After being overwhelmingly approved by voters, Proposition 36 went into effect across California on December 18. It toughens penalties for certain theft and drug offenses. Californians voted out Soros-backed Los Angeles DA George Gascon. Seventy-one percent of Californians voted for Proposition 36, the Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act, which seeks to undo portions […] The post Soros-Backed Lawlessness Policies Are Crumbling in California appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

Donald Trump Jr. is now escorting a new girlfriend around Palm Beach, socialite Bettina Anderson. They showed up together at the Christmas dinner in Mar-a-Lago. It looks like the engagement with Kimberly Guilfoyle is off. Kimberly will be completely out of the picture since she is now the US Ambassador to Greece. Anderson and Don […] The post Donald Trump Jr Has a New Girlfriend appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

The Club for Growth will back a new school voucher proposal backed by Tennessee Governor Bill Lee, the organization told The Daily Wire on Friday.  The organization said that it would be rolling out a major TV and digital advocacy campaign in favor of Lee’s latest school choice proposal, which includes 20,000 scholarships that can be used for tuition at private schools. The Club for Growth is a free enterprise advocacy group that backs limited government.   “Club for Growth and our affiliated organizations will be supporting Gov. Lee’s school freedom legislation with a major advocacy campaign including TV and digital ads,” Club for Growth President David McIntosh told The Daily Wire. “This is a continuation of our School Freedom Fund’s $15.7 million winning campaigns last year in Tennessee and Texas that successfully defeated 14 so-called Republicans. Now, kids all over Tennessee will be the winners!” The campaign is expected to target Republican legislators who may be undecided about supporting the legislation.  Across the country, the Club for Growth Action and its affiliated School Freedom Fund super PAC have backed primary challenges to 14 Republican lawmakers in Texas who opposed school choice legislation, defeating 10 of the targeted lawmakers. The group also opposed Republican lawmakers in Tennessee who did not support Lee’s push last year for similar legislation.  Lee’s proposal this year, known as the Education Freedom Scholarship Act, comes after similar legislation failed last year when Republicans in the state House and Senate could not agree on the proposal’s language.  In November, Tennessee Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson (R-TN) and House Majority Leader Rep. William Lamberth (R-Portland) introduced identical legislation in the Assembly in line with Lee’s scholarship proposal.  “A quality education can change the trajectory of a child’s life, and that’s why the vast majority of Tennesseans support empowering parents with school choice,” Lee told The Daily Wire. “I remain grateful for legislative leadership’s commitment to passing the Education Freedom Act early in the next legislative session and appreciate Club for Growth’s continued support.” 50% OFF ALL DAILY WIRE ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS FOR A LIMITED TIME! The proposal would create 20,000 scholarships worth an estimated $7,295 that parents could apply for and use for things like tuition at private schools and textbooks. Half of the scholarships would be reserved for students in households with annual incomes of less than 300% of the amount needed to qualify for free or reduced lunch. The second 10,000 would be universally open.  In the second year, an additional 5,000 scholarships would be made available if 75% of the available scholarships are taken the previous year. In this year, the scholarships are prioritized based on current recipients and income levels if there is more demand than supply.  Scholarship recipients would have to be administered a nationally standardized achievement test or the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program. The measure would also give all current public school teachers a $2,000 bonus and guarantee that public schools would not lose state funding based on disenrollment from their schools.

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has aims worthy of its mastermind, but plans for the government-slashing commission outlined so far have raised doubts about the project’s efficacy. Elon Musk, the wealthiest man in the world, originally suggested DOGE during a wide-ranging conversation with President-elect Donald Trump on an X space. With Trump to take office next month, he has tasked Musk alongside entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy with heading DOGE and crafting a report for ways to reduce government size and spending by July 4, 2026. The DOGE will be set up as an outside adviser group working closely with the White House to identify inefficiency in the federal government and recommend fixes, primarily through cuts, repeals, and reorganization. Musk has set an ambitious goal: cutting federal spending by $2 trillion, roughly a quarter of the federal budget, in addition to major reductions in regulations. The project has generated excitement among conservatives who have long called for drastic action on the expanding size of government. Some supporters of Musk and Ramaswamy’s goals for the project are nonetheless skeptical that their strategy will create meaningful and lasting savings or efficiency. “I’ve spent two decades thinking and writing about the administrative state and how I think it presents an enormous constitutional problem,” Hillsdale College politics professor Joseph Postell told The Daily Wire. “The fact that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are talking about the things that I’ve been talking to my students about for 10 or 20 years, I’m thrilled about this.” “I’m coming from a perspective of somebody who’s highly sympathetic to what they want to do, but who doesn’t want to see them waste their opportunity,” he added. Musk and Ramaswamy in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal in November outlined DOGE’s approach. “The two of us will advise DOGE at every step to pursue three major kinds of reform: regulatory rescissions, administrative reductions and cost savings. We will focus particularly on driving change through executive action based on existing legislation rather than by passing new laws,” they wrote. But for their recommendations to turn into lasting realities, Congress must be involved, according to Postell. And working with Congress, DOGE has the opportunity to rewrite the most expansive laws passed by Congress that have effectively given bureaucrats wide-ranging authority to regulate Americans’ lives. “I think you need laws passed by Congress that restructure the administrative state and sort of revise the authorities granted to it,” Postell said. “First and foremost, it would be great to have an enormous reform of the Administrative Procedure Act where we very clearly state what agencies can do, what they can’t do, and how they have to go about doing what it is that they do.” Postell cited reforming laws such as the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act, as well. Reforming major legislation would limit its scope while, in effect, repealing massive swaths of regulations crafted under the prior laws. As the project stands, however, Musk and Ramaswamy seem to prefer executive action rather than working with allies in Congress to battle against an expansive bureaucratic regime. Here’s a breakdown of the DOGE plan to reform the federal government: Spending Musk has said he can cut the annual federal budget by $2 trillion. Asked about the odds of DOGE being able to accomplish that, Postell placed the likelihood at “less than a percent.” Part of the problem lies in what DOGE can realistically recommend cuts to. Major entitlements such as Medicaid and Social Security, which Trump has campaigned against cutting, make up 46% of the budget. National defense, unlikely to be cut under Trump, is another 12%. Interest on the national debt is another 8%. As the options for cuts begin to narrow down, Musk’s $2 trillion target looks increasingly over-optimistic. Musk and Ramaswamy could recommend gutting the departments of Agriculture, Education, and Transportation and not account for half of the goal. Outside of entitlements and the military, Trump’s administration could still make significant cuts, if not enough to meet Musk’s goal, according to Postell. But of the coalition that put Trump in the White House, only a small portion of that is dedicated to slashing spending, presenting DOGE with a problem of lack of political support for its mission. “It actually kind of reflects a little bit more of the older Republican party, more of the Reagan side of the Republican party, which was really focused on shrinking government,” Postell said. “Part of what’s made Trump so successful is that he’s moved away from that concept – that kind of conservative, slashing government approach.” Regulation In its aim to cut regulation and free the American economy from onerous or duplicitous rules, Musk and Ramaswamy cited two Supreme Court rulings they say will provide the basis for their crusade against red tape: West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency decided in 2022 and Loper Bright v. Raimondo decided in 2024. In the EPA case, the court decided the major questions doctrine, ruling that government bureaucrats cannot make regulations over “major” policy areas without explicit approval from Congress. In Raimondo, the court overturned the Chevron doctrine, meaning that courts no longer must defer to bureaucratic interpretations of Congressionally-approved laws and rules. “Together, these cases suggest that a plethora of current federal regulations exceed the authority Congress has granted under the law,” Musk and Ramaswamy wrote in WSJ. It’s doubtful whether those cases will work for DOGE the way Musk and Ramaswamy predict. As far as West Virginia may be concerned, it’s unclear how many regulations could be affected.  “A lot of the existing rules really have already survived that kind of scrutiny,” Postell said. “So, I’m not sure how this authorizes a retroactive look back.” Raimondo may actually cause more headaches for DOGE than Chevron would have. Under Chevron, the Trump administration could use the ruling to assert its own narrow interpretation of a law and roll back regulations. Under Raimondo, courts have authority to interpret laws anew. “Now, there’s actually not going to be deference given to the Trump administration when, you know, Greenpeace or the NRDC inevitably sues the EPA over that,” Postell said. “In a strange way, the death of Chevron is going to be a problem for the Trump administration’s regulatory reform effort. It’s not a tool in their toolbox, it’s actually a tool that’s going to be used against them.” Bureaucracy Within the sprawling federal bureaucracy, there is undoubtedly much fat that can be cut while maintaining the government’s current level of function. Toward that end, Ramaswamy has suggested some policies that will likely provide substantial results, such as requiring all federal employees to work in office five days a week where appropriate. A recent survey found that just 6% of bureaucrats currently hold that schedule. That said, reductions in the federal workforce is arguably one of the least impactful of DOGE’s aims. Without the cuts to regulations and federal spending, reductions in the federal workforce would result in very little worthwhile change. “A lot of people don’t really want governmental efficiency,” Postell said. “You know, tyranny is not easier to swallow simply because it’s efficient.” While the extent of DOGE’s recommendations for cuts to the federal bureaucracy have yet to be seen, deep cuts could result in a different set of problems if government work is shifted from bureaucrats to private contractors. Private contractors already make up the majority of the federal government’s workforce. According to one estimate, the number of federal contractors nearly doubles the number of federal employees: 3.7 million contractors to 2 million employees. While a smaller federal footprint would generally be positive, if that reduction resulted in more duties turned over to private contractors, the benefits are more questionable, according to Postell. “If it starts to move towards a more privatized government, you could have serious concerns that you’ve actually made a problem worse because that’s a less accountable government, maybe, even than one where you know which department and which employees are behind whatever is happening,” Postell said.

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) last week said the union operatives who staff its internal offices must return to in-person work so they can be more productive in their jobs — a main focus of which is stopping President-elect Donald Trump from requiring the same of federal employees. “The new return-to-office mandate, ordered by national president Everett Kelley, is designed to ensure that the staff is fully prepared to tackle an onslaught of Trump policies targeting the federal workforce,” The Washington Post reported, citing AFGE spokesman Andrew Huddleston. It said Kelley notified employees that beginning in January, they would be able to work from home only one day a week, down from five out of every 10 days. AFGE’s employees, who are themselves unionized with The Office & Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU), have filed a labor grievance against AFGE, calling the move hypocritical, given that AFGE has demanded federal employees be able to work from home. “It’s hypocritical for AFGE to champion telework rights for federal employees while treating its own staff — the very people who negotiate and lobby for these rights — differently,” Justin Perpich, the steward for OPEIU representing AFGE employees, told The Post. With this move, AFGE seems to concede that working from the office can be beneficial for those with an important mission — but also seems to suggest that while stopping Trump requires that level of hard work, actual government jobs do not. AFGE and Perpich, whose Office & Professional Employees International Union Local 2 represents AFGE’s internal staff, did not return requests for comment from The Daily Wire. Perpich told the Post that Kelley, the union’s top manager, was violating its contract with its personnel union by changing telework policies, while AFGE said that its management had the right to do that. Many federal employees began working from home during the COVID pandemic. But even with COVID long receded, federal employees still work from home at such rates that government buildings are only 12% occupied, according report from Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa). Trump has said he intends to call federal employees back to the office. 50% OFF ALL DAILY WIRE ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS FOR A LIMITED TIME! Yet, AFGE last month signed a five-year contract with the Social Security Administration relinquishing management’s right to change the proportion of employee telework, essentially locking them in to a pandemic-era schedule through the Trump administration. Biden’s Social Security Commissioner, Martin O’Malley, declined to give up those rights while he was manager, but signed the contract two days before resigning his post to run for chair of the Democratic National Committee. AFGE, which represents 750,000 federal employees, has also been signing long-term contracts with agencies that extol the virtues of telework and imply that it brings no downside to taxpayers, a Daily Wire review found. The contracts with federal agencies say things like “Telework and remote work can be leveraged as a tool to enhance talent recruitment and retention, and advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” and bring “increased productivity and performance” and “additional time for focused work” — though it apparently isn’t putting its money where its mouth is when it comes to its own workforce. On December 18, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission signed a five-year contract that says employees can come into the office as little as two days a week. “The employer, in consultation with the union, shall maintain a Telework Program in every EEOC Office… All EEOC positions are eligible for some amount of telework,” it says. However, unlike the Social Security Administration contract, the EEOC’s contract contains language that would allow agencies to make the same argument that union boss Kelley is now making. The EEOC contract says “The employer, with notification to the union, may terminate the Telework Program if the program no longer supports the mission of the agency or costs of the program become impracticable. If the Telework Program no longer benefits organizational needs, termination of the program must be in accordance with procedures established by the Collective Bargaining Agreement.” Biden’s EEOC management may have been less willing than O’Malley — who drank and sang with union officials in Florida just before signing the contract — to appease AFGE because the union took a militant stance when EEOC pushed for a partial return to the office in 2022. On November 24, the Federal Railroad Administration signed a five-year collective bargaining agreement with AFGE, saying “The Parties recognize the value that a telework program contributes to helping accomplish the mission, goals, and work objectives of the FRA in a cost-effective manner” and that it could be done “without sacrificing the efficiency of FRA operations and customer relationships.” On August 19, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission signed an AFGE contract through 2030 saying “supervisors may approve up to 8 days (64 hours) regular telework per pay period” and “positions are telework-eligible except when the essential duties of the position prohibit telework.” Managers may only deny a telework request if it would result in a “reduction of the productivity of the Commission,” a “diminished level of services,” or an increase in costs. The contract said that remote employees — who don’t have to come into the office at all, and aren’t required to live near an office — can’t be made to work in person unless they have at least six months’ notice and the government pays for them to move. On June 14, the Environmental Protection Agency signed an agreement with AFGE through June 2028. It says “The Agency’s telework program has become a routine way of doing business at EPA” and “Telework eligibility shall be based on job functions and not managerial preference… When the Agency’s policies and this collective bargaining agreement conflict, the CBA shall govern.” On April 5, AFGE signed a three-year “interim master labor agreement” with the Department of Defense’s Defense Health Agency saying “The Parties agree that telework and remote work should be actively promoted” and “All eligible employees may request a telework arrangement and requests will not be unreasonably denied.” It said all employees are eligible for telework as long as they have not been disciplined for being absent without permission for more than five days in the last year, and have not been disciplined for looking at pornography on government computers. It also says employees can request to become “remote” employees — a much more permissive category where the employee never has to come in and can live anywhere. “All eligible employees may request a remote work arrangement. Requests will not be unreasonably denied.” In January, the National Archives signed a five-year contract saying “All permanent positions are eligible for telework” and that “The Agency is committed to expanding the amount of work that is available for remote work and telework.” It said any employee will be eligible for telework as long as he is rated “fully successful or higher” and meets other basic criteria. It said the telework agreement will be rescinded if “the employee has been disciplined for being absent without leave for more than 5 days in any calendar year; or If the employee has been disciplined for viewing, downloading, or exchanging pornography, including child pornography, on a Federal Government computer.” But it adds: “The Agency may rescind a telework agreement: 1. If telework diminishes employee or agency performance, after attempts to mitigate such diminishment have been unsuccessful.”

This screenshot was taken from a site notorious for spreading misinformation. 

'Two people who have been very consistent'

This is how we're going into 2025