It’s hard to comprehend the true scale of the fiscal disaster in Washington D.C. While most Americans feel the impact when gas or milk prices increase by even a nickel, Washington borrows almost $5 billion a day without batting an eye.
The difference between the ridiculous $18.1 trillion in debt from back in 2015 and the ludicrous $39 trillion debt of today seems inconceivable. Numbers this big just don’t seem real.
But if we think of our federal government finances in terms of a family budget, the problem becomes much clearer. So let’s talk about a hypothetical family – The Havernots. The Havernot family earns just under $66,000 a year, which is the same as the average American worker. That equates to a weekly paycheck of $1,266 or monthly earnings of $5,486, before taxes and other deductions.
Most families budget their income and expenses in a responsible manner – carefully allocating their money to basic necessities like housing, utilities, and groceries, while saving what they can for other purposes like retirement, unexpected expenses, and the occasional vacation. That’s the responsible way to manage your finances.
But that’s not how the Havernots live. They spend money in the same manner as the federal government. So for the purposes of this example, we have scaled down the federal government’s income (primarily tax collections) and expenditures (outlays for government programs and, increasingly, interest on the national debt), to match the Havernots&#8217; financial situation.
Once again, the Havernots earn nearly $66,000 and, like the federal government, spend far more than they bring in. In proportion to the federal government, they spend just over $86,500 a year, meaning they have to borrow more than $20,500 annually to cover their expenses. On a monthly basis, the Havernots bring in almost $5,500 while spending a little more than $7,200 a month, a recipe for financial disaster.
Of course, like the federal government, they’re already saddled with a hefty amount of debt due to many prior years of fiscal irresponsibility. The federal government is approaching $39 trillion in debt. That equates to a current debt burden of over $373,000 for the Havernots.
If, like the Havernots, you are currently $373,000 in debt and are adding $20,500 to that debt load each year, you had better have a good plan in place to get your finances in order, with Dave Ramsey on speed dial.
Unfortunately, that’s not the case for the federal government. Looking at projected finances for the federal government, things are going to get much, much worse. On a positive note, government revenue collections are projected to increase by 49.7% over the next ten years, and expenditures are expected to grow by 53.6% over that same period. The total federal debt will grow by 76%.
That means the outlook for the Havernots is equally depressing. Looking down the road 10 years, their income would increase from $66,000 to just over $98,500, which is great news. Until you realize that their annual expenditures grow from about $86,500 to about $132,950 over that same period, forcing them to borrow more than $46,000 annually. And their total debt burden has grown from $373,000 to more than $656,500. This is an unsustainable trajectory for the Havernots.
The silver lining for the Havernots is that some of their spending is being used to improve their financial standing. For instance, by steadily paying off their auto loan and mortgage, the Havernots will, in time, fully own their car and home. But the debt our nation is racking up isn’t putting us on a path to homeownership; it’s careening us toward homelessness.
The Havernot family’s disastrous situation should make it clear: President Trump and Congress need to work quickly to turn our nation’s finances around. There is no magic wand or silver bullet to reverse decades of fiscal irresponsibility, but there is hope.
The best option is a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as it would guard against the gimmicks and end-arounds that Congress regularly employs to skirt budgetary restraints.
A second-best option is creating a bipartisan debt reduction commission with the ability to push an aggressive plan directly to the floor of the House and Senate for a vote.
No matter the approach, it’s imperative for everyday Americans to make their voices heard in Washington if things are ever going to change.
And policymakers – just like the Havernots – need to gather around the kitchen table for an honest conversation about our current predicament and a sincere attempt at doing the right thing.
* * *
Brandon Arnold is Executive Vice President of National Taxpayers Union.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Month revenue of young couple

What America’s $39 Trillion Debt Looks Like On A Family Budget

Budget

Congress

Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

Dave Ramsey

Economy

Federal Government

finance

National Debt

Opinion

President Javier Milei’s economic revolution represents more than a policy pivot; it’s a moral restoration of economic freedom in a country long suffocated by political patronage and false populism.
For over half a century, Argentina sabotaged its own potential through destructive experiments in statism. Now, at last, a government in Buenos Aires is aligning economic reality with moral clarity: wealth is created by entrepreneurs, not bureaucrats.
This return to first principles is rekindling optimism not only among Argentines but across a region desperate for proof that markets and democracy still deliver shared prosperity.
One crucial reform remains for President Milei: fulfilling his campaign promise to replace the discredited peso with the U.S. dollar, which would slay the inflation dragon once and for all. Other Latin American nations have successfully done this.
This weekend, President Milei will join <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.batimes.com.ar/news/world/trump-to-host-latin-american-leaders-including-milei-in-miami-on-march-7.phtml__;!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!1lj03JOV51ushNRZ8I6bEicd-MCjFM8_7oSRvGjC-ZdxY1yQmBNK7tvJUriYzI4RmGou_Pok0uqJL1psbIsm4g$">President Donald Trump in Miami</a>, where several Latin American leaders will discuss a renewed hemispheric push for pro-growth cooperation. The very fact that Argentina now sits at such a table signals how far it has come in restoring credibility. A nation once dismissed as ungovernable is suddenly at the center of regional attention, reminding the world that bold ideas grounded in free markets can reshape national destiny. The discussions will also test whether Argentina can sustain reform momentum amid political resistance at home.
Shortly afterward, Milei&#8217;s administration will host “<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://x.com/ArgMilei/status/1992720098612940853?s=20__;!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!1lj03JOV51ushNRZ8I6bEicd-MCjFM8_7oSRvGjC-ZdxY1yQmBNK7tvJUriYzI4RmGou_Pok0uqJL1qR77feuw$">Argentina Week</a>“ in New York, showcasing opportunities for American investment in energy, agriculture, and finance. The symbolism is powerful: Buenos Aires is stepping out of its long isolation and back into a world governed by trust and transparency. For many investors who had written off Argentina years ago, this gathering marks the ultimate test of Milei’s reforms under political and legal scrutiny that past regimes failed. Clear progress will bring capital home, along with the modern infrastructure, technology, and competition needed to reinvigorate Argentina’s middle class and stabilize its currency.
Markets, however, are built on trust, not slogans. The outcome of the <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-08/argentina-ordered-to-pay-at-least-8-4-billion-in-ypf-lawsuit__;!!PxibshUo2Yr_Ta5B!1lj03JOV51ushNRZ8I6bEicd-MCjFM8_7oSRvGjC-ZdxY1yQmBNK7tvJUriYzI4RmGou_Pok0uqJL1rXv1ks2w$">Petersen v. Republic of Argentina</a> case — a $16 billion judgment tied to the Peronism-driven seizure of the energy company YPF — will test Argentina’s commitment to the rule of law. YPF’s nationalization back in 2012 was another failed experiment of Argentina’s Peronist past – one that resulted in major fallout for American investors. If the government honors that judgment and turns this costly dispute into a milestone of legal redemption, it would signal that the old habits of expropriation are truly over.
Refusing to honor that decision would risk undermining the very revival Milei seeks. It would chill investment just as confidence begins to return and cast doubt on Argentina’s reliability as a trading and financial partner. Upholding accountability, by contrast, would not only calm financial markets but also energize entrepreneurs at home, eager to build without fear of arbitrary intervention. It would confirm to foreign investors that Argentina’s new age of reform is anchored in institutions, not personalities.
The United States has already shown its faith in Argentina’s reform course. President Trump‘s $20 billion swap line was more than financial aid — it was a vote of confidence that free people and free markets can succeed where socialism failed. That confidence, however, will last only if Argentina maintains predictable legal and economic rules.
Milei has shown rare determination by slashing spending, ending price controls, and dismantling the bureaucracies that choked private enterprise. But lasting success depends on consistency: clear rules, sound money (hence the need for dollarization), and dependable institutions. Property rights are the oxygen of capitalism. When governments confiscate, investment dies. When they keep their word, growth flourishes.
The temptation to cut corners in the name of short-term relief always lurks nearby. But the only sustainable path forward is steady adherence to economic liberty and institutional reliability. The meetings in Miami and New York offer the ideal stage for Milei to affirm those values — and to show that Argentina’s new direction is not a passing wave but a permanent shift in national character.
If Argentina stays this course — resolving old debts, deepening ties with the United States, and proving that freedom and responsibility are inseparable — it can once again become a beacon of prosperity in the Western Hemisphere. The world is watching, and this time Argentina has a real chance to prove that freedom works.
* * *
Steve Forbes is Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of Forbes Media.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Javier Milei Opens 2026 Legislative Sessions

STEVE FORBES: Argentina’s Reinvention Depends On Faith From Free Markets

STEVE FORBES: Argentina's Reinvention Depends On Faith From Free Markets

Argentina

Economics

Free Market

Miami

New York City

South America

US dollar

Claiming a free $1,000 from the federal government for your child is now even easier. The Trump Administration on Monday launched a redesigned online intake form for opening a Trump Account. 
The new IRS Form 4547 at <a href="http://trumpaccounts.gov">TrumpAccounts.gov</a> replaces the clunky downloadable PDF parents previously had to navigate. The updated form, designed by the new government National Design Studio led by Airbnb co-founder Joe Gebbia, streamlines the process into a few simple steps. Parents are asked to provide their personal information, contact details, and their child’s information, along with consent for the Treasury Department and IRS to open a Trump Account on the child’s behalf. Families may also add additional qualifying children in the same submission. 
Once the form is submitted, the Treasury Department, in partnership with the IRS, will create and maintain the Trump Account. The account will be held in a partner institution, which will then contact parents with further instructions to complete the setup. 
The redesign radically simplifies the previous system, which required parents to download, fill out, and mail back the PDF form. The new online submission allows parents to complete the entire process digitally, eliminating paperwork and delays.
President Trump established the National Design Studio through executive authority as part of a broader effort to modernize outdated government systems. “There is a high financial cost to maintaining legacy systems, to say nothing of the cost in time lost by the American public trying to navigate them,” the President’s executive order states. 
Airbnb co-founder Joe Gebbia joined the government as an unpaid special government employee (SGE) to bring the President’s vision to life by redesigning the Trump Stock Account intake form. 
Trump Accounts have the potential to be financially transformative for American families. According to White House <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Trump-Accounts-Give-the-Next-Generation-a-Jump-Start-on-Saving.pdf">projections,</a> a child born in 2026 would have an account worth approximately $5,800 by age 18 with no additional contributions. With maximum contributions from parents and employers, that number could reach $303,800. By age 28, the account is projected to grow to $18,100 without additional contributions and as much as $1,091,000 with maximum contributions, highlighting the power of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-secret-weapon-that-will-supercharge-the-trump-accounts-for-newborns">reinvesting earnings</a> over time. Families, friends, and employers can contribute up to $5,000 per year per child. 
The account, managed by a professional firm, will invest the funds in a diversified portfolio of low-cost index funds aiming to maximize long-term growth while minimizing risk so that when the child turns 18, they have money to be able to fund their college education, buy their first home, or start a business.  
All children under the age of 18 with a valid Social Security Number are eligible to establish a Trump Account, but only children who were born between January 1, 2025, and December 31, 2028, are eligible for the $1,000 seed investment from the United States Treasury. The funding for Trump Accounts came from the Beautiful Bill and will have the opportunity to be extended in a later reconciliation bill for children born in 2029 and beyond.  
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent hopes that as children watch money in their Trump Account grow, they learn valuable lessons about investing and personal finance. At the Trump Account launch day, Bessent <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/white-house-says-trump-accounts-are-antidote-to-socialism">shared</a> a sobering statistic showing that two-thirds of Generation Z cannot answer more than half of the basic financial literacy questions on the Nation’s Personal Finance Index. He said that watching their own money grow in real time through Trump Accounts will give Americans the opportunity to course-correct their financial literacy.

US-POLITICS-TRUMP

Trump Accounts For Your Kids Are Now Easier Than Ever To Access

The Government Is Giving Kids $1,000—And It’s Now Easier Than Ever to Claim

family

News

Trump Administration

I grew up believing America is the land of opportunity. Over the last few years, however, I have begun to wonder if that America still exists. Are we still the kind of nation where children can realistically pursue happiness, homeownership, and the American Dream?
Even in the face of endless division and media narratives designed to make families doubt it, I believe, perhaps now more than ever, the answer is yes. That’s due in large part to the Trump administration introducing <a href="https://trumpaccounts.gov/?utm_source=chatgpt.com">Trump Accounts</a>, a major step in setting American children up for success. And that means a lot to this mother of three with a newborn at home.
During the Biden years, I was genuinely scared about the financial state of our country. Inflation was out of control, crime was rising, and the value of the dollar felt meaningless. I couldn’t help but wonder if my kids would ever be able to afford homes, raise families, or even live independently in the country I love.
That fear is exactly why <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/3209769/why-mothers-should-back-trump/">I pleaded</a> with other moms to vote for Donald Trump. And now, everything feels different.
Last month, I gave birth to my youngest daughter, Monroe Lee, a name rooted in American history. And for the first time in years, I feel something I haven’t felt in a long time about this country, real hope for the American Dream. Inflation and crime are down, and Wall Street can’t outbid first-time home buyers. Under President Trump, the American Dream feels alive and well again.
That’s why Trump Accounts hit me personally.
These investment accounts are brilliant in their simplicity. This isn’t some complicated, exclusive program — it’s a literal capital investment that starts growing right away. A $1,000 jumpstart for a better future.
If we want our nation to prosper, we must facilitate individual prosperity, and one of the easiest ways to kickstart long-term, widespread opportunity is to give every child a personal stake in the nation’s success from day one. Not only will they grow into more financially independent adults — reducing long-term reliance on government programs — but they will be literal stakeholders in America’s prosperity itself. With skin in the game, they’ll be eager to contribute so they can reap the financial benefits of their hard work, thereby driving progress and innovation. It’s textbook win-win-win.
While my first two children were born during the dark economic days under Biden, my third qualifies for a Trump Account. If we simply open the account, that original <a href="https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/articles/what-to-know-about-new-trump-accounts-for-kids.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com">$1,000 could be up to $8,000 by age 18, and over $18,000 by age 28.</a> It could potentially turn into tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars by adulthood — especially if parents and family contribute. Under current guidance, parents, employers, and even philanthropists can add to these accounts, and contributions are invested in low-cost, diversified funds designed for growth. 
<div id="attachment_1038081" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1038081" class="size-large wp-image-1038081" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-1933761156-864x576.jpg" alt="nicoletaionescu. Getty Images. Mother and child having fun walking outdoors in winter season" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-1933761156-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-1933761156-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-1933761156-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-1933761156-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-1933761156-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-1933761156-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-1933761156-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />nicoletaionescu. Getty Images.</div>
This is the kind of financial opportunity that creates generational wealth — something that has, for too long, mostly been accessible only to the already wealthy. But Trump Accounts change that by giving every child a tangible financial head start.
The tragic reality is that most Americans lack the kind of financial literacy and experience that builds wealth. That’s why it often seems that the rich get richer: they know what they’re doing, and oftentimes they have a head start. While the American Dream provides endless opportunities, that means little to those who don’t know how to take advantage of them. But Trump Accounts make it as easy as it’s ever going to get to <a href="https://time.com/7358662/trump-accounts-babies-kids-investment-businesses/">break the curse of generational poverty</a> and shrink economic disparities.
Hard-working Americans — parents, grandparents, employers, and even outside donors like Michael and Susan Dell — can contribute to these accounts over the years so kids can watch their money grow with them. Major financial firms have committed to <a href="https://people.com/jpmorgan-chase-bank-of-america-match-employees-trump-accounts-11894873">matching contributions</a> for employees’ children, and some philanthropic investments provide additional seed funds for those who otherwise might be left out. 
Even just that sense of security in knowing there’s money in the bank can pave the way for children to pursue greater opportunities as they unfold before them. By the end of President Trump’s term, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/society-equity/bessent-says-500000-have-signed-up-trump-accounts-more-donations-coming-2026-01-28/">25 million American children</a> could have investment accounts growing in their name — if only parents and families simply take advantage of this opportunity.
As a mother, I’m perpetually thinking about the long game: Am I teaching my kids the skills they’ll need as they grow? Am I instilling values that lead to success? Am I doing everything I can to set them up for happiness and prosperity? But it isn’t just parents who should be thinking about these things. The whole nation should consider what we are doing now to build a better future for those coming after us.
At the very least, every American child now has equal access to a seeded investment portfolio, regardless of race, creed, or economic status, thus creating unprecedented possibilities for tens of millions of Americans through generations to come. The clichés are real — the best time to start was yesterday, but the second-best time is now, because now is when their future starts.
***
Jillian Anderson King is a former Washington Redskins Cheerleader Ambassador and ABC’s The Bachelor and The Bachelor in Paradise contestant. She’s a Mombassador for Moms for America, an ambassador for Turning Point and Turning Point Faith, and a proud Christian Conservative mother and wife. Jillian is also the founder of The Kings Firm, a strategic communications firm.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

A Mother’s Case For The Return Of The American Dream

A Mother's Case For The Return Of The American Dream

Children

Donald Trump

Family Values

Funding

Money

Mothers

Trump Accounts

College ed

Why America’s Colleges Are Far More Fragile Than They Appear, Part II

American Universities

College

Education

Ivy League

Student Loans

Students

College decay

Why America’s Colleges Are Far More Fragile Than They Appear, Part I

President Donald Trump took aim at two major financial firms he said were pushing racial quotas and climate activism onto American companies in an executive order on Thursday. 
The executive order accused the proxy advisor firms of Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis of pushing leftist politics into the shareholder voting process. Both companies control over 90% of the market for proxy advising in the United States and advise powerful clients on how to vote on shareholder proposals on things ranging from climate policy to board composition. 
“These proxy advisors regularly use their substantial power to advance and prioritize radical politically-motivated agendas — like ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ and ‘environmental, social, and governance’ — even though investor returns should be the only priority,” Trump wrote in his <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/12/protecting-american-investors-from-foreign-owned-and-politically-motivated-proxy-advisors/">executive order</a>. “For example, these proxy advisors have supported shareholder proposals requiring American companies to conduct racial equity audits and significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and one continues to provide guidance based on the racial or ethnic diversity of corporate boards.”
Glass Lewis has provided <a href="https://perma.cc/9JFW-HKEM">guidelines</a> recommending against boards with fewer than one member of “an underrepresented community.” It defines “underrepresented” as non-white people or sexual minorities. It will also generally recommend against a board “that fails to provide explicit disclosure concerning the board’s role in overseeing [climate change] issues.”
ISS has adopted similar <a href="https://perma.cc/N9TG-B7X9">guidelines</a>, noting that it will generally vote against companies with no women on the board, against boards with no racial or ethnic diversity, and vote against companies it says have not taken “minimum steps” to address “climate change” risks. 
“Their practices also raise significant concerns about conflicts of interest and the quality of their recommendations, among other concerns,” Trump wrote. “The United States must therefore increase oversight of and take action to restore public confidence in the proxy advisor industry, including by promoting accountability, transparency, and competition.”
<a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible c-link--underline" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25" data-sk="tooltip_parent">Christmas Sale – Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>
The executive order directed the chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission to review all regulations related to proxy advisors and DEI mandates and directed the chair of the Federal Trade Commission to join state investigations into whether proxy advisors were violating unfair trade practices. It also calls for the attorney general and the secretary of labor to investigate the influence of proxy advising. 
Last month, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-florida-sues-major-financial-firms-over-dei-and-esg-push">filed a lawsuit</a> against ISS and Glass Lewis, accusing them of violating Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and state antitrust laws. Both firms <a href="https://www.wsj.com/finance/regulation/proxy-advisers-iss-and-glass-lewis-are-facing-antitrust-probes-22f0ff38?gaa_at=eafs&amp;gaa_n=AWEtsqc1i9ZlMDA8f3aZJiR2l7fRxLMEzpcyYRtsfyc4o8X1sQlk3u_hSRE9vvDqiKE%3D&amp;gaa_ts=691f1ec8&amp;gaa_sig=xwAM0c1b63ROAM2TrL-DyCp8Kzu_81NHpUXhlHCKKdp1uc0l_r4sb2vXNv1yUslNLkGqWHiK6ScdxjQHeJ7Tgw%3D%3D">are currently</a> under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission over how they direct clients on social and climate issues. 
In August 2023, the House Judiciary Committee launched an <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/letters.pdf">investigation</a> into ISS and Glass Lewis, probing their partnerships with climate activist groups and their push to “decarbonize” corporations.

Trump Targets Two Financial Firms Over DEI And ESG Push

Climate Change

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Florida has accused two massive proxy advisor firms of politicizing American retirement accounts by promoting DEI and ESG, according to a lawsuit filed Thursday.  
The suit from Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier accuses Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis of pushing companies to adopt race and sex-based quotas and embrace climate activism. The two firms comprise about 97% of the market for proxy advice in the United States, providing investment managers with guidance and research on how to vote on shareholder proposals. 
“Defendants have used this enormous influence to push their own dogmatic agenda,  one that seeks to require publicly traded companies to strictly adhere to highly controversial—and,  in some cases, illegal policies,” Uthmeier wrote in a copy of the lawsuit obtained by The Daily Wire. 
“Quotas for outright racial balancing, gender ideology that promotes genders beyond male and female, and an insistence that concerns about global climate change should influence every company&#8217;s decision-making are Defendants&#8217; basic requirements,” the suit added. 
Uthmeier&#8217;s suit, filed in the Second Judicial Circuit of Florida, accuses the companies of two counts of violating Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and state antitrust laws. Both firms <a href="https://www.wsj.com/finance/regulation/proxy-advisers-iss-and-glass-lewis-are-facing-antitrust-probes-22f0ff38?gaa_at=eafs&amp;gaa_n=AWEtsqc1i9ZlMDA8f3aZJiR2l7fRxLMEzpcyYRtsfyc4o8X1sQlk3u_hSRE9vvDqiKE%3D&amp;gaa_ts=691f1ec8&amp;gaa_sig=xwAM0c1b63ROAM2TrL-DyCp8Kzu_81NHpUXhlHCKKdp1uc0l_r4sb2vXNv1yUslNLkGqWHiK6ScdxjQHeJ7Tgw%3D%3D">are currently</a> under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission over how they direct clients on social and climate issues. 
Together, both firms work with hundreds of thousands of Florida employees’ retirement plans worth billions, according to the suit.
The suit states that the firms have pushed left-wing ideology by “recommending votes against corporate board members who are not the right gender or do not fall in line and affirmatively voice support for Defendants&#8217; ideological agenda.”
Examples cited in the suit include Glass Lewis providing <a href="https://perma.cc/9JFW-HKEM">guidelines </a>that include recommending against boards with less than one member of “an underrepresented community” on it. It defines “underrepresented” as non-white people or sexual minorities. It will also generally recommend against a board “that fails to provide explicit disclosure concerning the board’s role in overseeing [climate change] issues.”
Right now, DailyWire+ annual memberships are fifty percent off during our Black Friday sale. Join now at <a class="c-link c-link--focus-visible c-link--underline" href="http://dailywire.com/blackfriday" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="http://dailywire.com/blackfriday" data-sk="tooltip_parent">dailywire.com/blackfriday</a>.
ISS has adopted similar <a href="https://perma.cc/N9TG-B7X9">guidelines</a>, noting that it will generally vote against companies with no women on the board, against boards with no racial or ethnic diversity, and vote against companies it says have not taken &#8220;minimum steps” to address “climate change” risks. 
“Florida is done allowing two unaccountable foreign-owned private corporations to manipulate shareholder votes behind closed doors,” Uthmeier told The Daily Wire. “ISS and Glass Lewis claim to be neutral advisors, but they use their near-total control of the proxy-voting market to push divisive political mandates that threaten retiree savings, distort corporate governance, and undermine the rule of law. That ends now.”
The suit was supported by Will Hild, the executive director of Consumers’ Research. 
“We will continue to encourage and support aggressive enforcement action until ISS and Glass Lewis stop their abuses and commit to transparency, neutrality, and true accountability to the investors and consumers they are supposed to serve,” he said. 
In August 2023, the House Judiciary launched an <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/letters.pdf">investigation</a> into ISS and Glass Lewis, probing their partnership with climate activist groups and pushing to &#8220;decarbonize&#8221; corporations.

National-Conservatism-Conference-in-Washington

EXCLUSIVE: Florida Sues Major Financial Firms Over DEI And ESG Push

EXCLUSIVE: Florida Sues Major Financial Firms Over DEI, ESG Push

Florida

Investors

Retirement

The following is a portion of an edited transcript from a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mrn-250824-member-exclusive?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+Show+Episodes+Carousel">Weekend Edition of Morning Wire</a> where Daily Wire Executive Editor John Bickley sat down with Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for Responsible Federal Budget.
* * *
JOHN: Joining us now is Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for Responsible Federal Budget. Maya, thanks so much for coming on. First, tell us, what exactly is the <a href="https://www.crfb.org/">Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget</a>?
MAYA: Thanks for having me. Other than a mouthful of a name, it&#8217;s a bipartisan nonprofit watchdog group. Basically, we&#8217;re very concerned about fiscal policy, meaning how big our debt and deficits are and we don&#8217;t have a political agenda at all. I&#8217;m a political independent. Our board and our staff are from across the political spectrum. But we are deeply concerned that our political environment now focuses on borrowing when we shouldn&#8217;t be because of the political benefits of not actually dealing with trade-offs. And that concern has been growing over time.
JOHN: I wanted to ask you exactly about that. You&#8217;ve been warning about borrowing. Why is the growing debt so dangerous for the U.S. economy? What specific ways will it actually impact Americans?
MAYA: I think that&#8217;s one of the biggest challenges about this whole issue. It&#8217;s really not something that feels directly related to us as individuals, but it&#8217;s directly related to everything we care about. The fiscal health of the country is really the underpinning of both our economic and our national security strength. So, if your debt is too high — and ours without question is — every warning sign that there is is blinking bright, bright red right now. But if your debt is too high, it actually means that the government borrows so much money, it squeezes out the investment possibility and the private sector. It slows growth and slows productivity, it pushes up inflation, pushes up interest rates, all sorts of things that slow economic growth, which translates into lower wages, lower standard of living, and less job security. Nothing good on the economic front. That&#8217;s one. 
Two, it means that our budget has huge pressure because interest payments start to absorb more and more of our resources. Whether you want huge tax cuts or huge growth in spending, we can fight about those things, but interest payments get the first claim on the dollar in the budget. Right now it&#8217;s our second largest item in the budget and the single fastest growing item. It also means that when we have national emergencies where you should be borrowing, it&#8217;s more difficult to do so. And it means that, if you&#8217;re trying to fight a recession or a pandemic or a national emergency, you may have high pressure on upward interest rates when you&#8217;re trying to borrow. Whereas, if your debt&#8217;s lower, that doesn&#8217;t happen. 
But it&#8217;s also expanded now where it&#8217;s not just an economic issue, it is a national security issue. We are borrowing from countries with whom we are not aligned. We are not able to make our own national security decisions just from a strategic and security perspective, we have to think about budget resources and you don&#8217;t want to be in that position. So it weakens our ability to respond to emergencies, take advantage of opportunities. But bottom line, we can do fewer things and we become poor as a nation.
And finally, for those people who worry about the next generation, it&#8217;s really, really [hosing] a generation that&#8217;s already facing so many challenges. They are facing a much more difficult, fast-paced, changing world and we have tied up their budget with interest payments and promises to seniors. They don&#8217;t have the fiscal flexibility to respond and they owe a whole lot of debt because of the borrowing we took on.
&nbsp;
<iframe style="width: 100%; max-width: 660px; overflow: hidden; border-radius: 10px;" src="https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/debt-deficits-disaster-can-washington-change-course/id1576594336?i=1000723297012" height="175" frameborder="0" sandbox="allow-forms allow-popups allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-storage-access-by-user-activation allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation"></iframe>
JOHN: Like you said, it&#8217;s insidious because you don&#8217;t feel a lot of the effects. There are a lot of things that we can&#8217;t do now, things that we could have done if we had more money available. And then, kicking the can down the road. We&#8217;re not feeling it now – but our kids will feel it, and their kids will feel it. Is there any progress on this in Washington? Anyone paying attention to this?
MAYA: Yes, it&#8217;s so discouraging, honestly, because the situation is getting worse. Our debt to GDP is getting worse. Our annual deficits are getting worse, and this is outside of emergencies. And, frankly, our political environment and willingness to talk about this is much, much worse. We&#8217;re so polarized. You have both parties basically fighting with each other by giving away more things. &#8220;I&#8217;ll give you tax cuts, no taxes on this.&#8221; &#8220;Well, I&#8217;ll give you bigger tax cuts, and I&#8217;ll increase the spending.&#8221; &#8220;I&#8217;ll also increase the spending.&#8221; It used to be that you thought of Republicans as wanting tax cuts and Democrats as wanting spending increases. It&#8217;s literally both now. So, they fight for these huge giveaways. 
So, no, the situation is frankly very troubling both from an economic, national security, but also a political perspective. And internally, because it&#8217;s frustrating to work on an issue where you know we&#8217;re not going to have the big debt deal that we really need to have this year, for instance, a lot of times the best we can do and sort of why we&#8217;re able to pat ourselves on the back for some work is when things would have been worse without the kind of fiscal pressure we put on. But it&#8217;s really frustrating to say, &#8220;Well, we borrowed a trillion dollars, but we might have borrowed a trillion and a half if it weren&#8217;t for our pushing against this issue.&#8221; We&#8217;ve got to do better than that. We&#8217;ve got to start actually turning the ship around and bringing the debt as a share of GDP trajectory down instead of continuing to grow it&#8230;
* * *
<h3><a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/debt-deficits-disaster-can-washington-change-course/id1576594336?i=1000723297012">Catch the full interview with Maya MacGuineas on Morning Wire.</a></h3>

‘Blinking Bright, Bright Red’: Maya MacGuineas On America’s Debt, Deficits, And Disaster

'Blinking Bright, Bright Red': Maya MacGuineas On America’s Debt, Deficits, And Disaster

Morning Wire

Spending Bill

U.S. House of Representatives

A conservative policy powerhouse is calling for changes to financial rules that allow the government to pressure banks into cutting ties with groups they find ideologically objectionable.
The America First Policy Institute&#8217;s Center For American Prosperity on Wednesday <a href="https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/debanked-when-political-bias-trumps-financial-judgment">released</a> &#8220;Debanked: When Political Bias Trumps Financial Judgment.&#8221; The white paper outlines five proposals that the authors say would stop government regulators from weaponizing their influence over banks to further their political agendas.
Debanking &#8220;creates a de facto blacklist of people and organizations that have lost access to banking services and have significant difficulty regaining access to banking,&#8221; Jill Homan, Deputy Director of Trade and Economic Policy, and David Vasquez, Senior Policy Analyst for Energy &amp; Environment at AFPI, write in the report.
&#8220;Debanking creates uncertainty and hardship. In a nation governed by laws, the practice of legal coercion through regulatory discretion is antithetical to the American system of justice,&#8221; the authors add.
&#8220;Ultimately, debanking is not just an economic problem, but a constitutional one. When federal officials use unofficial “guidance” to achieve what Congress never authorized, they violate both the spirit and letter of the law. The solution is to excise power from the regulators, and that begins with narrowing their discretion.&#8221;
President Donald Trump made a similar point earlier this year.
“The regulators control the banks,&#8221; Trump said in June. &#8220;It’s not the president of the bank. The president of the bank is far less important to a bank than a regulator, and a regulator can put that bank out of business.”
Debanking reached a fever pitch in 2013, when the Obama Justice Department launched “Operation Choke Point.&#8221; Under the operation, the Justice Department targeted “companies believed to be at a high risk for fraud and money laundering.&#8221; In reality, Choke Point involved government officials pressuring banks to cut ties with firearms dealers and other businesses the Obama administration deemed intolerable. The Biden administration continued its debanking efforts with <a href="https://financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=409457">Operation Choke Point 2.0</a>, an effort to target the cryptocurrency industry.
In addition to the firearms and crypto industries, religious groups and conservative organizations have also been frequent targets of government-run debanking.
The authors suggest a number of policy tweaks that could prevent future debanking efforts. They urge Congress to pass the Financial Integrity and Regulation Management Act, which would “remove the subjective criteria of &#8216;reputational risk&#8217; which bank regulators use to evaluate a financial institution. … Instead, financial regulators would rely entirely on objective criteria to assess financial soundness.”
The law would also restrict the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation from judging a financial institution’s trustworthiness on the “competency of bank management,” which is evaluated based on the risk regulators believe the institution is exposed to, based on the businesses it serves.
The authors also call for a uniform “Federal Fair Access” standard that would “end the need for states to develop separate debanking legislation that further complicates banking operations with a patchwork of inconsistent and conflicting state laws.”
A requirement to notify customers and explain the reasoning ahead of a decision by a financial institution to end its relationship with someone would increase transparency. Modernizing old regulations would also mitigate problems brought about by using a 1970s legal framework in the present-day financial environment.
&#8220;Whether the result of politically driven regulators abusing their authority or bad policies, this administration and Congress have an opportunity to dramatically curb the practice of government-driven debanking across the country through federal action,&#8221; the authors conclude. &#8220;Doing so involves reducing subjectivity and instituting these changes into law.&#8221;

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Conservative Group Calls For Lawmakers To Fight Government-Driven ‘Debanking’

Debanking Is A Serious Problem For Conservatives. Here Are Some Expert Suggestions To Fix It

America First

Banking

Censorship

Cryptocurrency

Guns

Obama Administration

JPMorgan Chase <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-11/jpmorgan-tells-fintechs-they-have-to-pay-up-for-customer-data">just announced</a> a new set of fees on financial-technology (fintech) platforms for access to their customers&#8217; bank account information. This move from the banking giant is a direct attack on consumer choice, financial innovation, and the free market.
America’s biggest bank is effectively imposing a tax on consumers. These fees aren’t about protecting customers or improving service; they’re about preserving the bank’s monopoly over your money and your information.
This is the clearest sign yet that Wall Street is terrified of competition from fintech platforms, decentralized finance (DeFi), and crypto. That’s because these sectors are delivering what traditional banks have long resisted: greater consumer choice, better user experiences, lower fees, and more transparency. They’re unlocking new technologies, slashing costs, and giving users greater control over their financial futures.
Apps like Venmo, Acorns, Robinhood, and Chime rely on secure access to banking data to offer direct-to-consumer services. These apps work because they can securely link to a user’s bank account through third-party platforms. When banks like JPMorgan make those connections more expensive or difficult, they’re not just squeezing fintech platforms, they’re cutting off consumers from tools they increasingly rely on and, in essence, forcing you to pay for access to your own banking information.
It&#8217;s clear JPMorgan and other major banks are trying to preserve their role as gatekeepers and consolidate control over consumers. It’s anti-competitive, plain and simple.
Worse still, when big banks like JPMorgan consolidate control, they’re able to impose political agendas. We&#8217;ve already seen how major financial institutions have embraced ideological causes and weaponized their power to &#8220;debank&#8221; disfavored individuals and businesses, usually conservative ones. Restricting access to financial data is just another tool to block the rise of independent platforms they can’t control.
These new fees will stifle innovation, suppress competition, and force Americans to depend on institutions that have prioritized politics over people.
At risk are the apps and digital currencies that give Americans the freedom to move their money, manage their budgets, invest in new ways, and protect their data from the very institutions that have spent decades abusing their trust.
That’s why Consumers’ Research is calling out JPMorgan’s tactics for what they are: predatory, monopolistic, and dangerous.
This is not what the future of banking should look like, but rather the past trying to hold on. By making it harder for outside platforms to access data, the big banks keep users locked into their own systems and interfaces. This allows them to charge higher fees, limit transparency, and maintain their control over customer relationships and financial insights.
Consumers’ Research has long warned that consolidation in the financial sector is a danger to both economic freedom and political neutrality. These new fees are another way to prevent disruptive platforms from offering alternatives that embrace consumer choice and remain free of political agendas. JPMorgan’s self-serving actions are bad for consumers and bad for America.
* * *
Will Hild is the Executive Director of Consumers’ Research, the nation’s oldest consumer advocacy organization.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

JP Morgan Chase & Co. Ahead Of Earnings

Debanking By Design: JPMorgan’s War On Fintech And Consumer Choice

Debanking By Design: JPMorgan's War On Fintech And Consumer Choice

debanking

JP Morgan

When President Trump says other countries are “ripping us off,” he is referring to more than trade or currency manipulation. He is also talking about predatory investors overseas — foreign-based hedge funds and sovereign wealth funds — that have devoted staggering amounts of money to bankroll frivolous lawsuits in American courts. Why? Their aim is to pocket a significant portion of any verdict or settlement. If successful, these litigation gamblers not only secure a sizable return on their investment, they also walk away without having to pay any taxes.
It is unfair to American companies, consumers, and taxpayers. 
There is, however, a real opportunity to stop this litigation abuse through the budget negotiations currently underway in Congress. Foreign investors are using our U.S. court systems to punish American companies and citizens while enriching themselves. Since litigation is so costly, risky, and time consuming, many companies often agree to settle even when the case lacks real merit, because the risk of going to trial is simply too high.
The lawsuit funding landscape has become akin to the wild west. Foreign investors take advantage of loopholes to avoid paying taxes on their judgments or settlements even if the plaintiffs they are bankrolling are required to pay taxes. One reason this practice is not better known is very few jurisdictions require investors to disclose their involvement in cases or the terms of their agreements.
Allowing foreign-based investors to operate in the shadows, cloaked in anonymity, raises a host of legal, ethical, and even national security concerns. How are judges to know if they need to recuse themselves if they do not have access to all the facts? Who are the attorneys acting on behalf of the plaintiffs or the investors? Is the often-confidential information obtained during the discovery process about American citizens and companies at risk of being turned over to foreign funders, some of whom may hold views antithetical to our national interests? What are the real motivations for these lawsuits? Is it about justice or achieving other geopolitical goals?
Clearly, this practice is cloaked in secrecy. And while there is much the American people still do not know, they know enough to understand it’s both unfair and a serious threat. At least $15 billion is devoted to this dubious practice as of today. We also know Russian oligarchs have <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation-finance/putins-billionaires-sidestep-sanctions-by-financing-lawsuits">dodged sanctions</a> by investing in lawsuits in American courts and investors based in China have <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/china-firm-funds-us-lawsuits-amid-push-to-disclose-foreign-ties">used</a> litigation financing arrangements to target tech companies.
The good news? There is a remedy at the ready.
Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Congressman Kevin Hern (R-OK) introduced the <a href="https://www.tillis.senate.gov/services/files/94578FC8-8F83-48AB-9932-7D61465A7FFF">Tackling Predatory Litigation Funding Act</a>, a bill which cracks down on the misuse and abuse of our courts by ending investors’ preferential tax treatment and creating much-needed deterrence. This legislation will, at a minimum, make investors think twice before targeting a successful American company with a frivolous claim.
The Tillis-Hern Tackling Predatory Litigation Funding Act takes the “for sale” sign off of American courthouses and amends the tax code to impose a new “tax on income from litigation which is received by third-party entities that provided financing for such litigation.”
Income from lawsuits is just that – income; just as American taxpayers have to pay taxes on the money they make, so too should foreign investors who use our court systems as a casino.
President Trump’s Reconciliation Bill passed the House last month and now awaits consideration in the Senate. While it contains a permanent extension of the Trump tax cuts, No Tax on Tips, and billions for immigration enforcement – the Senate also has a chance to fix the equity and tax issues associated with predatory foreign litigation investing. In addition, the Tillis-Hern Tackling Predatory Litigation Funding Act would crack down on foreign intrusions in our courts, safeguard national security interests, and generate new tax revenues to fund other commonsensical American priorities.
This is an ideal time and a good legislative vehicle to stop foreign investors from using U.S. courts to harm and punish American taxpayers, and this Reconciliation Bill can accomplish just that.
* * *
Trey Gowdy represented South Carolina’s 4th District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2011 until 2019.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=wisepops&amp;utm_campaign=dad&amp;utm_content=fathersdaygiftpopups">Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!</a>

Menu