Doomscroll News

Category: Government

  • The Autopen Republic: An Exposé on Legislative Negligence

    The Autopen Republic: An Exposé on Legislative Negligence

    The assertion that “no one has ever read an entire bill before voting on it” rings with a cynical truth that many Americans feel deep in their bones. It’s a damning indictment of a broken system. This isn’t about lofty ideals or the complexities of modern governance; it’s about a fundamental failure of duty. We demand proof of review, a guarantee that our laws are not passed by autopilot. The era of excuses is over.

    By the Numbers: A Crisis of Volume and Verbiage

    The sheer scale of legislation has become a convenient shield for lawmakers. But a look at the data reveals a problem that has spiraled out of control.

    • The Longest Bill: The record for the longest bill ever passed goes to the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021. At an obscene 5,593 pages, it was a behemoth spending bill combining COVID-19 relief with a $1.4 trillion omnibus package. To expect any single human to read, comprehend, and critically analyze this mountain of text before voting is a physical and cognitive impossibility. It was signed into law by President Trump on December 27, 2020, after passing both houses of Congress with large bipartisan majorities just days earlier.
    • The Shortest Bill: In stark contrast, some legislation can be very brief. In 2017, a bill was introduced in the House with a single sentence: “The Environmental Protection Agency shall terminate on December 31, 2018.” While this bill did not pass, it demonstrates that brevity can be a tool for radical change.
    • The “Average” Bill – A Rising Tide of Text: The very concept of an “average” bill is misleading, but the trend is undeniable. In the 1947-48 session, the average law was just 2.5 pages. Today, that average has ballooned to nearly 18 pages. More complex legislation often exceeds 1,000 pages. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010, for example, clocked in at over 2,500 pages.
    (more…)

  • Big Beautiful Bill: Critiquing Expenditures & Rescissions with a New Federalism Vision

    This article will dissect key components of the bill, reinforcing a fiscally conservative perspective focused on efficiency, market-based solutions, and a reduction in federal overreach.

    A recurring theme will be the devolution of certain programs and responsibilities to the states. It is important to note that many of the responsibilities envisioned for state management are relatively minor in scope, aiming to return local control over local matters. However, even in these areas, and certainly in any more significant transfers, fiscal prudence is paramount. This necessary shift away from federal overreach cannot be a license for states to engage in fiscal malfeasance, particularly when such actions have broader national implications, such as contributing to inflationary pressures through unfunded liabilities or chronic deficit spending.

    To ensure accountability without fostering inter-state conflict, any transfer of responsibilities must be accompanied by a carefully designed mechanism for mutual accountability. This system would involve regular reviews, based on clear, objective, and pre-agreed metrics, of state performance in managing these devolved areas. Should a state demonstrably and significantly mismanage its obligations, leading to measurable negative externalities for other states – for example, by directly exacerbating national inflation through irresponsible fiscal policies directly tied to these devolved functions – a transparent and impartially administered penalty system could be considered. Such penalties, if ever deemed necessary, should be narrowly targeted and proportionate, based on an automatic formula and/or pardons, to avoid politicization and ensure they serve as a corrective measure rather than a tool for “financial war.” The primary goal is to incentivize sound governance, not to create adversarial relationships between states.

    (more…)

  • Immediately repeal the federal Real ID Act, replace with StatePass or Nothing

    Immediately repeal the federal Real ID Act. Its core danger lies not just in bureaucratic failure, but in its fundamental threat to personal liberty and privacy. Real ID creates the infrastructure for a national tracking system, linking state databases and enabling unprecedented government surveillance of citizens’ movements—precisely the kind of invasive system that evokes deep-seated fears among many Americans, including concerns resembling a “mark of the beast” scenario where government monitors and controls individuals through mandatory identification. This potential for pervasive tracking violates the spirit of the 4th Amendment and must be dismantled.

    Replace Real ID with StatePass, a new system of state-controlled secure IDs for domestic travel originating within their borders. Leveraging lessons from Real ID’s troubled history, states will implement StatePass quickly and efficiently. The absolute priority of StatePass is preventing federal surveillance; standards must prohibit centralized databases or features allowing easy federal tracking, focusing instead on secure credentials verifiable locally, not federal data collection. This state-centric approach, where states design, issue, and manage their own StatePass IDs and verification, directly counters the “mark of the beast” concerns tied to federal overreach.

    State accountability will be ensured through robust mechanisms. The State Security Assurance Fund (SSAF) is a mandatory pool of state contributions, essentially security deposits, used to levy substantial financial penalties against any state whose faulty StatePass system causes a major security breach originating there. The Interstate Travel Security Commission (ITSC), composed of representatives from participating states, manages the SSAF, investigates security failures to determine penalties, and facilitates voluntary collaboration on StatePass best practices.

    (more…)
  • The Crypto Eradication and Corporate Fraud Retribution Act (Hypothetical)

    The Crypto Eradication and Corporate Fraud Retribution Act (Hypothetical)

    Preamble: To ensure the integrity of financial markets, discourage speculative and potentially illicit activities associated with certain digital assets, and hold accountable high-level corporate executives who defraud investors in smaller public companies, this Act establishes a stringent taxation regime for digital assets and dedicates the resulting revenue exclusively to the prosecution and incarceration of culpable C-suite executives.

    Section 1: Taxation of Digital Assets

    • (a) Capital Gains and Income: All realized capital gains and income (including staking rewards, mining income, airdrops, and interest) derived from digital assets shall be taxed at a rate of 90%.
    • (b) Capital Losses: No capital losses from digital asset transactions may be deducted against gains from digital assets or any other form of income.
    • (c) Annual Wealth Tax: An annual wealth tax of 10% shall be levied on the total market value of all digital assets held by a U.S. person (individual or entity) as of December 31st each year, regardless of whether the assets have been sold or generated income.
    • (d) Transaction Tax: A 5% excise tax shall be imposed on the fair market value of every digital asset transaction, including purchases, sales, exchanges (crypto-to-crypto, crypto-to-fiat, fiat-to-crypto), and payments for goods or services. This tax is payable by the U.S. person initiating the transaction.
    • (e) Reporting: Taxpayers must report all digital asset holdings and every transaction, regardless of value, on their annual tax return with detailed information including dates, values, counterparties (where identifiable), and transaction IDs. Brokers and exchanges must issue detailed 1099 forms for all customer activity.
    • (f) Penalties: Failure to comply fully with reporting requirements or tax payments under this section will result in penalties including, but not limited to, a fine equal to 100% of the unreported assets’ value or unpaid tax, plus potential criminal charges including tax evasion. Egregious non-compliance may result in asset forfeiture.
    (more…)