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.
Botched Administration of July 28 Bar Exam Shows Why Government Officials Should Never Be Above the Law
English Summary
The article uses the catastrophic failure of a state bar exam administration to argue that government officials should never be immune from accountability when their negligence causes public harm. Key evidence includes reports of institutional collapse in Yakima, WA, where preventable technical failures and poor contingency planning led to the cancellation of the exam despite warnings from local IT staff. The policy implication is twofold: State regulators must exercise their sovereign authority to bypass proprietary vendor protocols (like those of the NCBE) when necessary, and decision-makers who act with gross negligence should face personal liability rather than being shielded by immunity.
中文摘要
本文透過州級律師考試管理系統的災難性失敗案例，論證政府官員在其疏忽導致公眾危害時，絕不應享有免除問責的特權。關鍵證據包括華盛頓州雅基馬（Yakima, WA）的機構崩潰報告：該地因預防可避免的技術故障和糟糕的應變計畫，導致考試取消，儘管當地資訊科技人員已發出警告。政策意涵是雙重的：首先，州級監管機構必須行使主權權力，在必要時繞過專有供應商的協議（例如NCBE）；其次，對於行為存在重大疏忽的決策者，應承擔個人責任，而非被免責特權所保護。
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.