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.
Possible Higher Education Budget Reforms on the Horizon
English Summary
CATO proposes three higher education budget reforms—converting subsidized loans to unsubsidized, eliminating Federal Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants, and cutting work-study funding—that would save taxpayers money while improving outcomes by redirecting savings to Pell grants. The analysis demonstrates that these programs have inherent flaws: subsidized loans cost over $1 billion annually with minimal impact on enrollment, while campus-based aid is allocated based on historical political power rather than actual student need. CATO refutes opponents' claims that eliminating subsidies would increase average student debt by $6,000, showing through detailed calculations that the actual average impact would be under $400 per student, making this a fiscally prudent shift toward means-tested aid for the neediest students.
中文摘要
CATO 提議進行三項高等教育預算改革：將補貼貸款轉為非補貼貸款、取消聯邦補充教育機會補助金（Federal Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants），以及削減工作學習補助經費。這些改革旨在透過重新分配節省的資金至佩爾助學金（Pell grants），從而為納稅人節省開支並提升教育成果。分析指出，現有計畫存在固有缺陷：補貼貸款每年耗費超過 10 億美元，但對學生的入學率影響甚微；此外，校園資助的分配依據是歷史政治權力，而非學生實際需求。CATO 反駁了反對者的說法，即取消補貼會使平均學生債務增加 6,000 美元。透過詳細計算，研究顯示實際平均影響將低於每位學生 400 美元，這證明了將資金轉向針對最需要學生的「生計檢核補助」，是一個極具財政審慎的轉變。
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.