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.
Ro Khanna’s “$25” Minimum Wage Bill
English Summary
CATO’s analysis of Ro Khanna’s proposed $25 minimum wage bill finds the proposal overly reliant on outdated comparisons and flawed reasoning. The bill, primarily pegged to two-thirds of national median hourly earnings, would likely result in a minimum wage closer to $16.34 in 2025 and $20.22 in 2031, significantly lower than Khanna’s $25 target. Evidence suggests that tying wages to productivity is misleading, as minimum wages primarily affect low-productivity sectors, and aggressive increases risk disemployment through layoffs or reduced hiring. The analysis highlights that the real value of the federal minimum wage has historically been much lower than Khanna’s claims, and that productivity gains don't automatically justify such a substantial wage increase.
中文摘要
CATO 對羅·卡納 (Ro Khanna) 提出的 25 美元最低工資法案的分析認為，該提案過於依賴過時的比較和邏輯上的缺陷。該法案主要基於全國中位時薪的兩 thirds，預計最低工資在 2025 年將接近 16.34 美元，在 2031 年將達到 20.22 美元，遠低於卡納的 25 美元目標。證據表明，將工資與生產力掛鉤是不準確的，因為最低工資主要影響低生產力部門，而過於激進的提高工資風險會通過裁員或減少招聘來導致失業。分析指出，聯邦最低工資的歷史價值遠低於卡納的聲稱，並且生產力增長並不能自動證明如此巨大的工資提高。
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.