We have known for some time that our federal employees have cushy lives compared to the people for whom they work (us). What is particularly infuriating is that so many of them either don’t pay their taxes or are seriously delinquent on what they owe their employer—the federal government. Recently, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration found in a new report showing that 6.9% of federal employees are delinquent on their IRS taxes. That amounts to about 215,000 employees. This is a marked increase in three short years from 4.9%. It is appalling that the rate was previously as high as it was, but it has now hit crisis level, seemingly with little or no consequences. This is in contrast to a 5% delinquency rate among the general population. The number of delinquents exploded during the Biden administration, which was lax on enforcing anything for favored groups. We can only speculate as to why federal employees felt they had the right to forgo paying their taxes. It might be Biden allowing so many people to go without repaying their student loans that encouraged the government’s employees to skip payments. The fascinating aspect of this is that these employees are W-2 wage earners who have withholding taken out of their paychecks. The government can easily enforce additional withholding to make sure its employees are in compliance. The feds can easily garnish workers’ wages, as they certainly know where they work. Indeed, the feds do this all the time to ordinary citizens. Worse, about 2,000 of these culprits work for the IRS. It is estimated that their back debt is $50 million. As of 2024, the most recent year for which data is available, there are about 50 employees who have been delinquent for more than five years. Yet these people still work for the agency collecting taxes from the public. There have only been 20 employees terminated for nonpayment in recent years. Nongovernmental professionals who help American citizens comply with the maze of tax laws to properly file their personal returns have significant requirements to stay current on their tax filings and payments.   The broadest manner in which the feds control tax preparers is through the Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN). These numbers became mandatory in 2010. It allows the feds to track anyone who is a preparer. The preparer must renew annually and must attest to the fact that he or she is current on tax filing and payments. If the preparer is not current, the preparer’s right to file taxes will be suspended. Of course, we know it is illegal to lie to the federal government in these situations. As usual, government likes to punish people with penalties. If someone files a return without a valid PTIN, there is a $530 penalty per return. There is another mandatory number tax professionals receive to be able to file tax returns electronically. That number is an Electronic Filing Identification Number (EFIN). The IRS conducts continuous surveillance of tax preparers to monitor their compliance with tax laws and, if someone is not current, they will suspend the tax professional’s right to file. There is an even higher standard for CPAs and tax attorneys. The IRS issues a document called Circular 230 for code of conduct for tax professionals. I once asked if there was a similar document for conduct of IRS employees. Not surprisingly, the answer was no. The failure to file or pay taxes can permanently disbar these professionals from representing clients or signing tax returns. This is the way the government treats ordinary Americans regarding tax filings or delinquencies. It is an understatement to say that dealing with the IRS can be very harsh and incomprehensible. It would be nice to know if our federal employees delinquent on their taxes were receiving similarly harsh treatment for their errant liabilities. When American citizens are working hard and complying with the tax laws, they should have no tolerance for their federal employees failing to file and pay their taxes on time. It seems natural that, in order to work for the federal government, employees should be current on their taxes, just like tax professionals must. Working for the government is a privilege, not a right. To maintain that privilege, employees should be required to file and pay their taxes on time. Lax enforcement of this standard must end. The American people should demand this. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

One classical school in Minneapolis offers a lesson on how to create opportunities in tough areas. Policymakers and special interest groups should pay attention. In May, at a hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce, Rep. Bob Onder, R-Mo., described a reality that has been obvious to parents in the inner city for years: “Democrats and their teacher union allies are opposed to giving poor children, and yes, poor black children [and] poor Hispanic children, opportunity to achieve a good education.” Students from low-income families, especially those in urban areas, are often assigned to public schools that have been persistently low performing for generations. These families’ situations are even more dire in cities that have repeated instances of fraud and mismanagement among assigned schools. Though teachers unions refuse to admit it, there is a way out for these families. A great example can be found in Minneapolis, where city officials have lost the trust of residents due to repeated scams and a public school budget deeply in the red. Minneapolis made headlines in 2026 for widespread childcare fraud and empty “learning centers” that received millions in taxpayer spending. The city’s public schools are also stuffed with taxpayer dollars, even as many of them fail to fill hundreds of available seats.Rising above the morass is Hope Academy, a classical school serving students in downtown Minneapolis. Hope’s students reflect the city’s diversity: 84% of students are ethnic minorities, and school officials report dozens of languages are spoken in the hallways. The median income of Hope Academy families is less than $43,000 per year. Despite these challenges, Hope officials report 97% of students graduate on time. The majority of ninth graders who have attended the school for at least two years are proficient in math and reading. The school even tracks the number of conversations on religious values that educators have with students each year. Every teacher monitors test scores, but how many educators can tell you how often they talk with students about matters of character and devotion?According to researchers at Stanford University, the Minneapolis public school students score nearly two grade levels below the national average in both math and reading. In fact, black and Hispanic students are 4.5 and 5.4 grade levels behind the national average in combined achievement levels, respectively, while white students are two grade levels ahead. Chronic absenteeism rates (the rate of students missing 10% or more of the school year) are up compared to 2019 (though figures have improved since 2022). These dismal results come on top of a district budget that has been riddled with errors and is now nearly $40 million in the red. Meanwhile, Hope Academy tuition is supported by private donations, and the median tuition contribution from families is a mere $850 per year. The difference at Hope Academy is not in how much money is spent but how it is spent. Hope is one of 900 classical schools in The Heritage Foundation’s Classical Schools Database. This database not only tracks the growth of classical schools around the country but also provides information on classical schools’ distinctives compared to assigned public schools. For example, Hope uses a curriculum that includes the trivium (grammar, logic, and rhetoric), teaches Latin and Greek, and engages students in Socratic seminars. Heritage’s database includes 19 other classical schools in Minnesota, but none are located in urban Minneapolis. Minnesota used to be a pioneer of the school choice movement, a movement that encouraged the growth of public and private schools of choice. State lawmakers adopted the first charter school law in the nation in 1991. Unfortunately, lawmakers have not kept up with the expansion of education choice policies nationally. Today, lawmakers in 18 states allow every family in their state to apply for education savings accounts to pay private school tuition or buy other education products and services for their children. Minnesota lawmakers in both chambers have introduced education choice bills that would create these accounts, but these proposals have not advanced. Instead, lawmakers continue to pour dollars into empty daycares and half-empty public schools. When education and the success of future generations are concerned, moms and dads should call for solutions, hold policymakers accountable for fraud, and ask why more students do not have access to schools such as Hope Academy.

This past week, Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent sparred with Democrats as he testified before multiple committees on Capitol Hill. Here are the seemingly mild-mannered secretary’s most vicious verbal battles of the week during his testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee. Who Was President During WWI? “Do you agree with President [Donald] Trump that you also do not care about Americans’ financial situation?” Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., asked Bessent, pressing him on the economic consequences of the president’s decision to strike Iran. “Who was the president during World War One?” Bessent replied. “I don’t know,” Chu admitted. .@RepJudyChu: "Do you agree with President Trump that you also do not American's financial situations?"Secretary Bessent: "Congresswoman, who was the President during WWI?"Rep. Chu: "I don't know, but clearly you are not answering my question." pic.twitter.com/0X2l2Xtb7e— CSPAN (@cspan) June 4, 2026 Bessent went on to argue that Trump, similar to President Woodrow Wilson, was willing to accept certain consequences for voluntarily entering a conflict. “I will promise you that President Woodrow Wilson, who was president during World War One—that the Germans did not attack us, that he got into that. It was a war of principle. And I guarantee you President Woodrow Wilson thought the same thing, congresswoman,” Bessent said. Suozzi’s ‘Former Constituents‘ Bessent also sparred with Rep. Tom Suozzi of New York, a Democrat who represents an eastern Long Island district. “Prices are up, gas prices are up, grocery prices are up, energy prices are up, health care prices are up, interest rates are high—all specifically related to the policies of this administration,” Suozzi said. Secretary Bessent Makes quick jab at @RepTomSuozzi after exchange: "I want to invite you to South Carolina to see all your former constituents." pic.twitter.com/lwzRxLpj1k— CSPAN (@cspan) June 4, 2026 “Good to see you, Congressman. I want to invite you to South Carolina to see all your former constituents,” Bessent told Suozzi, poking fun at the number of New Yorkers moving to the Palmetto State. Wyden Bessent was particularly vicious with Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who accused Bessent of covering up the financial records of the now-deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein “The machinery of government works to the benefit of Donald Trump before all else,” Wyden said. “That’s the corrupt framework that produces insurrection slush funds, protects pedophiles, and dismisses the concerns of people who are worried about being able to make rent.” Bessent fired back ruthlessly. “Sen. Wyden has mendaciously slandered the Treasury building in an attempt to cover up his son having an investment meeting with Jeffrey Epstein to ask for funding,” Bessent said. Documents released by the Department of Justice revealed Wyden’s son Adam, an investor, had engaged in business discussions with Epstein.  .@SecScottBessent: "Sen. Wyden has mendaciously slandered the treasury building — to cover up his son having an investment with Jeffrey Epstein."Sen. @RonWyden: "Let's be clear here, nobody is interested in the rambling of a capo in the most corrupt regime in American history." pic.twitter.com/sabIAv7YA7— CSPAN (@cspan) June 3, 2026 “Nobody is interested in the ramblings of a capo in the most corrupt regime in American history,” Wyden replied. “We would like to hear what Adam Wyden and Jeffrey Epstein talked about,” Bessent said. “Your son’s largest investment position was Rick’s Cabaret. So did your son and Jeffrey Epstein talk about pole dancing as he begged him for money using your limited credibility?” RCI Hospitality Holdings, previously known as Rick’s Cabaret, operates strip clubs across the United States. Adam Wyden’s investment firm, ADW Capital, did not respond to a request from the Daily Signal for comment on Bessent’s remarks. Related PostsHere’s How the IRS Is Taking on the Networks Potentially Funding AntifaTreasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters Thursday that the Internal Revenue Service and the FBI have made substantial progress on investigating the networks funding Antifa leftist agitators, and he mentioned one concrete policy change that could undermine nonprofits’ ability to prop up the violent movement. “In October, the Treasury Department started working with the FBI…Still Wearing a Bandage, Pam Bondi Walks Into Committee Epstein InvestigationFormer U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi sat down for her second round of interviews with the House Oversight Committee Friday amid investigations into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein—despite undergoing treatment for thyroid cancer. Bondi underwent surgery in May. She wore a throat bandage from the surgery on her walk to the committee hearing. She testified…What I Saw on Pete Hegseth’s Trip to SingaporeSecretary of War Pete Hegseth said American relations in the Indo-Pacific are stronger than ever after he crossed the ocean to meet with his counterparts in Singapore.  Hegseth spoke at the Shangri-La Dialogue conference, an Asia security summit, in Singapore, and held bilateral meetings with Indo-Pacific leaders on issues facing the region. The Daily Signal… Related PostsHere’s How the IRS Is Taking on the Networks Potentially Funding AntifaTreasury Secretary Scott Bessent told reporters Thursday that the Internal Revenue Service and the FBI have made substantial progress on investigating the networks funding Antifa leftist agitators, and he mentioned one concrete policy change that could undermine nonprofits’ ability to prop up the violent movement. “In October, the Treasury Department started working with the FBI…Still Wearing a Bandage, Pam Bondi Walks Into Committee Epstein InvestigationFormer U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi sat down for her second round of interviews with the House Oversight Committee Friday amid investigations into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein—despite undergoing treatment for thyroid cancer. Bondi underwent surgery in May. She wore a throat bandage from the surgery on her walk to the committee hearing. She testified…What I Saw on Pete Hegseth’s Trip to SingaporeSecretary of War Pete Hegseth said American relations in the Indo-Pacific are stronger than ever after he crossed the ocean to meet with his counterparts in Singapore.  Hegseth spoke at the Shangri-La Dialogue conference, an Asia security summit, in Singapore, and held bilateral meetings with Indo-Pacific leaders on issues facing the region. The Daily Signal…

The polls closed in California on Tuesday at 8 p.m. local time. As of Saturday, nobody knows which two candidates will be competing in November for governor or Los Angeles mayor. Indeed, mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day may stumble in for seven days until June 9—and still be counted. Thus, weeks could pass before these major political contests are settled. Counties have until July 3 to report their official results to the secretary of state. It was not always this way. By 5 a.m. on March 6, 2013, 100% of precincts had totaled the previous day’s ballots. Nine hours after voting ended, Angelenos knew the final two mayoral rivals. (Gil Garcetti prevailed.) As of Friday, only 71% of ballots had been tabulated in Los Angeles and just 68% statewide. Escargot can count votes more swiftly than Californians. Pundit Nate Silver calls this “failed state shit.” He observed this week via X: “The fact that California elections often can’t be resolved for weeks is kind of insane and not common in other electoral systems around the world.” Silver and Eli McKown-Dawson elaborated, “Colombia held a presidential election on Sunday [May 30], and 99.98% of the result was in on Monday morning. Japan also counts most of its votes overnight. And in the UK (not exactly a poster child for state capacity), you can generally expect to have calls for all 650 parliamentary seats the morning after the election.” California Counts President Donald Trump is not amused. “The Dumocrats are at it again!” Trump roared Thursday via Truth Social. “They are trying to STEAL THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PRIMARY, AND THE MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES, PRIMARY, AWAY FROM TWO GREAT REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES. Here we go with the very late and massive numbers of MAIL IN BALLOTS.” Trump continued: “There’s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California. Votes are all tied up. May not be in for weeks. Under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles. Why the vote counting DELAY???” Trump echoes conservative complaints that GOP candidates in tight races too often triumph only on Election Night. Thanks to magic ballots, these Republicans wane, and the Democrats wax and then win. Magic ballots rarely favor Republicans. California Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton. (Mario Tama/Getty Images) Confidence Corrodes Californians are experiencing either corruption or the appearance of corruption. Neither “I am being robbed” nor “I think I am being robbed” yields deep sleep. If Democrats are using this slovenly process to slouch toward a stuffed-ballot-box defeat of Steve Hilton, Spencer Pratt, or both, the perpetrators must be handcuffed at once. But even if California’s count is purer than St. Francis of Assisi and merely looks crooked, millions of Americans will conclude that someone is cheating, and the entire system is rigged. Such suspicions corrode confidence in elections and the republic that they serve. Winners easily respect their leaders and institutions, but even citizens who lose elections can accept opponents who succeed, fair and square. But when voters feel cheated at the polls, then the whole structure starts to reek. “That’s not my mayor” and “That’s not my governor” become battle cries as America slides toward Civil War 2.0. SAVE America Act California’s pathetic performance offers yet another reason for the U.S. Senate to pry its collective butt out of the proverbial Barcalounger and pass the SAVE America Act already. Catapulting mass mail-in ballots atop the ash heap of history and limiting them to the sick, the infirm, and those absent on Election Day (as the SAVE America Act requires) would go far toward ending this nightmare. And, to be accepted, all ballots must arrive before polls close (as the U.S. Supreme Court soon might decide.) With these two reforms, California (and other states) could manage a much shorter stack of mail-in ballots. They could be counted every Election Day, with normal ballots. Winners and losers would emerge before the cocks crow at dawn. To the Republican-led Senate: Scrap mass mail-in ballots. Pass the SAVE America Act. Make Election Night Great Again!

It was the based of times, it was the woke of times, it was the age of candor, it was the age of cant, it was the epoch of sense, it was the epoch of pretense. And it was the season when firms started moving from high-tax, high-cost blue states to freedom-loving red states. ExxonMobil’s shareholders just sent a clear message: enough is enough. By a margin of 71%, they voted to move the firm’s legal home from New Jersey to Texas, overriding objections from proxy advisers Glass Lewis and ISS, which warned that the move might erode shareholder rights. You know what erodes shareholder rights? Climate litigation, ESG-driven activism, and state attorneys general who treat energy companies as political targets. New Jersey has been among the states pursuing aggressive environmental and climate-related litigation against energy companies. Of course, no modern business can entirely avoid these pressures. Commercial relationships span state lines, and policies enacted in blue states such as New Jersey and California can continue to affect companies’ operations even after they relocate their legal domicile or headquarters to red states such as Texas. The redomiciliation, at any rate, makes sense. Exxon has operated out of Texas since 1989. Its New Jersey incorporation was a legal relic, a 140-year-old address with no operational meaning. But relocation alone should not be mistaken for broader reform. Firms can, after all, change their state of incorporation while maintaining the same (often woke) operational structure, workplace policies, and business practices. Texas has, by comparison, established a corporate legal framework that emphasizes business operations over broader social policy objectives. Recent statutory changes have made derivative suits more difficult to bring, strengthened protections for directors, and codified aspects of the business judgment rule. The Wall Street Journal editorial board highlights that New Jersey’s corporate tax rate has ranked among the highest in the nation, reaching 11.5% for many large corporations, whereas Texas has no corporate income tax whatsoever. Industrial electricity costs are also lower in Texas than in New Jersey. The regulatory climate (like the sunshine and weather) is friendlier down south. Exxon isn’t the first to notice: SpaceX, Tesla, Coinbase, and Chevron have all made the same calculation. There is a legitimate concern worth acknowledging. Texas’s new director-friendly statutes could, in the wrong hands, entrench management against legitimate shareholder challenges. Exxon alleges that it won’t adopt “any elective provisions” under the Texas statutory scheme “that weaken shareholder rights as compared to New Jersey law.” And that’s the right call. But a pledge is not a biblical covenant. Could the company formalize those commitments in its governing documents, with any future changes requiring majority shareholder approval? Possibly. Boards that trust their own stewardship shouldn’t fear putting that in writing. Courts, however, have recognized that contractual arrangements that unduly constrain a board’s ability to exercise its fiduciary duties—absent a fiduciary-out mechanism—may be impermissible in merger negotiations. Although that reasoning presumably does not apply to charter or bylaw provisions, the comparison raises an interesting issue. Federalism works, it seems, as designed. States compete for corporate charters. That competition disciplines them toward better governance. Texas has made its case: lower costs, cleaner legal frameworks, less exposure to politicized litigation. And corporations, no surprise, are responding. The migration of capital and enterprise to the Lone Star State—and other red states—is a market verdict. The deeper question is whether corporate boards have an obligation to shareholders to reconsider domicile when a state’s tax burden, regulatory hostility, and litigation climate consistently destroy value. The answer looks like yes. Talent, network advantages, and inertia may keep some companies tethered to California or New York for now. But Austin and Nashville are no longer afterthoughts. ExxonMobil has moved toward operational reality and away from a jurisdiction that had made itself hostile to the business of business. Other boards should be asking whether their own legal addresses still make sense or are just bad habits to break. In a republic built on divided sovereignty, the freedom to exit is one of the most powerful checks on bad governance. Texas is winning. New Jersey and its blue-state counterparts are losing. It is, in the end, a tale of two states. One offers stability, clarity, and the quiet confidence of a jurisdiction that trusts enterprise to create value. The other offers the best of intentions and the worst of incentives: high taxes, regulatory hostility, and a plaintiff’s bar that never sleeps. For ExxonMobil, the choice between them was not close.