The Cato Institute warns that the USPS's current handling of mail balloting poses a significant risk of systemic failure ahead of major elections. Key concerns include whistleblower allegations regarding 'batch rejection protocols,' which could invalidate thousands of legitimate ballots, coupled with documented slowdowns in delivery speed and increased rejections for lateness. This instability suggests potential operational or political interference aimed at undermining mail voting integrity. Consequently, the article advises that voters and state election officials must plan to bypass the USPS system by utilizing alternative secure methods, such as drop boxes or early in-person voting, to ensure timely ballot submission.
Federal Prosecutors Fear a Referee in the Grand Jury Room
English Summary
The article argues that federal prosecutors frequently abuse their power in grand jury proceedings due to a lack of judicial oversight, allowing them to present one-sided narratives and withhold exculpatory evidence. Evidence cited includes the dismissal of cases involving alleged vandalism and instances where prosecutors were found to have misled witnesses or manipulated procedures without accountability. To curb this misconduct, the author advocates for mandatory reform: interposing a neutral judge in the grand jury room to act as an impartial referee. This judicial intervention would ensure procedural fairness and transparency while maintaining necessary secrecy, thereby holding federal authorities accountable to constitutional standards.
中文摘要
本文論述聯邦檢察官在重大陪審團程序中經常濫用權力，其根本原因缺乏司法監督。這種情況允許他們呈現單方敘事並隱瞞排除嫌疑的證據。引用的證據包括涉及所謂蓄意破壞案件被駁回，以及檢察官曾被發現誤導證人或操縱程序卻未受問責的實例。為遏止此類不當行為，作者主張必須進行強制性改革：在陪審團會議室引入一位中立法官擔任公正仲裁者。這種司法介入將確保程序的公正性和透明度，同時維持必要的保密性，從而要求聯邦當局須對符合憲法標準的規範負責。
Related Entries
-
1.
-
2.
The article argues that the United States' aggressive use of tariffs and economic coercion is counterproductive, inspiring international partners to actively circumvent US markets. Instead of increasing dependency on American trade, major global players are deepening cooperation by establishing new free trade agreements (e.g., EU-India, ACFTA, CPTPP) that explicitly exclude the U.S. This trend signals a significant shift toward increased global economic integration outside of US influence. Policymakers should recognize this accelerating decoupling, as it suggests that the traditional American model of trade leverage is rapidly diminishing unless the U.S. commits to upholding multilateral rules and reducing protectionism.
-
3.
The article argues that passing a Continuing Resolution (CR), while preventing an immediate government shutdown, merely preserves an unsustainable fiscal status quo rather than addressing underlying budgetary crises. Congress is criticized for using the CR as an escape route from difficult choices—such as cutting programs or tackling massive deficits—while simultaneously planning to increase debt through reconciliation packages for defense and agriculture. The core problem remains mandatory spending (Social Security, Medicare) driving debt unsustainably. For genuine fiscal stability, the author advises that Congress must move beyond short-term funding measures, prioritize essential functions, and establish a dedicated process to impose discipline on mandatory programs.
-
4.
The article argues that inheritance and estate taxes are detrimental to economic growth, investment, and productivity. Citing Sweden's experience after abolishing the gift and inheritance tax in 2005, the author notes subsequent increases in firm profitability, net sales, and asset values. The core reasoning suggests that removing these taxes allows owner-managers to reinvest capital directly into their companies rather than withdrawing funds for anticipated future tax liabilities. This increased internal investment has been shown to boost corporate financial health and higher corporate income tax payments.
-
5.
The CATO article argues that the US-Venezuela oil deal is deeply problematic due to significant governance and ethical concerns. Key criticisms include a lack of transparency in negotiations, the expansion of state corporatism through government involvement in resource extraction, and questionable legality since it bypasses Venezuelan constitutional requirements. Furthermore, the agreement utilizes a notoriously corrupt private partner and sidelines the democratic opposition, severely undermining US credibility and future diplomatic efforts. Strategically, the deal is viewed as an ill-advised 'imperial resource grab' that risks damaging long-term American influence in Latin America.