With the Democratic National Convention in the rearview mirror, we can turn our attention to the future. Do you want to know what a Harris administration will look like? Just take a look at California. Americans should prepare for the possibility of living in the United States of California — with all the costs, inconveniences, and restrictions of California policy without any of California’s nice weather or beachfront property. It’s no coincidence that Harris hails from California and came up through its progressive political machine. We can expect a Harris administration to double and triple down on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives as well as renewable energy subsidies and requirements. And now we know that higher taxes and restrictions on market prices are also part of her plans. In short, a Harris administration would attempt to mold the United States into the image of California. Federal regulators have pushed ESG everywhere they can since President Joe Biden signed Executive Order 13985, “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” and Executive Order 14305 on “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility in the Federal Workforce” in 2021. These executive orders mobilized federal agencies and federal contractors to prioritize DEI in personnel policies.  Harris was also part of Biden’s administration when he signed Executive Order 14030 on “Climate-Related Financial Risk.” The Biden–Harris administration further expanded the role of government agencies in promoting ESG priorities through the Inflation Reduction Act, killing the Keystone Pipeline project, and instituting a moratorium on the development of new liquefied natural gas export facilities in Texas. But worst of all, Harris has said she wants to implement a wealth tax and impose price controls on groceries and other products. Few proposals could be more disruptive to the economy and harmful to the well-being of ordinary Americans. Besides expanding the reach of government even more to find and assess people’s wealth, this new tax will distort financial markets and stop innovation in its tracks. The price controls, if implemented, will lead to shortages and empty shelves in grocery stores across America. Many people know that gas and electricity prices are high in California, but most don’t know just how high. Saying the cost is double the national average doesn’t do it justice. In some places, Californians pay over $1,000 for electricity for a modest home in a single month! A grocery store owner in Borrego Springs pays almost as much for electricity (about $8,000 a month) as he does for rent. Consider that Americans in states with “normal” electricity costs may only pay $1,200–$1,500 per year. A doubling of electricity costs would mean many Americans would pay $2,400–$3,000 per year for electricity. To make things worse, unemployment is higher in California than it is just about everywhere else in the country. California also has one of the highest rates of homelessness in the country — more than three times the rate of states like Florida. In addition, California has the highest marginal state income tax in the nation. Meanwhile, crime has become a significant problem across California — especially in its big cities. Not surprisingly, most people don’t want to live in the United States of California. Consider how California’s population declined three of the last four years. The imbalance of people moving to and from California is so great that it can be half the normal price or less if you rent a moving truck going to California. Continuing the environmental and DEI policies of the Biden administration and adding a wealth tax and price controls on top of them are a surefire way to get economic stagnation, high costs, lower employment, and greater lawlessness. Additionally, the Harris campaign has promised hundreds of billions of dollars to first-time homebuyers, new small-business owners, and people with student debt. California’s fiscal situation and unfunded liabilities are bad, but in this area, the United States is worse. Harris has offered no plans to address runaway spending and debt. Unless she is prepared to renounce the policies of her home state and of the Biden administration, as well as her recent economic policy proposals of price controls and a wealth tax, Americans should expect everywhere to look more like California under a Harris administration.  READ MORE: Questions for Kamala Harris Kamala Harris Is No Joe Biden. Or Is She? The post A Harris Administration Will Create the United States of California appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

In a recent 9–7 ruling in Consumers Research v. FCC, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that allowing a private company to manage the funding for a $9 billion government program violates Article I of the Constitution. This case highlights a concerning phenomenon — federal agencies turning to funding structures outside the appropriations process to expand their regulatory size and scope, often freeing themselves from democratic oversight. Permitting federal agencies to get creative with revenue generation doesn’t just overstep constitutional limits, it also makes reining in federal spending nearly impossible. Now that one federal court has brought this unconstitutional joy ride to an end, the Supreme Court should follow suit next term. At issue in Consumers Research is the Universal Service Fund, which was created by the 1996 Telecommunications Act to subsidize telecommunications carriers so that rural regions of the United States could receive the same access to services as other, more profitable areas. The funding for this program comes from a universal service fee that is added to each American’s cell phone bill. In its ruling, the Fifth Circuit held that this fee is really a tax in disguise. The constitutional defect lies in who is collecting and distributing that tax. The FCC — the federal agency that administers the program — does not run the program itself. Instead, the FCC has empowered a private company, the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), to determine how much private consumers must pay and how to distribute those funds to participating private telecom carriers. USAC determines the funding amount based upon demand projections from the same telecommunication companies receiving the subsidy. More troublesome is that many of USAC’s directors also hold positions at the telecommunications companies that stand to benefit. In other words, Congress gave the FCC a vague directive to establish “specific, predictable, and sufficient … mechanisms to preserve and advance universal service.” The agency interpreted this as a green light to essentially self-fund the program by asking the regulated companies how much money they need and then charging Americans that amount — all outside of the normal appropriations process. This is precisely the sort of financial creativity and delegation of authority that the Supreme Court needs to closely examine. Hopefully they do so next term, if not for our liberty, at least for our balance sheet. The review is overdue. Since 1928, the Supreme Court has maintained that broad, permissive delegation to administrative agencies is consistent with the Constitution — so long as the agency is given a guiding principle. This has led to the ballooning of the federal government, unparalleled spending, and a regulatory cobweb that is unproductive at best and illiberal at worst. This shift away from congressional control over the federal purse strings has contributed to the exploding of the national debt, as agencies pursue their agendas with little regard for fiscal restraint. When agencies are empowered to determine their own budgets, or when that authority is handed off to private entities, the incentive is clear: Collect more funds from Americans than would be approved through the normal legislative channels. And the trend is growing. In 2019, over $300 billion in federal agency spending occurred outside of the regular appropriations process. Over 200 federal programs currently have the authority to collect fees, fines, and other self-generated revenue. Financial delegation to both agencies and private entities leads to wasteful spending that is difficult to curtail, in no small part because the funds are not centrally held by the Treasury Department and controlled by the appropriations process. Revenue generated by federal taxes is collected in the Treasury and then disbursed by congressional appropriation, where it can be accounted for. When agencies generate their own revenue, it’s difficult to maintain the same level of financial transparency and accountability. The results speak for themselves: The Universal Service Fund made nearly $1 billion in improper or incorrect payments in a single year out of the $9 billion program total. Despite the gross mismanagement of taxpayer funds, the FCC has never invalidated a funding decision made by USAC. Taming the deficit will require not just major spending cuts, but a fundamental reexamination of how federal agencies finance their operations and the degree to which they can self-fund initiatives outside of the normal budgetary process. Jill Jacobson is a 2024–2025 federal law clerk, a visiting fellow at Independent Women’s Law Center (iwlc.org), and a contributor at Young Voices.   READ MORE: Politics Infiltrates Wisconsin’s Supreme Court in Recent Ballot Box Decision How Conservatives Can Finally Get Judicial Nominations Right The post Delegation Dooms the Deficit appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

by Cristina Laila, The Gateway Pundit: The talking potato is back! Brian Stelter on Tuesday announced he is returning to CNN after he got canned from the network in 2022. “I’m returning to CNN in a brand new role as Chief Media Analyst. I’ll be appearing on TV, developing digital content, and once again helming the Reliable […]

by Ronan Manly, BullionStar: There is an ominous development gaining momentum across the world’s financial systems which has the potential to undermine monetary and personal freedom, yet which remains largely under the radar for most of the world’s population. This development is the globally coordinated plan to roll out retail central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). […]