Issues & Insights,
by
The Editorial Board
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/17/2026 9:25:56 AM
Post Reply
When Washington lawmakers were debating the state’s first-ever income tax, Gov. Bob Ferguson said the 9.9% rate on incomes above $1 million “represents historic progress in rebalancing our unfair system.”
And at first blush, you can see why Washingtonians might agree with him. The new tax promises, after all, to raise $3.7 billion from fewer than 0.5% percent of the state’s taxpayers, with the money going toward such wonderfulness as education, child care, and expanded low-income tax credits.
The middle-class families in that state are in for a rude awakening.
First, the tax isn’t likely to collect anywhere
Issues & Insights,
by
The Editorial Board
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/16/2026 8:18:12 AM
Post Reply
In just the first five months of the new fiscal year, the federal government has already spent more than $3 trillion – more than it spent in all of 2009 – $1 trillion of which it had to borrow.
And what is all this money going toward? The federal government was told 15 years ago to take a full, annual inventory of everything it does. It’s never been able to get that done.
“Each year, the federal government spends trillions of dollars on federal programs that support the American people and address policy goals,” notes the Government Accountability Office in a report released earlier this month.
Issues & Insights,
by
The Editorial Board
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/13/2026 9:09:26 AM
Post Reply
For many years, we’ve marveled at the fact that Moody’s Analytics keeps paying Mark Zandi to be its chief economist. While he’s good at parroting Democratic talking points, anyone who followed his economic predictions over the past decades would be in the poorhouse.
Let’s take just one example: Inflation.
Presumably, this is something that economists should be able to understand and reliably forecast.
When Joe Biden was pushing his massive “Build Back Better” plan, even we non-economists knew it would spur inflation
Issues & Insights,
by
The Editorial Board
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/12/2026 9:35:05 AM
Post Reply
The Democrats have been making desperate arguments against voter ID legislation, including claims that it will disenfranchise married women due to their name change. Naturally, they’ve left out the part about Barack Obama launching his political career by using the name change of a married woman in his successful attempt to have all his opponents kicked off the ballot and run unopposed.
The SAVE Act, which has been passed by the House and is heavily supported by the public but is stalled in the Republican Senate, simply “requires individuals to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship
Issues & Insights,
by
Terry Jones
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/11/2026 11:11:02 AM
Post Reply
The bitter debate between Democrats and Republicans over the SAVE Act — which would require voters to provide a valid ID to cast a ballot — has roiled political waters as both major parties gird themselves for the 2026 midterms. But do voters care? They sure do, and it’s not good news for the Democrats, the latest I&I/TIPP Poll results indicate.
The online poll, taken from Feb. 24 to Feb. 27 by 1,456 adults nationwide, asked voters: “The SAVE Act (Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act) is a proposed federal law that would require individuals to present identification and prove U.S. citizenship
Issues & Insights,
by
The Editorial Board
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/10/2026 8:56:13 AM
Post Reply
"The Democrats are betting on failure.”
That’s how National Review’s Noah Rothman characterizes the Democratic Party’s response to the U.S.-Israeli attacks on the terrorist regime that controls Iran.
But Rothman has it only half right. Democrats aren’t just betting on failure in Iran. They are trying to engineer it. And not just in Iran, but at home as well, where they are actively trying to undermine the economy.
Because, you see, the midterms are coming up, and to Democrats, what matters isn’t the well-being of Americans or ridding the world of its chief terrorist threat. The only thing that matters is winning elections.
Issues & Insights,
by
The Editorial Board
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/9/2026 8:36:34 AM
Post Reply
The United Nations is having a budget crisis. It might have to lay off part of its staff. No one should be brokenhearted over this. It should instead be cause for celebration. The U.N. is nothing more than a parasite leeching off the American taxpayer while propping up dictators, terrorists, and every left-wing crackpot scheme ever dreamed up. It should be dissolved.
Earlier this year, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres “sent a dramatic letter to” member states to warn them “about the ‘imminent financial collapse'” of the organization, says the Global Policy Forum of Europe. “The letter
Issues & Insights,
by
The Editorial Board
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/6/2026 7:49:27 AM
Post Reply
The cranky Vermont senator who believes billionaires should be abolished wants to legislate them out of existence. It’s too bad that he doesn’t understand that one billionaire is more valuable than a thousand Bernie Sanders.
“Billionaires should not exist,” Sanders, who identifies as a socialist, raged in 2019 during his previous attempt to hit the wealthy with an additional tax that punished them for their success.
That effort, the New York Times reported, was “particularly aggressive in how it would erode the fortunes of billionaires” and “would cut in half the wealth of the typical billionaire after 15 years,
Issues & Insights,
by
The Editorial Board
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/5/2026 7:59:49 AM
Post Reply
Virulent Trump-hater George Will penned a column in the wake of the Iran attacks titled “At last, the credibility of U.S. deterrence is being restored.”
Do you think Will turned a corner about President Donald Trump? Hardly.
If you want to know who restored the credibility of U.S. deterrence, Will isn’t saying. You’d think it fell out of the sky.
The most he will concede is that “Donald Trump’s administration has chosen not to wager U.S. safety on Iran’s abandoning its multi-decade pursuit of nuclear weapons, or on Iran’s acquiring them but not really meaning ‘Death to America.’”
Wait. Trump’s “administration” made that choice?
Issues & Insights,
by
Clyde Wayne Crews Jr.
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/4/2026 1:45:17 PM
Post Reply
Policymakers often argue over whether capitalism works and how aggressively it should be restrained. But they rarely ask the more pertinent question: where, exactly, does large-scale laissez-faire capitalism even exist?
The uncomfortable answer is that in the 21st century, it barely does. Across sectors, federal policy does not merely regulate at the margins; it often coordinates at scale, sometimes through forms of rulemaking that do not appear in the traditional Federal Register. Prices, payment flows, entry conditions, risk allocation, technology adoption, and even product, service, and
Issues & Insights,
by
Terry Jones
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/4/2026 8:54:53 AM
Post Reply
On Feb. 24, President Donald Trump gave what many, including some critics, thought was one of the most effective presidential State of the Union speeches of recent decades, if not ever. But it barely moved the needle when it comes to his presidential favorability ratings, the latest I&I/TIPP Poll shows.
In the March online national I&I/TIPP Poll, taken from Feb. 24 to Feb. 27 by 1,456 adults, Trump showed only slight improvement on the lead presidential leadership question: “Overall, is your opinion of Donald Trump generally favorable, generally unfavorable, or are you not familiar enough to say one way or the
Issues & Insights,
by
The Editorial Board
Original Article
Posted by
RockyTCB
—
3/3/2026 7:54:57 AM
Post Reply
The federal income tax is abusive. It is inconsistent with liberty. It has, as Chief Justice John Marshall noted, the power to destroy. There is nothing positive to be said about it. It cannot even raise government revenues efficiently. As we said a year ago, of all the good Donald Trump could do in his second term, eliminating the federal income tax would be one of his greatest achievements.
It’s clearly one of his goals.
“As time goes by, I believe the tariffs paid for by foreign countries will, like in the past, substantially replace the modern-day system of income tax,” Trump said during his State of the Union address.