Originally published on Substack. 

If the economy feels harder to navigate—even after tax cuts, deregulation, and promises of growth—there’s a reason. I’ve seen it before, up close, from inside the White House.
​
This isn’t hindsight punditry. I lived it. Not sure how or why it happened, but God.

I served at the Office of Management and Budget from June 2019 through May 2020, at the pleasure of President Donald Trump as a political appointee as associate director for economic policy (“chief economist”).

I worked on what became the president’s final budget, which included $4.6 trillion in proposed savings over a decade—documented in the OMB Budget Historical Tables and scored against Congressional Budget Office baselines.
And even that wasn’t enough.

I’m writing this now because the second Trump administration reflects a deeper shift—away from pro-growth reform and toward national conservatism using progressive tools. If this continues, it will make life harder for millions of Americans, regardless of intent.

My goal here isn’t to attack; it’s to share lessons learned, warn about concerns, and offer a better path forward.

​What I Supported—and What I Warned About

Inside the administration, I strongly supported policies that genuinely helped people prosper:

• Tax relief and marginal rate reductions, especially the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which improved incentives for work, saving, and investment
• Deregulation, particularly in energy, finance, and labor markets, with compliance-cost reductions
• Pro-growth reforms that trusted people and markets—not Washington—to allocate resources

But I consistently raised concerns—internally—about three areas:

• Trade protectionism, which I warned would raise relative prices and distort supply chains—later confirmed by research
• Immigration restrictions, which reduce labor supply and long-run growth, as documented later
• Overspending, which I argued would eventually overwhelm much of the benefits of tax cuts and deregulation, which it did

At OMB, many of us pushed hard for spending restraint. The uncomfortable truth is that spending discipline was not a top priority for the president or many agency heads. Not then. And judging by today’s policies, definitely not now.

Internally, the warning was clear—and it bears repeating today: excessive spending and trade protectionism would undo the gains from tax cuts and deregulation.

When COVID Hit, Government Power Took Over

When COVID escalated in early 2020, I was often working with our senior leadership team at OMB and other executive personnel to devise ways to get government out of the way, not expand it—through regulatory relief, waivers, and flexibility consistent with OMB emergency guidance.

I also sat—more than once—in the White House’s Situation Room with economic teams to discuss how people (the economy) would respond to different policy paths.

I was vehemently opposed to lockdowns.

I warned senior leadership and others intensely that the policies being pushed by Dr. Anthony Fauci and others would:

• Break market coordination (supported by analyses on mobility restrictions and economic activity)
• Destroy small businesses (shown in data)
• Centralize power (massive expansion in spending by Congress and Fed)
• Cause long-run damage far worse than acknowledged (education loss, lockdown-related deaths, etc.)

Ultimately, whether President Trump agreed or not, he went along with lockdowns. That decision became one of the largest government failures in modern history—economically, socially, and institutionally.

Lockdowns didn’t just pause the economy. They rewired the relationship between government and markets, normalizing trillions in new spending, debt monetization by the Federal Reserve, and executive control over daily life.
Nearly every affordability crisis we face today traces back to then.

Why I’m More Concerned Today

Back then, there were still people inside the administration pushing back—arguing for restraint, markets, and limits on government power.

Today, I’m not sure that’s true.
​
It increasingly looks like national conservatives (“natcons”) have captured the MAGA policy agenda and are comfortable with:

• Government picking winners and losers through subsidies and mandates
• Price controls and caps on interest rates for credit cards
• Protectionism as an erratic policy with high tariff rates

• Industrial policy and subsidies for purchase of a share of Intel, use of $200 billion to purchase mortgage backed securities, Trump accounts, Trump RX, and more
• Carveouts and exemptions instead of pro-growth tax policy

That’s not conservatism.

It’s not libertarianism.

And it’s not free-market capitalism.
​
Functionally, it’s progressivism with different branding—and it erodes the institutional framework that made American prosperity possible.

Spending is the Problem: Economic Chain Reaction Too Few People See

Here are the steps for how spending seems benign but it is a malignant cancer metastasizing throughout our lives and livelihoods:

1. Overspending leads to deficits.
2. Deficits add to debt.
3. Debt pushes interest rates higher.
4. Higher rates attract foreign capital, strengthening the dollar.
5. A stronger dollar widens trade deficits (not an issue but some hate it), which politicians then “fix” with tariffs.
6. Higher rates pressure the Fed to buy Treasury debt.
7. Debt monetization fuels inflation, distorting the orders of production while reducing real wages and increasing inequality and poverty.

​This isn’t ideology. It’s arithmetic. And it’s happening now.

What Should Be Done Instead

The hopeful part is that none of this is irreversible.
​
That’s why my work has focused on sustainable budgeting with groups like Americans for Tax Reform, the Club for Growth Foundation, and others. You can see that framework here:

• Let Americans Prosper Project: Ensuring Fiscal Sustainability for America’s Future
• Responsible State Budgets Across the U.S.

States that limit spending growth to population growth plus inflation often run surpluses, cut taxes sustainably, and avoid debt spirals.

Washington should finally learn from them.
​
A real pro-growth agenda would:

• Spend less—now, not later (yes, cutting government spend is pro-growth!)
• End trade protectionism (end tariffs and have the focus on what we can control regarding policies at home instead of trying to change policies abroad)
• Reject price controls (say no to credit card interest rate caps, no to MFN drug pricing, and more)
• Stop picking winners and losers (don’t take shares of private businesses, don’t give $1,000 of taxpayer money to parents with newborns, don’t remove specific things like tips, overtime SS income, interest on car loans from the tax code but instead lower and flatten the income tax rates)

• Unleash supply in housing, energy, healthcare, and capital markets (end Dodd-Frank , CFPB and Section 1033 rule, empower patients, and remove incentives in demand and supply side of housing and other markets)
• Let people in markets work!

A Final, Personal Note—and a Small Ask

I’m not writing this to relitigate the past—or to score political points.

I’m writing it because I’ve seen how quickly good intentions turn into bad outcomes when government power replaces market institutions. I’ve also seen how powerful growth can be when policymakers trust people, markets, and sound rules.

The Trump administration has governed for growth before. It can do so again. But only if it rejects progressive tools—no matter how they’re labeled—and recommits to the institutions that allow people to prosper.
​
As Milton Friedman reminded us, policies should be judged by results, not intentions.

Originally published at Kansas Policy Institute. 

​The Kansas State government may be collecting more money than expected, but that should make lawmakers nervous, not comfortable. 

Individual income tax collections are surging, but at the same time retail sales are slowing and corporate income tax revenues are weakening. When workers get paid more while consumers and businesses pull back, the economy is sending a warning.

This tax revenue surge is not the result of strong economic growth. It is largely the product of inflation pushing nominal wages higher and forcing Kansans into higher tax payments even as their real purchasing power falls. 

Meanwhile, households are cutting back and businesses are earning less. That combination matters because it shows where the cost of government is landing. It is landing on workers and families, not on expanding production or investment.

Basic economics explains why this is unsustainable. Durable tax revenue growth comes from rising productivity, business investment, and real income gains. Revenue growth driven by inflation and wage pressure is temporary. 

When consumption slows and profits shrink, the tax base eventually follows. Kansas is already seeing early signs of that shift.

Despite these signals, state spending continues to grow as if revenue strength will last forever. 

The 2025 Kansas Policy Institute Green Book shows Kansas state government spending per resident has climbed to $5,428, ranking 23rd nationally. State and local tax collections per person reached $6,326, ranking 24th. That places Kansas among the higher tax states in the region without the population growth or economic performance to support it.

Strong revenues should prompt restraint. Instead, Kansas relies on tax revenue triggers–whereby if revenues increase to a certain level then tax rates are automatically lowered–to claim discipline. Triggers do not control spending. Even after collecting hundreds of millions of dollars more than expected, Kansans received no meaningful tax relief because an arbitrary threshold was narrowly missed. Meanwhile, government spending kept climbing.

This is why Kansas still faces projected deficits later this decade. The problem is not tax relief. It is spending growth that consistently exceeds population growth plus inflation. When the government expands faster than the private economy, fiscal stress is unavoidable.

The Responsible Kansas Budget was created to stop this pattern. Its principle is simple. Government should not grow faster than what the average taxpayer can afford. Limiting spending growth to less than population growth plus inflation aligns the government with household budgets and economic reality.

But applying a spending cap to an already inflated budget is not enough. Kansas must first confront the size of government it has built. Locking in excess spending guarantees future shortfalls. Fiscal responsibility requires reducing unnecessary spending now, then enforcing a firm growth limit going forward. Some of this was driven by COVID era spending but much of it also because legislators and governors simply cannot help themselves to always spend more. 

This approach also restores accountability. When lawmakers operate within a real constraint, priorities matter. Programs cannot grow automatically. Tradeoffs must be justified. Waste becomes harder to defend.

As the 2026 session approaches, pressure will mount to spend what appears to be surplus revenue or delay reform until later. That would repeat the same mistake Kansas has made before. 

Revenue growth driven by inflation is fragile. If retail sales remain weak and business investment continues to soften, income tax collections will not hold up.

Without spending restraint, the next downturn will again lead to budget gaps and calls for higher taxes or service cuts.
Kansas does not need new budget gimmicks. It needs to apply basic economics consistently. Prosperity comes from private sector growth, not government expansion. Strong revenues should be used to slow spending growth, not accelerate it.

 A Responsible Kansas Budget provides a clear framework to do exactly that. The numbers are already clear. The only question is whether lawmakers act before the cycle repeats.

Originally published at The Pelican Institute.

​Federal spending is out of control. Washington is racking up debt faster than at any time outside a world war or national emergency, and the consequences aren’t theoretical. They’re hitting state and local governments hard, especially in Louisiana.

The national debt just blew past $38 trillion. This year’s deficit alone will be about $2 trillion, fueled not by declining revenues (they’re up!) but by a refusal to curb spending. And that spending spree is already showing up in Louisiana’s economy.

Louisiana’s Labor Market Shows a Slowing Recovery

The latest job numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveal that Louisiana added just 19,100 nonfarm jobs over the past year, a 1.0% increase as of August 2025 (latest BLS data available). That might sound encouraging in isolation, but zoom out, and it becomes a red flag.

Many neighboring states are growing faster. In a region where competitive tax structures and stronger labor markets are drawing people and capital, Louisiana risks getting left behind. A 1.0% job growth rate won’t be enough to reverse declining population trends, expand the tax base, or lift incomes. And here’s where it all ties back to Washington: Federal fiscal recklessness is magnifying Louisiana’s economic vulnerability.

Runaway Federal Spending = Higher Costs, Lower Growth

As the federal government borrows trillions of dollars to cover unsustainable spending, interest rates rise. That makes it more expensive for states and local governments to borrow for infrastructure, schools, and basic services. It drives up costs on mortgages, car loans, and business financing, squeezing Louisiana families and small businesses already facing affordability challenges.

And federal uncertainty breeds local instability. When D.C. starts trimming transfers, grants, or matching funds to rein in deficits, states like Louisiana, which rely heavily on federal support, will feel the crunch first. Whether it’s Medicaid, disaster aid, or education funding, when federal budgets tighten, fragile state budgets get stretched. It’s a perfect storm: Washington overspends, interest rates climb, uncertainty spreads—and Louisiana’s already-sluggish growth stalls further.

The Fire Is Spreading. Baton Rouge Can’t Just Watch.

The implications for Louisiana’s state and local policymakers are clear: don’t wait for D.C. to collapse before acting.

• Cap state spending growth to less than population growth plus inflation. That’s what responsible budgeting looks like, especially when federal instability is looming. 
• Advance pro-growth tax reform. Phase out the income tax. Simplify the tax code. Don’t let Louisiana become even less competitive as other states move ahead. 
• Strengthen local fiscal discipline. Cities and parishes must resist debt-driven budgets and prioritize performance, transparency, and responsible budgeting. 
• Shield the state from federal volatility. Don’t tie Louisiana’s future to Washington’s broken promises; reduce dependency on federal funds.

Congress Must Hear from Louisiana’s Leaders

Louisiana’s congressional delegation has an obligation to act before the fiscal cliff hits. The next budget deal, continuing resolution, or debt ceiling negotiation must include real spending cuts and growth limits—not just political posturing. That means rejecting gimmicks and demanding structural reform. Because the longer Congress delays, the greater the risk that Louisiana becomes collateral damage.

Bottom Line: This Is a Warning

The federal budget isn’t just some distant fight in Washington—it’s a ticking time bomb for states like Louisiana. The combination of slow job growth, rising costs, and economic uncertainty makes Louisiana especially exposed to the consequences of fiscal failure. The job numbers prove it: Louisiana isn’t growing fast enough to absorb the shock. Without immediate policy action—both at the state and federal level—the future looks bleak. The fire is burning. It’s time to break the glass and pull the brake before Louisiana gets scorched.

Originally published on Substack. 

​Black Friday always tells us something about the economy. This year, it tells us everything.

The National Retail Federation expects a record 186.9 million shoppers, the most ever. If you only read headlines, you’d think Americans are overflowing with confidence. They aren’t.
​
According to the Conference Board, consumer confidence fell to 88.7 in November—its lowest point since April and far below the 100–120 range that once signaled stability. Consumer sentiment dropped to near 60. And inflation-adjusted retail sales are flat since 2021.

When record crowds collide with falling confidence, it doesn’t signal prosperity. It signals pressure. Americans aren’t shopping because they feel good. They’re shopping because everything costs more. And the cause of that isn’t mysterious.

It’s federal overspending, inflation, tariffs, and bad policy—not consumer behavior.

Prices Didn’t Rise on Their Own—Policy Made Them Rise

Talk to shoppers and read the reporting, and the pattern is crystal clear.

Reuters highlights shoppers cutting budgets dramatically—one New Yorker dropping her holiday spending from $500 → $300, and a family in Idaho shrinking their budget from $2,000 → $750 due to rising healthcare premiums and higher everyday prices.

Retailers have pulled back on deals because their own costs—driven by tariffs and inflation—keep climbing.
Small appliances that once cost $5 after rebates now cost two to four times more, with fewer promotions and no rebates.

MarketWatch reports that Americans feel pressured to “get the best deals” because their dollars no longer stretch the way they used to. Even off-price retailers are seeing surging demand—not because consumers are thriving, but because they’re searching for value in a high-price world.

Then The Economist drives it home:

Americans are “miserable but still spending.”

That’s not irrational. It’s survival.

Americans Aren’t the Problem—Washington Is

Families don’t always budget perfectly. That’s life. But at least they spend their own money and face their own consequences.

Washington does neither.

The federal government has spent with abandon, avoided accountability by borrowing trillions, and fueled the affordability crisis hurting every household today.

Here are the facts from the ATR Sustainable Budget Project:

• Federal spending is up more than 50% in a decade.
• From 2020–2024, spending grew 10.9% per year—nearly triple the sustainable rate of 3.6%.
• Had Congress followed a responsible population-plus-inflation limit, Washington would have spent $2.2 trillion less this year.
• The U.S. would have $1.8 trillion less debt, instead of adding $14.3 trillion in a decade.

This isn’t complicated. It’s arithmetic. Inflation didn’t happen because of “greed.” Prices didn’t jump because Americans suddenly forgot how to shop.

The affordability crisis is the direct result of overspending and policy mistakes—tariffs that raised consumer prices, regulations that slowed investment, and deficits that stoked inflation.

Families are trying to manage the fallout. Washington is pretending it didn’t cause it.

Bad Policy Creates Bad Incentives

For years, federal policy encouraged households to overspend too:

• Inflation punished saving
• Easy money rewarded borrowing
• “Stimulus” checks trained people to spend rather than invest
• Tariffs raised the price of essentials
• Regulatory uncertainty weakened hiring and wage growth

Households are reacting rationally to bad incentives created by Washington—not some mythical “irrational consumer.” People feel they must “buy now before prices rise further” because, for years, they did rise further.
That isn’t a consumer problem. It’s a policy problem.

Savings and Stability: The Real Engines of Prosperity

Healthy economies depend on savings—the fuel behind entrepreneurship, investment, and long-term growth. But savings erode under inflation. And record federal deficits crowd out private investment.

Yes, households still have more cash than in 2019, but Bank of America finds they’re reluctant to draw it down—because uncertainty is replacing confidence. That uncertainty originates in Washington, not at kitchen tables.

The Fix Is Simple: Spend Less, Grow More, Restore Confidence

America doesn’t need new taxes, new bureaucracies, or performative “populism.” We need one rule: Limit federal spending growth to less than population growth plus inflation.

That’s the Sustainable Budget model—simple, proven, pro-growth, and aligned with the real-world constraints families face every day.

This rule:

• restrains overspending
• cools inflation
• stabilizes debt
• strengthens savings
• boosts investment
• rebuilds consumer confidence

States like Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Texas, and Tennessee already use versions of this framework. Washington can too—if it’s willing to choose discipline over denial.

My Take: Americans Are Doing Their Part. Washington Must Do Its Job.

Black Friday crowds aren’t a sign of a thriving economy. They’re a sign of Americans navigating abnormal economic conditions with grit and creativity—while Washington keeps making things harder.

Families are stretching dollars. Searching for value. Adjusting to higher prices. Washington is doing none of that.
It’s time for the federal government to relearn the lesson every family already knows: You cannot spend money you do not have without consequences.

The path forward is clear:

• Spend less
• Borrow less
• Inflate less
• Save more
• Grow more
• Trust free people, not central planners

That’s how we restore affordability, rebuild confidence, and let people prosper.

Originally published on Substack. 

​The federal government finally reopened — on my 44th birthday (Nov. 12), no less — after the longest government shutdown in American history.

Forty-three days of drama, political brinkmanship, and leadership failures from both parties ended with a massive spending deal that…cut no spending, kept Biden’s bloated post-COVID spending levels, but preserved the provisions in the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill”: expanded Obamacare subsidies that were supposed to expire years ago when Biden ended the emergency declaration but now represent $1.5 trillion in new spending over a decade.

In other words: Congress ended the shutdown by agreeing to spend more with continued trillions of dollars in deficits…to avoid talking about spending. But somehow, in the middle of all this dysfunction, they did find one thing they could agree on: A nationwide ban on hemp-derived THC products starting a year from now.

Yes — the government that can’t pass a real budget and running $2 trillion deficits for a $38 trillion national debt that’s 120% of GDP suddenly found laser-like focus when it came to shutting down an entire estimated $28 billion industry, destroying more than 300,000 jobs, and throwing thousands of small businesses under the regulatory bus.

As I’ve been saying for years: When politicians panic, liberty is the first casualty.

The Ban: A Disaster Wrapped Inside a Spending Bill

Tucked into the agriculture portion of the spending package was a provision banning any hemp-derived consumer product containing more than 0.4 mg of THC per container — far below what many products contains.

​For context:

• A typical edible gummy has 2.5 to 10 mg of THC.
• The 2018 Farm Bill allowed hemp with <0.3% THC by dry weight, not per container.
• This new threshold wipes out 95% of the legal hemp market.

It is, as industry leaders put it, “a complete ban dressed up as a safety rule.”
The ban takes effect one year from passage — unless Congress reverses course. That means the clock is already ticking. And as always, when government swings a hammer, real people get crushed:

• Texas, Kentucky, and Utah — states with major hemp industries — stand to lose thousands of farmers, manufacturers, and retailers.
• Consumers who use hemp products for sleep, chronic pain, PTSD, or simple relaxation lose access to legal, regulated options.
• And prohibition predictably shifts demand to black markets, where quality control is nonexistent and bad actors like drug dealers and cartels thrive.

If this sounds familiar, it should. We’ve run this experiment before — during alcohol prohibition, in the war on drugs, and every time politicians confuse public health with political control.
The result?
More crime. More cartels. More Al Capones. And less safety, less transparency, and less personal responsibility.
Thank You, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul — One Who Tried
Let’s be clear: not every Republican supported this nonsense. US Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) offered an amendment to strike the hemp ban outright. It was the right move — grounded in constitutional principles, federalism, and basic economic sanity. He deserves credit for standing firm for small businesses, property rights, and individual liberty. But most of the Senate ignored him and voted for prohibition anyway — many of whom preach “limited government” while voting like central planners.
Ask yourself: Are lawmakers protecting public safety…or protecting alcohol lobbyists who don’t want competition Because this looks less like moral conviction and more like the oldest story in politics: Baptists and Bootleggers working together.
Economics 101: There’s No Market Failure Here
For government to intervene in a market, there must be a clear, demonstrable market failure — something the private sector cannot solve. That simply doesn’t apply here. There is no imbalance of information: consumers know what a THC gummy is. There is no externality beyond personal choices: adults consume responsibly or not, like alcohol, caffeine, or Tylenol.
There is no monopoly requiring intervention: the hemp market is one of the most competitive sectors in America. What we have instead is a classic case of politicians treating adults like children and industries like political bargaining chips.
Prohibition is not regulation. Prohibition is not safety. Prohibition is not limited government. Prohibition is force — and force fails every time.
The Real Path Forward: Freedom, Federalism, and Civil Society
If Congress wants to keep communities safe and entrepreneurs accountable, here’s the path:
1. Legalize and Decriminalize, Don’t Criminalize and Ban
Prohibition empowers criminals, cartels, and fentanyl. Legal markets empower consumers, safety, transparency, and competition.
2. State-Level Regulation, not Bans, Work Better
Hemp is overwhelmingly a local and intrastate industry — making it a textbook case for federalism. Let states set testing standards, retail rules, and age limitations, not bans like Texas tried this year and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott vetoed and issued an executive order for 21+ purchases and not near sensitive locations like schools (should be legislation instead of EO as executives are getting too much power these days among populists).



3. Civil Society > Federal Bureaucracy
Addiction and misuse require family support, churches, nonprofits, mental-health expertise, and community care — not another round of federal raids or one-size-fits-all bans.
4. Respect Adults, Respect Markets
Consumers deserve choice. Entrepreneurs deserve opportunity. Liberty requires both.
Conclusion: If Congress Won’t Protect Liberty, We Must
This entire episode — the shutdown, the spending bill, the hemp ban — reveals a simple truth: Washington will spend endlessly, regulate recklessly, and ban freely unless the American people push back.
But there is good news: Liberty is resilient. Entrepreneurs are resilient. And Americans overwhelmingly prefer freedom over prohibition.
The hemp ban doesn’t take effect for one full year. That means now is the time — for advocacy, legislation, litigation, and education. And as someone who’s spent his career fighting for pro-growth, pro-freedom, pro-prosperity policy, I can tell you:

This fight is winnable. Let’s get to work.

​— Vance Ginn, Ph.D.