April 17, 2026

Trump Not MAGA

Blurb:

Five months ago, in these pages I expressed concern that Congress was missing the opportunity to restore merit to the military personnel system. To accomplish that task I urged Congress to include a meritocracy provision in the 2026 NDAA that does four things: (1) require all military personnel actions to be based exclusively on merit; (2) forbid race and sex-based preferences; (3) provide for reasonable exceptions when mission success requires sex or race be considered; and (4) define key terms so idealogues in the Pentagon cannot manipulate the language to further their diversity agenda.

When the House and Senate passed their versions of the NDAA, it appeared that between the two chambers some progress toward establishing a merit-based personnel system was being made. When the compromise bill resolving the differences between the House and Senate version, S. 1017, was released last week, it was readily apparent that Congress had no intention of requiring merit principles to govern military personnel actions. To make matters worse, the drafters employed smoke and mirrors to put a merit-sounding title on a provision that just reinforces the Biden-era identity preference status quo.

Blurb:

SAN ANGELO, TX — A high-stakes legal battle over the constitutionality of federal gun registration is heating up in Texas, as three of the nation’s leading gun control organizations have joined forces with the U.S. Department of Justice and former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi to defend the controversial National Firearms Act (NFA).

The lawsuit, Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF, was brought by Gun Owners of America (GOA), the Silencer Shop Foundation, and other plaintiffs. They argue that the NFA’s registration requirements for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and similar items are unconstitutional — especially after Congress eliminated the $200 transfer tax on many of these items in 2025. GOA contends that without a tax in place, the government has no constitutional authority to require a national gun registry.

Despite this change in law, the DOJ continues to enforce the registration framework, arguing that the NFA is still supported by Congress’s taxing and commerce clause powers. In a surprising twist, the DOJ’s position is now being reinforced by an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief filed by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, and Giffords Law Center — the three largest gun control lobbying organizations in the country.

Blurb:

In early November, The Hill reported that Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director Bill Pulte was working on a plan to introduce a 50-year home mortgage to buyers.

This scheme is unwise. It will make housing more expensive, hurt taxpayers, and set the groundwork for a future housing crisis. Sound reasoning indicates that the FHFA should not create the 50-year mortgage.

In fact, right there is the heart of the problem: that it is the Federal Housing Finance Agency that intends to create this mortgage product. The last 90 years of federal intervention in the housing market, from the National Housing Act of 1934 onward, have been a disaster. This was inevitable. It is intrinsic to human nature that central planners cannot allocate resources efficiently for the satisfaction of anyone’s desires save their own.

It is also in the nature of things that men who make their way in the world by seizing the resources of others at the barrel of a gun have little, if any, incentive to work for the good of others. Their access to violence precludes the need to produce anything useful.