With Democrat Leaders Thumbing Their Noses At The Supreme Court, Why Shouldn’t Student Loan Debtors?

Daily Caller Last week the Supreme Court declared President Biden’s plan to cancel $430 billion in student loan repayments unconstitutional. The President’s  response was to immediately announce that his Administration would find a way to circumvent the decision —  thereby further undermining respect for our courts and the judges who serve in them. Indeed, the previous day the President dismissed another ruling by the Court, this one on affirmative action, by disdainfully calling the Supreme Court of the United States “not a normal court” and impliedly unworthy of respect. It was no surprise, then, that the President’s challenge to the Court’s decisions prompted calls for those who would have had their debts wiped out by his plan, to simply refuse to make further payments. Who can blame them? Long gone are the days when political leaders would respond to a court ruling with which they disagreed by stating, “we disagree with the court’s decision but will of course abide by it.” Former Vice President Al Gore’s respectful acceptance of the December 2000 Supreme Court decision awarding the presidency to his rival George W. Bush, today would earn him the sobriquet of “wimp” by his Democrat colleagues. This latest round of disparaging judges and courts generally did not start with the current administration. Former President Trump was well-known for attacking judges who issued opinions with which he disagreed during his term in office. Few, however, have gone so far as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), when he threatened Associate Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh by name in 2020 at a pro-abortion rally on the steps of the Supreme Court. It is noteworthy also that Biden’s most recent...

Is There Light at the End of the Tax Tunnel?

Townhall Governments love to tax. It matters little if it is your local county commission looking to raise the millage rate on property taxes, or the federal government searching for new ways to tax income pursuant to the authority granted it by the 16th Amendment to the Constitution – the default for government is to increase revenue. There may, however, be a bit of light at the end of the tax tunnel. Predictably, of course, the Biden Administration and its cohorts on Capitol Hill and in lobbyist offices on the K Street Corridor remain adamantly opposed to any talk of tax “cuts.” The cautious optimism many experts see on the tax horizon, is thanks to the reality that Republicans maintain majorities in both the U.S. House of Representatives and in state governorships and legislatures. Tax policies that are supportive of both families and businesses are reasons why states including my home state of Georgia attract jobs, while high-tax states such as California are losing both people and businesses. Even at the international level, where President Biden two years ago embraced a G-7 plan for a global minimum tax of 15%, recent pushback by the GOP-controlled House has thrown a monkey wrench into Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s plan to move the United States closer to that competition-killing policy. Few public policy issues define more clearly the divide between Democrats and Republicans than taxes, and thankfully the GOP by and large remains the party that understands if you reduce the tax burdens on individuals and on businesses that create jobs, sufficient funds will still flow into government coffers with which to provide essential services. Democrats, on the other...

Congress Trying To Erase The Past Is Pretty Clear Evidence We Have Entered The Twilight Zone

Daily Caller In 1959, a young screenwriter named Rod Serling created what would become one of the 20th Century’s most iconic television series. “The Twilight Zone” has become so much a part of our culture that contemporary dictionaries include the term “twilight zone” as a defined noun, meaning “an area just beyond ordinary legal and ethical limits.”  Considering recent cultural changes, America’s political system quite easily can fit within that very definition, insofar as “ordinary legal and ethical limits” seem no longer to apply. In one of the most recent examples of this phenomenon, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Republican Kevin McCarthy, declared something that historically, ethically, and legally would in the past have been considered laughable — erasing official actions taken previously by the Congress of the United States. More specifically, McCarthy last week publicly endorsed legislation that purports to remove from the official record of the House of Representatives the 2019 and 2021 impeachments of former President Donald Trump; expunging the record of those proceedings as if they never took place.  A move such as McCarthy now supports would be in keeping with actions by Winston Smith, the protagonist in George Orwell’s prescient 1984. Smith’s job in that dystopian world was to cleanse history by erasing news accounts of disfavored past events or people.   As an institution, the House of Representatives was deemed so important by the drafters of our Constitution, that its description in that document precedes that of all the other components of the federal government. To now have members of that body acting as modern-day Winston Smiths is disconcerting in the extreme, even if the measures fail to...