Latest news with #Clegg
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Proposed city budget sparks debate on use of PSVS money
A presentation over the city's proposed budget turned into a debate about the use of Measure N funds Wednesday, as Bakersfield City Council members alternately decried or defended how the city spends the tax dollars. Council members were presented with a proposed budget of $850.2 million for the 2025-26 fiscal year, a $46.4 million reduction from the previous year. City Manager Christian Clegg attributed the reduction to minimal or no growth in tax revenues amid a larger economic slowdown. The proposed budget includes a $5 million reduction in operations and hiring freezes for most vacant positions for the first quarter of the fiscal year. 'The city has taken a much closer look at discretionary operational expenses with many departments reducing those budget line items with the understanding that more challenging financial circumstances lie ahead,' Clegg wrote in his introduction to the proposed budget. But the city's budget was only balanced using a $12 million allocation from the city's Public Safety and Vital Services fund, a 1% sales tax narrowly approved by voters in 2017 as Measure N. That was never the intended purpose of the money, according to Ward 3 Councilman Ken Weir, who said voters approved the measure with the understanding that the funds would be put toward new expenditures with a focus on public safety. 'Voters approved PSVS on the condition that we would not spend money that has already been on our books; it would be allocated to new things,' Weir said. 'The public was told we won't use the money for the expenses in the original general fund.' Ward 6 Councilman Zack Bashirtash was similarly critical of how PSVS funds were being spent, particularly on services for the homeless. "I don't believe that homelessness has gotten better or stayed the same. In my opinion, it's getting worse," Bashirtash said, noting the substantial amount of money the city provides to homeless service organizations. "We're talking about giving millions of dollars to organizations that have already received tens of millions of dollars," Bashirtash said. Clegg and other council members defended use of the funds, arguing the city had been able to shelter hundreds more people a year and has moved more than 400 into permanent housing. Ward 2 Councilman Andrae Gonzales noted PSVS funding had allowed the city to hire roughly 80 police officers and make several other improvements across the city. "When we approached the voters with Measure N, it was to preserve and enhance vital services," Gonzales said. "We had experienced two decades worth of cut after cut, cutting core services to the bare bone." Ward 1 Councilman Eric Arias listed several projects in his district funded by PSVS money and pointed to programs created by the funding he said increased quality of life. "I can't talk enough about how great the park rangers have been for our community, keeping our parks safe," Arias said. Arias noted that the city had seen a 57% reduction in homicides and a 60% reduction in shootings, which officials attributed to the work of a city-funded intervention program. Still, Weir and Bashirtash maintained the city's PSVS money was being ill-spent. "We know what the solution is for criminals, but we're spending money on not the solution," Bashirtash said. "At what point in time are we going to stop feeding the problem and actually start feeding the solution so that taxpayers are getting what they're paying for taxes?" Weir said calling the budget balanced by using PSVS dollars was misleading. "This year we've used $12 million of money that we should not have used," Weir said. "Now, I'm not going to argue about who spent what or anything else. I'm telling you we did a disservice to the people of this community, and we owe them $12 million." The city's budget will be formally introduced at the council's next meeting June 11. The city's fiscal year starts July 1.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Rep. Pingree decries cuts to Planned Parenthood, Medicaid
May 28—Rep. Chellie Pingree on Wednesday slammed the House Republicans' budget bill for targeting Planned Parenthood's federal funding and for the bill's overall health cutbacks to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. "If this bill passes, you would be seeing a massive loss in access to health care," Pingree, D-1st District, said during a roundtable discussion she hosted at Planned Parenthood of Northern New England offices in Portland. Nicole Clegg, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England — which provides abortion care, reproductive health care and other primary care services — said the nonprofit would stand to lose about $5.2 million in federal funding if the current version of the bill is signed into law. That represents about half of the annual revenue for the nonprofit, which serves Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont. "Everything is on the table," Clegg said when asked if clinics and service lines could shut down. "That is a tragedy." Planned Parenthood operates clinics in Portland, Biddeford, Topsham and Sanford. Clegg said the bill is "about targeting states where abortion is legal and making it impossible to access." Federal funding does not pay for abortions, but Planned Parenthood receives federal dollars for its other health care services, including through Medicaid. Maine Family Planning, the state's other abortion provider, is not specifically targeted in the bill the way Planned Parenthood is, but it would be affected by the health care cutbacks in the bill. Besides Planned Parenthood clinics across the country being under threat, the House bill would also result in about 14 million Americans becoming uninsured, including a projected 38,000 people in Maine. The increase in the uninsured rate and other cutbacks to to health care will result in rural hospitals closing, a sicker population and insurance rates increasing, Pingree said. Republicans who voted in favor of the bill argue that it's rooting out "waste, fraud and abuse" in Medicaid, and that government is bloated and needs to be cut. "We're not doing any cutting of anything meaningful," President Donald Trump told reporters after the bill passed the House. The bill has yet to be taken up in the Senate, where Republicans hold a four-seat majority. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, has said she's against Medicaid cutbacks, but has also said she would be willing to consider "reasonable" work requirements. The House bill would result in people losing Medicaid coverage if they fail to meet work requirements or incorrectly filling out paperwork. Pingree said the work requirement provisions are effectively cutting Medicaid because the bureaucracy surrounding filling out the forms and meeting the paperwork requirements will result in people losing coverage. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that 13.7 million Americans will lose their health insurance if the current version of the bill passes. According to KFF, a health policy think tank, about 75% of current Medicaid recipients work or are students, with most of the remaining 25% not working because they are disabled or retired. The bill would also cut health care by reducing Affordable Care Act subsidies that make ACA insurance premiums less costly. While Collins and a few other Republican moderates, such as Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, may be pushing scale back Medicaid cutbacks, some conservatives in the Senate are saying the bill doesn't go far enough and are pushing for larger cuts. Meredith Ruxton McIntosh, 55, of Hallowell, who was part of the roundtable discussion, said the cuts to Planned Parenthood need to be reversed. McIntosh, a U.S. Air Force veteran, said when she was young she got counseling, primary car and other help from Planned Parenthood, and she was able to lead a productive life because of the help she received. "Without the medical care and counseling that I was able to access through Planned Parenthood I would have likely dropped out of high school, never joined the military, never attended college or trade school and most certainly would have indulged in addictive substances to the detriment of my life," she said. Copy the Story Link
Int'l Business Times
28-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Int'l Business Times
Former Meta Executive Declares Asking Artists for Permission to Train AI Would 'Kill' the Industry Almost Immediately
Meta's former president of global affairs has stated that having to ask artists for permission to use their content to train AI is "implausible" and would be detrimental to the industry. Nick Clegg, who worked with Meta for almost seven years, was asked about his opinions regarding copyright laws and artificial intelligence while speaking to members of parliament on Thursday. "I think the creative community wants to go a step further," Clegg said, according to The Times . "Quite a lot of voices say, 'You can only train on my content, [if you] first ask'. And I have to say that strikes me as somewhat implausible because these systems train on vast amounts of data." "I just don't know how you go around, asking everyone first. I just don't see how that would work," Clegg said. "And by the way if you did it in Britain and no one else did it, you would basically kill the AI industry in this country overnight." Clegg made these statements after discussion pertaining to a potential amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Bill. If passed, the amendment would mandate that technology companies disclose the copyrighted works they used to train their AI. Earlier this month, hundreds of creatives, including Paul McCartney, Dua Lipa, Ian McKellen, Elton John and more, signed an open letter supporting the amendment to the Data Bill and urging the government to ensure that AI companies credit the copyrighted work they use. "We will lose an immense growth opportunity if we give our work away at the behest of a handful of powerful overseas tech companies, and with it our future income, the UK's position as a creative powerhouse, and any hope that the technology of daily life will embody the values and laws of the United Kingdom," the letter read, according to The Guardian. "I think people should have clear, easy to use ways of saying, no, I don't. I want out of this. But I think expecting the industry, technologically or otherwise, to preemptively ask before they even start training — I just don't see. I'm afraid that just collides with the physics of the technology itself," said Clegg. Originally published on Latin Times Artificial intelligence AI
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Legendary Facebook Exec Scoffs, Says AI Could Never Be Profitable If Tech Companies Had to Ask for Artists' Consent to Ingest Their Work
Fresh on the heels from his exit from Meta, former Facebook executive Nick Clegg is defending artificial intelligence against copyright holders who want to hold the industry accountable. As the Times of London reports, Clegg insisted during an arts festival last weekend that it's "implausible" to ask tech companies to ask for consent from creators before using their work to train their AI models. During a speech at the Charleston Festival in East Sussex — which was, ironically enough, meant to promote his new book titled "How To Save The Internet" — Meta's former global affairs vice president initially said that it was "not unreasonable" that artists may want to "opt out of having their creativity, their products, what they've worked on indefinitely modeled." But he then went on to suggest that those same artists are getting greedy. "I think the creative community wants to go a step further," Clegg then charged. "Quite a lot of voices say 'you can only train on my content, [if you] first ask.' And I have to say that strikes me as somewhat implausible because these systems train on vast amounts of data." "I just don't know how you go around, asking everyone first," Clegg said during a speech to promote his new book, ironically titled "How to Save The Internet," that took place at this year's Charleston Festival in East Sussex, England. "I just don't see how that would work." The former deputy prime minister then added that if AI companies were required only in Britain to gain permission to use copyright holders' works, "you would basically kill the AI industry in this country overnight." Clegg's comments came amid a fiery debate in England about AI and copyright, spurred on by a recent Parliament vote on an amendment to the UK government's data bill, which would have required companies to tell copyright holders when their work was used had it not been struck down in the House of Commons last week. His stance also put him in opposition to Paul McCartney, Elton John, Dua Lipa, and hundreds of other artists who called on the British government to "protect copyright in the age of AI," as Sir Elton put it in an Instagram post. Unfortunately, it seems that Parliament's lower house agreed with Clegg's sentiments and not the artists' — but history will show who was on which side of the AI wars. More on AI and copyright: Meta Says It's Okay to Feed Copyrighted Books Into Its AI Model Because They Have No "Economic Value"
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
A former top Meta exec says AI is doomed if artists want tech firms to ask for permission to train models on their work
Clegg was Meta's president of global affairs. He left the company in January. Clegg said it would be tough for companies to ask artists before training models on their work. He said this would "basically kill the AI industry" in the UK. Former Meta executive Nick Clegg says the UK's AI industry will be killed if tech companies must ask artists for permission to use their work when training models. Clegg was promoting his upcoming book "How to Save the Internet" at the Charleston Festival on Thursday when he was asked about artists' demands for tighter AI copyright laws. Clegg said it would be reasonable to let artists "opt out of having their creativity, their products, what they've worked on indefinitely modeled." However, he said it would be "somewhat implausible" if they expect companies to get permission before training models. Clegg said this is because "these systems train on vast amounts of data." "I just don't know how you go around, asking everyone first. I just don't see how that would work. And by the way, if you did it in Britain and no one else did it, you would basically kill the AI industry in this country overnight," Clegg continued. Clegg was the UK's deputy prime minister from 2010 to 2015. He joined Meta in 2018 as its vice president for global affairs and communications and was promoted to president of global affairs in 2022. He announced his departure from Meta in January. Clegg and representatives for Meta did not respond to requests for comment from Business Insider. In October, the UK government introduced the Data (Use and Access) Bill. The bill will allow companies to train AI on creative works such as books and music, unless the copyright holder opts out. Earlier this month, the House of Lords voted to amend the bill to require tech companies to disclose and seek consent before using copyrighted material to train their models. The House of Commons rejected the change. Singer Elton John said in an interview with the BBC on May 18 that he was "very angry" with the bill, as it would allow tech companies to engage in "theft, thievery on a high scale." He said he was prepared to take the government to court and "fight it all the way." "It's criminal, in that I feel incredibly betrayed," John said. Read the original article on Business Insider
