Here is the Heritage Take on the top issues today.Please reply to this email to arrange an interview.
Manchin breaks from Dems on S1 election bill: 'Wrong piece of legislation' to unite US <[link removed]> – H.R. 1 would federalize and micromanage the election process administered by the states, imposing unnecessary, unwise, and unconstitutional mandates on the states and reversing the decentralization of the American election process—which is essential to the protection of our liberty and freedom. It would (among other things) implement nationwide the worst changes in election rules that occurred during the 2020 election; go even further in eroding and eliminating basic security protocols that states have in place; and interfere with the ability of states and their citizens to determine the qualifications and eligibility of voters, ensure the accuracy of voter registration rolls, secure
the fairness and integrity of elections, and participate and speak freely in the political process. Heritage expert: Hans von Spakovsky <[link removed]>
Black Lives Matter leader resigns but this radical, Marxist agenda will continue <[link removed]> – Apparently some of those well-intentioned Americans who put BLM signs on their lawns have
buyers’ remorse after learning the true nature of BLM. They sent plenty of money in the interim, however. A 2020 Impact Report published this year said the organization had raised over $90 million in 2020 alone, and listed all the accomplishments – the lobbying, "Hamilton," etc. It’s not clear if Cullors’ resignation means she will fade away. Along with Alicia Garza and Opal Tometi, also committed Marxists, Cullors founded BLM in 2013 after a jury found George Zimmerman not guilty of murdering Trayvon Martin. But even if she does go away, don’t expect that to mean a softening of BLM’s radical agenda. That’s baked in. Heritage expert: Mike Gonzalez <[link removed]>
May Jobs Report: The Right Direction for the Recovery, but Nowhere Near Where Employment Should Be <[link removed]> – As small businesses across the country struggle to fill vacant positions, they need to keep pace with demand. Ongoing federal unemployment insurance bonuses are hurting, instead of helping the recovery. Americans have seen the 'help wanted' and 'we’re hiring' signs—even some businesses posting apologies for delays due to a shortage of workers. Businesses have had to raise compensation to compete with federal unemployment insurance benefits, resulting in higher prices for consumers. It’s time for the federal government to stop pumping more deficit-financed spending into the economy, simultaneously stimulating demand and restricting supply. Businesses already face high costs from government taxes and regulations—they don’t also need the government competing with them. Heritage expert: Rachel Greszler <[link removed]>
<[link removed]>Biden’s first defense budget batters the Army <[link removed]> – All these
cuts stand in sharp contrast to the average increase of 16 percent that the Biden administration proposes for every federal department other than Defense and Homeland Security — the two departments responsible for America’s national security. How odd that those two should be targeted for what are effectively net decreases in spending. America’s adversaries are rapidly increasing and modernizing their military capabilities. They are also doing their utmost to intimidate their neighbors: think Vladimir Putin in Ukraine and Xi Jinping in the South China Sea. Meanwhile, the Biden administration proposes dangerous cuts to military readiness. This is no way to keep us safe. Fortunately, Congress will get the final word on this budget. Let’s hope they think it through better than the White House has. Heritage expert: Tom Spoehr <[link removed]>
High Court Got It Right in Van Buren v. US: Prosecute Hacking, Not Terms of Service Violations <[link removed]> – Computer Fraud and Abuse Act prosecutions based on terms of service violations are rare, but, given the complexity of many websites’ terms of service agreements, their rapidly changing nature, and the regularity with which
average Americans violate them, Van Buren’s narrow interpretation of the statute will help avoid constitutional vagueness concerns. Website owners, of course, can still seek damages for breach of contract against individuals who run afoul of terms of service agreements, and employers can do the same (or impose disciplinary sanctions) against
employees who violate a contractual access restriction. Other federal criminal statutes will still punish individuals who steal from their employers under certain circumstances—for instance, when an employee misappropriates trade secrets. But after Van Buren, no American needs to fear the potential of an
arbitrary prosecution solely because they violated a widely unread terms of service agreement or a widely unenforced company information technology policy. Heritage expert: Michael Ellis <[link removed]>
-
