William F. Shughart II, “Unhealthy Time Change”, syndicated nationally by the McClatchy-Tribune News Service and posted on the websites of, inter alia, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, the News Observer (Charlotte, NC) and the Orlando (FL) Sentinel, 28 October 2009. Published as “Unhealthy Time Change”, Sacramento Bee, 28 October 2009; as “Time Change could Prove Hazardous to Your Health”, Houston Chronicle, 29 October 2009; as “Studies Show There are Health Risks to this Unnecessary Change”, Colorado Daily (Boulder, CO), 29 October 2009; as “A Costly Switch in Time”, The Oil City (PA) Derrick, 29 October 2009; as “The Twice-a-Year Unhealthy Time Change”, The Anniston (AL) Star, 29 October 2009; as “Time Change Proves Unhealthy”, Bradenton (FL) Herald, 30 October 2009; as “Unhealthy Time Change”, Daily News (Red Bluff, CA), 30 October 2009; as “Turning Back Clock Damages Your Ticker”, Post-Bulletin (Rochester, MN), 30  October 2009; as “Turning Back Clock Unhealthy Time Change”, Moline (IL) Dispatch, 30 October 2009; as “‘Falling Back’ may be Unhealthy”, Democrat and Chronicle (Rochester, NY), 31 October 2009; as “Daylight Killing Time”, Winnipeg (Canada) Free Press, 31 October 2009; as “Daylight Saving Time Kills”, Green Bay (WI) Press Gazette, 31 October 2009; as "An Unhealthy Time Change", StarNews (Indianapolis, IN), 31 Octover 2009, p. 13A; ;s “Daylight-Saving Time may Cause Heart Attacks, Accidents”, Arizona Daily Star (Tucson, AZ), 1 November 2009: as “Unhealthy Time Change”, Courier-Journal (Louisville, KY), 1 November 2009; as “Unhealthy Time Change”, Plain Dealer (Cleveland, OH), 1 November 2009; as “Time Shifts Not Merely Inconvenient”, Times News (Kingsport, TN), 2 November 2009; as “Time Changes have No Benefits, and They’re Unhealthy”, The Press of Atlantic City (NJ), 2 November 2009; and as “There’s a Health Price to Pay for Time-Shifting”, Pioneer Press (St. Paul, MN), 2 November 2009.

William F. Shughart II, “President Obama doesn’t Get It”, Sacramento Bee, 23 September 2009; also published under the same title in the Lexington (KY) Herald-Leader, 23 September 2009; as “Postal Service is a Warning”, Lawrence (KS) Journal-World & News, 24 September 2009; as “Postal Service a Poor Example for Promoting Public Option”, The Press of Atlantic City (NJ), 25 September 2009; as “President Obama doesn’t Get It”, Bradenton (FL) Herald, 25 September 2009; as “Profit Motive makes the World go ’Round”, Star Tribune (Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN), 25 September 2009; as “Post Office is an Example of Why ‘Public Option’ doesn’t Work”, Plain Dealer (Cleveland, OH), 26 September 2009; as “Obama and the Mailman: President Just doesn’t Get It”, The Anniston (AL) Star, 26 September 2009; as “Postal Service a Model for Health Reform?”, Press-Telegram (Long Beach, CA), 26 September 2009; and as "Obama goes Postal", Visión Hispana, 10–20 October 2009, p. 5.

William F. Shughart II, "Eating Junk Food could Fatten Your Tax Bill", Washington Examiner, 17 September 2009; also published as "The Government Sets up Shop in Your Cupboard", San Francisco Examiner, 17 September 2009; and as “Eating Junk Food could Fatten Your Tax Bill”, Visión Hispana, 26 September–9 October 2009, p. 5.

William F. Shughart II, "State's Policy is to Leave Money Sitting Idle during Deficit Times", San Francisco Examiner, 6 August 2009, p. 23.

William F. Shughart II, "Taxing Internet Sales is a Recipe for Big Government", Daily Sun News (Sunnyside, WA), 17 July 2009; also published as “Enough is Enough: Taxing Internet Sales is a Recipe for Big Government”, Manistee (MI) News Advocate, 17 July 2009; and as “Taxing Internet Sales is a Recipe for Big Government”, The Source, 9 August 2009.

William F. Shughart II, "Taxing Soda Pop is No Way to Fund Health Reform", The Mercury News (San José, CA), 24 June 2009; also published as “Can Soda Be Sinful? Yes, If the Government Says So (Again)”, The Star-Ledger (Newark, NJ), 25 June 2009; as “Drinking a Sweet Soda May Soon be a Sin”, Quad-Cities Online, 25 June 2009; as “Being Fat May Soon Be a Sin”, Daily Herald (Provo, UT), 25 June 2009; as “History Teaches Us to Beware of the Sin Tax”, Post Star (Glens Falls, NY), 26 June 2009; as “Being Fat May Soon Be a Sin”, The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, OH), 27 June 2009; as “Taxes on Soft Drinks Unfair, Not Healthy”, The Sun News (Myrtle Beach, SC), 27 June 2009; as “Excise Taxes: You May be Next”, The Philadelphia Inquirer, 28 June 2009; as “Tax Soda Today, Bacon Tomorrow” Arizona Daily Star (Tucson, AZ), 28 June 2009; as “Paying for Health Care Reform: Today, Soft Drink Tax”, Bradenton (FL) Herald, 28 June 2009; as “Tax on Soft Drinks Aimed at Ending Our Fatty Ways”, The Vindicator (Youngstown, OH), 28 June 2009; as “Taxing Sugary Soft Drinks to Help Pay for Health Care Simply Wrong”, Yakima (WA) Herald-Republic, 28 June 2009; as “Fat Tax: Being Overweight is Becoming a ‘Sin’”, York (PA) Daily Record/York Sunday News, 29 June 2009; as “Selective Excise Taxes are Blatantly Unfair”, The Times-News (Kingsport, TN), 29 June 2009; as Soft Drinks Today; Bacon Tomorrow”, Wyoming Tribune-Eagle (Cheyenne, WY), 29 June 2009; as “Being Fat May Soon be a Sin”, Portland (ME) Press-Herald, 29 June 2009; as “Being Fat Might Soon Be a Sin”, Post Bulletin (Rochester, MN), 30 June 2009; as “Where Will It End if Soda is Taxed?”, Centre Daily Times (State College, PA), 1 July 2009; as “Being Fat May Soon Be a Sin”, The Free Lance-Star (Fredericksburg, VA), 5 July 2009; as “Taxing Soft Drinks is First Step on Slippery Slope of Excise Tax”, Great Falls (MT) Tribune, 2 July 2009; as “Time for a Sugary Soft Drink Rebellion?”, News & Observer (Raleigh, NC), 5 July 2009; as “Soda-Pop Tax: Being Fat becomes a Sin”, Santa Fe New Mexican, 6 July 2009; as “Pop Tax Wrong Move”, The (Butte) Montana Standard, 7 July 2009; and as "Soft-Drinks Tax is Brazen Discrimination", The Providence (RI) Journal, 25 September 2009.

William F. Shughart II, "Wage Ordinance? Con: UM Economist Cites the 'Folly of a Living Wage'", Clarion-Ledger, 14 June 2009, p. 1C.

William F. Shughart II, "Tax Sugary Soft Drinks? Con: Just another Unneeded Infringement", The Debate Room, Business Week, 4 June 2009.

William F. Shughart II, "Nanny State runs Amok with City's Cigarette Tax", San Francisco Examiner, 2 June 2009.

William F. Shughart II, "Mixed Enterprises will Maximize Losses", Freedom Politics, 11 May 2009.

William F. Shughart II, "Presenting: United States Motors", Financial Post, 28 April 2009; also published in the National Post, 29 April 2009.

William F. Shughart II, "Put $80 Billion into a Paper Bag, and", The Free Lance-Star (Fredericksburg, VA), 24 April 2009.

William F. Shughart II, “A Budget Solution: Sell Off San Quentin", San Francisco Chronicle, 31 March 2009, p. A-15.

William F. Shughart II, “Fiscal Obamamania", The Monitor (McAllen, TX), 11 March 2009; also published as “Mortgage Aid Plan Rewards Irresponsibility,” Sun-Herald (Biloxi, MS), 12 March 2009; as "Obama's Spending Spree Adds to Deficit", The Vindicator (Youngstown, OH), 13 March 2009, as “Fiscal Obamamania”, Pittsburgh (PA) Tribune-Review, 15 March 2009; as “Fixing America’s Broken Nest Egg”, Rock Hill (SC) Herald, 15 March 2009; as “More Spending, More Bailouts won’t Work”, The Free Lance-Star (Fredericksburg, VA), 18 March 2009, p. A7; and as “Fiscal Obamamania”, York (PA) Daily Record, 19 March 2009.

William F. Shughart II, “Bad Business, as Usual", Los Angeles Business Journal, 9 March 2009.

William F. Shughart II, “Taking Wrong Course", The Oklahoman, 7 March 2009.

William F. Shughart II, “Folly of Incentives", Washington Times, 25 January 2009.

William F. Shughart II, “We Need 'Reform', Not an Increased Excise Tax on Cigarettes", Clarion-Ledger, 10 January 2009, p. 11A.

William F. Shughart II, “Paving Projects won’t Boost Economy”, Investor’s Business Daily, 6 January 2009; also published, inter alia, as “Will Obama’s Stimulus Pull Nation Out of Recession? CON: Jobs will be Created, but Money Could be better Spent Elsewhere”, The Blade (Toledo, OH), 3 January 2009, p. 7; as “Plan, Like FDR’s New Deal, Not Best Use of Funds”, The Sun News (Myrtle Beach, SC), 3 January 2009; as “A Jobs Stimulus has its Limits”, Keene (NH) Sentinel, 3 January 2009; as “Obama’s ‘New’ New Deal won’t Lift us out of the Recession”, Ogden (UT) Standard-Examiner, 3 January 2009, and Augusta (GA) Chronicle, 5 January 2009, p. A07; as “Obama Stimulus won’t Pull U.S. Economy out of Recession”, Kansas City Sunday Star, 4 January 2009; as “Obama Stimulus will Lead to More Jobs, won’t End Recession”, Modesto (CA) Sunday Bee, 4 January 2009; as “Obama’s ‘New’ New Deal will Create Jobs, but won’t Lift America out of Recession”, Hawaii Reporter, San Gabriel Valley (CA) Tribune and Whittier (CA) Daily News, 5 January 2009; as “New ‘New Deal’ will Create Jobs but not a Cure”, Charleston (WV) Gazette, 6 January 2009; and as “Recession Reinforcing Job Creation”, The Obama Watch, American Spectator Online, 8 January 2009.