South Carolina in the Final Four.
There aren't many easy paths in the NCAA Tournament, but that would certainly be a very challenging one. But there are still a lot of games to be played and moves to be made until the brackets are finalized.
2/20: ESPN has Iowa back as a #1 seed after some shake-ups in the Pac-12.
Women's Bracketology: UCLA takes over No. 1 overall seed, Tennessee climbs to 4-seed
With so many unknowns, the Lady Vols were a double-digit seed in the preseason. They've played their way to a No. 4.
www.espn.com
This mock bracket has LSU as the 4-seed in Iowa's region, which would set up a potential National Championship Game rematch in the Sweet 16. The winner of that game would likely get either 2-seed NC State or 3-seed Colorado in the Elite 8. And whoever emerges from that bracket would likely get South Carolina in the Final Four.
There aren't many easy paths in the NCAA Tournament, but that would certainly be a very challenging one. But there are still a lot of games to be played and moves to be made until the brackets are finalized.
Big Ten Football Media Days
- By major tom
- Iowa Football
- 0 Replies
Iowa is July 26th
bigten.org
Big Ten Conference Releases School Schedule for 2024 Football Media Days Presented by Old National Bank
ROSEMONT, Ill. –The Big Ten Conference announced today the school appearance schedule for the 2024 Big Ten Football Media Days Presented by Old National Bank.
bigten.org
Iowa Republicans are trying to dictate history curriculum. It’s a historic mistake
- By cigaretteman
- Off Topic
- 4 Replies
When my older kid was a sophomore in high school, she and hundreds of her classmates walked out of school to protest gun violence that turned so many schools like hers across the nation into killing fields.
She carried a sign. “Why such a big gun? Overcompensating?
Clever girl. Two years before the walkout, she used another kid’s cellphone to tell me her middle school was being evacuated due to a threat. I walked out of my house to the sound of wailing sirens. I drove toward the evacuation location, Lowe Park, not knowing what was happening.
The threat was fake. Still, she was scared. I was terrified.
So, smart kids such as my daughter, who pay attention to the news, are interested in history and have their own informed views about the state of the state and nation, understood the need to walk out and speak up. No one told her to do it. She just did.
Now, Iowa House Republicans are telling me it’s radical leftists in our schools who used civics instruction to push my kid into activism. Clearly, they have not met her.
But they have a bill to fix it. Because of course they do. It cleared the House this week.
House File 2544 prescribes what sort of civics and history should bet taught to Iowa students. Politicians writing detailed curriculum. What could go wrong?
One thing they want to do is ban “action civics.” So, what’s that?
According to Education Week, action civics’ goal is “not only to teach students how their government works but to harness that knowledge to launch them into collective action on issues they care about. And its lofty goal is to revitalize democracy with a new generation of informed, engaged citizens.”
Well, we’ve got to outlaw that.
The Education Week article talks about kids in Oklahoma who lobbied for accurate HIV and AIDS instruction, and middle school students in California who tested water in their school drinking fountains and convinced their principal to install a filtration system. Chicago kids convinced the transit authority to move a bus stop to a safer spot, and some more Oklahoma kids led the charge for an $11 million bond issue to renovate their school.
Sounds great. But the last thing a bunch of middle-aged, cranky conservative legislators want is kids involved in public policy. They have so many funny ideas about guns, racial equality, LGBTQ rights and environmental protection. After all, children should be seen and not heard. Maybe not even seen.
No Iowa school, under the bill, can teach action civics. And no state university can give credit for any course that teaches the value of activism.
Iowa is following the lead of ruby red Texas, which outlawed any assignments involving direct communications between students and federal, state and local officials.
Backers of the Iowa social studies bill would bury civic engagement in facts to memorize, documents to study and heroes to revere. Lawmakers get to choose.
Middle and high school students will learn about “Christian liberty” in England and the American colonies. They’ll learn about the civic virtues of famous people. Only two women make the cut, Susan B. Anthony and Abigail Adams. Although the list includes Ronald Reagan, Franklin Roosevelt is nowhere to be found. Nor is the nation’s first Black president.
The Holocaust is included in history curriculum, but not the failures of Reconstruction or the violent theft of land from indigenous people. The Civil Rights movement is mentioned, but not Jim Crow, or anything about structural racism that has survived to this day. Neither the Vietnam War nor Watergate is mentioned, although I’m pretty sure they happened.
Students will learn “The United States’ exceptional and praiseworthy history.” Same goes for “Western Civilization.” Somewhere, former Congressman Steve King is smiling.
Do truly exceptional nations really have to keep saying they’re exceptional?
Students will learn “The concept that United States history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teachable and testable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation based largely on the universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence,” the bill states.
I have no problem with teaching from source documents, focusing on big events, discussing our guiding ideals and introducing key figures. But the idea that American history can’t be questioned seems, well, un-American.
A lot of the language in the bill is cribbed from suggested legislation put forward by the America First Policy Institute, the Civics Alliance and the National Association of Scholars. Trumpers’ fingerprints are all over this stuff.
Permitting a radical right-wing Legislature to dictate what kids learn about history and civics is an astoundingly bad idea. They have no interest in turning out well-informed citizens who know how to think and are ready to take part in selecting the best leaders for our democratic institutions. They want citizens who will not question conservative orthodoxy, patriotic mythology or our current leaders, waving flags. We’re exceptional, so everything we do is magic.
Our founders were clearly practicing action civics. Now, activism is a dirty word, unless you’re trying to ban books, trample the rights of transgender kids or dictate civics and history curriculum.
One way to know for sure someone doesn’t really understand history is when they tell you there’s one, accurate version of our past. Anyone who studies history knows the more you learn, the more questions arise. You’ll find orthodox explanations don’t seem to fit as you peel back the layers.
Imagine someday when the history of our time is studied. Is there one clear, factual version? Yeah, no.
I can only be thankful that my kids won’t have to endure this transformation of history and civics programs into farm teams for the Heritage Foundation.
And why such a big bill? Overcompensating?
(319) 398-8262; todd.dorman@thegazette.com
www.thegazette.com
She carried a sign. “Why such a big gun? Overcompensating?
Clever girl. Two years before the walkout, she used another kid’s cellphone to tell me her middle school was being evacuated due to a threat. I walked out of my house to the sound of wailing sirens. I drove toward the evacuation location, Lowe Park, not knowing what was happening.
The threat was fake. Still, she was scared. I was terrified.
So, smart kids such as my daughter, who pay attention to the news, are interested in history and have their own informed views about the state of the state and nation, understood the need to walk out and speak up. No one told her to do it. She just did.
Now, Iowa House Republicans are telling me it’s radical leftists in our schools who used civics instruction to push my kid into activism. Clearly, they have not met her.
But they have a bill to fix it. Because of course they do. It cleared the House this week.
House File 2544 prescribes what sort of civics and history should bet taught to Iowa students. Politicians writing detailed curriculum. What could go wrong?
One thing they want to do is ban “action civics.” So, what’s that?
According to Education Week, action civics’ goal is “not only to teach students how their government works but to harness that knowledge to launch them into collective action on issues they care about. And its lofty goal is to revitalize democracy with a new generation of informed, engaged citizens.”
Well, we’ve got to outlaw that.
The Education Week article talks about kids in Oklahoma who lobbied for accurate HIV and AIDS instruction, and middle school students in California who tested water in their school drinking fountains and convinced their principal to install a filtration system. Chicago kids convinced the transit authority to move a bus stop to a safer spot, and some more Oklahoma kids led the charge for an $11 million bond issue to renovate their school.
Sounds great. But the last thing a bunch of middle-aged, cranky conservative legislators want is kids involved in public policy. They have so many funny ideas about guns, racial equality, LGBTQ rights and environmental protection. After all, children should be seen and not heard. Maybe not even seen.
No Iowa school, under the bill, can teach action civics. And no state university can give credit for any course that teaches the value of activism.
Iowa is following the lead of ruby red Texas, which outlawed any assignments involving direct communications between students and federal, state and local officials.
Backers of the Iowa social studies bill would bury civic engagement in facts to memorize, documents to study and heroes to revere. Lawmakers get to choose.
Middle and high school students will learn about “Christian liberty” in England and the American colonies. They’ll learn about the civic virtues of famous people. Only two women make the cut, Susan B. Anthony and Abigail Adams. Although the list includes Ronald Reagan, Franklin Roosevelt is nowhere to be found. Nor is the nation’s first Black president.
The Holocaust is included in history curriculum, but not the failures of Reconstruction or the violent theft of land from indigenous people. The Civil Rights movement is mentioned, but not Jim Crow, or anything about structural racism that has survived to this day. Neither the Vietnam War nor Watergate is mentioned, although I’m pretty sure they happened.
Students will learn “The United States’ exceptional and praiseworthy history.” Same goes for “Western Civilization.” Somewhere, former Congressman Steve King is smiling.
Do truly exceptional nations really have to keep saying they’re exceptional?
Students will learn “The concept that United States history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teachable and testable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation based largely on the universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence,” the bill states.
I have no problem with teaching from source documents, focusing on big events, discussing our guiding ideals and introducing key figures. But the idea that American history can’t be questioned seems, well, un-American.
A lot of the language in the bill is cribbed from suggested legislation put forward by the America First Policy Institute, the Civics Alliance and the National Association of Scholars. Trumpers’ fingerprints are all over this stuff.
Permitting a radical right-wing Legislature to dictate what kids learn about history and civics is an astoundingly bad idea. They have no interest in turning out well-informed citizens who know how to think and are ready to take part in selecting the best leaders for our democratic institutions. They want citizens who will not question conservative orthodoxy, patriotic mythology or our current leaders, waving flags. We’re exceptional, so everything we do is magic.
Our founders were clearly practicing action civics. Now, activism is a dirty word, unless you’re trying to ban books, trample the rights of transgender kids or dictate civics and history curriculum.
One way to know for sure someone doesn’t really understand history is when they tell you there’s one, accurate version of our past. Anyone who studies history knows the more you learn, the more questions arise. You’ll find orthodox explanations don’t seem to fit as you peel back the layers.
Imagine someday when the history of our time is studied. Is there one clear, factual version? Yeah, no.
I can only be thankful that my kids won’t have to endure this transformation of history and civics programs into farm teams for the Heritage Foundation.
And why such a big bill? Overcompensating?
(319) 398-8262; todd.dorman@thegazette.com
Opinion: Iowa Republicans are trying to dictate history curriculum. It’s a historic mistake
House File 2544 prescribes what sort of civics and history should bet taught to Iowa students. Politicians writing detailed curriculum. What could go wrong?
www.thegazette.com
Will Shortz, New York Times Crossword Editor, Says He Is Recovering From a Stroke
- By cigaretteman
- Off Topic
- 0 Replies
Will Shortz, crossword editor of The New York Times and the host of NPR’s “Sunday Puzzle,” is recovering from a stroke, he said on Sunday.
Mr. Shortz, who is 71 and has been with The Times for three decades, shared the health update in a recorded message that aired on Sunday at the end of the puzzle quiz segment during the NPR program “Weekend Edition Sunday.”
“Hey guys, this is Will Shortz. Sorry I’ve been out the last few weeks. I had a stroke on February 4, and have been in rehabilitation since then, but I am making progress,” he said in the message. “I’m looking forward to being back with new puzzles soon.”
Ayesha Rascoe, the host of “Weekend Edition Sunday,” wished Mr. Shortz a speedy recovery.
“We here at ‘Weekend Edition,’ we love Will and I know that everybody at home does too and we are rooting for him and we are so hopeful and know that he will feel better soon,” she said during the segment.
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Mr. Shortz, who last year celebrated his 30th anniversary as crossword editor at The Times, also founded the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament, spent 15 years as the editor of Games magazine, and has appeared weekly as the puzzle master on “Weekend Edition Sunday.”
“When I was a kid, I imagined a life where I’d be sitting in an attic somewhere, making my little puzzles for $15 each, somehow surviving,” he said in a 2017 interview with The Times. “I actually wrote a paper in eighth grade about what I wanted to do with my life, and it was to be a professional puzzle maker.”
Despite skepticism from his middle school teacher about that dream, Mr. Shortz went on to self-design a degree at Indiana University in enigmatology — the scientific study of puzzles as it is related to semiotics, culture and cognition. He also studied law.
In 1993, Mr. Shortz became the Times’s fourth puzzle editor, and, in an interview last year, he recalled telling his hiring editor at the time that he hoped to “maintain the quality and intellectual rigor of the Crossword” while bringing in young contributors, fresh themes and modern vocabulary.
The content of the crosswords, he said, should have lasting cultural impact, which he defined as “at least five to 10 years.”
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Mr. Shortz could not be immediately reached on Sunday for further comment about his recovery, and when he might return to work.
Jordan Cohen, a spokesman for The New York Times, said in an email that the newspaper had been in “regular contact” with Mr. Shortz and wished him “the best on his path to what is expected to be a full recovery.” Mr. Cohen added, “We look forward to having him back at work when he is ready.”
A spokeswoman from NPR shared Mr. Shortz’s aired statement by email on Sunday, but did not immediately respond to questions about when he might return to work.
Mr. Shortz, who is 71 and has been with The Times for three decades, shared the health update in a recorded message that aired on Sunday at the end of the puzzle quiz segment during the NPR program “Weekend Edition Sunday.”
“Hey guys, this is Will Shortz. Sorry I’ve been out the last few weeks. I had a stroke on February 4, and have been in rehabilitation since then, but I am making progress,” he said in the message. “I’m looking forward to being back with new puzzles soon.”
Ayesha Rascoe, the host of “Weekend Edition Sunday,” wished Mr. Shortz a speedy recovery.
“We here at ‘Weekend Edition,’ we love Will and I know that everybody at home does too and we are rooting for him and we are so hopeful and know that he will feel better soon,” she said during the segment.
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Mr. Shortz, who last year celebrated his 30th anniversary as crossword editor at The Times, also founded the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament, spent 15 years as the editor of Games magazine, and has appeared weekly as the puzzle master on “Weekend Edition Sunday.”
“When I was a kid, I imagined a life where I’d be sitting in an attic somewhere, making my little puzzles for $15 each, somehow surviving,” he said in a 2017 interview with The Times. “I actually wrote a paper in eighth grade about what I wanted to do with my life, and it was to be a professional puzzle maker.”
Despite skepticism from his middle school teacher about that dream, Mr. Shortz went on to self-design a degree at Indiana University in enigmatology — the scientific study of puzzles as it is related to semiotics, culture and cognition. He also studied law.
In 1993, Mr. Shortz became the Times’s fourth puzzle editor, and, in an interview last year, he recalled telling his hiring editor at the time that he hoped to “maintain the quality and intellectual rigor of the Crossword” while bringing in young contributors, fresh themes and modern vocabulary.
The content of the crosswords, he said, should have lasting cultural impact, which he defined as “at least five to 10 years.”
Editors’ Picks
How Should You Respond to a Friend’s Appalling Post?
Buying Houses Before Finding Spouses
Sports Anchors Went All In on Outrage. Then There’s Scott Van Pelt.
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
Mr. Shortz could not be immediately reached on Sunday for further comment about his recovery, and when he might return to work.
Jordan Cohen, a spokesman for The New York Times, said in an email that the newspaper had been in “regular contact” with Mr. Shortz and wished him “the best on his path to what is expected to be a full recovery.” Mr. Cohen added, “We look forward to having him back at work when he is ready.”
A spokeswoman from NPR shared Mr. Shortz’s aired statement by email on Sunday, but did not immediately respond to questions about when he might return to work.
Military Caught Airman Mishandling Secrets Before Arrest but Left Him in Job
- By cigaretteman
- Off Topic
- 4 Replies
Air Force officials caught Airman Jack Teixeira taking notes and conducting deep-dive searches for classified material months before he was charged with leaking a vast trove of government secrets, but did not remove him from his job, according to a Justice Department filing on Wednesday.
On two occasions in September and October 2022, Airman Teixeira’s superiors in the Massachusetts Air National Guard admonished him after reports that he had taken “concerning actions” while handling classified information. Those included stuffing a note into his pocket after reviewing secret information inside his unit, according to a court filing ahead of a hearing before a federal magistrate judge in Worcester, Mass., on Friday to determine whether he should be released on bail.
Airman Teixeira — who until March shared secrets with scores of online friends from around the world on Discord, a social media platform popular with gamers — “was instructed to no longer take notes in any form on classified intelligence information,” lawyers with the department’s national security division wrote in an 11-page memo arguing for his indefinite detention.
The airman’s superiors also ordered him to “cease and desist on any deep dives into classified intelligence information,” although it is not clear how, or if, they enforced that directive.
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
The new information was intended to drive home the government’s argument that Airman Teixeira’s relentless quest for intelligence to share with online friends — which he acknowledged to be improper — makes his release a danger to national security. But it also raised troubling new questions about whether the military missed opportunities to stop or limit one of the most damaging intelligence leaks in recent history.
The signs that something was amiss seem unmistakable in retrospect. In late January, a master sergeant who was working at the Air Force base on Cape Cod in Massachusetts observed Airman Teixeira inappropriately accessing reports on the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communication System, the Pentagon’s secure intranet system, the memo said.
“Teixeira had been previously been notified to focus on his own career duties and not to seek out intelligence products,” one of his superiors wrote in a memo on Feb. 4 that prosecutors included in their filing.
Image
The military gave Airman Teixeira a certificate for completing training intended to prevent the “unauthorized disclosure” of classified information in March, after superiors had caught him mishandling classified material.Credit...Justice Department
Not only was Airman Teixeira allowed to remain in his job — he seems to have retained his top-secret security clearance — but he was subsequently given the second of two certificates after completing training intended to prevent the “unauthorized disclosure” of classified information.
In their filing, prosecutors cited those trainings as evidence that Airman Teixeira, 21, knowingly violated the law despite being “well aware of his obligations” and could not be trusted if released.
Two of Airman Teixeira’s superiors at the 102nd Intelligence Wing on Cape Cod have been suspended pending completion of an internal investigation by the Air Force inspector general, according to a spokeswoman for the service, Ann Stefanek. Their access to classified information has been temporarily blocked, she added.
The government also introduced previously undisclosed Discord posts, including one from December 2022 in which he bragged about “breaking a ton of UD regs” — a reference to “unauthorized disclosure” — but said he did not care “what they say I can or can’t share.”
In their own filing, Mr. Teixeira’s legal team, which is seeking his release on $20,000 bail, argued that he posed no risk of disclosing new intelligence, and pointed to previous cases where leak suspects were not detained indefinitely.
Mr. Teixeira’s father told the judge in Worcester last month that he would take responsibility for monitoring his son if he were released and that he would use security cameras around his house to alert him of any suspicious behavior while he was at work.
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Much of what is publicly known about Airman Teixeira’s actions comes from reports by news organizations about posts he made on two Discord servers, including one that had about 600 members from at least 25 countries, according to their online profiles, The New York Times has reported.
In its new filing, the government said Mr. Teixeira had leaked intelligence on at least one more Discord server with at least 150 users, “some of whom represented that they lived in foreign countries.”
Airman Teixeira “ignored his oath and published sensitive, top-secret documents for his own pleasure,” prosecutors wrote in arguing for his detention. “The court should have no confidence that the promises he might make in this proceeding would mean any more to him than the many promises the defendant has already broken.”
The government had previously argued that releasing Airman Teixeira would pose a danger to his community, citing a history of violent remarks and racial threats, including comments about making a Molotov cocktail that got him suspended from high school several years ago.
A Times investigation revealed that Airman Teixeira was fixated on weapons, mass shootings and shadowy conspiracy theories. Even as he relished the respectability and access to intelligence he gained through his military service and top-secret clearance, he seethed with contempt about the government, accusing the United States of a host of secret, nefarious activities: making biological and chemical weapons in Ukrainian labs, creating the Islamic State, even orchestrating mass shootings.
“The FBI and other 3 letter agencies contact these unhinged mentally ill kids and convince them to do mass shootings,” Airman Teixeira wrote in an online chat group, sharing a debunked conspiracy theory after a gunman killed three people at a mall in Indiana last summer. The gunman, he claimed, was one of many mass shooters groomed by the government as part of a secret plot “to make people vote for” gun control.
www.nytimes.com
On two occasions in September and October 2022, Airman Teixeira’s superiors in the Massachusetts Air National Guard admonished him after reports that he had taken “concerning actions” while handling classified information. Those included stuffing a note into his pocket after reviewing secret information inside his unit, according to a court filing ahead of a hearing before a federal magistrate judge in Worcester, Mass., on Friday to determine whether he should be released on bail.
Airman Teixeira — who until March shared secrets with scores of online friends from around the world on Discord, a social media platform popular with gamers — “was instructed to no longer take notes in any form on classified intelligence information,” lawyers with the department’s national security division wrote in an 11-page memo arguing for his indefinite detention.
The airman’s superiors also ordered him to “cease and desist on any deep dives into classified intelligence information,” although it is not clear how, or if, they enforced that directive.
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
The new information was intended to drive home the government’s argument that Airman Teixeira’s relentless quest for intelligence to share with online friends — which he acknowledged to be improper — makes his release a danger to national security. But it also raised troubling new questions about whether the military missed opportunities to stop or limit one of the most damaging intelligence leaks in recent history.
The signs that something was amiss seem unmistakable in retrospect. In late January, a master sergeant who was working at the Air Force base on Cape Cod in Massachusetts observed Airman Teixeira inappropriately accessing reports on the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communication System, the Pentagon’s secure intranet system, the memo said.
“Teixeira had been previously been notified to focus on his own career duties and not to seek out intelligence products,” one of his superiors wrote in a memo on Feb. 4 that prosecutors included in their filing.
Image
The military gave Airman Teixeira a certificate for completing training intended to prevent the “unauthorized disclosure” of classified information in March, after superiors had caught him mishandling classified material.Credit...Justice Department
Not only was Airman Teixeira allowed to remain in his job — he seems to have retained his top-secret security clearance — but he was subsequently given the second of two certificates after completing training intended to prevent the “unauthorized disclosure” of classified information.
In their filing, prosecutors cited those trainings as evidence that Airman Teixeira, 21, knowingly violated the law despite being “well aware of his obligations” and could not be trusted if released.
Two of Airman Teixeira’s superiors at the 102nd Intelligence Wing on Cape Cod have been suspended pending completion of an internal investigation by the Air Force inspector general, according to a spokeswoman for the service, Ann Stefanek. Their access to classified information has been temporarily blocked, she added.
The government also introduced previously undisclosed Discord posts, including one from December 2022 in which he bragged about “breaking a ton of UD regs” — a reference to “unauthorized disclosure” — but said he did not care “what they say I can or can’t share.”
In their own filing, Mr. Teixeira’s legal team, which is seeking his release on $20,000 bail, argued that he posed no risk of disclosing new intelligence, and pointed to previous cases where leak suspects were not detained indefinitely.
Mr. Teixeira’s father told the judge in Worcester last month that he would take responsibility for monitoring his son if he were released and that he would use security cameras around his house to alert him of any suspicious behavior while he was at work.
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Much of what is publicly known about Airman Teixeira’s actions comes from reports by news organizations about posts he made on two Discord servers, including one that had about 600 members from at least 25 countries, according to their online profiles, The New York Times has reported.
In its new filing, the government said Mr. Teixeira had leaked intelligence on at least one more Discord server with at least 150 users, “some of whom represented that they lived in foreign countries.”
Airman Teixeira “ignored his oath and published sensitive, top-secret documents for his own pleasure,” prosecutors wrote in arguing for his detention. “The court should have no confidence that the promises he might make in this proceeding would mean any more to him than the many promises the defendant has already broken.”
The government had previously argued that releasing Airman Teixeira would pose a danger to his community, citing a history of violent remarks and racial threats, including comments about making a Molotov cocktail that got him suspended from high school several years ago.
A Times investigation revealed that Airman Teixeira was fixated on weapons, mass shootings and shadowy conspiracy theories. Even as he relished the respectability and access to intelligence he gained through his military service and top-secret clearance, he seethed with contempt about the government, accusing the United States of a host of secret, nefarious activities: making biological and chemical weapons in Ukrainian labs, creating the Islamic State, even orchestrating mass shootings.
“The FBI and other 3 letter agencies contact these unhinged mentally ill kids and convince them to do mass shootings,” Airman Teixeira wrote in an online chat group, sharing a debunked conspiracy theory after a gunman killed three people at a mall in Indiana last summer. The gunman, he claimed, was one of many mass shooters groomed by the government as part of a secret plot “to make people vote for” gun control.
Military Caught Airman Mishandling Secrets Before Arrest but Left Him in Job
A Justice Department filing urging that Airman Jack Teixeira be held without bail said his superiors had admonished him for taking notes and conducting deep-dive searches last fall.
Bill upping regent oversight, capping tuition, curtailing DEI could cost millions
- By cigaretteman
- Off Topic
- 0 Replies
Should the state adopt into law a bill that has passed the Iowa House to restructure the Board of Regents and its powers while capping tuition and diversity programming, Iowa’s public campuses face a multimillion dollar hit.
New positions, new curricula and a review of how the public campuses can cut expenses could cost upward of $3.6 million, according a report from the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency on House File 2558. The bill Thursday cleared the House, 56-39, with only Republicans in support and six Republican lawmakers joining the Democrats in opposition.
That total doesn’t include unknown costs for a new work-study program, a new baccalaureate program, expanded services, and a tuition cap and freeze the bill would impose. “But the freeze is expected to have a negative fiscal impact on the universities’ revenues,” according to the agency’s fiscal note.
The agency reported tuition and fee collection across Iowa’s three public universities this academic year was $298.3 million. Under the bill’s proposed restrictions, according to the agency, that total would have been $280.6 million — nearly $18 million less, or a 6 percent reduction.
“This clearly is a political bill,” House Minority Leader Jennifer Konfrst, D-Windsor Heights, said Thursday in urging her colleagues to vote against it. “It clearly is a bill that creates more inefficiencies, increased costs, reduces services and puts the accreditation of our regents institutions at risk.”
The version that cleared the House, becoming eligible for consideration in the Senate, looks somewhat different and more specific than the original proposal.
This bill — as originally proposed — would increase the number of Board of Regent members from nine voting members to 11 total members, including two non-voting members appointed from the Legislature.
While the nine voting regents still would be appointed by the governor and confirmed by a two-thirds Senate vote, the legislative members would be appointed by the majority leader in the Senate and the speaker of the House.
Rep. Taylor Collins, R-Mediapolis
“Increased oversight,” Rep. Taylor Collins, R-Mediapolis, said when Rep. Bob Kressig, D-Cedar Falls, asked him to explain the need for lawmakers on the board.
The revised bill would shrink the length of terms of voting regents from six years to four and hold non-voting members to two-year stints. The revision also changes the way the board chooses its leadership. Instead of allowing regents to elect a president — like they did earlier this week, choosing Sherry Bates by unanimous vote — the bill would require the board to nominate a president who must then receive Senate confirmation.
Addressing how the board hires university presidents — which it touts among its most important tasks — the bill could incorporate legislative say there, too.
It would require the board to hire an applicant recommended by a “presidential selection committee” made up of “only members of the board.” The bill doesn’t specify the committee include only voting regents — meaning legislative non-voting members could serve.
And where the universities now unveil finalists for president, typically bringing them to campus for public forums, the bill would keep confidential “the identity of a candidate for president of an institute of higher learning being considered by the presidential selection committee” unless committee members agree in writing to disclose a candidate’s identity.
Where the first version of the bill capped undergraduate tuition increases at 3 percent, the revised version maintains that cap for incoming students but also freezes tuition and fees for resident undergraduate students for four years.
For resident undergrads starting on or after the 2025-2026 academic year, tuition and mandatory fees couldn’t increase for their first four consecutive years.
Rates could go up for students who take longer or who come with transfer credits allowing them to graduate in under four years — but don’t.
The board for the current academic year increased resident undergraduate tuition 3.5 percent, and it increased the average combined tuition-and-fee rate for that group of students 4.3 percent to $10,396.30 a year.
“Is it worth it to have a capped tuition rate when we are not going to be able to get what I’m going to the University of Northern Iowa for?” Konfrst asked, using UNI as an example and asking what lost revenue could mean for that institution.
“The problem with the University of Northern, I believe, is enrollment, so we really felt that this tuition cap would serve as an attraction,” Collins said. “More students would go to the University of Northern Iowa, specifically, because of the tuition guarantee."
The revised bill bars the universities from creating new administrative positions — defining administrator as vice president, assistant vice president or associate vice president — without regents’ approval.
And it would codify a list of diversity, equity and inclusion directives the regents imposed on itself after a study group assessed DEI across the campus on the heels of legislative criticism. It directs the universities to restructure DEI offices to eliminate functions not required by law or accreditation; ensure DEI services are available to everyone; and ensure no one is required to submit a DEI statement or be evaluated based on his or her participation in DEI programming.
It would bar the universities from compelling people to disclose their pronouns and require new policies advancing the diversity of “intellectual and philosophical perspectives in faculty and staff applicant pools.”
It also would codify the limited power of faculty senates and committees; allow a university president to initiate post-tenure reviews; and require each university to create an “American history and civics” three-credit course that students must complete before graduating.
“When it comes to DEI … whether they were created with good intentions or not, it has become clear that they now are ideological enforcement centers that suppress the pursuit of truth and, most importantly, merit,” Collins said. “This bill stops the pursuit of these distractions and ideological agendas, reorients the focus of our higher education system back to the pursuit of academic excellence — which should have been the point from the start — controls the ever-rising cost of higher education and gives this body increased oversight over the regent enterprise.”
www.thegazette.com
New positions, new curricula and a review of how the public campuses can cut expenses could cost upward of $3.6 million, according a report from the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency on House File 2558. The bill Thursday cleared the House, 56-39, with only Republicans in support and six Republican lawmakers joining the Democrats in opposition.
That total doesn’t include unknown costs for a new work-study program, a new baccalaureate program, expanded services, and a tuition cap and freeze the bill would impose. “But the freeze is expected to have a negative fiscal impact on the universities’ revenues,” according to the agency’s fiscal note.
The agency reported tuition and fee collection across Iowa’s three public universities this academic year was $298.3 million. Under the bill’s proposed restrictions, according to the agency, that total would have been $280.6 million — nearly $18 million less, or a 6 percent reduction.
“This clearly is a political bill,” House Minority Leader Jennifer Konfrst, D-Windsor Heights, said Thursday in urging her colleagues to vote against it. “It clearly is a bill that creates more inefficiencies, increased costs, reduces services and puts the accreditation of our regents institutions at risk.”
The version that cleared the House, becoming eligible for consideration in the Senate, looks somewhat different and more specific than the original proposal.
Regents structure
This bill — as originally proposed — would increase the number of Board of Regent members from nine voting members to 11 total members, including two non-voting members appointed from the Legislature.
While the nine voting regents still would be appointed by the governor and confirmed by a two-thirds Senate vote, the legislative members would be appointed by the majority leader in the Senate and the speaker of the House.
Rep. Taylor Collins, R-Mediapolis
“Increased oversight,” Rep. Taylor Collins, R-Mediapolis, said when Rep. Bob Kressig, D-Cedar Falls, asked him to explain the need for lawmakers on the board.
The revised bill would shrink the length of terms of voting regents from six years to four and hold non-voting members to two-year stints. The revision also changes the way the board chooses its leadership. Instead of allowing regents to elect a president — like they did earlier this week, choosing Sherry Bates by unanimous vote — the bill would require the board to nominate a president who must then receive Senate confirmation.
Addressing how the board hires university presidents — which it touts among its most important tasks — the bill could incorporate legislative say there, too.
It would require the board to hire an applicant recommended by a “presidential selection committee” made up of “only members of the board.” The bill doesn’t specify the committee include only voting regents — meaning legislative non-voting members could serve.
And where the universities now unveil finalists for president, typically bringing them to campus for public forums, the bill would keep confidential “the identity of a candidate for president of an institute of higher learning being considered by the presidential selection committee” unless committee members agree in writing to disclose a candidate’s identity.
Tuition freeze
Where the first version of the bill capped undergraduate tuition increases at 3 percent, the revised version maintains that cap for incoming students but also freezes tuition and fees for resident undergraduate students for four years.
For resident undergrads starting on or after the 2025-2026 academic year, tuition and mandatory fees couldn’t increase for their first four consecutive years.
Rates could go up for students who take longer or who come with transfer credits allowing them to graduate in under four years — but don’t.
The board for the current academic year increased resident undergraduate tuition 3.5 percent, and it increased the average combined tuition-and-fee rate for that group of students 4.3 percent to $10,396.30 a year.
“Is it worth it to have a capped tuition rate when we are not going to be able to get what I’m going to the University of Northern Iowa for?” Konfrst asked, using UNI as an example and asking what lost revenue could mean for that institution.
“The problem with the University of Northern, I believe, is enrollment, so we really felt that this tuition cap would serve as an attraction,” Collins said. “More students would go to the University of Northern Iowa, specifically, because of the tuition guarantee."
DEI, administrative restrictions
The revised bill bars the universities from creating new administrative positions — defining administrator as vice president, assistant vice president or associate vice president — without regents’ approval.
And it would codify a list of diversity, equity and inclusion directives the regents imposed on itself after a study group assessed DEI across the campus on the heels of legislative criticism. It directs the universities to restructure DEI offices to eliminate functions not required by law or accreditation; ensure DEI services are available to everyone; and ensure no one is required to submit a DEI statement or be evaluated based on his or her participation in DEI programming.
It would bar the universities from compelling people to disclose their pronouns and require new policies advancing the diversity of “intellectual and philosophical perspectives in faculty and staff applicant pools.”
It also would codify the limited power of faculty senates and committees; allow a university president to initiate post-tenure reviews; and require each university to create an “American history and civics” three-credit course that students must complete before graduating.
“When it comes to DEI … whether they were created with good intentions or not, it has become clear that they now are ideological enforcement centers that suppress the pursuit of truth and, most importantly, merit,” Collins said. “This bill stops the pursuit of these distractions and ideological agendas, reorients the focus of our higher education system back to the pursuit of academic excellence — which should have been the point from the start — controls the ever-rising cost of higher education and gives this body increased oversight over the regent enterprise.”
Bill upping regent oversight, capping tuition, curtailing DEI could cost millions
Should the state adopt into law a bill that passed the Iowa House this week aiming to restructure the Board of Regents and its powers while also capping tuition costs and diversity programming, Iowa’s public universities could take a financial hit in the millions.
www.thegazette.com
Gotta love these "legitimate" job offers. Oh so close.
- Off Topic
- 9 Replies
I'd like to think ChatGPT would do a better job, though. I do love they recognize I have experience AS a clearance, though. 
Hello _________,
I received a copy of your resume recently and I love your experience as Cyber security clearance. We would enjoy discussing with you an opportunity that we have which is the Information Security Manager and an active TS/SCI clearance is a must, it is on-site and the location is in Arlington, VA. When is a good time for us to schedule you to speak to our Executive Recruiter on the phone together?
As you can see in the attached, EOR is a Unique Organization that is intent on creating a better world for us all. Our team here at EOR pays attention to building lifelong relationships that empower us all to build better dreams together. EOR expects that when people are doing what they love that we all win, all of the time.
I pray that this email, our future discussions, and the associated opportunities resonate with you, please reach out to me at your earliest available opportunity.
Hello _________,
I received a copy of your resume recently and I love your experience as Cyber security clearance. We would enjoy discussing with you an opportunity that we have which is the Information Security Manager and an active TS/SCI clearance is a must, it is on-site and the location is in Arlington, VA. When is a good time for us to schedule you to speak to our Executive Recruiter on the phone together?
As you can see in the attached, EOR is a Unique Organization that is intent on creating a better world for us all. Our team here at EOR pays attention to building lifelong relationships that empower us all to build better dreams together. EOR expects that when people are doing what they love that we all win, all of the time.
I pray that this email, our future discussions, and the associated opportunities resonate with you, please reach out to me at your earliest available opportunity.
