It’s been a few winters since gas prices were at the top of Americans’ list of concerns. But the pain many of us are feeling at the pump—and the drastic increase in home heating costs expected this winter—has changed public sentiment on energy policy.
Unfortunately, the Biden administration is pointing the finger in all the wrong directions. First, President Biden <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/biden-blames-higher-oil-gas-prices-opec-2021-11-02/">blamed OPEC</a>. Next, he <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/17/biden-calls-on-ftc-to-probe-anti-consumer-behavior-by-energy-companies-as-gas-prices-soar.html">called for a probe</a> into major energy companies, claiming some unidentified sort of collusion is the culprit. Then, President Biden announced a futile <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-several-other-countries-to-tap-strategic-oil-reserve-11637669762">release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve</a>, the nation’s emergency oil supply. His own energy secretary has mused, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/would-that-i-had-magic-wand-us-energy-chief-oil-output-2021-11-05/">“Would that I had the magic wand on this.”</a>
But there is a magic wand to fix skyrocketing energy prices and inflation, or, rather, a magic word. It’s “reverse”—reverse the disastrous anti-energy policies that are making global energy shortages far worse.
Our nation’s leaders must have missed the Schoolhouse Rock episode on supply and demand. The basic principles of economics—as they apply to energy and to everything else—are astonishingly simple. The more scarce oil is, the more expensive it is. It follows that any laws, taxes, fees, or regulations from the federal government that make producing, refining, and distributing oil more difficult also make it more expensive for consumers.
And that’s just what the Biden administration has been doing since day one. From enacting draconian regulations in the name of combating climate change to canceling the Keystone XL Pipeline, it seems killing the U.S. fossil fuel industry is the president’s No. 1 priority.
And it’s not working out well for the American people. Average national <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/11/business/gas-prices-oil-opec/index.html">gas prices just hit a seven-year high</a>, and home heating prices are <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/higher-home-heating-costs-could-burn-hole-your-wallet-winter-n1281679">expected to rise 30% to over 50%</a> this winter. Meanwhile, Congress is considering the latest iteration of the multi-trillion dollar Big Government Socialism Bill with more production restrictions and a natural gas tax hike that threatens to raise home heating costs <a href="https://www.aga.org/globalassets/letter-to-congress-on-methane-fees-090721_final.pdf">another 17%.</a>
Though President Biden has been in office less than a year, the disastrous ramifications of his anti-energy agenda are already unfolding. Gone is the energy dominance of the Trump era, which saw the United States become energy independent for the first time in nearly 70 years and <a href="https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/10/f79/Natural%20Gas%20Benefits%20Report.pdf">saved the average family of four $2,500 annually</a>.
Though Americans are feeling their wallets lighten now, it’s nothing compared to when winter comes into full swing. For some, the consequences of President Biden’s policies will be deadly.
Studies have repeatedly confirmed a link between <a href="https://seemajayachandran.com/heating_mortality.pdf">rising natural gas prices and preventable wintertime deaths</a>. Low- and fixed-income households too often can’t afford to keep their homes at a safe temperature when the weather turns frosty, jeopardizing their health and even their lives. According to the Energy Information Administration’s 2015 survey, <a href="https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37072">one third of American households</a> struggled to afford their home energy costs. Today, that number is likely even higher.
With energy costs projected to rise so drastically this winter, the Biden administration should be deeply concerned by the danger its own policies have caused. Instead of scrambling to assign blame to the oil and gas industry without evidence—or worse, <a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/oct/19/psaki-jokes-delayed-treadmills-are-tragedy-supply-/">laughing off the real crises the American people face</a>—our leaders need to get serious about solutions.
And the solution is not, <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2021/11/12/white-house-joe-biden-gasoline-prices-green-transition-jen-psaki/">as Press Secretary Jen Psaki ludicrously claimed</a>, the “green transition.” In fact, pushing more wind and solar would make this crisis even worse. In our home state of Texas, we’ve seen this sad truth firsthand. The tragic death of 11-year-old Cristian Piñeda, who froze to death in his sleep during the February blackouts, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdMqCUa7XJk">when wind and solar failed when Texans needed them most</a>, pulled at the heartstrings of the nation as the story unfolded in the media. And, unfortunately, Cristian’s story is not unique.
Though many politicians have forwarded lofty plans to go fossil-free, in every instance <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/04/23/if-solar-and-wind-are-so-cheap-why-are-they-making-electricity-more-expensive/?sh=57a9fa221dc6">costs have soared</a> while wind and solar failed to provide enough electricity. Germany, for instance, which claims to be a world leader in transitioning away from fossil fuels, now gets a significant portion of its energy not from wind farms or solar panels, but from Russian natural gas and biomass plants. And as Russia’s grip on the European energy market strengthens, the U.S. should be there to undercut and provide additional energy security to our allies—instead we are pursuing our own path to high prices and foreign dependence.
Ultimately, getting more affordable, reliable energy to as many people as possible is the solution to drastically improve lives and provide the necessary economic foundation for both future prosperity and the innovation essential to real environmental progress. This is a far more valuable use of our nation’s resources than symbolic attempts to fight climate change through counterproductive programs like tax credits for wealthy electric vehicle owners—especially since climate data models show <a href="https://lifepowered.org/data-banning-fossil-fuels-wouldnt-stop-climate-change/">even the most extreme emissions reductions wouldn’t meaningfully impact global temperatures</a> despite bankrupting the nation and hurting the poorest among us the most.
Our leaders must begin rolling back the disastrous policies enacted by the Biden administration, allow the American energy industry to flourish, and restore our nation’s energy dominance once more.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The Honorable Rick Perry is chairman of the Center for Energy Independence at the America First Policy Institute. Perry previously served as the 14th Secretary of Energy, where he advanced America’s dominance in energy production to help American businesses, workers, families, and farmers, and as the 47th governor of Texas.
The Honorable Jason Isaac is director of Life:Powered, a national initiative of the Texas Public Policy Foundation to raise America’s energy IQ. He previously served four terms in the Texas House of Representatives.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Gasoline

Yes, The Biden Administration DOES Have A Magic Wand For Energy Prices

Biden Administration

Energy

President Biden won the White House promising to resolve the Covid crisis, and prematurely declared victory on July 4th so he could shift attention to his Build Back Better boondoggle. As America’s Covid deaths in his first year exceeded those in President Trump’s last year, liberals are eager to blame conservatives for refusing to “follow the science.” Biden has framed vaccination as self-evident patriotic duty — rather than a personal choice based on risk tolerance and individual circumstances — giving liberals another excuse to feel morally superior.
Today’s Supreme Court hearing on vaccine mandates for <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46288">large companies and health care facilities</a> provides an opportunity to give Americans the responsibility to make their own heath care decisions. As President Obama opposed health insurance mandates before he was for them, Biden once opposed vaccine mandates. Biden’s employer mandate in September conveniently allowed him to demonstrate executive action. His approval ratings had dropped to their then-lowest levels, thanks to the messy withdrawal from Afghanistan and rise in covid cases.
A majority of Democrats and Independents supported the mandate, while over two-thirds of Republicans opposed it, but he wasn’t getting the latter’s votes anyway. He probably thought the surge would end on its own, and assumed he’d get credit for taking aggressive, albeit superfluous, action. Biden undercut his messaging by snapping he was “losing patience” with the unvaccinated, especially since many vaccinated understand their concerns, support religious, medical, and testing exemptions required by the Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, and do not want them fired.
Even before rules were promulgated, the announcement gave companies an excuse to require vaccines. Though the EEOC, beginning under Trump, advised companies they could mandate vaccination, many feared losing employees in a tight labor market and hid behind Biden’s announcement. Some health care facilities reported difficulty maintaining staffing levels due to turnover caused by the mandates and reduced services.
States have broad police powers they can invoke in emergencies. The Supreme Court ruled in the 1905 case of Jacobson vs. Massachusetts that states can mandate vaccines, but federalism allows states powers denied to Biden. Courts and legislators have curtailed emergency powers the longer the pandemic lasts, as governments have time to enact policies through normal legislative processes. Over half of the states passed laws limiting public health authority. After giving Biden time to pass legislation, the Supreme Court struck down the CDC&#8217;s ban on evictions started under Trump. Several states have challenged Biden’s mandates in court or banned them via laws and executive orders.
Biden relies on an expansive interpretation of public health authority to justify mandates. When OSHA issued an emergency covid rule in June concerning health care workers, it had previously lost in court five out of nine times it offered emergency standards. The last time it used this emergency authority was 1983. OHSA has to show “employees are exposed to grave danger from exposure to substances or agents determined to be toxic or physically harmful.” “Substance” has generally been interpreted as a chemical; a court ruled in 1985 that OSHA can define “grave danger,” but today&#8217;s court should worry that gives the agency too much power. Challengers to the health care mandate can cite the Supreme Court’s Affordable Care Act ruling that the Department of Health and Human Services cannot use funding to “coerce” states to expand Medicaid.
Biden’s obsession with vaccines and masks causes him to neglect tests and treatments, seeing them as distractions that will be rendered obsolete by universal vaccination. Vice President Harris <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/18/politics/kamala-harris-biden-administraton-delta-omicron-variant/index.html">admitted</a> they did not anticipate and prepare for more transmissible Delta and Omicron variants. The CDC in June said vaccinated individuals no longer needed to be tested, and the administration failed to approve tests available in Europe. The mixed messaging and uneven demand <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/20/us/abbott-covid-tests.html?referringSource=articleShare">caused Abbott Laboratories</a> to lay off workers, cancel supplier contracts, and destroy millions of tests. Biden’s mandate that unvaccinated employees be tested weekly creates even more unmet demand. While America has led other nations in developing and securing vaccines, the U.K. and Germany have done a better job providing rapid tests.
Biden belatedly credited Trump for vaccine development, but has not learned the lessons of his public-private partnership. Operation Warp Speed paid vaccine companies to scale up manufacturing during FDA’s review, ensuring adequate supplies upon approval. Biden failed to do the same with tests and treatments. Though Biden signed purchase agreements with Merck and Pfizer for treatments, relatively few doses will be available in coming weeks.
Biden should be giving Americans options for managing the Omicron surge and creating confidence among the vaccinated. He instead defines success in case numbers rather than more pertinent measures like serious cases, mortality, and hospital capacity, undervaluing the loss of freedom, privacy, and normalcy. Overpromising and underdelivering leave the vaccinated disappointed when confronted with breakthrough infections and calls for boosters, masks, and quarantines, and cause the unvaccinated to wonder why they should bother getting shots. Both groups suffer from covid fatigue and increasingly tune out experts. Biden’s top-down approach and repeated cycle of failed promises feed increasing polarization and decreasing trust.
Mindlessly chanting “follow the science” seeks to delegitimize conservatives without considering the merits of their arguments. “Follow the science” did not apply when Democrats questioned vaccines, and public health experts <a href="https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1473812600030994440?s=20">advocated delaying their approval</a> while Trump was in office. “Follow the science” does not apply when serious researchers explore whether herd immunity is a workable strategy, risk-based approaches should differ by age and other demographics, or the costs of eradicating covid exceed the benefit beyond making it endemic and largely survivable.
Biden’s strident rhetoric castigates mandate opponents as opposing science and favoring Covid. He seems more interested in browbeating than persuading the unvaccinated, and ignores the reasonable pro-vaccine, anti-mandate, and anti-school closures position that worked for Glenn Youngkin. One can believe in vaccines’ efficacy without believing them panaceas. Biden should follow the science and adopt a more holistic approach, as his vaccine idolatry is not working.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Bobby Jindal was governor of Louisiana, 2008-16, and a candidate for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. He currently chairs the Center for a Healthy America for the America First Policy Institute.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Joe Biden

Biden’s Vaccine Idolatry Is Not Working

COVID-19 Vaccine

As congressional Democrats struggle to breathe new life into their stalled legislative agenda, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi earlier this week told “VIP” donors on a leaked private phone call that all party members need to brag about the House-passed version of the Build Back Better bill even as she cautioned her colleagues not to describe the multitrillion-dollar spending measure’s impact as too sweeping.
“So, this is transformative. But people tell me, don’t use the word ‘transformative.’ Just say it lowers costs,” she <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10368449/Nancy-Pelosi-tells-donors-Democrats-need-boastful-Bidens-accomplishments.html">told supporters on the call</a>. “It lowers costs for health care — costs for families across America; it lowers cost of child care; it enables so much more to happen. So, we&#8217;re very, very proud of the legislation. Now we just have to get it passed.”
It’s a message that Democratic leaders have been unsuccessfully pushing for months amid Senate gridlock on the “human infrastructure” bill they view as companion legislation to the $1.2 trillion traditional infrastructure measure enacted in November.
Recent <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/04/cnbc-and-change-research-the-biden-economy-poll-president-biden-receives-low-rating-among-voters-as-his-presidency-approaches-its-one-year-mark.html">polls,</a> however, show that the flagging economy is the top priority for the majority of Americans who worry that President Biden’s agenda will continue stoking inflation – one of the main reasons why key Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin opposes Build Back Better. A <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/04/cnbc-and-change-research-the-biden-economy-poll-president-biden-receives-low-rating-among-voters-as-his-presidency-approaches-its-one-year-mark.html">CNBC Change Research survey</a> released this week found that a whopping 73% of voters believe the economy is in “poor” or “not so good shape,” and 60% disapprove of Biden’s economic record.
In light of those numbers, there’s little wonder why some Democrats in tough election battles this year aren’t heeding Pelosi’s call to sing the praises of progressives’ vast social spending measure. With the party facing serious headwinds in the November midterms, five Democratic House challengers have been noticeably mum about their position on BBB, failing to publicly tout Biden’s top legislative priority, with no mentions of it on their otherwise active social media sites.
Christina Bohannan, a Democratic state legislator from Iowa City who is running in her state’s newly drawn 1st Congressional District, is one example. Although the Iowa Democratic Party has been vigorously promoting Build Back Better, Bohannan has been conspicuously silent on the measure to the point of not even mentioning it on her Twitter account. She didn’t return repeated requests from RealClearPolitics to say whether she supports the bill. Instead of promoting her party’s top legislative priority, in December Bohannan tweeted about her endorsements, nursing shortages across Iowa, severe weather and her recent comments on education and abortion issues.
Several other Democratic challengers in highly competitive races have been similarly reticent even as progressives from safe seats, such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders, have spent weeks railing against Manchin for backing away from the measure after pledging to work with Biden to negotiate a compromise.
Nebraska state Sen. Tony Vargas, one of two Democratic challengers to Republican Rep. Don Bacon, as well as Yadira Caraveo, a Colorado pediatrician and state legislator, also have not wholeheartedly backed the BBB bill on social media or elsewhere. Neither candidate responded to RCP requests to state their position on it.
Even in a blue California district, a Democratic state legislator challenging Republican Rep. David Valadao has been muted in his public comments about Build Back Better. Republicans scouring Rudy Salas Jr.’s record on the subject did unearth a puckish reference to “BBB” on Twitter more than a decade ago, right before he ran for the open state assembly seat Valadao left behind, but it wasn’t about infrastructure spending of any type.
“At St. Francis for the BBB (Bible, BBQ, Beer) meeting this evening. Always good to be grounded,” he tweeted in April 2011.
Likewise, Liz Mathis, an Iowa state senator who is running against incumbent Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson, has only one BBB Twitter reference, and it dates back to 2013. Mathis tweeted out a photo from a fundraiser event for Bruce Braley, a former Democratic congressman who ran a losing campaign for Senate against Joni Ernst in 2014.
“BBB (Braley Backyard Bash) fundraiser for @BruceBraley,” she tweeted.
Instead of promoting passage of the social spending bill, Mathis on New Year’s Eve acknowledged that 2021 has been “a hard year.”
“The insurrection at the capitol on 1/6, the COVID crisis, and challenges facing the economy have all made certain that this campaign couldn’t be more important.”
Mathis did include a description of the Build Back Better measure in a newsletter her state Senate office released in late November. The BBB section appears under the heading “Federal Initiatives Invest in Iowa” and is listed after news of a state roundtable examining a teacher shortage.
The brief overview of the bill argues that it “addresses long-neglected needs,” touting provisions for paid family leave, caps on monthly insulin costs and Democratic claims that the measure would lower child care costs. In late October, however, the White House dropped any form of paid family leave from its framework after objections from Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.
“The federal legislation is expected to help level the playing field so that our economy once again works for everyone, not just those at the top,” Mathis <a href="https://us19.campaign-archive.com/?u=e1a8a6b06f1cce4e2c01436b3&amp;id=88723b7161">wrote in the newsletter</a>. “It aims to bring down costs that have held back families in Iowa for decades and give Iowans the chance to build a brighter future for themselves and their families.”
The new <a href="https://changeresearch.com/post/cnbc-change-research-national-poll-biden-year-1-economic-report-card/">CNBC poll,</a> which showed Biden with a 56% disapproval rating — the worst of his presidency — also revealed deep concerns over the spike in inflation since he took office. Nearly three-fourths of those polled disapprove of his handling of “kitchen table issues,” and 89% of voters labeled the price of everyday goods as “poor” or “not so good,” the survey found. Independents, who delivered the election for Biden, gave him a “D” across the board on economic issues with most voters blaming the rising prices of goods on his policies and government spending.
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki didn’t budge when asked Wednesday whether the poll’s findings would prompt Democrats to recalibrate their policy agenda. Instead, <a href="https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/press-secretary-jen-psaki-white-house-press-conference-transcript-january-5">she said</a> that the job of selling the bill to the American people would be easier after it becomes law.
“What we see in a lot of polling is that people like the components of the bill, but they don’t know exactly what is in Build Back Better and what it means,” Psaki told reporters. “And it’s always easier to sell a package to the public once it’s passed. So, we’re hoping to get to that point. That is our objective.”
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Susan Crabtree is RealClearPolitics&#8217; White House/national political correspondent.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Nancy Pelosi

Dems In Tough Elections Ignore Pelosi’s Push To Tout BBB

2022 Election

Build Back Better

The coming cold of winter is being paired with “green-inspired” energy policies that have created higher energy prices and fuel shortages.
Historically, winters have been big killers. But centuries of innovation made us more resilient to the cold as we fully utilized the naturally available fossil fuels to generate heat and electricity. However, today these modern advantages are being sacrificed at the altar of climate change in exchange for the purported magic of wind, solar and batteries.
Though the pandemic-led economic recovery has contributed to a surge in energy demand, the real reason for shortages and price hikes is the anti-fossil fuel policies of political leaders.
In the U.S., motorists have faced rising gas prices as President Joe Biden has suffered dropping approval ratings in polls. The president first blamed OPEC for the price hike and then pleaded to the same OPEC to increase production. International oil prices are inelastic, meaning they closely follow the rise and fall of demand. It should be no surprise that fuel costs rose as a result of Biden’s restraint on all things fossil.
As soon as Biden became president, he cancelled the Keystone pipeline, which would have delivered high quality oil from friendly Canadian neighbors. The president also brought in regulations that made drilling for oil more difficult, rendering the U.S. more dependent on Middle East producers.
As a stop-gap measure Biden has asked U.S. companies to produce more oil and for strategic reserves to be used. Nonetheless, the effects of his policies will be felt in the coming months and years. Americans may have to deal with energy insecurity for the next three years as Biden is determined to reduce consumption of fossil fuels.
In addition, there is a looming crisis in the power sector across the globe, courtesy the obsession with so-called renewables — also known as unreliables. Many places — like Colorado, Texas, Germany, and the U.K — are staring at the possibility of power blackouts. The situation is predominantly driven by an overreliance on renewable energy sources, which are intermittent year-round and cannot supply on-demand base load during peak hours.
In the modern world, blackouts result in extensive disruption to life as almost all sectors are power-dependent. An increased interest in electric vehicles could aggravate the problem with a higher demand for electricity.
In developing nations, energy disruption has the potential for more dire, life-and-death circumstances for millions of poor people in Africa, Asia, and South America. Both India and China faced in 2021 a severe coal shortage, which was partly the result of diverting a lot of public funds, time, and energy to creating wind and solar resources. The countries’ large-scale renewable installations could not provide on-demand electricity. Seventeen provinces in China experienced severe blackouts, forcing the closure of factories and offices, which resulted in unemployment among the poorest.
These episodes of energy shortages in Asia could serve as a sobering warning to other countries. The future of energy security will be dependent on the policies adopted, and it doesn’t look very good at this point.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Vijay Jayaraj is a Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Va., and holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, England. He resides in Bengaluru, India.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Wind and Solar

High Energy Costs The Christmas Gift Of ‘Green’ Politicians

Environmentalism

With Pennsylvania Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf term-limited in a state that <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/results-pennsylvania.html">narrowly went</a> to Joe Biden in 2020, both Democrats and Republicans are scrambling to best position themselves for the 2022 gubernatorial race. Democrats have rallied around the commonwealth’s attorney general, Josh Shapiro; on the Republican side, it remains unclear whether a sizeable primary field will help or inhibit the party’s efforts to secure the top office.
More than a dozen Republicans are currently running in the Keystone State – with <a href="https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2021/12/06/former-congresswoman-melissa-hart-pennsylvania-governor/">announcements</a> coming from still more candidacies. <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dvrzSIZ8TJrIoGanRopkOzBbjR-mFv4v/view">Polls</a> have <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2021/Toplines-PAStatewide-GOPGubernatorial-PublicRelease-Oct21.pdf">indicated</a> former U.S. Rep. Lou Barletta, state Sen. President Pro Tempore Jake Corman (pictured, at right), and state Sen. Doug Mastriano (who <a href="https://www.politico.com/newsletters/weekly-score/2021/12/06/the-most-competitive-governors-races-one-year-out-799288">has yet to announce</a>) lead the pack. It’s a crowded and diverse field, whereas Democrats have yet to put forth someone notable in opposition to Shapiro.
“Josh Shapiro has cleared the Democratic field because he is a thoroughbred, a bona fide statewide vote-getter, and a battle-tested campaigner who inspires confidence in all corners of the party,” Michael Bronstein, a state-based Democratic political consultant, told me. Bronstein added that Shapiro is “not exactly the type of person anyone should want to run against.”
Still, Shapiro is noticeably vulnerable. After all, the state’s chief law enforcement officer – along with ranking Democrats such as Philadelphia district attorney Larry Krasner – has drawn <a href="https://www.thetrace.org/2021/05/philadelphia-da-election-larry-krasner-opponent-gun-violence/">ire</a> from Pennsylvanians amid surging crime that has overwhelmed <a href="https://www.post-gazette.com/news/crime-courts/2021/11/29/homicides-killings-violent-crimes-increase-trend-Allegheny-county-pittsburgh/stories/202111270019">cities</a>, especially Philadelphia, which is experiencing its <a href="https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/sense-of-lawlessness-with-500-killings-2021-is-deadliest-in-philly-history/3057586/#:~:text=With%20more%20than%20a%20month,year%20in%20Philly's%20recorded%20history.">deadliest year</a> on record. Shapiro, moreover, has <a href="https://broadandliberty.com/2021/07/21/gina-diorio-the-many-unanswered-questions-surrounding-ag-josh-shapiro/">drawn criticism</a> for <a href="https://www.thetimes-tribune.com/news/prosecution-error-decimates-major-drug-case/article_be5ad5b9-2bcf-5b52-9db8-b36cd2cca5a6.html">botching</a> the prosecution of a significant drug case in northeastern Pennsylvania. And following the pandemic’s state-enforced lockdowns and restrictions, Philadelphia is on pace for a <a href="https://www.inquirer.com/health/opioid-addiction/philadelphia-overdose-deaths-2021-record-20211130.html">record year</a> in fatal drug overdoses. The opioid epidemic has intensified <a href="https://triblive.com/local/westmoreland/western-pa-among-nationwide-areas-seeing-dangerous-rise-in-opioid-epidemic/">throughout the state</a>, including the <a href="https://www.post-gazette.com/news/overdosed/2021/06/13/Fentanyl-overdose-deaths-Western-Pennsylvania-pittsburgh-Cody-Mahon/stories/202106130039">Pittsburgh region</a>.
If Republicans aim to strategically oppose Shapiro and the <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/22/philadelphias-campaign-to-prop-up-opioid-use-under-the-guise-of-safety-is-a-terrible-idea/">failed</a> progressive policies that have <a href="https://www.inquirer.com/crime/philadelphia-homicides-record-400-gun-violence-20210926.html">let</a> crime and drug use soar, one can only wonder if it’s time to narrow the party’s gubernatorial primary field. The first GOP debate is set to take place on Jan. 5 at <a href="https://www.pennlive.com/politics/2021/12/first-debate-announced-for-republicans-running-for-governor-in-pa.html">Dickinson College in Carlisle</a>. Voters may benefit from watching fewer candidates to get a sense of the most effective and winning message for a state navigating an uncertain future. Insiders have told me that several current candidates have no chance next November.
Polling groups have previously <a href="https://eu.timesonline.com/story/news/2021/03/02/pennsylvania-govs-race-toss-up-early-ratings-2022/6890231002/">released</a> data suggesting that Pennsylvania’s gubernatorial race is a toss-up. The question is whether it will stay tight as Republicans duke it out among themselves. Will noncompetitive candidates distract from the party’s messaging?
A Pennsylvania spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee did not respond to a request for comment on the matter.
According to Jim Lee, president of Susquehanna Polling and Research, the crowded GOP field situation is “really a glass-half-full or half-empty kind of thing.” (Lee disclosed in a statement that he has been contracted by GOP hopeful Barletta to do polling).
“On the negative side, this kind of a contested primary means spending limited resources that I agree will ultimately need to be saved for an expensive general election versus Shapiro, who will be well-stocked, well-funded, and ready for battle,” Lee told me. “Pennsylvania has six media markets – and we are an expensive state to compete in from a paid media perspective. So, a divided and bloody GOP primary definitely benefits the Democratic nominee.”
Lee, however, believes the multitude of candidates gives voters a wide range of options and the GOP an opportunity to determine who has the best chance to win.
The pollster’s view was echoed by Mark Harris, a founding partner at ColdSpark Media, a political consulting group headquartered in Pittsburgh.
Harris, who is being retained by Corman’s campaign, believes that Shapiro’s vulnerability on issues like crime and taxes gives Republicans leeway. He does not see the crowded field as a problem early on, but rather as a way for voters to determine which candidate is most appealing and most likely to stand up to progressivism.
“I think when all is said and done, Democrats will look back and wish they hadn’t given Shapiro – a historically weak candidate – a free pass,” said Harris. “The primary competition is one where we’re going to have a strong candidate come out the other end, who is going to be forced to raise money and run a real race.”
“Pennsylvania is a purple state, anything can happen.”
The veteran consultant added, “I think there are so many people running because everyone sees it’s a good Republican year, right?”
The filing deadline for nomination petitions is <a href="https://www.dos.pa.gov/VotingElections/CandidatesCommittees/RunningforOffice/Documents/2021/2021%20important%20dates.pdf">March 9</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Gabe Kaminsky is a senior contributor for The Federalist. His work has appeared in RealClearPolitics, the New York Post, Fox News, and other outlets. Follow him on <a href="https://twitter.com/Gabe__Kaminsky">Twitter</a>.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Voting

GOP’s Crowded PA Gubernatorial Field: A Help Or Hindrance?

Pennsylvania

Last week, shoppers enjoyed Cyber Monday deals from their fingertips. With inflation at a 30-year high, savvy consumers are finding the best deals and biggest savings. Yet one sector of the economy is blocking online shopping: healthcare. In contrast to the Cyber Monday economy, where competitive prices are low and easily known, the healthcare system blinds Americans to prices then blindsides them with massive bills that arrive in the mail weeks and months after care.
Cyber shopping can come to healthcare as early as next year when hospitals and health insurers comply with price transparency rules. Both are required by law to post their actual prices so patients can shop for the best care and coverage at the best prices from the comfort of their own homes.
Because healthcare prices have been hidden, consumers, including patients, workers, employers, and unions, are routinely overcharged and erroneously or even fraudulently billed. Out-of-control healthcare costs have put around <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/13/one-third-of-american-workers-have-medical-debt-and-most-default.html">one-third</a> of Americans in debt, and they cause roughly <a href="https://www.axios.com/hospital-billing?utm_source=newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&amp;stream=top">two-thirds</a> to delay care each year for fear of financial ruin. Axios <a href="https://www.axios.com/hospital-billing?utm_source=newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&amp;stream=top">reports</a> that hospitals mark up their prices by an average of seven times their cost of care. Last month, the Kaiser Family Foundation <a href="https://www.kff.org/health-costs/report/2021-employer-health-benefits-survey/#:~:text=The%202021%20survey%20included%201%2C686,the%20cost%20of%20their%20coverage.">revealed</a> that average annual employer-sponsored family healthcare premiums reached $22,221 this year.
These high coverage costs are <a href="https://www.barrons.com/articles/healthcare-costs-wages-inflation-transparency-51634155421">paid from employee wages</a>. Funds that would otherwise go to wage increases are cannibalized by runaway premiums. Hidden prices also result in <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-much-does-a-c-section-cost-at-one-hospital-anywhere-from-6-241-to-60-584-11613051137">wildly different bills</a> for the same care at the same hospitals. The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/some-hospitals-charge-up-to-10-times-more-for-medical-scans-than-others-study-finds-11638284400?mod=hp_lead_pos6">reports</a> this week that prices can vary by ten times for the same services. Studies <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7349401/">show</a> no correlation between health prices and quality. Providers and insurers are currently financially rewarded and get to bill for their medical mistakes and inefficiencies.
Real, upfront prices published online allow patients and employers to avoid price gouging providers. Instead, they can choose high-quality, less expensive alternatives, enjoying substantial healthcare savings. Federal law <a href="https://www.cms.gov/hospital-price-transparency">already requires</a> hospitals to post their actual prices, including their discounted cash and all negotiated rates, before care. It also requires hospitals to make them easily downloadable so that tech firms can aggregate them in search engines and create online shopping tools like Expedia, Priceline, and Kayak.
Yet a recent <a href="https://bit.ly/3hKIY8d">study</a> by PatientRightsAdvocate.org finds that only 5.6 percent of hospitals are fully compliant. Next July, a federal law, the <a href="https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/transparency-coverage-final-rule-fact-sheet-cms-9915-f">Transparency in Coverage rule</a>, expands price transparency throughout the healthcare system. It requires health insurers to publish their historical claims data and secret negotiated rates so that consumers can know what they&#8217;ll owe wherever they get care and be better informed of price-performance when choosing plans. Robust and timely enforcement of these price transparency measures will allow patients, unions, and employers to lead a consumer-driven healthcare revolution.
Actual prices (not estimates) will unleash a competitive market where prices, quality, outcomes, and standards of care are known upfront. Tech innovators can publish this data in Yelp-style online consumer guides and Amazon-style online marketplaces that show quality, outcome, and price information. When real prices are easily known, consumers won&#8217;t tolerate paying ten times more for the same care. Binding prices will prevent overcharging and give consumers immediate recourse in case their bills don&#8217;t match.
Many patients are already going online to access their healthcare by using telemedicine, whose increased popularity was a silver lining of the pandemic. The obvious next step to empower consumers to lower their costs of care and coverage is shopping on online search engines and mobile apps.
Healthcare delivery can follow in the footsteps of the airline industry. Since airline prices were deregulated in 1978, competition has reduced airfares by <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/how-airline-ticket-prices-fell-50-in-30-years-and-why-nobody-noticed/273506/">approximately 50 percent</a>, adjusted for inflation, made flying safer, and broadened access for hundreds of millions of Americans. Already, innovative employers throughout the country <a href="https://www.patientrightsadvocate.org/price-transparency-videos">have saved 30 to 50 percent</a> on their coverage costs by contracting with price transparent providers. They have shared these savings with their employees in the form of lower premiums and higher pay.
Systemwide price transparency will transform American healthcare by ushering in online shopping for care and coverage for everyone with a smartphone or computer. It will deliver substantial savings through competition and consumer choices &#8212; just like Cyber Monday shopping in the rest of the economy.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Cynthia A. Fisher is a life-science entrepreneur, founder and chairman of PatientRightsAdvocate.org, and founder and former CEO of ViaCord.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Health care

Systemwide Healthcare Price Transparency Can Bring Cyber Monday Shopping To Healthcare

Health Care

The Chilean people took to the polls on Nov. 22 to elect a president. On this day at least, the best laid plans of mice and totalitarian communist regimes were thwarted.
Thirty years earlier, the dust had barely settled from the dramatic fall of the Berlin Wall, the symbol of 20th century communism, when Cuban dictator Fidel Castro gathered Latin America’s foremost left-wing political leaders in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Castro was alone among attendees in retaining political power in the region. After decades of ever-shifting geopolitical dynamics, East-West proxy wars, and the not-coincidental birth of the narco-trade in Latin America, U.S.-backed neoliberalism had won the day.
Yet today, complacency following the West’s victory over Soviet-style communism has blinded it to the rise of 21st century totalitarianism. Western neoliberal governments moved on from the Cold War as if the world’s autocrats and Marxists had accepted defeat graciously, abandoned their ideology, and found something else to do with their time.
Leftist leaders instead set about to find better ways of doing business. From Moscow to Beijing to Havana, the left charted a course not to defeat democracy and tear down its market-based principles through direct confrontation, but to manipulate electoral systems in fledgling democracies, flood Western universities with Marxist ideology, and use rapidly expanding global corporate and banking sectors to finance its meteoric rise from the ash heap of history.
To that end, in what became known as the Sao Paulo Forum, Castro and the other leaders from leftist Latin American parties plotted their comeback in annual strategy sessions. The forum’s first victory came in 1999 with the election of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Evo Morales in Bolivia, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua and Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador in Mexico, among others, followed. Today, the ruling parties in Argentina, the Dominican Republic, Panama, Peru, Saint Lucia, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Mexico and Bolivia, as well as the incoming government in Honduras, all are members of the Sao Paulo Forum.
Since 1990, when Castro’s Cuba was the only leftist regime in power in Latin America, communist-backed parties have gained control of approximately half of the governments in the region. Closer geographically to the United States, only Guatemala, El Salvador and Costa Rica remain non-members of the Forum in Central America. For its part, El Salvador and its protean leader Nayib Bukele (pictured) have fallen under the siren spell of the Chinese Communist Party in the past year.
The U.S. response to the rising red tide to its south has been largely passive. The same national security apparatus that once fought bloody proxy wars in Central America to stop the advance of communism one inch north of Nicaragua now idly watches Mexico slip incrementally toward socialism as its massive, state-protected criminal organizations flood U.S. streets with China-sourced fentanyl and methamphetamine. The decades-long U.S. reluctance to address the extent of corruption in the Mexican political system has reaped catastrophic consequences.
Farther south, China has taken advantage of the astonishing Biden administration indifference toward two historical migrant source countries, Honduras and El Salvador, amid a historic immigration crisis. The Biden administration has steadfastly refused to engage either country diplomatically, and El Salvador’s Bukele has in turn taken significant steps both toward autocratic rule at home and China-backed unification with its Honduran neighbors. Honduras, which is developing a rapid rail system connecting the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean as a Panama Canal shipping alternative, figures to be a key commercial hub for Chinese Communist Party expansion into Central America.
Yet the CCP is not the greatest threat to democracy in the region. The Sao Paulo Forum continues to acquire chess pieces, with its latest targets being Chile and Colombia. In 2019, operatives from Cuba and Venezuela organized a series of violent Marxist-style worker riots in the southern Chilean province of Capitan Prat. The Chilean government discovered the plot after a top Cuban intelligence officer defected and revealed that Cuba and Venezuela had planned the riots to push Chile, a historically market-based economy, toward autocratic socialism. Fifty Cuban and Venezuelan operatives were subsequently expelled from the country. In 2021, the Colombian government discovered extensive and similar Cuban and Venezuelan involvement in a series of riots organized in Cali. Colombia will elect its next president in May 2022.
Another part of Sao Paulo Forum strategy appears to be the perpetuation of the U.S. border crisis as a smokescreen. Whereas most migrant encounters by U.S. border patrol in the first half of 2021 involved citizens of Mexico, El Salvador or Honduras, recently much larger and better organized caravans have been staged in Panama, a country led by a forum party, and have focused on a single port of entry in Del Rio, Texas. While the media have characterized the caravans as composed of Haitian refugees, most of the migrants are moving north from South America rather than Haiti and are mixed with Cubans, Peruvians and Venezuelans, all three forum countries. As the U.S. tears itself apart from within, in part over the politics of immigration and border security, forum participants move free from U.S. interference behind the border crisis smokescreen.
While the U.S. may not yet be paying attention, the freedom-loving people of Chile have been.  In their Nov. 22 presidential election, more than half of Chileans voted against leftist candidates. The presidential election now goes to a Dec. 19 runoff, but the Cuba/Venezuela-organized riots have, thus far, failed to move Chile to the ranks of Latin American socialist states.
The U.S. should recognize the Chilean rejection of socialism as an opportunity for reengagement in the evergreen struggle between democracy and totalitarianism. It should wake to the growing threat to its south, and, with its allies, return to the business of supporting fledgling democracies around the world.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Josh Jones is a senior fellow on border security for the Texas Public Policy Foundation.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Communism

Beyond The Border Crisis, A Red Curtain Stretches Southward

South America

Friends raved when I started making hand-decorated sugar cookies for my children’s birthday parties in Portsmouth, Rhode Island. They often would tell their friends about me, and soon other parents were asking me to bake for their events. Before long a small business emerged in my kitchen. I called the enterprise A Spoonful of Sugar. As a stay-at-home mom with four children under the age of 12, I had limited opportunities for income. So, the revenue proved valuable.
My customers also benefited. Besides enjoying one-of-a-kind creations, they liked the idea of using a local small business. Instead of supporting centralized bakeries in faraway places, they could buy homemade cookies, cupcakes and other treats from someone in their own neighborhood. Customers also appreciated my commitment to food quality and safety. They trusted me, and I never received a complaint. Everyone was happy — except the Rhode Island Department of Health, which shut me down in January 2021.
The reason had nothing to do with my facilities or processes. Regulators never even inspected my kitchen or sampled my work before taking action. They ordered me to halt my operation based on a zero-tolerance law in Rhode Island that blocks everyone except farmers from selling “cottage food,” meaning food made in a home kitchen for sale.
Considering that Rhode Island has about 1 million residents but fewer than <a href="https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2017/Online_Resources/County_Profiles/Rhode_Island/cp99044.pdf">1,800 farmers</a>, the law effectively excludes 99.8% of the population, including me. The only state with a more restrictive policy was New Jersey, which previously blocked 100% of its residents from cottage food sales. That prohibition ended on Oct. 4, 2021, when <a href="https://ij.org/issues/economic-liberty/homemade-food-seller/new-jersey/">new rules</a> took effect. Other jurisdictions acted sooner. Connecticut and Kentucky amended their farmers-only cottage food laws in 2018, giving equal opportunity to everyone. Delaware expanded its farmers-only law in 2016. Overall, 49 states and Washington, D.C., now have rules that would allow my business to thrive. Rhode Island is the lone holdout in the small but growing cottage food industry.
The movement fits within a larger trend toward healthy eating and responsible sourcing. <a href="https://ij.org/report/cottage-foods-survey/">Research</a> from the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm that supports cottage food producers, shows job growth when regulators let people work in home kitchens. Women entrepreneurs gain the most.
Despite the progress, the Rhode Island Department of Health continues to oppose reform. A 2021 <a href="https://www.wpri.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/23/2021/03/5758-Letter.pdf">letter</a> to state lawmakers cites hypothetical concerns about foodborne illness, but the department offers no evidence of actual harm. New Jersey health officials already looked into the matter and found little risk. The state’s introduction to its new rules points to “scientific evidence that supports a finding that shelf-stable food prepared in home kitchens is safe for consumers.” Part of the reason is the personal nature of cottage food. Buyers and sellers know each other, which creates a rapport. Cottage food also involves smaller batches and fewer handlers than industrial operations, which enables tighter process controls.
Unfortunately, the lack of real-world problems did not help me when I received my cease-and-desist letter. My only option, rather than permanent closure, was to move my operation to a state-approved commercial kitchen. I was lucky to find a suitable space about 7 miles south of my home in Middletown, but getting set up was not easy. State inspectors required paperwork, inspections, and fees, all of which caused delays. When approval finally came, I faced additional challenges. Instead of baking at home in a familiar environment, I had to work in someone else’s kitchen and often bring my youngest daughter with me to make the timing work.
Rhode Island can do better. State lawmakers introduced <a href="https://legiscan.com/RI/bill/H5758/2021">House Bill 5758</a> in 2021, which would have let me return to my kitchen, but the measure stalled. A new legislative effort will start in 2022, giving the General Assembly a chance to correct the error and spur economic growth. Other states already have called off the cookie police, creating a path to profit for all home bakers. Only Rhode Island continues to spoil the recipe.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Kara Donovan, owner of A Spoonful of Sugar, lives in Portsmouth, Rhode Island.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Cookies

I Battled Rhode Island’s Cookie Police

Rhode Island

According to a <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/357317/stricter-gun-laws-less-popular.aspx">new Gallup poll</a>, support for stricter gun control has fallen by 15 percentage points in just the last five years. But, despite the drop being driven by independents’ changing views, Democrats aren’t likely to rethink their support for more gun control. The partisan divide on this issue has never been so large — 91% of Democrats and only 24% of Republicans support stricter laws.
While Democrats claim they want “reasonable” or “common sense” laws, you get an idea of how stark the partisan differences are by considering the response to Gallup’s question about whether people support a complete ban on civilian ownership of handguns: 40% of Democrats like the idea compared to only 6% of Republicans.
The recent election results in Virginia and New Jersey show Democrats are in real trouble with rural, working-class voters. Some pundits put part of the <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/11/16/democrats-gun-owners-522562">blame</a> on the party’s constant push for gun control.
You can see the opposing views in the reactions to the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict. Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul <a href="https://twitter.com/GovKathyHochul/status/1461807608147456002?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1461807608147456002%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wgrz.com%2Farticle%2Fnews%2Flocal%2Fkyle-rittenhouse-verdict-reaction-new-york-wny-western-new-york%2F71-11e96095-4b2d-447f-ba6c-35bcfc5319d1">tweeted</a> the lesson she took from it: “If there was any question about why we need strong gun safety laws, this is your answer. This should never have been allowed to happen in the first place.”
Other Democrats see gun ownership in apocalyptic terms. “This entire tragedy [with Rittenhouse] makes the case that we should not allow our fellow Americans to own and use weapons that were originally designed for battlefield use,” <a href="https://crimeresearch.org/2021/11/cnn-beto-orourke-on-pushes-ban-on-weapons-of-war-and-reversing-texas-constitutional-carry/">said</a> Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke. “That AR-15, that AK-47, has one single, solitary purpose and that is killing people as effectively, as efficiently, in as great a number, in as little time as possible. We saw that in Kenosha.”
O’Rourke calls AR-15s “weapons of war,” but he appears unaware that these guns fire the same bullets, with the same rapidity, and do the same damage as a small caliber hunting rifle. They just look like military weapons.
The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/20/us/kyle-rittenhouse-gun-control.html">ties</a> the AR-15 that Rittenhouse used to the assault weapon ban lapsing in 2004 because Republicans “blocked its renewal.”
Meanwhile Republicans generally viewed the case as showing the benefit of guns for self-defense. They point out the person Kyle Rittenhouse wounded admitted on the witness stand that he was shot him only after he pointed a handgun directly at Rittenhouse. Another had struck Rittenhouse in the head with a skateboard and was going to do so again before Rittenhouse shot him.
You can also see the partisan gap in a <a href="https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/gun_control/gun_owners_oppose_federal_tracking_fear_confiscation">new Rasmussen survey</a>. While Democrats support a national registration system by a 64% to 25% margin, Republican opposition is the mirror image (27% to 63%). Sixty-four percent of Republicans fear that registration would mean the government will “eventually confiscate all guns.” They need not be conspiracy theorists to believe that, as 40% of Democrats agree.
The Washington Free Beacon obtained a leaked document this month showing that the Biden administration has already <a href="https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/biden-admin-amassing-millions-of-records-on-u-s-gun-owners-amid-new-crackdown-on-firearms/">compiled</a> the records of more than 54 million U.S. gun owners. They are also drastically changing Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) regulations to ensure the federal government collects all licensed dealer information on their customers.
It isn’t hard to see why so many Americans fear that eventual confiscation is the end game. Under the label of “reasonable” gun control laws, Democrats keep pushing rules to end private firearm ownership.
Do you think that is hyperbole?
Look no further than Biden’s nominee to head the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Saule Omarova. <a href="https://crimeresearch.org/2021/11/saule-omarova-bidens-nominee-to-head-the-office-of-the-comptroller-of-the-currency-called-for-the-debanking-of-what-she-called-socially-sub-optimal-industries/">She calls for “debanking” of what she claims are “socially sub-optimal industries.”</a> It is a revival of the Obama administration’s “Operation Chokepoint,” where the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) pressured banks into closing businesses’ accounts. Try running a company without someone to handle credit cards, lines of credit, check cashing, and other things that financial institutions do.
Or take President Biden’s “zero tolerance” policy toward what he calls “rogue” gun dealers. No policymaker wants dealers to secretly sell guns to criminals out of the back of their store. But that is not what Biden is going after. Even one mistake in paperwork, no matter how trivial and inconsequential, now means the loss of one’s license and the end of one’s business. When Biden talks about <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/06/23/remarks-by-president-biden-and-attorney-general-garland-on-gun-crime-prevention-strategy/">5% of the gun dealers selling 90% of the guns found at crime scenes</a>, he ignores the fact that 95% don’t.
The one common feature of these and many other proposals is to make owning a gun more costly and less common — thus driving gun makers and sellers out of business.
The Biden administration and other Democrats, even those in conservative states like Texas or <a href="https://billingsgazette.com/opinion/columnists/guest-opinion-new-background-check-bill-is-flawed/article_0dbc5e91-dec6-5b66-9ec1-075916ca9e84.html">Montana</a>, show no intention of changing course. Republicans see Democrats releasing violent criminals on little or no bail, refusing to prosecute violent criminals, and defunding the police. The Democrats’ sole focus on gun control ignores that <a href="https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2021/07/20/despite_what_biden_says_guns_factor_in_only_a_small_percentage_of_violent_crimes_786128.html">92% of violent crime has nothing to do with guns</a>.
Republicans believe that Democrats either don’t understand what works or don’t really care about reducing crime.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Lott is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and the author most recently of “Gun Control Myths.” Until last month, Lott was the senior adviser for research and statistics at the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Guns

Support For More Gun Control Falls, But Partisan Gap Grows

Gun Control

It costs more to pay rent each month and to fill up a tank of gas every week and to put food on the table every day. So, at a moment when the dollar doesn’t go as far as it once did, should Americans worry that injecting another $1.85 trillion into the economy might increase inflation?
No, Jen Psaki told Peter Alexander this week. And why not? Well, the White House press secretary <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2021/11/15/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-jen-psaki-november-15-2021/">explained</a> to the NBC News correspondent, “because no economist out there is projecting that this will have a negative impact on inflation.”
Of course, that isn’t true. There are many economists out there and some of them do warn that the Build Back Better plan will further increase the prices that dog consumers and can doom the careers of politicians. But the existence of economists with views contrary to those held by the president’s National Economic Council isn’t entirely the point. At issue more broadly is the fulfillment of something Joe Biden said back in April 2020.
“Milton Friedman,” he said <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/25/joe-biden-green-stimulus-207848">as a candidate,</a> “isn’t running the show anymore.” And nothing could be truer now that Biden is the president.
As the first year of his administration nears completion, inflation has emerged as an unwelcome accompaniment. It has not hit the double-digit levels that propelled Friedman, the late Nobel Prize laureate who warned about the dangers of an unchecked money supply, to prominence in the late 1970s. But consumer prices jumped 6.2%, years over year, in October, the biggest such increase in three decades.
“There&#8217;s no doubt inflation is high right now. It&#8217;s affecting Americans&#8217; pocketbooks. It&#8217;s affecting their outlook,” Brian Deese, director of the National Economic Council, told Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday. “But it&#8217;s important that we put this in context. When the president took office, we were facing an all-out economic crisis.”
The White House argues that those inflation numbers are transitory and will eventually come down. The temporary pain that consumers feel, they contend, is the result of pent-up demand and kinks in the supply chain, not because of excesses in government spending. Two of the president’s other economic advisers, Jared Bernstein and Ernie Tedeschi, dismissed early inflation warnings and predicted that price increases “should fade over time as the economy recovers from the pandemic.” <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/blog/2021/04/12/pandemic-prices-assessing-inflation-in-the-months-and-years-ahead/">That was in April.</a>
But lingering inflation hasn’t lessened the administration&#8217;s appetite for spending— witness the $1.2 trillion infrastructure plan signed into law this week or the $1.85 Build Back Better plan that’s still pending in Congress. The White House has shooed away concerns in recent weeks by pointing to a letter <a href="https://www.epi.org/open-letter-from-nobel-laureates-in-support-of-economic-recovery-agenda/">from 17 Nobel laureates</a> who predict that the spending “will ease longer-term inflationary pressures” and to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-rating-agencies-say-bidens-spending-plans-will-not-add-inflationary-2021-11-17/">analysis by Moody’s Investor Services</a> that reached the same conclusion.
“They&#8217;re all wrong,” said Steven Hanke, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University. He doesn’t deny that supply chains are backed up or that there may be pent-up demand. But Hanke told RealClearPolitics that those are “ad hoc excuses.” Inflation is being driven by “the money supply which has increased by over 35% since COVID, an unprecedented explosion since World War II.”
Along with John Greenwood, chief economist at the investment management company Invesco in London, Hanke likens the situation to a bathtub with three drains. The first two drains are economic growth and savings. In the absence of inflation, money that flows into the tub easily flows out of the tub through those two drains. “But if more money is flowing in than out,” the two reasoned in <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/monetary-bathtub-overflowing-inflation-drain-transitory-11634847429">a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed</a>, “the level of money rises. It will eventually reach the overflow, which is the inflation drain.”
An alumnus of the Reagan administration and a fervent supply-sider, Hanke notes that between December 2019 and August 2021, the supply of dollars in circulation grew by $5.5 trillion, “a stunning 35.7% increase in only a year-and-a-half, driven primarily by the Federal Reserve’s purchase of Treasury and mortgage-backed securities.”
Enter Biden and his human-infrastructure package. In Detroit on Wednesday, the president argued that his plan “is fully paid for” and does not increase the deficit “one single cent.” The spending plan would be paid for by new taxes on top earners who make more than $400,000, the administration insists. That might be true, if the bill that reaches Biden’s desk includes those tax increases, an unpopular possibility currently being debated in Congress. But that’s a big if: Sen. Joe Manchin, a linchpin for passage in the upper chamber, has repeatedly expressed his concerns.
There are other snags. As the New York Times reports, the head of the Congressional Budget Office <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/15/us/politics/biden-social-policy-bill-irs.html">warned Monday</a> that cracking down on tax evaders would produce about $120 billion, not the $400 billion Biden is relying on to cover some of the spending. While a full formal analysis is still expected, Hanke and others argue that deficit spending “makes the Fed’s job a lot more difficult” because when the Treasury Department issues new bonds to cover that debt, “what are they going to do? Say, ‘Oh, no — we’re not going to buy anymore.’ They are buying those bonds. That&#8217;s why the balance sheet of the Fed gets bigger and bigger. And that&#8217;s why the money supply gets bigger and bigger.”
The notion that increased government spending doesn’t carry the risk of inflation, said Michael Jay Boskin, an economics professor at Stanford University&#8217;s Hoover Institution, “is economically illiterate.” Increased government spending adds to the total demand for goods and services, he added, “such that we are risking inflation, and the Biden administration seems to be trying divert attention. There is a risk that inflation may become entrenched. It&#8217;s hard to imagine a worse outcome than an inflation spiral.”
Chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers from 1989 to 1993, Boskin notes that “a very large fraction” of the relief payments the federal government sent out in 2020 and 2021 was either saved or has yet to be spent. “That is a lot of government spending floating around the system now in the pockets of consumers and the budgets of state and local governments,” waiting to further flood the economy.
On the question of inflation, illustrations of the concept abound. A flood of dollars chasing too few goods. The monetary supply as an overflowing bathtub. But anti-tax conservative Stephen Moore prefers a more colorful one: “dumping gasoline on a forest fire.” A member of former President Trump’s economic task force, Moore questions the Biden administration’s explanation for inflation, specifically the idea that the problem is pent up demand post-pandemic. “Because if that’s the case, why did we spend $2 trillion earlier this year,” he said of the American Rescue Plan. “It doesn’t make any sense.”
The White House likely won’t heed his warnings or those of any naysayers. Analysis from Reagan and Bush alumni — let alone Trump advisers — certainly isn’t in fashion in this administration, especially since, as Biden noted more than a year ago, Milton Friedman “isn’t running the show anymore.”
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Philip Wegmann, RCP Staff.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Jen Psaki

Psaki’s ‘No Economist’ Assertion Draws Some Inflation Dissenters

Inflation

The results of Virginia’s 2021 election were no earthquake. Glenn Youngkin, the newly elected Republican Governor, squeaked home by the narrowest of margins. The swing from blue to red was a modest 5 percent.
Yet 2021 could turn out to be one of the America’s most significant elections for a generation.
Virginia offers the conservative movement a map back to electoral success — if they have the good sense to follow it.
It is easy when living in a state like Mississippi to assume that the Republican party is well entrenched. The reality across much of America, however, is that the conservative movement which dominated American politics in Ronald Reagan’s day has suffered defeat and retreat ever since.
The last time that a Republican candidate won a popular majority in a US Presidential election, for example, was back in 2004. Republican candidates have only managed to win the popular vote in two of the past nine Presidential elections.
It is not just that Republican candidates have not done poorly. Even more ominously, not every Republican candidate has been …. how might I put this delicately? …. conservative.
Over the past couple of decades, states like Virginia, which at one time tended to lean conservative, appeared to have shifted decisively to the left. Until this election.
Despite having failed to win a state-wide election for twelve years, conservative candidates in Virginia were elected not only to the gubernatorial post, but as Lt. Governor and Attorney General, too.
The Virginia result was a victory for school choice conservatism. With parents denied any real power in the public education system, moms and dads in Virginia felt anxious about some of the things their kids were being taught – such as Critical Race Theory.
Youngkin repeatedly made the issue of whether parents should be allowed a say in their child’s education the center piece in his campaign. Youngkin also calmly but firmly insisted that Critical Race Theory is wrong.
It turns out that giving people school choice is wildly popular and that millions of ordinary Americans are not that keen on having their kids indoctrinated into believing that their country is intrinsically racist either.
Here in Mississippi, we recently published a report on Critical Race Theory in our state. It shows how conservatives might offer something similar here, too.
Perhaps the most striking thing about the Virginia result was the record support that the conservative side got from both Hispanic and African America voters. Opposing a divisive anti-American ideology has broad appeal. Again, conservatives in the Magnolia State and beyond should take note.
One final observation about Virginia: The conservative side in the election did something that too often conservatives are loathe to do; they tried to understand and listen to their audience before trying to persuade them.
Too many of those that work in public policy presume that arguments that excite them appeal to everyone else. They don’t. In order to win in Virginia, conservative strategists used messages and messengers that resonated with the folk they needed to win over.
Instead of school choice, they talked about school freedom. Instead of attacking obstructive teacher unions, they made it clear that they wanted a better deal for teachers — if not necessarily union bosses.
It takes more than a bumper sticker to win over hearts and minds. A new conservative movement that understands this, while offering real school freedom and an alternative to Critical Race Theory, could be unstoppable.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Douglas Carswell is the President &amp; CEO of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Glenn Youngkin

Virginia’s Lessons For Conservatives

Critical Race Theory

Education

Virginia

With every new perceived emergency, we witness a rise in the power of the administrative state. Agencies with no accountability to the people or the government’s elected officers. Even when there is no emergency, the growth of the administrative state goes quietly unnoticed. Fighting the growth of the leviathan is not as difficult as it seems. Action can be taken at the state level.
The administrative state has grown so large and complex that it can no longer be held accountable by the citizenry or elected officials. The Federal Register currently has 71,222 pages of complex codes and regulations which is an increase of 2,104 pages from 2019. There are currently more than 2.1 million civilian workers in the federal workforce across more than 400 agencies. Congress has become dependent upon administrative agencies to interpret and enforce the laws it passes while leaving it to the courts to interpret whether the agencies are operating in accordance with congressional consent. At each step of the process the citizens get further removed from the process. This process can be reversed at the state level.
The states are showing the same frightening trend as the national government. With most state legislatures operating on a part time basis, most states leave it to the administrative agencies to do most of the rulemaking and enforcement. Citizens are supposed to be the ultimate source of authority in the United States. Our Founders instituted elections so citizens can voice their will and hold their officials accountable. But, the more complex the government becomes, and the more that is given to the administrative state, the further removed ordinary citizens are from the governing process. The solution is to pass state constitutional amendments that thwart the growth of the administrative state. With a model amendment that focuses on a few simple points, the government can once again be held responsible by the people.
First, the model amendment should require each line of the budget allocation to be accompanied by a mission statement that provides clear direction to administrators and judges. This also gives voters line of sight to legislative intent so that voters can assess for themselves if the rule is being implemented as the legislature had intended. Second, relevant Key Performance Indicators must be associated with each program and dollar allocation. This will allow for greater transparency and oversight while reinforcing legislative intent. By putting in place accountability metrics at the outset, citizens and legislators can accurately assess how well an administrative agency is doing.
The third component requires an annual report by the state’s governor. Since the governor sits at the top of the administrative branch, this report is a way for the governor to review the performance of those that report to her and for the citizens and legislators to hold the governor accountable for what has or has not been done well.
Given the size and complexity of government, the average voter — and even the average legislator — has no hope of being able to track everything going on. This model amendment would give voters shorthand information about what each part of government is trying to do and how effective it has been.
The national government is so overrun with special interests and complexity that the states should get a renewed focus in the battle against the administrative state. Once these measures demonstrate their efficacy at the state level they can be scaled to the national. It is a more practical and republican process of policy making to work up from the states to the national.
We urge those states that value the principles of our Founding Fathers to embrace these moves to transparency and oversight to combat the rise of the administrative state. It is through these measures that the people, and the institutions through which they voice their will, can reclaim the stature they were intended to.
The views expressed in this piece are the author&#8217;s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Michael R. Davis, JD, is a Research Fellow at the 1889 Institute in Oklahoma City. He can be reached at mdavis@1889institute.org.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Menu

RealClearWire