Categories
budgets & spending cuts national politics & policies too much government

Shutdown Rite

It’s like a fight between siblings: “It’s his fault!” “No, it’s her fault!” 

But it is Congress and its two political parties squabbling, and it’s the American voter playing the part of parent. Whose fault is it? Both make plausible cases, sort of, but neither sounds believable. Why can’t these two get along? And where’s my coffee? Where’s my gin?

The subject is the budget.

Not the actual voted-on budget, which though prescribed by the U.S. Constitution hasn’t been seen in quite a while. Congress offers up these makeshifts instead.

“Hours into a government shutdown, the Senate again blocked a pair of rival stopgap bills to fund the government, amid a partisan standoff that shows no signs of easing,” writes Jackson Richman at The Epoch Times. “The federal government shut down Wednesday morning after Congress failed to pass a Republican plan to fund operations through Nov. 21.”

Welcome to Fiscal Year 2026. 

Republicans call the failure a “Democrat Shutdown”; Democrats counter with “Trump Shutdown.”

The key concept here is CR — Continuing Resolution, the now-standard budget machinery. Congress must approve funding for federal agencies either through twelve individual appropriations bills or a temporary CR to bridge gaps while negotiating those bills. No full FY2026 appropriations have so far been enacted, and competing CR proposals from Republicans and Democrats both failed in the Senate on September 30, 2025, triggering the lapse under the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits spending without authorization.

Democrats insist on re-authorizing Obamacare subsidies, including healthcare for those in the country illegally — which Rep. Maxine Water (D-Ca.) nearly admits to, insisting upon “healthcare for everybody; we want to save lives.”

Republicans balk at that, their compromise being to regurgitate past CR specs. Which annoys Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky). “Republicans passed a line-by-line continuation of Biden’s last budget, including Doge-identified waste. BUT Democrats refused to vote for Biden’s last budget, thereby shutting down the government.”

Happy New Year!

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
subsidy too much government

Free Transit Isn’t Free

If Zohran Mamdani, the Big Apple’s openly democratic-socialist, covertly communist mayoral candidate makes it into Gracie Mansion, he will try to enact many plans to improve — i.e., worsen — things.

The candidate wants to increase taxes and government spending, reduce freedom and individual responsibility. The standard Democratic agenda, but foisted bigger and faster.

One announced plan is to scrap mass transit fees.

Taxpayers would then suffer new costs. But so would riders who travel “free.” Greater crowding is one. Another is the kind of people who would be more often riding, no longer discouraged by having to pay fares or having to risk arrest for jumping a turnstile. Riders would be plagued by more bums and more criminals.

Beggars already being a common sight on NYC subways, it’s easy to project that ending financial and physical barriers to entry would only encourage more. Criminals would also be encouraged.

We might consider what happened elsewhere when this has been tried. Kansas City, Boston, Philadelphia — a “scientific socialist” would insist on a thorough study of all those cases, but Mamdani’s merely mentioned Bogotá’s, and is not pushing a study, maybe because he’s seen the mess Albuquerque’s in, after eliminating its one-dollar bus fare in 2023. Buses were soon being used as “rolling homeless shelters.” Local media also reported that they were “being used as getaway vehicles for shoplifters. . . .  The addition of security guards on buses has undoubtedly caused criminals to think twice, but it has not solved the problem.”

The author of these words, Paul Gessing, is hoping that recounting Albuquerque’s experience will convince Mamdani to scrap his free-transit proposal. Should Mamdani become mayor, he may eventually be forced do so, but probably only after first making everybody suffer.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

Categories
First Amendment rights national politics & policies too much government

Free Jimmy

Last Friday (and Saturday), we supported the right of ABC’s corporate leaders to ignore bullying comments by Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr and produce the late-night show, “Jimmy Kimmel Love!” to their heart’s content.  

I’m happy to hear that ABC will bring Kimmel back tonight.

Not glad because I like him or will watch his show. I don’t. I won’t. I’d cancel him were it up to me. But freedom’s tops, so I get especially jazzed when people stand up to demand it. 

And concerned when those in power attempt to take it away.

The very potent public backlash against the idea that ABC was muscled by the Trump administration into suspending Kimmel’s show is why it has returned. That’s a healthy sign of our political culture. Plus, take note that this pushback against the FCC chairman and President Trump hasn’t come just from the Left but also, as The Wrap reports, from many prominent conservatives including “Tucker Carlson, Ben Shapiro and Ted Cruz.”

What Kimmel alleged — that the murderer of Charlie Kirk was somehow MAGA — was not only “without evidence” but clearly contradicted by the evidence. As well as being asinine on its face. And more than a bit callous.

Still, freedom of speech means the freedom to say what you think, no matter how boneheaded, whether those in power like it or not. 

Sinclair Broadcast Group, owner of the largest chain of ABC affiliates, has already announced that its stations will not be airing Kimmel’s program. As is their right.

Stick with freedom of speech, Mr. President. For all.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
insider corruption subsidy too much government

Ax Tax-Funded Tax-Grubbing

Some people in pursuing their business or charitable projects rely only on the voluntary support of customers or patrons. Other people rely on government funding, perhaps by default because it’s “always been that way.”

Still others not only feel entitled to government funding but are quite importunate about it, going so far as to use taxpayer dollars to pay for lobbying the government for even more taxpayer dollars. 

My theory? If taxpayers weren’t so routinely robbed to fund lobbyists, fewer dollars in general would be siphoned from taxpayers’ pockets to the demanders’ pockets.

Lone Star state officials are making some progress toward ending taxpayer-funded tax-grubbing. The state attorney general, Ken Paxton, has reached an agreement with several Texas school districts guilty of taxpayer-funded campaigning against a school choice bill. They have agreed to institute safeguards to prevent themselves from doing it anymore. We’ll see.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott “has also had enough,” writes John Fund. Abbott is promoting a bill being considered in the legislature that would prevent cities, counties, and school districts from using tax dollars to hire lobbyists. Officials and teachers would still be able to talk to their representatives themselves.

“Texans are being taxed twice,” State Senator Paul Bettencourt, a supporter of the bill, explains, “once to fund local services and again to fund political lobbying they may not support.”

Yes, that’s the costly and corrupting problem all right. One that Texas is hardly alone in suffering but perhaps a ‘lone star’ in fighting.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights Fourth Amendment rights privacy too much government

What Does the FBI Do?

“The FBI began surveilling a Catholic priest in 2023,” wrote James Lynch last week, “after the clergyman refused to divulge details about a recently arrested parishioner who was converting to Catholicism and seeking spiritual guidance.”

The agency’s Richmond Field Office “tracked the priest’s movements and coordinated with several other FBI offices and a foreign law enforcement agency to gather intelligence on the clergyman and his priestly organization,” Lynch summarizes.

This is all based on a new House Judiciary Committee report entitled “How the Biden-Wray FBI Manufactured a False Narrative of Catholic Americans as Violent Extremists.” *

“The FBI attempted to violate the priest-penitent privilege,” the report continues, “on the faulty reasoning that the Richmond subject under investigation seeking spiritual guidance had not been baptized or completed catechism.”

You may be asking yourself, is the FBI out of its mind?

Certainly, out of this hemisphere. Consider that FBI agents have also extended their reach way beyond U.S. borders to focus on wrongthink elsewhere.

According to investigative journalist David Ágape, “the FBI has helped Brazil censor its citizens,” working with the Soros’ Open Society Foundation to promote censorship in Brazil and a secret judicial police force targeting “people deemed to be spreading false information.”

Was the FBI nurturing censorship in foreign lands to later re-import them here?

From its beginning, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has had trouble staying within constitutional limits. I guess we should not be shocked that it doesn’t obey jurisdictional limits, either. 

Hopefully, Director Kash Patel will rein in the agency. It won’t be easy.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 


* According to the committee, “The report reveals that contrary to testimony from former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Christopher Wray, the 2023 Richmond memorandum that derisively labeled traditional Catholics as ‘racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists’ was not an isolated incident. Under the new leadership of Director Kash Patel, the FBI has cooperated considerably with the Committee’s subpoena, and has produced over 1,300 pages of additional documents related to the Richmond memorandum that the Biden-Wray FBI did not disclose.”
Note: You can also mouse-over the asterisk in the main text to see the footnote.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
deficits and debt partisanship too much government

Upstart?

The spectacular fallout between Donald Trump and Elon Musk over the Big Beautiful Bill in particular (but deficit spending and debt accumulation in general) promises political watchers a big, ugly brawl.*

Now, billionaire Musk appears to be serious about his proposed “third party,” the “America Party.” A name perfectly designed to ruffle Trumpian feathers. It might steal some of the thunder of “America First” and “Make America Great Again.”

The president mocks the notion, saying that third parties “have never succeeded in the United States.”

Well, that is not exactly true. For a long time, it was second parties that had problems. 

The first party, the Federalists, basically lost for a generation, finally withering away against the onslaught of that most American party of all, the Democratic-Republican. 

When the victorious party reformed under the leadership of Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren to become the Democratic Party, the Whig Party emerged to counter-act Jackson’s imperial presidency. The Whigs had some success — if with a string of presidents almost no one remembers — only to lose ground to Democrats and then a whiggish replacement, the Republican Party.

Yes, Trump’s own party was a “third” party once.

And it achieved power largely because the Democrats split into two for the 1860 election, leaving a sectional plurality candidate (Abraham Lincoln) to win the Electoral College as a Republican.

In modern times, Republicans and Democrats have ably squelched challenger parties

So Trump’s right — in spirit.

Now enter Andrew Yang, enthusiastic for the upstart. But how can his Universal Basic Income agenda fit with Elon’s fight against over-spending? 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


* Though, some wonder if the Trump-Musk feud isn’t all an act.

PDF for printing

Ilustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts


Categories
public opinion too much government

Vote Communist!

The world wants to be deceived, so let it be deceived!

Maybe, just sometimes, we let fools dig themselves deeper into their folly.

Take New Yorkers. The city’s government has been dysfunctional for ages. But now it’s potentially taking the starkest left turn yet, towards . . . communism.

Mayoral candidate Rep. Zorhan Mamdani may call himself a “democratic socialist” and quote Martin Luther King piously, but he also admits that seizing the means of production is the ultimate goal . . . just not politically acceptable. 

Yet.

That’s communism. Will New Yorkers vote for a commie?

Maybe running under the Democratic banner is cover enough for many voters. Seems safe. Seeking to help “the poor” by attacking “the rich” and “the whites” (as I wrote last Monday) is certainly not unfamiliar.

And neither is his reaction to rising food prices: blame something called “capitalism.” 

Then set up government-run grocery stores!

While our first instinct is to oppose him with everything we’ve got, comedian Steven Crowder counsels otherwise. “Maybe he’s exactly what New York City deserves,” says Crowder. Let Mamdani make New York an object lesson in what not to do. 

New Yorkers can vote in this “teachable moment” for the whole nation: pop the corn and watch the Big Apple rot under Mamdani — with food cheaper everywhere else, under Trump.

Or so Crowder argues.

Embrace the old motto, “mundus vult decipi” (the world wants to be deceived), and let one city run further down the length of rope . . . until they’ve done enough damage.

To learn. Finally.

If one city wants communism, let it have it. 

Good and hard.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Previously on This Is Common Sense:

July 3 — The Big Decommodification — a communist housing plan for socialist NYC.
July 1 — If Mamdani Wins — the likely results of electing a socialist mayor.
June 30 — Socialist Intifada — the problematic philosophy of NYC’s political phenom.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
free trade & free markets ideological culture property rights too much government

The Big Decommodification

Tired of that rundown shack you live in — for which each month you must cough up the rent money or a mortgage payment? No doubt, you’re chomping at the bit for the chance to move into clean, spectacular, state-of-the-art government housing.

Well, you’re in luck! That is, if you live in New York City.

You see, on Tuesday evening, Sean Hannity informed his Fox News audience that Zohran Mamdani, the Democrats’ mayoral nominee, has a “plan to slowly eliminate home ownership in New York City.”

“If we want to end the housing crisis, the solution has to be moving toward the full decommodification of housing,” Mamdani declares in a 2021 video for the Gravel Institute. “In other words, moving away from the status quo, in which most people access housing by purchasing it on the market.”

He says, “We’ll have to go beyond the market.”

That “has to be” the solution? Why? Because Mamdani’s socialist/communist dogma dictates that government should be the provider of all shelter? The “decommodification” must be “full” and complete. No private home can be permitted to be bought or sold . . . or lived in anymore.

Surely that would solve our problems.

The democratic socialist suggests that the government “gradually buy up housing on the private market and convert it to community ownership,” urging the city to “fully commit to a new era of social housing . . . using our wealth to build beautiful, high-quality social housing projects that offer good homes and strong communities to everyone.”

Yes, taxpayers, get ready to invest in the sparkling future of public housing. Cabrini-Green here we all come! 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
folly too much government

Europe Goes Dark

If you prevent countries from using the most reliable fuels for making the electricity that lights the lights, elevates the elevators, and powers all other powered things, what would be the likely consequence?

Not, I think, to make the power grids more reliable.

The power companies say they don’t know why almost all the power went out recently in Spain and Portugal and in other parts of Europe.

No indication so far of cyberattack or other sabotage. 

Red Electrica, Spain’s state-run electricity network, points to a “very strong oscillation” in the network causing the Spanish system to disconnect from the European system. Portugal’s grid operator says that the oscillations had to do with extreme temperature variations.

Spain’s electrical network now relies almost entirely on “renewable” sources of energy, “green” energy, anything but fossil fuels. (Actually, no energy is renewable; in usable form it’s gone the instant you use it. And it all comes from nature, including gas and oil.)

On April 16, Red Electra, eager to “curb the climate crisis” (weather), reported meeting all electrical demand using “renewable” sources of energy, mostly solar (60 percent).

Some have pointed out that solar and wind power don’t provide the inertia generated by the massive turbines of “traditional generators, like coal and hydroelectric plants or gas turbines.” And so the power grid becomes much more vulnerable to disruptions and oscillations, no matter the cause.

My theory is that the more ways you hobble yourself, the more likely you are to become hobbled. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Accountability too much government

Federal Self-Service

Even government agencies that perform an identifiable function should be eliminated if they are not performing a proper function of government.

But what about an agency that exists primarily “to provide luxurious lifestyles for its employees”?

The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service is one of the agencies getting the ax under the Trump administration, at least until some judge tries to resurrect it.

Nominally, FMCS existed to serve as a voluntary mediator between unions and businesses. But aside from doling out grants to unions and applicants with a tenuous connection to unions, its overriding purpose was to enable employees to splurge on themselves at the expense of taxpayers.

That’s what Luke Rosiak discovered during a year-long investigation.

One FMCS official pretended to take a years-long “business trip” so that taxpayers would foot the bill for his living expenses.

Employees unblocked government credit cards to circumvent protections against abuse, then used them to fund personal expenses. One leased a BMW with the card.

Junkets to resort locations supposedly to drum up interest in the pointless agency were really just a way of enjoying government-funded vacations.

One employee told Rosiak: “Personally, the reason that I’ve stayed is that I just don’t feel like working that hard, plus the location on K Street is great, plus we all have these oversized offices with windows, plus management doesn’t seem to care if we stay out at lunch a long time. Can you blame me?”

Yes, we can.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts