Source: Gideon’s Substack
by Noah Millman

“What makes a redistricting map fair? Is it the process or the product—and in either case, what process and what product? I’m prompted to ask this question, of course, by the proposed Texas gerrymander, aimed at increasing the Republican congressional delegation by five seats. From a process perspective, the objections are obvious. Redistricting only has to happen after a new census, so a redistricting at any other time is presumptively illegitimate. And for any purely partisan redistricting the negative presumption is even greater. There’s something obviously undemocratic about allowing incumbents to set the boundaries of their own districts to keep themselves in office, and to allow incumbent majorities to improve their political position by similar means. One of the teams playing the game shouldn’t be allowed unilaterally to change the rules.” (08/07/25)

https://gideons.substack.com/p/what-makes-a-redistricting-fair

Source: Town Hall
by Derek Hunter

“I check the Washington Post every day for work purposes (though I do so through a website that bypasses their paywall because screw the left-wing media) because, while the paper is marinated in left-wing bias, they generally get the basic facts correct as far as the ‘who, what, where and when’ of a story. And while they cover the unintentionally absurd more often than is likely healthy, sometimes they have stories that make you wonder what the hell is happening with our own side. One great example of a ‘what the hell is happening here’ story run just the other day that opened with, ‘Orange juice, known for its tangy, sweet taste, could be made with slightly less sugary oranges under a regulation proposed Tuesday by the Trump administration.’ Orange juice is an issue now?” (08/07/25)

https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2025/08/07/what-the-hell-is-happening-over-at-the-fda-n2661501

Source: The Hill
by Don Wolfensberger

“For nearly three decades I labored in the congressional vineyards of rules, procedures, norms and reforms. And, in all that time, until last week, I had never heard of a law creating the Senate rule of five or the House rule of seven. Suffice it to say it was antiquated, obscure and rarely invoked. Moreover, it is not contained in the standing rules manual of either body. Instead, it is enshrined in permanent law — namely 5 U.S. Code, sec. 2954, first enacted in 1928. That section simply directs any executive agency to comply with any request for information from one of the two principal oversight committees of Congress. … What has reignited interest in this succinct century-old law is its resurrection last week by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and all seven Democrats on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee demanding that the Justice Department turn over all documents relating to the Jeffrey Epstein controversy.” (08/07/25)

https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/5439184-senate-house-rule-epstein/

Source: Fox News
by Joshua Thompson

“It’s not every day a state manages to burn through billions and still ask for more. But California’s high-speed rail project has always been exceptional in that way. Last month, the federal government finally said enough, scrapping $4 billion in funding after years of missed deadlines, ballooning budgets and political theatrics. You’d think that would halt the train. Instead, the state celebrated by tweeting about construction jobs and posting photos of rebar. Ten years ago, I did the math and showed that for the price of California’s high-speed rail project, we could fly every Californian roundtrip to Tokyo, buy them a bullet train ticket to Kyoto and put them up for two nights at the Ritz-Carlton. And we’d still have money left over for sushi. A decade later, the bullet train still hasn’t arrived. But the fantasy rolls on, powered by taxpayer dollars and bureaucratic inertia.” (08/07/25)

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/its-time-newsom-pull-brake-on-californias-128-billion-ghost-train