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.
Friday Feature: Oakmont Education
English Summary
Oakmont Education demonstrates that specialized, career-technical education (CTE) is a highly effective alternative for at-risk youth, challenging the limitations of traditional academic models. The program's success stems from tailoring curricula to local economic demands—such as advanced manufacturing or healthcare—and utilizing industry professionals as instructors. This model emphasizes flexibility, individualized learning, and culminates in nationally recognized credentials, leading to high job placement rates and sustained post-graduation support. Policymakers should consider adopting similar integrated approaches, shifting educational funding and focus toward direct workforce alignment to improve labor supply and reduce social costs associated with dropout rates.
中文摘要
Oakmont Education 的實例顯示，專業的職能技術教育（CTE）是為面臨風險的青少年提供極為有效的替代方案，挑戰了傳統學術模式的局限性。該計畫的成功源於將課程內容量身打造以符合當地經濟需求——例如先進製造業或醫療保健——並聘用產業專業人士擔任導師。此模式強調彈性、個人化學習，並最終以國家認可的學歷結業，從而帶來高就業安置率和持續的畢業後支持。政策制定者應考慮採納類似的整合式方法，將教育資金和重點轉向與實際勞動力市場的接軌，以改善勞動力供給並降低與輟學率相關的社會成本。
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.