Authored by Michael Clements via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger wants the Commonwealth’s General Assembly to shore up what she sees as shortcomings in gun control bills it sent to her after its regular session.

Spanberger has requested amendments to clarify a bill banning so-called “assault weapons” and add universal background checks to a bill that raises the age to purchase a handgun or assault weapon from 18 to 21.

She also requested an amendment to clarify that rendering a gun inoperable with a gun lock will meet the safe storage requirements in the new law, and to clarify that the purpose of gun sell-back programs is “to provide Virginians who choose to safely return a firearm in their possession with a safe process to do so.”

The General Assembly is scheduled to reconvene and consider Spanberger’s amendments on April 22.

HB217, a ban on certain types of semiautomatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, is one of the most closely watched bills in the gun legislation package, including by federal officials.

Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general in charge of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) Civil Rights Division, warned Spanberger to reconsider the gun control bills, especially the ban, in a letter dated April 10.

“The Civil Rights Division will commence litigation in the event the Commonwealth of Virginia enacts certain bills that unconstitutionally limit law-abiding Americans’ individual right to bear arms,” the letter reads.

According to a statement from Spanberger’s office, the amendment for HB217 is to “provide additional clarity to law enforcement as it relates to the firearms included under this legislation, as well as protect the use of certain semi-automatic shotguns used for hunting.”

Under the new law, it would be illegal to import, sell, manufacture, purchase, or transfer an assault firearm as defined in the law, beginning July 1.

It defines an assault weapon as any semiautomatic rifle, shotgun, or pistol with a collapsible, telescoping, or thumbhole stock, a bayonet lug or grenade launcher, a magazine that holds more than 15 rounds, a second handgrip, or a threaded barrel to install a flash suppressor, muzzle brake, or compensator, among other things.

Those legally purchased before July 1 are grandfathered. However, the owners can only transfer them to licensed gun dealers outside the state, or to family members through private sale, gifting, or as part of an inheritance.

According to the DOJ letter, the U.S. Supreme Court has already opined that the AR-15 is “both widely legal and bought by many ordinary consumers.”

HB1525 raises the minimum age to buy a handgun or assault weapon from 18 to 21. It also restores universal background checks in Virginia. The law includes exceptions for students in ROTC or law enforcement training.

The amendments direct the Virginia State Police to resume background checks for private sales and to align the checks with HB217.

Additionally, the amendments include an emergency clause to implement the law upon action by the General Assembly.

HB702 would allow local law enforcement to develop policies and procedures to institute firearm buy-back or give-back programs by Jan. 1, 2028, and each year thereafter. Spanberger’s amendment is to ensure gun owners have a safe way to dispose of their firearms if they want to.

Spanberger signed bills banning unserialized guns and components, often called ghost guns, setting tighter regulations on firearms businesses, and two laws concerning possession of firearms by people under court orders, on April 10.

More Than 20 Bills Passed

These bills are among more than 20 gun control bills passed by the Virginia General Assembly during its regular session.

They include prohibitions on carrying guns on the Capitol grounds or within 100 feet of polling places or buildings used by election boards, and setting requirements for storing firearms in a home where children are present.

HB969 directs the secretary of public safety to study establishing a Virginia Gun Violence Prevention Center. Several states have set up similar offices modeled on the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention established under the Biden administration.

That office was closed on President Donald Trump’s second day in office.

In her statement, Spanberger said she supports the Second Amendment. She wrote that the new laws are about keeping Virginians safe.

“I support the Second Amendment. But gun violence is the leading cause of death for children and teenagers in America, and that should motivate all of us to ask ourselves what we can do to mitigate this harm,” Spanberger wrote.

Democrats passed similar gun control packages in the past two years, but then-Republican Gov. Glen Youngkin vetoed those bills.

In November 2025, Democrats took control of the General Assembly and the governor’s office. California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Washington state have similar bans.

Australia is facing a historic energy crisis with much of its gulf-sourced energy facing not one but two blockades. But at least some parts of the country are doing something about it, even if it is too little, too late. 

Western Australia will establish its own strategic reserves of diesel fuel to ease “acute shortages,” the state’s government said.

As Bloomberg reports, the government signed a deal with Cambridge Gulf to buy and store 4 million liters of diesel, which is expected to arrive in the coming weeks, according to a statement. The inventory may be expanded to 12 million liters, which should be enough to last the local infrastructure at least a few days. 

The move comes as the war in Iran and resulting blockades of the Strait of Hormuz hampered global oil flows, with panic buying in Australia leading to fuel shortages. Australia has a far bigger national fuel reserve, which included more than 2.8 billion liters of diesel as of April 7, but much of that is located on the nation’s east coast — thousands of miles away from Western Australia.

Read More: Are Australia’s Low Fuel Reserves Cause for Concern?: Explainer

Western Australia consumes a high amount of diesel due to its large mining and agricultural industries. Gas stations around the state have reported shortages, though just 18 of the 771 stations did so in the week to April 10, down from 61 in the prior period.

Western Australia is the country’s biggest producer of wheat and is home to vast mining operations including iron ore and gold, with Sanderson estimating the state accounts for 25% of the nation’s diesel consumption. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is due to visit more Southeast Asian nations this week in an effort to shore up fuel supplies as the Iran war shows no signs of abating.

“This would be solely for West Australians and be directed at the discretion of the state government to areas that need it most,” Energy Minister Amber-Jade Sanderson said at a press conference on Sunday, adding that more details would be provided in the coming days and weeks. The reserve would hold “millions of liters” and use “capacity in the existing distribution network,” she said.

“We have made real progress in the last month to address supply issues across regional areas, but we need to be prepared for the months ahead,” Sanderson said in a follow up statement Monday. “This strategic stockpile will give WA a source of fuel under its direct control – providing much needed flexibility as we continue to navigate this global issue.”

Establishing a strategic reserve is a “sensible move,” said Aaron Morey, chief executive officer of the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia, adding that the CME was looking forward to continuing work with the government “on the design and implementation” of the mechanism.

The Western Australian Farmers Federation said that they proposed separate stockpiles at a roundtable with the government on March 10, according to a statement, adding that it would improve supply security for growers.

The Israel-Lebanon peace talks which have kicked off at the State Dept. in Washington D.C. on Tuesday are unprecedented and historic, and yet they remain largely symbolic and will unlikely lead to much in terms of ending the conflict with Hezbollah. That’s of course because Hezbollah is not actually represented, only Lebanese government officials – who hold no power or sway over what is the single most well-armed paramilitary group in the country.

Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem on Monday demanded that Lebanon cancel the US-hosted meeting with Israel, reaffirming the Iran-aligned group’s rejection of direct negotiations with its sworn enemy.

“We reject negotiations with the usurping Israeli entity… We call for a historic and heroic stance by canceling this negotiating meeting,” Qassem stated. He blasted the talks as “futile”.

Hezbollah has sent thousands of rockets into Israel, both in support of Hamas during the two-year Gaza war, and more recently as the US war on Iran kicked off.

Israel has in turn obliterated parts of Beirut, southern Lebanon, and the Bekaa Valley – launching a brutal airstrike campaign, as if to punish the whole country. Earlier in the Gaza war Hezbollah leadership was decimated.

As for the Lebanese government, it first wants to secure a ceasefire in the Israel-Hezbollah war via these formal talks with Lebanon itself. The US and Israel in turn are hoping to pressure all of Lebanese society into disarming and dismantling Hezbollah.

For now, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed to keep up the fight against Hezbollah, saying Saturday that “we want the dismantling of Hezbollah’s weapons, and we want a real peace agreement that will last for generations.’

The Lebanon crisis holds the potential to impact the outcome of delicate on and off again peace talks between Tehran and Washington.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is currently overseeing the talks. Upon welcoming the rival ambassadors Tuesday he declared, “This is a historic opportunity. We understand we’re working against decades of history and the complexities that have led us to this unique moment and the opportunity here.”

“The hope today is that we can outline a framework upon which a current and lasting peace can be developed,” he added. Here’s how he framed the situation:

“The Lebanese people are victims of Hezbollah. The Lebanese people are victims of Iranian aggression.” Rubio stated. “This is a process, not an event.”

🇺🇸🇱🇧 Rubio just did something genuinely historic. Israel and Lebanon face to face in Washington for the first time since 1983, and he’s the one who made it happen.

His framing was sharp: “The Lebanese people are victims of Hezbollah. The Lebanese people are victims of Iranian… https://t.co/locPZ5hVdR pic.twitter.com/DslBsOQmJS

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) April 14, 2026

From Washington and Tel Aviv’s eyes, this lasting peace doesn’t have Hezbollah in the picture. The US has sought the group’s final demise for decades, and the lengthy Syrian proxy war also had this as a key objective, along with the overthrow of Assad, and eventual regime change targeting Tehran – to dismantle the so-called Shia axis.

Authored by Monica O’Shea via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Australia’s flag carrier Qantas will cut domestic flights and redeploy capacity from the United States towards Europe as fuel prices double.

Qantas revealed fuel costs remained turbulent amid the Iran War in an update on its 2026 financial outlook, which noted that jet fuel prices have more than doubled and remain highly volatile.”

“Given the continued volatility in fuel prices and the global economic conditions, the group has reduced domestic capacity in 4Q26 by around 5 percentage points,” Qantas said.

Customers will be notified of which routes will be affected.

Meanwhile, in response to strong demand for European flights, Qantas will also add more options to Paris and Rome.

Qantas said it had fixed price contracts in place for about 90 percent of its crude oil but the airline was still exposed to surging jet fuel prices, which have jumped from about US$20 per barrel in February to as high as US$120.

As a result, the group now expects its fuel bill to cost between $3.1 billion or $3.3 billion.

“We are closely monitoring the situation given the ongoing uncertainty in global fuel supply chains,” Qantas added.

The move comes as other major carriers Air New Zealand, Air India, and Delta Airlines cut back on capacity amid surging jet fuel costs.

Qantas is Australia’s biggest airline founded in 1920 and operates two brands, Qantas and low cost airline Jetstar.

Listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX), the airline flies across Australia, North America, Asia, Europe, Africa and to and from South America.

Overall, Qantas said it remains in a “strong financial position” and is progressing its 2027 financial year funding plans, even as it tightens capital spending.

Current FY26 capital expenditure is now expected to come in at or below $4.1 billion, at the lower end of its previous guidance range. Capital expenditure refers to the dollars spent by the company on buying and upgrading long-term assets including planes and buildings.

The company confirmed a $300 million interim dividend will be paid to shareholders on April 15, but its planned $150 million share buyback has not begun due to ongoing volatility.

Net debt is expected to sit at or above the middle of its target range by June 2026 and Qantas will delay its FY27 update.

Meanwhile, Qantas’ largest competition Virgin also faces disruption from the Middle East crisis with its codeshare flights with Qatar Airways suspended.

Virgin delivered a $279 million net profit after tax in its latest financial results (pdf) ahead of expectations despite inflation pressures.

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) resigned from Congress on Tuesday, effective today, capping a stunning collapse of his political career just one day after he suspended his bid for California governor. The move came hours after a new accuser, Lonna Drewes, held a press conference in Beverly Hills alleging that Swalwell drugged, raped, and choked her unconscious in a West Hollywood hotel room in July 2018.

Drewes, a former model and fashion technology entrepreneur, told reporters she met Swalwell three times that year while he offered political connections for her business. On the third encounter, she claims she had one glass of wine she believes was spiked, became incapacitated, and was assaulted at the Montrose Hotel. She said she thought she was going to die. Drewes did not pursue a rape kit at the time but says she told friends, kept journal entries, and preserved texts and photos. Her team filed a formal complaint with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department the same day.

Lonna Drewes on Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA): “I had contact with Eric Swalwell on three separate occasions…On the third occasion I believe he drugged my drink…he raped me and he choked me…I did not consent to any sexual activity…I have never doubted what happened. I stand… pic.twitter.com/1mJPrZPQrx

— CSPAN (@cspan) April 14, 2026

The allegation is the latest – and most detailed – in a string of at least five public accusations of sexual misconduct against Swalwell. He has denied all of them.

What makes Drewes’ claim particularly damaging is fresh documentation tying Swalwell to the scene. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department confirmed the alleged assault occurred in the 900 block of Hammond Street – the exact location of the Montrose Hotel. Campaign finance expert Rob Pyers flagged, and Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin amplified, FEC records showing “Swalwell for Congress” spent $361 ($353 + $8 travel) at that hotel on July 18, 2018 – the precise date referenced in the sheriff’s statement.

NEW: The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department says the alleged rape of Lonna Drewes by Eric Swalwell took place in July 2018 in the 900 block of Hammond Street. This comes back to the Montrose Hotel. Campaign finance expert @rpyers has flagged a travel expense from Swalwell’s… pic.twitter.com/jEH19r9Ihp

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) April 15, 2026

Swalwell’s office cited the mounting accusations and an ongoing House Ethics Committee investigation as the reason for his exit. He had already faced a separate criminal probe by the Manhattan DA’s office over a prior assault claim.

Rumors of a Wider Capitol Hill Reckoning

Swalwell’s resignation has sparked online speculation about additional lawmakers potentially facing scrutiny. Much of the chatter has centered on a list of names that originated in a post by former Rep. George Santos (R-NY) on Monday. In it, Santos claimed that while in Congress he had heard “rumors and or allegations” of lewd or alleged sexual misconduct involving several members and staff or reporters. He listed:

• Eric Swalwell (D-CA)
• Tony Gonzalez (R-TX)
• Max Miller (R-OH)
• Dan Meuser (R-PA)
• Matt Rosendale (former Rep., R-MT)
• Ruben Gallego (D-AZ)
• Nancy Mace (R-SC)
• Anthony DeEsposito (former Rep., R-NY)
• Mark Green (former Rep., R-TN)
• Lori Chavez (former Rep., R-OR)
• Ritchie Torres (D-NY)
• Brian Steil (R-WI)
• Cory Booker (D-NJ)

Reality check on the list: At least two names have already acted. Swalwell is out. Rep. Tony Gonzalez (R-TX) also resigned Tuesday after admitting to an affair with a staffer who later died by suicide; TMZ had been covering that story extensively. Several others on the list (Rosendale, DeEsposito, Green, Chavez, Menendez) are already former members of Congress. 

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday that he spoke with Vice President JD Vance after the US-Iran talks in Pakistan and described the call as part of a daily report the Trump administration provides him.

“I spoke yesterday with Vice President J.D. Vance. He called me from his plane on his way back from Islamabad. He reported to me in detail, as this administration does every day, about the development of the negotiations,” Netanyahu said at a cabinet meeting, according to Axios reporter Barak Ravid.

The comments from Netanyahu highlight the close coordination between the US and Israel on Iran. Ravid reported in early March that US envoy Steve Witkoff and President Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who has known Netanyahu since he was a child, were speaking to Netanyahu and other Israeli officials nearly every day. Witkoff and Kushner led the negotiations with Iran in the lead-up to the war and both attended the Pakistan talks.

A March 4 report from Ravid for Axios reads: :A US official said special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner talk almost every day to Netanyahu, to the director of Mossad David Barnea, and to other Israeli officials — and that regardless of ups and downs in the past, the coordination over the last month was very close.”

Netanyahu said in his comments on Monday that he and Vance discussed an “explosion” in the US-Iran talks, which he blamed on Iran. The Israeli leader claimed that Tehran had violated its ceasefire agreement with the US by not fully opening the Strait of Hormuz, but Iran didn’t take the step to open the waterway in response to Israel’s escalation of its bombing campaign in Lebanon.

The original ceasefire announcement issued by Pakistan’s prime minister, which the US had approved, said that the deal includes a truce in Lebanon, but the US backtracked on that commitment after Israel kept bombing the country.

“The explosion came from the American side, which could not tolerate Iran’s blatant violation of the agreement to enter the negotiations. The agreement was that they would cease fire, and the Iranians would immediately open the gates. They did not do that. The Americans could not accept that,” Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu also said that Vance told him the US priority was related to Iran’s nuclear program. “He also made it clear to me that the main issue on the agenda for President Trump and the United States is the removal of all enriched material, and ensuring that there is no more enrichment in the coming years, and that could be in decades, no enrichment within Iran. That is their focus, and of course it is also important to us,” he said.

Joe Kent, the former head of the National Counterterrorism Center, who resigned in opposition to the war with Iran, has described the US demand for Iran to commit to never enriching uranium as a “poison pill” in the negotiations that serves Israel’s interest.

“Upcoming negotiations will fail if we don’t restrain the Israelis & stop giving them access to our decision-making. The Israelis push for zero uranium enrichment because they know it’s a poison pill for Iran & will result in the war continuing,” Kent said on X in response to Netanyahu’s comments. “Iran has committed to not developing or obtaining a nuclear weapon since 2003. A deal can be reached about uranium enrichment levels & monitoring – ending the war & opening the [Strait of Hormuz]. This can only happen if we treat the Israelis like the junior partner & put our interests 1st.”

Tesla’s China president was quoted by local media on Tuesday as saying the Shanghai Gigafactory could eventually play a major role in mass-producing humanoid robots. The comment comes after Tesla said earlier this year that it would pivot away from producing Model S and X vehicles at its California factory and convert the vehicle production lines to Optimus robot production.

The Shanghai Morning Post quoted Allan Wang Hao, a senior executive at Tesla China, who said the Shanghai Gigafactory could provide a “golden key” to mass-producing the Optimus robot.

“Like other Tesla factories, Giga Shanghai can shoulder important responsibilities in manufacturing all new products, including robots, to make our contributions to the company,” Hao said. “We are highly confident in welcoming the arrival of a new era of robots.”

Giga Shanghai is Tesla’s largest factory. In 2025, it produced 851,000 EVs, more than half of Tesla’s global output, and in the first quarter of 2026, the factory accounted for about 60% of worldwide deliveries.

SCMP noted, “It was the first time a Tesla executive publicly mentioned the potential use of the Shanghai factory for building humanoid robots.”

Earlier this year, Elon Musk told investors on an earnings call that the company would stop making new Model S and Model X vehicles in the second quarter.

“It’s part of our overall shift to an autonomous future,” Musk said, adding that the Model S and X production lines in Fremont, California, will be converted to making Optimus.

Musk recently stated on X, “Custom orders of the Tesla Model S & X have come to an end. All that’s left are some in inventory.”

The latest Polymarket odds for when Tesla will release the humanoid robot for consumers stand at just 6% by June 30 and 16% by the end of the year.

UBS analyst Phyllis Wang recently added color to the global landscape of humanoid robotics, and the big takeaway was that production is set to ramp up.

Read the report here for more color on the humanoid robot shipment roadmap.  

Authored by Javier Simon via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Target-date funds (TDFs) can be effective retirement savings vehicles for many investors.

TDFs are professionally managed portfolios often built with various mutual funds. They are designed to automatically adjust their asset allocation of stocks, bonds, cash and sometimes alternative investments to become more conservative as you reach the target date.

Over time, these funds reduce exposure to generally riskier assets like stocks and shift toward typically safer investments like bonds in order to mitigate risk and reduce volatility. It could allow the fund to focus more on stability and capital preservation as retirement nears.

To many retirees, this makes sense. By the time you reach retirement, you may prioritize income potential and reduced risk. By design, TDFs aim to provide this to investors.

But also within its inherent design, there may lie some flaws that could raise serious challenges in retirement. So let’s take a closer look.

May Become Too Aggressive or Too Conservative

By the time you reach the target date, your TDF may still be heavily exposed to stocks. At a glance, a 2030 TDF from a major provider is composed of about 62 percent stocks. This asset allocation may be too aggressive for some retirees. Their portfolio would likely take a major hit if a severe market downturn occurs during the early retirement.

This is known as sequence or returns risk. It could force retirees to sell investments at a loss. And that would not only lock in those losses, but it prevents those investments from growing when the market recovers.

But the opposite can happen too. A retiree with multiple sources of income, who prioritizes growth potential, could end up with an extremely conservative TDF upon retirement.

This is why it’s important to carefully analyze a TDF’s glide path. This is the planned change in asset allocation over time.

Moreover, it’s also important to understand whether your TDF is a “to” or “through” fund. “To” funds become most conservative at the target date. “Through funds” may continue to get more conservative beyond the target date.

So it’s key to make sure that the TDF’s glide path still aligns with your risk tolerance, investment goals and financial situation as you get closer to retirement.

Lack Asset-Allocation Flexibility

A TDF automatically rebalances its asset allocation over time. That’s very convenient for the set-it-and-forget investor and younger ones who may find it difficult to start saving for retirement in the first place.

After all, TDFs are often the qualified default investment alternative (QDIA) in many corporate 401(k) plans. This means they’d be automatically enrolled in a TDF that aligns with their potential retirement year if they don’t choose their own investment options.

Those just entering the workforce may find it suitable to stick with a TDF rather than taking the time to carefully choose and analyze different investment options to build a personalized portfolio.

And that may work in the beginning. But over time, your financial situation could get more complex.

You may need to tailor your asset allocation to align with factors like change in risk tolerance, other sources of income, and tax efficiency.

With a TDF, this is virtually impossible since the fund managers run the entire portfolio on behalf of potentially millions of investors with varying needs.

Lack of Withdraw Efficiency

A TDF generally limits you to proportional withdrawals from the different assets it holds.

So keeping your savings in a TDF may not fit well into dynamic strategies like the bucket approach. This involves strategically breaking down your retirement assets into three or more time-based buckets. The first one would hold generally safer and liquid assets like cash and cash equivalents. While the other buckets are filled with growth-oriented investments ranging from bonds to stocks and exchange-traded funds (ETFs). The idea here is to begin drawing from the first bucket during the first few years of retirement in order to give the other buckets more time to grow.

May Not Make Sense Once You Retire

TDFs were built for simplicity. And by the time you retire, your financial situation may be far more complex than when you started saving.

Your risk tolerance could be drastically different from what you were expecting. You may have other sources of income like multiple investment accounts, pensions, and Social Security benefits. So your risk tolerance may leave more appetite for growth.

In such situations, you may want to consider alternatives.

Moving Out of Your TDF

You can take the funds from a TDF and move it into a more personalized portfolio adhering to your risk tolerance and investment goals. You could consider a mix of low-cost ETFs, bond funds, Treasury securities, and alternative investments.

If your TDF is held in a 401(k), however, you may be limited to available investment options and restricted by plan rules. So it’s important to check in with your human resources department before you proceed.

The Bottom Line

A TDF could be the ultimate retirement fund for the set-it-and-forget investor, especially younger ones. But as you move closer to retirement, your financial situation and financial goals could change dramatically. This is why it may be suitable to eventually move out of a TDF and into a customizable portfolio that could align with your risk tolerance, investment goals and other variables in retirement. You can also work with a qualified financial adviser to come up with an individualized and comprehensive financial plan that may better suit your needs.

The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors. They are meant for general informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as a recommendation or solicitation. The Epoch Times and ZeroHedge do not provide investment, tax, legal, financial planning, estate planning, or any other personal finance advice. The Epoch Times holds no liability for the accuracy or timeliness of the information provided.

Authored by Edward Pinto via RealClearMarkets,

Federal housing policy is afflicted by several shortcomings—it is expensive, outdated, and inflexible. The states, free from these restrictions, have begun experimenting with tailored approaches. Congress should take note.

In 1932 Justice Brandeis observed that “one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.” By its nature, the states as laboratories do not suffer from the shortcomings that afflict Congress’s efforts. 

Federal policy is unsuccessful because it is top-down, one-size fits all. Once Congress passes legislation, it tends not revisit it for decades. And, it is incredibly expensive. A recent subsidized development in a suburb of Los Angeles cost $159 million—nearly $800,000 per unit—to develop a 200-unit residential complex, with $117 million in direct subsidies and $31 million in subsidized financing.  The agency responsible called it a typical cost per unit for Los Angeles County. 

The states are working on a simpler solution: allow owners and builders to build housing that is more affordable. Research has shown that policies allowing smaller lots increase both supply and improve affordability. They reduce land costs, result in smaller, but still family-sized homes, and allow townhomes, which cost less to build than similarly sized detached homes.   

The good news is that dozens of states are considering legislation that does just that. In recent years, California, Florida, Maine, Massachusetts, Montana, Oregon, Rhode Island Texas, Vermont, and Washington have already implemented experiments in giving markets the flexibility to build lower cost, starter homes. And the process of getting it right is ongoing. Since its initial passage in 2023, the Florida legislature has revisited its Live Local Act three times to address shortcomings or expand applicability. 

This stream of experimentation turned into a torrent in 2026, with twenty-five legislatures considering at least 41 bills. Idaho and Washington have already seen two bills enacted into law, while Florida, Indiana, and Maryland tried, but failed on three more. While each of these efforts tailors solutions to each state’s needs, they share three common themes: lot size flexibilities in new residential subdivisions, home dwelling type and lot split flexibilities on existing lots, residential overlays in commercial zones. Flexibilities that follow the KISS principle (keep it short and simple) are best positioned to succeed, thereby promoting a virtuous cycle of continuous improvement.

Congress should embrace this state-led trend by providing financial incentives to states that pay for actual results. Congress could pay states incentives based on the number of additional small lot homes built in new residential subdivisions, or additional homes using dwelling type and lot split flexibilities on existing lots, or extra homes built because of new residential overlays in commercial zones.

Today, the federal government spends about $100 billion per year on the Department of Housing and Urban Development and various housing subsidies. Less than ten percent of this total—about $9 billion per year—would result in 240,000 additional homes for a one-time payment per added home of less than $40,000. Consider that President Trump recently announced his 2027 HUD budget, which calls for a $10.7 billion reduction.

Congress should seize the opportunity to replace ineffective policies with performance-based incentive payments to the states.

Edward J. Pinto is a Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and Co-Director of its Housing Center. 

Authored by Susan Crabtree via RealClearPolitics,

SAN DIEGO—Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell’s gubernatorial campaign implosion on Friday couldn’t have been better timing for California Republicans.

The state’s GOP was already set to convene in San Diego for their spring convention over the weekend, and the series of Democratic leader defections from Swalwell, as additional sexual allegations surfaced on social media, left candidates and activists gleeful and gloating. 

Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host and the frontrunner in the crowded contest to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom in November, on Saturday addressed hundreds of attendees, beginning his address by using Swalwell as a punchline.

“After 16 years of failure and corruption, the California Dems are collapsing in chaos, and sleaze, and scandal,” Hilton, whom President Trump endorsed earlier in the week, told the crowd Saturday afternoon. “It’s been a couple of hours – I think we’re due for another Eric Swalwell intern eruption.”

Hilton, after his remarks, told RealClearPolitics he believed the Swalwell news could buoy his campaign even further.

“We’ve really seen the California Democratic Party revealed as a totally morally bankrupt institution that only cares about its own power,” he said in an interview. “That’s why I think they’re going to lose.”

Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco, who is running neck-and-neck or slightly behind Hilton, trained his fire on Swalwell exclusively, urging him to drop out from both the governor’s race and public life immediately.

“As a person that investigates predators and puts them in jail, he has absolutely no business being in public service and in a position of authority,” Bianco told Amy Reichert, a citizen-journalist and California GOP delegate. “Do the right thing for everybody in this state and this country and resign from your position and drop out of this race.”

Delegates and other GOP attendees at the convention spent the weekend swapping Swalwell sex scandal allegations and trading speculation about whom top Democrats and the state’s powerful unions would back next.

Even as they needled the Democratic Party over its disarray in the wake of Swalwell’s dramatic downfall, the California GOP remained split on its two Republican contenders in the campaign to lead the state.

Both Hilton and Bianco engaged in furious last-minute campaigning for delegate support at the GOP convention, which took place at the Sheraton San Diego Resort against the backdrop of the San Diego skyline as yachts and sailboats cruised in and out of the marina just yards away.

Hilton and Bianco signs blanketed the hallways as the two candidates pressed the flesh with attendees for hours each day and into the night at fundraisers. Yet on Sunday, in a vote by California GOP delegates and their proxies, neither candidate managed to reach the 60% threshold to win the party’s endorsement.

Bianco walked away with the most votes, 496, with Hilton close behind with 442, while 75 individuals chose not to endorse.

Some party delegates considered the party’s failure to endorse the most positive outcome possible because boosting neither candidate ahead of the other could end up providing the best chance for a Democratic shutout. State election laws allow the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, to run against one another in the general election.

“I’m going to vote for a Republican regardless, and I like both [GOP] candidates, so the best chance for us to get the one-two shot is that nobody endorses – not Trump, not the party,” Scott Davison, California GOP delegate and education advocate, told RCP.

After the vote, Hilton supporters said the party’s division over the two candidates didn’t matter, though they touted Trump’s endorsement as a big net positive.

“This will have no impact on the top of the ticket as every other race does have an endorsement,” Mike Netter, a delegate who is running for state Senate, told RCP. “The most important endorsement to the voting public is that Trump endorsed Hilton.”

In years past, most California Republicans running statewide have avoided courting Trump’s backing, fearing it could backfire in cobalt blue California. Hilton says that was a mistake because California Democrats inevitably try to tar any Republican they’re running against as a MAGA candidate, and Trump’s endorsement will help engage conservative voters and drive up GOP turnout.

“They have nothing new to offer,” Hilton said of California Democrats. “All they have is Trump, Trump, MAGA, MAGA. So, the real impact of the Trump endorsement is not on Democrats or independents because they will have heard these arguments anyway. It’s actually on Republican voters, because in a mid-term election, it’s all about turnout, and the Trump endorsement helps very strongly with turnout.”

Even before the bombshell Swalwell news, Hilton and Bianco, who had consistently polled a few points ahead of Swalwell, were tied at 14%, according to a poll released Tuesday by Evitarus.

Swalwell had trailed the Republicans at roughly 12%, just 1 point ahead of billionaire Tom Steyer, who garnered 11%, and former Rep. Katie Porter with 7%. Candidates Xavier Becerra, Matt Mahan, and Antonio Villaraigosa each held 4% of likely voters, while Betty Yee and Tony Thurmond followed, each attracting just 1%. 

California Democratic Party officials for the last two months have been so concerned about a shutout that they’ve urged candidates polling in the single digits to drop out of the race so others could consolidate greater support. Paul Mitchell, a prominent Democratic political data expert, in March identified a 17% to 20% probability of a “nightmare scenario” for Democrats, where Hilton and Bianco advance to the general election.

And that was before the Swalwell sex scandal exploded into public view Friday when a former staffer for the seven-term congressman told the San Francisco Chronicle he sexually assaulted her twice while she was intoxicated.

At first Swalwell pledged to fight what he deemed as inaccurate allegations, even after three other women Friday night came forward to accuse him of sexual misconduct in a CNN interview. By Sunday afternoon, Swalwell announced he was suspending his campaign even as he vowed to continue to fight “serious, false allegations.”

“I am suspending my campaign for Governor,” he posted on X. “To my family, staff, friends, and supporters, I am deeply sorry for mistakes in judgment I’ve made in my past. I will fight the serious, false allegations that have been made — but that’s my fight, not a campaign’s.”

Swalwell capitulated after a domino of defections. Powerful Democrats, including former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, as well as Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, a personal friend of Swalwell’s who had run his short-lived 2019 campaign for president, all told him to drop out of the campaign. 

The Manhattan district attorney on Saturday opened an investigation into allegations against Swalwell, and a spokesperson for the office encouraged anyone with knowledge of the allegations to contact its Special Victims Division.

Now Democrats are in the awkward position of trying to avoid a lockout by regrouping and throwing their support behind the most viable candidate in a field who were all polling behind Swalwell before the cascade of allegations of sexual misconduct.

It won’t be an easy choice. Last fall, Porter’s campaign imploded after a 2021 video surfaced showing her yelling at and cursing at a staffer, “Get out of my f—— shot!” during a virtual interview. Porter acknowledged the incident, admitted her behavior was wrong, and apologized to the staffer, publicly as well.

At 68, Steyer, a billionaire hedge fund founder who invested in private prisons, doesn’t look poor nor fit Democrats’ national messaging against extreme wealth and its push for wealth taxes. While Steyer’s record as an environmental activist is a strength in California, his prior campaign against cash bail conflicts with voters’ recent rejection of soft-on-crime policies. And Steyer’s more than $100 million infusion of his own money into television ads, so far, has failed to propel him into the top-candidate tier.

Xavier Becerra, who served as California attorney general and Health and Human Services Secretary under Biden, may be the safest Democratic choice, though, as a Cabinet secretary, Becerra received lackluster reviews from national Democrats for poor management of pandemic-related agencies and a low-profile approach.

To back Becerra this late in the primary election, Democratic leaders and the unions would have to throw their support behind him so strongly that it could turn off Democratic voters, as well as independents, who will likely play a greater role in determining the outcome after such an unpredictable and chaotic series of events.

California Republicans say the election is wide open as of now, but are bracing for a desperate Democratic maneuver, such as tapping Kamala Harris to fill the Democratic leadership vacuum in California.

“When Biden imploded [in 2024], they released Kamala, and now that Swalwell has imploded, maybe they’re looking at Kamala for California governor,” Reichert suggested.

“She seems to be everybody’s favorite dark horse candidate,” laughed Scott Davison.