If, on the other hand, you are somewhat less than ecstatic about outrageous taxes, hordes of illegal aliens on welfare, the Legislature’s impending gun grab, the fifth or sixth highest utility rates in the US, the utter breakdown of law and order and not just in Boston either….

If any of this concerns you, you might want to… send them a message, as they used to say.

Next Tuesday, you can do just that by voting for a Republican in the special election to replace a Democrat who resigned to grab a $117,000-a-year hack job from Gov. Maura Healey.

Only three of the 39 current members of the state Senate are Republicans. The GOP could literally caucus in a telephone booth. That’s how far the party has fallen, and it’s why a Republican victory might actually mean something.

Rep. Peter Durant is running in a semi-rural central Massachusetts district that includes one city (Gardner), a couple of Worcester wards, and 19 towns, all but one of them in Worcester County.

A Durant victory would be the first Republican takeaway of a Democrat seat since 2018. That’s how long the party’s tailspin has been going on.

Despite their iron grip on power, the Democrats are pulling out all the stops to defeat Durant. They want Massachusetts to be even more of a one-party state than it already is.

The Democrat candidate is another state rep, a 33-year-old named Jonathan Zlotnik. He seems to be rather a nonentity, but all that matters is that “D” after his name.

By his campaign contributors, ye shall know him, and you should see the collection of hacks who’ve ponied up big time for Mr. Z.

First, Marty Meehan, the career coat holder who is now the $697,076-a-year president of hack-infested UMass. Ya think Marty could afford that $200 he sent the Democrat?

Marty has an “assistant to the president” named David McDermott. He makes a mere $350,000 a year. At ZooMass this is called a starting wage. McDermott gave $250.

More interesting, though, is the $200 contribution Zlotnik pocketed even before this current election, from one Ken Halloran. Does that name ring a bell? Probably not, but keep your eyes on this payroll patriot.

Halloran is the “partner” of Tara Healey, the younger sister of Maura Healey. Partner – that’s how Tara is described in the obituary for Halloran’s mom, and in the pages of a local state-run media outlet, the Globe.

He was basically a state-paid lobbyist for the State Police during the very ethical era of Leigha Genduso, Troop E organized racketeering, tubby corrupt union boss Dana Pullman and a cast of dozens of other unspeakably corrupt troopers.

Halloran retired in January 2022, after it became clear that the sister of his “partner” was going to be the next governor. He pocketed his $90,451-a-year pension.

Now he’s in a new lobbying firm with, among others, ex-Sen. Henri Rauschenbach, age 76. Republican Rauschenbach has a nickname – Kickenbach – from his corruption trial in 1995 on conflict-of-interest and conspiracy charges. He beat the rap. It always helps to be tried by a Suffolk County jury.

Like all the other ancient lobbyists I wrote about on Sunday, Kickenbach last won an election in the 20th century – in 1996.

But now Kickenbach is living large, partnered up with the governor’s almost brother-in-law. Ya think that connection helps when you’re soliciting business on Beacon Hill?

It’s only natural that Halloran would be funneling cash to Rep. Peter Durant’s opponent. Democrats, you know.

Many of the ancient lobbyists I wrote about in my Sunday column want to keep the party going. The state is imploding, but they’re getting filthy rich on their way out the door.

Zlotnik’s lobbyist contributors include all the old Boston glad-handers, with names like Joyce, Delaney, Malloy and Hickey. From the Worcester forgotten-but-not-gone brigade, he’s grabbed cash from Joe Ricca and Paul Giorgio.

He’s also collected from most of the furthest-left state senators in the far, far left state Senate: Pat Jehlen, William Brownsberger, Susan Moran, Jason Lewis et al.

But the lobbyists’ showering of cash to Zlotnik is the most telling. These slugs run everything on Beacon Hill. As a group, they’re not terribly swift, but in the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man shall lead.

When they write another billion-dollar blank check for their bundlers and advocates and brothers-in-law, all the lobbyists do is scrawl a few words at the top of the legislation:

“Notwithstanding any general or special order to the contrary….”

And that is exactly the reason there should be at least a handful of Republicans up there to yell: “Stop thief!”

Perusing the list of greed-crazed hacks who are spending thousands to defeat Rep. Peter Durant, I keep asking myself one question.

Is there a single ex-legislator over the age of 75 — indicted, convicted or otherwise — who isn’t riding off into the sunset pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars a year from “lobbying” at the State House?

I just came across two more of the erstwhile solons approaching the checkout counter yesterday.

One was an ex-state rep named Steve Karol. He last won an election in 1992. Now, at age 75, he has a lobbying firm with a 78-year-old ex-state senator named W. Paul White. White’s name most recently appeared on the ballot in 1996.

But when the Democrats blew the hack dog whistle, these two old-timers raised their snouts from the trough and came hobbling back to the crime scene. Because they want to keep the dumpster fire that is Massachusetts state government going.

It’s good for business – monkey business.

If you agree with all the above tax-fattened Democrat millionaires that happy days are here again in Massachusetts, you should definitely not vote for Peter Durant in the special state Senate election next Tuesday.

Durant wants to be that guy yelling, “Stop thief!”

(Order Howie’s new book, “Paper Boy: Read All About It!” at howiecarrshow.com or amazon.com.)

Religious violence is on the rise across the world, affecting various groups in different regions, most prominently today against Jews and Christians in the Middle East. Across the world, within the last year, some 360 million Christians have been persecuted or discriminated against for their faith, a growing number. As a leading humanitarian superpower, it falls upon the United States to take a stand for international religious freedom and democracy, which comes hand-in-hand with that freedom.

A world where religious persecution goes unchallenged is a world where democracy and human rights are undermined.

I have spoken with presidential candidates and emphasized the urgency of standing up for International Religious Freedom, especially in the Middle East.

While Israel has the means and every right to fight back against the terrorist Hamas forces, others have nearly no defense. Some 120,000 Christian Armenians were forcefully displaced from their homes in Artsakh, a territory also known as Nagorno-Karabakh. The Armenian people of Nagorno-Karabakh were put under blockade and denied food, fuel, and medicine.

Now, the leader of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, whom Hamas has praised for previous attacks on Christians, walks through the empty streets of Stepanakert in Nagorno-Karabakh. Citizen journalists have bravely reported that Aliyev’s supporters have gone so far as to remove Christian crosses from buildings before his visit. These acts are part of a campaign to erase Armenian Christian presence, even churches, from the area to justify their attacks.

All of this while being supported by U.S. taxpayers thanks to waivers of a U.S. law that was supposed to stop us from enabling the Aliyev regime.

Azerbaijan can also enjoy a double standard of aid from America’s enemies. Just as Hamas attacks Israeli civilians thanks to generous support from Iran, the Aliyev regime benefits from the Ayatollah, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and its neighbor Turkey. Armenians are surrounded on all sides by enemies who seek their active destruction because of their faith or who enable their subjugation.

In a now-walked-back statement, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken admitted that Azerbaijan would likely continue its campaign against Armenian Christians with a potential invasion of Armenia proper.

The time to speak up for Armenia, the world’s first Christian nation, is now. The history of the United States is filled with previous leaders who took courageous steps to defend the persecuted, and it is now your turn to uphold this legacy.

The world looks to the United States for guidance. When the next president takes the oath of office, they must commit to championing religious freedom within the nation’s borders and on a global stage. It is not only a call for moral courage but a call for practical action. The United States must sanction those perpetrating these acts of violence. Whether it’s taking on Hamas for its genocidal campaign against Israel or sanctioning the Aliyev Regime, there are actions we as a nation can do to promote freedom on a global scale.

The next steps are clear: silence in the face of genocide is not an option. The next president must be a beacon of hope, advocating for religious freedom and sending a powerful message that the United States stands firmly on the side of justice and humanity.

Bob Vander Plaats is president and CEO of The Family Leader/InsideSources

The manager stared at the slowly exiting graduate for a moment, adding that this person’s idea of “truth” seemed little more than a self-rewarding, ideological, cultural, morally empty, uneducated malevolence including antisemitism afflicting Jews through the ages. While these brave, tradition-blessed, self-disciplined people are small in number, they have done enormous good for the world and are still at it, this imagined manager said by way of expressing my opinions for me through a writing trick.

Some sympathizers of the Hamas celebrants have weirdly suggested their savage deeds were more a matter of responsibility than vicious desire. By way of common sense, video viewers may have noticed the enjoyment as these thugs went about their handiwork, acts of uncivilized, inhumane cruelty that their defenders just might imitate.

The way this torture festival in the Middle East has been so widely welcomed in American colleges across the country and among certain other segments of the American population is itself tortuous. It speaks to our decadence, the wasting away of so much of what has been exceptional about us. Consider how higher education has grown greedy beyond the capacity of millions to pay tuition, that it has been downplaying the crucial humanities and mostly junked the once-required study of the miracle of Western civilization.

In America today, the two-parent family is withering away with atrocious consequences for the children. Public schools are well behind educational achievements in other developed countries in the teaching of reading, writing and arithmetic, although they are helping to instruct students on gender decisions. Common sense is hiding out.

Crime is less and less being punished while more and more ruining lives. The federal government has become a mystery with President Joe Biden being the least answerable question.

In the middle of all of this and far more, we have had these anti-Israel protesters all over the country, including at colleges often with special courses emphasizing diversity, equity and inclusion as the modern way of “reform.” Jews don’t seem to be diverse enough for inclusion. Five Middle East nations attacked Israel in 1948 right after the ancient entity was officially named a new nation. A Hamas official, Fathi Hamad, said every Jew everywhere in the world should be “slaughtered and killed.”

To me, the nonchalance among too many Americans about such ambitions and their blaming Israelis for what neighbors want to do to them is solid evidence of American decadence on the march.

Tribune News Service

“He was wearing his SEAL Team 7 T-shirt, red, white, and blue board shorts, and illuminated a shadow box next to where he was,” said Larkin as he choked up while talking with DCJournal.

He had just recounted how his son fought a losing battle not only inside his own head but with the Veterans Administration. “He says… ‘All they do is keep writing me prescriptions and these drugs, I don’t even feel like I’m in my own body.’ And he said to me, ‘I’m banged up inside.’”

Government statistics say there were 6,146 veteran suicide deaths in 2020, almost 60% higher than non-veteran adults. The next year, 519 active-duty members of the Armed Forces took their own lives.

Larkin, a former Navy SEAL and Secret Service agent who also served as the 40th U.S. Senate Sergeant at Arms, used his son’s death to form Warrior Call. It connects veterans and former first responders with resources to help them get past isolation and thoughts of suicide.

“In many cases, it’s because the time they spent in service to our country is not well understood by our society,” Larkin said. “So, when they come out of their service, or while they’re still in uniform, there’s kind of a translation challenge with folks who are on the outside that have not served to understand what life is in uniform.”

Visible injuries sustained while on duty may be one reason why veterans and first responders have trouble adapting to civilian life. But invisible injuries also exist, mainly in the form of Traumatic Brain Injuries (TBI). In March, researchers from the Naval Health Research Center discovered a combination of high-level and low-level blasts may increase the chances of military members later developing migraines and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Their conclusion was there is a need for “public health surveillance initiatives for blast exposure and or safety recommendations for training and operational environments.”

The good news is Congress seems to be getting on board. The Senate has passed a resolution making Nov. 12 National Warrior Call Day. It encourages Americans to call active duty military members, veterans, and first responders and talk with them about how they are feeling. The resolution implores people to connect veterans with support, knowing that it could save their lives.

“Those who have taken the oath to defend our country deserve our appreciation and support long after their service ends,” said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) in a statement. She and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) co-wrote the Warrior Call Day resolution. “I’m glad the Senate passed my bipartisan resolution that, if signed into law, would designate a National Warrior Call Day to help raise awareness and strengthen the relationship between veterans and civilians.”

The House has yet to vote on National Warrior Call Day, something that has caused Larkin to feel frustrated. He wants veterans and first responders to realize that they are not alone. “Much of this work, at least the advancement of the knowledge of what’s going on, especially with regard to brain health, is occurring in the nonprofit and the private sector with a lot of the universities and research institutions that are not aligned with the government,” he said.

He hopes people will start checking up on veterans that they know. “If you sense that they’re not in a good place, then get them tied up with some resources that potentially can help pull them out of the darkness and get them to a better place.”

Taylor Millard writes about politics and public policy/InsideSources

Gov. Maura Healey, like leaders of other states buckling under the strain of a never-ending migrant influx, is on board with Biden’s short-term solution bonanza.

As the Herald reported, the Healey Administration and the White House announced a plan to help some new arrivals secure employment.

During the week of Nov. 13, officials from the Department of Homeland Security and the Bay State will host a “work authorization clinic” for migrant families currently living in state-provided housing.

“We are glad that the Biden-Harris Administration is hosting this clinic with us, which will help process work authorizations as efficiently as possible. Many shelter residents want to work but face significant barriers to getting their work authorizations,” Healey said.

“This clinic will be critical for building on the work that our administration has already been leading to connect more migrants with work opportunities, which will help them support their families and move out of emergency shelter into more stable housing options,” she said.

And what stable housing options might those be? There’s a shortage of affordable housing in Massachusetts as it is, as the non-migrants in the state’s shelter system can no doubt attest.

Rising rents have made it increasingly difficult for working families to afford to keep a roof over their heads. Having a job doesn’t guarantee you’ll have enough to rent a home or apartment.

In fact, Healey addressed this very issue last week, with the release of a $4 billion bond bill aimed at spurring housing production and boosting affordable home ownership. The Affordable Homes Act, a package of spending, policy and programmatic actions, represents the largest proposed investment in housing in the state’s history while simultaneously striking at the root causes of housing unaffordability, according to an administration release.

So, when migrants in our overwhelmed state shelters get work authorization help and secure jobs, where will they move to? What happens next? Whatever affordable housing options are produced by Healey’s bill are down the road at best, so migrants will find themselves in the same boat as others looking for a place to live that won’t take up their entire paycheck, and then some.

Leaders are working on that solution, and have been as the number of unhoused grows in Massachusetts. The migrant influx isn’t helping, and gainful employment for new arrivals will provide a leg up, but not necessarily the sort of boost that leads to a stable address.

There are two simultaneous crises in the Bay State: a migrant influx and housing. One needs to be solved, or at least greatly ameliorated, before the other can be competently dealt with.

Also omitted by Biden and Healey: there are more migrants coming. As the Associated Press reported, some 5,000 migrants set out on foot from Mexico’s southern border Monday, walking north toward the U.S.

Here they can get a drivers license and a job – and join the scrum to find

a place to live.

Business is the backbone of our democracy, and neglecting the engine that drives our freedom is irresponsible. Every warning light is blinking, governor, so erase your calendar, roll up your sleeves, and get out your toolbox.

The Tax Foundation ranks Massachusetts as the 5th worst state in its Business Tax Climate Index. New Jersey, New York, California, and Connecticut rank lower — but New Hampshire is in the Top 10. That alone should worry Gov. Healey. Last time when drove north it was a quick trip.

The sad part is Healey doesn’t seem to care. Neither does Speaker Ron Mariano and state Senate President Karen Spilka. Our Democratic-run government is more adept at knocking down entrepreneurs than helping them out.

This Tax Foundation report — showing the Bay State dropping 12 spots in just the past year — should be a wake-up call. Businesses and citizens vote with their feet, and we risk losing both if the status quo remains.

A driver behind the state’s nosedive in tax competitiveness, the Tax Foundation found, is the state’s new Fair Share Amendment – or Millionaire’s Tax – which taxes incomes over $1 million an extra 4%.

“While the $1 million threshold at which the surtax kicks in is indexed to inflation, the surtax imposes a sizable marriage penalty that the Commonwealth lacked previously,” authors wrote in the report which came out last week. “This policy change represents a stark contrast from the recent reforms to reduce rates while consolidating brackets in many other states.”

Paul Craney, a spokesman for Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance and a staunch opponent of the Millionaire’s Tax, called out proponents who pledged that the surtax would strictly apply to individuals with an income of over $1 million.

“With a flip of a switch, the Legislature lowered that threshold to $500,000 for married people and the Tax Foundation is predicting a clear negative outcome from this,” Craney added.

Why should you care?

Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, told the Herald this weekend that people and businesses alike are continuing to leave Massachusetts due to taxation.

His organization represents 4,000 businesses in the state so it’s not wise to ignore his comment.

The Tax Foundation also called out a payroll tax that went into effect this year in Massachusetts’ poor ranking. The organization also found that the state dropped 33 spots from the 11th-best state for individual taxes to the sixth-worst.

Hurst said high unemployment and health insurance costs, both of which are the worst in the nation, according to the Tax Foundation, need to be fixed.

The Healey administration and Beacon Hill lawmakers can not be allowed to go unchallenged. It’s embarrassing to be near last on any list. It’s unacceptable and reflects how out of touch our lawmakers have become.

With the gutless coward Robert Card the suspect in the mass shootings in Lewiston, Maine found dead, this is the best outcome that could have possibly happened. The good citizens of the state of Maine are spared the cost of a trial where Card’s lawyers would have played the insanity card. And the state of Maine is spared the cost of incarceration for decades to come. Unfortunately the families of those Card murdered will never learn why this happened . My heart goes out to the families of all those killed and injured.

Paul J. Baranofsky

Waltham

Audit the Legislature

It makes perfect sense for the Massachusetts State Auditor, Diana DiZoglio to lift the veil of secrecy and audit the Legislature.  In our one party, Democrat-led state, there is always meetings held behind closed doors and deals made in secrecy.  What better reason for an audit is what Speaker Ron Mariano and President Karen Spilka say in opposition to opening up the books of their fiefdom.  They howl that the Legislature is a separate branch of government that makes its own rules and governs and audits itself.  Wow, isn’t that a reason enough for another pair of eyes to peak under the rug and see what was swept under it?

Donald Houghton

Quincy

Hamas terror

The White House Office of Moral Philosophy, formerly staffed by Barack Obama and presently by his student Joe Biden, continues to plead for ethical clarity to the theocratic hooligans in Iran. If we just give them a little more, the Obama-Biden thinkers believe, then surely they will meet us halfway. But, dagnabbit, those rascals in Tehran never seem to get the memo. Oh well, better not upset them, after all holy men follow different timelines and patience on our end will gain credence with Russia and China. Yeah, that’s the ticket. I suspect that elimination of this train of thought would go a long way toward countering the moral confusion tangling our nation, especially the anti-Enlightenment antisemitism now raging on our streets.

Paul Bloustein
Cincinnati, Ohio

Biden and oil

Joseph Robinette Biden and his administration has shut down oil and gas leases from the nation’s vast public lands and waters starting on Jan. 20, 2021. Well, I have a question, don’t all military tanks, ships, planes and transport vehicles use fuel oil? So if the United States can’t supply this product who will? There’s a lot of bad stuff going on in the world, time for America to rethink stopping oil production in our country, being self sufficient is the answer and trusting other countries to step up and help is really scary.

Tony Meschini

Scituate

Today, some 57 years later, the murder of a  family in a rural area would barely make the front page. Mass murders such as the recent horrific event  in Lewiston, Maine are now commonplace in schools, recreational facilities and retail establishments.

Within the past week, just prior to the Lewiston tragedy,  a judge was gunned down by a father whose custody rights the judge had limited.  The circumstances surrounding these events  and scores of other mass murders illustrate our collective vulnerability due to the  superior status many still insist is provided by the Second Amendment.

As these murders continue, time after time the public offers “thoughts and prayers” to families of the victims and mourns the senseless killings of children and adults who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.  In the meantime, a feckless Congress struggles for weeks to elect a Speaker because many remain beholden to the lingering shadow of an indicted former president fined $10,000 last week by a judge  for refusing to keep his mouth shut.

In reality, we are all still held hostage by a government unwilling to face the grim reality that citizens have no reason to possess these weapons of mass destruction. Gun control remains the third rail for too many elected officials who still maintain the right to possess them is as sacred as it was when enacted to protect the militia during the Revolution.

In 1919, following World War I, the United States was besieged by a national crisis of widespread intoxication and domestic violence. Both the House and the Senate concluded that a moratorium on alcohol consumption could reduce the number of incidents. As a result, Prohibition, the 18th Amendment, was enacted, to substantially restrict the consumption of alcohol.  Although repealed in 1931, Prohibition succeeded in reducing alcohol related domestic violence during the period and thereafter.

A similar legislative enactment is needed in 2023 since we are all hostages staring down the barrel of the next assault rifle that could murder any of us or our families. Lewiston, Maine is just the latest location that underscores that vulnerability.

Each day,  we continue to read the shocking details of the hostages held by Hamas in Gaza. Ironically, the refusal of Congress to pass any meaningful gun control legislation makes us hostages in our own country, endangered by  the tactics of unpredictable and unstable individuals still entitled to possess assault weapons.

Unless and until preventive actions are taken concerning their possession, we will probably see many sequels to “In Cold Blood.”

Thoughts and prayers have limits.

Steven Kramer was an assistant attorney general under Massachusetts Attorney General Frank Bellotti from 1980 to ’87.

So, what the Israelis continue to find are body parts, the humans with which those parts were once associated blown up or burned beyond recognition, such that extracting and examining DNA is impossible.

And this, of course, doesn’t count the 5,800 Israelis who, maimed and mutilated on Oct. 7, are still alive. It doesn’t count the 230 people – the elderly, the disabled, the frail, the wounded, the helpless, children and babies, all terrified – abducted at gunpoint and held in Hamas’ tunnels, constructed under hospitals, homes and mosques so that Israel is constrained from going after them. And it doesn’t count the rest of Israel’s families, virtually all of whom know someone killed, maimed or held hostage by Hamas.

While Israelis were being blown or burned to unrecognizable pieces by a joyful Hamas, here in America the academic year had barely begun at colleges and universities where students pay upwards of $100,000 annually for the privilege of studying the humanities and liberal values. Comfortable faculty members were returning to the familiar pleasant routine of attending to personal jealousies and intra-departmental rivalries. Students resumed arguing on social media about just how egregiously the disturbing prospect of knowing that a speaker had been invited to campus prepared to express a view contrary to their own would constitute a violation of their safe spaces. News that 1,400 Israelis – including  many hundreds their own age – had been butchered to death and 5,800 more maimed barely piqued their interest. After all, these were Israelis – and whether Israelis were even entitled to live life free of being butchered was politically debatable.

As for the 230 souls who have been kidnapped and are forcibly held in dank Hamas tunnels, either near dead or scared to death, among faculty members and students who fancy themselves “progressive,” this has elicited a Big Yawn.

But when Israel, like any other country not only on the planet but in the history of the planet, determined that of course this could neither be tolerated nor permitted to recur, the ears of faculty and students perked up. And not only perked up. Promptly and self-confidently, they assessed that the outrage was not Hamas’ slaughter of Israelis, but Israel’s determination not to permit the slaughter from happening again.

So it is now a “thing” for pious defenders of “free speech” in all context other than those involving Israel to rip down posters with pictures of kidnapped Israelis held in captivity, posted so that we can see their faces and hold them in our hearts.

On innumerable American campuses, in settings in which students are charged to learn that humans are to be respected, not massacred, vigils are held to honor as “martyrs” those who pulverized Israeli children – and boasted about it.

Faculty members compete to ingratiate themselves with pro-Hamas students by proclaiming themselves “exhilarated” by the killings, and “in solidarity” with the murders as acts of “resistance.”  Students cheer on the murders as contributions to the “cleaning” of Israel. Professors at Columbia University inform us that the slaughter of Jews demands “contextualization.”

Here’s where we are. When it comes to the slaughter of Jews, many in American academia are down with it. But ask them if they’re antisemites?

Of course not.

Jeff Robbins is a Boston lawyer and former U.S. delegate to the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

Healey is planning to stop admitting migrants and the homeless to motels and shelters on Wednesday but faces a legal challenge from a civil rights group.

Liberal-on-liberal crime can get especially ugly.

Healey is staring down a lawsuit from the Boston-based group Lawyers for Civil Rights, which argues that the state must give the Legislature 90 days’ notice before changing the state’s shelter system of handling migrants and homeless.

“The idea that the state would want to turn its back on children in desperate situations, forcing them to live in the streets, in cars, and in unsafe situations is appalling to many in the state,” Lawyers for Civil Rights litigation director Oren Sellstrom told WBUR.

Pretty tough words for a Democratic governor to hear – that you’re forcing homeless and migrant children to live on the streets.

Healey is so desperate not to appear tone-deaf to the migrant crisis that her office on Sunday night put out an “embargoed” press release announcing that the administration was partnering with the Office of Homeland Security to host a work authorization clinic for migrants in two weeks.

The non-news announcement was withheld from public release until 6:30 a.m. Monday so as to get a better bounce from the morning media. But Healey was nowhere to be seen on Monday because she had no public schedule. That way she could avoid pesky questions about the lawsuit or swelling numbers of migrants who are about to be turned away from shelter.

“We are glad that the Biden-Harris administration is hosting this clinic with us, which will help process work authorizations as efficiently as possible. Many shelter residents want to work but face significant barriers to getting their work authorizations,” Healey said in the statement. “This clinic will be critical for building on the work that our administration has already been leading to connect more migrants with work opportunities.”

You get it. A lot of self-congratulating.

Wu faces similar backlash from some liberals for passing an ordinance clearing out the encampments from the drug-ravaged Mass and Cass zone. Her administration will be sending in police on Wednesday to remove tents and clean up the open drug dealing that has been going on – hopefully to arrest a few criminals as well.

The city has reserved extra beds to house the homeless living at Mass and Cass but won’t let them build any new tents.

Several progressives on the council voted against the ordinance but not enough to block it.

But civil rights advocates will be watching closely to see that police don’t go over the line or simply push people out onto the streets. Wu will face stiff blowback from her progressive friends if that happens so she’s hoping for a smooth transition.

It is also Gov. Maura Healey’s deadline for taking in new immigrant families who are flocking to Massachusetts seeking free housing and support under the state’s “right to shelter” law.

So, if a family with children comes trick or treating at your door looking for shelter, they are liable to be immigrants from Haiti or Afghanistan or Ecuador looking for a place to crash.

Massachusetts is an internationally known sanctuary or handout state.

That may be an exaggeration, but you get the point.

The state is so overflowing with migrants that there are no longer the means to care for them.

There is no more room at the inn, Healey said in so many words– as if that will stop them from coming. Massachusetts is overflowing with immigrant families from around the world with few places to house them.

“If there is no place for them, where do they go?” House Speaker Ron Mariano sensibly asked.

It is a good question.

But Healey does not seem to have a good answer. She said that even though the state does not have “enough space, service providers or funds” to expand shelters, “Families with high need, including health and safety risks, will be prioritized for shelter placement.”

If the shelters are full, newly arrived immigrant families will be placed on a waitlist if they are not “immediately connected with shelter.”

Since no immigrants, let alone illegal immigrants, are sent back to where they came from, where do they stay while waiting to be housed?  In tents on the Boston Common? Not likely.

Healey’s remarks translated mean that the state will somehow continue to house and feed incoming immigrant families despite their immigrant status and despite Healey’ Halloween deadline that goes into effect Tuesday.

Winter is coming and no one should be left out in the cold. Everybody agrees on that.

The challenge is coming up with a solution.

While the state has the capacity to accommodate 7,500 immigrant families, or 24,000 individuals, there are currently some 7,200 families in the system, 3,489 families with children living in hotels and motels and 3,629 in traditional shelters.

They get taxpayer-funded free housing, free food, free medical care, security, free schooling for the children and so on. The taxpayers get the bill without even a thank you.

They are still coming, and the problem is still growing.

Unless Healey gets a handle on it, it will consume her administration just the way the COVID pandemic consumed Gov. Charlie Baker, her predecessor, limiting the time and energy he could have spent on other issues, like the MBTA, for instance.

But just as COVID was not Baker’s fault, Healey, although a welcoming progressive, had nothing to do with the immigrant invasion. It was Joe Biden who opened the borders and let millions of foreigners into the country with no questions asked.

It is also Biden who has refused to deal with the problem or provide Healey with the federal funds she needs to pay for Biden’s reckless and wrongheaded open door immigration policy.

And all the big talkers of the Massachusetts Congressional delegation, from Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Eddie Markey on down, have been unable to extract a dime from Biden to deal with the problem.

Healey was rightly proud to have signed into law the recent tax cut bill.

But at the rate the state is spending money on the immigrants, and with no help from Biden, she soon may have to raise taxes to pay for it all.

It is costing Massachusetts taxpayers $45 million a month to house and care for the immigrants already here. Healey has already burned through $350 million previously appropriated for the immigrants. She is now asking the Legislature for $250 million more.

If the additional $250 million is approved by the Legislature—which it has not yet taken up—Speaker Mariano said it would not even be enough “to get us to the end of this month.”

The end of the month is here.

Happy Halloween.

Peter Lucas is a veteran Massachusetts political reporter and columnist.

Some institutions, like universities, promise their members they won’t be punished for free expression. But for-profit employers rarely promise to protect employees’ speech, for market-oriented reasons. Because companies care about what customers and clients think, they typically reserve the authority to make workers comply with their preferred speech policies.

So-called “cancel culture” offers a clear example of how what you say can have consequences. Those canceled in recent years mostly found they had little recourse other than abjectly apologizing and hoping the cancellation would have a sell-by date. Consequences ranged from getting fired to losing work to simply being criticized — albeit brutally.

As it happened, most canceling initially came from the left. As a consequence, most leftists either thought there was nothing wrong with the practice or pointed out that “cancellation” was nothing more than the exercise of free speech by critics. The right, for its part, complained bitterly but offered little in the way of a principled objection to the idea that people are free to criticize, even boycott, opinions they don’t like. In the end, cancellation emerged as a phenomenon enabled by the combination of free speech and free market forces.

Since Hamas’ terrorist attack on Israeli civilians on Oct. 7, the political winds of intense public criticism have shifted. Left-leaning critics of Israel are now finding themselves the targets of calls for cancellation.
Paddy Cosgrave, the CEO of Web Summit, had to step down after a tweet that called out Israeli war crimes but never mentioned Hamas, let alone its intentional killing of noncombatants. Cosgrave tried to retract and contextualize, but his efforts were not sufficient to save his job. He’s only the most prominent example — others whose tweets have cost them employment include journalists and actors.

Meanwhile, at law schools including NYU, Columbia and Harvard (where I teach), several students have had job offers rescinded by corporate law firms on the theory that they — or organizations they led — excused or endorsed violence committed by Hamas. In some cases, this happened even after the students made it clear that they condemned Hamas and their organizations retracted their earlier statements.

Under principles of academic freedom, a university may forcefully disagree with its students’ views but must not not punish students for expression of political opinions. Academic freedom isn’t exactly the same as First Amendment free speech. Its purpose is to foster an atmosphere of open intellectual discussion in pursuit of truth under conditions of civility, not to impose the strict neutrality that bars government from picking winners in the realm of ideas.

That means universities may exercise professional judgment about the quality of ideas when making decisions about hiring, tenure or grades. It would be impossible for the university to be entirely neutral about the content of ideas when fulfilling these functions. (Public universities pose their own complex problems. They are both state actors for First Amendment purposes and also academic institutions.)

Private employers don’t adhere to the principles of academic freedom nor are they bound by the First Amendment. Their calculus is different: They have to weigh the reputational costs of hiring people associated with controversial political positions against the reputational costs of being seen as having a political litmus test for employees.

Our polarized politics mean that companies must tread carefully when they make expressly political decisions. They owe it to their employees, their customers and their shareholders to exercise good judgment after real thought. Companies do better when they have clearly stated values and transparent processes in place for sound decision making.

As for individuals, we no longer have sharp dividing lines between our social media lives, our work lives, and our expression of political ideas. It follows that we had better realize that that the difference between contexts determines the consequences of our speech. The First Amendment remains a bedrock of democratic values, but it protects us from the state, not from each other.

Noah Feldman is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. A professor of law at Harvard University, he is author, most recently, of “The Broken Constitution: Lincoln, Slavery and the Refounding of America.”/Tribune News Service

What’s the biggest lie promulgated by the left?  President Biden’s age is an asset.  What’s the second biggest?  Foreign policy is his particular strength.

Someone needs to remind N.H. Senator Maggie Hassan that the reason this country is confronting “significant problems at home and around the world” is 100% due to the stunning lack of competence and forthrightness of the Biden administration.  Has anyone noticed that the bad actors around the world only began to stir when Trump left the White House?

Sean F. Flaherty

Boston

Renaming Hall

There is a movement to rename Faneuil Hall again. I cannot think of one rational reason to do that. Unlike the renaming of Dudley Square which had no national recognition, people countrywide say if you visit Boston you have to visit Faneuil Hall. At some point we have to let names of places stay as is and don’t cater to special interest groups’ demands.

Paul Quaglia

Billerica

Wars abroad

Peace through strength is not an empty cliché.  Under President Trump, the United States had become energy independent.  The U.S. was able to become an oil exporter,  selling oil to Europe and undermining Russia’s stranglehold on Europe’s oil dependency.  Now, Russian oil sales are funding the war in Ukraine.  In September 2020, President Trump brokered the historic Abraham Accords where countries of Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates recognized Israel’s sovereignty.

There was relative peace in the Middle East.  Iran’s mullahs were dealing with internal unrest.  Oil embargoes handcuffed Iran’s ability to fund Hamas and Hezbollah.  Along comes Biden who is eager to dump billions of dollars in Iran’s lap.  What could go wrong?  Then we have Biden’s total fiasco of the U.S. pull-out from Afghanistan.  Thirteen marines were killed and $80 billion worth of ammunition, guns, trucks, jeeps and rockets were left behind for the Taliban while our forces snuck out in the middle of the night from Bagram Air Base.  Israel and Hamas are at war.  Ukraine and Russia are at war.  These are Biden’s wars because America displays weakness on the world stage.

Donald Houghton

Quincy

Such plans are a one-stop-shop. They typically offer perks excluded from traditional Medicare, such as vision and dental coverage, with low or zero premiums and caps on out-of-pocket spending. Despite more limited networks of doctors and hospitals, most seniors who’ve signed up say they’re happy with the choice.

Yet Medicare Advantage has drawbacks — notably, its exorbitant cost. Government reports show the program routinely overcharges taxpayers relative to original Medicare — to the tune of $27 billion this year alone — at a time when the system’s solvency is at risk.

With more than half of enrollees now covered by Medicare Advantage — a share expected to grow briskly — the program could well displace traditional Medicare in the coming years. A better balance between the interests of beneficiaries and taxpayers will be critical for it to thrive as it should.

Congress established what’s now called Medicare Advantage three decades ago to offer seniors more choice and (in theory) to keep Medicare’s ballooning budget in check. The government would pay commercial insurers to deliver more efficient care, the thinking went.

But Medicare Advantage has never saved the government money. Congress’ internal advisory committee estimates overpayment to Medicare Advantage plans will reach hundreds of billions of dollars in the decade through 2033. Independent researchers have found that insurers make more than double per patient in the program compared with individual or employer-sponsored plans.

How did Medicare Advantage become, as one study put it, a “money machine”? Insurers submit bids to Medicare that cover the estimated cost of providing standard services to an average beneficiary. Medicare calculates a payment “benchmark” for a given county. If a plan bids below the benchmark, it can receive a “rebate” from the government — funds that are required to pay for extra perks and lower premiums. What’s left goes toward profits and administrative costs. Plans receive bigger payments for riskier enrollees with higher expected health spending.

Without careful oversight, such a system can be easily abused.

The best way forward would be to phase out the benchmark system, which — counterintuitively — is designed to overpay. In some areas, benchmarks are set higher than average Medicare costs. This inducement was originally intended to expand coverage. With the program now ubiquitous, it no longer makes sense.

Medicare should instead enable plans to compete directly with each other on premiums as they would in the commercial market. Such a change would allow both taxpayers and beneficiaries to share in savings, which could amount to as much as $230 billion over a decade.
Medicare Advantage is popular for good reason and should remain an alternative to traditional Medicare. With the right payment reforms, the program should work in the best interests of everyone involved.

Bloomberg Opinion/Tribune News Service

The op-ed “Menthol ban would boost $$ incentive for cartels” omits recognizing the unprecedented scientific evidence-based facts favoring the FDA’s pending menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars ban. A nationwide menthol ban would be the most aggressive and impactful development to diminish the leading cause of preventable death, smoking, in the world.

It is misleading not to mention that the FDA mission is to save millions of lives and the pending menthol ban is expected to have an offramp for smokers by also focusing on nicotine addiction. Reports have suggested that FDA authorized modified risk tobacco products may be exempt from the ban.

A plant biotech company named 22nd Century Group has FDA authorization for the first nearly nonaddictive cigarettes in history, called VLN (Very Low Nicotine) and the FDA requires “Helps You Smoke Less” to be on all their packs.

The immeasurable mortality and enormous public health costs of not banning menthol cigarettes and addressing nicotine addiction makes drug cartel profits miniscule in comparison. The FDA has put a lot of scientific research and resources into the menthol ban decision and evaluated input from a wide range of professionals and the public. Politics and preserving tobacco industry profits shouldn’t play a key role in the decision.

Devender Coleman

Boston

Biden on world stage

During these perilous times, with the world becoming increasingly destabilized, American civilians being killed and U.S. soldiers under attack in the Middle East, people are sharpening their scrutiny of President Biden, particularly given his overt weakness, timidity, and unsettling vacillations in response to ominous global developments. Many political observers can’t help but remember what Robert Gates, who served as defense secretary for the Obama administration, famously said about Biden some years ago: “I think he’s been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

And many Beltway observers are also uncomfortably remembering something that former president Barack Obama, in a moment of brutal candor, privately said of Biden: “Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to (expletive) things up.”

By all accounts, as evinced through Biden’s unsteady presidency, and particularly through his handling of the unnerving world events of today, it would appear that Gates and Obama were uncannily accurate in their assessment of Biden.

Michael J. DiStefano

Jamestown, RI

Unfortunately, the president continues to play games.

The Associated Press reported that President Joe Biden was hoping to persuade Republicans to support more aid for Ukraine by tying the issue to the U.S.-Mexico border. After nearly three years of tolerating a porous southern border, Biden now proposes spending $14 billion to beef up security there as part of a $106 billion package that includes more money for Ukraine to defend itself against Russian aggression.
Logrolling — the practice of exchanging political favors — has a long history in Congress, of course. But this is no time to be cavalier about border policy. Biden needs to set aside these border funds regardless of what happens to Ukraine funding.

More than 3.8 million people have illegally crossed our southern border since the president took office in January 2021, according to the New York Post, and nearly half of them “slipped into the country illegally and were never caught.” Some reports put the number as high as 5 million. Yet the White House has treated this issue as if it’s a fiction created by right-wing xenophobes. In fact, concern about the administration’s indifference to the influx of migrants on our border with Mexico is widespread.

In a recent Fox News poll, 71% of those surveyed disapproved of the president’s handling of border security, with even a majority of Democrats and Biden voters decrying the status quo. “The issue has become a political headache for the Biden administration,” Politico reports, “which has faced criticism from Democratic state and local officials over the federal government’s seeming inaction in the face of the crisis.”

Addressing this problem becomes even more imperative given the brazen terror attacks on Israel.

A memo obtained by the Daily Caller reveals that the Customs and Border Protection Intelligence Division is warning “that individuals inspired by, or reacting to, the current Israel-Hamas conflict may try to travel to or from the areas of hostility in the Middle East via circuitous transit across the Southwest border.” This is an open acknowledgment that, absent more aggressive efforts to control illegal entries, the country faces potential risk. Have any terrorists already slipped through thanks to Biden’s indifferent approach?

It’s past time the Biden administration acknowledged its failures at the border and got serious about imposing policies that discourage illegal crossings. Unfortunately, the president’s effort to link additional border security funding to Ukraine aid — in the wake of the gruesome terror attacks in Israel — indicates he continues to fail the American people on this important issue.

Las Vegas Review-Journal./Tribune News Service

It is a welcome development for the country and for Washington’s ability to govern. Unfortunately, the selection does not guarantee that the United States will be able to swiftly come to the aid of its close allies, including Israel, as well as fund its own government and sustain domestic strength.

After conservative firebrand Jim Jordan’s third failed attempt at becoming Speaker of the House of Representatives last week, the Republican conference dropped him as their nominee.

This led to a new open nominating process that started with nine candidates from across the Republican spectrum and ended with moderate-leaning Majority Whip Tom Emmer as the nominee.

However, within four hours, his bid was shot down by the MAGA wing of the party and he never made it to the House floor. Right-wing representatives were following the lead of former President Donald Trump who signaled he was against Emmer and even made calls to House members expressing his opposition.

The root of the MAGA hostility towards Emmer’s nomination was his vote to certify President Joe Biden’s 2020 electoral college victory. Some GOP members also singled out Emmer for supporting same-sex marriage, and in an appalling exchange a colleague even questioned his Christian faith.

After Emmer’s withdrawal on Tuesday, the Republican conference miraculously coalesced around the lesser known Mike Johnson – a deeply conservative member and mentee of Jordan who was backed by the far-right of the party – and he was elected speaker on Wednesday afternoon without losing a single Republican vote on the floor.

While it is undoubtedly positive that the American people finally have a Speaker of the House again, the Republican Party is playing with fire by choosing someone with little leadership experience and a rigid hard-right track record. Democrats are not innocent either, as their decision to join the motion to vacate on Kevin McCarthy led to an extreme conservative gaining the speaker’s gavel

Johnson is extremely conservative on social issues, as he voted against federal protections for same-sex marriage and has repeatedly supported and co-sponsored national abortion ban bills. In fact, he is the first former chair of the deeply conservative Republican Study Committee to become speaker.

Furthermore, Johnson was a prominent election denier in 2020 and the legal architect of the Electoral College objections that were denied by the Supreme Court.

It is clear that Trump and his MAGA acolytes got exactly what they wanted, as one of their own is now the most powerful Republican in Washington. If their victory could not be any more clear, Rep. Matt Gaetz emphasized it with glee on Steve Bannon’s podcast, “If you don’t think that moving from Kevin McCarthy to MAGA Mike Johnson shows the ascendance of this movement and where the power in the Republican Party truly lies, then you’re not paying attention.”

House Democrats are already seeking to paint Johnson as “Jim Jordan in a suit.” Make no mistake, Johnson’s extreme positions along with his lack of fundraising skill compared to his predecessor will hurt congressional Republicans’ electoral chances in 2024. While former Speaker Kevin McCarthy raised over $100 million for Republicans during the 2022 election cycle, Speaker Johnson has raised just $553,013 total this cycle.

This dynamic will certainly create challenges for Republican congressmen from moderate districts in California who benefitted from McCarthy’s robust political operation. Along with losing out on fundraising opportunities, Johnson’s extreme right-wing social positions will not play well in these swing districts.

There is also some doubt over whether Johnson will be on the side of public opinion on upcoming legislation to strengthen our allies and ensure we avoid a government shutdown that could have catastrophic economic consequences.

Johnson voted against the current continuing resolution, which has reached its halfway mark, and he has been one of the staunchest opponents to sending aid to Ukraine.

It is clear the American people want Congress to support our allies as they battle terrorism and authoritarianism, and Johnson and the GOP must show voters they can be trusted. A poll this week from The Economist/YouGov found 61% of registered voters think the U.S. should maintain or increase military aid to Ukraine and 83% of registered voters think the U.S. should maintain or increase military aid to Israel.

While President Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries line up behind a supplemental bill that will send military aid to Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan, as well as new funding to help secure the southern border, there is significant opposition among House Republicans to additional spending, especially for Ukraine.

The ultra conservative Johnson mirrors the right flank of his caucus on these issues, but to pass real solutions to the pressing challenges facing Congress he must find a middle ground that Democrats and Senate Republicans can accept. Otherwise, moderate Republicans will be forced to go around him and work closely with their Democratic counterparts.

The first big test for Speaker Johnson is in less than a month when he will either let the government close down or work on a bipartisan basis to keep America as a functioning democracy at a crucial moment for our allies. Positively, Johnson seems to be moving towards the middle in his new leadership role, as he has proposed a second continuing resolution that would last through January, albeit with little detail about the spending numbers.

In order to have a successful speakership and meet the needs of the United States at this critical inflection point, it would be wise for Johnson to moderate his views and seek productive compromise with centrist Republicans and Democrats. Speaker Johnson must put policy over politics to bolster our allies and protect our economy.

Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant.

That’s how ex-pols are often described at the State House after they leave elective office. But after checking out the latest Beacon Hill lobbying reports, that old saw needs to be updated.

Forgotten, but not gone – and filthy rich!

It is astonishing to see how much some of these ancient shiftless hacks are grabbing, especially when you consider how long it’s been since any of them ever won an election.

Let’s start with 79-year-old ex-Lt. Gov. Tommy O’Neill – “Thomas P. O’Neill da Turd” as the sergeant-at-arms used to describe him when he entered the House chambers for the annual State of the State address.

Da Turd is the son of ex-House speaker Tip O’Neill, and he was dragged into office twice on the bottom of the Democrat gubernatorial ticket. But on his own Tipleet won just a single election – as a state rep in Cambridge, in 1972.

No problem, though. For the first six months of the year, his firm, O’Neill and Associates, collected $1.89 million from 59 clients. And here I was wondering how he was paying for that swell new waterside mansion in Harwich Port, with the smart Mercedes sports coupe parked outside. Hi Tommy – see ya next summer, pal!

State House hacks usually make their millions the old-fashioned way – with the kiss in the mail. Like Billy Bulger, the Corrupt Midget. Now 89, the CM has been pocketing a pension that is now $273,759 a year for more than 20 years.

At the State House, one of Bulger’s stooges was Chester Greenough Atkins – “Billy Bulger’s butler,” as he was known. Fat and entitled (he was born in Switzerland) Chet served briefly in Congress until he retired due to ill health – the voters got sick of him.

A four-term incumbent, he lost the Democrat primary in 1992, with a miserable 35 percent of the vote. It may have been the worst Congressional primary drubbing ever until Liz Cheney last year in Wyoming.

But no problem – at age 75, Billy Bulger’s butler is now a “partner” in something called Tremont Strategies. According to the State House News Service, Atkins’ crew took in $2.04 million in the first six months of the year.

Another lobbyist in that outfit is one Jason Aluia. He used to be a coat holder for Sal DiMasi, the former House speaker, convicted felon and jailbird.

Given the fact that Sal can list his Bureau of Prisons number – 27371-038 – as a resume enhancer, you’d think he too would be making the big bucks in his post-prison career as a lobbyist. But Sal, at age 78, is not rolling in the dough, maybe because his former street soldiers are cutting in on the take.

Not just Aluia, but Aaron Michlewitz, who went from skipper of Sal’s staff to being current Speaker Ron Mariano’s elected consigliere as Ways and Means chairman. Poor Sal – his payroll Charlies are putting him to shame in the lobbying grift.

Speaking of the Boston boys, how about the East Boston crew? Bobby Travaglini, who’s a young whippersnapper in this mob at a mere 71 years old, made his bones in the 1970s as a precinct captain working for guys named Dee Dee Coviello and Sonny Buttiglieri.

Now Trav, who became Senate president, paid himself $445,000 in the first six months of the year. Trav, you’ve come a long way from Junior’s Trolley!

According to Secretary of State Bill Galvin’s records, Trav is tied for highest-paid lobbyist with another Ward 1 ward heeler – Carlo Basile, the ex-state rep who went to work for then-Gov. Charlie Parker as patronage boss. Now Carlo made just under half a million a year in the first six months of the year.

It’s amazing how well these Eastie guys are doing, especially considering the ruination of Ward 1. In the old days, Eastie pols were strictly small timers, like Pixie Palladino, who definitely wasn’t a pixie, or James Coffey, who was known as “I’ll Take a Buck.” The name said it all.

Carlo is in the same firm with ex-Rep. Mike Costello. Costello is a second-generation State House hack. His father was another Bulger stooge in the Senate – Nick Costello. Now the son has figured out the racket, and their firm raked in $2.72 million in the first six months of the year. Costello pocketed $335,000 in the first six months of the year.

Another erstwhile Eastie pol living large in his golden years is Dennis Kearney. He last won an election in 1982, and is now 74 years old. Kearney’s lobbying firm collected $1.42 million in the first six months of 2023.

Obviously, even a dunce can make big bucks in the lobbying racket. Consider ex-Rep. Brian Dempsey. He got his B.A. from UMass – Lowell – at age 32.

Like Sal DiMasi, he has what you would consider a stellar State House curriculum vitae. Not only has he been lugged for drunk driving, but Dempsey was also taken into protective custody by the local cops for getting into a brawl with his brother in his mom’s parlor – on Mother’s Day.

Dempsey now has the third highest-grossing lobbying firm in the hackerama. He personally made $300,000 in the first six months of the year.

Then there’s Phil Johnston – talk about forgotten but not gone. He was first elected to the legislature back in the days of the old 240-member House, which was abolished in 1978. Mike Dukakis gave him a hack job in 1984, and Bill Delahunt stole a US House seat from him in a primary recount – in 1996.

But living well is the best revenge, and now, at the ripe old age of 79, Phil Johnston just pocketed $269,600 from his lobbying firm. That is what his old boss Mike Dukakis used to call a “good job at a good wage.”

How ecstatic do you think all the above were last week when Ron Mariano announced he’d run for yet another term as Speaker next year?

He’s from Quincy, which so many of these glad-handers have ties as well. So the gravy train will keep on trucking for a while longer.

And why can’t Mr. Speaker just keep running and running and running? After all, he’s still a young man. Ron doesn’t turn 77 until Tuesday – Halloween.

No wonder he gets along so splendidly with all his fellow ancient hacks.

They’ve all spent a lifetime together – slurping happily at the public trough.

Trick or treat, taxpayers!

(Order Howie’s new book, “Paper Boy: Read All About It!” at howiecarrshow.com or amazon.com.)

If your town or city does not abide by the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 in its entirety, it is more than likely leaving the door open for dead folks to walk into the voting precincts. Or better yet, these folks could vote absentee – well, they are “absentee voters” in a sense – after all they are dead or no longer live where they once lived. But for the overly ambitious political operative, they are votes to be had.

Both parties potentially could take advantage of this situation. The political machines of each party learn this early on. I did. Because back in the early 1980s I got my very first volunteer job as a political “worker bee.” Years later, I realized I was helping to build the foundation for such practices.

It must be noted that, even at its worst, this practice would only affect close elections. Not too close, because the bad political operatives involved could not afford to have a recount as it may shine unwanted light on the corruption.

There are a variety of ways the bad folks can accomplish their goal. One method could be door-to-door canvassing. Keep in mind that the name and address on the voting roll may not match who actually resides at that address. That represents an opportunity. It clearly means that John Doe has moved or is dead. But it does not mean John Doe cannot still vote.

Without any form of voter ID system in place anybody can become John Doe. After all, he does not exist, as you have confirmed, per your door-to-door canvassing.

If there is no voter rolls list management, as required by the aforementioned law of 1993, John Doe’s name would still appear as a potential voter.

In Connecticut in the summer of 2020 during COVID, 100,000 ballots came back to the Secretary of State as undeliverable. This would represent 8% of the registered Democrat and Republican voters (but would not include independents). The Connecticut Secretary of State claimed that the national average was far worse, hitting a whopping 15%. This means that voters have moved or passed away since the last time the list was updated. In Connecticut the election authorities quickly ordered local towns and cities to purge these folks from their voter rolls.

That begs the question: How long were these folks wrongly on the voting rolls? For years, maybe decades? We only found out because of new election practices that emerged with the pandemic.

It is very simple to figure this out. Question: When was the last time you received a postcard or letter from the local person in your town responsible for voting list management? If the answer is not in a while or never, it is likely you have been targeted by “dead” or missing folks voting.

Bad actors, usually part of the local political machine, know who cannot be found and they “find” these folks and allow them to vote with other people “filling” in. They are the “weeds” within the “grassroots” effort.

There is a second chance to catch these fraudulent activities and prevent this from happening. And I hope you answer this question correctly: When was the last time you were asked to show any form of identification prior to voting? If your answer is never (my answer), rarely, or I cannot remember, then I would say your town is a prime target for dead-people voting.

I strongly believe that we have the best voting systems in the world. But we also need to follow the laws on the books and manage our voting lists and remove people who should not be on them anymore, purely because they do not exist at that address, town, state, or at all.

It is imperative that we have some form of verification of identity at the polls. The NAACP and other like-minded organizations that once supported the Voter Registration Act now call most forms of list management a violation of voting rights laws. That is a bogus charge. And they cry about photo ID requirements as disproportionately hurting Black people. That’s laughable.

Back in the day, the unofficial rule was for each party to use only folks from their own party. This meant that dead or missing Republicans were left to Republican leaders and dead or missing Democrats for Democrat leaders. This would prevent “two” John Does from showing up on election day at the polls. When a candidate is “set up” or loses the support of their party leaders, then the opposing party could use all the dead folks. That would usually result in a landslide or doom the candidate previously favored to win to narrowly lose their election.

It is simple. If your town has proper list management and proper voter identifications at the polls there can be no dead people voting, as they would remain in their graves.

However, if you only do one of the two, it is possible they can vote and if you do neither, it is highly likely that the dead and missing have been voting in your town for years. Ask your town officials when was the last time the voter rolls have been updated via mail canvassing.

In a democracy, the will of the people should prevail, not the will of the political machine.

Gary Franks served three terms as U.S. representative for Connecticut’s 5th District. He was the first Black Republican elected to the House in nearly 60 years and New England’s first Black member of the House. Host: podcast “We Speak Frankly.” Author: “With God, For God, and For Country.” @GaryFranks/Tribune News Service

It is the poisoned fruit of teaching a generation of college students to despise their own civilization.

Jesse Jackson famously led a chant at Stanford University in 1987, “Hey, hey, ho, ho, Western Civ has got to go.” He was talking about the college course, but he might as well have been talking about the thing itself.

Jackson and his allies had extraordinary success in extinguishing the teaching of Western Civ. Not only have we largely stopped transmitting the story of our own civilization, we have substituted an alternative narrative that the West is reducible to racism, imperialism and colonialism.

It is in this context that the current outburst of anti-Zionism has to be understood. Yes, it has been fed by anti-Israel agitation on campus over the decades and yes, students are susceptible to witless radicalism in the best of circumstances. Yet the loathing of Israel is particularly intense because it is viewed as an outpost of Western civilization and all its alleged ills.

The hatred of Israel is tainted by and, in some cases, driven by antisemitism. Another way to look at it, though, is that it’s not so much about hatred of the “the other,” as progressives put it, as hatred of ourselves and all our works.

It is, on one level, incorrect to consider Israel exclusively an artifact of the West. The Jews are indigenous to the region going back to Abraham, with their story caught up in the story of the land. A large proportion of the current population traces its origins from the Middle East and North Africa, rather than Europe.

But there is no doubt that Israel is a Western society — in its political system, in its respects for rights, in its innovative economy, in its mores.

From any rational perspective, this would be something to celebrate. Many legitimate criticisms can be made of Israel, and indeed are a feature of the Israeli domestic debate itself, but there’s no doubt that it is a flourishing society.

If Gaza were equally Westernized, it would be worrying about whether it’s overbuilding seaside real estate rather than having to get water and electricity from the neighboring country its governing authority — a savage terror group — is trying to destroy.

Yet this is the society that anti-Western opinion holds up and wants to sweep all before it. This point of view loves Gaza for its failure and hates Israel for its success; loves Gaza for its terror and hates Israel for its self-defense; loves Gaza for its vicious anti-Western sponsors and hates Israel for its Western allies, especially the United States.

Violence is part of the radical anti-Western vision. The anti-colonial bible, “The Wretched of the Earth,” written by Frantz Fanon in 1961, is widely taught on campus.

Fanon wrote that “decolonization is always a violent phenomenon.”

By this standard, Hamas is a good and worthy anti-colonial organization, and there’s no wonder it has found supporters and useful idiots among the West’s self-loathing radicals.

Rich Lowry is editor in chief of the National Review

Will the Biden administration make the same mistake?

It was August 2012 when Obama, running for a second term in the Oval Office, held a news conference and fielded a question about the ongoing civil war in Syria. The president said that he had so far avoided U.S. military intervention but that his calculations would change if Syria crossed a “red line” and used chemical weapons.

A year later, a chemical weapons attack believed to have been carried out by the regime of Bashar al-Assad killed 1,400 people near Damascus. Obama did little about his “red line” but eventually cut a deal with Vladimir Putin and Russia to have Syria turn over its chemical stockpiles to international inspectors. The agreement was a failure, the victim — as The Atlantic later put it — “of Syrian deception, Russian duplicity and American dithering.”

Fast forward to this month in the wake of the horrific Hamas terror attack on Israel. As the Jewish state increases its ground operation in Gaza, militant groups threaten to escalate the conflict and have even targeted American forces. There’s little doubt that Iran is helping to fund and organize such aggression.

In recent days, Iranian-backed groups in the region, The Wall Street Journal reported this week, “launched 10 drone and rocket attacks against bases that U.S. troops use in Iraq and three on a U.S. base in southeast Syria.”

In response, the United States has ramped up the rhetoric. “My warning to the Ayatollah,” President Joe Biden said, “was that if they continue to move against” U.S. troops in the Middle East, “we will respond. And he should be prepared.”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken sent a similar message.

“The United States does not seek conflict with Iran; we do not want this war to widen,” he said Tuesday. “But if Iran or its proxies attack U.S. personnel anywhere, make no mistake, we will defend our people, we will defend our security, swiftly and decisively.”

These warnings are entirely appropriate as an exercise in deterrence.

But this administration’s fiasco in Afghanistan and the Obama administration’s “red line” still haunt American diplomacy. It’s highly likely that the resolve of the Biden White House will be tested in coming weeks and months by Iranian-backed terrorists hoping to harm Americans in the region. Is Biden prepared to follow through? Or will he speak loudly and carry a small stick?

The administration faces serious challenges on the foreign policy front. Americans of all political persuasions should hope the president is up to it.

Las Vegas Review-Journal/Tribune News Service

The president’s campaign has made a calculated risk that Granite State voters will forget Biden’s snub of refusing to put his name on the primary ballot.

Chances are they won’t forget. New Hampshire has four electoral votes and in a close election losing them could be a major blow to Democrats’ hopes of holding on to the White House.

But Biden has chosen South Carolina over New Hampshire and Iowa by endorsing the Palmetto State primary first in line – rewarding the place that rescued his 2020 campaign.

South Carolina is now the leadoff voting state in the selection process under Democratic National Committee rules, but New Hampshire is ignoring that DNC list, vowing to hold its primary first under its own state law. Iowa Democrats are also working to preserve their early January caucus.

“While the president wishes to participate in the primary, he is obligated as a Democratic candidate for president to comply with the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2024 Democratic National Convention promulgated by the Democratic National Committee,” Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said in a letter advising New Hampshire officials he won’t be on the ballot.

Baloney. Biden is picking South Carolina over New Hampshire for strictly political reasons and for payback for embarrassing him four years ago.

Biden finished fifth in the New Hampshire primary and wants to punish the state that kicked his butt.

His campaign is likely instead to mount a write-in campaign and finish first that way – the same strategy President Lyndon Johnson used in 1968.

“The reality is that Joe Biden will win the NH FITN (first-in-the-nation) primary in January, win renomination in Chicago and will be re-elected in November. NH voters know and trust Joe Biden that’s why he is leading Trump in NH by double digits,” NH Democratic chair Ray Buckley said in a blustery statement.

The only problem is Johnson dropped out of the race after Democrat Eugene McCarthy finished a closer-than-expected second. So, if Biden doesn’t earn a resounding write-in victory, it could be viewed as a loss.

The move by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to abandon the Democratic race and run for president as an independent makes it easier for Biden to slide by. But the president could now face Democratic opposition from U.S. Rep. Dean Phillips, who decided Friday to launch a primary challenge. The moderate Minnesota Democrat has argued that Biden is too old to run again and filed papers on Friday to get on the ballot in New Hampshire.

Phillips’s surprise decision could complicate Biden’s plan for a write-in win in the Granite State.

“I think it’s a mistake that he’s not putting his name on the ballot,” New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan said.

Consider that a warning.

She is the state auditor who wants to take down the Massachusetts Legislature, and she is on her way to doing it.

DiZoglio, a former legislator herself, is seeking clear authority from the voters to audit — or, as some fear, oversee — the workings of the House and Senate the way the auditor does other state agencies.

Toward that end, she is halfway to gathering the 75,000 signatures of Massachusetts voters needed to get the issue on the 2024 ballot for voter ratification as she awaits a decision from Attorney General Andrea Campbell paving the way for her to sue the Legislature to comply.

Either way it is all but certain that the question will not only be on the ballot, but, given the public’s general negative attitude toward the Legislature, it will surely pass.

While most in Massachusetts speak well of their representative or senator, the same voters look much less kindly on the Legislature as a whole.

Both House Speaker Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka oppose the move on the grounds that the Legislature is a separate branch of government that makes its own rules and governs and audits itself.

Others on Beacon Hill, where DiZoglio has gotten little support, believe it is a vengeful political power grab by DiZoglio who had a controversial and rocky road with the Democrat leadership in both the House and Senate when she served in both branches before being elected auditor in 2022.

DiZoglio, of course, denies the charges, saying that she is fulfilling a campaign promise to bring accountability and transparency to the Legislature.

DiZoglio seems unperturbed by the little support she has gathered from her colleagues at the State House, from Gov. Maura Healey on down, all of whom are fellow Democrats, as is just about everyone else on Beacon Hill.

Massachusetts is a one-party Democrat state and, since the few Republicans at the State House don’t count, the Democrats end up fighting among themselves.

Merits of DiZoglio’s issue aside — and there are questions of tampering with the legislative process — she continues to gather momentum, attracting support outside the State House from Republicans, Democrats, conservatives and liberals.

Last week, the conservative Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance joined the left-wing Our Revolution in support of DiZoglio’s cause and offered volunteers to gather signatures.

“The more the merrier,” DiZoglio said, adding that she now has 530 volunteers out gathering signatures that are all due to be filed with the secretary of state Nov. 22.

If DiZoglio succeeds, she could shake up the Legislature the way it was rocked a generation ago when the move to reduce the size of the House from 240 to 160 members was approved.

Back then, after a long struggle in the 1970s, the Massachusetts League of Women Voters, then an important public interest lobby group, was successful through signature drives, media campaigns and lobbying, to win the battle to reduce the House by 80 members.

It was an idea that seemed good at the time. It was supposed to make the House more efficient and transparent, which is a joke. Democracy is designed to be messy.

What it did, however, was to make the Speaker of the House more powerful since the smaller House, with fewer dissidents, was easier to control. Many important issues, once hatched out in open House debate, are now decided behind closed doors and rubber-stamped by the House.

In that way the House is indeed more efficient, but the quality of the legislation approved and the way it is passed depends on the nature of the speaker and the leadership team he has around him, not the rank-and-file members.

Also, in a smaller House, members who were once approachable by average citizens became distant once they were stashed away in their new offices protected by staff and press secretaries. Minority representation also took a hit.

Speaker Mariano, a moderate Democrat with a steady hand amidst the growing progressive crowd at the State House, has by all accounts been a good, fair and common-sense leader. Whack job progressives do not rule the House as they do the Senate.

So, at age 77, it was generally greeted as good news when Mariano said he will run for re-election and remain as speaker, at least for a while. He just might be the last moderate Democrat to hold the job. After him comes le deluge.

But no matter his skill and experience, it will be tough going to stem DiZoglio’s voter drive to bring the Legislature to heel.

But be careful what you vote for. You just might get it.

Peter Lucas is a veteran Massachusetts political reporter and columnist.

Powerful Mexican cartels, sophisticated multibillion-dollar criminal enterprises, are already trafficking illicit tobacco to fund their violent operations. The current regulated market for menthol cigarettes is $30 billion. A nationwide prohibition on menthols will create a tremendous profit incentive for these cartels to become more aggressive in their activity.

As the General Director of the National Citizen Observatory of Security, Justice and Legality A.C. (ONC), and a National Security Council of Mexico member, I know what the cartels are capable of. These high-tech, organized crime networks continue to innovate and diversify beyond drugs and weapons. They evolve into new products and industries where they can capitalize on growing demand while also minimizing risk.

Over the past few years, the illicit tobacco market has allowed these criminal networks to generate massive revenue – rivaling narcotics – with a fraction of the risk. The sale of illegal cigarettes is already a multibillion-dollar market in the U.S. Criminal networks profit from the price and tax disparities between states. Increasing the transborder traffic of contraband cigarettes from Mexico into the U.S. should give policymakers pause.

The cartels know better than most that tobacco restrictions like bans or taxes won’t reduce consumer demand for an addictive product. So, when states like California ban menthol cigarettes and legitimate retailers are prohibited from selling products to meet consumer demand, the opportunistic cartels quickly become the suppliers of choice.

Mexico’s most powerful and violent drug cartel is Cártel de Jalisco Nueva Generación (CJNG). According to our estimates, CJNG’s assets are in excess of $20 billion, with a presence in at least 27 of the 32 Mexican states. The CJNG, which has been sanctioned by the United States for its role in drug trafficking, is a glaring example of a modern cartel diversifying and smuggling tobacco along the same routes that it traffics narcotics like fentanyl, weapons, and sadly, even humans.

Recent investigations have linked the CJNG to Tobacco International Holdings SA, a Switzerland-registered corporation. This linkage has enabled the cartel to monopolize the Mexican cigarette market and evade sanctions as it ships tobacco into the U.S.

The House Committee on Homeland Security chairman emphasized the threat of cartel tobacco trafficking in a recent letter to the secretary of Homeland Security.

My fear, and that of many colleagues in government and international security, is that a nationwide menthol cigarette in the U.S. will play right into the hands of the CJNG and other violent Mexican cartels. A ban would give the cartels virtual control of another lucrative commodity across America’s southern border. This will create an unprecedented windfall for the CJNG and their rival cartels. The resulting profits fund violent crime throughout Mexico, perpetuating a lawless culture.

With the next presidential election in the United States on the horizon, now is the time for an important discussion about smart policy. The president of the United States must understand that overzealous domestic policies have foreign implications, and bans on popular consumer products like menthol cigarettes can create adverse outcomes in both Mexico and the U.S.

I urge the Biden administration, members of the United States Congress, and candidates for president to work with Mexican authorities to understand what policies, such as a menthol cigarette ban, would impact both our countries. Instead of empowering Mexican cartels, we should be doing everything in our power to work collaboratively to stop the CJNG and other cartels from growing in power and influence.

Francisco Rivas is the General Director of the National Citizen Observatory of Security, Justice and Legality A.C. (ONC) and member of the National Security Council of Mexico/InsideSources

Massachusetts is one of the best-educated states in the country, the only one in which more than half the workforce holds a bachelor’s degree or better. Yet when Pioneer Institute commissioned and Emerson College Polling conducted a survey that asked state residents some of the questions immigrants must answer correctly to gain U.S. citizenship, the responses earned those voters a cumulative grade of 63, or a “D.”

State residents got a failing grade on two basic questions about the U.S. Senate. Only 52% knew the Senate has 100 members, while just 55% knew that a senator’s term is six years.

The questions most often answered correctly were one in which respondents were given a list of places and asked which is a U.S. territory, and one about the month in which federal elections are held. Eighty-five percent identified Puerto Rico as a territory and 76% knew federal elections are held in November. This means the best grades Massachusetts residents could muster are a “B” and a “C.”

There wasn’t a lot of difference in how well respondents did based on party affiliation, but registered voters scored higher than those who aren’t registered. Unaffiliated voters scored best, getting 69% correct. They were followed by Democrats and Republicans, each at 62%. Those who aren’t registered to vote earned a failing grade, getting the correct answer just 46% of the time.

It’s not surprising that those with more education did better, but perhaps the most troubling parts of the poll are the breakdowns based on respondents’ age and how many civics classes they have taken. Those over 65 did best in the poll, getting 75% of the questions right. They were followed by those ages 55-64 (68%) and ages 45-54 (65%). The three youngest age ranges did the poorest — ages 18-24 (58%), ages 35-44 (55%), and ages 25-34 (52%).

Performance was correlated with the number of civics classes taken. Respondents who took multiple civics classes in middle or high school got an average 69% of the questions right, while those who took one class averaged 65%, and those who didn’t take any averaged 58%.

The poor performance of younger people on the exam and the correlation between performance and the number of civics courses taken highlight the near-disappearance of civics from Massachusetts public school curricula in recent decades. As public education has increasingly come to be thought of as little more than workforce development, teaching civics has become less and less of a priority.

America’s Founding Fathers weren’t perfect, but they possessed wisdom that was far ahead of their times. They saw the primary role of public education at the state and local levels as preparing young people to be active participants in our democracy. At a time when our nation faces staggering challenges and much of the public lacks even the most rudimentary civic knowledge needed to choose between different approaches to confronting those challenges, we may be about to learn — the hard way — just how right the founders were.

Charles Chieppo is a senior fellow and Jamie Gass is the director the Center for School Reform at Pioneer Institute, a Boston-based think tank.

The number of migrants pouring across the southern border hit a record high, according to data released last week. Illegal immigrant crossings soared 21% over the previous month. On a yearly basis, the figure hit 2.48 million.

Democrats may feign shock and distress. Don’t be fooled. Dems see these newcomers as their guarantee of a permanent voting majority in local elections. Not years from now, after the newcomers become citizens. Right now.

New York Mayor Eric Adams’ rhetoric is typical. He warns that the overwhelming number of migrants arriving — currently 16,000 to 17,000 a month — “will destroy New York City,” but he’s also leading the legal effort to turn migrants into voters.

Adams and other New York Democrats pushed President Joe Biden to expedite work authorizations for them. They said it’s about making migrants self-sufficient. Maybe, but Dems have another powerful motive.

If you read the fine print of New York City’s “Our City, Our Vote” law, enacted in December 2021, it says that anyone with a work authorization who has been in the city for a mere 30 days can vote, even if they entered the country illegally.

The law is tied up in court.

A group of Republicans led by Staten Island Borough President Vito Fossella sued, arguing the state constitution grants the right to vote to “every citizen.” A Staten Island judge bought that argument and struck down the law, but Adams’ law department is appealing that ruling in a higher court, arguing that the state constitution does not specifically prohibit noncitizens from voting.

Adams has a shot at winning. Vermont’s top court ruled in favor of allowing noncitizens to vote in municipal elections, even though the Vermont constitution restricts voting in state elections to U.S. citizens.

California and Maryland also already permit municipalities to enfranchise noncitizens.

The Boston City Council is debating allowing newcomers to vote, including migrants who recently came across the border illegally and have temporary protected status.

In Washington, D.C., Democrats rammed through a local law in November 2022 allowing noncitizens, even foreign embassy employees, to vote, as long as they’ve resided in the city for 30 days.

In Connecticut, Democrats want to amend the state’s constitution to allow noncitizens to vote in state and local elections.

Voting is a privilege reserved for citizens. Once immigrants follow the law, become naturalized and swear loyalty to this nation and its Constitution, they should be entitled to vote. Not before.

Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York and chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths.

Wednesday night’s mass shooting at a bowling alley in Lewiston, Me.; the gunfire at a Dorchester parade in August that left eight injured, the shootings that shatter the peace of Boston’s streets night and day. These are, sadly, just to name a few.

Law enforcement is vital to the central nervous system of this city, and a crucial voice at the table.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t have one.

The Boston City Council votes on the Boston Police Department budget, makes declarations and proclamations and protestations about neighborhood policing and safety, but none of the councilors knows what it’s like to work those streets as a police officer.

Enter Jose Ruiz.

The City Council candidate for District 5 has been in the BPD for 29 years. He can speak from experience of what’s needed to make communities safe, because he’s seen what happens when they’re not. And not from the vantage point of a press conference, or day-after statement at City Hall, but as a first responder at the scene of a crisis.

We need this wisdom and lived experience now more than ever. Even sections of the city not known for gun violence have been disrupted by demonstrations and riots in recent years, from outside agitators to home-grown protests. The rancor over the terrorist attacks in Israel has spurred a heightened sense of vigilance, particularly in public spaces.

While the council had a heated discussion last week regarding the Israel-Hamas war, police set up a barricade at the entrance to City Hall.

And no plan for Mass and Cass is possible without a BPD component, requiring officers to work in a dangerous, often violent area most people try to avoid.

None of this is abstract. Policing is boots on the ground, real-life, real-world efforts to keep Boston safe and communities strong.

We need a police veteran like Ruiz to add depth and breadth to the council.

The progressive agenda holds that crime can be solved not so much by going after criminals, but by strengthening the foundations of neighborhoods. Ruiz has that covered.

Uplifting communities has been a key part of Ruiz’ contributions to Boston. He organized the largest city-wide youth baseball and softball league, including life skills presentations for players. He doesn’t talk about giving back – he does it.

The elections on Nov. 7 will come and go. After the dust has settled, there will still be criminals trafficking in drugs and illegal firearms, there will still be murders committed with ghost guns, predators stalking the vulnerable, and any number of sudden, unexpected events that necessitate all hands on deck for local law enforcement.

These could be talking points for the city council, issues of debate swayed by agendas. Or, a new voice on the council could bring insight and expertise and ideas that have real-world resonance.

This is critical if Boston is to grow and thrive.

The city needs Jose Ruiz as councilor for District 5.

Bud Light.

Other than that, it’s been up, up and away ever since Brandon was installed as president in January 2021.

Of course, in the tradition of state-run media, Biden’s demolition of American middle-class living standards is being hailed because… Democrats.

The New York Times’s Paul Krugman says the economy is “remarkably successful, even if nobody will believe it.”

Bloomberg Opinion: “Biden’s Economy Is Great Everywhere Except in the Polls.”

The Washington Post began its daily Democrat cheerleading by saying, “As the US economy continues to improve, President Joe Biden continues to not get credit for it.”

So who are you going to believe, the comrades of state-run media or your lying eyes… or wallet.

Occasionally I ask my radio audience what they’re seeing in their own lives.

The consensus? Prices are way, way up, portions are down, and everybody who’s not a criminal illegal alien living large on welfare is running out of money.

Here are some of my audience’s recent observations on their daily experiences in this “remarkably successful” economy:

From 413 area code: “Daycare was $70 a day for 12 hours and they fed the kids. Now it’s $90 a day for 10 hours, and I have to provide food. Only a 28% increase, but I didn’t get a 28% pay increase.”

From 603: “Mama Rosie’s frozen pasta used to be 2 bucks now 4 bucks at Market Basket. Almost $8 at Shaw’s!”

From 207: “The average transmission replacement 6-7 years ago was around $3000. The average price I’m seeing now is around $6-7000 for a transmission and people can’t afford new car payments.”

No kidding. In 2017, there were 36 new models priced for less than $25,000. Now automakers produce only 10 such economy cars.

That stat came from the Wall Street Journal, which also ran a quote from a house cleaner in Illinois:

“I almost had a heart attack the other day when I saw a box of cereal for $8.99.”

When the RINO swells at the Wall Street Journal notice that the peasants are revolting, as they used to say, then the Democrats have a problem.

Back to my unscientific survey:

Matt: “My son plays hockey and baseball. A hockey stick is $300, used to be a buck and a half. Mouthpieces are 2 for $20, used to be 5 bucks apiece. Skates are up to $600. Batting gloves used to be $20, now $45.99.”

Scotia: “I have a cat, Norton. He eats Fancy Feed. Two years ago, it was 62 cents a can, now it’s 90 cents. The other brand went from 70 cents to $1.39. And those are the puny little cans. Norton’s gonna have to get a job.”

Bob from Plymouth: “My wife and I used to go to the 99, would spend $300-400 a month there. Chicken parmesan was $9.99. The other night I picked up two orders and it cost $37 and change and the portions seemed a lot smaller.”

From 860: “Shake & Bake no longer provides plastic bags in the box to coat your meats in. Unbelievable.”

Steve in Vermont: “I heat with coal. A 40-pound bag last year cost $6, now it’s $12.99. So a ton went from $300 to $650 in one year – a 117 percent jump.”

From 978: “McDonald’s Sausage Burrito, extra hash browns, medium OJ & medium coffee. Used to be $10. Last week $18.”

From 407: “Every staple product I buy at Publix has gone up at least 20% since Jan. 2021. With exception of milk, fruit and vegetables, I seldom buy anything unless it’s on BOGO.”

Farmer Jon in 860: “I’ve got 2023 expenses & 1975 income. Let’s go Brandon!”

Joe, a truck-repair shop owner in rural Maine: “Tires are through the roof, batteries that were 100-150 are now ticking over 200. A brake job has gone from $300 to $400, it’s the cost of the parts, the metals like rotors. We say the parts are all made out of ‘Chinese-ium.’ Biden is just hammering us.”

From 774: “Auto insurance. Just got new policy from $102 to $218 a month. Same coverage.”

From 781: “On Jan. 18 2000 I put 17 gallons of hi-test into my vintage 2001 Volvo at $2.25 a gallon. $38.25. Today at $4.49 the same 17 gals. $76.33. The same cheap gas station I’ve used for years.”

Justin at Boyle’s Bodyworks in Arlington: “All my ancillary supplies are at least double.”

From 860: “A 50-lb. bag of dog food is now 33 lbs. and costs more than the 50-lb. bag did. That’s Bidenomics for you!”

Limerick Guy: “Less than 2 years ago I paid $14 for a 2-pack of Costco brand fiber powder & today I purchased the same 2-pack for $29. Thanks, Brandon.”

Tony: “I priced some tires for a small Toyota RAV4 — $550 31/2 years ago, $850 now and these aren’t race-car super-duper tires. Truck tires are double, from $200 to $400.”

Mindy in Bangor: “Apartment rent used to $500, now it’s $1,200.”

From 401: “My cheapest Medicare Part D drug plan went from $6.80 a month to $15.70 a month. Thank you Brandon for bringing down the price of what you call prescription ‘jugs.’”

Andrew: “My old grandmother used to wring out wet paper towels and put them to dry and then re-use. I thought she was insane. Now an 8-pack of towels costs $30 and guess what I’m doing? Wringing them out like my grandmother.”

But… but… don’t my listeners read the New York Times? If they did, they’d realize how great the economy is.

Randy Newman used to sing, “Mr. President, have pity on the working man.”

Too bad Joe Biden doesn’t know any workingmen, or women. Too bad none of the Democrats do anymore. But I just thought of something else that’s gone down in price since January 2021.

Fentanyl. Maybe it’s all part of the plan.

(Order Howie’s new book, “Paper Boy: Read All About It!” at howiecarrshow.com or amazon.com.)

American businesses pay the highest swipe fees in the industrialized world. While these fees remain hidden from consumers, their impact is far-reaching. Last year alone, U.S. merchants paid over $126 billion in credit card processing fees, a staggering increase of more than 20% from just a year earlier. Such an exponential rise has severe implications for businesses, especially small enterprises, struggling to recover from the economic aftermath of the pandemic.

Yet Visa and Mastercard just announced they will raise these fees again to further pad their bottom line. The credit card giants are preparing to heap additional financial burdens on merchants with fee hikes that could cost merchants an extra $502 million annually.

These costs aren’t absorbed solely by businesses; because when profit margins are tight, merchants have no choice but to pass these fees on to consumers, leading to higher prices across the board. Estimates show the average American family pays an additional $1,000 a year in higher priced goods as a result of these swipe fees.

The impending fee hikes set to be imposed by Visa and Mastercard in the coming months signal more than just a financial blow to merchants and consumers alike. It underscores a systemic issue where money spent in your local community is subtly siphoned away to Wall Street, only to reappear in the form of extravagant sponsorships and VIP privileges sponsored by the credit card giants.

Currently, Visa and Mastercard set the swipe fees merchants pay. While network fees directly benefit the card companies, the big banks issuing the cards get a portion of those fees, which incentivizes them to oppose any effort to lower fees for merchants. With a substantial rise in fees on the horizon, Congress must address this clear market collusion.

Thankfully, there is a solution. The Credit Card Competition Act (CCCA) aims to alleviate the burden put on businesses by allowing merchants to choose between multiple transaction routing options when processing a credit card. This step, though seemingly minor, can have a profound impact by fostering a more competitive payment processing market, leading to a reduction in swipe fees and the cost of goods overall.

Opponents on Wall Street often raise concerns that heightened competition might jeopardize the availability of credit card rewards points. However, new reporting shows that is not the case. If not clear by how much money the credit card giants spend on flashy advertising, Visa maintains incredibly high profit margins of over 50%, with Mastercard trailing closely with almost 45%.

A competitive payment landscape would compel credit card companies to enhance their offerings to stay relevant. Heightened competition need not dampen credit card rewards; it can serve as a catalyst for innovation.

Visa and Mastercard’s opulent displays might be captivating, but it’s essential to see beyond the glitter. Behind the scenes, small businesses in your community are being stifled by these ever-rising fees, and you are paying more every time you check out.

Hopefully, Congress will put Main Street before Wall Street.

Kelly McKone is Executive Vice President of Real Estate for 1784 Capital Holdings, a nationwide leader in self-storage development./InsideSources