Sen. Josh Hawley Calls on Biden to Use Defense Production Act to Bail Out Aluminum Manufacturer

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) recently reacted to the announced closure of a prominent aluminum manufacturer in Missouri by making an odd request of President Joe Biden. In a letter, he asked that the president use the Defense Production Act (DPA) of 1950 to compel the company to remain open so it can continue producing its wares.

However, Hawley’s letter raises questions about the extent of the president’s power, and whether the state should be empowered to make such a move. In the letter, Hawley addressed the announced closure of Magnitude 7 Metals, explaining that this would be “a devastating blow to working families and good-paying union jobs in my state.”

The lawmaker also pointed out that the company accounts for “nearly 30 percent of the nation’s primary aluminum production” and that its loss would “put more than 500 workers out of a job.”

Under the legislation, the president can mandate that businesses prioritize government contracts and orders over private interests, as long as the materials and services are required for national defense. It can include directing companies to produce products or services that are required by the military to conduct its operations. The president can also allocate or control general distribution of certain materials and offer incentives to expand production.

The Biden administration, day by day, not only seems to have less regard for the rule of law but seems now to have just abandoned any pretense of such regard. In an ongoing crackdown on natural gas and oil-fired home heating, last Friday, the administration invoked the 1950 Defense Production Act to push for funding of green energy technologies. Specifically, the administration has called for electric heat pumps for home heating.

It's important to note that these "investments," which translates to "pouring millions of your taxpayer dollars down green energy sinkholes," almost never work out as planned.

Read more updates here

Turns Out That Laws Restricting Alcohol Sales on Sundays Are Completely Useless

According to a recent study conducted by the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of Connecticut, Storrs, and various other universities, repealing blue laws does not have the pernicious impact that proponents might predict. The study focused on Connecticut, which repealed Sunday blue laws in 2012, and analyzed the trends.

The move was initially opposed by liquor stores, which argued that allowing grocery stores and other retailers to sell alcohol on Sundays would cut into their profits. They also pointed out that staying open an extra day would add more to their overhead costs. Others indicated that it would promote increased alcohol consumption. Yet, the researchers found that none of this materialized over a decade after the state repealed the restrictions.

This study examines the impact of repealing Sunday blue laws on alcohol sales and retail competition, focusing on Connecticut’s 2012 policy change allowing Sunday beer sales in grocery stores. Using nationwide data from 2004 to 2021, we find a short-term increase in beer sales post-policy change, but no significant long-term economic effects on grocery and liquor stores.

Our analysis also shows similar treatment effects for chain and standalone liquor retailers, suggesting limited lasting implications for the liquor retail industry’s performance and conduct after Sunday sale restrictions were lifted.

The study found that “repealing these laws significantly increased beer sales at grocery and liquor stores directly after the policy shift, but these effects disappeared afterward.” As it turns out, blue laws do not protect small business.

Read more updates here