Today, Victor Davis Hanson’s book on President Trump’s political comeback reaches the no.1 spot on The New York Times bestseller list; David Henderson explains how the administration’s tariffs threaten the competitiveness of auto manufacturing firms on both sides of the US-Canadian border; John Cochrane outlines the basics of his ideal tax system; and Paola Sapienza announces a new program within the Hoover Immigration Initiative, which she directs.
Contemporary US History
Senior Fellow Victor Davis Hanson’s latest book The Counterrevolution is currently no. 1 on The New York Times nonfiction bestseller list. Hanson charts how President Trump mounted a political comeback of historic proportions following his defeat in the 2020 election. Hanson argues that the ambition and aggressiveness of Trump’s second-term agenda can only be fully understood as the product of his four years in the political and legal wilderness. Hanson details what he sees as the tactical errors and overreaches of Trump’s opponents, as well as how facing prosecutions in multiple jurisdictions shaped Trump’s second term agenda around “striking back.” The Counterrevolution offers the definitive account of how a reelection once viewed as improbable transformed contemporary American history. Read more here.
Freedom Frequency
At Freedom Frequency, Research Fellow David R. Henderson warns that new US tariffs pose a threat to the thriving US-Canadian auto industry, which was built on the flow of parts and vehicles across international borders duty-free. Preexisting agreements between Ottawa and Washington took decades to refine, Henderson points out, and now the potential uncertainty of future disruptions—let alone worries about immediate tariffs that could rise as high as 50 percent—means a well-oiled international trade is being needlessly harmed. Henderson also notes that while various courts, including the Supreme Court, have ruled against the manner in which Trump has previously imposed tariffs, the administration can—and has—proffered different legal rationales to institute similar duties afresh, extending the policy uncertainty facing businesses. Read more here.
“How should we fix the tax code?” That’s the question at the heart of this week’s Grumpy Economist Weekly Rant. Senior Fellow John H. Cochrane argues that a real fix would “eliminate income, corporate, estate, excise, and all other taxes.” Instead, Cochrane says, the government should tax consumption, at the same rate for every good. He emphasizes that this proposal results from his analysis of tax incentives. As he notes, “When you tax anything, you get less of it—but some things more than others. So, ideally, the government would tax things that people will still buy and still produce despite the higher taxes.” The current tax code, Cochrane explains, “combines very high all-in statutory marginal tax rates with a Swiss cheese of deductions, credits, exclusions, and complex deals, so that it doesn’t end up raising that much revenue.” Read more here.
Immigration Policy
Senior Fellow Paola Sapienza announces a new Hoover Immigration Initiative investigating how the patchwork of laws and administrative rules that have shaped immigration policy over the last half century are currently serving our economy. The program will start by focusing on the part of the system that facilitates most high-skill immigration: nonimmigrant visas that authorize temporary work and study in the United States. The Immigration Initiative is publishing a series of Data Explainers, the first of which presents data on who comes through America’s largest high-skilled work-visa program, including their age, gender, and countries of origin. It also highlights the intense demand for H-1B workers among US employers: businesses filed nearly 1.8 million registrations across four recent lotteries, while Congress caps new visas at 85,000 per year. Read more here.
Economics
In the summer of 2026, Distinguished Visiting Fellow David F. Larcker, Senior Fellow Amit Seru, and Stanford researcher Bryan Tayan jointly conducted a nationwide survey, representative in terms of gender, race, age, household income, and region of residence, to understand how the American public views CEOs who take public positions on environmental, social, and political issues. This survey follows up on similar research conducted in 2018. The authors found that “55 percent of the public believes the CEOs of large corporations should use their position and potential influence to advocate on behalf of social, environmental, or political issues they care about personally, while 45 percent do not. These figures are down from 65 percent in favor and 35 percent opposed in 2018.” The authors also note that public support for CEO activism is greater on environmental issues, as opposed to contentious social or political topics. Read more here.
Hoover Institution News
The Hoover Institution has established a new pathway for recent college graduates to pursue consequential policy research alongside leading Hoover scholars with its new Ketterer/Vorwald Post-Baccalaureate Fellowships. With the generous support of the Ketterer and Vorwald family, Hoover has welcomed four recent college graduates to a yearlong paid fellowship. Participants will contribute to the work of Hoover scholars and research initiatives while receiving close mentorship at a formative stage in their careers. “The Ketterer/Vorwald Post-Baccalaureate Fellowships reflect Hoover’s commitment to investing in the next generation of scholars and leaders,” said Hoover Institution Director Condoleezza Rice. “By pairing talented recent graduates with Hoover fellows and research programs, we are enabling them to deepen their intellectual interests, contribute to important scholarship, and explore how ideas can shape public policy. We are deeply grateful to the Ketterer and Vorwald family for making this program possible.” Read more here.
Related Commentary