“Not even shutting down the government can stop Republicans from forcing their way into corporate boardrooms these days.
The federal government is, at the moment, incapable of completing its most basic and routine task—passing a budget—and yet it is simultaneously expanding its portfolio to include a 10 percent ownership stake in an Alaskan mining company.”
“New York’s experiment with delivery driver wage mandates hasn’t gone well. Pay went up after the 2023 rule kicked in, but so did prices—and many drivers left the market altogether. The city saw an 8 percent drop in its delivery workforce, while food delivery costs rose 10 percent, including a 12 percent jump in restaurant prices and a staggering 58 percent spike in app fees. Tips, meanwhile, plunged 47 percent. Platforms even started capping drivers
…
Seattle followed suit in 2024 with a $26-an-hour minimum wage for delivery drivers—and immediately watched the system collapse. Apps tacked on a new $5 delivery fee, and with taxes added, customers were soon paying bills with nearly 30 percent of the cost unrelated to the food itself. DoorDash saw 33,000 fewer orders in just the first two weeks, wiping out about $1 million in restaurant sales.
Counter to the law’s intention, many Seattle delivery drivers saw their earnings slashed by over half. “Demand was dead,” according to one such driver. A recent report from gig companies found that, following the ordinance taking effect, delivery orders dropped 25 percent, and driver pay fell 28 percent per hour logged on.”
“Set aside the fact that the so-called epidemic of autism does not result from a surge in actual cases but from a broadening of the diagnosis over the past 50 years—from what psychiatrists in the 1970s called a form of childhood schizophrenia, marked by early social withdrawal, impaired language, and rigid, repetitive behaviors, to today’s ASD. This new understanding includes highly capable, sometimes gifted individuals who simply interact with others in unusual or atypical ways. Additionally, because social, educational, and health care services are now more accessible to children with ASD, increased parental awareness and more screening by pediatricians, school psychologists, and educators have led to greater detection.
That nuance seems lost on Kennedy, who treats autism as if it were an infection or a tumor.
…
What we know so far about the link between prenatal acetaminophen and autism—that it remains inconclusive—is based on independent clinical studies not influenced by a government agenda. Without government interference, these studies might find definitive proof that prenatal acetaminophen causes ASD, or they could lead to dead ends, encouraging scientists to explore other possibilities.”
“Natcast signed on 200 members — notably, Nvidia, Intel, Apple, Samsung, Google and AMD — to pursue breakthroughs in the foundational technology that powers virtually every modern asset from AI to defense systems. The group spent its year-and-a-half existence trying to set up and eventually run a national hub where that R&D would happen, along with programs to ease the semiconductor industry’s severe talent crunch.
Lutnick’s clawback produced deep uncertainty while companies, researchers and lawmakers scrambled to understand where it leaves over a dozen awardees, plus the remaining billions. Nearly $2 billion was promised to infrastructure, research and workforce projects in states like Arizona, New York, California and Texas.
…
The Commerce head has focused its dealmaking heavily on chipmakers. His new “investment accelerator” was handed supervision of tens of billions of dollars in CHIPS subsidies and ordered to negotiate “much better deals than those of the previous administration.” The undermining of Natcast followed an agreement to grant the U.S. a 10 percent stake in Intel, when Lutnick redid the terms of its CHIPS award.
Seven people, including from three Capitol Hill offices, raised concerns with the possibility that renegotiations for this $7.4 billion may involve similar government equity stakes. People also questioned whether requirements to share revenue from research patents could be under consideration. Lutnick spoke about subjecting universities to the idea the day after he voided the Natcast contract.
…
When the agency started soliciting proposals for R&D funding last week, it told applicants, as a condition of an award, they “may be required to issue to the Department equity, warrants, licenses to intellectual property, royalties or revenue sharing, or other such instruments to ensure a return on investment.” The guidelines do not mention the national hub, yet cite the law that established it.
LC: If we need these companies to produce important technology, then we don’t need special deals to help them. We should help them because it is good for the country. The technology will produce a better economy and therefore more normal tax revenue. If we want these companies to pay us back directly, just make sure they are paying their normal taxes.
…
“They decided to burn two years of delay to try to create their own thing,” said a former Trump official, who, like several others for this report, was granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic. “While Natcast was not a Republican initiative and wasn’t how we wanted it go, I think it was better than burning down the whole system and starting over again.”
…
“The companies are scared,” said a person familiar with the industry dynamics. “Companies want CHIPS funding, and they’re very afraid that if they speak out, they’ll lose it. No one wants to come into the crosshairs of the administration.”
…
“There’s just a feeling of, for many of us, a year’s work going down the tubes, taxpayer dollars being flushed down the toilet,” said one person closely associated with Natcast.”
…
An industry lobbyist said, “those who stand to lose the most in this process will be start-ups and research centers that were at the cutting edge of innovation.””
“Interviews with more than a dozen technology executives over the past week revealed that the Trump administration’s announcements of government stakes in companies such as Intel have had a chilling effect, with executives now filtering many decisions through the prism of how the White House might respond.”
“The Problem: The base pay for tipped workers in Washington, D.C., is a fraction of the minimum wage, making their income heavily reliant on unpredictable gratuities.
The Solution: Initiative 82, which phases in a higher base wage for tipped workers until it meets D.C.’s full minimum wage in 2027 ($17.95).
Sounds like a great idea, with the best of intentions. What could possibly go wrong?
Turns out, money has to come from somewhere. New labor costs led many restaurants to raise prices, drop staff, cut hours, or close up shop entirely. Many establishments began charging “Initiative 82 fees,” which customers found difficult to swallow, especially when Maryland and Virginia are just minutes away. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the average tipped wage worker in D.C. saw their income drop by over $1,800 in the two years since the initiative went into effect.”
“Liquor and wine will likely get more expensive next year in Pennsylvania—and residents will have no choice but to pay the higher prices, thanks to the state’s monopoly on alcohol sales.
The Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PLCB) voted earlier this month to impose a new “bailment fee,” which it says is necessary to cover rising warehouse costs and improve its distribution system. The $1 fee will be charged on all packages that move through the state’s warehouses, and will take effect at the start of 2026.
…
In other states, those producers would have more options when a wholesaler or retailer—the PLCB fulfills both functions—decides to impose a new fee or otherwise raise prices. Some wineries or distilleries might choose to pay the extra per-package fee and build the cost into their pricing. Others might look for different distributors to carry their product, or other distributors might try to undercut whichever one was raising fees in the first place.
In Pennsylvania, like in other states that maintain a monopoly on alcohol sales, those options do not exist. If you want to sell or buy alcohol in the Keystone State, you’ll simply have to accept whatever prices and fees the PLCB chooses to charge.”
“The case against government grocery stores is straightforward. Government providers have no incentive to spend money wisely or respond to customers’ needs. Unlike private businesses, which must compete for customers by offering quality goods at reasonable prices, government entities get paid regardless of performance. Tax dollars flow into the system whether the shelves are stocked or empty, whether the service is stellar or abysmal.”