“People understandably have misgivings when someone injects the Bible into a discussion of economic issues. The Bible certainly is not an economics text. Its treatment of economic themes is desultory and brief, lacking in detail and depth. Not surprisingly, then, the Bible’s economic implications are perceived in many different ways. The Bible touches upon economic themes in ways that are sometimes descriptive (value-free) and sometimes prescriptive (value-laden, normative). These distinctions are crucial.” (06/17/25)
“Brendan Carr used to talk a big game on free speech. In 2021, when members of Congress urged the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to block the sale of a Miami radio station over its perceived political slant, Carr — one of the agency’s commissioners — called that move ‘a deeply troubling transgression of free speech and the FCC’s status as an independent agency.’ … These days, Carr has little credibility on freedom of speech. Now the chair of the Commission, he has been busy reopening investigations against broadcast networks because of their editorial policies, threatening public broadcasters ostensibly about how they raise sponsorship funds (but really about their editorial positions), threatening media companies over their hiring practices, and strong-arming technology companies about issues well beyond the FCC’s limited statutory mission.” (for publication 07/25)
“The policy argument on the American political right these days between postliberals with (some) populists, on the one hand, and Reaganite and market-oriented fusionist conservatives, on the other hand, is, in essence, an argument over externalities. More particularly, the argument is over what’s included in our set of policy-relevant costs and benefits when we consider policy problems and solutions. The controversy circles around postliberals proposing the inclusion of a set of non-pecuniary costs when identifying policy problems and when considering policy change. Recognizing this means there is enough common ground for constructive debate over policy rather than each side arguing past the other.” (06/17/25)
“The Senate Finance Committee released the text of its critical portion of the Big Beautiful Bill late Monday afternoon. The big thing to note is that the Senate does pick fights with two motivated House factions: the “SALT Caucus” that wants bigger tax breaks for high-income earners who deduct state and local taxes, and the Freedom Caucus that wants quicker phaseouts for clean-energy tax credits. But in the health care title, the bill actually got worse, and will be more immiserating for patients, hospitals, and states, particularly blue states. Here’s what we know so far while we continue to dig into it …” (06/17/25)
“On June 18, Anasse Kazib, a French railway worker, trade unionist and socialist leader will stand trial for the charge of ‘apologia for terrorism.’ His supposed crime? Tweets posted to the social media platform X in support of the Palestinian people in rejection of Israel’s campaign of genocide. France concedes that Kazib has no ties to terrorist organizations nor has he engaged in terror-related actions and is persecuting him simply on the basis that his speech offends the Israeli state and its supporters. With this campaign against Kazib and other activists, the French state, led by president Emmanuel Macron is attempting to chill the movement for Palestine as a whole and to ensure the continued impunity of Israel.” (06/17/25)
“On March 20, President Trump signed an executive order ‘Eliminating Information Silos.’ The order directed heads of federal agencies to make sure officials designated by the president ‘have full and prompt access to all unclassified agency records, data, software systems, and information technology systems.’ The executive order did not attract much attention until it was more recently revealed that the administration was working with tech company Palantir to create a database containing all information collected by all federal agencies on all US citizens. … Despite the obvious threat to liberty the ‘big ugly database’ poses, some commentators and ‘influencers’ who would normally oppose, or at least be skeptical of, expansion of the surveillance state are supporting it because they believe it will be used to locate illegal [sic] immigrants.” (06/17/25)
“David French remains an incorrigible defender of illegal aggression: ‘While it’s far too soon to tell whether Israel’s military strikes will cripple or even substantially set back Iran’s nuclear program, the necessity of stopping Iran’s march to a bomb [bold mine-DL] is far more clear today than it was even three years ago.’ Iran was not ‘marching’ to get a bomb when Israel attacked. There was no ‘march’ to be stopped. The Iranians were involved in negotiations in which they were willing to accept significant restrictions on their nuclear program to guarantee that it would remain peaceful. There was no need for the Israeli government to strike, and they had no right to attack in any case. Israel’s new war against Iran is as unnecessary and unjust as can be.” (06/16/25)
“Murder rates are plummeting. While we still have more than half a year to go, Kash Patel, the FBI’s director, says that the U.S. is on track to have the lowest murder rate ever. The current record low occurred in 2014 when the FBI reported a murder rate of 4.45 per 100,000. The question is: why? Law enforcement matters, but it is probably also that Trump is deporting criminal illegal [sic] aliens. According to Patel, ‘Let good cops be cops,’ is the answer. ‘I’m gonna let you, the agents, the police officers, the sheriffs, go out there and do the work you so badly want to do. And I’m gonna give you the resources you need to do it. And I’m gonna take away the politicization and weaponization … and that’s what we’ve done.'” (06/16/25)
“The U.S. Court of International Trade recently made headlines by issuing an order voiding many of President Donald J. Trump’s tariffs. The case was V.O.S Selections v. United States. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has stayed the order pending appeal. When the news hit, many people, including many lawyers, were unaware that the Court of International Trade even existed. A one-time Justice Department lawyer, now a leading radio talk show host, admitted he’d never heard of the tribunal and then mistakenly suggested it was merely an administrative agency rather than a court created under Article III of the Constitution. But it is a real Article III court. Congress established it in 1980 as the successor to the U.S. Customs Court. Its decision in the V.O.S Selections case is worth attention.” (06/16/25)
“Since June 13, Israel has been carrying out a major military campaign against Iran, with the stated aim of destroying the country’s nuclear program. Although the United States first distanced itself from the strike, U.S. President Donald Trump later embraced it, posting on social media that he had warned Iran about the consequences of not making a deal. He also claimed that the strike was ‘excellent’ and said it could make it more likely that Tehran accepts an agreement. It is impossible to predict at this point how the war will evolve, let alone conclude. But chances are good that Israel’s attack on Iran will not have the effect that Trump hopes. Instead, it will make reaching a diplomatic agreement harder and increase the chances that Iran eventually builds a nuclear weapon.” (06/16/25)
