Why Hotwire is AWESOME! A lesson on Turbo frames

(The Center Square) – The Trump administration is starting a new $25 million program that will pay Americans who discover and report instances of fraud up to $30,000 per qualifying tip.

The federal government has established similar financial incentive programs before, including an IRS whistleblower program strengthened in 2006 to reward individuals for reporting tax violations and a Securities and Exchange Commission program authorized in 2010 to reward tips about securities law violations. But a defining feature of the new program is that it is designed to reward whistleblowers “at a much earlier stage of prosecution” and does not “require the matter to result in large fines or forfeiture.”

“These early-stage rewards aim to encourage prompt disclosure of information by giving whistleblowers more certainty about the amount and timing of a possible reward payment, while still leaving whistleblowers eligible for potentially larger rewards should their tips ultimately lead to large financial penalties or forfeiture,” the program’s webpage reads.

While a report doesn’t have to result in substantial financial penalties or forfeitures to reward the whistleblower, it does have to result in criminal charges. To qualify, reports may also concern crimes involving health care benefit programs or benefits administered by the Departments of Agriculture, Labor, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Veterans Affairs, War or the Small Business Administration. 

The program particularly targets fraud involving hospice care, home health care, day care and special services.

YouTuber Nick Shirley, who investigated fraud in Minnesota, California and elsewhere, was recognized during Tuesday’s Oval Office announcement of the new initiative.

“We’re actually thrilled to be joined by Nick Shirley, who, as the president said, has done more than anybody that I've met recently as a citizen journalist to uncover the fraud. Nick is going to get a financial reward for doing so,” said Vice President JD Vance.

The program is the latest in a series of efforts by the Trump administration to root out fraud involving government programs, efforts that have intensified amid revelations of widespread fraud in Minnesota. Earlier this year, the administration established a new Justice Department division dedicated to fraud enforcement, launched a Treasury Department whistleblower initiative and created a government-wide anti-fraud task force chaired by Vance. It also announced an IRS task force targeting tax-related fraud, expanded federal health care fraud prosecution efforts and introduced new measures to combat Medicare and Medicaid fraud.

(The Center Square) — Federal agencies have spent $16 million since January 2025 to assess how office buildings are being used across the government, but a new report said it does not do enough.

The federal government spends approximately $7 billion annually on office spaces, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The government spent approximately $5 billion to lease office space and $2 billion a year to operate and maintain office buildings.

The Government Accountability Office analyzed the implementation of the 2025 Utilizing Space Efficiently and Improving Technologies Act, legislation set to monitor how federal agencies manage office space across the government. The General Services Administration, a federal agency that oversees government infrastructure, required agencies to analyze timecard entries, daily check-in surveys, badging and visual inspections to determine how often federal employees used offices.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture accounted for $9 million in costs associated with the program’s implementation due to badge scanner upgrades throughout the agency. However, not all agencies across the government used data in the same way due to discrepancies in reporting.

Demian Brady, vice president of research at the National Taxpayers Union Foundation, said costs associated with the program should be seen as an investment to lower taxpayer bills on future federal office properties.

“If we're spending this money to better track the comings and goings of federal employees, we should be able to put this data to good use and figure out where the federal government has office space that could be unloaded,” Brady told The Center Square.

The GAO found the Department of the Interior only reported on how many employees were assigned to a particular office, not whether they showed up for work. Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security did not report occupancy data for nearly 700 agency spaces under the USE IT Act due to limited badging technology.

“There was some inconsistency in terms of how agencies interpreted the guidance, what they counted as typical office space and what they didn’t,” David Merroni, director of physical infrastructure at the GAO, told The Center Square.

Merroni said the GSA interpreted the USE IT Act in a way that excluded some vacant office spaces within tenant buildings. The GAO found that the GSA did not include certain vacant office spaces it managed in its report.

“Buildings that GSA was reporting on, particularly these multi-tenant facilities where many agencies are essentially renting space, that in those cases GSA wasn't reporting vacant space, and so that's not captured in the data that's out there right now,” Merroni told The Center Square.

The GAO called on the GSA to report data on all occupied office buildings, clarify whether office spaces meet or exceed the USE IT Act’s 60% utilization threshold, reevaluate reporting guidelines, and develop a plan to improve the program's future efficiency.

Merroni said that implementing the GAO’s recommendations would likely lower costs over time, resulting in greater taxpayer savings as the government improves efficiency. He estimated that the government’s $16 million cost of analyzing occupancy would decrease once efficient mechanisms were implemented.

“Agencies really should move forward now to get rid of clearly underused properties, where it's not a matter of ‘Is the data 5% off?’ But it's clear this property is highly underused; there's no clear plan to use it anytime in the near future,” Merroni told The Center Square. “Agencies should move forward now with the data they have to make decisions and reduce the footprint to make for a more efficient government and ultimately save taxpayer dollars.”

The GAO found that agencies planned to cut office space contracts and deals following the report’s findings. GSA officials reported plans to cut 40,000 square feet of office space from one of its leases in Kansas City. The Department of Energy planned to cut seven leases, estimating $1.6 million in savings and the Department of Homeland Security reported 15 space reduction projects valued to save $350 million over the next 20 years.

Brady said the best way for the government to save money is to make specific cuts in federal programs and agency actions. He pointed to unsuccessful efforts in 2016 to establish a public buildings reform board that affected perceived success for future programs.

Congress failed to provide appropriations for the board over the last three years, The Center Square reported. 

“It had some specific rounds of sell-offs of federal property, but it wasn’t quite as successful,” Brady told The Center Square. “It’s not as easy to do as you might think.”

He said a program in which federal agencies could retain a portion of the proceeds from selling federal office space could incentivize greater taxpayer savings.

“They can offset other costs that the agency has while also making sure that we're able to have some good savings for taxpayers as well,” Brady said. “That gives them a stake in reviewing, analyzing, processing, and disposing of these unneeded excess properties.”

Brady called for an extensive review and coordination across federal government branches to reduce costs and save taxpayer dollars.

“We have a $40 trillion debt, so everything has to be on the table. Some people will say, ‘Well, it's just a few million dollars,’ but it all adds up to $7 trillion in annual spending and about $2 trillion in annual debt,” Brady told The Center Square. “We got to find ways to pare back the federal government wherever we can.”

(The Center Square) – Clients in the case commonly known as the "Ring Boys" are able to move forward following a federal judge’s rejection on Monday of a constitutional challenge brought by World Wrestling Entertainment, TKO Group Holdings, Vince McMahon and U.S. Education Department Secretary Linda McMahon.

U.S. District Judge James Bredar’s ruling in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland involved constitutionality of Maryland’s Child Victims Act of 2023. Defendants request for dismissal was rejected in December. The case is formally filed as John Doe 1, et al., v. World Wrestling Entertainment, et al.

World Wrestling Entertainment, TKO Group Holdings, and Vince and Linda McMahon are accused of bringing in underage boys for wrestling events. Accusations of exploitation and sexual abuse are in the lawsuit.

Linda McMahon – native of New Bern, N.C., and graduate of nearby East Carolina University – is the second-term Republican President Donald Trump’s choice to lead, and eventually shutter, the Education Department. Her lawyer, Laura Brevetti, is on record saying the civil litigation is "baseless," without truth, and was probed by the FBI years ago, with no findings to pursue prosecution.

Maryland’s Child Victims Act of 2023 eliminated time limits on civil lawsuits involving childhood sexual abuse. Defendants said the law violates the 14th Amendment due process clause; Bredar disagreed, writing in his opinion, "the law is constitutional as applied to the case."

Future dates for the litigation are expected to be known after a Nov. 17 conference. The discovery phase would be the next round. The possibility of trial would likely not be before 2027.

(The Center Square) – Although Congress failed to pass the Ratepayer Protection Act, another bipartisan bill the U.S. Senate intends to take up would codify even stronger protections for American taxpayers facing surging electric bills due to data centers.

Yet the long-awaited permitting reform bill, the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, would also accelerate data center buildouts and restrict impacted communities’ abilities to reject those projects, critics warn.

The primary purpose of the 417-page bill is to expedite the permitting approval process for energy-related projects – such as natural gas pipelines, drilling and mining, and data center infrastructure – by scaling back environmental and judicial reviews.

Sponsors of BAAJA say it will increase energy supply, lower electricity costs, and create more jobs as the country enters a new era of energy demand.

Notably, it also requires owners of data centers that draw more than 20 MW of power plugging into the electric grid to pay for the associated grid upgrade costs.

“We have an enormous opportunity to build big things again to meet that moment – to build more generation, expand our grid, create more jobs, lower energy costs, and make sure we have the energy we need to compete,” Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Ranking Member Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., stated.

“It should not take decades to build the infrastructure our country needs,” Heinrichs added. “Our Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act will help us get to ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on energy projects faster.”

Without faster buildout of high-voltage transmission lines, additional power generation facilities, and other energy infrastructure, the U.S. demand for energy will overtake supply within the next ten years, according to the North American Electric Reliability Corporation.

NERC’s 2026 forecast also noted that data centers are the primary drivers of the historically unprecedented surge in electricity demand.

But critics of BAAJA worry it would trample state and community rights by limiting litigation and local input, making it more difficult for states to deny federal projects, and most importantly, “seemingly make it impossible to put forward a pause or moratorium on an activity, even if the pause would only be to allow time for closer review of potential impacts,” the Wilderness Society warns.

Joined by nearly 200 other advocacy groups, Food & Water Watch called the bill a “sweetheart deal for data centers.”

“Communities are fighting AI data centers because they see first-hand the impacts these monstrosities are having on utility bills, quality of life and precious water resources they depend on,” policy director Jim Walsh at Food & Water Watch stated.

“Instead of helping, this bill will further harm families by facilitating a Big Tech power grab while limiting the power of states’ and local communities to protect the public. Congress must reject this cynical industry-backed effort[.]”

(The Center Square) – Minnesota ranked 15th nationally in Truth in Accounting’s 2026 “Financial State of the States” report.

The state received a “B” grade, according to the report, with a surplus of $6,300 per taxpayer.

It wasn’t all good news for Minnesota, however. Sheila A. Weinberg, founder and CEO of Truth in Accounting, discussed the findings with The Center Square in an exclusive interview.

“Minnesota was one of only 11 states whose financial condition deteriorated in 2025,” Weinberg said. “Growth in capital and restricted assets reduced the resources available to cover the state’s obligations, while expenses increased faster than revenues, further weakening its financial position.”

In total, Minnesota had $46 billion available to pay $32 billion worth of bills. That means the North Star state had a surplus of $13.9 billion.

Weinberg cautioned that the state should set aside the money to prepare for future financial challenges.

“Like many other states, Minnesota has benefited from historically high levels of federal funding and strong investment returns,” she said. “However, the state should preserve this surplus to maintain a financial cushion against future market downturns and potential declines in federal funding.”

Weinberg said all states should take steps now to strengthen their finances, rather than risk passing those costs on to taxpayers later.

“Maintaining adequate reserves and reducing unfunded liabilities would help states withstand future downturns without placing additional financial burdens on taxpayers or cutting essential services,” she said.

The report found that last year was particularly challenging for Minnesota’s finances, despite continued high levels of federal funding.

“After a $1 billion gain in 2024, its primary government reported a $103 million loss in 2025, largely due to losses in the Unemployment Insurance Fund,” the report found. “While revenues increased from higher income taxes and federal grants, expenses grew faster, driven by rising health and human services, education, transportation, and pension-related costs.”

Minnesota received approximately $25.9 billion – 34% of its revenue – from federal grants.

Because Minnesota receives federal funding, it was required to conduct a spending audit that identified accounting and oversight issues, including $304.4 million in errors caused by incorrect data.

Compared with other states, Minnesota’s financial condition was average. North Dakota ranked first in the report, with a surplus of $72,300 per taxpayer, while New Jersey ranked last at No. 50, with a deficit of $45,800 per taxpayer.

The report found that, at the end of 2025, 24 states did not have enough money to pay their bills.

Weinberg explained why this report should be helpful for taxpayers, especially going into election season.

“An accurate and understandable analysis of state finances is essential to helping citizens become informed participants in government,” she said. “By understanding their state’s financial condition, citizens can make more informed decisions about tax and spending policies and use that information to guide their voting decisions.”

(The Center Square) — Maine's three-day "cooling off" period for firearm purchases remains in effect after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider a challenge to the controversial new requirement. 

The high court’s rejection leaves intact an April decision by the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, which lifted a preliminary injunction blocking the 72-hour waiting period from going into effect after ruling that the requirement is likely constitutional. 

The 72-hour "cooling off" period was a provision of a broader gun-control bill Democratic lawmakers passed through the House and Senate in response to the Oct. 25, 2023, Lewiston massacre. An Army reservist opened fire in a bowling alley and bar in Lewiston, killing 13 people and injuring 18 others.

Gov. Janet Mills, a Democrat, allowed the 72-hour waiting period to become law without her signature, saying she was "conflicted" over the measure after considering both sides of the gun control debate.

The restrictions prompted a lawsuit by a coalition of gun rights groups who say they violated the constitutional rights of lawful citizens and were inconsistent with the nation's history of firearm regulation.

In February, U.S. District Court Judge Lance Walker issued a temporary injunction blocking the law after siding with gun sellers who filed a lawsuit claiming the restrictions are unconstitutional.

In his ruling, Walker sided with the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine and several gun sellers who argued that the law violates the Second Amendment. Walker said the waiting period is "indiscriminate" because it applies to all firearm purchasers regardless of whether they pose a threat, and said the plaintiffs are "likely to succeed" on the merits of the case.

Attorney General Aaron Frey has appealed the ruling, and in April the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against a previous decision blocking the law from being enforced. 

The National Rifle Association and Sportsman's Alliance of Maine filed a petition to the high court, asking it to overturn the previous ruling and declare that the waiting period is unconstitutional under federal law. 

Lawyers for the petitioners, which included several Maine firearm retailers, argued that the three-day waiting period was unconstitutional based on the nation's history of firearm regulations and recent high court rulings.

The case now heads back to the U.S. District Court in Maine for further proceedings. 

Gun control groups welcomed the Supreme Court's decision not to intervene in the case, saying the waiting period is aimed at preventing suicides and gun violence in the state.

“We know from reporting from the Department of Public Safety that Maine’s 72-hour waiting period has already worked to save lives from preventable gun deaths in our state," Nacole Palmer, executive director of the Maine Gun Safety Coalition, said in a statement. "Despite the gun lobby’s best efforts, our waiting period law will continue to save lives and we expect and hope that it will continue to be upheld." 

But Larry Keane, senior vice president for government affairs at the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told WVOM's "Voice of Maine" talk show Tuesday morning that the legal challenge "goes on" and vowed to continue to push to overturn the waiting period. He said claims that the Supreme Court upheld the law are inaccurate. 

"The case is not over," Keane said. "The only thing the Supreme Court decided was not to hear the appeal at this point in time. They did not make any decisions about the merits of the case. So it goes on." 

(The Center Square) – A new poll has Republicans ahead in key statewide races by slim margins. Several key races are statistically tied.

The University of Houston’s Hobby School of Public Affairs poll also posted a key benchmark not addressed by other polls: many say they aren’t confident in the election process or the state’s or counties’ administration of it.

Only 25% of Texas likely voters say they are “very confident that the November 2026 election will be conducted fairly and accurately” while 45% say they are somewhat confident, 22% not too confident, and 8% not at all confident, according to the new poll. 

Only half of Texas likely voters say they are very confident that all U.S. citizens who want to vote in the November 2026 election will be able to do so; 27% said they are somewhat confident, 17% not too confident, and 6% not at all confident. 

The sentiment comes after problems have been reported for months with the state’s voter registration system that left a backlog of more than 500,000 registrations in counties statewide. The state has since said the problem is corrected and a record more than 19 million Texans are registered to vote, The Center Square reported.

The majority polled also expressed concern about noncitizens voting.

The majority polled, 86%, support requiring all voters to show a photo ID when voting in person; 76% support automatically registering all U.S. citizens to vote; 52% support having federal law enforcement officers at polling locations.

The survey contacted 2,000 Texas registered voters expected to vote in the November 2026 midterm elections. It has a margin of error of +/- 2.19%.

When it comes to the direction of the country, 59% polled said the U.S. is heading in the wrong direction; 55% said Texas is. 

Fifty-four percent of likely Texas voters polled said they have an unfavorable opinion of President Donald Trump, after Trump won Texas three times. Trump’s economic policies have been identified in multiple polls as the top reason why many Texas voters have soured on him and his endorsed candidates, The Center Square reported.

Similar to other polls, the Hobby poll has statewide races statistically tied. The difference it is has Republicans leading in all but one race, instead of Democrats. 

In the race for governor, incumbent Republican Gov. Greg Abbott is leading his Democratic opponent state Rep. Gina Hinojosa 49% to 46%. 

In the race for lieutenant governor, incumbent Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick is leading Democrat state Rep. Vikki Goodwin 47% to 42%.  

In the race for attorney general, two state senators are running, with Republican Mayes Middleton leading Democrat Nathan Johnson 47% to 42%. 

In the race for Texas comptroller, incumbent Republican Don Huffines is leading Democrat state Sen. Sarah Eckhardt 47% to 40%. 

In the race for Texas Land Commissioner, incumbent Republican Dawn Buckingham is leading Democrat Benjamin Flores 47% to 40%.

In the race for Texas Agriculture Commissioner, Republican Nate Sheets is leading Democrat Clayton Tucker 46% to 40%. 

In the race for Texas Railroad Commissioner, Republican Bo French is leading Democrat Jon Rosenthal 45% to 43%.

The outlier is the U.S. Senate race where Democrat state Rep. James Talarico is leading Attorney General Ken Paxton, 48% to 46%. This is consistent with every poll conducted in Texas and nationally. The only difference is the margin by which Talarico is leading Paxton.   

Early voting is underway through Oct. 30. 

(The Center Square) – Michigan ranked 30th nationally in Truth in Accounting’s 2026 “Financial State of the States” report.

The state received a “C” grade because it does not have enough money to cover its bills, according to the report. Michigan had a $2,000 taxpayer burden, the measure used to determine the state’s ranking.

Although Michigan’s finances remained in the negative, this year’s report showed improvement in the state’s financial standing from last year – when it ranked 32nd nationally.

Sheila A. Weinberg, founder and CEO of Truth in Accounting, discussed the findings with The Center Square in an exclusive interview.

“Michigan’s financial condition improved largely due to double-digit investment returns on pension fund assets. As a result, the state’s pension obligations are now 80% funded,” Weinberg said. “However, given these historically strong investment returns, the pension systems should ideally be overfunded to provide a financial cushion when markets inevitably experience downturns.”

In total, Michigan had $42.1 billion available to pay $48.8 billion worth of bills. That means Michigan has $6.7 billion in unfunded obligations.

“Despite a balanced budget requirement, Michigan has accumulated $6.7 billion in bills in excess of the assets available to pay bills,” Weinberg said. “This results in a taxpayer burden (per taxpayer share) of $2,000.”

That figure is down significantly from $4,100 per taxpayer in 2025, a decline Weinberg also attributed to continued “historically high” federal funding.

“Federal grants accounted for 40% of the state’s revenue,” Weinberg said. “Although the COVID-19 public health emergency ended several years ago, federal funding remains at levels comparable to those provided during the pandemic, raising questions about the sustainability of the state’s reliance on these funds over the long term.”

This leaves Michigan particularly vulnerable to federal funding cuts, which Weinberg warned could pose challenges in the coming years.

“Given the strong investment returns and historically high levels of federal funding, I believe states should be in a stronger financial position to weather unexpected economic and financial crises, which tend to occur periodically, often every seven to ten years,” she said. “Maintaining adequate reserves and reducing unfunded liabilities would help states withstand future downturns without placing additional financial burdens on taxpayers or cutting essential services.”

Because Michigan receives federal funding, it was required to conduct a spending audit that identified accounting and oversight issues. The report warns that these weaknesses could leave the state vulnerable to potential fraud.

“Missing documentation, late reporting, inadequate review, and weak procedures led to inaccurate financial reports, unsupported expenses, and difficulty confirming that federal funds were properly managed,” Weinberg explained.

Unfunded pensions make up a substantial portion of Michigan’s financial obligations. The report found that the state’s major retirement systems had a combined $24 billion in unfunded liabilities. If the shortfall is not addressed, retirees could face reduced benefits, or workers and taxpayers could be required to contribute more.

Compared with other states, Michigan’s financial condition was roughly in the middle of the pack. North Dakota ranked first in the report, with a surplus of $72,300 per taxpayer, while New Jersey ranked last at No. 50, with a deficit of $45,800 per taxpayer.

The report found that, at the end of 2025, 24 states did not have enough money to pay their bills.

Weinberg explained why every American should care about the report’s findings.

“Understanding whether states have sufficient resources to cover their bills helps citizens evaluate how responsibly their tax dollars are being managed and whether current fiscal policies are sustainable,” she said. “A state’s financial condition can affect the services residents rely on, the taxes they pay, and the financial burdens passed on to future generations.”

(The Center Square) – Federal funding remains available to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, says a settlement for litigation between the nation’s oldest public university and the U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Education.

That funding could be in the form of grants, contracts or research awards.

The Office of Civil Rights Division within the Education Department is closing 18 active investigations, and a compliance review originating April 18, 2025. Monitoring and reporting provisions are part of the agreement, including an immediate 30-day window for the university to choose a merit and civil rights administrator for implementing terms of the settlement.

The Carolina probe involved antisemitism, admissions practices and educational operations.

Terms include the university not using race, race data or programs that consider protected characteristics; mandatory antisemitism training for students and staff; and quarterly reports through Dec. 31, 2028.

In its public acknowledgement, Chancellor Lee Roberts said, “This announcement reinforces our commitment to the fair and equal treatment of everyone at Carolina. For at least a decade, through different presidential administrations, U.S. universities have faced heightened public scrutiny across a range of issues. We’re proud to resolve those issues at Carolina in a way that protects our mission and affirms the civil rights of everyone in our community.”

The agreement is not an admission of violating civil rights law, the university said. “The agreement recognizes Carolina expressly denies liability with respect to the subject matter of the investigations covered by the agreement,” its statement said in part.

The university said implementation costs “are expected to be consistent with ordinary operating expenses.”

In announcing the settlement, the Justice Department gave praise for Carolina’s leadership in resolution.

“Title VI requires that all students – regardless of their ancestry or race – receive equal treatment under the law at federally funded colleges and universities,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “Higher ed policies and practices that tolerate antisemitism or favor certain racial groups over others, frustrate our color-blind justice system. The Civil Rights Division commends UNC for its cooperation in meeting its obligations under federal law without the need for litigation; we hope other institutions will take note and do the same.”

(The Center Square) – Wisconsin is among the states where someone is mailing suspicious mail to officials connected to next month’s election.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission, as well as both of Wisconsin’s U.S. Senators, and even the people at the Marquette Law School all reported receiving mail on Monday with a “suspicious substance” inside.

"Unfortunately, my office received a letter with a suspicious substance inside – similar to what other elected officials have received nationwide. Thankfully, everyone is safe and the matter is being investigated by the FBI and U.S. Postal Inspection Service," U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisconsin, said on X. "I appreciate local police and law enforcement for their work to keep the public safe."

"A suspicious envelope was delivered to my Milwaukee office today at 2:38 p.m. CT," U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisconsin, wrote in a post of his own. "The return address matched the description of letters sent to other congressional and state offices across the nation. My staff immediately isolated the envelope, cleared all staff members, and called 911 and the Sergeant at Arms. The first responders confiscated the letter, and thankfully, everyone is safe. Our office operations have now resumed as normal."

No one is guessing who is sending the suspicious mail or if the same person or people are sending mail to elected officials and election managers in other states.

Law enforcement officials say Ohio's secretary of state got some suspicious mail last week.

In Wisconsin, the suspicious mail comes as early in-person voting begins today.

The suspicious mail to the Marquette Law School Poll comes just days ahead of Marquette's final poll of the election season in Wisconsin. That poll is due out Friday.