Tag: Federal

  • Critique of “Portland residents beg Antifa not to destroy property during anti-ICE riots”

    The article by Hayden Cunningham, while capturing the correct sentiment of residents’ fear, is a deeply flawed piece of journalism that mischaracterizes the situation in Portland and fails in its basic reporting duties.

    1. Misleading Terminology Minimizes Violence

    The article consistently uses passive and misleading language that downplays the severity of the events.

    • It refers to “ongoing protests” and “anti-ICE activists” when the situation is more accurately described as a series of organized riots and attacks on federal property.
    • These are not peaceful “demonstrators” but masked agitators who have engaged in violence against more than just law enforcement. Reports from Portland have described rioters using commercial-grade fireworks as weapons, committing arson, and assaulting officers. There are also accounts of Antifa attacking civilians, Christian prayer groups, and destroying private businesses, none of which is detailed in the article.
    • Calling the events “clashes” and “confrontations” fails to capture the reality of the targeted violence.
    (more…)
  • Healthcare Provisions Within the “Big Beautiful Bill”: Exacerbating Failed Policies

    The comprehensive legislation, dubbed by some the “Big Beautiful Bill” (BBB), includes a substantial set of provisions pertaining to healthcare. These proposals aim to reform Medicaid, Medicare, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and other health-related sectors. However, rather than offering genuine solutions, these healthcare sections largely entrench and expand failed federal programs. Market-based and state-level solutions are the appropriate path forward; continuing with the current trajectory will only worsen our $37 trillion national debt and further degrade our healthcare system.

    Medicaid and CHIP: Entrenching a Failed System

    A significant portion of the bill addresses Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), programs that have demonstrably failed to deliver efficient, fiscally responsible healthcare.

    • Enrollment and Eligibility: Provisions imposing moratoriums on recent rules for Medicaid/CHIP enrollment (Sec. 44101, 44102), while citing concerns over states’ ability to remove ineligible enrollees, tinker at the edges of a fundamentally broken system. Robust income verification, streamlined through tax data, is essential, but this addresses symptoms, not the core disease of these programs. The argument that the delayed rules could weaken verification standards only underscores the inherent vulnerability to fraud and improper payments within these federal structures.
    • The mandate for states to improve enrollee address information and participate in a federal system to prevent multi-state enrollment by 2029 (Sec. 44103) is a minor, albeit logical, measure within a system that requires wholesale replacement.
    • Quarterly screenings against the Death Master File (Sec. 44104) and enhanced provider screening (Sec. 44105, 44106) are basic anti-fraud measures that should have been rigorously implemented decades ago, and their inclusion now highlights past failures.
    • Increasing eligibility redeterminations to every six months (Sec. 44108) will inevitably create more bureaucracy, not genuine integrity, within these failed expansion programs. Stringent initial enrollment criteria are necessary, but the programs themselves are the problem.
    • Proposed revisions to home equity limits for Medicaid long-term care (Sec. 44109) are an egregious component of a system that forces asset depletion. The link between Medicaid and long-term care services must be severed entirely.
    • Prohibiting Federal Financial Participation (FFP) for individuals without verified immigration status (Sec. 44110) is a necessary, though insufficient, step toward fiscal discipline.
    • Conversely, efforts to “streamline” enrollment for out-of-state providers (Sec. 44302) are a pathway to inefficient contracting and cronyism, typical of bloated federal programs.
    • Spending and Program Integrity:
    • The removal of the good faith waiver for certain erroneous excess Medicaid payments (Sec. 44107) is an admission of the rampant improper payments that plague the system, reinforcing the argument that Medicaid must be abolished.
    • Modifying retroactive Medicaid/CHIP coverage (Sec. 44122) is a trivial adjustment.
    • Federal intervention in pharmacy payments (Sec. 44123, 44124) is an unacceptable overreach. Free markets, not government dictates, ensure fair pharmacy pricing.
    • The prohibition of federal Medicaid/CHIP funding for gender transition procedures (Sec. 44125, Sec. 112030) is correct; such funding has no place at the federal level and should be entirely a private matter, with no exceptions for federal dollars.
    • Prohibiting federal payments to “prohibited entities” in family planning (Sec. 44126) is a sound policy; such funding decisions should be eliminated from public coffers altogether.
    • Sunsetting increased FMAP for new Medicaid expansion states (Sec. 44131) and imposing a moratorium on new provider taxes (Sec. 44132) are welcome, as no new taxes should support these failing programs.
    • Revising payments for state-directed Medicaid based on Medicare rates (Sec. 44133) perpetuates federal price-fixing. Medicaid must be dismantled, replaced by a system focused on transparently priced emergency and preventative services, potentially leveraging innovations like robotic-assisted procedures to reduce costs and liability.
    • Mandating Medicaid community engagement requirements (Sec. 44141) is a gross federal intrusion into matters that are exclusively state or local concerns.
    • Modifying cost-sharing for Medicaid expansion individuals (Sec. 44142) is merely propping up a failed expansion of a failed program using flawed metrics like the federal poverty line. The entire edifice needs to be replaced with free-market solutions.
    (more…)
  • Federal Reserve Notes vs. United States Notes

    Federal Reserve Notes vs. United States Notes

    United States Notes differed from the later Federal Reserve Notes primarily in their issuing authority and initial backing.

    How United States Notes Initially Worked: United States Notes were first authorized by the First Legal Tender Act in 1862 during the Civil War. They were issued directly by the U.S. Treasury to pay for war expenses and other government obligations. This meant the government itself was putting this money into circulation, essentially as a “bill of credit,” without involving lending or borrowing from a central bank. Initially, these notes, popularly known as “greenbacks,” were a form of fiat currency, meaning their value was based on government decree rather than being backed by a specific commodity like gold or silver that could be redeemed on demand. However, later, some United States Notes were redeemable for precious metal after the specie resumption of 1879. The early notes carried an obligation stating they were legal tender for all debts, public and private, except for duties on imports and interest on the public debt.

    A Silver Certificate
    (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…)