Libertarian: Nothing New About ‘Bidenomics’
The term “Bidenomics,” argues Veronique de Rugy at Reason, is “little more than marketing” — it means “nothing but the same old program of big spending, big regulations, and big cronyism” Democrats have always loved. “Begin with Bidenomics’ hallmark: record spending,” the “over-the-top embrace of the fiscal irresponsibility of the $2 trillion American Rescue Plan.” (That “turned modest post-pandemic inflation into a 40-year inflation record.”) Then there’s “Biden’s reversal of Trump’s productive regulatory reforms and imposition of additional regulations.” Biden has “aggressively subsidized preferred industries such as semiconductors and electric cars, sheltered special interests from the accountability of consumers through mandates and bans, and boosted the fortunes of its union friends.” The result? “Higher prices, slower growth, and fewer jobs.”
Conservative: Supremes Did Minorities a Favor
In striking down affirmative action, the Supreme Court “did Black and Hispanic students a massive favor by forcing them to rely on how they think, not how they look,” cheers Deroy Murdock at The Washington Times. It’s the complaints of liberal leaders who bemoan the ruling that are actually “racist,” because assuming “minority children need racial preferences declares being Black or Hispanic a handicap.” The real impediment for these kids: “government schools that leave their minds empty.” Studies repeatedly show students doing exceptionally poorly in government-run schools where Americans “spend more” and “get less.” The court’s ruling will prompt educational excellence and rejects “mediocrity and its advocates: teachers unions.”
NY crime beat: Spurn Progs, Eric — Back Cops
Mayor Adams needs to “cast aside the divisive identity politics that have characterized his political rise and repudiate the misguided progressive crusade to demonize police officers,” insists retired NYPD Det. James Coll at City Journal. The mayor has touted his “22 years in various ranks in the NYPD,” yet he’s too often “been content to criticize those who serve, while celebrating his own career in the department.” His failure to fiercely “support those who actually police New York City today flows from his stance on relevant issues,” including supporting “the initial state bail-reform law that has had disastrous results.” Keeping crime in check “begins with maintaining law and order and restoring trust” in police. “That can only happen with a mayor genuinely committed to supporting the city’s cops.”
Health desk: Joe’s Twist on Barack’s Big Lie
President Biden’s move to curtail short-term, limited-duration health plans will rob “millions” of their current insurance, warns Dean Clancy at the Washington Examiner. These health plans have provided “affordable alternatives to Obamacare’s high-premium, high-deductible offerings,” which is why 78% of Americans support their availability. Biden suggests the plans are inferior because they don’t cover as much, but his real goal is to appease insurers “who want more young and healthy customers to sign up for Obamacare plans to balance their risk pools.” If millions “have to take on higher premiums, larger deductibles, and narrower provider networks, so be it.” Hmm: Maybe Biden will recycle the Barack Obama line that earned him a “Lie of the Year” award — but with a twist: “If I like your insurance plan, you can keep it.”
Court watch: Dems’ Fake Ethics Scandals
“Senate Democrats are advancing a doomed Supreme Court ‘ethics’ bill,” yet “the Senate doesn’t have the power to dictate” how the court conducts its business — “any more than SCOTUS has the power to prescribe rules for the Senate,” thunders The Federalist’s David Harsanyi. If Congress thinks any justice is corrupt, it should impeach him; that’s the Senate’s only tool. Yet “the effort to intimidate” the court is meant “to corrode constitutional governance, so perhaps the bill makes a certain amount of perverse sense.” Each week, “another ethics scandal ‘emerges,’ one dumber than the next.” But none of these reports “has uncovered a single case in which a justice” has deviated from “his long-held judicial philosophy to help anyone benefit, much less himself.”
— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board