Authored by Lawrence Wilson and Sylvia Xu via The Epoch Times,

Congress responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by passing the American Rescue Plan Act in early 2021. This $1.9 trillion spending bill was intended to provide relief and spark an economic recovery.

Among other provisions, the law expanded the availability of government-subsidized health care through the Obamacare Marketplace to help low- to middle-income people maintain health coverage until the economy normalized.

The measure brought millions of middle-class Americans into Obamacare, but had the unintended consequence of making many of them dependent on government aid.

The law also introduced temporary, enhanced subsidies, which raised Obamacare premiums, some observers say.

Though the enhanced subsidies expired on Dec. 31, 2025, Congress continues to debate their possible reinstatement.

Expanded Enrollment

Obamacare was created for people caught in the gap between Medicaid coverage and employer-sponsored health insurance.

The program provides income-based premium tax credits, which are subsidies paid directly to insurance companies, for people whose incomes are on the poverty line and up to four times above the poverty line (between 100 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level).

People earning less than—or in some states, up to 138 percent of—the poverty level are eligible for Medicaid. Obamacare offers help for people earning up to four times that amount, up to $62,600 per year or $106,600 for a family of three, based on the current federal poverty level.

During the pandemic, Congress created subsidies that had no income cap. These enhanced subsidies also lowered enrollees’ affordability cap—the maximum amount a customer would pay out of pocket for a monthly premium.

Under the enhanced subsidies, introduced in 2021, no enrollee would spend more than 8.5 percent of their monthly income on premiums. Some would pay no more than 6 percent, others 4 percent or 2 percent, and some would pay nothing.

Enrollment boomed, jumping from 11.4 million to 14.5 million in two years. By 2025, enrollment had doubled from its pre-pandemic level, topping 24 million, according to data from health research organization KFF.

The enhanced subsidies were set to expire in 2022, allowing just enough time to get people back to work.

But when the pandemic ended, the enhanced subsidies remained.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and fellow Democrats hold a news conference on the East Front Steps of the U.S. Capitol on Dec. 18, 2025. Jeffries said on Jan. 5 that House Democrats are seeking to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits, which expired on Dec. 31, 2025. Heather Diehl/Getty Images

Premiums Increased, Wages Didn’t

Health insurance premiums increased dramatically during Obamacare’s first five years. The average individual premium for a 40-year-old went up at least 75 percent, according to data reported by KFF.

Prices soared in commercial markets, too, where the cost of individual premiums rose about 120 percent from 2013 to 2019, according to The Heritage Foundation.

Obamacare prices leveled out before the pandemic hit and from 2020 to 2022, which includes the first two years of enhanced subsidies, prices dropped 5 percent, according to data reported by KFF.

But in 2022, the year the subsidies were set to end, inflation was on the rise, peaking at more than 9 percent by midyear, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Economists broadly agree that this was an unintended consequence of American Rescue Plan spending. The rising prices were “the product of easy fiscal and monetary policies, excess savings accumulated during the pandemic, and the reopening of locked-down economies,” Ben Bernanke, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, wrote in a co-authored assessment for Brookings.

Congress responded by spending even more money. The Inflation Reduction Act, passed in August 2022, would pump another $1.2 trillion into the economy within a decade, the Cato Institute estimated. That included a three-year extension of the enhanced subsidies.

(L–R) Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), and Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) speak at a press conference at the U.S. Capitol on Aug. 3, 2022. While most Republicans opposed extending the enhanced Obamacare subsidies, some supported a second short-term extension of one to three years. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Obamacare premiums shot back up, according to data reported by KFF, rising more than 13 percent in three years.

Economic and policy researcher Cynthia Cox for KFF pointed to a number of factors driving the recent rise in premiums, including increased hospital costs, the rising popularity of expensive new drugs such as Ozempic, and the use of tariffs.

Many observers also cite the enhanced subsidies themselves as a driver of the problem they were created to address.

“The [Affordable Care Act] subsidy structure is itself inflationary—driving up health care prices and total premiums,” said Mark Howell and Brian Blase of the think tank Paragon Health Institute. “As Congress considers the future of the COVID Credits . . . it must confront the reality that the [Affordable Care Act] made coverage far less affordable.”

That reality was largely hidden from many who received the enhanced subsidies because their out-of-pocket premium payments were capped based on income. Price hikes above that cap were paid by taxpayers, which meant the enhanced subsidies were now even more important for people with modest incomes.

Meanwhile, the real wages of American workers were not keeping pace with the price of consumer goods, let alone the skyrocketing cost of health insurance.

Around that time, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) commented on the value of the enhanced subsidies to members of his congressional district. “Without the Inflation Reduction Act, the average premium for these individuals would have increased by 76 percent, to $1,430, in 2023,” he said in a statement.

By 2025, the year the enhanced subsidies were again scheduled to expire, Obamacare premiums were at their highest point ever. Health insurers realized that, without the additional subsidies, healthier enrollees would drop their coverage in 2026, leaving a smaller, more expensive pool of people to insure, according to the Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker.

Insurers responded with premium increases ranging from 10 percent to 59 percent, Peterson-KFF found, with the median being 18 percent.

Congressional Democrats argued that the enhanced subsidies had become essential and moved to make them permanent. Some Republicans agreed that a second extension of one to three years was needed.

After five years of premium increases largely paid for by federal taxpayers, both the insurers and the insured appear to have become dependent on the enhanced subsidies.

Increased Fraud

Most Republicans opposed extending the enhanced subsidies. Before spending more money on rising premiums, they said another problem hidden in the system needs to be fixed first—fraud.

There has been no dispute among lawmakers that the enhanced subsidies have been a boon to consumers.

The average Obamacare premium for 2025 was $619 per month, of which subsidies covered more than $500. More than 10 million enrollees, 46 percent of those receiving aid, paid $10 or less per month out of pocket for premiums.

About 8 million paid $0, according to Brookings.

That’s exactly the problem, according to some analysts, because the possibility of enrolling large numbers of people who would never receive a bill created a ripe opportunity for fraud.

Many people were enrolled in the program without their knowledge by unscrupulous insurance brokers, Blase alleges, prompting the federal government to send a commission check to them—and premium payments to an insurance company.

These phantom enrollees are detected in part by their lack of activity once enrolled, Blase said.

“In 2024, nearly 12 million enrollees did not use their plan a single time—up from fewer than 4 million in 2021,” Blase told the House Judiciary Committee on Dec. 10.

Overall, 35 percent of all exchange enrollees never used their plan, and 40 percent of fully subsidized enrollees did not have a single claim, which Blase said is double the rate in both the commercial market and pre-pandemic Obamacare.

America’s Health Insurance Providers, the trade association for health insurance companies, disputed that claim.

“A ‘no-claims’ year is evidence that a consumer stayed healthy or only had a few months of coverage—not that taxpayer money was misdirected or that their policy was illegitimate,” the group said in an Aug. 18 statement.

Yet in December 2025, the Government Accountability Office provided evidence of enrollment fraud in Obamacare that suggests fake accounts are being created.

Pages from the U.S. Affordable Care Act health insurance website healthcare.gov are seen on a computer screen in New York City on Aug. 19, 2025. Patrick Sison/File/AP Photo

Investigators were able to enroll 20 nonexistent identities in Obamacare in 2024 by using Social Security numbers that had never been issued to any person and other easily created counterfeit documents.

Of the 20 false enrollments, 18 were still active in September 2025, costing taxpayers more than $10,000 per month.

Investigators also found 26,000 accounts that received subsidies in 2023 based on Social Security numbers that matched records in the Social Security Administration’s death file.

More than 7,000 Social Security numbers belonged to people who were reported dead before enrolling in Obamacare, and 19,000 Social Security numbers matched death data by number but not name and address, indicating that false identities may have been created for enrollment.

Taxpayers paid more than $94 million in subsidies for one year based on those numbers.

Another indication of fraud is the number of states where enrollment in Obamacare plans with a $0 premium is unreasonably high compared to the number with a qualifying income.

Twenty-four states have more Obamacare enrollees claiming incomes between 100 percent and 150 percent of the federal poverty level than there are people living in the state with that income, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The problem appears worse in states that have not adopted expanded Medicaid, which would have increased Medicaid eligibility to 138 percent of the federal poverty level.

Obamacare customers are automatically re-enrolled each year, so a fictitious account would continue to generate fraudulent commissions and wasteful insurance payments until detected.

Fraudulent enrollment costs up to $20 billion per year, according to Paragon Health Institute.

A Social Security card sits alongside checks from the U.S. Treasury in this photo illustration in Washington on Oct. 14, 2021. The Government Accountability Office found evidence of Obamacare enrollment fraud involving fake accounts created with Social Security numbers of people reported dead before enrollment. Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Making Health Care Affordable

The enhanced subsidies expired on Dec. 31, 2025.

Congressional Republicans and Democrats continue to agree that the U.S. health care system has become unaffordable and want to address the problem. They differ in approach.

Democrats generally favor government intervention in the system, as in the case of Obamacare, where taxpayers pitch in to cover rising costs.

The Senate in December 2025 rejected a proposal to make the enhanced subsidies permanent.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said at a press conference on Jan. 5 that his party continues to seek an extension of the subsidies “to protect the health care of tens of millions of … everyday Americans, middle-class Americans and working class Americans.”

Without the subsidies, Jeffries said, some consumers would face cost increases of up to $2,000 or more per month.

Republicans generally favor using the power of government to create marketplace competition. Senate Republicans recently presented a plan to provide dedicated funds directly to consumers, which they could use to shop for health care. That plan, too, was rejected by the Senate.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the Senate majority leader, addressed the differing philosophies in a Dec. 16, 2025, press conference.

“If [Democrats are] willing to accept changes that actually would put more power and control and resources in the hands of the American people, and less of that in the pockets of the insurance companies, I think there’s a path forward,” he said.

The House passed a three-year extension of the enhanced subsidies on Jan. 8. A bid by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y) to pass the bill via unanimous consent in the upper chamber failed on Jan. 14.

President Donald Trump has said he would veto any extension of Obamacare subsidies that came to his desk.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s interview with Christopher Rufo last week highlighted that there is still unfinished business at DOGE, where fraud, waste, and abuse may account for as much as 10% of the total federal budget. We even joked that the scale of recent fraud uncovered in Democratic states could compel Elon Musk to return to DOGE in some capacity, as his recent X posts targeting dark-money NGOs suggest renewed interest.

At one level, one has to admire the entrepreneurial spirit of the Somali scammers — with just a few Quality Learing Centers, they built an industrial scale fraud operation nearly on par with USAID, a feat which took our best educated deep staters decades to do … https://t.co/dxxGGh27GT

— DOGE State (@DOGE_STATE) January 16, 2026

After Nick Shirley’s exposé on Somali fraud in Minneapolis, citizen journalists across the country began investigating where their tax dollars are going in Democratic run states. What followed has been a wave of DOGE-style efforts by citizen journalists to root out left-wing corruption, and what they are uncovering is alarming, particularly in California.

The focus is no longer limited to Minnesota and California, but extends across blue states where local left-wing leaders, posing as responsible stewards, are often little more than activists with exceptional talent to loot local, city, state, and even federal coffers.

The latest example of why a DOGE revival at the state level is urgently needed comes from Maryland, a one-party rule state controlled by Democratic kings and queens, where the word accountability doesn’t exist, and the state’s financial profile is rapidly deteriorating, placing increasing financial strains on working-class households as taxes soar amid a deficit crisis.

Fox Baltimore reporter Patrick Hauf dropped a bombshell report this week, revealing that top leaders in Baltimore City do not actually know how many taxpayer dollars are being funneled into the nonprofit universe.

Hauf’s investigative team asked Baltimore City Council members, along with the mayor and comptroller, whether they track nonprofit funding. None provided a precise figure or centralized data.

“None of them provided a precise measure. Some argued that the city government has thorough oversight of taxpayer funds, while others said greater oversight and transparency would be beneficial,” the report wrote.

Hauf’s reporting comes after a similar report of how Maryland state leaders were unable to specify how much taxpayer money they sent to nonprofits.

The pattern of behavior from city leaders to state officials is that accountability doesn’t exist, and why should it when the state is controlled by Democratic Party kings and queens?

The think tank Urban Institute estimated that Maryland nonprofits received more than $6 billion in federal, state, and local grants in 2021. ProPublica data Nonprofit Explorer shows Maryland nonprofits reported $95 billion in revenue in 2024, including executive compensation as high as $7.1 million.

Here are the responses when Hauf’s team asked City Council members, along with the mayor and comptroller, how much taxpayer money is being funneled into nonprofits:

City Council responses:

• Zach Blanchard said his office does not track nonprofit funding and doubts other council members do, though he expressed interest in increased disclosure for larger nonprofits.

• Mark Conway supported nonprofits but said there is no centralized, public-facing system showing how much public funding flows to nonprofits or what outcomes it produces.

• Odette Ramos pointed to oversight hearings, while John Bullock and Jermaine Jones declined interviews.

Mayor and comptroller:

• Mayor Brandon Scott and Bill Henry said spending is publicly available through the Baltimore City Board of Estimates dashboard.

• The dashboard does not identify whether recipients are nonprofits or organize spending by district.

• Both offices acknowledged that greater transparency would be welcome, while maintaining existing oversight requirements.

Fox Baltimore reported earlier this month that the Baltimore City Health Department funneled more than $60 million in federal funds since 2022 to Connections Thru Life, a nonprofit that has not completed required audits and shares office space with a for-profit firm led by the same individual.

Meanwhile, working-class Marylanders are furious with Democratic kings and queens who appear to be looting taxpayers while simultaneously raising taxes and plunging the state into a deficit crisis. On top of that, backfiring green energy policies have collided with surging data-center power demand, sparking a power-bill crisis in the state that is financially crushing working-class households.

Growing anger. 

The state’s fiscal mess is the byproduct of one-party rule. Poor stewardship has sent Gov. Moore’s polling numbers sliding, a rare sight for a Democrat in the deep-blue state.

Doesn’t look good for the mayor of Baltimore…

And Gov. Moore.

Do these Democratic kings serve the residents of the state or left-wing billionaires with nonprofits?

Update: President Trump escalated his threat to use the Insurrection Act (as we detailed here) earlier today, warning that state and city officials “have totally lost control.”

The origin of the chaos appears to be mostly manufactured and began hours after the legal observer was shot and killed last Wednesday:

• Minneapolis ICE Shooting Shows Left Wing’s Protest Industrial Complex Wants Another ‘George Floyd’-Type Riot

• Tim Walz Activates Emergency Operations Center, Alerts National Guard After ICE-Involved Shooting Sparks Protest Threat

Democrats are using the manufactured chaos, think of it as George Floyd 2.0, in an attempt to sway public opinion polls about Trump’s deportation policies. As Trump strips power from Democrats and the party’s unhinged left watches its illegal alien voter bloc get deported, those with their backs against the wall increasingly see violence as the only remaining option. Just wait until spring.

WATCH — @POTUS weighs Insurrection Act:

“If I needed it, I’d use it. It’s very powerful.”

💪🇺🇸👏pic.twitter.com/k1kzO8Bkay

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) January 16, 2026

As Michael Snyder detailed earlier via The Economic Collapse blog, what we have witnessed on the streets of Minneapolis this week has been absolutely stunning.

It was once such a beautiful city, but now it has been transformed into a war zone. For more than a decade, I have been relentlessly warning my readers that civil unrest would be one of the core elements of the coming “perfect storm”, and now we are literally watching violent clashes between radical leftists and federal authorities play out right in front of our eyes. In fact, it is getting so bad that President Trump is threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act. That hasn’t happened since the Los Angeles riots of 1992. If we keep going down this path, will we soon see martial law in major U.S. cities?

Independent journalist Nick Sortor is on the ground in Minneapolis, and last night he watched as rioters destroyed multiple federal law enforcement vehicles…

MULTIPLE ICE and FBI vehicles have been DESTROYED and LOOTED by rioters in Minneapolis after federal agents were forced to abandon them

Agents gear, laptops, and personal information now LITTERS the street

THIS IS ABSOLUTE ANARCHY

He is right.

It is absolutely anarchy.

Sortor is also reporting that the rioters actually broke into a weapons locker in one of the vehicles and got away with a rifle and ammunition…

Minneapolis rioters successfully BROKE OPEN a weapons locker in a federal vehicle and STOLE A RIFLE and ammunition before fleeing

I captured the thief’s face and license plate on the getaway vehicle.

A state of lawlessness exists on the streets of Minneapolis at this moment, and President Trump just threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act…

As the rioters were destroying and looting federal vehicles, the police just stood by and did nothing.

Of course the reason why they didn’t intervene is because that is what their leaders are instructing them to do.

In remarks that she just made to the press, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt explained that Trump’s threat to invoke the Insurrection Act “spoke very loud and clear to Democrats across this country”…

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday that President Donald Trump’s threats to enact the Insurrection Act in Minnesota “spoke very loud and clear to Democrats across this country.” Leavitt said it send a message to elected officials “who are using their platforms to encourage violence against federal law enforcement officers who are encouraging left-wing agitators to unlawfully obstruct legitimate law enforcement operations.”

Of course the Democrats are not going to back down.

And neither will the Trump administration.

So I expect things to get really crazy in the months ahead.

If Trump actually invokes the Insurrection Act, that will allow him to deploy active duty soldiers to Minneapolis…

The president would have fairly broad authority under the law, Gene Rossi, a former federal prosecutor, told Newsweek on Thursday.

“The punchline is this. Under the Insurrection Act, President Trump and any president has broad power to invoke that act, which is an extraordinary step,” he said. “What it means is that the president can employ active duty soldiers to assist state and local authorities in executing the federal laws.”

In Minnesota, ICE is “executing, in their mind, the immigration laws in terms of arresting and detaining people who are here without proper documentation,” Rossi said. Trump would have broad authority to determine whether laws cannot be effectively executed without invoking the Insurrection Act, he said.

If troops are deployed in the streets, will far left radicals stop harassing ICE?

Of course not.

Instead, there would probably be even more violent confrontations like the one that we just witnessed on Wednesday evening…

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent is in the hospital after being ambushed during an attempt to arrest a Venezuelan national in Minneapolis on Wednesday evening, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

The agent was ambushed by two people while attempting to conduct a traffic stop on an illegal immigrant from Venezuela, DHS said, adding that the agent fired his gun during the alleged attack because he was “fearing for his life and safety.”

One Venezuelan suspect was shot but is reported to be stable and is now in custody, DHS said.

The radical left has drawn a line in the sand.

They are going to resist ICE no matter how much the Trump administration escalates matters.

And so now our society stands at a very dangerous tipping point.

According to a post by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security on Facebook, the ICE agent that is in the hospital got hurt when two men attacked him with “a snow shovel and a broom handle”…

At 6:50 PM CT, federal law enforcement officers were conducting a targeted traffic stop in Minneapolis of an illegal alien from Venezuela who was released into the country by Joe Biden in 2022.

In an attempt to evade arrest, the subject fled the scene in his vehicle and crashed into a parked car. The subject then fled on foot.

The law enforcement officer caught up to the subject on foot and attempted to apprehend him when the subject began to resist and violently assault the officer. While the subject and law enforcement were in a struggle on the ground, two subjects came out of a nearby apartment and also attacked the law enforcement officer with a snow shovel and broom handle.

As the officer was being ambushed and attacked by the two individuals, the original subject got loose and began striking the officer with a shovel or broom stick.

Fearing for his life and safety as he was being ambushed by three individuals, the officer fired a defensive shot to defend his life. The initial subject was hit in the leg.

All three subjects ran back into the apartment and barricaded themselves inside.

The attacked officer and subject are both in the hospital. Both attackers are in custody.

This attack on another brave member of law enforcement took place while Minnesota’s top leaders, Governor Walz and Mayor Frey, are actively encouraging an organized resistance to ICE and federal law enforcement officers.

Their hateful rhetoric and resistance against men and women who are simply trying to do their jobs must end. Federal law enforcement officers are facing a 1,300% increase in assaults against them as they put their lives on the line to arrest criminals and lawbreakers.

It would help if Democrats would tell their constituents to calm down and leave federal law enforcement officers alone.

But that isn’t happening.

In fact, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is calling on the citizens of his state to “resist” the “occupation” that he believes is currently taking place…

Folks, I know it’s scary, and I know it’s absurd that we all have to be defending law and order, justice, and humanity while also caring for our families and trying to do our jobs. So tonight, let me say once again to Donald Trump and Christine Noem: End this occupation, you’ve done enough.

…

Donald Trump wants this chaos. He wants confusion, and yes, he wants more violence on our streets. We cannot give him what he wants. We can, we must, protest loudly, urgently, but also peacefully.

All across Minnesota, people are learning about opportunities, not just to resist, but to help people who are in danger. Thousands and thousands of our fellow Minnesotans are going to be relying on mutual aid in the days and weeks to come, and they need our support.

Tim Walz was a member of the National Guard for 24 years.

When he uses military terminology, he knows exactly what he is doing.

On the other side, Stephen Miller is warning that federal officials are in the process of “identifying, disrupting and dismantling the insurgent networks” that are causing so much chaos in Minnesota…

Stephen Miller, a top White House official, said Tuesday evening that federal law enforcement now has the resources to protect its officers and begin the work of “identifying, disrupting and dismantling the insurgent networks” hampering Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in Minnesota.

That sounds very similar to the terminology that many of our politicians would use regarding anti-insurgent operations in Iraq and Afghanistan under previous administrations.

But even if the violent radicals in Minnesota are successfully suppressed, more will just pop up elsewhere.

Personally, I believe that this is just the beginning of an enormous wave of civil unrest.

And if a major war erupts in the Middle East, that will just add more fuel to the fire.

This year is already off to such a crazy start.

And we are only halfway through the first month.

Unfortunately, I believe that the rest of the year will be even more insane.

*  *  *

Michael’s new book entitled “10 Prophetic Events That Are Coming Next” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.

Two scammers in Brooklyn pleaded guilty on Thursday to defrauding the state’s controversial Medicaid home care program to the tune of $60 million. 

Manal Wasef and Elaine Antao, both 46, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit health care fraud. Their scheme involved referring Medicaid recipients to two Brooklyn social adult day care centers and a home health company in exchange for illegal kickbacks and bribes, the DOJ announced on Thursday. 

Between approximately October 2017 and July 2024, in exchange for illegal kickbacks and bribes, Wasef and Antao referred Medicaid recipients to the social adult day cares and the home health company. The defendants also paid illegal kickbacks and bribes to Medicaid recipients for social adult day care services and home health care services that were billed to Medicaid but were not provided or that were induced by kickbacks and bribes. Wasef and Antao used multiple business entities to launder the fraud proceeds and generate the cash used to pay kickbacks and bribes. In connection with their guilty pleas, Wasef and Antao agreed to collectively forfeit approximately $1 million. Wasef and Antao are the sixth and seventh individuals, respectively, to plead guilty in this case. -DOJ

The pair were tapping into the Consumer Directed Personal Assistance Program (CDPAP), which allows people with minimal health care experience to care for their elderly disabled relatives and friends. According to the NY Post, hundreds of ‘middleman’ firms work as de-facto payroll agents between the caregivers and Medicaid – all with minimal oversight.

On top of their guilty plea, the pair agreed to pay back around $1 million.

“Today’s guilty pleas demonstrate the Department’s longstanding commitment to rooting out fraud in government health care programs by aggressively prosecuting those who steal from taxpayer-funded programs,” said Assistant Attorney General A. Tysen Duva of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division.

The pair are scheduled to be sentenced in May, where they each face a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. 

Overall, eight people were initially accused of participating in the yearslong scheme to defraud the state. Also charged were owners Zakia Khan and Ahsan Ijaz, as well as Oasmneah Hamdi, Ansir Abassi, and Amran Hashmi. 

Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) held a rare meeting at the White House on Thursday to discuss an array of issues.

Schumer’s top concern was the Trump administration’s hold on the $16 billion Gateway tunnel project between New York and New Jersey.

“In the meeting, Leader Schumer emphasized the urgent need to promptly release the already-secured funds for the Gateway Program—the most important infrastructure project in the nation employing thousands of workers and vital to New York and the entire Northeast economy,” Schumer’s office said in a readout of the meeting.

According to Schumer, Trump requested the meeting.

Over the past year, Schumer and Trump have disagreed publicly on an array of issues—executive nominations, health care subsidies, a 43-day government shutdown, and others—but the two New Yorkers have rarely met in person.

Late last year, Trump indicated that the funding for the project would not be provided due to the government shutdown.

Aside from the tunnel project, Schumer’s office said that the Democratic leader encouraged Trump to throw his backing behind a bill that would extend tax credits for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) for three years.

The bill was advanced by the House on Jan. 7 in a 221–205 vote that originated with a discharge petition, a parliamentary measure that allows bills to advance without the speaker’s approval. The next day, the House approved the measure in a final 230–196 vote, which won the support of 17 Republicans.

The bill would restore ACA enhanced tax credits, which were created during the Biden administration under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and later extended by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Those subsidies expired at the end of 2025.

Following the House’s passage of the bill, Trump indicated he may veto it.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) blocked any debate on renewing the tax credit subsidies ahead of the House vote.

The two also discussed the ongoing controversy surrounding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, which has sprung up in the wake of the ICE-involved shooting of Renée Nicole Good in Minneapolis.

Amid mass protests in Minneapolis calling for ICE to withdraw from the city, Trump has surged immigration agents to the area. Democrats and local leaders have echoed the call for ICE to scale back operations in the area.

“Leader Schumer told the president ICE raids are terrorizing communities,” Schumer’s office said. “Leader Schumer also told President Trump that their actions are dangerous and putting more people at risk and he must pull back ICE from U.S. cities.”

The Associated Press and Bill Pan contributed to this report.

Once a sitting head of state, and now a convicted felon – and potentially much worse still to come: former South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, after his dramatic fall from power and attempt to stay in office by declaring martial law in December 2024 – a move that plunged one of Asia’s most stable democracies into a brief period of chaos – is going to serve hard time.

He could actually still face the death penalty (with several more charges pending related to treason), according to South Korean law as it pertains to ‘rebellion’ and treasonous activity, but he has been sentenced Friday to five years in prison after being found guilty on multiple initial charges.

The ruling was handed down Friday by the Seoul Central District Court in televised proceedings, capping what has become one of the most explosive political trials in South Korea’s modern history – though over the decades there’s been plenty of competition and examples of ex-presidents being arrested and facing trial.

Yoon, who was impeached and detained after mass protests erupted nationwide in late 2024, has been found guilty of abusing the power of the presidency to obstruct justice, but there’s more yet to come as he still faces multiple criminal cases. A conviction on insurrection charges could carry the death penalty.

Again, while indictments have happened with plenty of ex-presidents and former top officials, Yoon is now the first sitting president in South Korea’s history to be arrested, indicted, and sentenced.

Yoon attempted to block his own arrest after parliament voted to impeach him, using presidential security forces to defy a lawful warrant issued by the Corruption Investigation Office (CIO). He went on national TV and declared martial law in an address to the country on December 3, 2024.

“But Yoon, in an unprecedented manner, notified only some Cabinet members of the meeting on the proclamation of martial law, thereby directly violating the Constitution and infringing the deliberation rights of Cabinet members who were not notified,” the judge said in the ruling.

The court also found that “The defendant abused his enormous influence as president to prevent the execution of legitimate warrants through officials from the Security Service, which effectively privatized officials … for personal safety and personal gain,” Judge Baek stated further.

Prosecutors also allege that he ordered military and police forces to seal off the National Assembly in an effort to prevent lawmakers from entering the building where they would overturn the martial law decree.

Korea’s diplomatic strategy of being chill seems to have worked in securing a demanding seat at every table. He’s doing all of this while the admin is trying to push for a death sentence for his rival Yoon lmao. pic.twitter.com/kaf4ZDKwHn

— Action Karnçaise 류대강™🕯️☘ (@KarnesMellagio) January 13, 2026

Importantly, South Korea has not carried out an execution since 1997 – so if Yoon is eventually executed, it would send a chilling and strong message to current and future leaders.

However, there’s expected to be an avalanche of appeals, and there are cases pending down the line, which could draw out the legal process for years to come.

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge on Jan. 15 dismissed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) bid to access California’s voter registration databases, ruling that the demand for voter data from California Secretary of State Shirley Weber was “unprecedented and illegal.”

In a 33-page decision, Clinton-appointed U.S. District Judge David O. Carter sided with California, saying the DOJ cannot use civil rights legislation “as a tool to forsake the privacy rights of millions of Americans,” noting that such authority rests solely with Congress.

The DOJ filed lawsuits in September against six states, including California, alleging they violated federal law by refusing to provide voting records the department said were necessary to prevent inclusion of ineligible voters. The lawsuits were filed separately in each state.

“The Department of Justice seeks to use civil rights legislation which was enacted for an entirely different purpose to amass and retain an unprecedented amount of confidential voter data,” Carter said.

“This effort goes far beyond what Congress intended when it passed the underlying legislation.”

The judge also said the federal government’s request could deter voters from registering due to concerns about how their personal information might be used, threatening the right to vote.

“The centralization of this information by the federal government would have a chilling effect on voter registration which would inevitably lead to decreasing voter turnout as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose,” Carter said.

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber speaks in Los Angeles on April 15, 2024. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Weber welcomed the ruling and said she would continue to challenge what she described as the administration’s “disregard for the rule of law and our right to vote.”

“As California Secretary of State, I am entrusted with ensuring that California’s state election laws are enforced—including state laws that protect the privacy of Californians’ data,” Weber said in a Jan. 15 statement.

The Epoch Times reached out to the DOJ for comment, but did not receive a response by publication time.

In its complaint against California on Sept. 25, 2025, the DOJ said the state refused to cooperate with the federal government’s request for voter registration databases—including each voter’s full name, date of birth, address, state driver’s license number, and the last four digits of their Social Security number—citing concerns over privacy protections.

The DOJ had argued that its Civil Rights Division has been tasked by Congress with ensuring that states conduct voter registration list maintenance to prevent ineligible voters from being listed.

“Clean voter rolls are the foundation of free and fair elections,” U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement at the time.

“Every state has a responsibility to ensure that voter registration records are accurate, accessible, and secure—states that don’t fulfill that obligation will see this Department of Justice in court.”

Citing the lawsuits, the DOJ said at the time that Bondi is uniquely charged by Congress “with the enforcement of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which were designed by Congress to ensure that states have proper and effective voter registration and voter list maintenance programs.”

Update(1658ET): President Trump issued another somewhat bizarre Iran statement on Truth Social on Friday. He repeated the White House line that 800 executions that were scheduled and supposed to take place yesterday were halted in Iran. He even ‘thanked’ the Iranians for not carry out the supposed mass execution plan:

“I greatly respect the fact that all scheduled hangings, which were to take place yesterday (Over 800 of them), have been cancelled by the leadership of Iran. Thank you!” he wrote earlier in the day.

He also told reporters “I convinced my myself” not to attack Iran, after painting himself in a corner by essentially setting red lines previously. Trump had said days ago if Iranian authorities kill protesters they would get hit hard by the US.

As for the “800 executions” – it’s very unclear where this number came from. Certainly Iranian state media or officials haven’t said any such thing, and there’s a likelihood it’s just propaganda. 

* * *

US Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz told the UN Security Council on Thursday that the “brave people of Iran” have risen up and that President Donald Trump “has made it clear all options are on the table to stop the slaughter” – this despite widespread reports that the protests and rioting are over at this point.

“President Trump is a man of action, not endless talk like we see at the United Nations. He has made it clear all options are on the table to stop the slaughter,” Waltz told the Security Council meeting, held at the request of Washington.

“Everyone in the world needs to know that the regime is weaker than ever before, and therefore is putting forward this lie because of the power of the Iranian people in the streets. They are afraid. They’re afraid of their own people,” Waltz claimed, but he did not address the huge pro-government rallies which engulfed Iranian streets from earlier this week, which largely supplanted the protests and riots.

But a near total internet outage has endured going all the way back to January 8. This suggests the crisis may not be completely finished, but Tehran is touting that security services and police are back in control of the streets.

The US is still rushing military assets to the area. “The Pentagon is moving a carrier strike group from the South China Sea to the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, which includes the Middle East, as tensions escalate between the Trump administration and Iran,” according to NewsNation.

“Moving the carrier strike group – a naval formation centering around an aircraft carrier, with a variety of other vessels, including at least one attack submarine – is expected to take about a week, a source said,” the report continues. “The USS Abraham Lincoln reportedly is the aircraft carrier that is on the move.“

Meanwhile, Russian ​President Vladimir Putin is putting himself forward as potential mediator, ⁠which was conveyed in a fresh phone conversation with Iran’s President Masoud ​Pezeshkian. Pezeshkian thanked his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin for Moscow’s support at the United Nations in the wake of the crisis.

A readout indicated Pezeshkian thanked Putin for “Russia’s position” and explained that “the role and direct involvement of the United States and the Zionist regime in recent events in Iran is evident” – in reference to Israel.

Previously at the UN emergency session, Russia’s UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia charged the United States with convening the Security Council in a bid to “justify blatant aggression and interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state” and threats to “solve the Iranian problem in its favorite way: through strikes aimed at overthrowing an undesirable regime.”

As tensions rise between U.S. and Iran, the Pentagon is moving a carrier strike group toward Middle East. The USS Abraham Lincoln, west of the Philippines, turned west yesterday, detected on @CopernicusEU satellite imagery by @oballinger’s computer program. 11.9892, 117.9423. pic.twitter.com/Zz8rokebZq

— Christiaan Triebert (@trbrtc) January 15, 2026

The swipe and reminder of Washington’s addiction to regime change also comes on the heels of the Trump-ordered January 3rd overthrow of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Amb. Nebenzia said further: “We strongly urge the hot heads in Washington and other capitals… to come to their senses.”

At the same time, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has urged “maximum restraint at this sensitive moment and calls on all actors to refrain from any actions that could lead to further loss of life or ignite a wider regional escalation.”

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has finalized an order banning General Motors (GM) from disclosing consumers’ geolocation and driver behavior data to consumer reporting agencies for a period of five years, the agency said in a Jan. 14 statement.

The FTC had filed a complaint against GM and its subsidiary OnStar LLC in January 2025.

GM “collected, used, and sold drivers’ precise geolocation data and driving behavior information from millions of vehicles—data that can be used to set insurance rates—without adequately notifying consumers and obtaining their affirmative consent,” the agency said at the time.

GM was encouraging customers to sign up for its OnStar connected vehicle service and the OnStar Smart Driver feature through a “misleading enrollment process,” the FTC said at the time.

During enrollment, the company did not “clearly disclose” that collected information—including data regarding speeding, late-night driving, and instances of hard braking—would be sold to third parties such as consumer reporting agencies, the commission said.

This information was used by reporting agencies to compile credit reports that were subsequently utilized by insurance companies to set rates and deny insurance, the commission said. The FTC said that tracking and collecting geolocation data was an invasion of privacy.

The five-year ban is part of the FTC’s settlement order with GM. The ban is appropriate “given GM’s egregious betrayal of consumers’ trust,” the FTC statement said. The order was issued against OnStar LLC, General Motors LLC, and General Motors Holdings LLC, which are all owned by the General Motors Company.

In addition, for the next 20 years of the order, GM is required to obtain “affirmative express consent from consumers prior to collecting, using, or sharing connected vehicle data” except under certain circumstances, such as providing location data to emergency first responders, the FTC said.

During that period, GM must ensure that U.S. customers can request a copy of their data, ask for their data to be deleted, and opt out of geolocation and driver behavior data collection.

“The Federal Trade Commission has formally approved the agreement reached last year with General Motors to address concerns,” a GM spokesperson told The Epoch Times on Jan. 15.

“As vehicle connectivity becomes increasingly integral to the driving experience, GM remains committed to protecting customer privacy, maintaining trust, and ensuring customers have a clear understanding of our practices.”

In a statement on Jan. 16, 2025, GM said that although Smart Driver was created to promote safer driving among users, the company ended the program following customer feedback.

“Last year, we discontinued Smart Driver across all GM vehicles, unenrolled all customers, and ended our third-party telematics relationships with LexisNexis and Verisk,” GM said at the time.

“The FTC consent order includes new measures that go above and beyond existing law, while capturing steps we’ve already taken to establish choices for customer data collection and communications about how the information is used.”

GM had affirmed that it would obtain customer consent before collecting, using, or disclosing certain types of connected vehicle data, in line with its agreement with the FTC.

Vehicle Data Collection

Multiple other car companies admit to collecting driver data as part of their privacy policies.

For instance, Honda gathers geolocation and driver behavior data, according to its data privacy practices webpage.

Driver behavior information includes “vehicle speed, vehicle acceleration and deceleration, pedal positions, engine speed, direction and time of travel, steering angle, yaw rate, vehicle control, and Honda Sensing or Acura Watch system settings and usage,” it said.

In a Jan. 6 statement, Toyota said it collects a vehicle’s precise location, within 1,850 feet. The company clarified that it does not use the location or driving data for marketing purposes or offer it to third parties.

Kia’s privacy policy states that the company collects geolocation data and other vehicle information that could be shared with third parties for purposes such as crash notification assistance, content-based services, roadside assistance, and determining driving score and usage-based insurance.

In April, Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) introduced the Connected Vehicle National Security Review Act, which would allow the Department of Commerce to ban or restrict connected vehicles or components coming from China or other nations of concern if deemed to pose a threat to national security, according to an April 10, 2025, statement from the lawmaker’s office.

“Chinese vehicles, which are dirt cheap thanks to state subsidies, could collect full motion video of sensitive sites, 3-D mapping, and geolocation of individual drivers—all of which could be sent back to Beijing,” Slotkin said.

The bill was referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs in June 2025.

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

It is expected that AI productivity increases will vastly transform the U.S. economy. Firms are utilizing AI productivity enhancements to automate repetitive tasks, and research and coding functions have already been implemented. The obvious problem is that when machines perform functions once done by humans, what are the humans supposed to do for income? This increase in AI productivity is measurable across various sectors, as supply chains operate more efficiently, data analysis accelerates, and customer service utilizes automated agents to streamline tasks. Manufacturing, once considered a stable sector of the economy, is increasingly using robotics to reduce labor costs. Professional services are also increasingly displacing workers in medical, legal, and other areas of the service economy to improve output (read: profits) per worker.

This is not a new thing. It has been accelerating since the invention of the fax machine and phone answering devices. The use of AI productivity-enhancing technology is becoming increasingly apparent. But as shown, the shift by corporations to focus on worker productivity is ongoing.

Recent corporate statements confirm this shift. At a 2025 financial conference, JPMorgan Chase reported that AI adoption doubled productivity gains in certain operations from 3% to 6%, with some roles seeing efficiency increases of 40% to 50%. Other banks said AI allows them to accomplish more work with the same headcount.

In theory, the promise of AI productivity increases is alluring. While firms can produce more with fewer inputs, humans will have more time to pursue education, leisure, and spend time with their families, increasing overall health and happiness. Again, that is theory, and the subject of today’s commentary.

Productivity Set To Surge

The strict definition of “productivity” is the output per unit of input. In other words, if output rises, it should correspond to an increase in employee compensation, as economic demand leads to the production of more products. Since 1947, a correlation has existed between economic output and the 3-month average of the annual rate of change in employee compensation.

Between 2004 and the pandemic, annual labor productivity growth averaged just 1.5% per year, significantly below the pace required for sustained real wage improvement. Recent gains measured in 2023 showed a temporary uptick; however, whether this marks a trend driven by AI rather than short-term business cycles remains unclear.

Furthermore, emerging research suggests that AI has the potential to deliver significant productivity improvements. A study of generative AI usage found that average workers using tools like ChatGPT completed tasks 40% faster with higher quality, implying substantial productivity enhancements when AI is integrated into work processes. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis estimated that generative AI contributed a roughly 1.1% boost to aggregate productivity, with individual workers saving multiple hours per week on routine tasks. Lastly, a TIME-published analysis of Anthropic research suggests that AI has the potential to double U.S. labor productivity growth, increasing it by approximately 1.8% if widespread adoption occurs.

These projections also align with broader institutional forecasts. The IMF reports that AI could significantly impact nearly 40% of jobs worldwide, presenting both opportunities and risks for income growth and inequality. Yet, productivity gains alone do not automatically lead to wage increases or employment growth.

The Problem

The problem arises when productivity increases without a corresponding demand for labor. AI operates without downtime, 24/7, and does not require traditional wages, benefits, or breaks. If AI performs tasks that previously employed millions of workers, the question of how displaced workers earn income becomes central. Corporate leaders acknowledge this challenge. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has highlighted the unpredictability of AI’s impact, noting that productivity gains may come with labor market disruptions that current policy tools are ill-equipped to manage.

Historical examples show how technological shifts displace workers in the short term. For instance, during the “Industrial Revolution,” artisans lost jobs to mechanized production. Horse‑drawn carriage drivers disappeared with the advent of automobiles. Yes, workers eventually moved into new fields, but the transition involved hardship and community upheaval. Automation in prior eras often created new kinds of jobs, but the pace and breadth of AI disruption could set this wave apart. Instead of merely replacing manual labor, AI now substitutes for tasks across both blue-collar and white-collar jobs. Research by Oxford economists Carl Frey and Michael Osborne highlighted that many occupations have tasks that are susceptible to automation, and could disappear entirely.

Compounding the challenge, since the late 1970s, productivity gains started diverging from typical worker compensation. According to the Economic Policy Institute, productivity growth far outpaced wage growth for the median worker, signaling that gains from technology and economic expansion have accrued disproportionately to capital owners and high‑skill labor. This productivity-pay gap signals that, even before AI’s full impact arrives, workers were not sharing equitably in productivity-driven prosperity.

The pace of technological change means millions of Americans face an uncertain labor market. Young workers entering the workforce find fewer traditional hiring pathways and rising expectations around digital and AI‑related skills. Older workers frequently lack the time or resources to retrain in rapidly shifting skill environments. Across age groups, employers deploying AI experience reduced labor costs and increased productivity, which simultaneously puts pressure on wages and job security.

The reality is stark. The economy may grow, but how the gains are distributed will determine whether everyday Americans thrive or struggle. Without structural policy interventions, technological displacement risks widening income inequality and weakening labor market attachment. The promise of more leisure, education, and family time from productivity gains remains theoretical. If workers lack stable incomes, employment opportunities, or bridging support, the rest won’t matter.

But, this is where the “cries for UBI” become most vocal.

The Wrong Solution

Legendary investor Howard Marks has described AI’s impact on employment as “terrifying.” He emphasized that work provides purpose and identity beyond mere income. Notably, he stated that “…financial support alone will not replace the psychological and social benefits of employment.” That is a crucially important statement, which we now have the data to support. Universal Basic Income (UBI) is the default proposal to offset the impacts of increased AI productivity. The logic sounds simple enough: “If AI displaces workers, send checks to households to replace lost wages and economic stability returns.”

The problem is that the evidence does not support this conclusion.

Following the pandemic-driven shutdown of the economy, we sent checks to households, which was a form of Universal Basic Income. Many articles espoused the benefits of such an operation, but the results were far less appealing. Surging inflation eroded the benefits of the stimulus and left Americans far worse off than they would have been otherwise. However, other real-time tests have also yielded less than promising outcomes.

We previously discussed one of the UBI experiments, which found predictable results. Short-term relief did not translate into higher employment, improved skills, or long-term income growth. Cash transfers temporarily increased consumption but did not raise productivity, increase labor force participation, or improve economic mobility.

“Participants in the study generally did not use the extra time to seek new or better jobs—even though younger participants were slightly more likely to pursue additional education. There was no clear indication that the participants in the study were more likely to take the risk of starting a new business, although Vivalt points out that there was a significant uptick in “precursors” to entrepreneurialism. Instead, the largest increases were in categories that the researchers termed social and solo leisure activities.”

The Argument magazine also reviewed multiple studies on guaranteed income and reached a similar conclusion. While recipients reported lower stress and higher short-term satisfaction, these gains faded quickly. Employment outcomes showed little improvement, job search intensity declined in several cases, and participation in education and retraining did not rise significantly.

In other words, giving people money without purpose helped much less than promised.

The core flaw in UBI is structural, as it treats income as the problem. Employment is the real issue. Yes, work provides wages, but it also offers skill development, social structure, and a sense of purpose, along with long-term stability. A simple check replaces none of those, and unfortunately, as 2020 shows, when producers realize that checks are being sent, they raise prices to capitalize on it. In other words, an artificial increase in incomes will quickly be absorbed by higher prices (inflation), effectively rendering the UBI useless.

Here is the most critical point.

“An economy cannot function on transfers alone; production must precede consumption. UBI reverses this order.“

Cost also matters. A national UBI program large enough to offset AI-driven displacement would require trillions of dollars annually. Funding such a program would either require higher taxes, debt expansion, or both. While each option will reduce future growth, higher taxes reduce investment incentives, while increased debt raises interest costs and crowds out private capital. Neither path supports long-term prosperity.

UBI also weakens the labor signal. Wages communicate where labor is needed, and training follows opportunity. UBI dulls this signal by separating income from work, and, over time, workforce attachment erodes, skills decay, and reentry into employment becomes increasingly complex. This dynamic showed up repeatedly in pilot programs.

Most importantly, UBI avoids the hard work of reform. It sidesteps education reform, workforce retraining, mobility assistance, and pro-growth labor policy. It accepts displacement as inevitable and permanent. History shows this approach fails, and past technological shifts succeeded because workers moved into new roles. In other words, policy supported adaptation, not withdrawal.

AI productivity gains will demand active solutions, not government gifts. Skill development, apprenticeships, employer-based training, wage insurance, and mobility support. These tools address displacement directly, while UBI does not.

Defaulting to UBI is an admission of policy failure and signals surrender to the disruption rather than managing it. The United States grew prosperous by expanding opportunity, not replacing work with checks. That lesson remains relevant today as AI continues to reshape the economy.