Commentary: The Role of Federalism in Trump’s Second Term

Donald Trump

The presidential election is in its final stretch and the race is neck-and-neck, according to the polls. The outcome will have a profound impact at all levels of government and business, so preparing for a second Trump term would be prudent.

In office and on the campaign trail, former President Trump has championed federalism and granting the states greater latitude to implement policies and programs. He has voiced a commitment to reducing the footprint of federal regulations. As president, he implemented executive orders and other actions that sought to ease regulatory costs and effects. The Trump Administration also galvanized deregulatory efforts at the state and local level through the Governors’ Initiative on Regulatory Innovation. A similar effort can be expected in a second term.

Read More

While Condemning ‘Dark Money,’ Democrats Funnel Huge Amounts of Anonymous Cash into 2024 Election, Outpacing Republicans

A new review of financial documents shows Democrats are pouring more money than ever into 2024 political campaigns, especially in close races.

Read More

Commentary: The Abortion Wars Are Just Getting Started

The Supreme Court’s apparent decision to send the abortion issue back to the states may be a triumph for federalism and the concept of the separation of powers, but it is also a recipe for unyielding division. Abortion politics will become even more of a litmus test for tens of millions of pro-choice and pro-life voters at the local, state, and federal levels because their legislators will have far more power to shape policy. This, in turn, will further polarize our politics and empower the extremes because many voters will likely back candidates no matter their position on schools, crime, housing, jobs and debt, so long as they are the right kind of “pro.”

Read More

Commentary: The Tyranny of Experts

The principles and policies of America’s original progressives have received renewed attention over the last decade, both in academia and in public discourse. Today’s progressive politicians and intellectuals have pointed to their roots in the original progressive movement; moreover, the connections between the original progressive calls for reform and the language and shape of our politics today have become increasingly obvious. In what follows, the relevance of original progressivism to government today will be more fully explored. There is no better place to begin than with our administrative state. This essay deals with the general principles of the administrative state and its roots in the original progressive movement.

The term “administrative state” has come to have a variety of meanings, but at its core it points to the situation in contemporary American government, created largely although not entirely by Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, whereby a large, unelected bureaucracy is empowered with significant governing authority. The fundamental question for many of those making reference to an “administrative state” is how it can be squared with government by consent and with the constitutional separation-of-powers system.

Read More

Commentary: Biden Seeks to Override States Prohibiting School Mask Mandates, Citing Civil Rights Act

The back-to-school mask wars have been heating up for weeks, but the Biden administration just took them to a whole new level. On Wednesday, the president ordered the US Department of Education to use all available measures to prohibit states from banning school mask mandates.

In his remarks, Biden decried the contentious school board meetings that have occurred in districts across the country as parents argue for and against school mask mandates. He indicated that the “intimidation and the threats we’re seeing across the country,” from concerned citizens who oppose mask mandates “are wrong. They’re unacceptable.”

Read More

Commentary: Taking Federalism Seriously

The Framers left us a Constitution that gives powers and authority both to the national government and to the states. But the Constitution does not systematically expound on the nature and extent of those powers, nor does it offer a clear-cut rationale for what the states are supposed to do beyond checking national power – a theoretical deficiency rooted in political reality.

Read More