We wish a prayerful Ash Wednesday and a spiritually rich Lent to those who celebrate. Your correspondent is currently fighting a stomach bug which is certainly helping him with the Ash Wednesday fast, since he couldn't eat if he wanted to.

And yet, we love you so much, dear subscribers (many people are saying we've got the best subscribers, lovely subscribers) that we dragged ourselves out of our bed of sickness to watch President Trump's speech to the Joint Session of Congress, and the Democrat response.

We think our preview was pretty much on the money. There was not much policy news in the speech. It was a rah-rah, political speech. We must say we were affected by the story of little DJ Daniel, the cancer-afflicted boy who wants to be a police officer and who President Trump made a honorary Secret Service Agent—and disgusted by the chamber's Democrats' refusal to stand up for Laken Riley.

Astute observation from Politico this morning: "Stuff he didn’t mention at all: The words “middle class” … Medicaid or Medicare … artificial intelligence … Chinese President Xi Jinping … one big, beautiful bill vs. two … NATO."

Here are the policy announcements that stuck out at us from the President's speech—not because they were the most important, but because we thought they were noteworthy.

Encouraging the mining of rare earths. Looks like they're not just going to come from Greenland or Ukraine. It will be interesting what that cashes out as in terms of permitting regime. And perhaps subsidies? The problem with rare earths is not just the difficulty (and environmental concerns, though they can be managed) of mining them but the fact that they must be embedded in a supply chain, which is another reason why most of the rare earth mining is in China.

The gold card. This is clearly an idea President Trump has taken to heart!

Making interest payments on car loans tax-deductible as long as the car is Made in America. We think that's a new one! Lovers of economic efficiency will be thrilled, we know.

Reciprocal tariffs are set to kick in on April 2nd. What also struck us is that Trump also said America would retaliate against non-tariff barriers. It will, once again, be interesting to see what form that takes.

Repeal of the CHIPS Act. The President added that the money saved would go to pay down the debt. We're curious what this would look like given that most projects have already broken ground and the President supports at least some level of industrial policy. It sounds like gratuitous partisan bluster to us, but the President is not to be underestimated.

Mexico handing over cartel leaders under threat of tariffs. This may be the most astonishing part of the speech, and of course, details remain to be validated and probably are classified, but it is striking that this hasn't been reported on more. Are you telling us that all this time Mexico could have apprehended drug cartel leaders who were wanted by the United States? And they chose not to? And because of a threat of tariffs they finally did? It's hard to imagine anything more scandalous, more corrupt. This plainly justifies every form of US government bullying toward Mexico.

Creation of an Office of Shipbuilding in the White House and "tax incentives" for shipbuilding. Doing "something" about shipbuilding has been urgent for many years. Hopefully we will soon see what that "something" will be.

Finally, the most beautiful line of the speech, arguing against the transgender craze: "Our message to every child in America is that you are perfect exactly the way God made you."

So that's the President's speech.

What about the Democrat response? As you can tell, we were impressed. And surprised to be impressed.

First, it is a very difficult exercise generally. The visual of the President standing on the rostrum of the House of Representatives, addressing the representatives of the nation, is always a powerful one, and the comparison with the lone person standing in front of a camera with a drab backdrop behind him is unflattering.

Second, the Democrat Party is currently in an identity crisis. What do they stand for? Are they the slaves of "the groups"?

Which is why we were very impressed with freshman Democratic Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin's response. It was basically a moderate, center-left response.

She checked a lot of boxes: we should make more stuff in America (with "union jobs") and reshore from China. The tax code should help businesses create jobs. She attacked Trump's trade war against Canada, fair enough, but which means pointedly not attacking his overall trade agenda. She moaned about the debt, and praised Social Security, Medicare, and VA benefits, pointedly attacking Elon Musk for calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme. She tried to tread a line on the border, agreeing in principle with the idea of border security, but calling it "a distraction". She mostly stayed silent about flashpoint issues, making only an oblique reference to trans athletes—she is still a Democrat.

She struck patriotic notes, calling America "exceptional" on several occasions. There is a quote we wrote down: "We are more than a patch of land. … Generations of us have fought to secure our rights." This is an interesting way to combine the "propositional nation" conception of America with its conception as an incarnate nation. Americans should indeed be proud of their ancestors and their history, but because they fought for the rights in the Constitution.

And finally, she called on people watching her speech to "organize," which is of course how the left wins so many cultural and also policy battles, by out-organizing the Right.

Overall, it was an excellent center-left response to the MAGA agenda, one which points the way to a Democratic Party that can win elections nationally again.

Policy News You Need To Know

#UnitaryExecutive — Justices Roberts and Barrett joined the Supreme Court's liberals to order the Trump Administration to pay out $2 billion in frozen USAID money. Justice Alito wrote a blistering dissent for the minority. Ball is now in the President's court…

#UnitaryExecutive — The NYT makes much of the fact that a "Top New York City FBI Agent" was "forced out" by the new leadership at the DOJ. But the man had, according to the paper's reporting, written an email to colleagues asking them to "dig in" against the new DOJ's priorities. This sort of stuff is simply unacceptable in 2025. The Constitution puts the executive branch under the control of the President of the United States. Nobody elected bureaucrats to do anything except follow directives from political leaders or resign. It's important to set examples early on.

#Budget — Article in the WSJ over the debate on scoring the bill on a "current policy baseline." This is almost a perfectly Washington debate: whether to engage in a bit of kabuki to win at another bit of kabuki (the political importance of the "score"). Note that the amount of money that comes in and out of the Federal government's purse—which is what bond markets actually look at—does not change.

#Life — Politico: "The Trump administration decided yesterday to drop a yearslong legal battle with Idaho over the right to an abortion in a medical emergency, just one day ahead of a major hearing — reversing its stance in one of the highest-profile cases it inherited from the Biden administration"

#Antisemitism — "The Free Press exclusively obtained a letter from the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) to Columbia University interim president Katrina Armstrong, warning that the college could lose $5 billion in federal funding for active grants if it fails to address antisemitism on its campus." This is good, but more importantly it is an examplar of a good broader approach. Universities have become hotbeds of anti-American political activism. They are also dependent on Federal funding. Federal funding should not go to anti-American activities.

#Tariffs #Realignment — Worth noting: the UAW endorsed President Trump's tariff plan.

#Eggs — Egg prices! FTC Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya recently suggested the increase in egg prices could be due to monopoly dynamics. Given that there was a giant culling of birds because of a bird flu scare, it seems like the laws of supply and demand is more likely to blame, as AAF's Fred Ashton reminds us.

#KOSA — Interesting new study looking at Google data to suggest that age-verification bills don't really change search behavior. Not if those laws are easy to get around…

#Crypto — At AAF, Douglas Holtz-Eakin weighs in on the idea of a US crypto reserve.

#DEI — New reporting from John Sailer shows that "the National Science Foundation is currently giving $10 million to implement a DEI-focused hiring program at universities in Maryland, Texas, and North Carolina."