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.
Study: More Parole Doesn't Mean More Safety — It May Mean More Prison
English Summary
A study of Illinois parole reform finds that reducing parole supervision for exiting prisoners lowered one-year reincarceration rates by 9–10 percentage points, driven almost entirely by fewer technical revocations rather than any change in criminal behavior. The research shows no evidence that reduced supervision increased crime; in fact, the absence of parole's ongoing threat of technical revocation appeared to offset any potential uptick. Policy simulations suggest that halving parole terms for low-to-medium-risk offenders could shrink average prison populations by roughly 3 percent with no harm to public safety, reinforcing the argument that existing parole systems inflate incarceration through procedural violations without meaningful safety benefits.
中文摘要
一項針對伊利諾州假釋改革的研究發現，減少對出獄囚犯的假釋監管使一年內再入獄率降低了9至10個百分點，此降幅幾乎完全源於技術性撤銷假釋案件的減少，而非犯罪行為的任何變化。研究顯示，並無證據表明減少監管會導致犯罪增加；事實上，取消假釋中持續存在的技術性撤銷威脅，似乎抵消了任何潛在的犯罪上升。政策模擬顯示，將中低風險犯罪者的假釋期限縮短一半，可在不損害公共安全的前提下，將平均監獄人口減少約百分之三，進一步印證了現行假釋制度透過程序性違規擴大監禁規模、卻未帶來實質安全效益的論點。
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.