Trucking Giant Shuts Down After 99 Years, 30,000 Could Lose Their Jobs

Yellow, one of the largest and oldest U.S. trucking companies, shut down Sunday after succumbing to substantial debt and a lengthy standoff with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT), according to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ).

The 99-year-old company had more than 12,000 trucks moving freight across the country for Walmart, Amazon and many other small businesses that relied on their Less-Than-Truckload or LTL shipping model, the WSJ reported. Under the LTL model, customers can transport any amount of freight to allow for smaller loads. Yellow employed approximately 30,000 people, including 22,000 IBT employees. Its collapse would be the biggest in the U.S. trucking industry in terms of revenue and jobs, according to the outlet.

Yellow’s financial hardships have compounded this year as shipping demand declined and sent rates falling. Its cash holdings fell to around $100 million in June from $235 million in December, according to the WSJ.

Yellow was about $1.5 billion in debt as of March, including about $729.2 million owed to the federal government, according to Fortune. In 2020, under the Trump administration, the Treasury Department gave Yellow a $700 million pandemic-era loan as part of the COVID-19 rescue plan, citing reasons of national security, the WSJ reported.

A special congressional oversight report recently concluded that the U.S Treasury “made missteps” in their decision to give Yellow the loan, adding that Yellow’s “precarious financial position at the time of the loan, and continued struggles, expose taxpayers to a significant risk of loss.”

The company is preparing to file for bankruptcy and is discussing selling off all or parts of the business, according to the outlet.

AUTHOR

ALYSSA RINELLI

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: UPS Avoids Major Strike In New Deal With Union

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Take An Inside Look At The New Conservative Company Fighting Back Against Corporate America’s Woke Agenda

Launched nationally only 13 months ago, PublicSq. — a new “parallel economy” for conservatives — went public on the New York Stock Exchange this week.

PublicSq. aims to be the platform where “freedom-loving” Americans can find “quality products, services, and exclusive discounts from values-aligned businesses.” The company describes its values as “Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Pro-Freedom.”

Company founder and CEO Michael Seifert gave viewers a behind the scenes look into the launch, discussing the goals he has for the company moving forward. He was joined by PublicSq. investors Donald Trump Jr. and Omeed Malik. Malik is a minority owner of the Daily Caller.

Seifert explained, “I think a lot of people view going public as sort of an exit, or a finish line, and for us, it’s fundamentally the opposite. We have a country to save.” One of the main perks of going public, he continued, is “our consumers being owners in the platform.”

Speaking on his desire to get involved in the company, Trump Jr. explained that “half the market’s been ostracized by woke corporate America.”

“We wanted to create a place where people can find businesses and where businesses can find consumers that share a common values base,” he added.

He hopes PublicSq. will “inspire people to be more vocal about the basic tenets of America — freedom of speech, freedom of commerce.”

On his vision for the company, Malik explained that “patriotic capitalism is putting the country first in our economic decisions. You have to have a digital platform where people can find each other.”

“The foundation of any economy is an exchange,” he continued, “and in the parallel patriotic economy, it’s PublicSq.”

Nick Ayers, another investor, applauded PublicSq for already having over 55,000 small and medium businesses on the platform and over one million consumers.

Chants of “USA” erupted on the floor of the stock exchange as the PublicSq. team rang the opening bell.

AUTHOR

GAGE KLIPPER

Contributor

RELATED ARTICLE: Online ‘Parallel Economy’ For Conservatives Prepares To Go Public

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Real Cost of an Open Border: How Americans are Paying the Price

On July 26th, 2023 the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement, led by Chairman Clay Higgins (R-LA), and the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, and Intelligence, led by Chairman August Pfluger (R-TX), held a joint hearing to examine the tragic human cost of Alejandro Mayorkas and Joseph Robinett Biden Jr.’s historic humanitarian border crisis.

Below is the testimony of Todd Bensman Senior National Security Fellow, Center for Immigration Studies.

The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit research organization founded in 1985. It is the nation’s only think tank devoted exclusively to research and policy analysis of the economic, social, demographic, fiscal, and other impacts of immigration on the United States.

Watch Todd Bensman’s opening statement on the real cost of an open U.S.-Mexico border,

TRANSCRIPT OF TODD BENSMAN’S TESTIMONEY

Messr. Chairman Higgins, Ranking Member Correa, Chairman Phluger, and Ranking Member Magaziner and Members of the Subcommittees, thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the important issue of impacts from the worst mass migration crisis ever to have occurred at the American southern border. And what is happening at that border is, by every possible metric on government record, the worst such mass migration in the American experience, now well into its third year with at least four million foreign nationals allowed to enter and stay in the United States for their illegal crossing efforts.

I have studied, analyzed and reported border issues for more than 17 years. First, during my 23-year career as a journalist for major media outlets through 2009. Then for nine years as an intelligence analyst for the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Intelligence and Counterterrorism Division, and since 2018 as a senior national security fellow for CIS.

In the official capacity of my current role, I have spent a great deal of the past two-and-a-half years on the ground, both sides of the border, usually with the immigrants before and after they cross. And from thousands of their testimonials, I have written the only comprehensive first draft of this historic event’s causes and effects, in my book OVERRUN.

In it, I document the genesis of this incredible continuous event to specific policies that went into effect on President Joe Biden’s Inauguration Day, which immigrants unanimously tell me are the main reasons they decided to journey across the southern border.

The administration put a freeze on required border enforcement measures and fast-tracked release of the majority of illegal crossers into the country where they and most experts know they will stay forever.

And on their cell phones, which every immigrant has, they sent word of this incredible bonanza down trail, to home villages and all along the migration trails. And in this way, those first tens of thousands who began crossing on inauguration day quickly became hundreds of thousands a month, and then millions a year. Counting an estimated 1.7 million never apprehended, probably more than 4 million have entered the country from the border in a mere 30-month span. Perhaps as many as six million largely uneducated and needy people will be in the country before the Biden policies might first be reversed in the 2024 national elections and the floodgates closed.

Those millions of policy-enticed entries in so short a time already are – and will have – transformative impacts in the form of unplanned-for demands on public welfare and assistance programs, health care systems, Social Security, housing, labor markets, schools, and the criminal justice system.

It is too early in the crisis to measure many of these impacts – assuming anyone is willing to do this politically aversive work. But, despite political reticence to do so, Congress, researchers, media reporters and state and local governments should endeavor to measure impacts in three general areas where indicators of consequential change are already well indicated: public school burdens, unnecessary preventable crime, and unfunded burdens for local communities.

Public School Systems

Probably the very first area of civic life where most Americans will experience the impact of the Biden border crisis will be in the public schools. Local schools face the most immediately visible impacts because a main feature of the Biden border crisis, and also of the earlier Trump swell of late 2018–early 2019, was that immigrants in family groups around the world discovered a certain legal loophole – known as the Flores Settlement. The 2015-amended settlement requires DHS to release immigrant families with young children from detention within 21 days to pursue years of mostly ineligible asylum claims while living inside the United States, rather than to be deterred by detention and deportation.

Children became extremely valuable as tickets into America. So millions of people in family units brought school-aged children in for the Flores Settlement quick-release treatment. At the same time, non-Mexican children traveling without a parent learned they could exploit the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA of 2000) to gain release within three days, sparking rushes on the border of unaccompanied minors.

School-aged children poured in over the border with parents or guardians, or alone unaccompanied by the hundreds of thousands and then the millions to gain the advantage of these quick-release loopholes.

That mostly ended when former President Donald Trump introduced Remain in Mexico and Title 42 instant expulsions for all illegal entrances as a Covid control measure.

But then the Biden administration on day one opened exemptions in Title 42 expulsions, and ended the Migrant Protection Protocols, or Remain in Mexico. These moves allowed for the quick interior releases of a majority of immigrant families, unaccompanied minors, and pregnant and postpartum women.

The public is never told how many advanced-stage or school-aged children got in through these exemptions and entered public school systems.

Based on publicly available data, it’s difficult to estimate just how many school-aged children brought in over the border joined the estimated 49 million children enrolled in American public school systems.1

But national enrollments would have had to include a bulk of the 545,000 unaccompanied minors enticed by policy to cross since 2019 – 388,748 of them just since 2020. Hundreds of thousands more would surely have crossed in to enroll among the 1.9 million foreign nationals apprehended as family units from 2018 to date.  Up-to-minute data is not yet available but, as of 2021, 11 million public school students from immigrant-headed households (legal and illegal) accounted for nearly one out of four students in public schools, more than double the 11 percent in 1990 and more than triple the 7 percent in 1980.2

As for the hundreds of thousands that have certainly driven those percentages much higher since 2021, school districts across America had to enroll them under a 1982 Supreme Court ruling regardless of immigration status, numbers, costs, and hardships.

What might those be?

Spiking enrollments that force school districts to hold successive tax-hiking bond elections to purchase portable classrooms, build new schools, expand existing schools, hire more administrators, janitors, security officers, school cafeteria workers, and hire more English as a Second Language teachers, according to complaints leaching into the public realm.

For instance, in and around New York City, a significant surge of 5,000 immigrant children flooded into four counties in a single eleven-month span through August 2021, posing a $139 million unplanned burden on New York taxpayers to educate them.3  The arrivals of mostly teenage boys created a classroom crisis that strapped educational resources and aided gang-recruiting efforts, the New York Post reported. In May 2022, New York City education officials grappling with older illiterate teen immigrants who have gone years without formal education agreed to launch a pilot program that would all 400 “newcomers” fan out to identified high schools where they can learn English.4

In Austin Independent School District, teachers protested in April 2022 about a 400-student influx of immigrant teenagers from Central America at its International High School and Eastside Early College High School campus.5 Teachers complained they were left to give instruction in hallways and conference rooms. Similar scenarios are unfolding more quietly in school districts across America.

For what that may look like in extreme form, parents whose children attend public schools across the United States need look no farther than Cleveland Independent School District (CISD) in East Texas’s Liberty County about 40 miles northeast of Houston. A sprawling new community called Colony Ridge, whose new and established residents – and CISD’s School Superintendent – universally acknowledge that many are illegally present in the United States, has boomed inside the CISD’s 143 square miles to some 60,000 as of 2021.6

In 2019, the growth driven by largely immigrant children prompting the Texas Education Agency to label CISD a “hyper-growth” district.7

CISD Enrollments exploded from 3,693 K-12 students and four main schools in 2011-2012 to more than 12,000 in 2022. From four schools, CISD is now 12 schools and 60 portable classrooms funded by continual bond elections and with plans for a $1.2 billion expansion to twenty more schools over the next decade to accommodate an anticipated student body of 20,000 students as Colony Ridge continues a massive migration-fueled expansion. A decade ago, CISD was 40 percent Hispanic. Now it is 90 percent and very different from the old country days.

In 2022, I traveled to CISD and Colony Ridge as part of research for my book Overrun and interviewed students, parents, teachers and the superintendent Stephen McCanless. From them, I learned that the district’s ills there take many forms. Classroom and school overcrowding have required portable classroom farms, sharp spending increases to hire new teachers and bus drivers, continual requests for voters to approve bonds to build new schools, fallouts from language barriers and uneven education levels, less individualized teacher time per student, poorer academic performances for all, and public safety concerns.

What I learned from public records and my interviews was that most of the new students can’t speak English. Those with limited English proficiency rose from 20 percent in the 2011-2012 school year to 55 percent in 2021-2022. English-as-a-Second Language curricula now makes up more than half of all school curricula. The entire teaching staff is required to obtain state ESL certification or an equivalent one, and expensive and time-consuming endeavor requiring constant management. The majority of parents speak limited English too and stay away, some for fear of deportation.

Many of the new students were teenagers who couldn’t read or write. Broad language barriers suppress academic achievement. Student-teacher ratios range in the upper thirties per teacher for certain core classes. It’s crowd control, not education, one teacher told me. Some of the statistics are alarming. Nearly half of Cleveland High School’s students were considered to be at risk of dropping out. Nearly 60 percent of Cleveland Middle School’s 2,238 students were considered at risk of dropping out.8

“Texas Education Agency says they have a right to a free public education,” McCanless told me. “And I can’t put a fourteen-year-old in a second-grade class, so we put them in an age-appropriate grade level and we give them all the supports we can, and then you’re like, ‘how do we teach a fourteen-year-old how to read!? I mean, that should have been learned in first or second grade. But we have to do it. We’re doing it. We have some now. And then the state tells us they’re expected to take the state test!”

“How are they doing on the tests?” I asked. “How do you think?” McCanless replied.

The district has repeatedly asked voters to approve massive tax-spiking bond elections, an $85 million one in 2017, a $198 million one in November 2019, another for $150 million in 2021, another for $115 million in 2022. Weary voters approve some and reject others.9

Keeping up with this problematic growth is a nonstop desperate struggle that has left students with sub-par education and caused the flight of pre-existing students to other cities and towns. The growth has spawned a wide variety of social problems never seen in CISD’s history.

McCandless and teachers told me of gang formation, drug trafficking and violence came into the school system with the “newcomers.” “And we have dealt with them. And I have expelled them.”

No one seems to be systematically tracking these transformative kinds of impacts anywhere in America’s public schools.

But while the case of CISD is in many ways extreme, there can be no doubt that school districts across America are undoubtedly experiencing similar pain to greater or lesser degrees, suffering in silence.

A Great Unnecessary Crime Wave

For years, advocates of a borderless United States have pointed to academic-seeming “studies” that compare illegal alien criminality to American citizen criminality and then conclude that Americans commit more than the illegal immigrants.10 Its progenitors cite the comparison to nullify concerns about illegal immigrant crime. They use it to argue that the American people should leave the illegal immigrants alone and more properly tend to American citizen criminals.

The result of these comparative “studies” is that while America keeps busy with the ostensibly more real problem of US citizen crime, the nation’s leaders let the illegal immigrant flow continue unimpeded since that population is so much less worrisome.

But this “comparative research” diverting concern from illegal immigrant crime constitutes one of the greatest academic and intellectual frauds in the annals of immigration studies.

The notion that these two groups should be compared is intellectual misconduct of the highest order, a sham campaign that almost surely has extended the unnecessary carnage against American citizens and lawful residents. The comparison studies factory is a sham because illegal immigrants, and especially those with knowable criminal histories, are uniquely subject to government deportation and detention, which does not exist for American citizens and lawful residents.

So, unlike every crime committed by American citizens, every crime committed by illegally present immigrants with criminal histories was avoidable. Because illegal immigrants are constantly subject to entry blockage and removal, all of their crimes must be counted as a 100 percent net-gain increase of a social ill that hurts real people in the worst imaginable ways on a consistent, long-term basis.

Conversely, American citizens and lawful residents, obviously, are not subject to a national government apparatus in place to block and remove them from American territory so that they are not present to commit crime. America is stuck with its criminal citizens before, during, and after every crime they commit. The DHS detention and removal machine cannot and will not ever prevent a single crime by an American citizen.

That is a Grand Canyon-sized difference between the two groups disqualifying them for comparison in crime or anything else, like how often both use public assistance. Immigration enforcement will always eliminate or reduce the presence of illegal immigrants who commit crimes but never American residents. Americans have no choice but to suffer every single American citizen-committed crime but should never have to suffer one single illegal immigrant-committed crime.

Illegal immigrant crime is notoriously difficult to measure because doing so is politically aversive to government agencies in politically liberal precincts. But in addition to sudden painful public school enrollments, most Americans will suffer more crime committed by more illegal immigrants. Most U.S. states do not keep track of crime committed by illegal immigrants, and neither does the federal government.

Only Texas tracks much of its crime by noncitizenship and its data is likely indicative of crime trends in other large-population states.

It is too early as of this writing to guess the extent to which alien crime that will result from the Biden border crisis.

But if the past is any indicator of the future and the Texas numbers can indicate problem scope, America is in for a sustained unnecessary crime wave of preventable murder, rape, child abuse, burglary, felony theft, drug trafficking, alien smuggling, and drunken driving manslaughter on a higher permanent scale.

The Texas Department of Public Safety learns the immigration status of suspects booked into local jails through a program that submits fingerprints to the FBI for criminal history and warrant checks, and to DHS, which returns immigration status information on those whose fingerprints were already on file (which is not all of them).11

The glimpse is limited and not a reflection of much almost certain higher totals, but it is telling about the trend line ahead across America. Between June 1, 2011, and July 31, 2022, these 259,000 illegal aliens were charged with more than 433,000 unnecessary, preventable criminal offenses. Those included 800 homicide charges (resulting in 374 convictions as of July 2022), 822 kidnapping charges (resulting in 265 convictions), 5,470 sexual assault charges (resulting in 2,593 convictions), 6,485 sexual offense charges (resulting in 3,065 sexual offense convictions), and 4,945 weapons charges (resulting in 1,723 weapons convictions).

What the Texas data show is that hundreds of dead people should be alive, thousands of sexual assault and sexual offense victims should never have suffered the trauma, and tens of thousands of assault charges involving victims would not have been hurt.

The Texas data also shows that criminal aliens took up police time and clogged up the American justice system that could have been more dedicated to American criminals. Thousands of drug, burglary, robbery, and weapons charges need not have jammed the Texas criminal justice systems at taxpayer cost.

The Texas program found that another 10,590 illegal aliens were identified while they were in Texas state prisons over the past decade. Among them were prisoners serving time for 119 more unnecessary homicides.

Back to Liberty County’s massive settlement of Colony Ridge, legacy residents are increasingly alarmed by criminal atrocities never seen before. On April 29, a five-time deported Mexican national who owned a home in neighboring San Jacinto County allegedly murdered five members of a Honduran family that lived next door after they complained that his firing of a semi-automatic assault-style rifle at 11 p.m. was keeping the baby awake. He allegedly killed mothers and children, two of whom miraculously survived the massacre under the bodies of their parents who died shielding them.12

That one made national news but many other atrocities and evidence of Mexican cartel operations in the area did not, such as the April 2023 murder of two former area middle school students found riddled with bullets in a car.13

In 2020, an illegal alien from Mexico who settled in Colony Ridge chained two house cleaners to a bed and sexually assaulted them in a blackmail scheme during which he took nude photos.14 The nightmare ended when one of the women attempted an escape in her vehicle but didn’t make it; her assailant managed to shoot her to death and set her car on fire with her inside before fleeing back to Mexico. Border Patrol caught him trying to cross again in California a short time later.13

In 2016, owners of a Colony Ridge lot who were clearing it of brush discovered the decomposing remains of a single mother of five children named Esmeralda Pargas-Nunez, 42, who’d been reported missing a month earlier. It took two years, but homicide detectives tracked down her alleged killer to Houston in 2018, another woman named Sabrina Olarosa Garcia, and charged her with murder.15 This was evidently part of a kidnapping scheme in Houston where the alleged murderer first lured her victim to a meeting.

In September 2022, passersby in Colony Ridge found the body of a 16-year-old Honduran girl who’d been shot to death and dumped in a ditch by the side of a road, still wearing her uniform from her work busing tables at a local restaurant. Gang unit police arrested three foreign nationals, all under 21, and charged them with the murder of Emily Rodriguez-Avila, citing “gang overtones” as a motive. The family shipped her body back to Honduras for burial.

In June 2022, a Liberty County dog brought home a human hand, which led to the discovery of a badly decomposed body of a man who had been buried with his gun. Police couldn’t identify the corpse and were left to post photos of the clothing in hopes someone would recognize them.

The Gulf and Sinaloa Cartels invested in Colony Ridge from its earliest inception, they said, financing lots for local operatives to run safe houses through which they move smuggled drugs and people from the border to interior America. They were using them still to smuggle people coming in under Biden.

Evidence of cartel involvement dates to the earliest days of the illegal-alien settlement boom. To at least 2013, when federal, state, and local investigators raided a Mexican drug cartel’s marijuana grow operation on 300 acres in Liberty County, finding explosives, 6,000 marijuana plants, worker bunk houses, and guard towers.16 Local police at the time called it the “largest and most sophisticated marijuana-growing operation” in the county’s history.

In July 2021, the DEA broke that dubious record with the new biggest drug bust in Liberty County history with a raid that broke up a multimillion-dollar methamphetamine manufacturing lab operating inside one of the Colony Ridge dwellings.

During a recent trip, a police investigator drove me around several town neighborhoods pointing out high-end brick homes where cartel management figures lived before they were busted or moved away.

This kind of criminality grew so problematic by 2021 that the fearful town leaders of Plum Grove established a first police department that works in concert with two county-paid bilingual constables that Liberty County funded to exclusively patrol Colony Ridge.

The addition of several police officers amounts to a drop in the ocean, one officer from the region told me. Drive-by shootings, stealing, and drug trafficking are rampant, victimizing mostly the new community.

Indeed, a five-month-long gang and narcotics investigation by the Liberty County Sheriff’s Office came to a dramatic end in December 2021 with the arrest of two 15-year-old boys and a 17-year-old boy who were part of a violent drug-trafficking racket in Colony Ridge.17

After three or four months where the boys would engage in gun battles with drug buyers who wouldn’t pay on time, local police had to investigate. When the day came to make arrests, the armed 17-year-old rammed a police car during a pell-mell car chase near Plum Grove, fled home, and barricaded himself in his house until a SWAT unit had to extract him and a girlfriend inside, who also was arrested amid drugs that were found.18

If those who committed these crimes were in the country illegally, none of this should have happened since they and their parents would not be present if immigration laws were followed.

Within Texas, which probably is emblematic of many other states, Liberty County reflects a microcosm of what unnecessary crime can look like anywhere large numbers of foreign nationals who are only thinly vetted settle. Much more of this is on the way to communities across America, whether anyone systematically records it or not.

American cities and towns feeling under siege

The pain of unfunded impact from the White House’s mass illegal immigration crisis can be heard in the ever-lengthening lists of cities and towns forced to contend with unmitigated inflows of needy immigrants from the southern border.

Cities as far north as Chicago and as far west as Denver are squealing in pain from unfunded burdens of having to shelter, feed, clothe, medically treat, and support never-ending inflows of needy, uninsured, limited English-speaking immigrants from throughout the world.

Cities such as Washington DC, New York, and Chicago have declared states of emergency and demanded federal bailouts that will come at the taxpayer expense to feed, house, and care for tens of thousands of illegal immigrants allowed into the country to stay under Biden policies.19

No one wants to share the pain of sudden massive influxes of dependent, needy immigrants in New York, the ultimate not-in-my-backyard issue. New York City and 30 state counties are locked in litigation over plans to export immigrants to them as 15,000 new immigrants a month pour into the city.20 Nine New York State counties were suing to block New York City’s immigrant-export operations.

American citizens, including veterans, are displaced from city-run homeless shelters as towns and cities fill up all available public spaces, to include public school auditoriums and college dorm rooms. Cities and towns along the Texas border have declared border-related disasters and emergencies, to include Brownsville, Laredo, and El Paso. One town 400 miles from the border, Cold Spring one county over from Liberty, declared a migration-related emergency as recently as June because of a “massive surge of drug and human smuggling” associated with the border crisis.21

As the Biden border crisis grinds on and on, expect the silent majority of cities and towns across America to add their voices of pain and protest to the lengthening list. They will do so because their leaders have correctly assessed that this massive new population of needy foreigners will burden and transform their communities without their say-so.

End Notes

1Back-to-School Statistics,” National Center for Education Statistics.

2Steven A. Camarota, “Mapping the Impact of Immigration on Public Schools,” Center for Immigration Studies, 20 June 2023.

3Kerry J. Byrne, “Border Crisis Hits Classrooms as Unaccompanied Minors Flood NY Schools,” New York Post, October 30, 2021.

4Reema Amin, “NYC to Expand Transfer High Schools to Help English Language Learners,” Chalkbeat, May 11, 2022.

5Natalie Haddad, “Austin ISD Confirms One Campus Is Overcrowded, Not All Students Are in Classrooms,” KVUE ABC News, April 29, 2022.

6Fitch Affirms Cleveland ISD, TX’s ULT Bonds and IDR at ‘AA-’; Outlook Stable,” Fitch Ratings, July 2, 2022.

7District Improvement Plan 2021–2022,” Cleveland Independent School District.

8Cleveland High School,” Texas Tribune Public Schools Explorer.

9Bond Elections,” CISD website.

10Michael T. Light, Jingying He, and Jason P. Robey, “Comparing Crime Rates between Undocumented Immigrants, Legal Immigrants, and Native-Born US Citizens in Texas,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 117, no. 51 (December 7, 2020).

11Texas Criminal Illegal Alien Data,” Texas DPS website, accessed August 26, 2022.

12Maria Jimenez Moya, Eduardo Medina and Jesus Jimenez, “After a Neighbor’s Complaint, Gunman Kills Five People in Texas Home,” The New York Times, April 29, 2023.

13Daniela Hurtado, “2 former Santa Fe Middle School students identified as bodies found in car, deputies say,” ABC13 News, 11 April 2023.

14Dorian Geiger, “Man Who Allegedly Killed Woman and Sexually Assaulted Another He’d Chained to a Bed Arrested by Border Patrol,” Oxygen True Crime, November 25, 2020

15Nicole Hensley, “Houston Woman Arrested for Murder in 2016 Cold Case,” Houston Chronicle, 20 September 2018.

16Drug Cartel Linked to Multi-Million-Dollar Pot Bust in Liberty County,” KHOU TV Houston, November 9, 2013.

17Aaron Drawhorn, “DEA Fighting on the Frontlines: Biggest Drug Bust in Liberty County’s History,” KFDM 6,14 July 2021.

18LCSO Deputies, Pct. 6 Constable’s Office Arrest Suspects in Plum Grove Area for Alleged Gang Activity,” Bluebonnet News, 9 December 2021.

19Sonnet Swire, Priscilla Alvarez and Paul Le Blanc, “DC mayor declares state of emergency over migrant arrivals from Arizona and Texas,” CNN, 8 September 2022.

20Daniel Wiessner, “New York City sues counties refusing to house migrants,” Reuters, 7 June 2023.

21Bob Price, “East Texas County 400 Miles from Border Declares Migrant-Crisis Disaster,” Breitbart News, 14 June 2023.

©2023. Center for Immigration Studies. All rights reserved.

Fed Resumes Interest Rate Hikes To Highest Level Since 2001

The Federal Reserve hiked its benchmark federal funds rate by a quarter of a percentage point on Wednesday after skipping the previous hike, bringing the rate to the highest level since 2001.

The rate hike brings the Fed’s target rate within a range of 5.25% and 5.50%, making this the eleventh hike since March 2022, after temporarily pausing the rate increases in June. Most economists anticipated a quarter-point interest rate hike as a part of the ongoing effort to bring inflation down, bringing the high end of the range to the highest rate since January 2001, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

“The Committee decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate to 5-1/4 to 5-1/2 percent,” the Federal Reserve press release said. “The Committee will continue to assess additional information and its implications for monetary policy. In determining the extent of additional policy firming that may be appropriate to return inflation to 2 percent over time, the Committee will take into account the cumulative tightening of monetary policy, the lags with which monetary policy affects economic activity and inflation, and economic and financial developments. In addition, the Committee will continue reducing its holdings of Treasury securities and agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities, as described in its previously announced plans. The Committee is strongly committed to returning inflation to its 2 percent objective.”

“I suspect the Fed will raise rates a quarter of a point at the upcoming FOMC meeting and then wait a few months to see any lagged effects come in,” Peter Earle, economist at the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER), told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “If disinflation continues at its current pace, with this rate hike we may be at the top of this cycle. If disinflation slows or the prices of certain goods/services prove sticky—like rents/shelter costs—we could see another 25 basis point hike in the late summer/early fall.”

The increase comes as inflation remains high. The Consumer Price Index (CPI), a broad measure of prices of everyday goods such as energy and food, increased 3.0% year-over-year for the month of June, which is down from 4.0% for May but still far from the Fed’s 2% target. Core CPI, which excludes energy and food, rose 4.8% on an annual basis in June compared to 5.3% in May.

“Inflation is now falling faster than Fed officials expected, which may put them in danger of overtightening and creating a recession if they continue raising interest rates as planned,” Dr. Thomas Hogan, senior research faculty at the AIER, told the DCNF.

As of Wednesday morning, markets were predicting more than 96% odds that the Fed would raise the federal funds rate by 25 basis points, according to the CME Group.

“When Silicon Valley Bank and a handful of other regional banks failed in the spring, many thought that, inflation or no inflation, the FOMC would quickly shift to an expansionary policy bias,” Earle told the DCNF. “They didn’t. The next test for the Fed will come if the softness currency seen in the US economy becomes a recession. If that happens and inflation isn’t back down to 2 percent, will stable prices or macroprudential concerns take precedence in their policy setting? That’s the question.”

AUTHOR

WILL KESSLER

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: China’s Economic Turmoil Could Raise Prices For Average Americans, Experts Say

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

VIDEO: Full Hearings on Biden Family Tax Evasion

Interestingly, within 72 hours of these hearings new material has emerged which offer a very high resolution lens with which to view the testimony given below.

Daily Mail: RELEASED: Bombshell FBI document detailing alleged $10M Biden bribery scheme: Burisma CEO said Hunter was ‘stupid’ but necessary to keep on board because ‘his dad’ could ‘protect’ them from ‘problems’

A highly-anticipated internal FBI document – obtained by DailyMail.com – includes bombshell claims that Joe Biden and his son Hunter forced a Ukrainian oil executive to pay them $10 million in exchange for the then-Vice President’s influence in getting a senior prosecutor fired.

According to the conversation between a confidential source and Burisma CFO Vadim Pojarski in 2015, Hunter Biden was hired onto the company’s board to ‘protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems.’ 

Burisma CEO Mykola Zlochevsky told the source: ‘It costs 5 (million) to pay one Biden, and 5 (million) to another Biden.’

FBI Document 1

FBI Document 2

FBI Document 3

FBI Document 4

‘For the better part of a year, I’ve been pushing the Justice Department and FBI to provide details on its handling of very significant allegations from a trusted FBI informant implicating then-Vice President Biden in a criminal bribery scheme,’ Grassley said in a statement.

‘While the FBI sought to obfuscate and redact, the American people can now read this document for themselves, without the filter of politicians or bureaucrats, thanks to brave and heroic whistleblowers.’

Read more.

RELATED ARTICLE: IRS Whistleblower Joseph Ziegler Confirms Biden Family Received $17 Million in Payments

RELATED VIDEO: Julie Kelly Unpacks Newly Released FBI Documents Detailing Alleged Biden Bribery Scheme

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column posted by is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

BIDENOMICS: Biden Regulations Have Cost Americans a Whopping $10,000 Per Household: Study

The Democrats are killing us.

If rulemaking and regulatory costs continue to accelerate at the same rate as they did during the Obama administration, the report states, “[T]he result after eight years [under Biden] would be a cumulative $7 trillion, which is almost $60,000 per household.

And media is applauding this legal plunder.

Biden regulations have cost Americans almost $10,000 per household: study

Biden admin regulatory costs surpassing those under Obama, research shows

By Aaron Kliegman | Fox News June 29, 023:

The Biden administration’s burdensome regulations have cost Americans about $10,000 per household, according to a new report, which noted that figure could skyrocket if President Biden is re-elected in 2024 and serves another four years.

Casey Mulligan, a professor of economics at the University of Chicago, compares the regulatory records of President Biden and former Presidents Donald Trump and Barack Obama in a new study published by the Committee to Unleash Prosperity.

As of the end of last year, according to the study, the Biden administration imposed new regulatory costs on American households and businesses at a pace that is surpassing that of the Obama administration during a comparable time period. Specifically, Mulligan writes that the Biden administration has so far been adding regulatory costs at a rate of $617 billion per year of rulemaking, not counting regulatory costs created by statutes and other non-rule regulatory actions.

Mulligan calculates that the added costs of these Biden-era rules finalized in 2021 and 2022 — including both their current and expected future costs — amount to about $9,600 per household. These costs are spread over time rather than concentrated in the first year that the rules take effect — and could spike significantly if Biden is re-elected.

If rulemaking and regulatory costs continue to accelerate at the same rate as they did during the Obama administration, the report states, “[T]he result after eight years [under Biden] would be a cumulative $7 trillion, which is almost $60,000 per household.”

Still, Biden has fewer regulations per year than Obama and Trump in almost every category, according to the report. However, the current administration has implemented some especially costly regulations, such as actions on student loans and vaccine mandates.

Overall, automobile fuel economy and emissions standards account for a third of the total regulatory costs, with health, labor, telecommunications and consumer finance regulations also comprising a significant chunk.

Unlike Biden, Trump oversaw large-scale deregulation, as the report notes.

“The Trump administration’s agencies through four years reduced regulatory costs by almost $11,000 per household in present value,” according to Mulligan, who notes that figure doesn’t include Operation Warp Speed to produce a COVID vaccine. “On an annual basis, President Trump was on net reducing regulatory costs (more than $300 billion per year of rulemaking) almost as fast as Presidents Obama and Biden were creating them ($600 billion per year of rulemaking).”

If rulemaking and regulatory costs continue to accelerate at the same rate as they did during the Obama administration, the report states, “[T]he result after eight years [under Biden] would be a cumulative $7 trillion, which is almost $60,000 per household.”

Keep reading

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: 131 Manufacturing organizations ask Biden White House to stop unprecedented regulatory ‘onslaught’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Fed’s Spending Disaster and Target’s Satanist LGBTQ Collection

GUESTS AND TOPICS

FRANK VERNUCCIO

Frank Vernuccio serves as editor-in-chief of the New York Analysis of Policy & Government, providing objective coverage of key issues facing the United States today. Frank is the co-host of the Vernuccio/Novak Report, nationally both on broadcast radio and the web at amfm247.com. FRANK also co-hosts of the “The American Political Zone,” Broadcast on the AUN-TV Network and on cable in eastern Connecticut.

TOPIC: The Federal Government’s Spending Disaster!

JUDGE PHIL GINN

Judge Phil Ginn was appointed president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in April 2021 after a distinguished career as both a lawyer and a judge. He holds a B.A. from Appalachian State University, a J.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and a Doctor of Ministry from Southern Evangelical Seminary. Prior to his appointment as SES president, Judge Ginn served as SES Chairman of the Board of Trustees.

TOPIC: Target’s Satanist-affiliated LGBTQ collection as store stock plummets!

©2023. Conservative Commandoes Radio. All rights reserved.

House Oversight Investigates John Kerry’s Secret Communist China Deals That Undermined U.S. Economy and National Security

This parasitic scumbag has made a career out of selling out this country, undermining our economy and national while acquiring enormous wealth. Climate is a euphemism for corruption. Imaginable corruption.

Has the FBI searched Kerry’s homes for classified docs?

John Kerry’s secret CCP negotiations probed by GOP Oversight chairman

Kerry’s activities, conducted ‘under the guise of climate advocacy,’ could undermine American interests, top Republican says

By Thomas Catenacci | Fox News

House Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., is probing Special Presidential Envoy for Climate (SPEC) John Kerry’s secretive negotiations with his Chinese counterparts.

Comer informed Kerry in a letter sent Thursday afternoon that the committee, under his leadership, has opened an investigation into Kerry’s role in the Biden administration and, in particular, his high-level climate negotiations with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). To date, Kerry has ignored information and document requests from Comer and other committee Republicans sent when they were in the minority.

“To date, you have failed to respond to any of our requests,” Comer wrote to Kerry. “Yet, you continue to engage in activities that could undermine our economic health, skirt congressional authority, and threaten foreign policy under the guise of climate advocacy.”

“The Committee requests documents and information to understand your role and provide necessary transparency over the SPEC and its activities,” he continued. “As a member of the President’s cabinet, you should be representing the United States’ interests. Your statements, however, consistently show disregard for American national security and taxpayer dollars.”

[….]

Letter to Kerry Re SPEC 118… by Jim Hoft

Despite the high-level role leading the Biden administration’s global climate strategy, Kerry’s office has been tight-lipped about its internal operations and staff members, sparking criticism from Republicans, including Comer, who have demanded transparency for such an important office.

“We are left with an insufficient understanding of your office’s activities, spending, and staffing,” Comer continued. “To enable long overdue oversight of your office, please provide the following documents and information.”

The Oversight Committee chairman added that Kerry has been too soft on China’s human rights violations “while promoting climate negotiations that the CCP does not even appear interested in entering.”

Kerry has been blasted for various comments that have appeared to downplay vast human rights abuses tied to China’s green energy supply chain. After he was asked in November 2021 about how slave labor was reportedly employed by solar panel firms in China, Kerry said he had to stay in his “lane” when negotiating with Chinese officials.

“Well, we’re honest about the differences,” Kerry said at the time. “We certainly know what they are, and we’ve articulated them, but that’s not my lane here… My job is to be the climate guy and stay focused on trying to move the climate agenda forward.”

Since assuming the SPEC position, Kerry has engaged in various private talks with Chinese counterparts, including two 2021 meetings that took place in China. Following a regional climate summit in April 2021, Kerry told CNBC that solving climate change was “not about China.”

“This is not about China. This is not a counter to China,” he told the outlet. “This is about China, the United States, India, Russia… a bunch of countries that are emitting a pretty sizable amount.”

China accounts for about 27% of total global emissions — nearly tripling the total in the U.S., the world’s second-largest emitter, according to Rhodium Group — and continues to approve and construct a large amount of coal power plants.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: John Kerry’s office consulted left-wing environmental groups while crafting policies, emails show

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Why There Are No ‘Fair’ Solutions Out of the Federal Government’s Spending Quagmire

The federal government is facing very serious budget issues, dramatically worsened by the past few years’ expansion in profligate spending. But while that gets most of the fiscal headlines at the moment because of the national debt limit discussion, the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds have far more unfunded liabilities than the official federal deficit. And those huge problems are well past the “something should be done” stage and getting very close to the “something must be done” stage. That has led some to reconsider reforming Social Security, the famous “third rail” of politics.

The mere possibility of that has energized those who fear that a change from the status quo might give them less, even though the huge financial holes involved cannot be sustained for long, meaning that “doing nothing” for now guarantees a worse deal for many soon. So such opponents are gearing up to prevent any move toward improved fiscal responsibility and sustainability that might involve reducing anyone’s benefits now or in the future by asserting that it would be unfair.

Unfortunately, however, if we rule out all options that might “unfairly” reduce benefits for current or future beneficiaries, we must be unfair to others. The reason is that the federal government has promised trillions of dollars more in benefits than taxes to fund them through Social Security (and even more so for Medicare), and those overpromises leave no fair way out.

Consider the option of reducing Social Security retirement benefits in one way or another. That is not fair, because government promises of ongoing retirement support have led people to believe in continued funding at the promised levels, and to adapt their behavior to those promises. Having done so (e.g., saving less privately for their retirement), it is unfair to cut that funding, because many who relied on benefit promises have become dependent on the government living up to them.

But there is a good reason for considering this possibility—if we continue to do nothing to change things, the trust funds will soon run out and benefits will have to fall substantially from then on, which would also be unfair, and potentially even more so.

Despite that, if history is any guide, any serious proposal of potential benefit reductions will not lead to rational discussion, but fights to make sure someone named “not us” will bear as much of the burdens as possible. We will witness a “guilt parade” of the most obviously pitiful and destitute beneficiaries, none of whom should be forced to “do without,” to remind us of its unfairness (just as we see struggling family farmers when agricultural or water subsidies are under fire; the most seriously ill when medical benefit cuts are proposed; poor, inner-city children when cuts to education funding are considered; etc).

Now, this fairness argument is partly correct. But only partly, because it does not consider the fairness of the alternatives. While benefit cutbacks can be considered unfair to those now and soon-to-be dependent on them, every alternative is unfair as well. Rather than choosing between fair and unfair options, we must choose between unfair ones.

Say we look to maintain benefit promises through substantially higher Social Security taxes. The problem is that people have also adapted their behavior to the promised extent of those taxes (already greater than income taxes for the majority of Americans), and some now depend on not losing any more take-home pay just as many recipients depend on not losing anticipated benefits.

Proposing that we just tax “the rich” more, as by increasing or even eliminating the income limits on Social Security “contributions,” would especially increase its unfairness to higher income earners, who are already paying far more in Social Security taxes than they will ever get back in benefits, and who also pay a sharply disproportionate share of income and other taxes as well (not to mention being in the crosshairs for further increases in those taxes).

Benefits could be maintained without increasing Social Security taxes by federal borrowing. But borrowing is just deferred taxation, so that would unfairly burden whichever taxpayers will be left holding the bag for those taxes. It would also increase the tax uncertainty faced by all Americans, who face a harder task of guessing how, where, when, and on who those future taxes will be assessed.

What about some sort of privatization? That could potentially increase the rate of return earned on retirement savings relative to what Social Security offers, improving the system from this point in time forward. However, such a move cannot magically eliminate its current multi-trillion dollar unfunded liabilities. And if future benefits are to be more closely based on private contributions than the current system, as privatization would require, treating those savers more fairly would unfairly take funds now used to subsidize the retirement of current workers, even though many of them paid far less in taxes than they will receive in benefits under the current structure.

Even doing nothing about Social Security to avoid treating people unfairly is unfair, since the status quo is unsustainable, requiring future commitments to be broken in a major way. Even Social Security statements now communicate that there will soon be too little money to meet their benefit promises.

It is time we realized that there is no fair way out from government Social Security commitments that exceed the funds available. Current overpromises mean that everyone has a plausible fairness claim on their side, yet something must give. The closest we can come to being fair is to avoid making any new over-commitments, to search for ways to make the program more sustainable (to reduce future unfairness problems), and to look seriously at the contentious issue of which of the options will minimize the adverse impacts of unfairness that cannot be avoided altogether. Demonizing any real consideration of the various options, as some have already started doing, only increases the likelihood that there will ultimately be more unfairness than necessary.

It’s also important to recognize that the inherent unfairness we must soon address is not limited to Social Security. That problem comes in the wake of any ongoing government program that offers benefits in excess of costs to beneficiaries at the start, because in a world without free lunches, that requires future Americans to be saddled with the burden of paying for those excess benefits.

So “not fair” also applies not only to the introduction and past expansions of Social Security, but also to current attempts to sweeten the Social Security pot, as with the Social Security 2100 Act. It also applies to Medicare, Social Security’s 1965 offspring, which faces an even larger financing hole, since early recipients got far more benefits than they paid for (both because benefits have increased and because early recipients paid for at most a few years at lower tax rates than now, but got benefits for the rest of their lives).

The same unfairness applies to any government trust fund with unfunded liabilities, such as for the Highway Trust Fund, due to be fully depleted within the next dozen years. (Since benefits from the road work began long before much of the associated costs came due, the program leaves more costs than benefits for succeeding Americans.)

The national debt reflects similar benefits that have not been paid for, unfairly leaving the tab for a huge pile of not-even-remotely-justified government spending projects and policies to later generations (not to mention providing the leverage for further expanding not-yet-paid-for benefits every time the debt limit expansion provides a must-pass piece of legislation).

It is worth remembering that in many areas that have been put under government control, the word “unfair” is correct. But that is because unfairness is baked in from the beginning of such government programs.

We can now only choose among unfair options which will be unavoidably difficult and unpleasant, with a government that has shown very little interest in facing those sorts of problems. And the way to prevent further inherent unfairness problems is not by embracing policies that attempt to buy votes today by creating policies where people are disproportionately treated (debt forgiveness, anyone?). Unfortunately, there is an ever-present pile of policy proposals whose political attraction is just such disproportionate treatment, which justifies little optimism for solutions arising out of the beltway anytime soon.

AUTHOR

Gary M. Galles

Gary M. Galles is a Professor of Economics at Pepperdine University and a member of the Foundation for Economic Education faculty network. In addition to his new book, Pathways to Policy Failures (2020), his books include Lines of Liberty (2016), Faulty Premises, Faulty Policies (2014), and Apostle of Peace (2013).

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Crossroads of Collectivism: Trump Tax Plan, Laffer Curve and Reagan & Thatcher Prosperity in the US & UK

 

[ The following article was forwarded to President Trump’s campaign during the 2016 election cycle.  Today, simply apply it the 2024 cycle & update the Federal Debt to 37 Trillion. ]

 

Collectivist States seek Total State Power by Force, Political Action & Economic Means.  Once a State controls the Means of Production & Distribution it quickly controls the Wealth of the People.  Under Compulsion, Liberty evaporates & horrid enormities occur as the State purges Citizens refusing surrender.  These ill effects are the same regardless of from which sector in the political spectrum Collectivism arises.

The United States has reached a Tipping Point beyond which the Aggregation of Total State Power into the hands of a Cabal of Rulers of vetted Legislators & private Central Bankers will be fully consummated  –  unless a political course change for the Ship of State is made in the present election cycle.

With the reasonable premise we do not need to be taxed more  –  here are some thoughts about taxation policy & economic circumstances underlying the present, or any, political circumstance.

To start, it is always far more serious if taxes are too high for effective compliance  –  than if an increment of revenue is lost by tax reduction.  Lowering tax rates actually increases revenue  –  as careful consideration of the following information shall illuminate.

Consider President Ronald Reagan’s experience.

Reagan made tax cuts with a cooperative Legislative Branch.  Presidential Candidate Donald Trump can do the same  –  should Republicans hold control in the House & Senate in the general election of November, 2016.

Taxation advisor Arthur Laffer was a member of Reagan’s Economic Policy Advisory Board from (1981-1989).

Laffer also advised Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher on fiscal policy in the UK during this period.

As you may be aware, simply stated, Laffer’s taxation premise is:

If taxes are low, compliance is high

&

if taxes are high, compliance is low.

Dubbed the Laffer Curve (LC), it is a quantification of human nature known for centuries.

The chart below expresses the LC axially.

The Laffer Curve

It also happens to demonstrate the realization European monarchs arrived at several centuries ago, assisted by the Rothschild family banking franchises.  When you tax people around 50% of their earnings, they begin to lose incentive to participate.  For a monarch this could mean losing everything  –  including one’s head in a revolt.

Enter the concept of Fiat Currency  –  printing money to bridge the gap between a monarch’s cultural limitation in tax receipts & the additional cost of Imperial Designs.  This is the camel whose nose is presently under the US fiscal tent.

A Monarch (or Government) has only to print more currency to reach further into the purses of Subjects (or Citizens) because each unit of currency in their pockets is devalued by the addition of newly created units arriving in circulation, printed out of thin air, in the act of Monarchical (or Legislative) Fiat.

After all, a nation’s currency in its entirety, reflects the sum total of a nation’s Debt  –  which can be divided into an infinite number of parts or units.

This is the same Central Banking trick known today as ‘Inflation’  –  so named because prices of goods & services become necessarily inflated to reflect the intentional devaluation of each unit of the currency.

In this way, Legislators escape culpability for grossly over-spending the People’s Treasure  –  inflating away its value in an unending game of self-interested appropriation  –  under cover of Central Bank ‘monetary policy’, over which politicians purposefully have no statutory control.

In return for this political cover, Central Banks accrue interest on Debt Notes they issue from thin air  –  paid by a government with the power to coerce its people through taxation enforcement up to & including penalty of imprisonment or corruption of blood.

Thus Inflation is onerous, unseen, unbridled & un-legislated Taxation.

By the way, the Monarch (or Government) does not suffer the effect of Inflation, because as much fiat currency as necessary can be printed without limitation  –  to pay for the original purchase supporting imperial (or state) designs.

The totality of this scheme is quite divisive in governments of popular form.

A few examples illustrate the point.

If government employees receive ‘inflation-adjusted’ compensation, they have a compelling personal stake in perpetrating the un-legislated tax of inflation upon their fellow citizens.  This self-interest becomes manifest in several unhealthy expressions for a Republic.

For example, citizens who take government pensions or benefits become wholly compromised in any consideration of the merits of government monetary or other policy & should honorably absent themselves from political advocacy  –  unless willing to demonstrate complete renunciation of those benefits.

Similarly, the until recently, unheard of practice of active duty US Military Officers engaging in political advocacy  –  previously forbidden by Service traditions & the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)  –  is now commonplace.

Witness recent Obama campaign signs in the front yards of active duty Military Officers in Washington, DC area communities.  Something compelled these officers to do this.  This is dangerous precedent for the preservation of Liberty, under a latent threat of military coercion in US politics.

Thus governments become entrenched in folly & inequity that ultimately leads to their dissolution in revolution.

To conclude the point on taxation policy, the following from the Laffer Center’s website is succinct:

“Importantly, the Laffer Curve does not say whether a tax cut will raise or lower revenues, nor does it predict that any and all tax rate reductions would necessarily bring in more total revenues.  Instead it says that tax rate reductions will always result in a smaller loss in revenues than one would have expected when relying only on the static estimates of the previous tax base.  This also means the higher the starting tax rate, the more dramatic the supply-side stimulus will be from cutting the tax rate.  It is possible this economic effect will swamp the arithmetic effect, causing an actual increase in tax revenue.”

Reagan tax cuts combined with cuts in Federal spending produced the real, positive economic effects Laffer described.

Mrs. Thatcher achieved similar results in the UK.

Prosperity resulted.

How much?

For a cogent discussion of the remarkable results achieved with tax reductions by Reagan see:

Revisiting Reagan Tax Cuts.

Then politics crept in and the advances were incrementally squandered by forces of what President George Washington called ‘Interest’  –  meaning political Self-Interest.  In our discussion, we can call this effect ‘Entitlements’.

Mrs. Thatcher codified it another way, calling it socialism:

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

How did this happen?  For an excellent summation see these two links:

  1. Stagnation Prosperity Stagnation
  2. Reaganomics Tax Cuts Alone are Not Enough

Some further observations about how this happened are worth emphasizing.  They highlight structural flaws which must be corrected by the People using further Constitutional Amendments.

First, in the smoke & mirrors world of Congressional appropriation of funds & extra-governmental management of monetary policy by the Central Bank Cartel known as the Federal Reserve (Fed), there exists a Deliberate Disconnect in Accountability to the People  –  because federally elected Legislators cannot be held accountable for monetary policy actions of the private entity Fed.  This crippling slight of hand supports vast transfers of the People’s Wealth to the Fed over time  –  the very root of income disparity in our society today.

All this results from the Federal Reserve Act of 1913  –  which established US Central Banking for the fourth time  –  and from the purported ratification of the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution in 1913, which created Income Tax.

It’s no accident they occurred simultaneously  –  a one-two punch for the Rothschild Model in a popular government.

AMENDMENT XVI  –  The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

We’ll deal further with rectifying the problem of the Fed below, but there’s an obvious solution to the inequities & inefficiency arising from Income Tax.

Income Tax must be abolished by a 27th Constitutional Amendment repealing the 16th Amendment. Income Tax can then be replaced by a Consumption Tax in a 28th Amendment.  The Consumption Tax (CT) is a very, very low automated percentage of each transaction (no more than 1%).  CT obviates the need for an Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which can be largely retired & eliminated.  The aggregate volume of transactions occurring in the US economy ensures more than enough revenue to conduct the nation’s business.  Happily, the Laffer Effect of tax reduction boosting an economy, will ensure the US economy reaches the most robust dimensions ever enjoyed.

Understanding the elegant simplicity & unimpeachable fairness of the Consumption Tax is subject for another discussion.  Suffice to say here, CT is real, effective & has been successfully used before in the United States.

Additionally in 1971, the Nixon Administration repudiation of the ‘Gold Standard’ backing US currency opened ‘Pandora’s Box’ to the ills of fiat currency because Legislators, in collusion with Central Bankers, could print untethered currency to their heart’s content  –  and have!

It took Federal Legislators & Presidents a few years to fully realize they were no longer accountable to the People for ‘Sound Money’, but they caught on quickly enough  –  in an era of Legislative Bill ‘Riders’  –  to do serious damage to the national Treasury.  Federal Debt has spiraled uncontrollably upward ever since.  A return to backing US currency with Gold & other precious metals will help quickly dispatch this Inflation Racket.  President Richard Nixon’s Executive Order of 15 August 1971  –  the policy instrument authorizing fiat money  –  can be cancelled to commence the process of returning to Sound Money.

The following chart will water the eyes of any thinking American  –  the more so because it’s already out of date  –  the US Federal Debt now stands at nearly $20,000,000,000,000 (trillions):

US Federal Debt $20 Trillion

The American Public is paying a staggering $440 Billion in annual interest  –  just to service the US National Debt.

Who receives this interest?  The few members of the Federal Reserve  –  a private entity.  See chart below.

$440 Billion Annual Interest Paid On US $20 Trillion Debt (Aggregated Monthly Over Fiscal Year)

US Entitlements & Debt Interest in the next 15 years, completely crowd out the primary function of the Federal government  –  Defense of the Nation.  Repeat, there will be no money for Defense.

Why would a nation do that to itself?

On the chart below  –  at the intersection of Revenue & Debt  –  lay the next American Revolution.

US Entitlements & Interest On Debt Consumes Entire Federal Budget

See also:

Question, you ask:

“With the majority of accumulation of $20 trillion in US Federal Debt since after 1971, why haven’t the prices of goods & services inflated through the roof  –  most particularly given acute Federal Budget excesses committed by Congress & the Executive Branch over the last 8 years from 2008-2016?”

Answer:

The post Word War II Baby Boom Generation of Americans is now in the stage of life during which shedding debt & downsizing is the norm.  This effect is destroying private debt at a rate coincident with unrestrained creation of debt by government.

When this generational force has subsided, prices must inflate under aggregated & continuing unchecked currency devaluation by Federal government through Unbridled Spending & Debt Interest.

Our Nation & the world will experience the true Mother of All Depressions.

This is because each new added dollar represents a smaller & smaller slice of the Federal Debt Pie  –  as that Pie is sliced more & more thinly.  Ultimately, US Debt paper (dollars) will be rendered worthless, each representing a slice so thin, it won’t be negotiable.

As the currency collapses, every sector of the economy must absorb the loss.

Home prices, government pensions, everything of value is lost.  This is what happened in 1929, when markets & assets lost 90% of their value & remained devalued for the decade long Great Depression.
In the customary Revaluation that follows, secured creditors deemed ‘Too Big To Fail’ are made whole on the backs of depositors & mortgage holders  –  in what has become the customary “Bail Out”.  Only this time, since the currency will be worthless, it will be a “Bail In”.  As we saw in Argentina & other revaluations, US citizens will be permitted to withdraw only that amount of their own money not imperiling a Bank’s Reserves, which at a maximum represents only 10% of Bank Obligations  –  due to a logic-defying practice known as ‘Fractional Reserve Lending’.  And then payment will only be made at a rate consistent with a revalued currency at pennies on the dollar.

It gets pretty complicated when Central Banks tinker with money supply as a chief tool for managing monetary policy.

In fact, it is criminally complicated.  Central Bankers the world over should be held accountable for malfeasance & for the untold heartache they have caused for hundreds of millions of people through the profiteering scheme of ‘Inflation’ which is at the root of nearly two centuries of boom & bust cycles and several armed conflicts among nations.

To start in the US, using our 27th Constitutional Amendment abolishing Income Tax, we must likewise abolish the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 to prevent further Central Banking & to end forever the two senseless practices of paying interest on our National Debt & paying the Un-legislated Tax called Inflation.  A deeply onerous Racket the private ‘Federal Reserve’ Bank franchise must end permanently, if our Republic will survive & flourish.  Happily on several past occasions Central Banking has been successfully repudiated by Congress & by Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Jackson & Wilson.  Absent this critical step, the People’s wealth will be consumed.

In response to the assertion that a welfare constituency in the United States has no skin in the game if they pay no tax, there is a more direct & sustainable course than fretting about lack of taxation participation:

End entitlements all together.  This is fiscally sound, Constitutionally sound & a certain inducement to innovation in income production among tax skates.  The Framers never intended the nation would encumber itself in this way.

Entitlements are a problem worth worrying about.

In sum, there is merit to be found in the Trump Tax Plan & some cogency in its numbers.  Certainly, it does not go far enough, but if extended growth of the economy can kick the can a little further up the road  –  to wean Americans off entitlements through employment  –  it may be of interim use.  In totality Trump’s Tax Plan appears to resonant with the structure of Reagan era taxation policy, which proved beneficial & prosperous.

Taking the ‘Drag Brake of Taxation’ off the ‘Wheel of the US Economy’ will create unprecedented Prosperity in the United States.  The only reason not to do so is if you don’t want the US Economy to prosper & soar!

Why would someone want that?

As a related economic issue, Mexico is a failing State ripe for the next chapter of its history.  Mr. Trump’s border wall, will prove important to our Nation’s Security & Economy Stability as the Mexican State trajectory unfolds.  Trump’s plan contains sensible points of leverage available to the United States in dealing with this issue. Certainly, allowing further abuses of US Sovereignty & Security associated with Mexico cannot serve US national interests  –  nor the long term interests of our southern neighbor.

Mexico’s trajectory is Mexico’s & not ours  –  violent La Raza Racists & other Provocateurs not withstanding.

See:  Pay for the Wall

Mr. Trump’s style is occasioned by deep sincerity in promoting a Return to American Greatness.  The deeper one looks into his platform, the stronger his arguments become.

Some would say his style is bona fide of something other than dysfunctional politics as usual.  That may well be true.

That said, regarding the fallacious assertion the Trump Tax Plan is not viable, it may be more to the point to observe the challenge is to find any discernible tax plan at all from Candidate Clinton.

Please see:  Hillary Clinton’s Plan to Raise American Incomes

Even a cursory look at this ‘offering’ reveals button-pushing, pandering & double-talking rhetoric largely offensive to Liberty loving Americans & belies a measured political calculation that is all too familiar.  Of course, we are all fed up to here with that sort of self-serving Collectivist politic.  The plain truth is Mrs. Clinton’s bromides do nothing to address serious, unsustainable structural defects in US Treasury, Taxation & Monetary Policy.

Given the overt & concentrated assaults on American Liberty, sovereignty, morality, normative culture, fiscal responsibility & official accountability that has come acutely  –  even brazenly  –  to the fore in the Obama full court press of the last 8 years, it appears we have arrived at a crossroads of historic import for the trajectory of the greatest nation to ever appear on Earth, the United States of America.

On such occasions, all hands must be mustered & the decks cleared for action.

We each must decide whether our personal trajectories are sufficient reason to countenance further politics as usual, or whether Liberty is more precious to the longer course of our Nation’s affairs for Ourselves & Our Posterity.  The Tyranny of Collectivism stands before us & we are already well worn in its rub  –  a state no nation can hope to long endure.

An answer must soon be given if our Experiment is to last.

Though we risk Tyranny of another stripe, it seems necessary to answer the present danger of Collectivism.  As Party dice appear to have been cast, this means support for Trump.

The alternative must be deemed unrecoverable.

 

© 2016 Strategic Waters International, LLC.  All Rights Reserved.

Biden’s Energy Chaos: The Who, What, When, Why and How?

Cheap and reliable energy is what makes our nation strong in peace time and in war. Without it we devolve into a second rate nation dependent on others for energy, the very life blood that drives our economy.

Biden’s key policy is to create chaos by attacking our ability to discover, mine, drill, extract, refine, transport and provide cheap and reliable energy to every American family, community, business and governments at every level.

Watch this video interview with Rick Perry, the 14th United States Secretary of Energy from 2017 to 2019 and the 47th Governor of Texas from 2000 to 2015, on Fox News to discuss the Biden Administration’s Energy Crisis:

Here are the answers to the questions we asked in the title.

WHO: Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. and Jennifer Mulhern Granholm the United States Secretary of Energy. Granholm said, “I think blaming the president for high gas prices is like blaming Rudy Giuliani for 9/11.Note: The twin towers in New York City and the Pentagon were deliberately attacked by the radical Islamic terrorist group al Qaeda supported by the Taliban in Afghanistan. Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. deliberately canceled the Keystone XL pipeline, stopped issuing permits to explore and drill for oil and natural gas, made the decision to reduce and ultimately eliminate fossil fuel use and his policy to save the planet by going to green energy. Both of these are terrorist attacks on the American people.

WHAT: The Green New Deal.  The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA)—a sweeping climate and health care package that invests $369 billion in energy, climate, and justice over 10 years—was signed into law in August of 2022. After the law was signed by Biden Natural Resources Defense Council President Manish Bapna stated, “This law moves us closer to President Biden’s pledge to cut climate pollution 50 to 52 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. To get there, he must use his established authority to write rules to help cut carbon pollution from our cars, trucks, and dirty power plants, reduce methane emissions, and keep investors informed on corporate climate risk…This is a turning point in the climate fight – the strongest U.S. action yet to confront the existential challenge of our time [climate change].” Note: No piece of legislation can alter the weather, let alone the climate. Climate change is a myth to pass legislation that forces mankind to do things that harm it.

WHEN: August 2022 with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA). Note: The passage of this act has not reduced inflation. In fact consumer prices and the inflation rate was 9.1% in June and has gotten much worse and America is officially in a recession. Wall Street is experiencing a bull market as well. The U.S. dollar has lost 13% its value since 2020. Today’s prices are 1.14 times higher than average prices since 2020, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer price index. A dollar today only buys 87.390% of what it could buy back then. The inflation rate in 2020 was 1.23%. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon stated that the S&P 500 could yet fall by “another easy 20%” from current levels, adding that “the next 20% would be much more painful than the first.” Global inflation is forecast to rise from 4.7 percent in 2021 to 8.8 percent in 2022.

WHY: Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. policies including lockdowns, vaccine mandates, goal to eliminate fossil fuels and his anti-capitalism policies. OPEC and its plus one Russia (OPEC+) announced they would curb production by 2 million barrels per day. This happened despite the Biden Administration’s plan to purchase OPEC barrels to refill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) in exchange for a guarantee to not lower production. According to Goldman Sachs, we are likely to see oil prices return to $110 per barrel, and gasoline prices will likely return to $5 to $6 a gallon nationally.

HOW: By Executive Orders and legislation passed by the current Democrat controlled Congress.

In a Real Clear Policy column titled How Much Worse Can Our Energy Policies Get?  adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute Jonathan Lesser reported,

In the wake of OPEC’s two million barrel per day announced production cut, the Biden Administration has responded with a cynical set of policy responses that will further damage the US and world economies.

[ … ]

Back at home, the Department of the Interior is considering a ban on all offshore oil and gas leases for the next five years that is being pushed by green energy advocates. Coupled with DOI’s slow-walking of new leases on federally-owned lands, the ban will push natural gas and crude oil prices even higher. If Democrats convince the Biden Administration to ban natural gas exports, the harm will be compounded. Natural gas prices in Europe will rise even further and countries will burn more crude to generate electricity, raising crude prices still higher. OPEC and Russia will be delighted.

A cynical short-term effort to reduce the price of gasoline. Price controls on Russian crude that will increase prices. Restrictions on US natural gas and oil supplies supposedly to speed the transition to green energy. If these policies were not so economically destructive, they would be laughable.

Except consumers and businesses around the world won’t be laughing.

The Bottom Line

Americans nationwide have been footing the bill at the pump, at work and at the grocery store for the Biden Administration’s disastrous energy policies. Americans are paying the price for the Biden Administration’s energy dependence at the feet of Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and foreign adversaries like socialist Venezuela.

Unfortunately, our fuel bill is about to skyrocket yet again.

America First Policy Institute reports,

The Biden Administration’s energy dependent policies have put the United States in a vulnerable position. Instead of working for energy independence, the United States runs to foreign governments for energy. These governments include Venezuela, which is ironically an OPEC member.

Watch Astrid Hajjar examines the Biden Administration’s flirtatious advances toward Venezuela.

The cost of the Biden Administration’s energy dependent policies is being paid for by hardworking Americans, and these policies are helping enrich tyrants abroad. An America First Agenda is one that restores our energy independence and alleviates Americans’ pain at the pump.

©Dr. Rich Swier, the America First Policy Institute and the Center for Energy and Environment. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEETS:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Journalists Hook Camper Up to $115k Electric Hummer, It Can Only Make It 123 Miles – But It Gets Worse

White House Planning Oil Reserve Release Announcement This Week

Less Fuel Is More Fuel For Red Wave

How Much Worse Can Our Energy Policies Get?

Inflation 75 Year High, Unemployment 24% 

Biden Admin Begged Saudis To Delay Oil Production Cuts Until Days Before The Election

Energy Analyst Says EV Charging More Expensive Than Gas

America’s Suicidal Energy Policy Has Very Real Costs

Americans identify ‘the most important problem facing the country’—the Government’

U.S. State GDPs Compared to Entire Countries

It’s pretty difficult to even comprehend how ridiculously large the US economy is.


Click here to view the U.S. State GDPs Compared to Entire Countries map.

The map above (click to view and enlarge) matches the economic output (Gross Domestic Product) for each US state (and the District of Columbia) in 2018 to a foreign country with a comparable nominal GDP last year, using data from the BEA for GDP by US state (average of Q2 and Q3 state GDP, since Q4 data aren’t yet available) and data for GDP by country from the International Monetary Fund. Like in past years, for each US state (and the District of Columbia), I’ve identified the country closest in economic size in 2018 (measured by nominal GDP) and those matching countries are displayed in the map above and in the table below. Obviously, in some cases, the closest match was a country that produced slightly more, or slightly less, economic output in 2018 than a given US state.

It’s pretty difficult to even comprehend how ridiculously large the US economy is, and the map above helps put America’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of $20.5 trillion ($20,500,000,000,000) in 2018 into perspective by comparing the economic size (GDP) of individual US states to other country’s entire national output. For example:

  1. America’s largest state economy is California, which produced nearly $3 trillion of economic output in 2018, more than the United Kingdom’s GDP last year of $2.8 trillion. Consider this: California has a labor force of 19.6 million compared to the labor force in the UK of 34 million (World Bank data here). Amazingly, it required a labor force 75% larger (and 14.5 million more people) in the UK to produce the same economic output last year as California! That’s a testament to the superior, world-class productivity of the American worker. Further, California as a separate country would have been the 5th largest economy in the world last year, ahead of the UK ($2.81 trillion), France ($2.79 trillion) and India ($2.61 trillion).
  2. America’s second largest state economy—Texas—produced nearly $1.8 trillion of economic output in 2018, which would have ranked the Lone Star State as the world’s 10th largest economy last year. GDP in Texas was slightly higher than Canada’s GDP last year of $1.73 trillion. However, to produce about the same amount of economic output as Texas required a labor force in Canada (20.1 million) that was nearly 50% larger than the labor force in the state of Texas (13.9 million). That is, it required a labor force of 6.2 million more workers in Canada to produce roughly the same output as Texas last year. Another example of the world-class productivity of the American workforce.
  3. America’s third largest state economy—New York with a GDP in 2018 of $1.68 trillion—produced slightly more economic output last year than South Korea ($1.65 trillion). As a separate country, New York would have ranked as the world’s 11th largest economy last year, ahead of No. 12 South Korea, No. 13 Russia ($1.57 trillion) and No. 14 Spain ($1.43 trillion). Amazingly, it required a labor force in South Korea of 28 million that was nearly three times larger than New York’s (9.7 million) to produce roughly the same amount of economic output last year! More evidence of the world-class productivity of American workers.
  4. Other comparisons: Florida (about $1 trillion) produced almost the same amount of GDP in 2018 as Mexico ($1.19  trillion), even though Florida’s labor force of 10.2 million less than 20% of the size of Mexico’s workforce of 59 million.
  5. Even with all of its oil wealth, Saudi Arabia’s GDP in 2018 at $683 billion was below the GDP of US states like Pennsylvania ($793 billion) and Illinois ($863 billion).

Overall, the US produced 24.3% of world GDP in 2017, with only about 4.3% of the world’s population. Four of America’s states (California, Texas, New York and Florida) produced more than $1 trillion in output and as separate countries would have ranked in the world’s top 16 largest economies last year. Together, those four US states produced nearly $7.5 trillion in economic output last year, and as a separate country would have ranked as the world’s third-largest economy.

Adjusted for the size of the workforce, there might not be any country in the world that produces as much output per worker as the US, thanks to the world-class productivity of the American workforce. The map above and the statistics summarized here help remind us of the enormity of the economic powerhouse we live and work in.

So let’s not lose sight of how ridiculously large and powerful the US economy is, and how much wealth, output, and prosperity is being created every day in the largest economic engine there has ever been in human history. This comparison is also a reminder that it was largely free markets, free trade, and capitalism that propelled the US from a minor British colony in the 1700s into a global economic superpower and the world’s largest economy, with individual US states producing the equivalent economic output of entire countries.

This article is reprinted with permission from The American Enterprise Institute.

AUTHOR

Mark J. Perry

Mark J. Perry is a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a professor of economics and finance at the University of Michigan’s Flint campus.

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

U.S. Adds Fewest Jobs This Year As Labor Market Cools

The U.S. labor market cooled once again in September, adding the fewest jobs this calendar year, according to a Friday morning report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), fueling investor hopes that the Federal Reserve might reduce the intensity of its anti-inflation campaign.

The U.S. added 263,000 jobs in August, slightly higher than investor expectations, a meaningful drop from August’s addition of 315,000, and half the 528,000 added in Julyaccording to the BLS. The unemployment rate edged down to 3.5% in September, from 3.7% in August, with 5.8 million Americans currently unemployed, beating investor expectations.

The decline in job growth is another sign that the red-hot labor market is beginning to cool after job openings plunged 10% to 10 million in September from 11.1 million in August, according to a Tuesday BLS report. This slowdown is likely to be welcomed by investors, who hope that loosening labor conditions might prompt the Federal Reserve to reduce the intensity of its anti-inflation campaign, according to CNBC.

Members of the Federal Open Market Committee, the Fed group that sets its policy on interest rates, have been consistent in their messaging that high interest rates and elevated levels of inflation are expected to last at least another several months. The battle against inflation is still “in the early days,” said President Raphael Bostic of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, according to CNBC.

Wages grew by 5% over the past 12 months in September without accounting for inflation, according to the BLS. In August, wages were up 5.2% over the previous 12 months, without accounting for inflation, but once inflation and a reduction in the average hours worked were considered, earnings actually decreased by 2.8% in August, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“Despite the stronger wage growth due to the tightness of the labor market, a majority of workers are finding their wages falling even further behind inflation,” Fed researchers wrote in a Tuesday report on wage growth published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas on Tuesday.

A small minority of workers saw significant real wage growth, while the proportion of workers who saw wages decline fell slightly from pandemic-era highs to 53.4%, the highest rate since 2011, the Fed researchers reported. Amongst those that saw wages decline, the median decline was 8.6%, far greater than the typical range of a 5.7% to 6.8% decline seen in the past 25 years.

Earnings data for September is due on Sept. 13, alongside inflation data in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), a measure of the inflation faced by typical urban households in the U.S.

AUTHOR

JOHN HUGH DEMASTRI

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: Wages Took Their Worst Hit In 25 Years: REPORT

RELATED TWEETS:

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The Biden Administration Just [Quietly] Scaled Back Student Loan ‘Cancellation’

UPDATE: 


Student debt forgiveness is unjust, highly regressive, and inflationary. It should be scrapped, not scaled back.


In August, the White House announced that most federal student loan borrowers would be eligible for forgiveness. Most borrowers who didn’t receive a Pell Grant would be eligible for up to $10,000 of forgiveness, while borrowers who did receive a Pell Grant—a type of financial aid for low-income undergrads—would be eligible for up to $20,000.

In what NPR describes as a “remarkable reversal,” the US Department of Education last week “quietly changed its guidance around who qualifies” for student debt forgiveness under President Biden’s controversial executive order.

“At the center of the change are borrowers who took out federal student loans many years ago, both Perkins loans and Federal Family Education Loans. FFEL loans, issued and managed by private banks but guaranteed by the federal government, were once the mainstay of the federal student loan program until the FFEL program ended in 2010.

Today, according to federal data, more than 4 million borrowers still have commercially-held FFEL loans. Until Thursday, the department’s own website advised these borrowers that they could consolidate these loans into federal Direct Loans and thereby qualify for relief under Biden’s debt cancellation program.

On Thursday, though, the department quietly changed that language. The guidance now says, ‘As of Sept. 29, 2022, borrowers with federal student loans not held by ED cannot obtain one-time debt relief by consolidating those loans into Direct Loans.’”

NPR adds that the change could affect as many 1.5 million borrowers, noting that it’s “unclear why the department reversed” course.

While the Department of Education is mum on the sudden change, National Review suggests it may be a legal maneuver to strengthen the constitutionality of Biden’s executive order, which was recently challenged by attorneys general in Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Missouri, South Carolina, and Arkansas, which filed a federal lawsuit alleging that Biden’s unilateral order was unconstitutional.

The Pacific Legal Foundation has also filed suit, contending “that student-loan borrowers in states like Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Arkansas, and North Carolina would be unfairly taxed for the student-loan ‘forgiveness’ under President Joe Biden’s program.”

Few people, I suspect, could explain the difference between an FFEL loan or a Perkins Loan (I certainly couldn’t). But many rightfully question the constitutionality of the president of the United States unilaterally “canceling” with the stroke of a pen hundreds of billions of dollars in student loans, all of which will have to be paid by taxpayers who did not take out the loan or receive the service.

While I’ll leave the constitutional question to legal scholars, it’s clear student debt forgiveness is unjust, highly regressive, and inflationary.

Lawrence Summers, an economist who served in both the Clinton and Obama administrations, made it clear that Biden’s order would have inflationary consequences.

“Student loan debt relief is spending that raises demand and increases inflation,” Summers argued. “It consumes resources that could be better used helping those who did not, for whatever reason, have the chance to attend college. It will also tend to be inflationary by raising tuitions.”

While many will point out that government shouldn’t be “helping” those who didn’t attend college anymore than those who did, his observation that forgiveness will cause tuition prices to rise is spot on.

Second, even the Washington Post concedes that Biden’s plan is “a regressive, expensive mistake.” How regressive?

As Politico points out, a recent study by economists Constantine Yannelis and Sylvain Catherine “concludes that blanket forgiveness of $10,000 in debt would offer $3.60 to the highest-earning 10 percent of households for every $1 it gave to the bottom 10 percent and that three quarters of the benefits would flow to households with above-median incomes.”

Finally, some may argue that student debt forgiveness is unjust because it’s regressive. While they have a point, debt forgiveness would be unjust even if it was not regressive. As Brad Polumo recently wrote for FEE, loan forgiveness is a textbook example of what the nineteenth century economist Frédéric Bastiat described as “legal plunder.”

Polumbo explained that it’s no coincidence that Biden’s loan bailout was rolled out right before midterm elections in November, describing it as a “calculated attempt” to reward his voting base at the expense of the public treasury. This, Bastiat explained, is legal plunder.

“See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong,” Bastiat wrote in The Law. “See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.”

Bastiat warned that “sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it.” Looting might be legal when the government does it; but it’s never moral, regardless of how many votes it buys or who the beneficiaries are.

Why the Biden administration is “scaling back” its student loan forgiveness order is anyone’s guess. What’s clear is that it should not just be scaled back; it should be scrapped.

This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

AUTHOR

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

RELATED ARTICLE: Segregating Students by Age Is a Terrible Practice

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Constitutional Crisis: Biden’s Student Loan Handout Could Cost $400 Billion, Congressional Budget Office Reports

UPDATE: ‘FLAGRANTLY ILLEGAL’: Lawsuit Filed to Stop Biden’s Student Debt Cancellation


As Americans drown in Democrat incurred debt, they are ramping up more trillion dollar debt. President Biden’s move to cancel up to $10,000 in student loans for privileged borrowers (at the expense of the working class) — and up to $20,000 for others — will cost more than $400 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

“By suddenly adding so-called student loan “forgiveness” to the November elections, President Joe Biden has used politics to paper over the constitutional crisis he precipitated. Under the Constitution, paying off federally insured student loans would be a presidential usurpation not only of the legislative power but also the appropriations power, the taxing power, and the “debting” power.”

Fox NewsPresident Biden’s move to cancel up to $10,000 in student loans for many borrowers — and up to $20,000 for others — will cost more than $400 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The CRFB also included in its estimate about $120 billion in costs to taxpayers from another element of the Biden’s executive order on “income-driven repayment,” which the CBO said it excluded. (Fox News). CBS News: The cost of the debt-forgiveness plan has sparked a debate among some Republicans and those without college degrees, who have argued that the plan isn’t fair to people who didn’t go to college but yet whose tax dollars will support the effort. After the report was issued, Republicans decried the plan’s price tag, citing the CBO’s forecast, with Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona writing on Twitter that it was “even more expensive than we initially thought.” Even so, the CBO’s estimate is lower than an earlier forecast from the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Wharton Budget Model, which pegged the cost at $519 billion (CBS News). National Review: More than 60 percent of Americans would oppose President Biden’s student loan “forgiveness” if it were to raise taxes, according to a new poll by the Cato Institute (National Review).

AUTHOR

RELATED TWEETS:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Americans Spent More on Taxes in 2021 Than on Food, Clothing and Health Care Combined

Can Congress Sue Biden Over The Student Loan Constitutional Crisis He Created?

Explosions Reported On Nord Stream Pipelines As Massive Gas Leaks into Baltic Sea

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.