Tag: taxes

NASA’s Artemis Program Is a Monument to Government Waste. It Can Only Go Up From Here.

If the pending Artemis II mission is successful, it will not just send Americans around the moon and back for the first time in more than half a century—it will send them further than any human being has traveled into space. If the rest of the Artemis program proceeds on schedule, astronauts will return to the lunar surface by the end of the decade.

That’s been a long time coming. The government has been working to get Americans back on the moon since the Bush administration created the Constellation program in the mid-2000s. Wondering why it’s taking so long, given that the original moon mission required only seven years? The answer involves the familiar forces of government inefficiency and pork barrel congressional politics.

How We Got Here

After the space shuttle Columbia disintegrated while reentering the atmosphere in 2003, the Bush administration decided to shift the space program away from the Space Shuttle program. The result was the more targeted, purpose-driven Constellation program, which focused on completing the International Space Station and laying the groundwork for a “return to the Moon no later than 2020.” This, officials hoped, would be a stepping stone toward a crewed mission to Mars not long afterward.

By the time President Barack Obama took office, the Constellation program was already on the way to cancellation; the new administration declared the program “over budget, behind schedule, and lacking in innovation.” When the Shuttle program retired in 2011, no vehicle was set to take its place. So in 2010, Congress mandated that several legacy aerospace companies create the Space Launch System (SLS), both to take over the missions that the shuttle had been servicing and to provide for future space missions.

As development began on the rocket, the projected budget cost through 2017 was $18 billion, a number that would soon start growing. Early in development, each launch was projected to cost $500 million, a number very optimistic in hindsight: According to the White House’s 2026 budget proposal, an SLS launch costs about $4 billion. Through last year, the total cost of the program has exceeded $60 billion.

The SLS program isn’t just way over budget. It’s way behind schedule too. Congress told it to fly by 2016, but the first launch didn’t come until 2022. The second launch will be Artemis II.

When the first Trump administration started the Artemis program in 2017, the vision was to send Americans to the moon and then Mars. As the program developed, officials set a goal of having humans on the moon again by 2024. In April 2021, SpaceX won the bidding process to build the Human Landing System—the lunar lander that would deliver the astronauts to the moon’s surface. Blue Origin then sued NASA over losing out to SpaceX, and NASA had to pause work until the lawsuit ended. The suit was resolved in November, at which point SpaceX and NASA returned to work. 

Infrastructure issues plagued Artemis, with repairs spanning months. Rocket launches require good weather, and launch windows can be tight, so a few days of bad weather can postpone a launch by weeks or months.

After Jared Isaacman became NASA administrator last year, the Artemis mission schedule underwent substantial structural changes. Artemis III, which had been set to be the mission that would send astronauts to our satellite’s surface, has now become Artemis IV, scheduled for 2028; the new Artemis III will test on-orbit capabilities but will stay in low Earth orbit. Further missions down the line are supposed to begin assembly of a U.S. lunar base. The current slate of missions run through Artemis X, projected to have a 2035 launch date.

Keep reading

Judge Rejects Anti-Marijuana Groups’ Motion To Block CBD And THC Medicare Coverage Plan, Setting Hearing For 4/20

A federal judge has denied a request from a coalition of anti-marijuana organizations that sought to immediately block the Trump administration’s initiative to cover hemp-derived CBD and THC products through Medicare from launching on Wednesday.

The groups’ overall lawsuit challenging the policy is still under consideration, however, with a hearing on their separate motion for a preliminary injunction scheduled for April 20, which coincidentally is known as the unofficial cannabis cultural holiday 4/20.

Judge Trevor N. McFadden on Tuesday rejected the request from Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) and nine other drug prevention groups to issue a temporary restraining order to halt the federal cannabis initiative, which is being facilitated by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), from taking effect.

McFadden, in his one-page order, quoted case law holding that a temporary restraining order is an “extraordinary and drastic remedy” that can only be granted if a party makes a “clear showing that four factors, taken together, warrant relief: likely success on the merits, likely irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, a balance of the equities in its favor, and accord with the public interest.”

“Having considered the arguments in Plaintiffs’ motion and at a motions hearing, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have not met this high standard,” the judge wrote. “The motion for a temporary restraining order is thus denied. The Court will consider Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction and motion to stay upon the completion of briefing.”

Defendants in the lawsuit—CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.—now have until April 9 to file briefs responding to the prohibitionist groups’ motion for a preliminary injunction. The plaintiffs then have a reply brief due on April 13, a week ahead of the 4/20 hearing on the matter.

The lawsuit comes as CMS is set to start covering CBD and THC products under select federal health insurance programs as a Substance Access Beneficiary Engagement Incentive (BEI) beginning on Wednesday.

Under the BEI, patients enrolled in specific federal health insurance programs could have up to $500 worth of hemp-derived products covered each year. The CBD-focused plan will also allow a certain amount of THC in products, but the agency said that the rules are subject to change if federal hemp policy changes, as is currently expected under a law set to take effect later this year.

Keep reading

You Are Paying for Retirees’ Lavish Lifestyles

As he celebrated the 50th anniversary of Social Security, then–Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill (D–Mass.) hailed the program’s epic accomplishments.

In the days before Social Security was born, O’Neill said, “Life for the elderly is filled with uncertainty, dependency, and horror. When you get old, you are without income, without hope.” The federal government’s payments to retirees, he continued, meant that Americans no longer had to live in “fear and dependency” in old age.

It was a tidy summary of the conventional wisdom surrounding America’s old-age entitlement state—which includes not just Social Security, but also Medicare and many other taxpayer-funded efforts to subsidize the supposedly nasty, brutish, and not-so-short lives of the over-65 crowd.

It is a narrative that deserves to be shoved off a cliff.

Today’s retirees, most of them from the baby boomer generation, are the wealthiest cohort of Americans. The median household headed by someone over age 65 is far wealthier than the average household headed by someone in their late 30s.

Despite that, roughly 22 cents of every dollar the federal government spent last year was funneled to retirees via Social Security. Medicare spending accounted for another 14 percent. Many of those dollars were extracted from younger, poorer Americans. (The rest were borrowed and added to the national debt.)

A retired couple today might possess a robust retirement account and own a million-dollar home, but the government still acts as if they live in the poverty-stricken hellscape that O’Neill described. And as the old have gotten wealthier, the taxpayer-funded benefits have only gotten more lavish.

Social Security provides inflation-proof monthly payments, keeping retirees ahead of the curve even as working-age Americans struggle to make ends meet. In many places, seniors are gifted special exemptions from taxes on homes and vehicles that aren’t available to younger Americans. Medicare, created to address seniors’ medical needs, now offers such taxpayer-funded perks as discounted golf course fees, ski resort lift tickets, even pet supplies and pickleball equipment.

In short: Today’s old-age entitlement system is not a last-resort guardrail against poverty and desolation. It is a sprawling, expensive lifestyle-subsidy program that steals from the poor to give to the rich—while also worsening the housing crisis and pushing the country toward a dangerous fiscal cliff.

Keep reading

Children’s Health Defense Wins Settlement in Landmark Censorship Case

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) finalized a settlement in CHD’s landmark class action censorship lawsuit against key Biden administration officials accused of colluding with tech companies to censor social media content.

In a press release, the DOJ cited President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20, 2025, Executive Order “acknowledging that ‘the previous administration trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans’ speech on online platforms, often by exerting substantial coercive pressure on third parties, such as social media companies, to moderate, deplatform, or otherwise suppress speech that the Federal Government did not approve.’ 90 Fed. Reg. 8243 (Jan. 28, 2025).”

CHD, along with its then-Chairman Robert F. Kennedy Jr., sued the Biden administration in March 2023.

The lawsuit, Kennedy v. Biden, became CHD v. Trump after Trump became president of the U.S., and Kennedy, who first left CHD to run his own presidential campaign, was later named secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the Trump administration.

The class action lawsuit against then-President Joe Biden, Dr. Anthony Fauci and other top administration officials and federal agencies alleged they “waged a systematic, concerted campaign” to compel the nation’s three largest social media companies to censor constitutionally protected speech.

Jed Rubenfeld, attorney for CHD, called the settlement a “tremendous win” against government censorship.

“We brought this case years ago to challenge the Biden administration’s assault on free speech,” Rubenfeld said. “Today, the government, under a new administration, acknowledged that assault. And via a previously issued Executive Order, the president prohibited government officials from pressuring social media companies in the future to trample on Americans’ First Amendment rights.”

As part of the settlement with CHD, the government agreed to pay attorneys’ fees.

The DOJ also settled a similar lawsuit, Missouri v. Biden, and issued a consent decree in the case.

Keep reading

Obama Judge Blocks Trump’s Executive Order Aimed at Ending Federal Funding For NPR, PBS

A federal judge on Tuesday blocked President Trump’s executive order aimed at ending federal funding for NPR and PBS.

US District Judge Randolph Moss, an Obama appointee lashed out at President Trump and said he targeted PBS and NPR for their viewpoints.

Last year, President Trump ended taxpayer subsidization of ‘biased media.

“National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) receive taxpayer funds through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). Unlike in 1967, when the CPB was established, today the media landscape is filled with abundant, diverse, and innovative news options. Government funding of news media in this environment is not only outdated and unnecessary but corrosive to the appearance of journalistic independence,” the Trump White House previously announced.

“At the very least, Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage. No media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies, and the Government is entitled to determine which categories of activities to subsidize,” the White House said.

“The CPB fails to abide by these principles to the extent it subsidizes NPR and PBS. Which viewpoints NPR and PBS promote does not matter. What does matter is that neither entity presents a fair, accurate, or unbiased portrayal of current events to taxpaying citizens,” the White House said.

“I therefore instruct the CPB Board of Directors (CPB Board) and all executive departments and agencies (agencies) to cease Federal funding for NPR and PBS,” Trump said.

On Tuesday, Judge Randolph Moss blocked President Trump’s executive order ending taxpayer subsidization to PBS and NPR.

“It is difficult to conceive of clearer evidence that a government action is targeted at viewpoints that the President does not like and seeks to squelch,” Judge Moss wrote.

Keep reading

Liberals Won’t Confront Fraud Because They Still Believe Government Is The Solution

At least the bombs are real.

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof has pulled out the hoariest of boomer liberal tropes, asking what the money spent on war could buy if redirected to welfare programs. Examples include “For less than three weeks of war, or $35 billion, we could run a nationwide pre-K program for 3- and 4-year-olds,” and “For $75 million, about an hour’s worth of war, we could provide three books free to every child in America who is living under the poverty line.” Ah yes, we could fund so many Minneapolis daycares and “Quality Learing” centers.

I don’t know how our campaign against the mullahs will turn out, but it has real bombs being dropped on real targets with people really dying. In contrast, the sorts of programs Kristof promotes as better recipients of taxpayer money tend to be more ephemeral in their results — and that’s assuming that the recipients even exist. To cite a few examples that even a New York Times columnist ought to have heard of, there is the Somali daycare piracy, the California wildlife bridge to nowhere, the California high-speed rail debacle, and the embarrassing spectacle of cities spending endlessly to end homelessness while not even reducing it.

Kristof and his ilk never seem outraged at these wasted and stolen billions. They might mildly tsk-tsk, but there is no visceral rage toward those who plunder billions that were supposedly for helping children. Yet if lefties really believe that government programs are the key to a wonderfully better society and world, shouldn’t they be furious at those running them into the ground or robbing them?

Keep reading

Pete Hegseth Cancels Suspension of Aircrew in Kid Rock Helicopter Flyby; “No Punishment. No Investigation.”

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced Tuesday evening he is lifting the suspension of the aircrew involved in the flyby of 2 Army AH-64 Apache helicopters near music icon and Trump supporter Kid Rock’s Nashville, Tennessee area home on Saturday. Rock has also done several USO tours to perform for troops overseas in war zones.

NBC News reported earlier Tuesday that the Army had suspended the aircrew pending an investigation.

“Thank you @KidRock. @USArmy pilots suspension LIFTED. No punishment. No investigation. Carry on, patriots”

Keep reading

Iran strike destroys $300M U.S. E-3 Sentry radar aircraft at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia

An Iranian missile strike on a base in Saudi Arabia reportedly destroyed a $300 million U.S. Air Force E-3 Sentry, a loss analysts suggest could compromise the military’s ability to detect long-range threats.

The E-3 Sentry — an Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) — was one of six units stationed at Prince Sultan Air Base before Friday’s attack. These aircraft are critical for spotting incoming missiles and coordinating complex airstrikes.

At least 10 American service members were injured during the strike on the facility, located approximately 80 miles southeast of Riyadh.

While 16 E-3s remain in the U.S. fleet, a significant portion of them are not currently mission-ready. Notably, this incident marks the first time an AWACS has been destroyed in combat. By Monday, defense analysts were raising urgent questions regarding how such a high-value asset was left vulnerable to the Iranian strike.

“Extraordinary measures are often taken to protect it from hostile enemy fire while in-flight. Sometimes it receives fighter escorts and is never allowed to overfly hostile territory in order to keep it safe,” said military analyst Cedric Leighton.

Andreas Krieg, a senior lecturer at King’s College London’s School of Security Studies, argues that the U.S. should have anticipated such an escalation and better prepared for a prolonged conflict. He emphasized that the military should have bolstered defenses for permanent installations, particularly in a theater where the adversary possesses extensive inventories of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and one-way attack drones.

Conversely, Burcu Ozcelik, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, expressed a more measured view, warning against underestimating the potential for internal damage within Iran. Ozcelik suggested that at this stage of the conflict, observers should remain cautious and avoid overstating the actual extent of the damage sustained by U.S. forces.

Keep reading

New Restrictions On SNAP Purchases To Take Effect In More States In April

Food stamp recipients in Florida, Texas, and West Virginia will face restrictions on buying certain kinds of less nutritious items such as soda and candy, some starting in April.

West Virginia’s restrictions became effective on Jan. 1, but retailers have until April 1 to be fully compliant.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has approved Colorado’s restrictions waiver, but the state has delayed implementation of restrictions on certain items for food stamp recipients until after April 30 and stated that it would have a final vote on April 3 on the program.

The Trump administration is clamping down on soda and candy being charged to food stamps, as 22 states now have been approved to restrict certain purchases under the program. The restrictions still require state approval before taking effect.

Kansas, Nevada, Ohio, and Wyoming were the latest states to receive USDA approval for food and beverage restrictions.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps, had 40.7 million people participating nationwide at a monthly cost of $7.97 billion as of November 2025.

“The Trump Administration is leading bold reform to strengthen integrity and restore nutritional value within the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,” the USDA stated on its website. “USDA is empowering states with greater flexibility to manage their programs by approving SNAP Food Restriction Waivers that restrict the purchase of non-nutritious items like soda and candy. These waivers are a key step in ensuring that taxpayer dollars provide nutritious options that improve health outcomes within SNAP.”

For example, starting on April 1, Texas residents will not be able to buy candy or sweetened drinks on their SNAP-provided Lone Star Cards. Those restrictions will ban such purchases as candy bars, gum, and taffy, as well as nuts, raisins, or fruits that have been “candied, crystallized, glazed or coated with chocolate, yogurt or caramel.”

Texas also will ban sweetened non-alcoholic beverages made with water that contain 5 or more grams of sugar or artificial sweetener, according to Texas Health and Human Services.

Keep reading

10 Years Ago Today, Trump Promised To Eliminate the National Debt. Instead, It Has Doubled.

Ten years ago today, Donald Trump said he would pay off the national debt in the span of just eight years.

That did not happen. Instead, the gross national debt has doubled since that day—from about $19 trillion to over $39 trillion. Much of that additional borrowing has taken place during Trump’s five-plus years in the White House.

The gap between Trump’s outlandish promise and the brutal fiscal reality of the past decade is not just a political gotcha. It’s also an apt illustration of how far and how fast the debt has spiraled. And it’s a painful reminder of a missed opportunity that Americans will be facing for a long, long time. The bill for these 10 years of fiscal profligacy will be coming due long after Trump has finally departed from the political scene.

But it’s a story that starts, as everything in politics seems to these days, with Trump.

“We’re not a rich country. We’re a debtor nation,” is what then-candidate Trump told The Washington Post in an interview on March 31, 2016 (a full transcript was published two days later). “We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion in debt.”

How long would it take to do that, asked the Post‘s Bob Woodward.

“Fairly quickly,” Trump replied. When pressed for a more specific answer, Trump provided a shocking timeline. “Well, I would say over a period of eight years.”

That was never going to happen. As the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) pointed out shortly after Trump’s comments made headlines, “achieving this goal would be virtually impossible—particularly for a candidate who has proposed large tax cuts and ruled out significant entitlement reforms.”

Instead, the CRFB estimated that Trump’s proposals would cause the national debt to nearly double within 10 years. The group arrived at that figure by taking the existing baseline for the debt—which, as of early 2016, was expected to grow to about $28 trillion by 2026—and adding the estimated cost of Trump’s various campaign promises.

It’s worth appreciating how remarkably accurate that assessment turned out to be. The number-crunchers at the Congressional Budget Office and the CRFB didn’t know there would be a pandemic. They didn’t know the outcome of the major tax-and-spending bills that Trump and President Joe Biden would pass. Heck, they didn’t even know who would be president—remember, in April 2026, most of the political class didn’t believe Trump had much of a chance.

The accuracy of that prediction points to two things, Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at the CRFB, said when asked about it this week. First, the extent to which rising debt was baked into the federal budget before Trump came on the scene. Social Security and Medicare are the largest federal programs, and both were on pace to borrow more during the 2020s.

Second, it’s due to Trump keeping many of his campaign promises. That’s not the compliment that it might sound like. Trump vowed not to touch the aforementioned entitlement programs that were driving borrowing to new heights, and he promised to both cut taxes and increase military spending. That was a recipe for higher deficits, and over his first four years in office, Trump added over $8 trillion to the national debt that he’d once sought to “get rid of.”

Biden picked up where Trump left off, adding another $4.7 trillion to the debt with various proposals. In his first year back in the White House, Trump has done nothing to address the growing pile of debt. The federal government borrowed $1.8 trillion during the fiscal year that ended in September and is on pace to borrow about the same amount this year.

What have Americans gotten from a decade of heavy borrowing that doubled the size of the debt? Higher inflation and higher interest rates, for starters.

Keep reading