Foundations
Here's a look at documents from U.S. foundations
Featured Stories
WLF Launches Video Shorts Series to Demystify Complex Legal Principles
WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 -- The Washington Legal Foundation issued the following news release on Oct. 8, 2025:
* * *
WLF Launches Video Shorts Series to Demystify Complex Legal Principles
"This series is about breaking down those barriers so business leaders, policymakers, students, and everyday citizens can engage in the conversation."
-- Glenn G. Lammi, WLF Executive Director and Vice President of Legal Studies
*
The Washington Legal Foundation (WLF), a national public-interest law firm and legal policy center, has launched two new educational video series--The Plain Meaning and Law Made Simple--to
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 -- The Washington Legal Foundation issued the following news release on Oct. 8, 2025:
* * *
WLF Launches Video Shorts Series to Demystify Complex Legal Principles
"This series is about breaking down those barriers so business leaders, policymakers, students, and everyday citizens can engage in the conversation."
-- Glenn G. Lammi, WLF Executive Director and Vice President of Legal Studies
*
The Washington Legal Foundation (WLF), a national public-interest law firm and legal policy center, has launched two new educational video series--The Plain Meaning and Law Made Simple--tomake complex legal and regulatory issues more accessible to a broader audience.
Both series reflect WLF's mission to shape how laws and regulations influence the freedom of individuals and businesses to make decisions, innovate, and engage in a fair and accountable marketplace.
The Plain Meaning videos define and explain legal terms that underscore the principles behind WLF's advocacy, showing how those concepts apply in real-world contexts. Law Made Simple builds on those definitions, exploring key court cases, policy debates, and the evolution of major doctrines.
The first video, released today, is part of The Plain Meaning series and unpacks the concept of commercial speech--a cornerstone of the First Amendment that protects truthful communication between businesses and consumers.
Future videos will explore topics such as compelled speech, preemption, and regulatory overreach. All episodes will be available on WLF's website, YouTube, and LinkedIn -- presented in a short, easy-to-share format designed to educate and engage a broad audience.
Celebrating its 48th year, WLF is America's premier public-interest law firm and policy center advocating for free-market principles, limited government, individual liberty, and the rule of law.
* * *
Click HERE (https://youtube.com/shorts/WFEJ1Np90VQ?si=PrGRpzKQ0QkZO7EV) for the first video in The Plain Meaning series.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.wlf.org/2025/10/08/communicating/wlf-launches-video-shorts-series-to-demystify-complex-legal-principles/
[Category: Law/Legal]
From Building Prosperity by Design to the American Dream: Closing Day of the 2025 Prosperity Summit Highlights Innovation, Access, and Community
WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 -- Prosperity Now (formerly the Corporation for Enterprise Development) issued the following news release:
* * *
From Building Prosperity by Design to the American Dream: Closing Day of the 2025 Prosperity Summit Highlights Innovation, Access, and Community
The final day of the 2025 Prosperity Summit convened leaders from finance, policy, housing, and the arts to explore practical ways to strengthen financial stability for families and communities. From rethinking how households save and own homes to celebrating creativity and connection, the day reflected the Summit's theme:
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 -- Prosperity Now (formerly the Corporation for Enterprise Development) issued the following news release:
* * *
From Building Prosperity by Design to the American Dream: Closing Day of the 2025 Prosperity Summit Highlights Innovation, Access, and Community
The final day of the 2025 Prosperity Summit convened leaders from finance, policy, housing, and the arts to explore practical ways to strengthen financial stability for families and communities. From rethinking how households save and own homes to celebrating creativity and connection, the day reflected the Summit's theme:Together, We Thrive.
The morning plenary: Building Prosperity by Design: Rethinking Taxes for Future Generations, invited attendees to consider how modern tax tools can help families save earlier and more consistently. Speakers discussed approaches such as Baby Bonds, Trump Accounts, and the Child Tax Credit, emphasizing how early investments can help households plan for key milestones and strengthen the broader economy.
Moderated by Robin McKinney, CEO of the CASH Campaign of Maryland, panelists included Ray Boshara (The Aspen Institute), Pete Sepp (National Taxpayers Union), and Emily Wielk (Bipartisan Policy Center).
"If it takes 35 years at 2% growth to double a living standard but only 23 years at 3%, that's the difference between a generation that thrives and a lost generation. We need to understand how family-focused tax policy contributes to growth the same way we study business taxes," said Sepp.
"We've learned that saving behavior has less to do with how families behave and more with how institutions behave. Anyone, at any income level, can save if given access to structured, automatic systems," said Boshara.
Following the plenary, guests experienced a multimedia art installation titled American Latinos 1935-1945 by award-winning artist Alberto Ferreras. Through film, photography, and sound, the exhibit illustrated the depth and diversity of American identity and the role of storytelling in shaping shared understanding.
"This project is about showing the Latino presence in American history. The images were there all along, but no one had taken the time to look. These photographs remind us that our stories have always been part of America's story--they were just waiting to be seen," said Ferreras.
Throughout the afternoon, participants joined breakout sessions on topics such as homeownership, small business growth, financial technology, child and family support, workforce development, and community lending.
The closing plenary, Homeownership Reimagined - Innovation, Opportunity, and the American Dream, featured athletes, entrepreneurs, and housing leaders - including Commanders legends Doug Williams and Sheldon Day, Olympian Kellie Wells Brinkley, and D.C. United's Jacob Murrel - discussing new models that expand access to ownership, such as modular construction, co-buying, and shared appreciation approaches.
"I want to give people, women, girls that look like me, boys that look like me - the dream that you can do more. I lost my mom when I was 16, with no direction. So providing direction for the next generation, those are the ones that are going to take care of us, and that's how you pour back into your communities, by actually working with the people," said Brinkley.
The Summit concluded with Club Prosperity, an evening of connection and celebration featuring a live performance by TLC ahead of their upcoming musical CrazySexyCool. Their performance echoed the Summit's central message: that progress happens when people come together to create, collaborate, and build the future they want to see.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.prosperitynow.org/news-and-insights/from-building-prosperity-by-design-to-the-american-dream-closing-day-of-the-2025-prosperity-summit-highlights-innovation-access-and-community
[Category: Economics]
Right to Work Foundation Urges Ninth Circuit to Reject CA Law Granting Union Bosses Massive Power Over Cannabis Industry Workers
SPRINGFIELD, Virginia, Oct. 8 -- The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Right to Work Foundation Urges Ninth Circuit to Reject CA Law Granting Union Bosses Massive Power Over Cannabis Industry Workers
*
Amicus brief: "Labor peace agreement" mandate violates federal law and subjects workers to coercive union organizing tactics
San Francisco, CA (October 8, 2025) - The National Right to Work Foundation has filed an amicus brief at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Ctrl Alt Destroy v. Elliott, arguing that California's regulatory
... Show Full Article
SPRINGFIELD, Virginia, Oct. 8 -- The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
Right to Work Foundation Urges Ninth Circuit to Reject CA Law Granting Union Bosses Massive Power Over Cannabis Industry Workers
*
Amicus brief: "Labor peace agreement" mandate violates federal law and subjects workers to coercive union organizing tactics
San Francisco, CA (October 8, 2025) - The National Right to Work Foundation has filed an amicus brief at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Ctrl Alt Destroy v. Elliott, arguing that California's regulatoryregime imposing so-called "labor peace agreements" on the cannabis industry violates federal law.
These so-called "agreements," which cannabis companies must adhere to in order to maintain a license under California law, rig the law against workers opposed to union control by censoring speech critical of unionization. They also mandate that employers grant union campaigners access to employees.
"Since 1968, the Foundation has been the nation's leading litigation advocate for employee freedom to choose whether to associate with unions," the amicus brief reads. "The Foundation has an interest in this case because it concerns whether California can lawfully subject employees of cannabis retailers to union organizing agreements."
The Foundation's amicus brief argues in particular that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) preempts California's "labor peace agreement" statutes. The NLRA is the federal law that governs most private sector labor relations. The four conditions mandated for cannabis companies under California law, "an agreement with a...union, a ban on disrupting union organizing, a ban on union members picketing, boycotting, or striking, and a clause granting union organizers access to employees at work" all concern activity that the U.S. Congress intended the NLRA to deal with - not state law.
CA Statutes Force Employers to Bargain With Union Bosses Their Employees Never Voted For
Notably, the brief explains that California's labor law requires cannabis employers to bargain with union officials - even if a majority of employees have not expressed that they want a union in the workplace. "California obligating employers to simply bargain with unions over labor peace agreements runs also afoul of [Supreme Court precedent] because the NLRA contains no such obligation," the brief says. "The NLRA only requires employers to bargain with unions after a majority of employees choose that union to be their exclusive representative, but not before as California's law does."
Federal law also preempts California's mandate that cannabis employers provide union bosses access to workers, the brief contends. The mandate lets union agitators intrude on private property so they can subject employees to campaign activity whether they want it or not. "This requirement unconstitutionally deprives employers of their property rights," the brief reads. "The requirement also deprives employees who oppose unions of being able to work free from unwanted solicitations by outside union organizers."
"California and several other states are pushing forward so-called 'labor peace agreements' to appease powerful union special interests, while workers and entrepreneurs in the fledgling American cannabis industry are left in the lurch," commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. "While federal labor law certainly has its flaws, California's statutes and similar ones around the country provide even less protection for workers, and seemingly treat employees' free association rights as an obstacle to greater control over the industry.
"California's scheme has no legal underpinning and will cause employees great harm. The Ninth Circuit should invalidate it," Mix added.
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Print Share
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, assists thousands of employees in about 200 cases nationwide per year.
Posted on Oct 8, 2025 in News Releases
***
Original text here: https://www.nrtw.org/news/ctrl-alt-destroy-amicus-10082025/
Reason Foundation Issues Commentary: Sen. Ted Cruz Proposes Federal Regulatory Sandbox to Encourage AI Innovation, Development
LOS ANGELES, California, Oct. 8 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary:
* * *
Sen. Ted Cruz proposes federal regulatory sandbox to encourage AI innovation, development
The SANDBOX Act would allow innovators to obtain temporary regulatory waivers for artificial intelligence technologies from federal agencies.
By Gregory Ferenstein
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has introduced draft legislation to create a program that would allow artificial intelligence (AI) pilot projects to operate under temporary exemptions from certain federal rules. The bill, known as the Strengthening Artificial
... Show Full Article
LOS ANGELES, California, Oct. 8 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary:
* * *
Sen. Ted Cruz proposes federal regulatory sandbox to encourage AI innovation, development
The SANDBOX Act would allow innovators to obtain temporary regulatory waivers for artificial intelligence technologies from federal agencies.
By Gregory Ferenstein
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has introduced draft legislation to create a program that would allow artificial intelligence (AI) pilot projects to operate under temporary exemptions from certain federal rules. The bill, known as the Strengthening ArtificialIntelligence Normalization and Diffusion by Oversight and Experimentation (SANDBOX) Act, would allow innovators to obtain temporary regulatory waivers for AI technologies from federal agencies. Developers could commercialize their product for a specified period, subject to added oversight from regulators and reporting requirements.
The bill would authorize the creation of a federal program to oversee pilot projects of AI tools in sectors such as energy, infrastructure, healthcare, and education, allowing them to apply for temporary liability protections. Administered by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), this program would enable AI users and developers to request waivers or modifications to existing federal rules and regulations. OSTP would route applications to the appropriate agencies and work in collaboration with them to determine whether to accept or reject an application, based on an evaluation of the risks and benefits to consumers.
As an example, AI-enabled medical devices may currently require Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for minor adjustments. However, by design, the benefits of AI are that it regularly learns from the experience of user data. A device that analyzes images of the heart to diagnose cardiac risk better could improve rapidly every time it receives data from more patients. The FDA has acknowledged that the approval process is a problem and is currently developing more effective rules for AI-enabled devices.
Under Cruz's plan, the FDA could create a new rule that would only apply temporarily to a specific product. This is more politically palatable than revising rules for the entire industry.
Once an application is approved, developers and their products receive certain specific legal protections. Per the draft bill:
No existing right of action of a consumer to seek actual damages or an equitable remedy may be waived or modified under the Program. (2) While a waiver or modification is in effect, and the person is in compliance with the written agreement entered into pursuant to subsection (e), the person shall not be subject to the criminal or civil enforcement of a covered provision specifically identified in the waiver or modification.
Under this framework, developers would apply to release a product or service that requires a waiver from a specific federal regulation or rule under an agency's jurisdiction. The legislation would not override existing state or local regulations. For example, it would not preempt state laws targeting fraudulent videos or so-called "deep fakes," or restrictions on using AI in mental healthcare like Nevada's. Local ordinances, including zoning laws that limit data centers due to concerns about water or electricity usage, would also remain in effect.
To understand what kinds of AI applications might qualify for this type of legal protection, it is helpful to examine how similar programs, known as regulatory sandboxes --hence the bill's acronym --have evolved and the range of technologies they have enabled in practice.
Regulatory sandboxes have been in operation for several years, enabling a range of innovative financial services. One of the early motivations for sandboxes started with the United Kingdom's Financial Conduct Authority, which sought to address a surge of financial technology (fintech) startups encountering unclear or overly burdensome rules. This allowed firms like MarketFinance to trial peer-to-peer business lending under supervised conditions. In Singapore, the Monetary Authority's sandbox supported projects such as Project Ubin, a blockchain-based cross-border payment trial with Standard Chartered and local banks.
Following these pioneers, jurisdictions around the world rolled out ideas similar to sandboxes. Australia set up an Innovation Hub in 2016 to support fintech and insurance technology (Insurtech) pilots. Canada's Ontario Securities Commission introduced LaunchPad in 2017, and Abu Dhabi established a sandbox in 2018 to spur financial technology growth in the United Arab Emirates. Each program shares the core feature of time-limited, supervised testing under regulatory relief, tailored to local market needs.
Public reports of sandboxes rarely look at the long-term success of products or companies in which they were incubated. One standout example is Zilch, a medium-sized fintech company that credits the UK's sandbox for helping it navigate the complex regulation of its buy-now-pay-later approach to credit and consumer purchasing.
Stanford's Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society notes that "a well-designed and executed sandbox can facilitate innovation and protect consumers, avoiding the pitfalls that concern many critics." The center also observes that "one of the benefits of a regulatory sandbox is that it has the potential to provide clear rules of the road for market participants, particularly where new technologies or new products and services pose challenging questions with respect to regulatory requirements and ensuring consumer protection."
A World Bank review similarly highlights the impact of sandboxes on financial innovation: "In only four years, sandboxes have become synonymous with fintech innovation, offering the unique benefit of providing the empirical evidence needed to substantiate decisions in the field."
Regulatory sandboxes have expanded well beyond their origins in fintech to encompass a wide array of industries. Sandboxes now operate in the insurance industry, allowing new underwriting models to be tested under relaxed rules. In the health sector, national data institutes like Health Data Research UK have used sandboxes to pilot data-driven diagnostics and patient-monitoring services in a controlled setting.
Interest in AI sandboxes is now rising in Europe under the proposed AI Act. Article 57 of the AI Act requires each European Union member state to establish at least one AI regulatory sandbox by Aug. 2, 2026, creating controlled environments for the development and validation of AI systems before market launch.
In the United States, Utah stands out for its approach to AI. The state's Office of Regulatory Relief oversees technology sandboxes. One early sandbox pilot involved a product called ElizaChat, an AI-powered mental health chatbot designed for teenagers. Dave Barney, CEO of ElizaChat, reports:
"The AI Policy team engaged with us, understood our business needs, and crafted a regulatory relief contract that freed us to explore creative products that will help teenagers improve their mental health, without fear of regulatory risk."
In July, the White House released an AI action plan, which directed agencies to adopt a wide range of AI-related rules, including the creation of a regulatory sandbox. The SANDBOX Act would take Utah's approach to the federal level and establish a more formal mechanism than outlined in the White House plan (the White House plan simply recommended the establishment of a sandbox without as much detail).
Sandboxes are new to the U.S. federal government, so it is unclear how willing agencies will be to consider waivers for AI products and services. We may learn more as the discussion around the SANDBOX Act progresses.
Still, sandboxes hold considerable promise. Total, permanent deregulation is often politically unpopular. Agencies may be more willing to experiment with temporary deregulation around AI products, which gives innovations an opportunity that they might not otherwise have.
* * *
Gregory Ferenstein is a senior fellow in drug policy at Reason Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/commentary/sen-ted-cruz-proposes-federal-regulatory-sandbox-to-encourage-ai-innovation-development/
Reason Foundation Issues Commentary: A Look at the White House's Pro-Innovation Artificial Intelligence 'Action Plan'
LOS ANGELES, California, Oct. 8 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on Oct. 7, 2025:
* * *
A look at the White House's pro-innovation artificial intelligence 'action plan'
The White House's AI action plan represents a clear policy direction favoring rapid innovation and reduced regulatory oversight.
By Gregory Ferenstein
Earlier this year, the White House released an artificial intelligence (AI) "action plan," declaring that, "Winning the AI race will usher in a new golden age of human flourishing." The document's central purpose is straightforward: to preserve American
... Show Full Article
LOS ANGELES, California, Oct. 8 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following commentary on Oct. 7, 2025:
* * *
A look at the White House's pro-innovation artificial intelligence 'action plan'
The White House's AI action plan represents a clear policy direction favoring rapid innovation and reduced regulatory oversight.
By Gregory Ferenstein
Earlier this year, the White House released an artificial intelligence (AI) "action plan," declaring that, "Winning the AI race will usher in a new golden age of human flourishing." The document's central purpose is straightforward: to preserve AmericanAI superiority. In practice, the plan mostly recommends consolidating and formalizing a long series of pro-innovation, anti-regulation executive orders the White House has issued since January 2025. Overall reactions from industry have been positive and reflect optimism over the administration's commitment to free market innovation.
The plan is structured around three pillars: accelerating AI innovation, building American AI infrastructure, and leading in international AI diplomacy and security. The first pillar focuses on removing regulatory barriers and promoting private-sector development, including open-source AI and workforce training. The second pillar targets energy, permitting, and semiconductor supply chains, aiming to rapidly expand and secure the physical and technical infrastructure needed for large-scale AI deployment. The third pillar advances an assertive international strategy--promoting U.S. AI standards abroad, tightening export controls, and countering adversarial influence, especially from China.
The plan builds on the regulatory shift that began when President Donald Trump rescinded an AI-related executive order from President Joe Biden. Biden's order focused on public support for regulations that reduced bias in AI products, while Trump's first executive order on AI, issued in January, explicitly called for the removal of barriers related to AI development.
The action plan recommends tasking a broad set of agencies with carrying forward a deregulatory mandate. Each would be charged with reviewing, revising, or eliminating existing rules, adjusting grant-making, and accelerating approvals to align federal AI policy with the administration's pro-innovation priorities, which aligns with Reason Foundation's testimony on how to promote AI innovation.
For example, the plan recommends the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) "work with Federal agencies that have AI-related discretionary funding programs to ensure, consistent with applicable law, that they consider a state's AI regulatory climate when making funding decisions and limit funding if the state's AI regulatory regimes may hinder the effectiveness of that funding or award."
Should the Trump administration ultimately grant agencies this broad discretion, the plan potentially hands them a tool to reward or penalize states on AI regulation at their own judgment. For instance, the National Science Foundation has a $100 million grant for AI research that it awards to various universities. It's possible these kinds of large grants could be in jeopardy for states that, from the perspective of an agency, create burdensome regulations.
State legislatures and many Republican governors publicly opposed a congressional moratorium on state AI regulations, arguing that it would preempt state powers to enact laws, such as those that would criminalize deceptive AI-generated media intended to influence elections. This plan, instead, takes an agency-centric approach. Each state's AI policy would be evaluated by federal bodies, whose leadership is closely tied to the Trump administration. Strategically, this is a more politically directed tool than the proposed moratorium by Congress, which would have undercut the authority of both Republicans and Democrats to control AI policy.
The plan includes a dedicated section on government AI adoption that recommends "all Federal agencies ensure--to the maximum extent practicable--that all employees whose work could benefit from access to frontier language models have access to, and appropriate training for, such tools."
This directive could materially affect government efficiency and labor costs. For example, preliminary evidence from Pennsylvania's early generative AI pilot, in which 175 state employees across 14 agencies used ChatGPT Enterprise for drafting, summarization, research, and IT support, reported an average of 95 minutes saved per day on these tasks. While still in the early stages, these results suggest that broad-based adoption and training in frontier language models may yield significant productivity improvements across federal operations and potentially lead to labor cost reductions for an administration willing to replace overhead with automation.
The action plan also coincides with an executive order aimed at streamlining federal permits for data centers. Large-scale storehouses of computers have become an essential component of artificial intelligence programs, both for building ("training") the foundational models and for enabling models to interact with users. The administration has recognized that current regulations hamper new data centers, with Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin noting on Fox News that the "EPA wants to increase certainty for owner-operators in the permitting process, making it clear what kind of permits are needed for new and modified projects."
New data centers have often been met with local resistance, with citizens utilizing environmental protection rules at their disposal in an attempt to delay or block the creation of facilities that they argue reduce the quality of life or consume excessive resources. At the same time, federal and state energy agencies have identified the need for extensive additions to electricity infrastructure to meet this new demand; however, such infrastructure comes at a cost and requires time, tending to grow more slowly than demand. It is unclear how this new executive order will actually impact the construction of new data centers, but it demonstrates the administration's willingness to explore ways to cut red tape and accelerate the permitting process.
Finally, the AI action plan recommends that several agencies promote and incentivize the use of publicly available data, including the creation of a new data "portal" for datasets from the National Science Foundation.
This plan marks a departure from a purely free market approach by calling for federal agencies to be empowered with broad discretion on politically sensitive issues--such as cutting government contracts with software that explicitly promotes progressive climate change reform. The result is a policy framework that both crystallizes the administration's deregulatory agenda and provides agencies with explicit "air cover" to reward or penalize states based on both political criteria and compliance with federal AI priorities.
The White House's AI action plan represents a clear policy direction favoring rapid innovation and reduced regulatory oversight. The plan's effectiveness will depend heavily on how federal agencies interpret and implement their expanded discretion. However, it will give executive air cover to agency leaders who wish to create rules that are friendly to the expanding market of AI products.
* * *
Gregory Ferenstein is a senior fellow in drug policy at Reason Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/commentary/a-look-at-the-white-houses-pro-innovation-artificial-intelligence-action-plan/
Prosperity Now Announces Intent to Acquire Change Machine's Financial Coaching Platform to Strengthen Tech-Enabled Support for Practitioners Nationwide
WASHINGTON, Oct. 8 -- Prosperity Now (formerly the Corporation for Enterprise Development) issued the following news release:
* * *
Prosperity Now Announces Intent to Acquire Change Machine's Financial Coaching Platform to Strengthen Tech-Enabled Support for Practitioners Nationwide
Prosperity Now announced today its intent to acquire the nationally recognized Change Machine financial coaching platform, expanding its ability to provide community-based practitioners with trusted digital tools, training, and shared learning opportunities.
Developed with input from practitioners nationwide, the
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 8 -- Prosperity Now (formerly the Corporation for Enterprise Development) issued the following news release:
* * *
Prosperity Now Announces Intent to Acquire Change Machine's Financial Coaching Platform to Strengthen Tech-Enabled Support for Practitioners Nationwide
Prosperity Now announced today its intent to acquire the nationally recognized Change Machine financial coaching platform, expanding its ability to provide community-based practitioners with trusted digital tools, training, and shared learning opportunities.
Developed with input from practitioners nationwide, theplatform is a leading resource for financial coaches and community organizations to better serve their customers through data, training, and peer learning. Under Prosperity Now's leadership, Change Machine will build on that foundation while being optimized to better serve financial coaches, Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs), and other community lenders that help families and small businesses achieve financial stability.
"This is more than an acquisition, it's an evolution," said Marisa Calderon, President and CEO of Prosperity Now. "We're combining two experienced teams to expand the digital tools that communities rely on to ensure they continue to meet the scale and complexity of today's economic environment."
As the platform transitions to Prosperity Now, users and partners will continue to receive seamless support, strengthened by expanded infrastructure, technical innovation, and a sustainable framework for future growth. The move enables Prosperity Now to combine Change Machine's proven technology with its own national reach and research, helping community organizations deliver financial coaching more efficiently and with greater consistency.
"This collaboration ensures the platform continues to evolve while maintaining the reliability and purpose that make it so effective," said Kevin McQueen, Chairman of Change Machine. "Prosperity Now's operational strength and national reach create the right environment for the next stage of growth."
The platform is set to be integrated into Prosperity Next, Prosperity Now's national platform supporting non-profit organizations, Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) and other community lenders. Prosperity Next focuses on practical, scalable tools that strengthen how these institutions operate, reducing administrative burden, improving data visibility, and expanding access to capital, while reinforcing the trusted role they play in their communities.
"Together, we're preserving what makes the platform so trusted - its authenticity and practitioner focus - while expanding its ability to help more organizations deliver high-quality, practical support," added Calderon.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.prosperitynow.org/news-and-insights/prosperity-now-announces-intent-to-acquire-change-machines-financial-coaching-platform-to-strengthen-tech-enabled-support-for-practitioners-nationwide
[Category: Economics]
Foundation for Economic Education Issues Commentary: Case Over a Case
DETROIT, Michigan, Oct. 8 -- The Foundation for Economic Education issued the following commentary on Oct. 7, 2025:
* * *
A Case over a Case
Can the government just take your plane?
By Katrina Gulliver
A case has been slowly making its way to the Supreme Court hinging on one question: Can the government take this guy's plane?
The story began in 2012, when Ken Jouppi, a pilot in Alaska, was taking a passenger from the city of Fairbanks to the town of Beaver (population: 48). Pilots like Ken often ferry people in private planes to more remote settlements. Among the passenger's groceries were
... Show Full Article
DETROIT, Michigan, Oct. 8 -- The Foundation for Economic Education issued the following commentary on Oct. 7, 2025:
* * *
A Case over a Case
Can the government just take your plane?
By Katrina Gulliver
A case has been slowly making its way to the Supreme Court hinging on one question: Can the government take this guy's plane?
The story began in 2012, when Ken Jouppi, a pilot in Alaska, was taking a passenger from the city of Fairbanks to the town of Beaver (population: 48). Pilots like Ken often ferry people in private planes to more remote settlements. Among the passenger's groceries were3 cases of beer, intended as a gift for her husband. Unfortunately, Beaver is a dry town; thus Ken and his passenger were breaking the law by bringing in alcohol. State troopers searched the plane, and found the beer.
But rather than just seizing the Budweiser, and hitting Ken and his passenger with a fine or a citation (they did that too: Ken paid a $1,500 penalty and spent 3 days in jail), prosecutors also decided to seize the whole plane, a 1969 Cessna U206D. A $95,000 aircraft, over 3 cases of beer.
Ken first fought his case in front of the Alaska Supreme Court. Who sided with the prosecutors, agreeing that this was a perfectly valid seizure, and did not breach the US Constitution's Excessive Fines Clause.
With the help of the Institute for Justice, Ken is now taking his case to the United States Supreme Court. If he prevails (and we hope he will), this would be another blow against the system of asset forfeiture in the US.
The civil forfeiture cases against which IJ continually fights are, unfortunately, the tip of the iceberg. The amount seized in the United States is sometimes higher than that taken in burglaries. The seizures are often disproportionate in value to the alleged offenses and are not reflective of the general public's view of justice. Sometimes the people whose property is seized have not even been charged with a crime, let alone convicted.
Authorities empowered to seize private property leave victims with limited recourse. For those who fight back, the processes are lengthy and expensive, despite protections in the Fourth Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures, and in the Eighth Amendment on "excessive fines." In fact, the US wildly outpaces other common law countries in allowing local officials to take people's stuff. And courts have been reluctant to address this, just as state and federal legislators have been disinclined to rein the practice in.
If agents of the state take your possessions, and the onus is on you to argue why you should get them back, this is not liberty.
Last year's Rebel Ridge, starring Don Johnson, at least suggested Hollywood might be taking interest in this kind of injustice. The plot revolves around a man carrying cash to pay bail for a relative, who is pulled over by local cops and has the money seized. This scenario--of motorists pulled over, only to have their possessions taken--happens with alarming frequency in some jurisdictions.
But Rebel Ridge framed the issue as local corruption of cops, rather than the broader system that allowed it to flourish. Systems where local police departments are expected to fund themselves through fines and seizures are a moral hazard, as anyone could anticipate.
Civil forfeiture is not new, and we've been covering it at FEE for years. A minority of states have laws against it, but far too many don't.
It takes people like Ken to get the system changed. As he explained:
This case isn't just about me or my airplane anymore. I'm in my 80s now, and I've been fighting this for over a decade because I see it as my duty to ensure that the Bill of Rights actually means something in protecting against government overreach.
* * *
Katrina Gulliver
Katrina Gulliver is Editorial Director at FEE. She holds a PhD from Cambridge University, and has held faculty positions at universities in Germany, Britain and Australia. She has written for Wall St Journal, Reason, The American Conservative, National Review and the New Criterion, among others.
* * *
Original text here: https://fee.org/articles/a-case-over-a-case/
