Search Results

By Brian Palmer, CEO of Palmer Angus In rural America, we understand a basic economic truth: when you can’t tell what you’re buying, you can’t price it honestly. And when the price can’t tell the truth, the American rancher gets squeezed. That's where Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling (MCOOL) comes in. MCOOL requires retailers to clearly disclose where beef was born, raised, and processed so consumers know whether they are buying American-raised beef or imported product. It doesn’t ban imports. It doesn’t restrict trade. It simply requires transparency. When MCOOL was in place, shoppers could distinguish U.S. beef from foreign beef at the meat case, and the market could respond accordingly. Without it, imported beef can be blended, packaged, and sold with little meaningful distinction, and most consumers have no idea. Here’s where it hits home. Ground beef isn’t one single cut; it’s a blend. Large processors combine lean trim, often 90% lean (90CL), with fat to reach popular ratios like 80/20. Right now, imported 90CL is averaging around $3.69 per pound , while domestic 90CL is closer to $4.26 per pound , a  $0.57 difference per pound . When there is no mandatory labeling, the cheaper imported lean can be blended into the same grind stream as U.S. beef. Once it’s mixed, origin effectively disappears. That fifty-seven-cent spread becomes a built-in advantage for large packers who can source globally and blend at scale. The math isn’t complicated. Even using a conservative estimate that  3.5 billion pounds of lean trim influence the ground beef supply, a  $0.57 per pound  input advantage translates to roughly  $1.995 billion annually . That’s the procurement edge created when imported beef can flow through the same channels without clear origin disclosure, and it doesn’t stop at the packing level. But the domestic lean trim market is much larger. U.S. domestic lean trim production is estimated at around  9.7 billion pounds annually , and even if we conservatively assume 8 billion pounds, a significant amount of domestic trim is being undervalued. On the retail side, even a modest  $0.30 per pound premium  that consumers are willing to pay for clearly labeled U.S. beef represents roughly  $2.4 billion per year  on 8 billion pounds. But without MCOOL, that price signal can’t reliably make its way back to American ranchers. At CPAC’s Ranchers Coalition, we believe in free markets, but free markets only function when buyers have honest information. MCOOL doesn’t stop trade; it restores transparency. Right now, independent ranchers are forced to compete against imported products that can wear the same face at the meat counter without standing up and saying where it came from. The real price of no MCOOL isn’t just measured in billions of dollars; it’s measured in shrinking herds, struggling ranch families, and rural communities under pressure. If we want a level playing field, it starts with one simple principle: tell the truth on the label.

CPAC is proud to announce that Jack Posobiec is a confirmed speaker for CPAC USA 2026 in Grapevine, Texas, March 25-28. Jack Posobiec is the senior editor at Human Events , where he hosts the podcast Human Events Daily . Before his current editorial work, he served as a political correspondent for One America News Network (OANN) and gained national visibility during the 2016 election as a special projects director for Citizens for Trump . A veteran of the U.S. Navy, Posobiec served as an intelligence officer with deployments to Guantanamo Bay and East Asia before transitioning into political activism. He has frequently appeared at CPAC, advocating for the protection of religious liberty and calling for aggressive action to combat Big Tech censorship. Don’t miss the opportunity to hear Jack Posobiec at CPAC USA 2026!  Reserve your tickets today here .

CPAC Education Coalition partner Sam Sorbo recently shared a powerful story that highlights a core failure in modern education: we have elevated credentials over character. Her daughter, Octavia, was teaching an art class when she noticed one student repeatedly drawing dark, disturbing imagery. Rather than brushing it off as harmless creativity, Octavia recognized something deeper: a young girl struggling internally. She stepped in, offered guidance, and helped redirect the student toward healthier expression. Later, the girl’s mother revealed something telling: she hadn’t enrolled her daughter for art skills. She enrolled her for mentorship. It was never about the art; it was about building and guiding character. That reality should challenge every parent. Children spend more than 1,200 hours a year in school. During that time, they absorb far more than math formulas and grammar rules; they absorb values, assumptions, and worldviews. Yet our culture has conditioned parents to prioritize diplomas over discernment and certifications over character. We carefully vet a babysitter who spends a few hours with our children, but rarely question the worldview of the educators and institutions shaping them every single day. Higher education only reinforces this misplaced trust. Universities continue promoting degrees as the surest path to success, even as academic standards decline and tuition costs skyrocket. Parents are encouraged to ask where their child is going to college, not why. Meanwhile, institutions offer increasingly niche or ideologically driven courses while avoiding serious conversations about moral formation and responsibility. The system expects compliance, not scrutiny. At CPAC’s Education Coalition, we believe education must return to its proper foundation. Academic achievement matters, but character matters more. If children are not taught their inherent worth, personal responsibility, and how to discern right from wrong, no amount of information will prepare them to lead. Knowledge without character is unstable. America does not simply need more graduates; it needs principled leaders. It’s time for parents to demand schools that prioritize influence, integrity, and truth,  because it was never just about the art. Read more from Sam Sorbo here .

In the current age, America faces many threats, both foreign and domestic. One that is often overlooked is the looming threat of a nuclear war with Iran and Iran’s Islamic Regime in general. With its anti-Semitic rhetoric and calls for the destruction of Israel, human rights abuses, promotion of pedophilia in allowing men to marry girls as young as nine years old, and anti-US rhetoric, the current Iranian regime has proven over and over again that it is no friend of the United States.  United Against Nuclear Iran Ambassador and CEO Mark Wallace and his wife, Hiva, spoke at CPAC in DC 2025 about this threat on Friday, February 21, 2025. Wallace criticized the Islamic regime and spoke about its injustices.  “When you snuff out political speech, that’s just the beginning,” he said.  This speech came before CPAC’s announcement of a partnership with United Against Nuclear Iran. Together, they are working to support Iranians in their fight against the regime, as well as supporting Iranians who have been exiled. They have recently launched a website, titled CPAC for Iranians in Exile, to support this mission.   To learn more about this initiative, or to fill out a submission of interest, visit CPAC.org/Iranians .  Make plans to see more great speeches live at CPAC USA 2026 at CPAC.org/USA .

CPAC is proud to announce that Gordon Chang is a confirmed speaker for CPAC USA 2026 in Grapevine, Texas, March 25-28. Gordon Chang is a prominent attorney, author, and geopolitical strategist widely recognized for his expertise on U.S.-China relations. As a CPAC board member and a senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute, Chang contributes to the CPAC Center for Defeating Communism and serves as a leading voice calling for the total economic and technological decoupling of the United States from the Chinese Communist Party. Chang has served as an advisor and provided high-level briefings to the National Intelligence Council, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the U.S. State Department. Chang is a recurring expert witness before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, where he provides testimony on military deterrence and national security threats. Gordon Chang is a frequent speaker at CPAC, providing expert analysis on how America can combat the CCP and communism around the world to protect democracy and liberty. Don’t miss the opportunity to hear Gordon Chang at CPAC USA 2026!  Reserve your tickets today here .

CPAC is proud to announce that Jack Brewer is a confirmed speaker for CPAC USA 2026 in Grapevine, Texas, March 25-28. Jack Brewer is a former NFL star who played from 2002 to 2006 before transitioning into a prominent conservative political career. He served as co-chair for the Black Voices for Trump committee in 2020 and spoke at the Republican National Convention that year. He served as a White House presidential appointee on the Commission on the Social Status of Black Men and Boys and currently chairs the Center for Opportunity Now at the America First Policy Institute. At CPAC in DC 2025, Brewer argued that saving the country begins with saving the family, emphasizing the damage of fatherlessness on new generations. Don’t miss the opportunity to hear Jack Brewer at CPAC USA 2026!  Reserve your tickets today here .

CPAC is proud to announce that the Executive Producer of ‘The Benny Show’ podcast and conservative influencer, Alex Lorusso, is a confirmed speaker for CPAC USA 2026 in Grapevine, Texas, March 25-28. Alex Lorusso is a political commentator and conservative activist, known for engaging young Americans on issues of free speech, limited government, and constitutional values. As the Executive Producer for ‘The Benny Show’ podcast, Lorusso has worked with many prominent figures. By leveraging his knowledge of social platforms, Lorusso has become one of the most visible youth voices in the conservative movement. His social media has mobilized young conservatives and encouraged civic engagement among the next generation of leaders. Speaking at CPAC in DC 2025, Lorusso gave a powerful address about how conservatives can rewrite the cancel culture on social media and stand up for free speech. This is an address you will not want to miss! Don’t miss the opportunity to hear Alex Lorusso at CPAC USA 2026!  Reserve your tickets today here .

CPAC is proud to announce that conservative journalist, commentator, and Senior Editor at the Daily Caller, Amber Duke, is a confirmed speaker for CPAC USA 2026 in Grapevine, Texas, March 25-28. Amber Duke has worked with prominent outlets such as The Hill, The Daily Caller, and Campus Reform. She has become a trusted voice in conservative media, prioritizing journalistic integrity and principled, factual reporting over personal bias. Her reporting and commentary have reached national audiences through both digital and broadcast platforms. Duke is also active on social media, bringing her followers balanced news and commentary in this overwhelming cycle of news. This is an address you will not want to miss! Don’t miss the opportunity to hear Amber Duke at CPAC USA 2026!  Reserve your tickets today here .

Applications are now open for volunteer positions at CPAC USA 2026 in Grapevine, Texas, from March 25-28. CPAC is the premier gathering of conservatives from across America and around the world, bringing together the most influential voices and leaders of the conservative movement. Volunteers are central to the success of the conference. Those who are passionate about the conservative movement and ready to serve in a meaningful capacity are encouraged to apply. Volunteering at CPAC is a distinctive and rewarding experience. Volunteers work alongside fellow conservatives who share a deep commitment to the movement, building relationships and connections that extend well beyond the conference. Volunteers will gain an exclusive, behind-the-scenes perspective on how one of the most consequential conservative gatherings in the nation comes together. Volunteers receive access to the conference, where they will have the opportunity to hear prominent conservative leaders and influential figures deliver remarks from the Main Stage. It is an opportunity to serve the movement, engage with like-minded patriots, and be part of the largest conservative gathering in America. All interested patriots are encouraged to submit their applications today and join the team in Grapevine, Texas, for CPAC USA 2026. Apply here: CPAC.org/volunteer .

Image from Nashville Publicity Group Natasha Owens is making waves again. The patriotic singer-songwriter released her new single, “The Boss,”  on February 6 in response to Bruce Springsteen’s protest song criticizing federal immigration enforcement in Minneapolis. The result? Owens debuted at #1 on the iTunes Rock Chart , knocking Springsteen to #2. She also landed at #2 across all genres , ahead of Springsteen and new releases from Taylor Swift, Bad Bunny, T.I., and others. Owens says the song was written for longtime Springsteen fans who feel alienated. “Bruce Springsteen is an iconic artist… He used to speak for the common man but he’s taken that voice away. I have given it back,” Owens said in a press release. Lyrics from the song reflect that sentiment: "I danced to Rosalita / I shouted out thunder road / I used to believe you sang for me / In those glory days of old" Owens has emerged as a leading voice in the conservative culture renaissance. Her previous hits, including “Trump Won”  and “The Chosen One,”  topped charts and generated billions of social media impressions. “The Chosen One,” inspired by President Trump’s 2024 campaign, went viral and became an unofficial MAGA anthem. Owens recently met with President Trump in the Oval Office to present him with an award plaque commemorating the success of “The Chosen One.” In October, she released her 7th studio album, That America , and continues performing at CPAC, Mar-a-Lago, and conservative events nationwide — and internationally. With “The Boss” climbing the charts, Owens is proving once again that conservative anthems are resonating — and competing at the very top of the music industry. "The Boss" is available for download on iTunes. Watch the official video here .

The rescission of the 2009 Endangerment Finding is one of the most significant regulatory reversals in modern American history. For fifteen years, that single administrative determination served as the legal keystone of federal climate regulation. By declaring that carbon dioxide “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare” under the Clean Air Act, the federal government unlocked authority to regulate nearly every sector of the American economy. Power plants. Automobiles. Manufacturing. Oil and gas production. Financial disclosures. Housing construction. Even supply-chain reporting regimes. Everything flowed from that predicate. Its rescission is not a technical adjustment. It is a structural reset. What Was at Stake in 2009 The Clean Air Act was written to address localized air pollutants—sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter—substances with direct, measurable health impacts. It was never designed as a global climate statute. But when the Endangerment Finding was issued, CO₂—a ubiquitous, naturally occurring gas essential for plant life—was reclassified as a regulated pollutant. That reclassification transformed the statute. After Congress declined to pass cap-and-trade legislation, the executive branch pivoted. The Endangerment Finding became the administrative mechanism to advance climate policy without new legislative authority. From that moment forward: Vehicle emissions standards became greenhouse gas mandates. Power-sector regulation expanded under CO₂ authority. Industrial permitting incorporated carbon accounting. Financial regulators justified “climate risk” rules. States layered on complementary mandates built on the federal predicate. The Endangerment Finding turned the Clean Air Act into a climate planning tool. That is why its rescission is historic. It dismantles the legal architecture that enabled that transformation. The Costs Imposed Over Fifteen Years The consequences of that transformation were not theoretical. They were economic, cumulative, and systemic. 1. Rising Vehicle Costs Greenhouse gas fleet standards required manufacturers to embed increasingly complex compliance technologies into vehicles—lightweight materials, advanced turbocharging, electrification components, calibration software, and fleet-balancing strategies. Those costs were embedded into MSRP. For families financing a vehicle over five or six years, even modest compliance-driven increases translated into higher monthly payments. When regulatory policy narrows the availability of conventional internal combustion vehicles or forces cross-subsidization within fleet mixes, affordability suffers—especially for middle-income families who rely on used vehicle markets. 2. Higher Energy System Costs Treating CO₂ as a pollutant triggered layers of regulatory pressure on the power sector. Even where individual rules were contested, the cumulative effect was clear: Increased regulatory uncertainty. Higher capital costs for generation investment. Accelerated retirement of firm power without scalable nuclear replacement. Greater reliance on intermittent generation and fragile supply chains. Energy is an input into everything—manufacturing, food production, housing materials, transportation logistics. When regulatory structures increase system risk or capital cost, those effects propagate across the economy. Electricity bills may not spike overnight from a single rule, but long-term cost trajectories change. Affordability is about trajectory. 3. Industrial and Manufacturing Competitiveness For energy-intensive industries, CO₂-based permitting requirements layered additional compliance complexity onto facility upgrades and expansions. That complexity increased project timelines, raised financing risk, and in many cases incentivized production relocation abroad. The irony is stark: domestic regulatory burdens often pushed production to jurisdictions with weaker standards and higher emissions intensity, yielding no meaningful global emissions reduction while hollowing out American communities. 4. Regulatory Spillover into Finance and Supply Chains Once CO₂ was treated as a dangerous pollutant, the regulatory logic expanded beyond smokestacks and tailpipes. Financial regulators advanced climate disclosure mandates. States adopted Scope 3 reporting requirements. Corporations faced pressure to quantify and report carbon footprints across global supply chains. Compliance departments grew. Reporting systems expanded. Legal exposure increased. These costs are rarely visible on a monthly bill, but they are embedded in the price of goods and services families buy every day. CPAC’s Opposition: From Day One From the moment the Endangerment Finding was issued, CPAC policy leaders warned that it represented a fundamental shift in administrative power. The argument was consistent and principled: The Clean Air Act was being stretched beyond its statutory design. Major economic transformation should occur through Congress, not regulatory reinterpretation. The scientific basis required scrutiny commensurate with the scale of economic consequences. The cost burdens would fall hardest on working families. For fifteen years, that position did not change. When President Trump was re-elected, CPAC's Center for Regulatory Freedom filed comments, participated in proceedings, analyzed rulemakings, and consistently connected regulatory discipline to consumer affordability. The through-line was simple: environmental policy must not become economic central planning by administrative decree. Renewed Advocacy After President Trump’s Return When President Donald Trump returned to office for a second term, the opportunity to revisit the Endangerment Finding became real. From the outset of the second administration, CPAC advocated for a full reassessment. Not as a symbolic gesture.Not as partisan retaliation.But as a matter of statutory clarity and economic discipline. The Endangerment Finding was the keystone. Without revisiting it, regulatory layering would continue. CPAC urged: A fresh examination of the scientific record. A reconsideration of economic impact. A reassessment of statutory authority. A restoration of democratic accountability in climate policy. Rescinding the Endangerment Finding does not eliminate environmental stewardship. It restores boundaries. Why This Is a Generational Moment The rescission matters for four enduring reasons. 1. It Restores Statutory Alignment It reaffirms that the Clean Air Act is not an open-ended authorization for global climate governance. Major climate policy must come from Congress. 2. It Resets Energy Strategy It removes the automatic legal presumption that CO₂ must be regulated under the Clean Air Act framework, allowing energy policy to focus on reliability, affordability, and technological neutrality. 3. It Changes the Cost Trajectory Rescission will not instantly lower next month’s electricity bill. But it removes a structural driver of escalating compliance layering and regulatory risk. For families, that means improved affordability over time—lower embedded vehicle costs, more supply elasticity in energy markets, and reduced upward pressure across the goods economy. 4. It Reasserts Administrative Accountability Agencies must revisit foundational determinations when their economic consequences prove profound, and their legal footing is contested. The Endangerment Finding was never a minor rule. It reshaped trillions of dollars in economic activity. Rescinding it demonstrates that no administrative determination is beyond reassessment. When it was announced, CPAC Chairman Matt Schlapp said the rescission marks a major correction in federal regulatory policy: “For years, the 2009 Endangerment Finding has been used to justify sweeping regulations that reshaped our energy economy without clear congressional authorization. It became the legal foundation for mandates that drove up costs for families, weakened American energy reliability, and expanded administrative power beyond what Congress intended. President Trump’s action restores constitutional guardrails and reaffirms that major economic decisions must come from elected lawmakers, not unelected regulators." Andrew Langer, Director of the CPAC Foundation Center for Regulatory Freedom, added: "The decision by President Trump and Administrator Zeldin to rescind the Endangerment Finding marks an entirely new chapter in regulatory reform. In doing this, they defy every naysayer who said it was simply impossible to undo, that you couldn't, via a thorough administrative process, undo one of the most dangerous and expensive regulatory decisions ever levied by a presidency. When others said it was couldn't be done, President Trump and Administrator Zeldin said, yes... it can." The Beginning of a New Regulatory Chapter The rescission of the 2009 Endangerment Finding marks the most consequential recalibration of American environmental governance in a generation. For fifteen years, it functioned as the legal keystone of federal climate regulation. Its removal does not end the debate about climate or energy policy. It restores the proper venue for that debate. Congress must legislate. Agencies must administer within statutory limits. Economic transformation must not proceed by regulatory reinterpretation alone. For CPAC, this moment represents the culmination of sustained, principled opposition—and the beginning of a new chapter in disciplined, affordability-focused regulatory reform. History will record the Endangerment Finding as the turning point that expanded administrative climate authority. History may well record its rescission as the moment that restored balance.

On February 11th, USDA Secretary Brooke L. Rollins announced the Farmer and Rancher Freedom Framework. This is   a major new initiative from the Trump administration to protect America's farmers and ranchers from what the USDA calls "agricultural lawfare," the misuse of government rules, lawsuits, and enforcement to unfairly target producers. This is a direct response to years of stories where families have faced heavy-handed federal actions over land disputes, regulations, or eminent domain threats. The framework aims to end that overreach, lower costs for producers, and ensure food security by treating hardworking landowners as partners, not problems. The plan is built on four key pillars : Protect Producers  from politically motivated bureaucracy and enforcement; Preserve Land and Liberty  by blocking unnecessary federal land grabs or eminent domain abuses; Purge Burdensome Regulations  through cuts to red tape and more balanced environmental rules; and Partner for Agriculture’s Future  by teaming up federal, state, local leaders, and industry groups to fight these issues and raise awareness. Secretary Rollins launched it alongside HUD Secretary Scott Turner, Rep. James Comer, country music star John Rich, and affected farming families, emphasizing that America's strength comes from those who work the land, especially as the nation nears its 250th anniversary. Real stories highlight why this matters. Take the Henry family in Cranbury, New Jersey: Their 175-year-old, 21-acre farm, held since the 1850s, was targeted for eminent domain seizure in 2025 to build affordable housing apartments under state mandates. The family fought back, refusing to sell land that's been their livelihood and legacy, and with USDA and state collaboration, they secured an agreement in late 2025 to save the farm and explore preservation options. Another case involves the Maude family in South Dakota, who ran a small cattle and hog operation for generations. A minor boundary dispute over about 25 acres near federal grasslands escalated under the prior administration into felony criminal charges for "theft of government property," threatening their home and business. In 2025, the Trump team dropped those charges, calling it an overzealous, politically driven prosecution over what should have been a simple civil matter. That’s exactly what the Farmer and Rancher Freedom Framework is designed to do: deliver regulatory relief, defend private property, and put an end to politically driven “agricultural lawfare” that has punished independent producers for years. This is about restoring common sense, lowering costs, and treating farmers and ranchers as the backbone of America’s food security, not targets for bureaucratic abuse. If you’ve experienced federal overreach or land-rights intimidation, report it directly at   www.usda.gov/lawfare . This could mark a true turning point for rural America, protecting land, liberty, and the freedom to keep feeding this nation.