Feds Killed Plan to Curb Medicare Advantage Overbilling After Industry Opposition

 A decade ago, federal officials drafted a plan to discourage Medicare Advantage health insurers from overcharging the government by billions of dollars -- only to abruptly back off amid an "uproar" from the industry, newly released court filings showed.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) published the draft regulation in January 2014. The rule would have required health plans, when examining patients' medical records, to identify overpayments by CMS and refund them to the government.

But in May 2014, CMS dropped the idea without any public explanation. Newly released court depositions show that agency officials repeatedly cited concern about pressure from the industry.

The 2014 decision by CMS, and events related to it, are at the center of a multibillion-dollar Department of Justice (DOJ) civil fraud case against UnitedHealth Group pending in federal court in Los Angeles.

The Justice Department alleged the giant health insurer cheated Medicare out of more than $2 billion by reviewing patients' records to find additional diagnoses, adding revenue while ignoring overcharges that might reduce bills. The company "buried its head in the sand and did nothing but keep the money," the DOJ said in a court filing.

Medicare pays health plans higher rates for sicker patients but requires that the plans bill only for conditions that are properly documented in a patient's medical records.

In a court filing, UnitedHealth Group denied wrongdoing and argued it shouldn't be penalized for "failing to follow a rule that CMS considered a decade ago but declined to adopt."

This month, the parties in the court case made public thousands of pages of depositions and other records that offer a rare glimpse inside the Medicare agency's long-running struggle to keep the private health plans from taking taxpayers for a multibillion-dollar ride.

"It's easy to dump on Medicare Advantage plans, but CMS made a complete boondoggle out of this," said Richard Lieberman, a Colorado health data analytics expert.

Spokespeople for the Justice Department and CMS declined to comment for this article. In an email, UnitedHealth Group spokesperson Heather Soule said the company's "business practices have always been transparent, lawful, and compliant with CMS regulations."

Missed Diagnoses

Medicare Advantage insurance plans have grown explosively in recent years and now enroll about 33 million membersopens in a new tab or window, more than half of people eligible for Medicare. Along the way, the industry has been the target of dozens of whistleblower lawsuits, government auditsopens in a new tab or window, and other investigations alleging the health plans often exaggerate how sick patients are to rake in undeserved Medicare payments -- including by doing what are called chart reviews, intended to find allegedly missed diagnosis codes.

By 2013, CMS officials knew some Medicare health plans were hiring medical coding and analytics consultants to aggressively mine patient files -- but they doubted the agency's authority to demand that health plans also look for and delete unsupported diagnoses.

The proposed January 2014 regulation mandated that chart reviews "cannot be designed only to identify diagnoses that would trigger additional payments" to health plans.

CMS officials backed down in May 2014 because of "stakeholder concern and pushback," Cheri Rice, then director of the CMS Medicare Plan Payment Group, testified in a 2022 deposition made public this month. A second CMS official, Anne Hornsby, described the industry's reaction as an "uproar."

Exactly who made the call to withdraw the chart review proposal isn't clear from court filings so far.

"The direction that we received was that the rule, the final rule, needed to include only those provisions that had wide, you know, widespread stakeholder support," Rice testified.

"So we did not move forward then," she said. "Not because we didn't think it was the right thing to do or the right policy, but because it had mixed reactions from stakeholders."

The CMS press office declined to make Rice available for an interview. Hornsby, who has since left the agency, declined to comment.

But Erin Fuse Brown, JD, MPH, a professor at the Brown University School of Public Health in Providence, Rhode Island, said the decision reflects a pattern of timid CMS oversight of the popular health plans for seniors.

"CMS saving money for taxpayers isn't enough of a reason to face the wrath of very powerful health plans," Fuse Brown said. "That is extremely alarming."

Invalid Codes

The fraud case against UnitedHealth Group, which runs the nation's largest Medicare Advantage plan, was filed in 2011 by a former company employee. The DOJ took overopens in a new tab or window the whistleblower suit in 2017.

DOJ alleges Medicare paid the insurer more than $7.2 billion from 2009 through 2016 solely based on chart reviews; the company would have received $2.1 billion less if it had deleted unsupported billing codes, the government said.

The government argued that UnitedHealth Group knew that many conditions it had billed for were not supported by medical records but chose to pocket the overpayments. For instance, the insurer billed Medicare nearly $28,000 in 2011 to treat a patient for cancer, congestive heart failure, and other serious health problems that weren't recorded in the person's medical record, DOJ alleged in a 2017 filing.

In all, DOJ contends that UnitedHealth Group should have deleted more than 2 million invalid codes.

Instead, company executives signed annual statements attesting that the billing data submitted to CMS were "accurate, complete, and truthful." Those actions violated the False Claims Act, a federal law that makes it illegal to submit bogus bills to the government, DOJ alleged.

The complex case has featured years of legal jockeying, even pitting the recollections of key CMS staff members -- including several who have since departed government for jobs in the industry -- against those of UnitedHealthcare executives.

'Red Herring'

Court filings described a 45-minute video conference arranged by then-CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner on April 29, 2014. Tavenner testified she set up the meeting between UnitedHealth and CMS staff at the request of Larry Renfro, a senior UnitedHealth Group executive, to discuss implications of the draft rule. Neither Tavenner nor Renfro attended.

Two UnitedHealth Group executives on the call said in depositions that CMS staffers told them the company had no obligation at the time to uncover erroneous codes. One of the executives, Steve Nelson, called it a "very clear answer" to the question. Nelson has since left the company.

For their part, four of the five CMS staffers on the call said in depositions that they didn't remember what was said. Unlike the company's team, none of the government officials took detailed notes.

"All I can tell you is I remember feeling very uncomfortable in the meeting," Rice said in her 2022 deposition.

Yet Rice and one other CMS staffer said they did recall reminding the executives that even without the chart review rule, the company was obligated to make a good-faith effort to bill only for verified codes -- or face possible penalties under the False Claims Act. And CMS officials reinforced that view in follow-up emails, according to court filings.

DOJ called the flap over the ill-fated regulation a "red herring" in a court filing and alleged that when UnitedHealth asked for the April 2014 meeting, it knew its chart reviews had been under investigation for 2 years. In addition, the company was "grappling with a projected $500 million budget deficit," according to DOJ.

Data Miners

Medicare Advantage plans defend chart reviews against criticism that they do little but artificially inflate the government's costs.

"Chart reviews are one of many tools Medicare Advantage plans use to support patients, identify chronic conditions, and prevent those conditions from becoming more serious," said Chris Bond, a spokesperson for AHIP, a health insurance trade group.

Whistleblowers have argued that the cottage industryopens in a new tab or window of analytics firms and coders that sprang up to conduct these reviews pitched their services as a huge moneymaking exercise for health plans -- and little else.

"It was never legitimate," said William Hanagami, a California attorney who represented whistleblower James Swoben in a 2009 caseopens in a new tab or window that alleged chart reviews improperly inflated Medicare payments. In a 2016 decisionopens in a new tab or window, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that health plans must exercise "due diligence" to ensure they submit accurate data.

Since then, other insurers have settled DOJ allegations that they billed Medicare for unconfirmed diagnoses stemming from chart reviews. In July 2023, Martin's Point Health Plan, a Portland, Maine, insurer, paid $22,485,000opens in a new tab or window to settle whistleblower allegations that it improperly billed for conditions ranging from diabetes with complications to morbid obesity. The plan denied any liability.

A December 2019 reportopens in a new tab or window by the HHS Inspector General found that 99% of chart reviews added new medical diagnoses at a cost to Medicare of an estimated $6.7 billion for 2017 alone.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/publichealthpolicy/medicare/111723

Amgen Plans Phase III for Next-Gen Obesity Drug Targeting Liver, Kidney Diseases

 

A broad indication for MariTide could help Amgen secure Medicare coverage for the treatment following FDA approval, CEO Robert Bradway said at Wednesday’s Morgan Stanley Global Healthcare Conference.

Amgen is pushing its next-generation obesity therapy MariTide into a broad late-stage development program to assess the candidate’s potential in other weight-related conditions, such as heart, kidney and liver diseases.

Speaking at the Morgan Stanley Global Healthcare Conference on Wednesday, Amgen CEO Robert Bradway told investors that the pharma is “rapidly” advancing MariTide through Phase II, after which it will initiate “a robust, wide-ranging Phase III clinical program” for the candidate.

“We look forward to generating data that will show what we can achieve in patients that are obese or living with overweight and what we can do in that context for patients that are at high risk of heart disease, renal disease, liver disease,” Bradway said.

Having an obesity treatment that can also target other conditions “represents an exciting opportunity” for the company and its shareholders, he noted.

MariTide is an injectable bispecific molecule that works by simultaneously activating the GLP-1 receptor while also blocking the GIP receptor. Through this mechanism of action, MariTide is thought to promote the release of insulin from the pancreas, suppress appetite and improve various other metabolic parameters. The candidate is currently in Phase II development.

In February 2024, Amgen released Phase I data touting a 14.5% body weight reduction after 85 days. By comparison, placebo counterparts gained 1.5% body weight at this same time point. With these promising data, Amgen announced in its first-quarter 2024 business report in May that it would be throwing its weight behind MariTide, with plans to accelerate development through Phase III.

At the time, CSO James Bradner reiterated Amgen’s confidence in MariTide, noting that the candidate can potentially “address important unmet medical needs” in obesity, diabetes and related conditions.

A potential advantage that MariTide has over its well-established competitors—Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy and Eli Lilly’s Zepbound—is a longer duration of effect. During Wednesday’s Morgan Stanley conference, Bradway pointed to MariTIde’s “antibody backbone” as a key feature that sets it apart from the currently commercially available obesity treatments and provides its longer treatment duration.

“Our medicine is likely to be administered monthly or less frequently than that,” Bradway said, whereas Wegovy and Zepbound are injected weekly.

Aiming for a broader indication could also help Amgen overcome a crucial barrier that Novo and Lilly faced with their incretin therapies when they initially hit the market—coverage. Medicare does not cover these drugs when used for weight loss but might do so when they are prescribed for other conditions.

In March, Medicare announced that it will cover Wegovy when used to reduce the risk of heart attack, stroke and other cardiovascular conditions in overweight or obese adults. Meanwhile, Lilly is working to expand Zepbound’s label into obstructive sleep apnea in an effort to secure similar Medicare coverage.

https://www.biospace.com/drug-development/amgen-plans-phase-iii-program-for-next-gen-obesity-drug-targeting-liver-and-kidney-diseases

On Being A "Threat To Democracy"

 by Donald Jeffries via "I Protest",

Merriam-Webster defines “democracy” as: “a: Government by the people especially : rule of the majority, b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.”

Well, that sounds good. Do we have a rule of the majority? The majority of Americans, after all, about eighty percent of them, are losing in this rigged economy, and living paycheck to paycheck at best. I don’t think they’re “ruling” anything. We all (well, some of us) know that the 10th Amendment to the Constitution clearly states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Again, sounds good. But when’s the last time you heard about one of our tyrannical judges ruling in favor of someone invoking the 10th Amendment? Since the Constitution delineates very limited powers to the central government, this should mean that the vast majority of power in this country resides in the States, or the people.

The 10th Amendment isn’t any more popular than the 1st, the 2nd, or the 4th. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have any “hate speech,” or “gun control” laws, or no-knock SWAT team raids on private residences. It’s pretty obvious that the people don’t have any power. There are, of course, distinct differences between democracy and the constitutional republic our Founders established. But today, in the year of our Lord 2024, we don’t appear to have either in America 2.0. Plenty of taxation, but no representation. Lincoln shattered the foundational principle of our War for Independence, the consent of the governed. Millions don’t consent to this tyranny and authoritarianism. It doesn’t matter. We can’t elect better leaders. 96 percent of these horrific incumbents are returned to office every election. It’s just as bad whether that’s because of fraud, or massive stupidity on the part of the voters.

Note in the illustration above that four of the ten hands are Black. Forty percent. Blacks are twelve percent of the U.S. population. Yes, I know that any television viewer would be shocked by that. I think that more than half the actors in commercials now are Black. I don’t need to mention how overrepresented Blacks are in sports and entertainment. So, how does all this excessive interest in our second largest minority group equate with majority rule? Which is what the dictionary says “democracy” is. What does “the people” mean? In our multicultural society, which people are we talking about? There are conflicting interests among these various groups of people. But the interests of White people- who are still clinging to a majority of the population- are ignored. Or belittled. By White elites.

Ballot referendums are a pure form of democracy. The voters decide on a policy, without any representative go-between. In 1994, a very demographically different California approved Proposition 13, which would have prohibited illegal immigrants from obtaining government services. Well, what could be more reasonable than that? The beloved Bill Clinton campaigned strongly against the measure, so you know it was a good one. Under the unconstitutional concept of Judicial Review, which I examine in detail in my book American Memory Hole, Judge Mariana Pfaelzer was able to quash the measure, and thus the will of the people, a month after the proposition was approved. To today’s Left, that was “democracy.” A judge overriding the majority of the people- you know, the ones who run things under a “democracy.” Millions of illegals later, we’re probably more “democratic” than ever.

In 2008, public opinion polls showed that 95 percent or more of Americans were opposed to the banker bailout. So, this being a democracy and all, every national political leader was opposed to the will of the people, and the disastrous bailout was implemented. In the 2020 election, millions of Americans were convinced that there had been massive electoral fraud, and that Joe Biden hadn’t been honestly elected. Was it a majority of the people? Hard to tell, but certainly enough that their voices should have been heard. That’s what would happen in any “democracy.” Instead, untold numbers of protesters were imprisoned, and some are still being denied due process over three years later. Those who appeared in court were subjected to Alice in Wonderland-style kangaroo trials, and given incredibly harsh prison sentences. We are told that these “insurrectionists” were a “threat to democracy.”

We hear that a lot now; about the “threat to democracy.” Donald Trump is a threat. So are all of those who support him. And the “White Supremacists” who secretly rule the land, but are too shy to ever make their presence known, represent the “greatest threat to democracy” of all. According to the lovable hair sniffer Joe Biden, before he was deposed from office in a silent coup. Elon Musk is another “threat.” Just issuing statements in support of free speech was enough. He probably doesn’t really believe in it, but in today’s climate, just saying something against censorship is a “threat to democracy.” Apparently, censorship is one of the cornerstones of democracy. Somebody tell Webster’s to update their definition. They did it for vaccines, after all, during the COVID psyop. Robert Reich and others now want Musk to be arrested. For making comments in support of free speech. That’s a “threat to democracy.”

Disputing the vote is a “threat to democracy.” If you don’t believe it, you may find yourself being prosecuted by the state. The same state that would be responsible for rigging elections, if one can imagine such a thing. Is that any different from the Crown prosecuting someone a few centuries ago, for offenses against the king? “Hate Speech,” the Orwellian term meant to cover Thought Crimes, is also something that violates the precepts of “democracy.” Disinformation, misinformation, conspiracy theories, all of it is a “threat to democracy.” Only FCC approved content is allowed in this democracy, peasant. The state will eagerly censor any unapproved books about Sandy Hook, Pizzagate, 9/11 and the like. But don’t you dare touch a pubic hair between the covers of the all-time classic Gender Queer. The Left considers removing this detailed account of man-boy love from school libraries to be “book burning.”

Prior to the 2022 midterm elections, Joe Biden attempted to frame the choices as either “democracy” or “MAGA Republicans.” Political satirist Tim Young observed, "I'm not saying ‘fascism’ officially had its coming out party in America tonight... I'm just saying Biden condemned his political opponents as a threat to America and democracy set to a blood red background with the military standing behind him." Never before had an American president demonized the opposition to such an extent. Biden was labeling half of America as “extremists.” Perhaps “insurrectionists.” So he was saying that protecting the border- as any nation must to remain sovereign- wasn’t “democracy.” Is private gun ownership part of “democracy?” So what does he and his ilk represent? Empty “Woke” rhetoric? Cancel culture? Abortion on demand?

I would love to hear a “journalist” ask Kamala Harris or Tim Walz for their definition of “democracy.” As we’ve shown, it isn’t the rule of the majority. White people, for example, are still a majority in this country, but anti-White discrimination in business and government hiring is established practice. That’s an odd way to treat the majority. You know, the ones who are in charge under a democracy. Harris, Walz, and every other leading Democrat is on the record as opposing free speech, and supporting censorship. So I guess democracy doesn’t mean free speech. Freedom of association? Nope, you’ll be branded “racist” if you say you aren’t interested in Black guys on a dating site. But you can harass Sarah Huckabee Sanders out of your restaurant. Does democracy respect privacy? Well, not if some cop asks you for your identification and you refuse, as you should under the Bill of Rights.

So what, then, is democracy? It sure isn’t what the dictionary says it is. To US leaders, who champion “our democracy” incessantly, it means sending billions to a comedian turned dictator in Ukraine, who has banned all political opposition and shut down newspapers who criticize him. Our billions are helping to “defend democracy.” Again, I’d really like to hear some Democrat define democracy. When I was a young, ACLU card carrying radical, I thought of the First Amendment when I thought of democracy. I thought of “the people” exerting their will, like Frank Capra taught me in his populist films. I thought of defending the little guy. Helping the poor. Avoiding war. Today’s Democrats defend the powerful. They don’t even notice the poor. And they haven’t opposed a war since Vietnam. To “Woke” Democrats, democracy means censorship, prosecuting your opponents, continuous war, and divisive cultural lunacy.

Benjamin Franklin described democracy as “two wolves and a sheep arguing over what’s for dinner.” In America 2.0 “democracy,” we have a small cartel of powerful wolves, and hundreds of millions of sheep. Despite it being a democracy, the sheep curiously have no power whatsoever. Thomas Jefferson is considered the first American Democrat, although his party called themselves the Democratic-Republicans. No modern Democrat dares to invoke Jefferson’s name, except perhaps to slander him as a “racist.” Jefferson would be a monumental “threat to democracy” in today’s world. So would all the Founders. Except Hamilton, of course. The Declaration of Independence is filled with “threats to democracy.” So is the Constitution, because of the inclusion of the Bill of Rights. Freedom. Liberty. Independence. All of it goes against the “core values” of America 2.0.

The word “democracy” comes from the Greeks, who are credited with establishing the first such form of government. In Greek, it means “peoples power.” Remember, the great Abraham Lincoln talked about of the people, by the people, for the people. Now he was celebrating a “cause” that revolved around stopping people from practicing all that “of, by and for” stuff, with guns and cannons. But the words are beautiful. They’re just classic disinformation. If only the Fact Checkers had been around at Gettysburg. So, the way the Greeks defined it, democracy sounds a lot like populism. Remember John Lennon’s song Power to the People? When’s the last time you heard that one on an oldies station? America is the wonder of the world; a democracy where the people have no power. And if you point that out, you’ll be considered a “threat to democracy.”

To most average people, democracy means freedom. Hey, we live in a democracy. We get to vote! The vote is sacred to defenders of American “democracy.” Go ahead, pick your candidate. You have two choices. Two! Our democracy is full of choices. That’s why “pro choice” is kind of the foundation of our “democracy.” The MAGA people are a “threat to democracy” because they want women to stop having abortions. To a mere community college dropout like me, that would seem to be a good thing. But apparently not. I see all the older women, past menopause, violently confronting pro-life demonstrators. It’s as if they would love to just have an abortion for the sake of it, if they were still biologically able to. That’s a moral disfunction I can’t comprehend. And we wonder why these same angry women embrace the transgender madness? Anything but birth! That would be a “threat to democracy.”

Just searching online, it’s easy to find all the “threats to democracy.” Like “racist,” they are everywhere. Democrats have called “Republicans” in general “threats to democracy,” much as Whites in general have been castigated for their imaginary “privilege.” During the 2022 elections, many Republicans were referred to as a “threat to democracy.” And to think the best the right-wingers in the 1950s could come up with was “commies” or “pinkos.” And elections themselves appear to be a “threat to democracy.” Time magazine warned, in 2021, that “American Democracy Can’t Survive Unless the Far Right Is Marginalized. Here’s How to Do It.” So despite their “rock the vote” lust for this “precious democratic right,” today’s Left actually wants to limit your largely nonexistent “choices” further. They want you to pick between a Democrat and a RINO. Every vote counts! Don’t complain if you didn’t vote. That’s “democracy.”

We also learn that “gender imbalance” is a “threat to democracy.” Presumably, this “threat” will be mitigated if the eminently qualified Kamala Harris attains the presidency. Another “threat to democracy” is the “climate crisis.” There are currently some 2807 climate-related laws and policies all around the world. But there is a call for even more. This obsession with the “climate” meshes perfectly with the insanity of transgenderism and critical race theory. What is meant by the “climate” is unclear. For instance, the damage done to the ecosystem by the Gulf Oil spill seems not to be any kind of “crisis.” Greta Thunberg is as disinterested in that as she is in the environmental disaster in East Palestine, Ohio. Well, at least the poor residents there got some fast food, courtesy of Donald Trump. Trump going there was probably a “threat to democracy.” Buying them fast food definitely was.

Now, before you chide me by saying, don’t you know we live in a constitutional republic, not a democracy? So let’s go to the dictionary again. We learn that a republic is a “form of government in which a state is ruled by representatives of the citizen body. Modern republics are founded on the idea that sovereignty rests with the people.” So that sounds pretty much like a democracy to me. Both stress the power of the people. But if we are a republic, then again 80 percent or more of “the people” appear to have no power, no matter what the dictionary says. So, yes, I know we are supposed to be a republic, but what we have doesn’t look like that, either. How about an oligarchy? Which the dictionary says is “a government in which a small group exercises control, esp. for corrupt and selfish purposes.” Now, that sounds familiar! Is there a better description for our society?

Well, how about plutocracy? A plutocracy is defined as “a form of government or rulership by the rich. It is a form of governance where policies and systems are geared to benefit the wealthy and powerful more than others.” Well, bingo there as well! I think we can combine the small, corrupt group of oligarchs with the plutocratic reality that all our policies are designed to benefit the rich and powerful. So what do we call that? An oligocracy? A plutoarchy? However you look at it, our system of government is much closer to an oligarchy or a plutocracy than a constitutional republic or a democracy. So Thought Criminals like us are not a “threat to democracy.” We’re a threat to oligarchy or plutocracy. “Woke” Hollywood catchphrases are not a substitute for human liberty.

So, in essence, the “democracy” today’s Democrats extol and claim to be defending is not a “democracy” by any definition of the word. The January 6 protesters felt that their votes hadn’t been honestly counted. To our “representatives,” that means they were a “threat to our democracy.” If they’d shown you didn’t count the votes honestly, your “democracy” might be overthrown. The defenders of America 2.0 democracy embrace censorship, and war, the Great Replacement, the transgender lunacy, and multitudes of illegal immigrants. And if those immigrants commit violent crimes, you better not mention it, or you’ll be as “racist” as Donald Trump. Rosa Parks refused to sit in the back of a bus for you. Your vote is precious. The troops died to preserve it. If anyone suggests otherwise, cancel them. Prosecute them. Hum the Black national anthem, click your heels three times and remember, you are defending democracy.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/being-threat-democracy

YouTube sets detection tools for music and faces, plus creator controls for AI training

 YouTube on Thursday announced a new set of AI detection tools to protect creators, including artists, actors, musicians and athletes, from having their likeness, including their face and voice, copied and used in other videos. One key component of the new detection technology involved the expansion of YouTube’s existing Content ID system, which today identifies copyright-protected material. This system will be expanded to include new synthetic-singing identification technology to identify AI content that simulates someone’s singing voice. Other detection technologies will be developed to identify when someone’s face is simulated with AI, the company says.

Also of note, YouTube is in the early stages of coming up with a solution to address the use of its content to train AI models. This has been an issue for some time, leading creators to complain that companies like Apple, Nvidia, Anthropic, OpenAI and Google, among others, have trained on their material without their consent or compensation.

YouTube hasn’t yet revealed its plan to help protect creators (or generate additional revenue of its own from AI training), only that it has something in the works.

“… we’re developing new ways to give YouTube creators choice over how third parties might use their content on our platform. We’ll have more to share later this year,” the announcement briefly states.

Meanwhile, the company appears to be moving forward with its promise from last year when it said it would come up with a way to compensate artists whose work was used to create AI music. At the time, YouTube began working with Universal Music Group (UMG) and its roster of talent on a solution. It also said it would work on an expansion of its Content ID system that would be able to identify which rightsholders should be paid when their works were used by AI music. The Content ID system currently processes billions of claims per year, and generates billions in revenue for creators and artists, YouTube notes.

In Thursday’s announcement, YouTube doesn’t tackle the compensation component to AI music but does say it is nearing a pilot of the Content ID system’s expansion with a focus on this area. Starting early next year, YouTube will begin to test the synthetic-singing identification technology with its partners, it says.

Another solution in earlier stages of development will allow high-profile figures — like actors, musicians, creators, athletes and others — to detect and manage AI-generated work that shows their faces on YouTube. This would go a long way to help prevent people from having their likeness used to mislead YouTube viewers, whether it’s for endorsing products and services they never agreed to support, or to help spread misinformation, for instance. YouTube did not say when this system would be ready to test, only that it’s in active development.

“As AI evolves, we believe it should enhance human creativity, not replace it. We’re committed to working with our partners to ensure future advancements amplify their voices, and we’ll continue to develop guardrails to address concerns and achieve our common goals,” according to YouTube’s announcement.

https://techcrunch.com/2024/09/05/youtube-is-developing-ai-detection-tools-for-music-and-faces-plus-creator-controls-for-ai-training/

Harris Campaign’s Facade of Freedom

 Ever since Kamala Harris took the Democratic nomination away from Joe Biden, the Democratic messaging shifted gears from “protecting democracy” to promoting “freedom.” This was especially true as Democrats unveiled an ad titled “Freedom” at the Democratic National Convention coupled with one of Harris’ go-to stump speeches where she proudly proclaims, “We chose freedom.”

As an immigrant, these promises of freedom and a brighter future resonate deeply. They echo the dreams of millions who have come to this country seeking the American dream—a place where freedom and opportunity are available to all. Yet, Harris's promise of freedom is hollow and devoid from reality.

For over two decades in public office, Harris has shown a disturbing pattern of undermining the very freedoms she now claims to champion. Her career has been marked by actions and policies that prioritize state control over individual liberty.

Harris’s journey began as San Francisco's District Attorney, where she used her prosecutorial power to defend a flawed justice system. Rather than advocating for the rights of the innocent, she shielded corrupt prosecutors and kept innocent people behind bars. Her tenure was not just about enforcing the law; it was about wielding power in ways that directly contradict her now supposed commitment to opportunity and freedom.

Her hypocrisy is further exposed by her handling of marijuana convictions. As District Attorney, Harris aggressively pursued marijuana cases, yet later, laughed about her own drug use. This is not even about drug use - it is about the double standard she uses. If she was an honest politician, she would admit that she deserves to be prosecuted for breaking the same law that she once used to put thousands of people behind bars.

This glaring inconsistency reflects a broader pattern, and her actions speak louder than words. If Kamala Harris believes in freedom, she believes it only for herself.

From the moment she entered the political sphere, Kamala Harris abused her power at the expense of the freedom of innocent Americans. But things did not improve once Kamala Harris was elected Attorney General of California in 2010. 

During her tenure as Attorney General, Kamala Harris supported and defended the aggressive use of civil asset forfeiture. This controversial practice allows law enforcement agencies to seize property—such as cars, homes, and cash—often without any formal charges being filed.

In 2023, a report showed that the FBI had seized over $86 million from innocent Americans who were not even suspected of committing a crime. In other words, Kamala Harris supported a policy that is routinely abused against innocent Americans. That is not a pro-freedom policy, it is an abuse of power and one that Kamala Harris is proud to support.

During her time in the Senate, Harris was momentarily restrained from undermining individual rights, primarily due to her limited power as a minority member and her absenteeism—she missed over 45% of votes. However, her assault on freedom quickly resumed when she assumed the role of vice president.

The Biden-Harris administration’s attempts to suppress dissent and control information were evident with the establishment of a Disinformation Board, echoing Orwell’s Ministry of Truth. 

Though public backlash led to its dismantling, the effort to manipulate and control information persisted behind the scenes. In fact, a recent report showed that the Biden-Harris administration directed 7 federal agencies to channel millions in grants to private organizations to censor their political opponents.

Harris’s campaign may project an image of freedom, but her record tells a different story. Her policies have consistently undermined the freedom of countless Americans. While she may claim to “choose freedom,” actions speak louder than words.

Gabriel Nadales is the National Director of Our America.

https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2024/09/05/the_harris_campaigns_facade_of_freedom_1056319.html

Economy, Border Security, And Inflation Dominate Voter Priorities

 

• Forty-two percent prioritize the economy as the country's most important issue
• Immigration/border security and homelessness are the other top concerns
• Abortion rose in importance to fourth place
• Sixty percent express dissatisfaction with the direction of the country

Biden is on the beach, and Harris is busy campaigning. Americans are left wondering: Who is managing the country anyway? The joy spread at campaign rallies doesn’t put food on the table. Living in a make-believe world is tough. The same people who hid a struggling Biden during the primaries now want to play the same hide-and-seek game with his replacement.

Is the media a cartel or simply the Democratic Party’s propaganda arm? Take your pick. They want Americans to believe everything is milk and honey and that we’re in for a new joy ride. Let's all smile, say "kumbaya," and elect their candidate.

But, with just over 60 days before the election, Americans are prioritizing keeping their jobs and putting food on the table. Forty-two percent picked the economy as the country's most important issue, followed by immigration and border security at 37 percent. Candidates who fail to address these priorities risk losing ground with key voter groups, especially independents.

Homelessness and abortion were also significant concerns, each cited by 18 percent and 17 percent of survey respondents, respectively.

In the run-up to the election, abortion has gained importance since January, when it was in 10th place and rated an important issue by only 12%.

These results are from the latest TIPP Poll, completed last Friday. The poll surveyed 1,582 Americans and asked participants, "What are the top three issues facing the country?"

Ten other issues received double-digit responses: health care (16%), crime (16%), national debt/federal government spending (15%), home affordability (14%), gun violence/gun control (14%), climate change (13%), trust in government/politicians (12%), election 2024 (12%), threats to democracy (12%), and lack of unity/division in the country (11%).

Meanwhile, terrorism/national security (9%), mental health (8%), Russia/Ukraine situation and global security (8%), Israel-Hamas conflict (5%), racial justice (5%), China-U.S. relations (4%), and coronavirus (4%) are in the bottom tier, each garnering under ten percent.

Immigration is a top concern for 61% of Republicans and 35% of independents, compared to only 18% of Democrats

For Democrats, the top issues are the economy (34%), abortion (27%), and health care (22%).

Republicans, on the other hand, prioritized immigration and border security (61%), the economy (50%), crime (23%), and national debt/government spending (21%).

Independents aligned more closely with Republicans, with their top concerns being the economy (42%), immigration/border security (35%), and homelessness (21%).

Top Economic Issues

Inflation (49%), food prices (47%), and people’s ability to pay their bills (26%) are among the top three economic issues facing Americans. (From a list of 21 economy-related issues, the survey respondents picked their top three concerns.)

Gasoline prices (24%), home affordability (20%), government spending (17%), recession (16%), tax rates (15%), rising interest rates (13%), and lack of good jobs (10%) received double-digit responses.

With food prices surging 22% under Biden-Harris leadership and 25% of Americans skipping meals, economic dissatisfaction will likely become a decisive factor in November, particularly in swing states with razor-thin margins.

Direction Of Country

Each month, the TIPP Poll probes the general sentiment​ about the country’s direction using the survey question, "In general, how satisfied are you with the direction that the country is going in at this time?"

Nearly two-thirds (60%) are dissatisfied with the country’s direction. 34% said they are not at all satisfied, and 26% are not very satisfied. Most Republicans (82%) and independents (67%) expressed dissatisfaction. Nearly two-thirds (65%) of Democrats are satisfied.

We also compute a compact index from responses to the above question. The index ranges from 0 to 100. A score of 50 or above is positive, below 50 is negative, and 50 is neutral.

Overall, the Index entered the negative zone in September 2021 and has remained there for 36 months. The September reading is 39.4.

Democrats have the most optimistic reading, 63.3, while Republicans have the lowest score (21.9), indicating extreme pessimism. Independents are in the middle at 32.9.

Democrats fell 25.4 points from a high of 77.3 in April 2021 to 63.3 this month—an 18% drop. Their median during the Biden-Harris presidency is 60.5.

Republicans' slide began after the elections in November 2020, and they have been posting pessimistic readings (under 50) for 46 months in a row, with a median of 20.9 during Biden's presidency.

The median rating of the independents during Biden's presidency is 31.2.

Biden Job Approval

Since the beginning of 2024, President Biden’s approval rating has been stuck in the mid-thirties. It is  37% in the latest TIPP poll.

Nearly three-fourths (75%) of Democrats approve of the job he is doing as president. In contrast, most Republicans (85%) and nearly six in ten independents (58%) disapprove. While two-thirds (69%) of liberals approve, only 17% of conservatives and 42% of moderates express approval.

Biden-Harris Administration

Fewer than 30% of Americans give the Biden-Harris administration good grades on all eleven issues tracked in the TIPP Poll. Notably, the administration flunked on key issues where a majority gave a D or F grade:

• Handling the economy (52%)
• Handling immigration/border security (53%)
• Handling spending and taxes (52%)
• Handling violence and crime in the country (51%)

The moral: It will be hard for Harris to distance herself from President Biden, as veteran strategist James Carville suggested in a recent New York Times piece, advocating for her to break from Biden on policy. However, Carville appears out of touch, disingenuously crediting Biden for taming inflation when, in fact, Biden-Harris policies caused it. Mr. Carville, gaslighting doesn’t work when stomachs are empty; no amount of fake vibes and artificial joy can lure hungry voters. When Biden and Harris took office, inflation was just 1.4%. Since March 2021, inflation has consistently remained above the Federal Reserve's 2% target for 41 consecutive months. Americans haven’t forgotten that Harris promoted Bidenomics and can’t simply distance herself from it.

Mr. Carville, when 25% of Americans are skipping meals, no amount of joy can unburden Kamala Harris from Bidenomics

As November looms, the overwhelming dissatisfaction with the country’s direction, driven by economic concerns, could be the deciding factor in swing states like Michigan and Wisconsin, where margins are razor-thin. American voters, known to vote with their wallets, demand solutions, and candidates who fail to deliver or browbeat voters would face their wrath at the polling booth.

https://tippinsights.com/economy-border-security-and-inflation-dominate-voter-priorities-just-60-days-before-election/