Republican party officials voted earlier on Friday to censure Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, the only two Republicans participating in the investigation of the January 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol
They cause vastly more harm than good and actually undermine health care and scientific progress in the long run.
His judicial philosophy emphasized promotion of democracy, a theme in tension with his emphasis on the need for deference to expertise.
They were a bit of both.
Plus: A very blunt Senate candidate, bad news for business mergers, and more...
The article challenges longstanding conventional wisdom claiming that judicial review of democratically enacted laws is at odds with popular political choice.
Both parties want to kill the filibuster when they are in the majority, and that's exactly why it needs to stick around.
Ignorance and bias played a major role in the attack on the Capitol and in the continuing belief of many Republicans that Biden didn't really win the 2020 election. The issue is part of the broader problem of political ignorance and bias, which is by no means confined to any one side of the political spectrum.
I picked three books I largely agree with - and two that I mostly don't.
It sucked for avoidable reasons.
Politics isn’t going away, so we can at least try to make it less bad.
How foot voting can expand political freedom for Americans, particularly the poor and disadvantaged.
If we can’t learn to leave each other alone, the country may have a violent meltdown.
A new report says many democracies have taken steps that are "disproportionate, unnecessary, or illegal" to curb COVID.
British political scientist David Runciman says the answer is "yes." And he makes a stronger case than you might think.
The revised edition addresses several new issues including arguments that migration must be restricted to curtail the spread of dangerous diseases, such as Covid-19, claims that immigration might generate a political backlash that threatens democracy, and the impact of remote work on foot voting.
One of the greatest political economists of the 20th century passed away earlier this month.
The Senate's leading progressive seems to misunderstand the basic math of American democracy.
The article explains how expanding opportunities for foot voting can enhance political choice, help the poor and disadvantaged, and reduce the dangers of political polarization.
NYU's Eliza Sweren-Becker debates Hans von Spakovsky of The Heritage Foundation
NYU's Eliza Sweren-Becker debates Hans von Spakovsky of The Heritage Foundation
The symposium includes contributions by Ben Powell, Peter Skerry, Eric Kaufman, and me.
A puzzle about the former; an argument about the latter
Putting criticisms of the Senate, Electoral College, and Supreme Court in perspective.
The article, which is available free on SSRN, criticizes claims that governments have a right to exclude migrants based on various theories of self-determination.
And yet neither Democrats nor Republicans represent those principles.
Specifically, political scientist Ilia Murtazashvili has published a review of my book "Free to Move: Foot Voting, Migration, and Political Freedom," in a leading political economy journal.
Plus: More Cuomo allegations, the "cult of now," the state budget apocalypse that wasn't, and more...
The previous administration had made some reasonable changes, but also introduced questions based on factual errors and questionable normative assumptions smuggled in under the guise of factual knowledge.
Today is the 100th birthday of the most influential political philosopher of the second half of the twentieth century.
The article adapts and expands some of the ideas developed in my recent book "Free to Move," and is now available for free download on SSRN.
California Democrats and their labor union allies are embracing anti-democratic principles to thwart the will of the people.
Yesterday's events at the Capitol building should be understood as a colossal law enforcement failure.
Pence had been presiding over the tally of Electoral College votes before rioters broke into the Capitol Building, forcing him to flee.
China accused the activists and former legislators of "subverting state power."
His promotion of far-fetched conspiracy theories about the election is highly unlikely to change the results. But it is damaging, nonetheless.
Trump is a wannabe despot, but let's not pretend the other side is flawless.
Like almost every newly elected president, Joe Biden claims he has a mandate. But does he? And should we care?
The combination of foot voting and decentralization of power can offer people more and better choices than are available at the ballot box.
There could be in some situations. But less often than many assume. And, ironically, the same reasoning suggests many people would have a duty NOT to vote in such cases.
Both candidates have serious flaws. But a Trump victory would be a much greater evil than the alternative.
The issue is currently before the Supreme Court in the case of Trump v. New York.
The event was sponsored by the Miller Center for Public Affairs.
Trump's garbled response probably wasn't a sign he's planning to subvert the election. But it was a failure of presidential competence.
In the 20th century, far more people were murdered by genocidal governments than by armed criminals.
Adam Thierer, author of the lead essay, has a response to his critics.
Political philosopher Jason Brennan explains why.
Politicians' opinions about the maneuver depend on which party is in power.
Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.
Make a donation today! No thanks
Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.
Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.
I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.
My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.
Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.
Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks