Blog

Michigan Lawmakers Consider Bills To Change Legal Marijuana Possession Limits And Alter Industry Disciplinary Rules

Four marijuana-related bills were up for consideration before a House panel on Thursday, with one aiming to upend rules on the legal amount of regulated marijuana a person is allowed to possess, both in plant and concentrate form.

Members of the House Regulatory Reform Committee discussed but did not amend or advance House Bill House 5104, Bill 5105, House Bill 5106 and House Bill 5107.

Derek Sova, a policy and legislative assistant for the Cannabis Regulatory Agency, told the committee previously that Michigan’s legal marijuana industry faced several challenges, and that two of those big hurdles were large illicit grow operations and the agency’s inability to go after bad actors because their licenses had expired.

The series of bills before the committee would address those concerns.

House Bill 5105 and House Bill 5107 are sponsored by state Reps. Pauline Wendzel (R-Watervliet) and Mike Hoadley (R-Au Gres), respectively. The bills would in tandem create new penalties for cultivating, delivering and processing black market marijuana, but also change the amount of marijuana a person is legally allowed to possess in plant and concentrate form.

The bills are tie-barred together, meaning both would have to jointly clear the Legislature and be signed by the governor to become law.

Under Wendzel’s bill, a person would be guilty of a misdemeanor if they possess between 10 and 25 kilograms, or between 50 and 100 plants, or between one and 2.5 kilograms of marijuana concentrate. The penalty would change to up to one year in jail or a $20,000 fine, or both.

Keeping between 25 and 125 kilograms, or between 100 and 500 plants, or between 2.5 and 12.5 kilograms of marijuana concentrate would become a felony punishable by two years in prison or a $500,000 fine, or both.

It would also be a felony offense to:

  • Keep between 125 and 250 kilograms, or between 500 and 1,000 plants, or between 12.5 and 25 kilograms. That could net a person four years in prison or a $2 million fine or both; and
  • Keep 250 kilograms or more, or 1,000 plants or more, or 25 kilograms or more of marijuana concentrate. The punishment there would be up to 10 years in prison or a $10 million fine, or both.

Sponsored by state Rep. Kristian Grant (D-Grand Rapids), House Bill 5104 would allow the Cannabis Regulatory Agency to sanction a person even if they are no longer a licensee or if they are no longer operating a marijuana facility.

Keep reading

They’re Coming For Your Wood-Burning Stove… Again

The weather is getting colder, and that means getting back to anti-wood-burning propaganda.

Did you know a wood burner can kill you? They pollute more than cars and cause cancer, “similar to cigarette smoke,” and so on.

Jeremy Vine is asking if it’s time to ban them.

This isn’t new – for want of a better word – “information”. We covered this last Christmas. Then over the summer, it was folded in with a barrage of “indoor air quality” fear-mongering, only to re-emerge now that the days are getting shorter again.

Sort of like reverse-hibernation.

A trendy wood burning stove almost killed me…they need to be banned before they do anymore damage

…screams the Daily Mail.

I like the word “trendy” — they keep using it — it’s so shamelessly manipulative, painting the humble stove as some pretentious luxury accessory, rather than the basic means of heating your home for literal millennia.

Anyway, the crux of the story is that this lady – Lizzie – had a severe asthma attack, and she “believes” it was linked to wood-burning stoves.

So they should be banned. Or something.

Then they quote a doctor:

‘This is why we want the government to launch a public awareness campaign on the health impacts and sources of pollution to empower the public to make cleaner choices and protect lung health, and other people like Lizzie.’

Then come the graphs. It’s all very predictable.

The Telegraph, more refined and less hysterical than the Daily Mail (which admittedly isn’t saying much) goes with…

Wood burners are bad for you. Here’s why you didn’t notice.

Detailing how new research has shown that wood burners are really terrible for everyone who uses them, but we just never noticed before.

Why didn’t we notice?

Oh, because the people who use them are “mostly” otherwise healthy and wealthy so the data was disguised by demographics.

Now, you might think that “research” which concludes “wood burning might make you sick, but being poor, eating badly or smoking are worse” is a shoe-in for the Well Duh! Prize at the annual Waste of Time Awards, but you’re wrong. It’s very serious.

Anyway, here’s their version of the doctor quote:

“It would be good to see increased awareness on the impact of wood burners, with clearer information and guidance from the Government on the health impact, as well as increased regulation around domestic wood-burning.”

No graphs this time, which is nice. But notice, like the Daily Mail article, the repeated association of wood burning with the upper class. It’s a luxury, not a right. That’s the message. The “expert” in the Telegraph even says, “primarily the reason for having a wood burner is the aesthetic of it.”

That’s a common sentiment, always presented without evidence.

That’s something I still find hilarious about the press — perhaps the British press in particular. These are identical stories, just in a house style. It’s like AI image filters, where you upload a photo of yourself and ask, “Show me this image as if it were painted by Van Gogh.” Or Rembrandt. Or Picasso.

“Tell me burning wood causes cancer in the style of the Guardian”. Or the Mirror. Or The Sun.

The aesthetic changes, the message does not.

And, of course, it’s not just the UK. When is it ever?

The devolved Scottish Parliament has already banned wood burners in newly built homes, with some local councils banning the installation of wood-burners in their council houses.

The anti-stove agenda clearly summers in Australia, because back in July, ABC were reporting on “the silent killer” of wood smoke, and how experts were calling for bans.

In New Zealand, government-commissioned research is blaming not just wood-burning stoves, but open fires, gas heaters and gas ovens for thousands of deaths per year.

In Canada, British Columbia is enforcing a registry for those who want to burn solid fuel domestically.

Keep reading

“We’re Living Through A Coordinated Sabotage Of Truth-Seeking Institutions”

“A civilization is defined by its ability to discern truth from falsehood,” writes ‘Camus’ (@newstart_2024) in a post on X.

So, what happens when every apparatus built for that purpose is systematically dismantled?

Bret Weinstein issues a stark warning: we are living through a coordinated sabotage of our truth-seeking institutions.

This is not a minor critique; it is a fundamental attack on the very mechanisms of a functional society.

He argues that the assault is comprehensive:

  • The University System: Once a beacon of knowledge, now a source of unreliable research and curricula that teach verifiably false concepts as truth. The cornerstone of academic rigor has been cracked.
  • Regulatory Agencies: These bodies have been inverted. Their purpose is no longer to protect citizens from harm, but to protect the regulators and the system from the citizens they are meant to serve.
  • Scientific Integrity: We are left grappling in the dark on critical issues. Determining something as scientifically straightforward as the potential link between mRNA vaccines and turbo cancers should be a matter of transparent data. Instead, we are forced to rely on buried anecdotes and studies designed to fail.

This is the realization of René Descartes’ deepest fear – that the very foundations of what we believe to be factual cannot be trusted.

We have been severed from the tools of the Enlightenment, left in a precarious state where anecdote replaces evidence and ideology replaces inquiry.

We are now navigating a world without a compass.

The predicament is not just dangerous; it is existential.

The question is no longer just “what is true?” but “how do we find out, when the paths to truth have been deliberately destroyed?”

Keep reading

The Government Shutdown Isn’t Stopping Trump From Amassing ‘Emergency’ Powers

Usually when we’re in the midst of a government shutdown, I’m in a good mood. Sure, recent shutdowns haven’t accomplished much in terms of shrinking the cost or scope of the federal government in the long run, but it’s nice to walk around feeling a little less governed than usual.

But even that small pleasure has turned sour. Yes, fiscal restraint matters. It matters to this magazine, which has made cutting spending the subject of a greater percentage of our cover stories than perhaps any other publication. And it matters to me personally; I’ve spent the last 25 years writing about the need to take debt and spending seriously. The size of the state is inversely proportional to personal liberty in ways that are too often overlooked.

But the intense acceleration of the quest to aggregate power in the White House is now unambiguously the more immediate threat to liberty. It’s visible every day on my commute to work, as National Guardsmen linger in my D.C. Metro stop. It’s visible in the September gathering of the nation’s top military officials for something between a pep rally and a company retreat. It’s visible everywhere Immigration and Customs Enforcement is staging raids and setting up warrantless checkpoints. It’s visible in the administration’s moves to take a stake in Intel and broker a TikTok sale. It’s visible from space. (As I write this, Blue Origin is completing its 36th New Shepard flight—a bright spot in a dark month.)

The Cato Institute’s Gene Healy wrote the bible on the imperial presidency, tracing how voters of all stripes invest outsized hopes in presidents and then act shocked when presidents behave like tyrants. The durable lesson: Don’t confer powers on your team’s guy that you wouldn’t trust in the other team’s hands.

But it’s hard to break the habit of agglomerating authority when your party is in charge. This problem is cross-partisan and is older than Donald Trump—or Joe Biden, or even Richard Nixon. After Watergate, the nation briefly remembered why limits are good. But it wasn’t long before the White House started soaking up power again, and by the 2000s a cadre of executive-power enthusiasts, such as Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, started pushing hard to “restore” presidential prerogatives. The legal and scholarly scaffolding for today’s power grabs was assembled well before the last few months.

Meanwhile, the “national security” and “federal property protection” exceptions have become a tunnel wide enough to drive an armored personnel carrier through. In 2020, the Department of Homeland Security surged hundreds of federal officers into Portland, Oregon, with threadbare training for the job at hand; internal reviews later read like warnings from the future we’re now experiencing. Surveillance of protesters and mission creep were inevitable; they were the most predictable features of an overgrown executive. But despite that mess, the boots just keep hitting the ground. Portland is once more bracing for a federalized deployment—this time National Guard troops—with state and local officials fighting back on the grounds of both necessity and legality.

Immigration enforcement shows how this logic lands in daily life. The federal government claims sweeping authority within a 100-mile border zone that covers where nearly two-thirds of Americans live. That zone has long been a gray area for warrantless stops and checkpoints, ripe for masked agents far from any actual border to nick away at ordinary civil liberties. Powers granted today will be used more aggressively tomorrow. And powers used in that 100-mile border zone will soon be used elsewhere.

The emergency is now the default. Most of the knobs and levers a modern president uses to bully companies, police speech, or move bodies around aren’t new laws—they’re standby powers that switch on with a magic word: emergency. Congress littered the U.S. Code with these shortcuts; the Brennan Center for Justice has cataloged 137 statutory powers that spring to life the moment a president declares one. (Many never fully turn off.) As of mid-2025, there were roughly 50 simultaneous national emergencies still in force; they are renewed annually, spanning everything from sanctions to tariffs. That architecture lets the White House reach for trade controls, financial blockades, and tech blacklists without returning to Congress. If you like your powers separated, this is the opposite.

Keep reading

Democrat Establishment Finally Rallies Behind Communist Zohran Mamdani — House Leader Hakeem Jeffries Gives Full Endorsement

For anyone saying that the Democratic Party does not have strong links to communism, the proof is now in the pudding.

On Friday afternoon, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries officially endorsed Zohran Mamdani, a proud Muslim communist who is likely to win the New York City mayoral race.

Jeffries, who had held off on endorsing Mamdani since his victory against Andrew Cuomo in May’s Democratic primary, said that although the two men had “areas of principled disagreement,” he was still offering his endorsement to the entire Democratic ticket.

“Zohran Mamdani has relentlessly focused on addressing the affordability crisis and explicitly committed to being a mayor for all New Yorkers, including those who do not support his candidacy,” Jeffries said in a statement to The New York Times.

“In that spirit, I support him and the entire citywide Democratic ticket in the general election,” he continued.

The endorsement comes several weeks after New York’s Democratic governor, Kathy Hochul, also confirmed she would be supporting his candidacy.

In a statement at the time, Hochul said that Mamdani was “focused on making New York City affordable, a goal I enthusiastically support.”

“In the past few months, I’ve had frank conversations with him,” she said at the time. “We’ve had our disagreements.”

“But in our conversations, I heard a leader who shares my commitment to a New York where children can grow up safe in their neighborhoods and where opportunity is within reach for every family.”

Keep reading

Jay Jones’ ‘Community Service’ Scandal Is Worse Than You Think

Democrat Jay Jones has found himself in hot water during the final weeks of his campaign to become Virginia’s top law enforcement officer. The closer to Election Day it gets, the scandals seem to keep piling up.

At around the same time he was fantasizing about assassinating Virginia’s former Republican House speaker and wishing death upon his children in 2022, Jones had a truly remarkable run-in with the state’s criminal-justice system. According to recent reports, the Democrat AG candidate is now under investigation for a 2022 reckless driving incident.

By way of background, Jones was clocked going 116 mph in a 70 mph stretch of highway and charged with reckless driving. While other defendants facing the same charge as he faced — with the “same initial hearing date as Jones” — reportedly got jail sentences, Jones got away with a fine and 1,000 hours of community service. (These defendants were even caught driving more slowly than Jones was, according to Cardinal News.)

Supposedly, Jones did that community service in 2023 — 500 hours at “Meet Our Moment” and 500 hours at the Virginia chapter of the NAACP. The first tranche of hours has caused considerable controversy and may be at the heart of the aforementioned criminal investigation.

Meet Our Moment is Jones’ own political action committee, founded to train Democrats to run for office. His hours were certified by an adviser of his, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported. As noted by National Review, social media posts revealed Jones crisscrossed Virginia campaigning for Democrats in 2023, raising questions about whether such activities were counted as part of the 500 hours of “community service” he purportedly conducted with the group.

Perhaps equally interesting, however, is Jones’ “community service” time with the Virginia wing of the NAACP.

In 2023, Jones was a senior associate at the massive law firm known as Hogan Lovells. While there, he was involved in a high-profile lawsuit against the Youngkin administration regarding a dispute over public records pertaining to voting restoration practices for previously convicted felons.

The client Jones and Hogan represented in that case? None other than the Virginia NAACP. (Jones apparently ended work on the case when he started campaigning for state attorney general.)

Much like with Meet Our Moment, it’s unclear how Jones spent his 500 hours with the Virginia NAACP, once again raising questions about whether any of his legal services for the group in its lawsuit against Gov. Glenn Youngkin were counted as “community service.”

These services would seemingly have been provided by Hogan “pro bono,” or for free. But they’re provided for free by the firm’s partnership.

Keep reading

Anonymous donor gives President Donald Trump $130 million dollars to help pay the military affected by the government shutdown orchestrated by the Democrats

President Donald Trump announced that an anonymous billionaire, described by him as a «great friend» and a true patriot, has delivered a check for $130 million directly to the federal government.

This fund is intended to cover any deficit in the salaries of active military personnel, affected by the prolonged government shutdown orchestrated by Democrats in Congress. «He sent us a $130 million check today!» Trump exclaimed, emphasizing that the donor rejects any public recognition.

The announcement took place during an event at the White House, where Trump did not hold back his criticism of the «Democrat-led government shutdown,» which he blamed for jeopardizing U.S. armed forces.»

«He called us the other day and said: ‘I’d like to contribute to any shortfall you have due to the Democrat shutdown. I’d like to contribute personally to any shortfall the military might have, because I love the military and I love the country, and any shortfall, if there is one, I’ll contribute,’» Trump recounted.

This patriotic gesture arrives at a critical moment: the budget deadlock threatens to delay payments to hundreds of thousands of soldiers, reservists, and families, despite a prior executive order from Trump that redirected unused research funds to mitigate the damage.

This donation is not only a financial lifeline but also a reminder of how the private sector—driven by patriotic values—can correct the disasters caused by leftist obstruction.

Keep reading

Illegal Alien POLICE OFFICER Cost Illinois Taxpayers More Than $205,000

In Governor J.B. Pritzker’s Illinois, taxpayers are funding one of the most shocking sanctuary state scandals to date: an illegal alien working as a sworn police officer. 

His salary, benefits, and pension package together cost the public more than $205,000 this year alone.

Radule Bojovic, an illegal alien from Montenegro, was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during Operation Midway Blitz on October 15. 

ICE officials confirmed Bojovic had been unlawfully living in the United States for over a decade after overstaying his B-2 visitor visa, which expired on March 31, 2015. 

Despite his unlawful presence and felony ineligibility to possess a firearm, Bojovic was sworn in as an officer with the Hanover Park Police Department, a suburb of Chicago.

According to police department and pension board records, Bojovic was granted a starting salary of $78,955.70 and was approved by the Hanover Park Pension Fund Board of Trustees in January 2025. 

But his overall taxpayer burden reached far higher.

In 2025 alone, Bojovic’s employment cost Illinois residents $205,707, including salary, benefits, and $9,276 in FICA and Medicare taxes.

The revelation that an illegal alien was given a badge, gun, and pension eligibility has sparked outrage across Illinois and beyond. 

Federal law is explicit: illegal aliens are prohibited from owning or possessing firearms under any circumstance. 

Yet under sanctuary policies supported by Pritzker, Bojovic not only carried a firearm but enforced laws while in violation of them.

Keep reading

Here’s An Inside Look At The Radical Dogma Being Taught At The No. 1 Elementary Teaching School

“Even my teacher at the first day of class, she said, ‘everything is political,’ and I didn’t understand what she meant until I started doing the content.”

Adrianna Mobley should have been excited to be accepted to Michigan State University’s elementary education program, ranked the top elementary program in the nation. Excited, that is, until she stepped into her “Social Foundations of Justice and Equity in Education” class this fall. Required for all elementary education majors, the class dives deep into the demonization of free market principles, meritocracy, and American values.

Higher education isn’t a vacuum. Colleges of education and far-left teachers unions are known to push curriculum saturated in Critical Race Theory, breeding K-12 educators ready to pass the narrative to the next generation. It should be no surprise that 58 percent of K-12 teachers in America lean towards or identify with the Democrat Party, disproportionate to the 47 percent of the general public, Pew Data shows. A study of 2022 campaign contributions from the Educational Freedom Institute revealed that 68 percent of K-12 teachers and 93 percent of college professors donated to Democrat candidates or committees.

But how bad is it in the classroom? Take the course mentioned above from Michigan State University’s supposedly top-ranked elementary education program. It’s described on MSU’s website as “understanding self, schools, and society; emphasizing racial justice, equity, and social identity markers.”

According to Mobley, the course materials and conversations have a constant focus on race and a consistent dismissal of capitalist principles unlike anything she had experienced. “As somebody who’s grown up in the school system … I don’t remember anything like this happening before,” Mobley told The Federalist. 

Course materials shared by Mobley show that one of the class units included an interview with activist and educator Angela Davis, formerly an official member of the Communist party and collaborator with the Black Panther Party.

“Racism is integrally linked to capitalism,” Davis said in the video, “and I think it’s a mistake to assume that we can combat racism by leaving capitalism in place.”

“This is a period during which we need to begin that process of popular education which will allow people to understand the interconnections of racism, heteropatriarchy, capitalism,” the video concludes. It would seem that MSU agrees.

In a class assignment, Mobley referenced an article from The Federalist arguing that a system has no moral agency, and thus “systemic racism” is a misnomer skirting the actual problem in legitimate instances of racism – people.

In response, Mobley’s professor (LinkedIn pronouns listed as “she/they”) argued that “Systems are in place and gain traction over time, momentum which builds into norms. Therefore there ARE operators constantly putting forth the systems which we see as normal – it’s us!” 

She went on to reply to Mobley that “if we’re teachers going about our business as usual in a school which perpetuates inequitable outcomes for students of color or low-income students, we are … perpetuating those inequalities,” according to assignment records Mobley shared with The Federalist.

Another required video claims that “America can never be a meritocracy” until it provides “an equal starting point and equal resources.”

After one class discussion, Mobley’s professor asked to speak with her. “She told me that it seems like I’m going to have a really hard time. It was kind of like pushing me, almost, to think that I wasn’t going to do well, or it was going to be too difficult for me because I had opposing views,” Mobley told The Federalist.

Mobley told The Federalist that her professor has not been hostile toward her. However, her professor did warn her that the tone taken in Social Foundations of Justice and Equity in Education was not unique to that class. 

“She said that this is a [recurring] theme throughout all of the teaching program. So Critical Race Theory and DEI are all concepts that elementary education is centered around,” Mobley told The Federalist. 

The Federalist asked MSU whether it supported the professor’s remarks advancing a narrative of systemic racism and asked whether the school supports using materials from a self-professed communist and former Black Panther Party collaborator to teach its students. The Federalist also asked whether the school agrees with the assessment that its education program is apparently so dependent on radical concepts like DEI and critical race theory that students with opposing viewpoints could have a hard time succeeding, but did not receive a response to the questions.

Other required classes in MSU’s elementary education sequence echo leftist ideology, including “Pedagogy and Politics of Justice and Equity in Education,” and three one-credit seminar classes titled “Justice and Equity.“ Mobley is enrolled in another required class, “Engaging Elementary Learners in Science: Culture and Equity. “

Keep reading

‘Something has to give’ watchdog warns as national debt climbs rapidly toward $39 trillion

Awatchdog group is warning that “something has to give” as the U.S. national debt climbs rapidly toward $39 trillion.

The national debt grew faster than at any time other than the COVID-19 pandemic to $38 trillion this week, in part, due to the lifting of the debt ceiling under the GOP’s “One Big Beautiful Bill.” Before the bill was signed in July 2025, the debt ceiling was $36.2 trillion.

In a detailed press release, The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFP) predicted that the U.S. would “likely hit the next milestone in just a matter of months.” The CRFB estimated that the deficit would likely reach $2 trillion for fiscal year 2026. 

The deficit was $1.8 trillion in fiscal year 2025, which just concluded on September 30.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the deficit was under $1 trillion.

In fiscal year 2019, the deficit was $984 billion and the national debt was $22.7 trillion, according to Treasury Department data. 

The road ahead: $1 trillion for interest payments will be needed

“We’re on course to spend $1 trillion just on interest payments on the national debt this year, exceeding our spending on our national defense,” Maya MacGuineas, president of the CRFB said in the statement. 

“Something has to give – and eventually it will, whether we are prepared for it or not,” she added.

According to the Joint Economic Committee, the total U.S. national debt has increased by $69,713.82 per second over the past year.

“The reality is that we’re becoming distressingly numb to our own dysfunction. We fail to pass budgets, we blow past deadlines, we ignore fiscal safeguards, and we haggle over fractions of a budget while leaving the largest drivers untouched,” MacGuiness said.

“Social Security and Medicare, for example, are just seven years from having their trust funds depleted – and you don’t hear anything from our political leaders on how to avoid such a disaster,” she added.

The CRFB said current law “calls for deep across-the-board cuts in benefits” when the trust funds are depleted. 

Keep reading