Think Tanks
Here's a look at documents from think tanks
Featured Stories
Manhattan Institute Issues Commentary to Wall Street Journal: Zohran Mamdani Is Still a Radical
NEW YORK, April 24 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on April 23, 2026, by senior fellow James B. Meigs to the Wall Street Journal:
* * *
Zohran Mamdani Is Still a Radical
Don't believe the rumors that the mayor has softened his socialism.
*
New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani came into office promising to give the city a sweeping socialist makeover. It didn't take long for his revolutionary fantasies to collide with fiscal and political reality. Facing a budget shortfall, the new mayor promptly backtracked on several key campaign promises. His vow to make
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, April 24 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on April 23, 2026, by senior fellow James B. Meigs to the Wall Street Journal:
* * *
Zohran Mamdani Is Still a Radical
Don't believe the rumors that the mayor has softened his socialism.
*
New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani came into office promising to give the city a sweeping socialist makeover. It didn't take long for his revolutionary fantasies to collide with fiscal and political reality. Facing a budget shortfall, the new mayor promptly backtracked on several key campaign promises. His vow to makecity buses free got pushed into the misty future, for example, while his billion-dollar plan to replace some police officers with social workers was reduced to a token effort.
Friendly media outlets portray Mr. Mamdani's climb-downs as signs that the boyish activist is growing in the job. The new mayor, Politico writes, "is already a more complex city executive" than the one who promised not to "abandon my principles for fear of being deemed radical" in his inaugural address. The New York Times praises Mr. Mamdani's unexpected "commitment to the brass tacks of municipal government," and cites a poll showing that a majority of residents believe the city is "moving in the right direction."
The mayor came into office with the energy of "a theater kid crossed with a let's-change-the-world college activist," as Free Expression's Kyle Smith put it recently. Has the youthful radical really matured into a sober realist in just a few months? Don't fall for it. While the media gives Mr. Mamdani credit for decisions that were forced upon him, his underlying worldview remains untouched by recent encounters with reality. It is a worldview shaped both by his upbringing (his father is an anti-American, terrorist-defending academic) and by his education in trendy radicalism.
Continue reading the entire piece here at the Wall Street Journal (https://www.wsj.com/opinion/free-expression/zohran-mamdani-is-still-a-radical-227c5e26?mod=free-expression_lead_story)
* * *
James B. Meigs is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a City Journal contributing editor.
* * *
Original text here: https://manhattan.institute/article/zohran-mamdani-is-still-a-radical
[Category: ThinkTank]
Manhattan Institute Issues Commentary to Wall Street Journal: Don't Worry, Be Unhappy
NEW YORK, April 24 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on April 23, 2026, by policy analyst Carolyn D. Gorman to the Wall Street Journal:
* * *
Don't Worry, Be Unhappy
The mental-health industrial complex insists sadness is a disease, but it's part of human nature.
*
In the years since Sigmund Freud discovered the couch, Americans got the strange idea that happiness is the natural human condition. Unhappiness, they decided, is a psychological problem. "Unhappiness is both a political state and a mental health crisis," wrote Tara D. Sonenshine in the Hill
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, April 24 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on April 23, 2026, by policy analyst Carolyn D. Gorman to the Wall Street Journal:
* * *
Don't Worry, Be Unhappy
The mental-health industrial complex insists sadness is a disease, but it's part of human nature.
*
In the years since Sigmund Freud discovered the couch, Americans got the strange idea that happiness is the natural human condition. Unhappiness, they decided, is a psychological problem. "Unhappiness is both a political state and a mental health crisis," wrote Tara D. Sonenshine in the Hillin 2024. In a Guardian piece last month, therapists described patients who became "depressed" by political stress.
Despite the narrative that it's a disease to be treated, unhappiness is totally normal.
Humans aren't designed to be happy all the time. We have what psychologists call a "negativity bias," a well-documented tendency for negative stimuli to register more than positive ones. Harvard's Roy Baumeister described this phenomenon in a foundational 2001 paper suggesting that "bad" hits harder than "good" in everything from learning to emotions to relationships. Happiness is so statistically abnormal that one clinical psychologist proposed (albeit facetiously) that it be classified as a psychiatric disorder.
Continue reading the entire piece here at The Wall Street Journal (https://www.wsj.com/opinion/free-expression/dont-worry-be-unhappy-772ee0c4?mod=free-expression_lead_pos3)
* * *
Carolyn D. Gorman is a Paulson Policy Analyst at the Manhattan Institute.
* * *
Original text here: https://manhattan.institute/article/dont-worry-be-unhappy
[Category: ThinkTank]
Manhattan Institute Issues Commentary to The Times: Americans Say Their Dream Is Dying. Here's Why They're Wrong
NEW YORK, April 24 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on April 22, 2026, by senior fellow Rob Henderson to The Times:
* * *
Americans Say Their Dream Is Dying. Here's Why They're Wrong
Influencers and the rich are killing belief in hard work -- but I'm living proof that anyone can make it in this country
*
I was born into poverty. My mother, an immigrant from Seoul, suffered from drug addiction. When police and social workers arrived at our slum apartment in Los Angeles in 1993, she told them she didn't know who my father was. I was three. It wasn't until
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, April 24 -- The Manhattan Institute issued the following excerpts of a commentary on April 22, 2026, by senior fellow Rob Henderson to The Times:
* * *
Americans Say Their Dream Is Dying. Here's Why They're Wrong
Influencers and the rich are killing belief in hard work -- but I'm living proof that anyone can make it in this country
*
I was born into poverty. My mother, an immigrant from Seoul, suffered from drug addiction. When police and social workers arrived at our slum apartment in Los Angeles in 1993, she told them she didn't know who my father was. I was three. It wasn't untilI reached 31 that I learnt I am half Mexican on my father's side.
After being taken from my mother, I grew up in foster homes in California.
As a teenager, I worked as a busboy, a dishwasher and a supermarket bagger. At 17, I enlisted in the US air force.
After leaving the military, I attended Yale with the support of the GI Bill, where I earned a degree in psychology.
I later completed a PhD at the University of Cambridge as a Gates scholar. My first book became a national bestseller and was named one of the best books of 2024 by The Economist. The New York Times once described me as "self-made" and despite my uneasiness with that phrasing, I can't fully deny it.
My story is what people often mean when they talk about the American Dream. Someone starts with very little and, through effort, opportunity and a bit of good fortune, builds a better life. Today, I am living proof that it's possible to overcome hardship to achieve traditional success. It's a promise that this country still offers, and continues to deliver.
By most broad measures, Americans today are better educated, live longer and have more disposable income than previous generations.
So why, as this country prepares to celebrate its 250th birthday, do so few Americans believe the dream is available to everyone?
Continue reading the entire piece here at The Times (https://www.thetimes.com/us/opinion/article/americans-say-their-dream-is-dying-heres-why-theyre-wrong-jjbwbr2l9?t=1776859282128)
* * *
Rob Henderson is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of City Journal. He has a PhD in psychology from the University of Cambridge and is the best-selling author of "Troubled: A Memoir of Foster Care, Family, and Social Class."
* * *
Original text here: https://manhattan.institute/article/americans-say-their-dream-is-dying-heres-why-theyre-wrong
[Category: ThinkTank]
Hudson Institute Issues Commentary: Inescapable Truth of Euro-Atlantic Defense - No Way Forward Without Turkiye
WASHINGTON, April 24 -- Hudson Institute, a research organization that says it promotes leadership for a secure, free and prosperous future, issued the following commentary on April 23, 2026, by nonresident senior fellow Can Kasapoglu:
* * *
The Inescapable Truth of Euro-Atlantic Defense: No Way Forward Without Turkiye
The grammar of military science is unforgiving. Defense architectures built on European autonomy assumptions and that sideline Turkiye or non-EU NATO nations are doomed to fail: they will neither deter threats to Europe nor prevail a war.
*
For some time, rhetoric toward Turkiye
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 24 -- Hudson Institute, a research organization that says it promotes leadership for a secure, free and prosperous future, issued the following commentary on April 23, 2026, by nonresident senior fellow Can Kasapoglu:
* * *
The Inescapable Truth of Euro-Atlantic Defense: No Way Forward Without Turkiye
The grammar of military science is unforgiving. Defense architectures built on European autonomy assumptions and that sideline Turkiye or non-EU NATO nations are doomed to fail: they will neither deter threats to Europe nor prevail a war.
*
For some time, rhetoric toward Turkiyehas been building across multiple fronts - at times critical, and in some cases even adversarial. While these strands often appear disconnected, they converge at the geopolitical level around a common effect: increasing friction with a country that has consistently contributed to international stability across NATO missions, from Afghanistan to the Balkans - effectively drawing it into a dynamic of sustained antagonism. More recently, some of these lines have moved beyond criticism of Turkiye itself to challenge the structural foundations of Euro-Atlantic defense, extending into assumptions that risk weakening the allied cohesion in NATO.
These approaches overlook several hard constraints. The first is a basic military balance, visible in open-source defense data: absent the combat capacity of Turkiye - as well as Ukraine - the defense of Europe and the security of the Euro-Atlantic space become technically strained.
War is, at its core, about numbers - mass, readiness, and deployable combat power. Recent remarks by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reinforce the point. Zelenskyy warned that Europe's defense would face serious vulnerabilities without contributions from Turkiye, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, and Norway - none of them members of the EU.
By contrast, comments attributed to Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission - that "Europe cannot be left to Turkish, Russian, or Chinese influence" - illustrate a different tendency: political framing that risks drifting from operational realities. The issue is not diplomatic rhetoric per se, but the gap it can open between military-strategic requirements to defend Europe and unrealistic, narrow Euro-centric public positioning.
Zelenskyy, a wartime leader operating under continuous missile and drone salvos even from his presidential office, does not have the luxury of political daydreaming, at all. His perspective is shaped by immediate military constraints rather than political signaling. Early in the invasion, as Kyiv came under direct threat and some Western voices urged the Ukrainian government to evacuate the capital, several European nations initially limited their support to non-lethal aid, such as helmets and body armor. In that same period, Bayraktar TB-2 drones were already conducting effective combat sorties against Russian platforms. The contrast underscored a mere fact: combat-ready capability, not narrative, sets the terms of defense planning when strategic imperatives harden.
Breaking point
The political divergence between the White House and Brussels is widening, making Europe's reliance on non-EU actors of the continent more visible, not less. Estimates indicate that replacing the capabilities the US currently fields in Europe would require on the order of $1 trillion in long-term investment/[1]. In 2025, NATO's European members spent roughly $500 billion on defense; the aggregate outlays of EU members alone remain below that broader NATO-Europe benchmark, underscoring a persistent gap between ambition and capacity.
More critically, the picture grows more constrained when assessed in terms of combat-deployable deterrence. As of 2024, nearly half of EU member states are reported to field neither fighter aircraft nor main battle tanks in meaningful inventories [2]. At the high-end, EU members also lack sufficient quantities of key strategic enablers required for combat operations at scale - AWACS platforms, aerial refueling tankers, space-based ISR (intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance), and long-endurance unmanned systems - remaining heavily reliant on American-provided capabilities within the NATO framework. Europe faces additional shortfalls in integrated air and missile defense, counter-drone architectures, and in deep-strike assets, including tactical ballistic missile capabilities able to hit an adversary's rear area - requirements underscored by the operational realities of the Russia-Ukraine war.
As critical thresholds approach
A more severe political crisis along the American administration-Brussels axis is not required for Europe's predicaments to deepen or for its reliance on non-EU actors, such as Turkiye and Ukraine, to grow. The timeline outlined by Admiral Philip Davidson - widely referred to as the "Davidson Window"- identifies 2027 as a potential threshold for a Chinese move against Taiwan. In such a contingency, European security would likely rank below Indo-Pacific priorities in American force-generation. At the same time, the ongoing conflict in the Middle East is placing additional demands on US resource allocation. Taken together, these pressures suggest a more constrained American role in Europe at precisely the moment European requirements are expanding.
The near future may hold considerable risks for the Euro-Atlantic system. Danish intelligence assessments, for example, point to a deteriorating outlook. Particularly, under conditions in which the war in Ukraine is frozen and American engagement in European security declines, Russia could be positioned to launch a large-scale campaign on the continent within approximately five years [3]. Similar assessments have been echoed by other Western intelligence services and political leaders.
NATO's principal framework for such a contingency is the NATO Force Model (NFM). Built around a tiered readiness structure, the NFM envisages eventually generating a roughly 500,000-strong force within 180 days tops - an effort without precedent in the Alliance's history. On the European continent, few actors match the land power mass and recent combat experience of Russian forces in the Moscow and Leningrad military districts, or the formations operating in occupied Ukraine. The Turkish and Ukrainian militaries stand out in both scale and combat-readiness.
This raises a direct question: to what extent have alternative military concepts - those prioritizing EU-centric defense arrangements, excluding Turkiye, leaving Ukraine out in the cold, or assuming a diminished role for NATO and American combat formations - been thoroughly war-gamed in EU circles in Brussels? If Danish projections materialize, can EU capabilities alone generate comparable operational mass without Turkiye, or without a NATO framework underpinned by the US' warfighting edge?
Distinctive military characteristics in Turkiye and Ukraine merit attention. In several areas, both are approaching critical capability thresholds. For example, the Bayraktar TB-3 drone autonomously launched from the amphibious assault ship TCG Anadolu during NATO's Steadfast Dart 2026 exercise, engaging targets with Roketsan's MAM-L precision munitions. In April, the same platform struck a moving unmanned surface vessel during a national exercise. Meanwhile, Ukrainian forces - likely employing a Magura USV under the Unmanned Systems Command - reportedly intercepted a Russian-Iranian Shahed drone in mid-air using an interceptor drone.
The operational implication is straightforward: setting aside the US, how many European allies can replicate these concepts of employment today? How many could field comparable capabilities within the next year? And on what timeline could the European Union as a whole close that gap?
Certain constraints sit, or should sit, above politically-driven debates. The grammar of military power is unforgiving: defense architectures that exclude Turkiye, non-EU NATO nations, or Ukraine; and rest on assumptions of European strategic autonomy are structurally insufficient - they will neither deter a credible threat to Europe nor prevail if deterrence fails.
[1] Ben Barry, et.al. Defending Europe Without the United States: Costs and Consequences, IISS, 2025.
[2] Camille Grand, "Defending Europe with Less America", European Council on Foreign Relations, Temmuz 2024.
[3] Opdateret vurdering af truslen fra Rusland mod Rigsfaellesskabet, https://www.fe-ddis.dk/globalassets/fe/dokumenter/2025/trusselsvurderin..., 2025.
* * *
At A Glance:
Can Kasapoglu is a nonresident senior fellow at Hudson Institute. His work at Hudson focuses on political-military affairs in the Middle East, North Africa, and former Soviet regions.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hudson.org/defense-strategy/inescapable-truth-euro-atlantic-defense-no-way-forward-without-turkiye-can-kasapoglu
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: Minnesota Schools Projected to Lose Students by 2031
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, April 24 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on April 23, 2026, by policy fellow Catrin Wigfall:
* * *
Minnesota schools projected to lose students by 2031
Minnesota public school enrollment is expected to decline between 2022 and 2031, according to projections from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).
The NCES predicts that only nine states -- Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee,
... Show Full Article
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, April 24 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary on April 23, 2026, by policy fellow Catrin Wigfall:
* * *
Minnesota schools projected to lose students by 2031
Minnesota public school enrollment is expected to decline between 2022 and 2031, according to projections from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).
The NCES predicts that only nine states -- Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee,and Utah -- will see public school enrollment grow over that time period, as first reported by Jude Schwalbach of the Reason Foundation.
As I have previously written, enrollment in Minnesota public schools has already fallen by nearly 3 percent since the 2019-20 school year. By fall 2031, NCES projects enrollment will sit at about 854,700 students, essentially returning the state to where it was in 2000 (854,340 students). From fall 2021 to fall 2031, that amounts to a roughly 2 percent decline. (Statista, a data gathering and visualization platform, projected a similar decline across this time period back in fall 2023, which I wrote about here [https://www.americanexperiment.org/minnesota-public-school-enrollment-projected-to-be-down-in-2031/].)
Minnesota Enrollment in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools
Selected Years, Fall 1990-Fall 2031 (projected)
[View chart in the link at bottom.]
Minnesota's projected decline is smaller than in other states, but the factors behind it are noteworthy -- ranging from migration to low birth rates to changing family preferences.
The most significant driver appears to be demographic. Birth rates in Minnesota have been declining for roughly a decade, mirroring a national trend.
But families are also making different choices. According to a 2025 Gallup poll shared by Schwalbach, "public schools have yet to fully regain parents' trust to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels, with 74% of parents -- eight percentage points less than in 2019 -- saying they were satisfied with their public schools." In Minnesota, American Experiment's Thinking Minnesota Poll shows a similar shift in satisfaction: Most residents now grade the state's public schools a "C" or worse.
In a system where funding follows students, how districts respond to these enrollment projections matters.
"With forecasts of fewer students in the years to come, school districts can't keep doing the same things they've been doing if they want to successfully compete in a more robust education marketplace," writes Schwalbach. And flexibility alone, such as open enrollment policies, "isn't enough."
"If school districts want to attract and retain students, they have to give students a reason to stay or choose them."
"...[P]ublic schools should get back to basics: teaching kids how to read and do math. The 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress results showed that one in three 12th graders' reading level scored below basic, and 45% of them scored at the same level in math, the worst results in two decades."
Additionally, "state policymakers should take steps to identify underutilized school buildings to help districts and taxpayers reduce costs," Schwalbach continues.
The Minneapolis school district, for example, long plagued by financial challenges, should consider consolidation and a more strategic allocation of building use.
Even though Minnesota's projected decline is modest, the trend points in one direction. Districts cannot continue operating as if enrollment is guaranteed and must find ways to adapt and innovate in a more competitive education environment.
Estimated Percent Change in Public School Enrollment by State, Fall 2022-Fall 2031
[View chart in the link at bottom.]
* * *
Catrin Wigfall is a Policy Fellow at Center of the American Experiment.
catrin.wigfall@americanexperiment.org
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/minnesota-schools-projected-to-lose-students-by-2031/
[Category: ThinkTank]
Center of the American Experiment Issues Commentary: Federal Tool Brings Greater Transparency to Union Spending
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, April 24 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary by policy fellow Catrin Wigfall:
* * *
New federal tool brings greater transparency to union spending
The U.S. Department of Labor has launched a new tool designed to make union financial disclosures more accessible to members, employees, and the public.
While unions have been required to file annual financial reports for decades, the department's Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) recognized the
... Show Full Article
GOLDEN VALLEY, Minnesota, April 24 -- The Center of the American Experiment, a civic and educational organization that says it creates and advocates policies, issued the following commentary by policy fellow Catrin Wigfall:
* * *
New federal tool brings greater transparency to union spending
The U.S. Department of Labor has launched a new tool designed to make union financial disclosures more accessible to members, employees, and the public.
While unions have been required to file annual financial reports for decades, the department's Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) recognized theneed to make the data more user-friendly.
I have written extensively on teachers' unions' annual financial reports, known as LM-2 reports, as they include information on membership, spending, and compensation for union officers and staff. But these reports are often hundreds of pages long and difficult to navigate, limiting their usefulness.
OLMS's new data visualization tool addresses this. The initial phase includes LM-2 data, which covers the nation's largest unions and contains some of the most detailed and complex disclosures. Now, the data is in a far more accessible format. Users can track trends in union finances -- including changes in dues revenue, membership, spending priorities, and compensation -- through interactive graphs, charts, searchable tables, and multi-year comparisons. This helps "union members engage in the governance of their unions" and helps "employees make informed choices about union representation," according to Elisabeth Messenger, director of OLMS.
For example, data from Education Minnesota (the state's teachers' union) can now be viewed at a glance rather than pieced together from multiple reports. Users can quickly see patterns such as declining membership, rising dues, growth in political spending, and increased employee compensation.
[View image in the link at bottom.]
This level of transparency is applauded and long overdue. In 2019, other think tank representatives and I met with the U.S. Department of Labor. Improving transparency and accessibility in these filings was a top reform priority we discussed.
OLMS has announced phase two is now underway, which will expand data visualization to additional reporting forms filed by employers and their labor relations consultants.
* * *
Look up reports filed by labor organizations, employers, labor relations consultants, and others here (https://www.dol.gov/agencies/olms/public-disclosure-room#union). Learn how to navigate the data visualization tool here (https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/OLMS/regs/compliance/OLMS_Data_Visualization_Announcement.pdf).
* * *
Catrin Wigfall is a Policy Fellow at Center of the American Experiment.
catrin.wigfall@americanexperiment.org
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americanexperiment.org/new-federal-tool-brings-transparency-to-union-spending/
[Category: ThinkTank]
America First Policy Institute: States Have New Weapons to Combat Rampant SNAP, Medicaid, Fraud
WASHINGTON, April 24 (TNSrpt) -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following news release on April 23, 2026:
* * *
States Have New Weapons to Combat Rampant SNAP, Medicaid, Fraud
The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) has released a new Issue Brief (https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/states-can-reduce-fraud-in-snap-by-sharing-data) and State Model Policy to help state lawmakers strengthen their SNAP oversight and work more effectively with the federal government to root out fraud, waste, and abuse and preserve SNAP benefits for the truly needy. This comes on the heels of
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 24 (TNSrpt) -- The America First Policy Institute issued the following news release on April 23, 2026:
* * *
States Have New Weapons to Combat Rampant SNAP, Medicaid, Fraud
The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) has released a new Issue Brief (https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/states-can-reduce-fraud-in-snap-by-sharing-data) and State Model Policy to help state lawmakers strengthen their SNAP oversight and work more effectively with the federal government to root out fraud, waste, and abuse and preserve SNAP benefits for the truly needy. This comes on the heels ofAFPI's release earlier this week of a toolkit to combat fraud at the state level in state Medicaid and other public assistance programs.
In the final months of 2025, and the beginning of 2026, massive amounts of Medicaid, Medicare, and Supplemental Assistance Nutrition Program (SNAP) fraud made headlines across multiple states.
Researchers and government officials estimate billions of dollars in safety net fraud--a massive abuse of taxpayer dollars, and a failure to protect vulnerable Americans and families who truly need financial assistance.
AFPI's anti-fraud package includes:
* Issue Brief: "States Can Reduce Fraud in SNAP by Sharing Data"
* State Model Policy: "State Policymakers Can Reduce Fraud & Improve SNAP Through Data Sharing"
* Research Report: "Protecting the American Dream: Restoring Accountability and Combating Fraud in Safety Net Programs"
AFPI has long championed policy reforms to federal assistance programs that are administered by state and local governments. By improving transparency and restoring accountability of taxpayer dollars in our federal and state assistance programs, trust may be restored once again.
* * *
MEDIA AVAILABILITY
Kip Tom, Vice Chair of Rural Policy is available for comment on how SNAP data sharing is the key to stamping out SNAP fraud. Click here (https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/contact/comms-team) to schedule an interview.
* * *
REPORT: https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/states-can-reduce-fraud-in-snap-by-sharing-data
* * *
Original text here: https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/states-have-new-weapons-to-combat-rampant-snap-medicaid-fraud
[Category: ThinkTank]
