Next steps for men's prison delayed
Venhuizen's letter says extra time is needed to come up with a proposal with enough detail. Project Prison Reset is looking at how and where to recommend construction of a new prison facility or facilities in the state.
USD still weighing decisions with NCAA settlement
Greg Jamison is on that task force, and he says they still aim to have a proposal completed in July. He says a delay will not only benefit them, but the entire legislature.
'We're knee deep in all the details, but the other legislators are not,' Jamison said. 'And so, the concept of asking them to approve something that we know inside and out, and they've only maybe had a couple of weeks to digest that seems like a challenge.'
The group's next meeting is scheduled for July 8th, and a special legislative session was originally set for July 22nd.
Governor Larry Rhoden says in a statement, 'I will accept the task force's request and will consult with legislative leadership on a rescheduled date for the special session. I'm eager to see what the task force can accomplish in their next meeting.'
'It makes a lot of sense for him to do that,' Jamison said. 'As a former legislator, he understands the complexities of this decision and the enormity of building this new prison.'
Attorney General Marty Jackley, who is also on the task force, supports an extended timeline.
'I believe this project can get done for that $525 to $625 million, 1,500 to 1,700 beds. You know, whatever the legislature needs to get that done. I think it makes sense to give them that time,' Jackley said.
As for how long the delay might be, Jamison isn't sure. In the meantime, the delay can allow lawmakers to voice their concerns, and it also leaves the task force adequate time to adjust their proposal.
'So if we're getting feedback from the legislative body and they want changes to it or they won't pass it, well then we need to make changes because we need to pass it,' Jamison said. 'We've got to do something.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
4 hours ago
- Business Insider
Trump Warns ‘There Will Be Severe Consequences' If his Alaska Meeting with Putin Goes Wrong: How Will Stocks & Crypto React?
Donald Trump just made a shocking statement on the White House's official YouTube page that 'there will be severe consequences' if his meeting with Vladimir Putin goes wrong. The meeting is scheduled for August 15, 2025, at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, where the two leaders will finally meet face to face. This warning has injected tension into the markets, with investors on edge about how political fallout could ripple into economics. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. The White House has tried to keep expectations low. The representatives called the summit a 'listening exercise.' But the tone of Trump's remarks suggests that a single misstep could trigger a broad market reaction. Investors Must Note that Stocks Are Now Poised for Volatility Stocks tend to pull back when geopolitical risks rise. If this meeting falters, defensive sectors like gold (CM:XAUUSD), utilities, and defense contractors could see buying interest. On the other hand, indices such as the S&P 500 (SPX), Nasdaq Composite, and Dow Jones Industrial Average may slide as investors pull back from growth shares tied to global stability. Even a minor diplomatic rift can have outsized effects on sentiment. With such high stakes, volatility could spike in the short term, even if markets stabilize later. Crypto Markets May Be Caught in the Crossfire Cryptocurrencies are typically viewed as high-risk assets that climb in confidence and fall with it. If global tensions escalate, we may see sharp crypto sell-offs. Those looking for stability may move toward safer tokens or stablecoins. Bitcoin (BTC-USD) has already dropped more than 4% in the past 24 hours. Ethereum (ETH-USD) has fallen almost 5% in the same period, which may be partly due to traders taking profits after its recent rally, but the added layer of geopolitical risk has amplified the decline. At the same time, some see crypto as a hedge. If investors believe central banks or governments may react unpredictably, digital assets could draw interest as an alternative store of value. Ultimately, crypto flows will depend on how the meeting unfolds. Trump's Alaska summit illustrates how geopolitical moves now have instant economic repercussions. A strong outcome could spark buying across asset classes. A misdirected approach could reset global risk appetite overnight. Investors can also monitor how Trump's statements might move the market using TipRanks' Trump News & Truth Social Market Impact dashboard. The tool tracks his latest Truth Social (DJT) posts, gives them a sentiment score, and shows how they could influence stocks and sectors. This can be useful ahead of high-stakes events like his meeting with Putin, as it allows traders to spot potential shifts in sentiment and position early.
The Hill
13 hours ago
- The Hill
The SCORE Act: A gift to the NCAA that betrays college athletes
After decades of watching coaches sign multimillion dollar contracts and universities rake in billions from television deals, college athletes are finally getting their prize money. Star University of Texas quarterback and Heisman favorite Arch Manning has inked contracts worth $6.5 million, while Duke basketball star Connor Flagg and Louisiana State University gymnast Livvy Dunne have commanded deals totaling more than $4 million. Even little-known players are earning an average of $40,000 annually — not riches, but much better than the previous status quo, which was nothing at all. But just as these young athletes are tasting financial freedom, Congress is preparing to take it away. Last month, the SCORE Act, a bill that would give the National Collegiate Athletic Association nearly unprecedented immunity from labor and antitrust laws, is making its way through the House of Representatives at lightning speed. The SCORE Act, the result of an NCAA lobbying campaign that cost more than $15 million, would overturn the Supreme Court's unanimous 2021 ruling that the NCAA and its member schools were running an illegal wage-fixing cartel, that amateurism was a myth they couldn't rely on anymore, and that they did not have antitrust immunity. As Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote at the time, scathingly, 'Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate. And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law.' But if NCAA backers have their way, that's just what will happen. The NCAA will be above the law and free to exploit athletes again. The SCORE Act accomplishes much of this through stealth. It says the NCAA cannot restrict name, image and likeness deals, which are student athletes' biggest earnings opportunities. But it also completely undermines them by prohibiting endorsement contracts unless they compensate college athletes at rates that are comparable 'to individuals … who are not student athletes.' Hello? Are we comparing star college quarterbacks to regular college students? This standard is nonsensical. Nobody cares about a random college student's endorsement, but they do care about Arch Manning's and Cooper Flagg's. This framework alone could crush college athletes' compensation. The bill also builds a surveillance state for suppression of athlete earnings. One of its more troubling provisions allows schools to ' collect and publicly share aggregated and anonymized data related to name, image, and likeness agreements.' This creates the perfect environment to develop algorithms to artificially suppress athlete earnings. This isn't just techno-paranoia. The newly created College Sports Commission — tasked with policing name, image and likeness deals for compliance with the NCAA's own new 'fair market value' rules — is already doing this. It hired accounting firm Deloitte to build an algorithm that evaluates such deals, and it rejected 70 percent of athletes' existing contracts with collectives. Because the SCORE Act's antitrust exemption is so broad, the NCAA (and advertisers that want to set rates) could probably call this 'compliance' and use the software with impunity. The bill also erases many of college athletes' legal victories. It prohibits schools from treating athletes as employees, contradicting a recent federal court of appeals decision whose dim view of the NCAA's amateurism mirrored the Supreme Court's. In a blistering opinion published last year, the Third Circuit skewered the NCAA for favorably comparing college athletes to prisoners in its legal brief. The SCORE Act would reverse this landmark decision. For student athletes, this would amount to snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. The SCORE Act was, most damningly, written without meaningful input from the people it affects most — the college athletes. Sure, it pays lip service to the need for better health care and education support, but those provisions are toothless. It ignores other problems athletes have been begging the NCAA and Congress to fix for years, like dangerous practice conditions and exhausting travel schedules created by money-hungry conferences used to treating the athletes under their control as unpaid commodities. In professional sports, athletes can unionize and negotiate wages, roster limits, free agency, health care and safety requirements. That's why the NFL Players' Association — which represents about 17,000 football players — has a collective bargaining agreement that is nearly 500 pages long. If the SCORE Act becomes law, more than 500,000 athletes will be governed by 30 pages of rules written by organizations and institutions that took advantage of them for decades. This is the opposite of a level playing field. The NCAA and its supporters call college sports the 'Wild West' and claim that government intervention, whether through executive order or the SCORE ACT, would create transparency and stability. But they are running a trick play that will hurt athletes while making coaches like Nick Saban richer. The claimed chaos is of the NCAA's own making. They refuse to give athletes collective bargaining rights, which would solve nearly every antitrust problem the NCAA is facing. And they continue to prohibit athletes in less lucrative sports like tennis from collecting tournament prize money. President Trump and Congress should not reward this behavior by giving the NCAA sweeping immunity from our antitrust laws. They should instead work toward a system that treats college athletes as the valuable contributors they are and end the era of college athlete exploitation once and for all.
Entrepreneur
4 days ago
- Entrepreneur
Trump's 50% Tariff on Indian Exports Threatens USD 87 Billion Trade, Experts Warn of Short-term Pain but Long-term Resilience
Nevertheless, there is still a possibility that the tariff tensions could be resolved. India has extended an invitation for talks and welcomed an understanding between the US and Russia for a leaders' meeting in Alaska on 15 August Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. You're reading Entrepreneur India, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. US President Donald Trump's decision to double tariffs on Indian goods has sparked a fresh wave of trade tensions between Washington and New Delhi, with experts warning of immediate disruption but also opportunities for long-term diversification. The escalation began on 30th July 2025, when Trump announced a 25 per cent tariff, accompanied by a provocative tweet: "I don't care what happens between India and Russia. They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care." The remark drew sharp reactions in India and abroad. That initial tariff took effect on 7th August and was already viewed as a significant blow to Indian exporters. But on 6th August, Trump added another 25 per cent levy, raising the total tariff to 50 per cent, the highest rate the US has imposed on any trading partner. The additional 25 per cent is scheduled to take effect on 27 August, leaving a narrow three-week window for talks. The Trigger The move follows difficult trade negotiations and longstanding US criticism of India's high tariffs and non-monetary trade barriers. Washington has also been angered by India's continued purchase of discounted Russian oil, despite Western sanctions and efforts to isolate Moscow over its war in Ukraine. Citing "national security" concerns, the US imposed the measure as a punitive step. With USD 87 billion worth of Indian exports to the US now at risk, the stakes are high. Experts from across sectors weigh in on the long-term impact Aloke Nandi, President, Finrex Forex Advisory Services said, "Over the last few months, horror stories about the impact of tariff hikes by the US have been repeatedly splashed over the media. None of these really looked at the underlying data. Even with a pessimistic view, exports to the US might drop by USD 21 billion, but this will likely be partly offset by higher exports to other nations and reduced imports linked to these goods. A current account deficit (CAD) rising to 1–1.5 per cent is not life-threatening. Unless the US imposes extreme measures like full trade sanctions, India will withstand these tariffs." Sarvadnya Kulkarni, CEO, General Instruments Consortium, acknowledged the immediate blow but noted the potential silver lining, "In the short term, raising tariffs to 50 per cent will swiftly bite, especially for MSMEs. About USD 87 billion in US-bound exports could be affected. In the long run, though, this may force India to diversify markets, bolster value-added manufacturing, and enhance export competitiveness." In fact, the government is already looking to direct Indian exports towards alternative destinations. Recently, Union Minister for Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Rajiv Ranjan Singh, noted that other markets are available for India's seafood exports. "The EU, Japan, South Korea, UK, Russia, Australia, West Asia, South East Asia, and many other countries are open for export of Indian seafood." Meanwhile, Smita Singh, Partner, S&A Law Offices, stressed the disadvantage India now faces. "With India now facing a 50 per cent tariff compared to Vietnam, Japan, and Bangladesh at 15–20 per cent, our exports could be costlier by 35 per cent. Sectors like gems, jewellery, textiles, footwear, apparel, and chemicals, which make up 55 per cent of exports to the US, will be most impacted. The government may need to offer targeted relief if negotiations fail." On the other hand, Kunal Gupta, Co-founder & CEO of EMotorad expressed, "We had projected INR 150 Cr in e-bike exports this year, with over INR 100 Cr destined for the US. The sudden hike has disrupted plans. But India has always thrived on adversity, we'll recalibrate, find new markets, and back our country's vision of self-reliance." In electronics and semiconductors, Sanjeev Kumar, CEO, Logic Fruit Technologies, warned of supply chain risks. "Tariffs of up to 100 per cent on Indian semiconductors and electronics risk erasing supply chain advantages and triggering production migration. Luxury exports like jewellery may remain resilient, but cost-sensitive segments could see significant damage. Policy agility in the coming weeks will define whether this is a setback or a catalyst for strategic course correction." Pawan Gupta, Co-Founder of Fashinza, believes apparel exports face an uphill battle. "At 50 per cent tariffs, exports become unviable. The good news is India's diverse, high-value-added products are in demand in the UK and EU. But apparel manufacturing, with its high labour input and low wages, is not viable in developed markets, this is why tariffs in this sector make little sense." For the medtech sector, Neeraj Katare, Founder of Tracky, sees both risks and opportunities. "The increase in tariffs is a double-edged sword for health tech. It raises import costs for essential components, but it also forces us to localise. With the right infrastructure and incentives, India can become a global health tech manufacturing hub." Himanshu Kohli, Co-founder, Client Associates, placed the issue in a broader economic context. "India's economy is largely domestic-oriented. Merchandise exports to the US account for only 2.2 per cent of GDP. A higher terminal tariff could trim GDP growth by 40–100 bps, but the economy remains relatively insulated compared to export-heavy Asian peers." Looking Ahead The US and India maintain a strong trade relationship, with bilateral trade reaching approximately USD 212 billion in 2024. That year, the US imported around USD 87.3 billion worth of goods from India, giving India roughly an 18 per cent share in total US goods imports. The US goods trade deficit with India stood at about USD 45.8 billion. India's top three exports to the US in 2024 were pharmaceuticals (USD 7.5–8.1 billion), telecom instruments (around USD 10 billion), and precious stones, gems, and jewellery (USD 5.3–10 billion). With the new US tariffs of up to 50 per cent, an estimated 55 per cent of this export value including textiles, gems and jewellery, and engineering goods is directly at risk. Nevertheless, there is still a possibility that the tariff tensions could be resolved. India has extended an invitation for talks and welcomed an understanding between the US and Russia for a leaders' meeting in Alaska on 15 August. New Delhi endorsed the summit, noting it could help end the Ukraine conflict and open prospects for peace, potentially easing the geopolitical tensions underpinning the tariffs. Though, many experts believe the disruption could serve as a catalyst for India to expand into new geographies, strengthen domestic manufacturing, and ultimately emerge more resilient in the global trade arena.
