Stop H.R.28 - Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2025

An activist friend of mine, referring to a proposed Federal law,  posted the following on March 3, 2025:

My political post for the month: some may be aware that this evening the Senate will be voting on the Protection of women in sports act *, which would prevent those with bats & balls, and those who identify with those who don’t have them, from competing against those who were born without them. This is a law that supports women in sports, and clearly those who oppose it really don’t care about women losing athletic opportunities and achieving the success they deserve. How anyone could support a political party that supports this travesty is beyond me! It amazes me that the Republican Senators need just 3 Democratic votes to pass this legislation and that it is uncertain they will get them. It is this sort of outrageous policy stance that is causing Democrats - and will continue to - lose elections. #protection of women in sports act [sic]

My Comments:

I agree with the intent but not the bill. These decisions should be left to the governing bodies of the particular sports organizations, be that be school boards, rule-making bodies of private sports institutions, et al. As a believer in reigning in the size and scope of government, especially the Federal Government, I don’t want to have Congress wading into this issue. As I recall, Trump wants to eliminate the Department of Education and leave education to the states. I agree. As I understand this Act, it applies only to school athletic programs. If Trump means what he says, he will veto this bill if it ever gets to his desk.

My friend responded:

my take is that because of the law Title IX, the regulations propagated by the federal government and the several “dear colleague“ letters that have been issued by the DOE, requiring adherence to DOE policy statements or threatening revocation of funding, this can only be resolved at the federal level. The alternative is that you could have Lea Thomas’s spring up in various states competing against women in other states that prohibit those with bats and balls from competing against those without. It’s handled with federal level legislation. [sic]

• 
  

My reply:

It’s already been resolved—by the courts, which threw out Biden’s twisted LBGTQ policy in its entirety a week and a half before Trump took office. “The alternative” is exactly the point—it’s rightfully and properly an issue for the states and their courts. Title IX is a bad law. It invites twisted interpretations. Congress should focus its energies on repealing, or at least amending, Title IX. H.R.28 is an unnecessary and dangerous escalation in Federal power over education.

For the record, I support the complete separation of education and state—and a Constitutional Amendment to lock in that principle—in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of church and state, and I will support any legislation that advances educational freedom toward that ultimate goal.

* [Note: The bill failed to get the votes in the Senate.]

Related Reading:

Beware of Federal Education Policies—Even If You Like Them by Kerry McDonald for FEE

Transgender vs. Transgender Impersonator [aka gender identity]

Crossing, a Transgender Memoir by Dierdre McCloskey

On the ‘Transgender’ Phenomenon

Why elite women’s sports need to be based on sex, not gender Doriane Lambelet Coleman

Beneath the Title IX Controversy

Toward a Free Market in Education: School Vouchers or Tax Credits? by me for TOS

Education in a Free Society—C. Bradley Thompson for The Objective Standard

QUORA: 'What is one constitutional amendment that should be added to the U.S. Constitution that does not exist today? Why does it need to be added?'

The Educational Bonanza in Privatizing Government Schools—Andrew Bernstein for The Objective Standard

The Idiotic “Economic Blackout” Charade

CNN reported on the February 28, 2025 “economic blackout. In Today’s ‘economic blackout’ began from an unlikely source. But it’s tapped into Americans’ anger, CNN’s  Nathaniel Meyersohn reports:

In early February, John Schwarz, a self-described “mindfulness and meditation facilitator,” proposed a 24-hour nationwide “economic blackout” of major chains on the last day of the month.

Schwarz urged people to forgo spending at Amazon, Walmart, and all other major retailers and fast-food companies for a day. He called on them to spend money only at small businesses and on essential needs.

“The system has been designed to exploit us,” said Schwarz, who goes by “TheOneCalledJai” on social media, in a video to his roughly 250,000 followers on Instagram and TikTok. “On February 28, we are going to remind them who really holds the power. For one day, we turn it off.”

I posted this article to Facebook, with this commentary, slightly edited for clarity:

John Schwarz, the architect of the recent  “economic blackout” of major retailers and fast-food companies, says the purpose is to protest “the system [that] has been designed to exploit us.” Are these the same companies growing big by successfully “exploiting” us by providing mass market products that improve our lives and that we willingly buy? Is this the same system, called Capitalism, that grew out of the Founding principles of unalienable individual rights that make America great and moral and our lives so rich and free?

Schwarz demands that we “spend money only at small businesses and on essential needs.” Are these the same small businesses many of whom started the bait-&-switch practice of greeting us with a welcome sign for credit cards, only to then charge us a penalty for using them? And why only “essential needs?” Is poverty the goal of this guy? What makes our lives worth living is that we can afford much more than essential needs.

Schwarz’s ignorant crusade is, of course, Marxist nonsense. Companies no more exploit us than consumers exploit them. Companies engage in voluntary trade with their customers. Trade is win-win and thus non-exploitative. Count me out of this and other such idiotic, anti-American charades. I won’t join the army of useful idiots who blindly fall for it. Business—especially big business—is today’s most persecuted minority. We should be thankful for big business and instead be protesting the encroachment of big government on our lives and freedoms.  

The article puts MAGA as the inspiration for the protest. But undoubtedly it was probably inspired, at least in part, by Joe Biden’s Big Lie of blaming private enterprise for the inflation the Federal Government's own policies caused. Remember “shrinkflation,” “greedflation,” and “corporate Greed?”

Related Listening:

America’s Persecuted Minority: Big Business by Ayn Rand, Recorded live at Chicago’s McCormick Place. [This talk was also published as an essay in Rand’s book Capitalism, The Unknown Ideal.]

Obama’s Fascist “Partnership” With Big Business

B of A's Debit Charges: It's About More Than Fees

Big Government vs. Big Business; or, Political Power vs. Economic Power

The Dollar and the Gun by Harry Binswanger

The Star-Ledger Exploits a Workers Death to Attack Big Business

Quora: ‘Is capitalism based on the exploitation of others?’

DEI Exposed for What it Means, and Where it Leads

New Jersey Spotlight News )NJSN) has a very revealing piece on President Trump’s war on the Left’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) movement—Taylor Jung’s ‘Chilling effect’ feared as Trump administration attacks DEI. Here is an annotated review of Jung’s “news” article. Indented portions are direct quotes from the article, with my emphasises.

Escalating federal pressure to end diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives is raising more questions than answers about the future of anti-discrimination programming in New Jersey and across the nation.

I have observed that NJSN leans strongly Left in its reporting. So right off the bat, incredibly disingenuous! DEI requires discrimination. Only the tribalism of relying on statistical "disparities" rather than actual evidence can justify seeing DEI programs as an anti-discrimination tool.

  

Last week, the Department of Justice signaled it could criminally investigate companies engaged in what it called “illegal” race- and sex-based discrimination under the “guise” of DEI. 

Note the framing. DEI requires race- and sex-based discrimination to achieve its self-described “equitable” ends, which means eliminating statistical disparities. Yet, Jung prefaces its reporting with a “what it called ‘illegal’” preface, and followed it up by referring to DEI as a “guise”—to what end . . . to protect racism? Apparently:

Legal and workforce experts say it could have a “chilling” effect on programs meant to combat prejudice 

How do you combat prejudice through race- and sex-based discrimination? 

and to promote equitable working environments 

"Equitable" means fair and impartial. How does discrimination lead to that? Of course, to the Progressive/Woke Left, equitable means Egalitarianism, the enemy of fairness and merit. 

It is also not clear what criminal laws the Trump administration is citing, those experts say.

“I think that, yes, that is an effort to utilize the kind of mechanism of civil rights law, not in favor of the groups that have been historically served by those laws because they were the impetus for those laws, but instead to say, ‘We believe society has gone too far in the direction of protecting the interest of those groups,’” said Stacy Hawkins, a professor at Rutgers Law School.

Note what's missing from this diatribe—the individual. And the individual is who gets discriminated against—i.e., marginalized, if the Left's favorite term has any meaning—when "protecting the interest of those groups." Groups are made up of individuals. Those who erase the individual from any moral, social or political consideration are not defenders of any group, and the Civil Rights Laws do not and were never meant to protect groups, only individuals. The law should never favor or disfavor any group. It should universally secure and protect individual rights and equal protection of the law. 

In order to systematize sex and race based discrimination, the DEI crowd is totally misrepresenting the Civil Rights Laws. Certainly, the historical  discrimination against black Americans were “the impetus for those laws." But the Civil Rights laws were never a mechanism for reverse discrimination. They insert universal principles meant to protect all groups from the kind of discriminatory injustices that victimized the black group, through the mechanism—the principles—of individual rights.

Workers are protected under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits workplace discrimination based on gender, race, color, religion and nationality. But Title VII is a civil law, not a criminal one.

This may be true. But whether civil or criminal, DEI requires precisely what Title VII prohibits—workplace discrimination based on gender, race, color, religion and nationality (Whether this provision should apply to private enterprise is another discussion).

This should be obvious to any objective person. I can’t believe Jung can’t see the blazing contradiction in his reporting. So, why DEI? 

“It is unconscionable that the Trump administration would coopt the language and vision of the civil rights movement in these executive orders as it attempts to send our nation back to an era of rampant, state-sanctioned discrimination [!!!]

 Which is exactly what DEI does. Biden's "whole of government approach" to systemitizing DEI is new era of rampant, state-sanctioned discrimination. This is exactly what Trump's policy is designed to save us from, as is obvious to anyone with any inkling of understanding capacity. By now, the absurdity and evasiveness of this article can not be hidden. Read on:

Ultimately, these measures drive us farther away from a future when health is no longer a privilege, but a right for all,” said Dr. Richard Besser, president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. (The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is a funder of NJ Spotlight News.)

There you have it. The ultimate goal of collectivist DEI. Totalitarian Socialism. Who would enforce this "right" to health? Slaves, that's who. If someone needs health care as a right, then those with the capability to provide it—the doctors and other health professionals—cannot refuse to provide it. Those who pay for it cannot refuse. The same goes for any economic "right"—a "right" to housing, education, food. Socialism is slavery, and totalitarian Socialism is the ultimate goal of anyone who preaches Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. After all, Socialism requires collectivism, and what better way to condition people to accept collectivism than by systematizing the easiest form of collectivism—racism.

Related Reading:

Discrimination and Disparities by Thomas Sowell

The Racism of “Diversity” by Peter Schwartz for Capitalism Magazine

Don’t Allow the Left to Own ‘Diversity’

SEC’s Boardroom ‘Diversity’ Rule Is Racist, Unnatural, and Politically Motivated

Individualism vs. Collectivism: Our Future, Our Choice—Craig Biddle

DelBarton Student’s 'Diversity' Initiative, Though Well-Meaning, is Based on Counter-Productive Premises

The Founding Fathers, Not ‘Diversity,’ is the Solution to ‘Our Racialized Society’

From 'Diversity Maps' to Forced Integration: Obama's Racist Housing Policy Masks the Real Problem—Lack of Free Markets

This is Rich—a ‘Diversity’ Exec Crying ‘Racism.’

U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, the Fed, ‘Diversity’, and Racism

Some Thoughts On Trump’s immigration Policies

First, let's look at the entire context. Remember that Joe Biden caused the problem that Trump is now reacting to. It was Biden who ignored the rule of law to unsecure the border and open the flood gates. That said, these Biden immigrants were essentially invited in by an American president. Is it now fair to unconditionally deport them? Does Trump's "mass deportation" scheme not amount to America breaking its promise to these same immigrants? I agree that presidents should do their Constitutional duty to enforce the laws. But it was Biden who failed in this duty. I find it incredibly disingenuous for Progressives to now sing the siren song of the benefits and rights of American immigration while at the same evading the person responsible for the migrant problem we now have, which in part helped elect Trump—Joe Biden. Yes, immigration is on balance good—and entirely beside the point. If Biden had had a rational immigration policy, there wouldn't be any Trump immigration executive orders to get outraged over.

That said, I don't agree with Trump's mass deportation solution. Yes, Trump is enforcing the law, after Biden flouted it. But the entire context should consider fairness and justice. What Trump should do now is to establish a legal pathway for the non-criminal, non-national-security-risk Biden immigrants—which is most of them—to remain in our country, as a matter of moral imperative. They uprooted their lives to make the grueling and dangerous trip to America, after all, on the open invitation of an American president, Joe Biden. It is that consideration that should hold sway. We are, after all, dealing with human lives who merely want to live in freedom and make a living.

For what it’s worth, my stance on immigration has been for open immigration coupled with strong, secure borders to screen out people who represent health, criminal, or national security threats. My position has evolved to include the ability to support themselves through work as a condition of entry. 

Related Reading:

Six big immigration changes under Trump - and their impact so far by Nadine Yousif

BBC News

Time to Rethink Immigration

My LTE on Immigration

Immigration and Individual Rights, by Craig Biddle

Immigrants on the Dole? That's a Myth, by Shikha Dalmia (Bloomberg)

Temp Workers’ 'Abuse' Stems from Immigration Policy

Armstrong on Myths and Facts about a Rights-Respecting Immigration Policy

Energy Entrepreneur Chris Wright Will Make a Great Energy Secretary

 Politico reports that Chris Wright has been confirmed by the Senate for Energy Secretary. This is great news! Not surprisingly, the Washington Post previously ran an article during his confirmation hearings that Trump energy pick misinterprets studies to support claims, scientists say, which claims that “Chris Wright cites data to back his claim there is no climate crisis. Authors of the papers he cites say he is misinterpreting their work.”

But Roger Pielke Jr., a contributor to the IPCC and expert on climate and climate damage impacts, countered with “The Washington Post published what can only be described as a hit piece on the nominee for Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright.”

I posted these Comments on the WAPO article, which for some reason were removed:

“Scientists say!” OK, but what’s the whole truth? What is often missed is that what the IPCC actually says is not the same as what someone says it says. Roger Pieke Jr. clears up this charade in his detailed report U.S. Hurricane Overview 2024. Pielke sets quotes from this article next to quotes from the IPCC research. Wright actually gets it right. 

Unfortunately, weather and climate have become so politicized by the Left that misinformation is rampant. That’s why Energy entrepreneur Chris Wright is a GREAT CHOICE for Energy Secretary! Not only is he an expert in fossil fuel production, by far our most vital energy source, he’s not corrupted by the Chicken Little "climate crisis" hysteria and its blind, fanatical push to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by strangling fossil fuel production. While recognizing that climate warming is a concern, Wright knows it's not the only concern or even the most important one. Wright realizes that reliable, affordable, plentiful energy is vastly more important to human well-being than a slightly cooler world. 

In a field of Trump cabinet appointees that is very mixed, to put it mildly, Chris Wright is one of Trump's best, and he'll be working with another good pick, Doug Burgum, who will be the chairman of Trump's new Council of National Energy. Our energy security will be in much safer hands and more affordable than under the current policies. And robust reliable energy production is precisely what we’ll need if indeed it turns out that weather extremes do intensify. 

I also posted on Facebook:

Energy entrepreneur Chris Wright is a GREAT CHOICE for Energy Secretary! Out will go the Chicken Little "climate crisis" hysteria with its blind, fanatical push to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by strangling fossil fuel production. While recognizing that climate warming is a concern, Wright knows it's not the only concern or even the most important one. Wright realizes that reliable, affordable, plentiful energy is vastly more important to human well-being than a 1 degree cooler world. I agree with Robert Bryce that "Wright will have his hands full cleaning house at the DOE, an agency that has, under [current Secretary] Granholm, been captured by anti-hydrocarbon NGOs and the anti-industry industry . . . A lot of damage has been done to our electric grid and to America’s energy sector over the past few years. It’s hard to imagine a better repairman than Chris Wright."

Wright is one of Trump's best cabinet picks yet, and he'll be working with another good pick, Doug Burgum, who will be the chairman of Trump's new Council of National Energy.

Finally, back in November 2024, POLITICO reported that Trump taps oil executive Chris Wright as Energy secretary. It had this to say: 

The oil executive and GOP fundraiser disputes the need to fight against climate change.

President-elect Donald Trump named oil industry CEO Chris Wright to lead the Energy Department, installing a vocal critic of government efforts to fight climate change as the head of the agency at the forefront of the Biden administration’s clean energy push.

Wright, if confirmed by the Senate, is likely to be one of the loudest voices in the administration against measures to curb greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels that are raising the planet’s temperature and causing an upsurge in extreme weather.

Politico, echoing the Left's talking points, implicitly criticizes energy entrepreneur Chris Wright for being "critical of government efforts to fight climate change [and] the Biden administration’s 'clean energy push,'" as well as being a "voice . . . against measures to curb greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels." 

Energy entrepreneur Chris Wright is a GREAT CHOICE for Energy Secretary! Out will go the Chicken Little "climate crisis" hysteria with its blind, fanatical push to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by strangling fossil fuel production. While realizing that climate warming is a concern, Wright recognizes it's not the only concern or even the most important one. Wright realizes that reliable, affordable, plentiful energy is vastly more important to human well-being than a 1 degree cooler world. I agree with Robert Bryce that "Wright will have his hands full cleaning house at the DOE, an agency that has, under [current Secretary] Granholm, been captured by anti-hydrocarbon NGOs and the anti-industry industry . . . A lot of damage has been done to our electric grid and to America’s energy sector over the past few years. It’s hard to imagine a better repairman than Chris Wright."

Wright is one of Trump's best cabinet picks yet, and he'll be working with another good pick, Doug Burgum, chairman of the new Council of National Energy.

Related Reading:

Chris Wright, An Unapologetic Energy Humanist, Will Be The Next Secretary Of Energy, by Robert Bryce, and energy expert 

For the first time, the DOE will be led by someone from the energy sector.

Energy-sector expertise has never been a prerequisite for the Secretary of Energy. At least, it hasn’t been until now.

That history is relevant because it underscores how remarkable it is that Trump has named Chris Wright, the founder and CEO of Denver-based Liberty Energy, an oilfield services company, as his nominee for Secretary of Energy. It’s not an exaggeration to say that Wright is the most qualified person ever named to that position. As Trump explained in his announcement, “Chris was one of the pioneers who helped launch the American shale revolution that fueled American energy independence, and transformed the global energy markets and geopolitics.”

Trump said that in addition to Energy Secretary, Wright will serve on the new Council of National Energy led by Doug Burgum, the governor of North Dakota, who is Trump’s nominee for Interior Secretary.

Climate Change Catastrophists Who Oppose Nuclear have Anti-Humanist Premises

Challenge the ‘100% Renewables” Fanatics on their Underlying anti-Humanism

Human Energy Needs vs. 'Mother Earth'

“Peoples Climate March” is No Friend of Humanity

The Environmentalists’ War on People—Ari Armstrong for The Objective Standard

"Citizens Climate Lobby" Turns to Force to Protect Nature at Human Expense