In The Citizens’ Voice, The Buckeye Institute and Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Foundation urge Keystone State lawmakers to look to Ohio for solutions to its power problem. “Nearly two-thirds of Pennsylvanians agree: Energy is unaffordable. Pennsylvania’s average residential electricity price was 11 percent higher this July than a year earlier, and it has risen by 45 percent since 2018.” “Pennsylvania should borrow Ohio’s playbook and begin comprehensive permitting reform to establish clear rules over political discretion.”

In a new policy memo, Restoring Legislative Oversight, The Buckeye Institute urged Ohio lawmakers to restore legislative oversight to Ohio’s rule-making process to ensure that elected officials are responsible for costly government regulations imposed on Ohioans. “By restoring legislative oversight over this process, Ohioans can hold their elected officials accountable for major, costly regulations while preserving executive authority over essential administrative functions and emergency responses.”

In Unlocking Capital, The Buckeye Institute’s economic modeling revealed that eliminating Ohio’s capital gains tax would lead to $1.15 billion in economic growth and 1,400 new jobs in the first year after implementation. Using STELA, a dynamic scoring model developed by economists at The Buckeye Institute, the paper’s authors analyzed the economic impact of eliminating Ohio’s capital gains tax on the state’s businesses, families, economy, and revenues.

The Buckeye Institute and Washington Policy Center feature the impacts of Senate Bill 6346 on Washington’s economy, writing, “[I]t will cost Washington roughly $4.9 billion in GDP, $3.1 billion in private investment, and about 7,800 jobs,” and urging Washington lawmakers to “look for solutions that preserve the advantages fostered by the state’s “no income tax” past, without jeopardizing its fiscal future.”

BBC News features The Buckeye Institute’s monumental case challenging the federal prohibition on home distilling: U.S. Department of Justice v. McNutt (formerly McNutt v. U.S. Department of Justice), which the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear. “The Supreme Court announced this week that it would reconsider the 1868 legislation forbidding the practice, and hobby distillers hope that their spirits will soon be treated like beer and wine, which are both legal to brew at home across the country.”

Fox News features The Buckeye Institute’s monumental case challenging the federal prohibition on home distilling: U.S. Department of Justice v. McNutt (formerly McNutt v. U.S. Department of Justice), which the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear. “Americans can legally brew beer and make wine at home, but producing even a small amount of whiskey could land them in federal prison. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to weigh in on a 150-year-old federal law prohibiting home distilling, a case that could have implications far beyond the liquor cabinet.”

The Washington Post calls on the U.S. Supreme Court to “let Americans make their own whiskey,” after the court agreed to hear The Buckeye Institute’s monumental case challenging the federal prohibition on home distilling: U.S. Department of Justice v. McNutt (formerly McNutt v. U.S. Department of Justice). “If the government prevails at the high court, the justices will have ratified a new, expansive federal power to regulate all kinds of conduct.”

CNN features The Buckeye Institute’s monumental case challenging the federal prohibition on home distilling: U.S. Department of Justice v. McNutt (formerly McNutt v. U.S. Department of Justice), which the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear. “The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide if the federal government may bar people from distilling liquor at home in an appeal filed by the Trump administration after the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the prohibition, ‘while venerable,’ violated the necessary and proper clause of the Constitution.”

Reuters features The Buckeye Institute’s monumental case challenging the federal prohibition on home distilling: U.S. Department of Justice v. McNutt (formerly McNutt v. U.S. Department of Justice), which the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear. “The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide the legality of a federal ban on the home distilling of alcoholic spirits that was enacted in 1868 after the US Civil War to crack down on liquor tax evasion.”

USA TODAY features The Buckeye Institute’s monumental case challenging the federal prohibition on home distilling: U.S. Department of Justice v. McNutt (formerly McNutt v. U.S. Department of Justice), which the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear. “The Supreme Court will decide whether a nearly 160-year-old federal ban on distilling whiskey and other spirits at home is constitutional…The would-be home brewers who challenged the law include John Ream, an Ohio engineer who crafts his own wine and mead and wants to experiment with spirits.”