Chevron deference, a doctrine created by the Court in 1984, gives federal agencies wide latitude in interpreting the meaning of various laws. But the justices may overturn that.
The president has tried to shift blame for inflation, interest rate hikes, and an overall decimation of consumers' purchasing power.
Reasonable options include gradually raising the minimum retirement age, adjusting benefits to reflect longer life expectancies, and implementing fair means-testing to ensure benefits flow where they're actually needed.
Why aren't politicians on both sides more worried than they seem to be?
Despite both presidential candidates touting protectionist trade policy, tariffs do little to address the underlying factors that make it difficult for U.S. manufacturers to compete in the global marketplace.
Price controls lead to the misallocation of resources, shortages, diminished product quality, and black markets.
Private unions have every right to exist, but that doesn't mean they're actually beneficial on net.
No technology exists today to enable railroads to comply with the state's diktat, which villainizes a mode of transportation that is actually quite energy efficient.
Let's just call this what it is: another gimmick for Congress to escape its own budget limits and avoid having a conversation about tradeoffs.
There are many pervasive myths about the U.S. tax code. Here are a few.
Despite their informal nature, those norms have historically constrained U.S. fiscal policy. But they're eroding.
These handouts will flow to businesses—often big and rich—for projects they would likely have taken on anyway.
The question of how best to measure inflation has no single and straightforward answer, but most people know that the president's economic claims aren't true.
Economic nationalists are claiming the deal endangers "national security" to convince Americans that a good deal for investors, employees, and the U.S. economy will somehow make America less secure. That's nonsense.
Support for industrial policy and protectionism are supposed to help the working class. Instead, these ideas elevate the already privileged.
The president wants to raise the rate from 21 percent to 28 percent, despite it being well-established that this is the most economically-destructive method to raise government funds.
The government needs to cut back on spending—and on the promises to special interests that fuel the spending.
Despite the popular narrative, Millennials have dramatically more wealth than Gen Xers had at the same age, and incomes continue to grow with each new generation.
The policy is a true budget buster and is ineffective in the long term.
The president criticized companies for selling "smaller-than-usual products" whose "price stays the same." But it was his and his predecessor's spending policies that caused the underlying issue.
Many who see overdraft protection as preferable to other short-term credit options will have fewer choices as some banks decide the service isn't worth offering anymore.
The reality raises questions about the kind of future we want to leave for the next generation.
His speech in Davos challenged the growing worldwide trend of increased government involvement in economic affairs.
They will either reduce the ability to spend money or to cut taxes.
Rosy fiscal expectations based on eternally low interest rates have proven dangerously wrong.
Rosy fiscal expectations based on eternally low interest rates have proven dangerously wrong.
That's bad news for Americans.
As we step into 2024, it's crucial to adopt a more informed perspective on these dubious claims.
Lawmakers can take small steps that are uncontroversial and bipartisan to jumpstart the fiscal stability process.
In today's innovative economy, there's no excuse for sending a gift card. The staff at Reason is here with some inspiration.
Lawmakers should consider a user-fee system designed to charge drivers by the mile.
We're often told European countries are better off thanks to big-government policies. So why is the U.S. beating France in many important ways?
The Copenhagen Consensus has long championed a cost-benefit approach for addressing the world's most critical environmental problems.
In the last 50 years, when the budget process has been in place, Congress has managed only four times to pass a budget on time.
Years ago, when interest rates were low, calls for the federal government to exercise fiscal restraint were dismissed. That was unwise.
Over the last several years, they have worked nonstop to ease the tax burden of their high-income constituents.
Higher rates lead to more debt, and more debt begets higher rates, and on and on. Get the picture?
Especially because the once-dismissed possibility of rising rates is now a reality.
Those sounding the loudest alarms about possible shutdowns are largely silent when Congress ignores its own budgetary rules. All that seems to matter is that government is metaphorically funded.
The best reforms would correct the real problems of overcriminalization and overincarceration, as well as removing all artificial barriers to building more homes.
The big spending has fueled higher inflation, resulted in larger-than-projected deficits, and contributed to a record level of debt.
This progress has been widely shared, to the great benefit of the people at the bottom of the distribution.
Rather than posing a national security threat, the growth of China's E.V. industry is an opportunity for global innovation.
The country's current struggles show the problems of the Beijing way—and make the case for freedom.
Legislators abuse the emergency label to push through spending that would otherwise violate budget constraints.
The guidelines would ignore decades of academic findings about how firm concentration can have a positive impact on consumers' welfare.
The lack of oversight and the general absence of a long-term vision is creating inefficiency, waste, and red ink as far as the eye can see.
Since Congress designed and implemented the last budget process in 1974, only on four occasions have all of the appropriations bills for discretionary spending been passed on time.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10
