Food Prices Soar Under Biden as Industry Leader Issues Dire Warning: ‘There’s Still More to Come’

H/T Western Journal.

People like myself on a fixed income are going to get hurt the worst.

The next time you’re shopping for groceries or taking in a meal at the local cafe, keep an eye out for newly raised prices.

Companies from Chipotle to Piggly Wiggly are raising prices in an effort to make up for elevated costs in labor, goods and transportation, according to The Wall Street Journal.

It’s just the latest inconvenience brought about by the real Biden Effect: Rampant inflation and ever-increasing costs.

Consumer prices flew upward by five percent in May, marking the highest rate of inflation since the Great Recession.

Now, the increasing costs of everyday necessities like food threaten to combine with that runaway inflation to the serious detriment of everyday Americans.

“Quite frankly, we’re not done with all the pricing actions that we need to take,” Hormel CEO Jim Snee told The Wall Street Journal in explaining the company’s raising of prices on everything from peanut butter to Spam. “There’s still more to come.”

The squeeze on Americans’ wallets seemingly isn’t pricing anyone out of food yet, but those with bigger families and grocery bills ought to prepare the best they can for a continued hardship.

The new hardship is an unfortunate fact of the Biden administration’s terrible domestic policies, which Ohio Sen. Michael Rulli concisely pointed out.

“Inflation is a tax on American families,” Rulli said.


Indeed, as food costs creep up and go unaddressed by the White House, everyday Americans will be forced to pay the price of a disrupted market if they want to eat.

As it turns out, the costs of the progressive stimulus-fever must be borne by more than simple tax dollars.

It’s little wonder the situation has many feeling nostalgic for a presidency gone by.

“Under Biden, we have rising inflation, open borders, an energy crisis, a stagnant economy, & weak foreign policy,” Florida Rep. Byron Donalds said.

Indeed, between rising food costs, record inflation, mass worker shortages and a historic border crisis, Biden’s number one policy priority appears to be highway robbery.

General’s Dire Warning: Here’s What Afghan Military Faces Without US Help

H/T Western Journal.

We are in a Catch 22 situation in Afghanistan we are Damned if we do leave some US forces there and we are Damned if we do not.

Against the recommendation of military commanders, President Joe Biden recently ordered that all U.S. troops must be withdrawn from Afghanistan by September 11.

The U.S. invaded Afghanistan in 2001 because the Taliban provided al-Qaeda protection as it planned the September 11 attacks. We have been mired there for nearly 20 years with little to show for it.

Currently, there is a force of approximately 2,500 U.S. troops there, along with 7,000 NATO forces who are committed to the same timetable for withdrawing.

While it’s past time we extricated ourselves from the Afghanistan boondoggle, we need to do it in a way that honors the American blood and treasure spent there and prevents the Taliban and their al Qaeda allies from seizing control of the country.

Yet that is precisely what Gen. Frank McKenzie, the head of U.S. Central Command and the top U.S. general for the Middle East and Afghanistan, is concerned will happen under Biden’s withdrawal plan.

In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee last week, Gen. McKenzie stated that Afghanistan’s military “will certainly collapse” without some continued American support once all U.S. troops are gone, reports the AP. “My concern is the Afghans’ ability to hold ground” without the U.S. forces, McKenzie told the Senate committee.

Last February, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met with Taliban officials in Doha, Qatar and negotiated a deal whereby the U.S. would withdraw its troops from Afghanistan if the Taliban renounced violence and ended its long-standing support for Islamist terror groups like al Qaeda.

The Taliban failed to hold up their end of the bargain. Despite that, President Biden has pledged to completely withdraw our troops by the symbolic, but entirely arbitrary, deadline of September 11.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has said that the U.S. will maintain the ability to counter terrorists in Afghanistan after the troop withdrawal, but he has provided few details on how he plans to accomplish this, and many in the military and intelligence community doubt it can be done.

Gen. McKenzie told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the U.S. wants to be able to conduct counter-terrorism missions from the air through the use of manned and unmanned aircraft.

However, because there is no significant American military presence in the countries surrounding Afghanistan, there is nowhere to base the aircraft. As a result, McKenzie acknowledged that it will take “considerably longer” than four hours to move armed drones in and out of Afghanistan.

This is hardly the sort of backup that the Afghan security forces can rely on.

Most military commanders and intelligence experts believe that without a U.S. military presence in the country, the government in Kabul to collapse and warlords and terrorist groups like al Qaeda will again take hold, leading to the conditions that brought us into Afghanistan in the first place.

According to a recent U.S. Treasury report, al Qaeda is “gaining strength in Afghanistan while continuing to operate with the Taliban under the Taliban’s protection.” The report further states that “al-Qaeda capitalizes on its relationship with the Taliban through its network of mentors and advisers who are embedded with the Taliban, providing advice, guidance, and financial support.”

A recent Pentagon report also highlighted that without the support of U.S. and other NATO allies, the Afghan government has little chance of prevailing against the Taliban once their troops have withdrawn.

And, in its 2021 Threat Assessment, published earlier this month, the U.S. intelligence community reached a similar conclusion, stating that “the Afghan Government will struggle to hold the Taliban at bay if the coalition withdraws support.”

Indeed, The Times reports that after Biden announced that all American troops would be out of Afghanistan in September, a senior Taliban commander taunted that they “are prepared and already present in the battlefield.”

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley reportedly, according to Vox, urged Biden to maintain a military presence in the country. According to sources familiar with the discussion, Milley made an impassioned plea, arguing that withdrawing troops would “open the door for the Taliban to overtake the country, making life worse for millions of Afghans and imperiling U.S. national security goals,” and would set women’s rights “back to the Stone Age.”

The full U.S. withdrawal also will create a vacuum in the country that ChinaRussia or Iran will fill, and make it harder to restrain aggression from nuclear-armed Pakistan.

President Obama’s withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq in 2011 is a case study in what not to do. Obama insisted on withdrawing all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2011, even though his military advisors almost unanimously advised against it.

With the Iraqi security forces unprepared to protect the country’s security, Obama’s troop withdrawal allowed ISIS to seize 40 percent of Iraq’s territory, establishing a caliphate.

Within just six months, ISIS had become the world’s most well-funded and best-equipped terrorist army. Its terrorist activities resulted in the deaths of over 1,200 people outside of Iraq and Syria, and included mass shootings in San Bernardino, California and Orlando, Florida.

We are now poised to repeat this calamity. We should heed Gen. McKenzie’s warning about what will happen to the Afghan military without U.S. troop support.

Preventing the Afghan military from collapsing would not take a large-scale force, but a small contingent of troops. The bipartisan Afghanistan Study Group said this year that 4,500 American troops would be enough “for training, advising, and assisting Afghan defense forces; supporting allied forces; conducting counterterrorism operations; and securing our embassy.”

Biden has flatly rejected this option, however.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that Joe Biden “has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

Regrettably, it looks like that trend is set to continue.

Without American Support Taliban Steamrolls Afghan Army, Walks Away with Precision US Weapons and Armored Fighting Vehicles

H/T Western Journal.

I think it is a big mistake to totally with drawling  all of our troops from Afghanistan as the Taliban will steamroll Afghan troops.

Then the Taliban will be armed with US munitions and other weapons then watch the attack other countries.

Leo Tolstoy wrote that “war is always pernicious even when successful.”

The United States’ ongoing withdrawal from Afghanistan demonstrates the truth of this claim.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid announced on Twitter that Taliban fighters overran government security forces with ease this week in the Maidan Wardak Province, just west of Kabul.

His posts included several pictures of booty from the conquest, which included American-made machine guns, rifles, carbines and armored vehicles.

“The enemy fled on seeing the casualties, and a large number of tanks, heavy and light weapons and ammunition fell into the hands of the Mujahideen,” he tweeted.



The Taliban also allegedly shot down a government helicopter, according to Afghan media outlet Ariana News.

News of the Taliban’s successes is merely the latest in the movement’s pernicious campaign to capitalize on the U.S. withdrawal, reassert its hegemony over Afghanistan and reinstate the government that the U.S. overthrew 20 years ago.

Alas, Afghan forces are unlikely to prevent a resurgence of the Taliban without American military presence. Despite the fact that America spent more than $2 trillion on the war effort and committed two decades of training efforts, Afghan security forces are, by all measures, a joke.

Indeed, there is something of a sad understanding on the ground that the Afghanistan government will wholly cave to the Taliban once the U.S. is gone, and a hardline interpretation of Sharia will once more become the law of the land.

“We want an Islamic government ruled by the Sharia,” said Taliban shadow mayor Haji Hekmat, according to BBC News. “We will continue our jihad until [government forces] accept our demands.”

It is a difficult statement to argue with, particularly given the Taliban’s recent acquisition of American-made armament that will now be used to further the violence directed at the Afghan government.

Such is perhaps the inevitable perniciousness of war, however, and despite the coming convulsions in Afghanistan, there is little chance that increasing the number of American troops or weapons in the nation would have any meaningful impact toward fostering peace.

It is a point stated clearly by former Michigan Rep. Justin Amash in a recent tweet.

“No more airstrikes. No more war,” Amash, a libertarian, wrote. “Twenty years of military involvement in Afghanistan — the longest war in U.S. history — provides more than enough evidence that our weapons will not end this conflict, but they will add to the bloodshed and suffering.”

Indeed, Amash is onto something for once.

The violent rush to fill the power vacuum that the U.S. is leaving in Afghanistan is a necessary result of foreign interventionism and a war carried out without meaningful objectives.

If Afghanistan falls to the Taliban or, worse yet, outright collapses, let it be a lesson that all such wars must end similarly.

It is a lesson that the United States appears dead set on learning again and again and again. Maybe this time it will stick.

Abbott Says Texas Will Immediately Begin Building Its Own Border Barriers

H/T Western Journal.

Bravo Governor Abbott for building the border wall Joe Pee Pads Biden refuses to build.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is directing his state to immediately begin building border barriers in areas where migrants have been pouring over the U.S.-Mexico border.

“The influx across the border is out of control, and the Biden administration has shown that is not going to step up and do its job,” Abbott told Breitbart Texas before a border summit he convented in Del Rio, Texas, on Thursday. “And amidst reports of even more people coming in across the border, we know we have to step up and do more.”

The governor picked Del Rio as the location for the summit because of the massive increase in illegal crossings in the sector.

Agents apprehended 27,890 migrants in the Del Rio sector, a 1,118 percent increase over the May 2020 report of 2,289, Breitbart reported.

“The reason why we are here is because of the massive increase,” Abbott said.

He recounted that border crossings used to be concentrated in the Rio Grande Valley.

However, “Now, you know we’re upstream from the Rio Grande Valley in the Del Rio Sector and the Del Rio Sector is suffering from some of the largest increases.”

Abbott said those entering his state without authorization put themselves in legal jeopardy.

“If you come to Texas, you’re subject to being arrested. You’re not going to have a pathway to roam the country. You’re going to have a pathway directly into a jail cell,” the governor said.

Concerning the placement of border barriers, Abbott explained that they serve the functions of being both a physical deterrent and a means to charge people with crimes.

“If [migrants] move or interfere with that barrier, they have committed several crimes,” he said, including criminal mischief, vandalism of state property and criminal trespass.

Customs and Border Protection reported that over 180,000 people were apprehended attempting to enter the country illegally through the southwest border in May.

That is a 21-year high.

Abbott issued a disaster declaration earlier this month due to the border crisis.

“President Biden’s open-border policies have paved the way for dangerous gangs and cartels, human traffickers, and deadly drugs like fentanyl to pour into our communities,” he said in a June 1 statement.

“Meanwhile, landowners along the border are seeing their property damaged and vandalized on a daily basis while the Biden Administration does nothing to protect them. Texas continues to step up to confront the border crisis in the federal government’s absence, but more must be done.”

Abbott told Breitbart Texas the federal government will have to change its policies for the crisis to be fully addressed.

“In the end, only the federal government and Congress can fix this,” he said, “but as it stands right now, the state of Texas is going to step up and we’re going to start making arrests — sending a message to anybody thinking about coming here,  you’re not going to get a free pass to the U.S. They’re getting a straight pass to a jail cell.”

Flashback: Gerald Ford’s Eerie Prediction Could Soon Come True for Kamala Harris

H/T Western Journal.

Will Gerald Ford’s prediction come true for Kalama Knee Pads Harris?

If any former president had access to an operational time machine, it may have been former President Gerald Ford.

But his foresight would not focus on the degradation of America’s international standing or the fiscal ramifications of stagflation and untethered federal spending. Rather, it would deal with how America would elect, or more precisely, promote the first female president.

When Ford visited the Herbert Hoover Presidential Library and Museum in West Branch, Iowa, on Oct. 18, 1989 — approximately a decade after leaving office — he was given the special chance to share with the nation’s youth the role that former presidents played in American society, after they departed from the presidency.

In this setting, the former president did not have to worry about ditching and dodging around the biting journalistic questions of the day. Instead, he was asked by one young girl, “What advice would you give a young lady wanting to become president of the United States?”

With a smile, the former president opened with, “Well I hope we do have a young lady at some point become president of the United States.” His following description would appear as if the 38th president was a part-time Nostradamus.

“I can tell you how I think it will happen because it won’t happen in the normal course of events.”

“Either the Republican or Democrat political party will nominate a man for president and a woman for vice president. And the woman and man will win, so you’ll end up with a president — a male — and a vice president — a female,” he said.

“In that term of office of the president, the president will die and the woman will become president under the law or Constitution,” Ford said, in an unknowingly foreboding sense.

Taking a quick look at the current administration, it may appear Ford was onto something.

At various times, President Joe Biden has slipped up — as he is known to do on occasion — and indicate that Vice President Kamala Harris is, in fact, his “president-elect” or “President Harris.”

Could Ford’s fortune-telling be correct?

There are a few pathways by which the vice president could become president. In the case of an assassination or resignation, the 25th Amendment gives the vice president the authority to take the role of the executive. In other cases, the mechanism of impeachment and removal gives Congress the means to check a president’s bad behavior.

Absent a popularly held election, however, it would be interesting to see how the American people would react to a Harris presidency, as conservatives, libertarians and even some progressives and liberals have voiced their concerns over her authoritarian record.

After former Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii highlighted Harris’ record as attorney general and prosecutor at a Democratic presidential debate in 2019, much of the country recoiled upon hearing that she forced prisoners to stay past their sentences and purposely hid evidence of innocence for a man sitting on death row.

As a Washington grifter, Harris’ actions do not often win the hearts and minds of the American people.

President Ford, nonetheless, left those young visitors with one last message.

“Once that barrier is broken, from then on men better be careful because they’ll have a hard, hard time ever even getting a nomination in the future.”

With everyone’s eyes set on 2024, it may be time for the guys to watch out.

Biden Revokes Significant Trump Executive Order

H/T Western Journal.

Joe Pee Pads Biden bowing to the wishes of his Chi-Com masters by revoking this order.

President Joe Biden signed an executive order on Wednesday ending former President Donald Trump’s attempts to ban TikTok and WeChat.

The new executive order revoked three Trump-era orders, including Executive Order 13942, called “Addressing the Threat Posed by TikTok, and Taking Additional Steps To Address the National Emergency With Respect to the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain.”

The New York Times reported the new order is “the first significant step Mr. Biden has taken to address a challenge left for him by President Donald J. Trump, whose administration fought to ban TikTok and force its Chinese-owned parent company, ByteDance, to sell the app. Legal challenges immediately followed and the app is still available as the battle languishes in the courts.”

A White House Fact Sheet released Wednesday said Biden’s administration “is committed to promoting an open, interoperable, reliable and secure Internet; protecting human rights online and offline; and supporting a vibrant, global digital economy.

“Certain countries, including the People’s Republic of China (PRC), do not share these values and seek to leverage digital technologies and Americans’ data in ways that present unacceptable national security risks while advancing authoritarian controls and interests.”

The new order seeks to help the U.S. “take strong steps to protect Americans’ sensitive data” and “Provides criteria for identifying software applications that may pose unacceptable risk,” among other measures.

In 2020, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo led an effort to ban the popular social media app TikTok in the U.S., culminating in an Aug. 6 executive order.

During an August 2020 appearance on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures,” Pompeo said the Trump administration was acting amid broader concerns about doing business with China.

“Well, here’s what I hope that the American people will come to recognize. These Chinese software companies doing business in the United States, whether it’s TikTok or WeChat — there are countless more — as [White House trade adviser] Peter Navarro said, are feeding data directly to the Chinese Communist Party, their national security apparatus,” Pompeo said. “Could be their facial recognition patterns. It could be information about their residence, their phone numbers, their friends, who they’re connected to.

“Those are the issues that President Trump has made clear we’re going to take care of,” Pompeo said.

According to the Brookings Institution, the catalysts for the ban were concerns about data security and privacy.

TikTok is owned by the Chinese company ByteDance. The company, founded in 2012, is known to act as a mouthpiece for Chinese Communist Party propaganda.

Pompeo warned, according to CNN, that users should only download TikTok “if you want your private information in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party.”

In addition to security concerns, Fox News reported in April that TikTok has been used by Mexican drug cartels to recruit teens and young adults to drive smuggled illegal immigrants deep into U.S. territory.

In exchange, the cartels offered the teens as much as $3,000.

“Images obtained by Fox News shows the ads cartels are using on social media apps like TikTok, where they offer more than $3,000 a ride for teens and young adults to come drive smuggled migrants into the U.S. when they reach the border,” Fox reported.

Palestinian Government Pays $42,000 to Family of Terrorist Who Killed Israelis

H/T The Washington Free Beacon.

42000 reasons we need to cut off all funding to the Palestinian government.

Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas authorized the payment on Sunday of $42,000 to the family of a terrorist who killed two Israelis through a policy that incentivizes and rewards terrorism against Israel.

Laila Ghannam, governor of Ramallah’s Al-Bireh district, personally handed the money to the family of Muhannad Al-Halabi, a member of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror group on Sunday. Al-Halabi fatally stabbed two Israeli civilians in 2015 before being shot by police. The $42,000 payment was given to Al-Halabi’s parents “on behalf of Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas to ‘complete the payment of the cost’ of their home, which was demolished by Israel following the attack,” according to the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), which tracks regional media reports.

The payment is a direct rebuke to a 2018 bipartisan American law known as the Taylor Force Act, which prohibits the U.S. government from giving the Palestinian government aid money until it ends the practice of paying terrorists, known as “pay to slay.” Republican lawmakers say the Biden administration violated this law by restarting U.S. aid to the Palestinians. The Biden administration approved another $100 million in aid for the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip late last month, even as it admitted these taxpayer funds could enrich terrorists operating there.

Sunday’s $42,000 payment is the latest proof the Palestinian government has no intention of ending its pay-to-slay program. The State Department informed Congress last October that the Palestinian government allocated hundreds of millions of dollars to this program in the last year.

In meetings with Western officials, Abbas has denied supporting the program and claimed his government has no formal ties to terror groups or militant operatives. His Arab-language rhetoric, however, mostly consumed by a domestic audience, routinely glorifies terrorism. Ghannam said over the weekend that Abbas asked her to deliver the $42,000 in funds to the terrorist family.

“The governor stressed that the meeting was being held on instructions from Abbas, who had ordered [Ghannam] to handle the issue of the house ‘in order to preserve the dignity of the family,’” according to MEMRI. “Ghannam thanked Abbas, who she said ‘attributes special importance to the families of the martyrs, prisoners and fighters’ and is ‘like a compassionate father to all our [Palestinian] people.’”

Republican Senators Team Up in Bid to Keep Critical Race Theory Out of Schools

H/T Western Journal.

This liberal tripe has no place in our schools.

Three GOP senators introduced a resolution on Monday  to condemn critical race theory in K-12 public education, arguing the controversial view “has no place in American schools.”

Florida Sen. Rick Scott, Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn and Indiana Sen. Mike Braun presented Senate Resolution 246 to push back against liberals who are working to include critical race theory in public schools.

The summary of the resolution says, “Expressing the sense of the Senate that Critical Race Theory serves as a prejudicial ideological tool, rather than an educational tool, and should not be taught in K–12 classrooms as a way to teach students to judge individuals based on sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin.”

Scott said in a statement from the three legislators, “Since America’s founding, our nation has strived to be a land of opportunity for all. While we cannot ignore the scars of our past, we also cannot tolerate the attempts of the woke left to weaponize our history in radical curriculums that teach our children to see America only for its worst days, and the American people only for their darkest hours.”


He added, “The far-left wants Americans to believe that our nation is inherently racist and bad. They want to discredit the values America was founded on. They’re wrong.

“We can’t stand by and allow ’woke’ liberals to divide our nation. Students in Florida and every state across this nation deserve better and I’m proud to lead my colleagues today in a resolution to stand up against this dangerous policy.”

Blackburn said, “Critical race theory has no place in American schools. The tenets of critical race theory are based in the destructive ideal of inherent racism and will teach our children to judge and self-segregate based solely on skin color.

“In Tennessee, we believe in equality and opportunity for all. Students should not be discriminated against on the basis of race under any circumstances. This resolution is an important step to prevent the far left from pushing their radical political agenda in our classrooms.”

Braun said, “America’s kids need to know that the fundamental values of our country are liberty, equality, and opportunity for all – not racism and oppression. I’m proud to join my colleagues in speaking out against divisive political agendas being pushed in our classrooms.”

The resolution followed a letter in April from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and more than 30 senators to Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona to request “the withdrawal of the Department’s ‘Proposed Priorities’ on American history and civics education,” according to the statement.

The GOP letter said, “This is a time to strengthen the teaching of civics and American history in our schools.”

It added, “Instead, your Proposed Priorities double down on divisive, radical, and historically-dubious buzzwords and propaganda.”

Several states have already enacted legislation against critical race theory in public schools.

In May, Tennessee joined a growing list of states in banning the theory.

Republican Gov. Bill Lee signed legislation that bars public schools from teaching divisive propaganda that effectively claims one group is inherently racist and that the United States is fundamentally, irredeemably racist and sexist.

These beliefs are the basic tenets of critical race theory, which labels all white people as racist and privileged and suggests that all black people are helpless victims because the U.S. is “systemically racist,” critics of the concept say.

“What I am most concerned about is that our education system reminds students that history is important, civics is important, American exceptionalism is important, and that political commentary is not important when teaching our children,” the governor told WTVF-TV.

A Baker’s Dozen: 13 Reasons Why Free College Tuition Is Bad for America

H/T Town Hall.

A “Baker’s Dozen” is synonymous with more, or extra in a transaction. This piece provides (extra) arguments – a baker’s dozen – why government subsidized, free college tuition is bad for all involved.

Making the case:

The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else. Frederic Bastiat

Nowhere are Bastiat’s words becoming more evident than with the many in Washington and their fascination with free college tuition.

To better understand the naïveté of this harmful and expensive proposition, consider the current state of affairs. According to Statista, the percentage of Americans 25 years old or greater who completed a four-year degree or higher has increased significantly from 1940 (5.5 percent of men and 3.8 percent of women) to 2019 (35.4 percent of men and over 36 percent of women).

Completion rates can improve, yet some in Washington suggest the only reason more individuals do not complete college is because the cost is too high and debt levels are unacceptable (cumulative U.S. student loan debt is over $1.71 trillion, with 45 million past and present students holding an average debt of $37,693, according to Forbes Magazine).

Addressing fiscal barriers is important, but financial hardship is but one factor in assessing the merits of free college tuition. Free college tuition is a false panacea and following are our baker’s dozen points that offer further food for thought.

  1. Impact on choice – Choice of institution, field of study, time to complete and study intensity will be limited due to financial rationing. We believe a free-tuition system will also, over time, limit institutional differentiation as government support will likely be conditional. The result is stifled competition, lower quality, and less innovation. In places like Norway, free tuition forced institutional mergers and campus closures. If implemented, expect the same here.

  1. Government power and monopolies – A free-tuition mandate will limit access and create space shortages (free-tuition universities in Sweden and Denmark had to cut budgets, forcing consolidation and denying access to about 1 in 4 aspiring students – usually those who could least afford it).

  2. Impact on the labor market – Free tuition will compel a great number of high school graduates to give college or university a chance. Realistically, many will be unsuccessful. This delayed entry into the workforce will limit earning power for some individuals, create worker shortages, impacting landscaping companies, hotels, restaurants, skilled trades, the U.S. Military, et al.

  1. Free college benefits higher income families – Studies have confirmed free tuition benefits are enjoyed mostly by those of higher socioeconomic status. Higher education consultant Alex Usher reminds us “we know that making higher education free, on its own, is very unlikely to change the social composition very much (i.e. it won’t be effective on its own terms), and therefore will provide extraordinary benefits to children of upper-income families.”

  1. Student loan forgiveness – Expect fierce legal and lobbying efforts for the federal government to forgive existing student debt.  In addition, Americans who sacrificed greatly and paid for their college education will rightfully seek compensation. We estimate this movement will cost over two trillion yet unbudgeted dollars.

  2. Embrace Private Higher Education – This year, U.S. News & World Report cited that 19 of the top universities in the world are American with 16 of them private, including the top 3. To grow American ingenuity and innovation, universities require more freedom from government interference, not less. Independence from government bureaucracy is essential.

  1. Rent controls are real – Over time, the demand for rent-controlled apartments skyrockets, exhausting inventory, creating long waiting lists, and limiting access. Look for a similar result in the higher education sector, as the need to build new infrastructure, hire new personnel and increase investments will either dramatically increase the budgeted cost of ‘free’ education or force institutions to cut costs and delay or forego improvements.

  1. College education is a public and private good – In speaking of free tuition, Ohio University Professor Richard Vedder argues… “such a program would disproportionately benefit moderately wealthy families who would send their kids to college largely on the backs of other taxpayers… (it also) eliminates the need for employers to give their employees the opportunity to take courses at certain colleges.”

  2. Incentives and disincentives matter – One of America’s higher education strengths is the diversity of institutions. The value of attaining a private college or university education cannot be understated as these institutions offer a much broader range of learning milieus, including faith-based, and other affiliations. Free tuition at public universities would harm private schools and forever compromise the long-term strength of America’s enviable diverse college system.

  1. Vocational Education – Many high schools offer students the opportunity to pursue a career pathway in the skilled trades (plumber, electrician, etc.) as this choice delivers a lucrative career without amassing college debt. With free college tuition, many future vocational candidates may decide to pursue a college degree, leading to reduced vocational education participation and an even greater shortage of skilled trades workers.

  1. Data. Is it a graduation rate problem or an excess number of students? – According to a 2017 UNESCO report, “The number of students in higher education institutions around the world more than doubled,” (2007: 100 million students; 2014: 207 million students).  During this time, the global higher education gross enrollment ratio rose to 34 percent, up from 19 percent. The United States is among the best at #6 overall, with a higher education gross enrollment of 47.43 percent of its 331 million population. Following far behind are countries like #30 Germany, 29.1 percent; #41 Mexico 18 percent; #44 India 10.60 percent; and, #45 China, 9.68 percent. It seems to us the UNESCO study and other facts noted above may be telling those in Washington to leave well enough alone.

  1. Nationalizing the American higher education system – The closing of many private K-12 schools – which stressed rigor and discipline – has contributed to the decline in American international scores in Math, Science and Reading. Unlike the K-12 system, the U.S. higher education system is the envy of the world, with private universities and colleges leading the way. Nationalizing much of higher education with free tuition will negatively and irrevocably impact the quality, innovation, and effectiveness of the American system, just as nationalization has done to numerous industries in socialist countries.

  1. U.S. National Debt – Our greatest concern is that the overall national debt of the United States now stands at a staggering $28.32 trillion. In 1980, the U.S. national debt was 34.59%  of GDP. Today it is almost 128% of GDP! Adding a free-tuition program will further negatively impact the outcomes of America for at least the next generation.

The debate regarding whether to adopt a free college tuition program seems to be abundantly clear.  This pursuit will limit student choices and weaken “The Academy’s” diversity of thought at all levels. Its expense will dramatically hinder our government’s ability to be fiscally responsive to other demands, including infrastructure, low interest rates, and keeping Americans and the world safe.

Free tuition and universal subsidies are regressive, benefiting those who already have the capacity to pay for a college education. Further, low income families already have tuition mostly covered through various grants.  Quite simply, free college tuition is an idea we simply cannot afford – financially, socially, economically, academically, and morally. Innovation and ingenuity are largely the result of individual liberty and freedom, entrepreneurship and risk-taking and institutional independence, not a nationalized higher education system.