LA City Council Socialists Launch Bid to Give Noncitizens Full Voting Rights in Local Elections

On April 30, 2026, two Los Angeles City Council members, Hugo Soto-Martínez and Ysabel Jurado, introduced a proposal to allow noncitizens to vote in city elections, including races for mayor and city council positions. This proposal is part of a larger effort to empower long-term residents who are noncitizens.

• The proposal aims to include noncitizens, such as green card holders and DACA recipients, in local voting, arguing they pay taxes and contribute to the community.

• If the full council supports the measure, it will be placed on the ballot for November 3, 2026. Voter approval would be required before amending city election laws.

• Supporters, including Angelica Salas from the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), emphasize that many noncitizens are directly affected by local policies and deserve a voice.

• Critics argue this undermines citizenship and the idea that voting should be exclusive to citizens. Ira Mehlman from FAIR labeled it an assault on the concept of American citizenship.

• Concerns have arisen that allowing noncitizen voting could lead to risks, such as creating a list of noncitizen voters that may expose undocumented individuals to immigration enforcement.

• Previous attempts to extend voting rights to noncitizens in California have met with mixed results; Santa Ana residents rejected a similar proposal in 2024, while San Francisco's measure was struck down by a judge. However, Oakland voters approved a comparable measure in 2022, which has yet to be implemented.

The proposal by Soto-Martínez and Jurado is now set to head to the council's Rules Committee for consideration. Its success will depend on city council support and the outcome of the ballot vote. The ongoing debate reflects broader national conversations about immigration, citizenship, and voting rights, testing whether the public believes that elections should be decided by citizens alone. 

https://californiaglobe.com/fl/la-city-council-socialists-launch-bid-to-give-noncitizens-full-voting-rights-in-local-elections/

The Democrats’ race-based regime is collapsing

Daniel McCarthy discusses the implications of the recent Supreme Court decision in Louisiana v. Callais et al., which ruled against the redistricting of electoral districts along racial lines. This ruling is seen as a significant shift in American politics that may affect the success of the Democratic Party.

1. Supreme Court Ruling: The Court's decision to stop the practice of racial gerrymandering is framed as an essential correction rather than an attack on the Voting Rights Act. The ruling indicates that electoral boundaries should not be drawn primarily to ensure representation by race.

2. Impact on the Democratic Party: The decision may enhance Republican prospects in upcoming elections, particularly the midterms. The reliance on racially designed districts has been a critical part of the Democrats' strategy, ensuring they retain a certain number of Black representatives based on majority-Black districts.

3. Nature of Racial Gerrymandering: The practice of creating majority-Black districts is highlighted as a problematic method of achieving representation, leading to a "spoils system" where political gains are tied to race rather than broader geographic or demographic considerations.

4. Shift in Political Landscape: The Supreme Court's ruling signals a broader shift away from the racial policies that have supported the Democratic Party, particularly in the South. This could require Democrats to seek support from a larger, more diverse voter base, challenging their long-held practices.

5. Future Outlook: While the Republican Party may gain a short-term advantage, factors such as political dynamics, economic conditions, and population trends in various states may influence long-term outcomes. The Democratic Party may respond by pushing for changes that could offer them advantages, including court-packing and statehood for Washington, D. C., and Puerto Rico.

6. Historical Context: McCarthy notes that the current approach to racial representation was initially a response to segregation but has become a form of discrimination itself over time, illustrating the irony of using segregation to end segregation.

The Supreme Court's decision represents a critical juncture for American politics, particularly affecting the Democratic Party's foundational strategies. As traditional methods of securing electoral advantages are under scrutiny, a new political landscape may emerge, compelling parties to adapt to changing demographics and voter expectations. The decision underscores the complexity of balancing race, representation, and geography in U. S. politics as both major parties navigate a shifting context. 

https://spectator.com/article/democrats-race-based-regime-is-collapsing-supreme-court/?edition=us

The U.S. Produces More Oil Than Anyone. So Why Are Gas Prices Still Surging?

 Many Americans are confused about why gas prices are rising sharply, especially when the U. S. is the largest oil producer globally. This situation raises important questions about the broader economic implications, including inflation and consumer behavior.

1. Current Gas Prices: Gasoline prices have risen to approximately $4.26 per gallon, the highest in nearly four years, significantly influenced by geopolitical tensions, particularly in the Middle East.

2. Oil Production vs. Gasoline Availability: The U. S. leads in oil production but does not have sufficient refining capacity to convert crude oil into gasoline efficiently. This discrepancy results in higher prices despite increased oil output.

3. Refining Capacity Issues: Many U. S. refineries face challenges due to past shutdowns and regulatory hurdles, leading to a tight refining market. This situation creates a bottleneck that contributes to rising gas prices.

4. Consumer Impact: Higher gasoline prices act like a tax on consumers, reducing discretionary spending and affecting retail, travel, and overall economic behavior, particularly among lower-income households.

5. Inflation and Federal Reserve: Sustained high gas prices complicate the Federal Reserve's ability to manage inflation through interest rate adjustments, leading to tighter monetary policy.

6. Energy Market Dynamics: Investors often overlook the differences in how producers and refiners react in rising price environments. Currently, refiners may benefit more from the market conditions than crude oil producers.

7. Watch the Signals: To understand future trends, it's crucial to monitor refining utilization rates, crack spreads, inventory levels, and consumer behavior changes.

The current rise in gas prices is not merely a result of geopolitical events but reveals underlying issues in the U. S. refining system, which struggles to convert oil into fuel efficiently. This scenario highlights where pricing power is developing in the market. Until refining constraints are addressed, elevated gas prices are likely to persist and become the new norm.

https://globalmarketnews.com/the-u-s-produces-more-oil-than-anyone-so-why-are-gas-prices-still-surging/

SC Integrity Watch, Dark Money, and an Attorney General Bid: What’s Known and What’s Alleged

 

By Staff Writer

A South Carolina attorney general candidate has accused a network of trial lawyers, political operatives and anonymous social media accounts of coordinating dark money campaigns and influence operations aimed at preserving the state’s existing legal and political power structures. The campaign’s detailed allegations link a local nonprofit called SC Integrity Watch, independent expenditure activity in recent state races, and federal inquiries into conduct during last year’s tort reform debate.

The candidate says SC Integrity Watch which the campaign describes as primarily funded by trial lawyers launched a coordinated digital and paid media effort after the candidate pledged to investigate alleged corruption connected to last year’s tort reform fight. The campaign alleges that the same anonymous Twitter accounts that targeted legislative leaders during the tort reform debate have since targeted the candidate’s campaign, repeating identical talking points and amplifying one another to manufacture the appearance of broad opposition. These claims are detailed in campaign statements and public posts from the candidate.

The campaign alleges ties between political operative Chris Slick and independent expenditures in the 2024 state Senate campaign of Sen. Matt Leber, including that Slick left the country after an FBI investigation into tort‑reform–related allegations became public. The campaign also alleges that notable trial lawyer Peter Protopapas made a $25,000 personal payment to Leber and that Protopapas is a major funder of anti‑candidate advertising. The campaign says Protopapas serves on the Judicial Merit Selection Commission and benefits financially from the asbestos docket. Those allegations are included in the candidate’s statements and campaign materials.

What reporting and public records show.

SC Integrity Watch is a political advocacy organization that has engaged in public campaigns around judicial and legislative issues in South Carolina. Local reporting has documented its activity in state political debates and noted funding and messaging around judicial selection and tort related policy fights.

Media reporting shows the FBI has probed conduct related to South Carolina’s tort reform debate; reporting has referenced questions raised on the Senate floor by Sen. Tom Fernandez and subsequent federal scrutiny. These reports indicate that what was raised during legislative debate later attracted federal attention, though specifics of any investigation and any targets have not been publicly disclosed in full.

Independent expenditure spending and digital ad activity in recent state races are publicly tracked through campaign finance filings and ad‑transparency tools. Reporting on the 2024 state Senate contests noted significant outside spending and coordinated messaging in several races, although the degree of direct coordination between donors, operatives and social media networks is often difficult to prove from publicly available records alone.

Public campaign finance filings show contributions and certain expenditures by named individuals and entities; however, establishing that a specific donor financed particular anonymous social media activity requires additional evidence beyond contribution records. Reporting to date has connected contributions from lawyers and related groups to outside spending in state races but has not published definitive proof publicly tying those donors to every asserted online operation.

Responses and denials.

Representatives of SC Integrity Watch, Mr. Protopapas, and Mr. Slick did not provide documents in the public record directly confirming the campaign’s specific characterizations in time for publication; where available, spokespeople have sometimes disputed assertions about coordination or the sources of funding. News outlets that have sought comment from the named individuals and groups report either denials, limited responses, or no public reply.

Sen. Matt Leber has publicly stated positions opposing the tort reform measures referenced and has addressed reporting about campaign contributions; reporting includes his public responses and, in some cases, statements from his campaign.

Direct, publicly available proof that the same anonymous Twitter accounts were orchestrated by a single group acting on behalf of specific donors has not been established in public records cited by major news outlets. Attribution of anonymous digital accounts requires platform cooperation or forensic analysis that has not been fully disclosed in reporting.

Details of the FBI inquiry remain limited in public reporting; federal investigations are often sealed or undisclosed until authorities announce charges or close inquiries. Reporting so far indicates federal interest tied to the tort reform episode but does not list formal indictments or prosecutions linked to the public allegations.

The allegations raise questions about transparency in political spending, the influence of sector specific legal markets such as asbestos litigation on policy and elections, and the use of anonymous social media networks and outside spending to shape local legislative outcomes. Campaign finance experts and journalists note that dark money influence and digital amplification tactics have been points of contention in state politics nationwide; South Carolina’s debates reflect those broader concerns.

The candidate has pledged that, if elected attorney general, they will open investigations into the conduct surrounding the tort reform debate and any related influence operations, saying such inquiries will be pursued methodically and without regard to who is involved. The pledge and surrounding campaign rhetoric frame the matter as a central theme of the candidate’s platform.

Documentary and public record steps for readers.

Campaign finance filings, independent expenditure disclosures, and state ethics filings are public records and can be consulted for amounts and timing of spending. Federal investigation details, if and when unsealed, typically appear in court filings or formal announcements from the Department of Justice. Ad‑transparency libraries and social media platform transparency reports can sometimes reveal buyers of political ads and promoted content.

This article summarizes public reporting, campaign statements, and available public records through local news coverage and campaign materials. Several of the campaign’s strongest allegations direct orchestration of anonymous accounts, explicit quid pro quo arrangements, and the full identity of dark money funders behind specific online operations remain matters of contested claim or limited public disclosure; they are described here as the campaign has presented them and where reporting has corroborated elements, and otherwise noted as unverified.

The Death of the College for All Myth: Why the Tool belt Generation is Rising

By Staff Writer

For decades, the American establishment has force fed a single narrative to every high school graduate. Take on five or six figures of debt, spend four years in a lecture hall, and emerge with a degree that supposedly guarantees entry into the middle class.

We now know the cost of that compliance. We’ve produced a generation of over credentialed, under skilled young people, while the essential infrastructure of the country the physical reality of our power grids, our homes, and our manufacturing is crumbling for lack of people who actually know how to build and fix things.

85% Jobs Are About To Change. What Happens Next? | Jason Altmire #481 | The Way I Heard It

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hALH0ruAeWo

The numbers don't lie, even if the university marketing departments do. We are witnessing a historic misalignment.

Record numbers of college graduates are functionally unemployed or working in roles that never required a degree, servicing massive student loans that effectively act as a tax on their future independence.

Simultaneously, employers in construction, healthcare, and advanced manufacturing are desperate for workers. The jobs are there, the competence is not.

As AI begins to automate white collar tasks from entry level analysis to basic coding the value of a generic four year degree is plummeting.

The question isn't whether your job is safe. It’s whether you possess the tangible, real world skills that an algorithm cannot replicate. As Jason Altmire, former Congressman and current advocate for career education, points out, we have spent years confusing career education with credentials. We traded practical competence for a piece of paper, and now the bill is coming due.

There is a quiet, necessary rebellion happening. It’s a shift toward what is being called opportunity pluralism the recognition that the college for all mandate was a cultural and political error, not an economic necessity.

The rise of the Toolbelt Generation marks a return to traditional values that actually sustain a civilization.

We are finally acknowledging that a master electrician or a skilled CNC machinist provides more immediate value to society than a mid-level bureaucrat with a liberal arts degree.

The future belongs to trade schools, apprenticeships, and career focused colleges that prioritize skill acquisition over four year indoctrination.

When the power grid fails or the plumbing gives out, nobody asks for your GPA. The necessity of skilled labor is the great equalizer that strips away the pretenses of identity politics and academic elitism.

The economy is currently undergoing a massive, painful correction. The era of the safe cubicle job is ending, and the era of the high skill technician is beginning.

If you’ve been relying on the old institutional path, it’s time to wake up. The race is already underway. You can either cling to a sinking credential model, or you can start building the kind of competence that AI can’t replace.

The path to success isn't one size fits all. It’s found in the shop, the field, and the lab. If you’re looking to understand why the current system is failing and how the next generation is reclaiming their agency, check out Trade Up: Why the Future Belongs to Skilled Trades and How Career Education is Transforming the Workforce.

It’s time to stop chasing credentials and start building a life that actually works.

We Are SkillsUSA

Representing more than 444,000 career and technical education students and teachers, SkillsUSA chapters thrive in middle schools, high schools and college/postsecondary institutions nationwide. Our mission is accomplished through the SkillsUSA Framework of Personal Skills, Workplace Skills and Technical Skills Grounded in Academics, which is integrated into classroom curriculum.

Through the Framework, SkillsUSA students hone their hands-on skills against current industry standards in more than 100 occupational areas, from 3D Animation to Welding and nearly everything in between. At the same time, they develop the transformative career-readiness skills — teamwork, communication, professionalism, leadership and more — that fuel career and life success.

A vital solution to the ongoing skills gap, where more highly skilled jobs are available than skilled professionals ready to fill them, SkillsUSA has served over 15 million diverse, difference-making members since 1965.

https://www.skillsusa.org/

 

Peer Review Is Broken—Here’s How to Fix It

 The academic peer-review system, once essential for validating research, is increasingly seen as flawed. This summary explores the issues with the current system and suggests a new approach modeled after the communal practices of earlier scholarly communities.

1. Historical Context:

• Scholars in the Middle Ages shared their research informally until the rise of scientific journals.

• As more scholars emerged and the need to publish grew, journal editors began relying on unpaid peers to evaluate submissions, creating the peer-review system.

2. Problems in the Current System:

• The initial peer-review framework worked well but has broken down due to excessive submission volumes and increased pressure on scholars to publish.

• The system became overloaded, leading to rushed evaluations and concerns over publication quality.

• John Ioannidis identified a "replication crisis," where many research findings cannot be reproduced, questioning their validity.

3. Critique of Peer Review:

• The peer-review system, intended to ensure quality, has instead devolved into a mechanism for enforcing dominant ideologies within academic disciplines.

• Academic gatekeepers decide which ideas are acceptable, often sidelining dissenting opinions, especially in politically sensitive fields like climate research and gender studies.

• Scholars face professional risks for challenging the established norms, which compromises the integrity of the scientific process.

4. An Example of Bias:

• In fields like climate science and transgender research, those expressing dissenting views struggle to publish, illustrating how peer review can hinder scientific discourse rather than promote it.

5. Proposed Solution:

• A return to a “community of scholars” model is recommended. This would involve creating online platforms where scholars could share works-in-progress and engage with peers openly.

• Features of the new system would include:

• Publicly accessible essays at any research stage, allowing for constructive feedback and collaboration.

• The ability to publish both positive and negative results, enhancing overall knowledge.

• Transparent authorship with timestamped submissions to protect intellectual property.

6. Community Engagement:

• The proposed forums would operate with a light moderation approach to maintain scholarly standards, while encouraging openness and self-policing among contributors.

• Academics would need to adapt their evaluation criteria for tenure and recognition based on participation in these forums.

The existing peer-review system is increasingly obstructive to the pursuit of truth in academia, urging a shift towards a more collaborative and transparent model. Embracing this new approach could revitalize scholarly communication and promote a healthier academic environment. Universities and academic societies must adopt this change to ensure that research advancement is prioritized over ideological conformity. 

https://brownstone.org/articles/peer-review-is-broken-heres-how-to-fix-it/

RINO JOHN THUNE STABS AMERICA IN THE BACK YET AGAIN: Refuses CBDC Ban in ANY Legislation, Declares “NO SAVE AMERICA”

 Senate Majority Leader John Thune's actions regarding legislation on Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and highlights concerns from lawmakers about surveillance and control over citizens' finances.

• Thune's Position: Senate Majority Leader John Thune has stated that he will block any efforts to permanently ban Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) in legislation sent from the House.

• Statements from Lawmakers: Rep. Anna Paulina Luna publicly warned that Thune's refusal to support a CBDC ban signifies a lack of commitment to protecting American citizens. Another Congressman, Tim Burchett, confirmed Luna's claims, stating he witnessed Thune's statements.

• Concerns about CBDCs: Lawmakers argue that a CBDC could allow the government to monitor and control every financial transaction, potentially leading to a totalitarian digital state similar to what is seen in China. There are fears that such systems could empower governmental agencies to restrict citizens' freedoms, such as freezing accounts for certain behaviors.

• Related Legislation: The content also references Thune's previous actions, particularly his refusal to support the SAVE America Act, which aimed to require proof of citizenship and identification for voting. Thune dismissed grassroots efforts to promote this legislation as "propaganda. "

Overall, the article highlights the critical stance of some Congressional members against John Thune's actions, viewing them as detrimental to American freedoms. Lawmakers express significant alarm over the implications of allowing CBDCs without sufficient protections for citizen privacy and financial autonomy. 

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/04/rino-john-thune-stabs-america-back-yet-again/