Jackson County Executive Frank White vetoes special vote for charter assessor
In a letter to Jackson County legislators, White called the special election 'unnecessary and premature' as there are already scheduled elections for which the ballot could be placed on well before its effects would be implemented.
Reps. Cleaver, Davids announce federal funding for World Cup security
The election would have taken place in November of 2025, with its decision not being implemented until 2028. Instead, White says that the election could be placed on a regular ballot, which would save millions for Jackson County taxpayers.
'This would be the fourth unbudgeted election proposed by this Legislature in less than two years,' he said. 'Not one has passed. Not one has been fiscally responsible. And this one is no different. I support giving voters a say, but we can and should do it in 2026, when it won't cost Jackson County taxpayers a single extra dollar.'
That's not the only problem, according to White, either. He says that, aside from the cost of the special election, the proposed ballot also misrepresents the responsibilities of the Charter Assessor.
'Abolished': State Department is laying off over 1,300 employees under Trump administration plan
'The ordinance says the elected assessor would be responsible for taxation in the county. That's just wrong,' White said in his release.
'Under Missouri law, taxation is the job of the collector. The assessor is responsible for valuing property accurately and fairly. If we can't get that distinction right in our founding document, we shouldn't be rushing this to the voters.'
However, White did include that he would be in favor of a revised ballot, just not one outside of an August 2026 or November 2026 election.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
What Does the New US Budget Law Mean for Physicians?
Physicians are still assessing the impact of the budget and policy package passed by Congressional Republicans and recently signed into law by President Donald Trump. The legislation makes the largest cuts to Medicaid in its history, eliminating about $1 trillion over 10 years and establishing a work requirement that could force many recipients off the program over bureaucratic hurdles. Nearly 12 million Americans are expected to lose health coverage over 10 years as a result, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Millions more will be affected by the law's ending of certain health insurance subsidies created under the Affordable Care Act. Here's what physicians should know: Medicare Pay Bump In the near term, physicians will see a 1-year 2026 temporary increase of 2.5% in a rate used in determining Medicare's payments to clinicians. Despite that bit of good news, the budget package will make it more challenging to practice medicine, Bobby Mukkamala, MD, president of the American Medical Association (AMA), told Medscape Medical News in an interview. Clinicians, hospitals, and medical groups are likely to have to provide more uncompensated care to the uninsured. 'When it comes to healthcare in this country and the training for healthcare in this country, I don't see anything to be happy about,' Mukkamala said. Medicaid patients made up about 17% of the average physician's caseload in 2016, according to the AMA's Physician Practice Benchmark Survey. But pediatricians, with the largest average Medicaid patient share of any specialty at nearly 35%, could see a bigger reimbursement hit, depending on whether they are on salary or not. Psychiatrists and emergency medicine physicians also have above average Medicaid patient shares (26% and 22%, respectively). Internists reported the lowest Medicaid patient share at just under 12%. New Med Student Loan Limits The new law also limits federal loans for professional programs including medical and dental school to $50,000 a year with a total cap of $200,000. The average medical school debt tops $234,000, according to an Education Data Initiative report, but tuition and living expenses for private schools can top $87,000 per year. The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) said in a statement that the budget package's elimination of the Grad PLUS loan program 'will affect many prospective medical and other health profession's students and worsen the nation's persistent doctor shortage.' AAMC leaders said they were 'dismayed' by 'massive cuts to Medicaid and changes to state health insurance marketplace exchanges that will lead to tens of millions of people losing much-needed healthcare coverage.' Anders Gilberg, senior vice president for government affairs for the Medical Group Management Association, said the newly cleared bill 'paints a grim future for America's physician practices by stripping healthcare coverage from millions of Americans.' People who lose healthcare coverage 'will still find care in our US healthcare system,' Gilberg said, but 'medical groups and hospitals will be left picking up the enormous tab.' 'With these historic Medicaid cuts, dedicated physicians and medical practices committed to providing care in our country's most underserved areas will face growing financial burdens as they are forced to offer more and more uncompensated care,' he said. A Boost for Direct Primary Care The budget package also for the first time allows patients to use their Health Savings Accounts to pay for monthly fees charged by direct primary care providers, which may include office visits but not major procedures, lab tests, or prescription drugs. Monthly fees of up to $150 ($300 per couple) will be allowed and will be tied to inflation going forward. The provision is seen as a win for the growing direct primary care movement. Uninsured Concerns It's not yet clear how many adults will eventually lose health coverage due to the implementation of the new law. The Congressional Budget Office had estimated that 11.8 million fewer people would have had health insurance in 2034 if an earlier Senate version of the bill were adopted. Belinda R. Avalos, MD, president of the American Society of Hematology said in a statement that nearly half of people living with sickle cell disease are covered under Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program. 'It is profoundly disappointing that the Senate and House have voted to adopt the devastating cuts to Medicaid outlined in this bill,' Avalos said. 'These cuts recklessly endanger the health of millions of Americans, including those living with complex, life-threatening blood disorders.' In a statement, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) said it also was 'disappointed that Congress has advanced legislation that could impact patients' access to Medicaid and limit providers' ability to care for vulnerable patients.' 'We encourage leaders in Washington to support measures that expand access to care and coverage for patients, rather than displacing the estimated 11.8 million Americans whose insurance could be at risk,' ACR said.
CNET
2 hours ago
- CNET
US Tariffs Could Be Triggering New Inflation Woes. Everything You Need to Know
The off-again, on-again nature of US tariffs in 2025 has many consumers anxious about the future. James Martin/CNET The One Big Beautiful Bill may have been signed into law, but the economic plan of the second Trump administration is still uncertain due to the confusion around tariffs. President Donald Trump unleashed chaos on April 2 ("Liberation Day") when he unveiled a laundry list of heavy tariffs for countries around the world. He then paused them for 90 days after the stock market dramatically tumbled. That 90-day pause was supposed to end this week, but the tariffs have been been extended again through Aug. 1. More recently, the administration hiked tariffs against Canada to 35% and threatened Brazil with a 50% rate, while the US Labor Department announced on Tuesday that consumer prices rose 2.7% in June, the highest spike since February. Amid the uncertainties and upheavals, Trump has barreled forward with his plans, including doubling the tariffs on steel and aluminum imports and announcing a new plan to increase the rate for China to 55%. He also hyped up a trade deal on July 2 that leaves Vietnam's import tax rate at a historically high 20%. The sweeping tariff initiative will likely impact your cost of living, which we know from our surveys is something you're worried about. That all came after Trump's push hit its biggest roadblock yet, when the US Court of International Trade ruled late last month that Trump had overstepped his authority when he imposed tariffs. That ruling was stayed, but the fight is likely to head to the Supreme Court. All the while, major US companies like Apple and Walmart have butted heads with the administration over the tariffs and their bluntness about how tariffs will make affording things harder for consumers. Should You Buy Now or Wait? Our Experts Weigh In on Tariffs Should You Buy Now or Wait? Our Experts Weigh In on Tariffs Click to unmute Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Skip Backward Skip Forward Next playlist item Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration 9:42 Loaded : 6.13% 0:00 Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 9:42 Share Fullscreen This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Text Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Caption Area Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Drop shadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Close Modal Dialog This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button. Close Modal Dialog This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button. Should You Buy Now or Wait? Our Experts Weigh In on Tariffs Amid all this noise, you might still be wondering: What exactly are tariffs, and what will they mean for me? The short answer: Expect to pay more for at least some goods and services. For the long answer, keep reading, and for more, check out CNET's price tracker for 11 popular and tariff-vulnerable products. What are tariffs? Put simply, a tariff is a tax on the cost of importing or exporting goods by a particular country. So, for example, a 60% tariff on Chinese imports would be a 60% tax on the price of importing, say, computer components from China. Trump has been fixated on imports as the centerpiece of his economic plans, often claiming that the money collected from taxes on imported goods would help finance other parts of his agenda. The US imports $3 trillion worth of goods from other countries annually. The president has also shown a fixation on trade deficits, claiming that the US having a trade deficit with any country means that country is ripping the US off. This is a flawed understanding of the matter, many economists have said, since deficits are often a simple case of resource realities: Wealthy nations like the US buy specific things from nations that have them, while those nations in turn may not be wealthy enough to buy much of anything from the US. While Trump deployed tariffs in his first term, notably against China, he ramped up his plans more significantly for the 2024 campaign, promising 60% tariffs against China and a universal 20% tariff on all imports into the US. "Tariffs are the greatest thing ever invented," Trump said at a campaign stop in Michigan last year. At one point, he called himself "Tariff Man" in a post on Truth Social. Who pays the cost of tariffs? Trump repeatedly claimed, before and immediately after returning to the White House, that the country of origin for an imported good pays the cost of the tariffs and that Americans would not see any price increases from them. However, as economists and fact-checkers stressed, this is not the case. The companies importing the tariffed goods -- American companies or organizations in this case -- pay the higher costs. To compensate, companies can raise their prices or absorb the additional costs themselves. So, who ends up paying the price for tariffs? In the end, usually you, the consumer. For instance, a universal tariff on goods from Canada would increase Canadian lumber prices, which would have the knock-on effect of making construction and home renovations more expensive for US consumers. While it is possible for a company to absorb the costs of tariffs without increasing prices, this is not at all likely, at least for now. Speaking with CNET, Ryan Reith, vice president of International Data Corporation's worldwide mobile device tracking programs, explained that price hikes from tariffs, especially on technology and hardware, are inevitable in the short term. He estimated that the full amount imposed on imports by Trump's tariffs would be passed on to consumers, which he called the "cost pass-through." Any potential efforts for companies to absorb the new costs themselves would come in the future, once they have a better understanding of the tariffs, if at all. Which Trump tariffs have gone into effect? Following Trump's "Liberation Day" announcements on April 2 and subsequent shifting by the president, the following tariffs are in effect: A 50% tariff on all steel and aluminum imports, doubled from 25% as of June 4. A 30% tariff on all Chinese imports until the new deal touted by Trump takes effect, after which it will purportedly go up to 55%. China being a major focus of Trump's trade agenda, it has faced a rate notably higher than other countries, peaking at 145% before trade talks commenced. 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and 35% on those from Canada. This applies only to goods from each country that are not covered under the 2018 USMCA trade agreement brokered during Trump's first term. The deal covers roughly half of all imports from Canada and about a third of those from Mexico, so the rest are subject to the new tariffs. Energy imports not covered by USMCA will be taxed at only 10%. A 25% tariff on all foreign-made cars and auto parts. A sweeping overall 10% tariff on all imported goods. For certain countries that Trump said were more responsible for the US trade deficit, Trump imposed what he called "reciprocal" tariffs that exceed the 10% level: 20% for the 27 nations that make up the European Union, 26% for India, 24% for Japan and so on. These were meant to take effect on April 9 but were delayed by 90 days due to historic stock market volatility, and then delayed again to Aug. 1. These rates are subject to change until that new effective date, and some have already been altered: the rate against Japan was upped to 25%, the same as the rate against South Korea; Trump has also threatened a 50% rate against Brazil. Trump's claim that these reciprocal tariffs are based on high tariffs imposed against the US by the targeted countries has drawn intense pushback from experts and economists, who have argued that some of these numbers are false or potentially inflated. For example, the above chart says a 39% tariff from the EU, despite its average tariff for US goods being around 3%. Some of the tariffs are against places that are not countries but tiny territories of other nations. The Heard and McDonald Islands, for example, are uninhabited. We'll dig into the confusion around these calculations below. Notably, that minimum 10% tariff will not be on top of those steel, aluminum and auto tariffs. Canada and Mexico were also spared from the 10% minimum additional tariff imposed on all countries the US trades with. On April 11, the administration said smartphones, laptops and other consumer electronics, along with flat panel displays, memory chips and semiconductors, were exempt from reciprocal tariffs. But it wasn't clear whether that would remain the case or whether such products might face different fees later. How were the Trump reciprocal tariffs calculated? The numbers released by the Trump administration for its barrage of "reciprocal" tariffs led to widespread confusion among experts. Trump's own claim that these new rates were derived by halving the tariffs already imposed against the US by certain countries was widely disputed, with critics noting that some of the numbers listed for certain countries were much higher than the actual rates and some countries had tariff rates listed despite not specifically having tariffs against the US at all. In a post to X that spread fast across social media, finance journalist James Surowiecki said that the new reciprocal rates appeared to have been reached by taking the trade deficit the US has with each country and dividing it by the amount the country exports to the US. This, he explained, consistently produced the reciprocal tariff percentages revealed by the White House across the board. "What extraordinary nonsense this is," Surowiecki wrote about the finding. The White House later attempted to debunk this idea, releasing what it claimed was the real formula, though it was quickly determined that this formula was arguably just a more complex version of the one Surowiecki deduced. What will the Trump tariffs do to prices? In short: Prices are almost certainly going up, if not now, then eventually. That is, if the products even make it to US shelves at all, as some tariffs will simply be too high for companies to bother dealing with. While the effects of a lot of tariffs might not be felt straight away, some potential real-world examples have already emerged. Microsoft has increased prices across the board for its Xbox gaming brand, with its flagship Xbox Series X console jumping 20% from $500 to $600. Kent International, one of the main suppliers of bicycles to Walmart, announced that it would be stopping imports from China, which account for 90% of its stock. Speaking about Trump's tariff plans just before they were announced, White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said that they would generate $6 trillion in revenue over the next decade. Given that tariffs are most often paid by consumers, CNN characterized this as potentially "the largest tax hike in US history." Estimates from the Yale Budget Lab, cited by Axios, predict that Trump's new tariffs will cause a 2.3% increase in inflation throughout 2025. This translates to about a $3,800 increase in expenses for the average American household. Reith, the IDC analyst, told CNET that Chinese-based tech companies, like PC makers Acer, Asus and Lenovo, have "100% exposure" to these import taxes, with products like phones and computers the most likely to take a hit. He also said that the companies best positioned to weather the tariff impacts are those that have moved some of their operations out of China to places like India, Thailand and Vietnam, singling out the likes of Apple, Dell and HP. Samsung, based in South Korea, is also likely to avoid the full force of Trump's tariffs. In an effort to minimize its tariff vulnerability, Apple has begun to move the production of goods for the US market from China to India. Will tariffs impact prices immediately? In the short term -- the first days or weeks after a tariff takes effect -- maybe not. There are still a lot of products in the US imported pre-tariffs and on store shelves, meaning the businesses don't need a price hike to recoup import taxes. Once new products need to be brought in from overseas, that's when you'll see prices start to climb because of tariffs or you'll see them become unavailable. That uncertainty has made consumers anxious. CNET's survey revealed that about 38% of shoppers feel pressured to make certain purchases before tariffs make them more expensive. About 10% say they have already made certain purchases in hopes of getting them in before the price hikes, while 27% said they have delayed purchases for products that cost more than $500. Generally, this worry is the most acute concerning smartphones, laptops and home appliances. Mark Cuban, the billionaire businessman and Trump critic, voiced concerns about when to buy certain things in a post on Bluesky just after Trump's "Liberation Day" announcements. In it, he suggested that consumers might want to stock up on certain items before tariff inflation hits. "It's not a bad idea to go to the local Walmart or big box retailer and buy lots of consumables now," Cuban wrote. "From toothpaste to soap, anything you can find storage space for, buy before they have to replenish inventory. Even if it's made in the USA, they will jack up the price and blame it on tariffs." CNET's Money team recommends that before you make any purchase, especially a high-ticket item, be sure that the expenditure fits within your budget and your spending plans. Buying something you can't afford now because it might be less affordable later can be burdensome, to say the least. What is the goal of the White House tariff plan? The typical goal behind tariffs is to discourage consumers and businesses from buying the tariffed, foreign-sourced goods and encourage them to buy domestically produced goods instead. When implemented in the right way, tariffs are generally seen as a useful way to protect domestic industries. One of the stated intentions for Trump's tariffs is along those lines: to restore American manufacturing and production. However, the White House also says it's negotiating with numerous countries looking for tariff exemptions, and some officials have also floated the idea that the tariffs will help finance Trump's tax cuts. Those things are often contradictory: If manufacturing moves to the US or if a bunch of countries are exempt from tariffs, then tariffs aren't actually being collected and can't be used to finance anything. This and many other points have led a lot of economists to allege that Trump's plans are misguided. As for returning -- or "reshoring" -- manufacturing in the US, tariffs are a better tool for protecting industries that already exist because importers can fall back on them right away. Building up the factories and plants needed for this in the US could take years, leaving Americans to suffer under higher prices in the interim. That problem is worsened by the fact that the materials needed to build those factories will also be tariffed, making the costs of "reshoring" production in the US too heavy for companies to stomach. These issues, and the general instability of American economic policies under Trump, are part of why experts warn that Trump's tariffs could have the opposite effect: keeping manufacturing out of the US and leaving consumers stuck with inflated prices. Any factories that do get built in the US because of tariffs also have a high chance of being automated, canceling out a lot of job creation potential. To give you one real-world example of this: When warning customers of future price hikes, toy maker Mattel also noted that it had no plans to move manufacturing to the US. Trump has reportedly been fixated on the notion that Apple's iPhone -- the most popular smartphone in the US market -- can be manufactured entirely in the US. This has been broadly dismissed by experts, for a lot of the same reasons mentioned above, but also because an American-made iPhone could cost upward of $3,500. One report from 404 Media dubbed the idea "a pure fantasy." The overall sophistication and breadth of China's manufacturing sector have also been cited, with CEO Tim Cook stating in 2017 that the US lacks the number of tooling engineers to make its products. For more, see how tariffs might raise the prices of Apple products and find some expert tips for saving money.
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
Chris Rufo lays out reforms to Trump administration on how to 'save' higher education
Chris Rufo, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, laid out a series of reforms in a letter on Monday that he believes will help "save" higher education in the country as well as taxpayers' hard-earned dollars. Rufo published his reforms in the Free Press, in which he calls for President Donald Trump to create a new contract with universities. In the new contract, universities should be part of each payment, loan, grant, eligibility, and accreditation. Failure to comply could mean the termination of all public assistance programs, Rufo suggested. The letter states universities must "advance truth over ideology, with rigorous standards of academic conduct, controls for academic fraud, and merit-based decision-making throughout the enterprise." Signed by over 40 people, including educators, religious leaders, academics and authors, the letter asks universities to stop taking part in social and political activism and "adhere to the principle of color-blind equality, by abolishing DEI bureaucracies, disbanding racially segregated programs, and terminating race-based discrimination in admissions, hiring, promotions, and contracting." It calls for a return to the concept of freedom of speech, the protection of civil discourse and "swift and significant penalties" for anyone who disrupts speakers, vandalizes property, occupies buildings, calls for violence, or prevents the university from carrying outits operations. The list of reforms also includes a request that universities are transparent about their operations and, at the end of each year, disclose the full data on race, admissions, and class rank, as well as employment and financial returns by major, campus attitudes on civil discourse, ideology, and free speech. The call to action directed at the Trump administration comes just over a month after the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust held a hearing on June 4 entitled, "The Elite Universities Cartel: A History of Anticompetitive Collusion Inflating the Cost of Higher Education." It also comes as the Manhattan Institute released a poll on Sunday that found that only 15% of registered voters say they have a lot of trust in private Ivy League colleges and universities. Among America's public colleges and universities, just one in five or 20% of registered voters say they have a "great deal" of trust in these institutions, according to the Manhattan Institute poll.
