Senator Chris Van Hollen: Tax Bill Video

I'm angry. I just got back from witnessing one of the biggest legislative heists in American history. For days, Republicans were huddled behind closed doors, surrounded by lobbyists for the rich and powerful. And now, under the cover of darkness, Senate Republicans voted to ram this tax scam through the Senate. Do you know why they don't want to wait to read the bill? Because the more the public sees their plan, the more they hate it. The faster they rush it, the easier it is for them to score a political win with their donors—which a Republican Congressman conceded was the goal of their bill.And despite what Republicans have promised, this legislation will not spur economic growth—it will cause our national debt to explode and slow economic growth as time goes on. The claim that workers will get a $4,000 pay raise will soon be shown for the farce that it is. Meanwhile, millions of middle-class families will pay more. And for those middle-class families who do get tax cuts, they will be puny compared to the $70,000 a year average tax cut for millionaires. Moreover, the tax cuts for families will be temporary while the giant tax cuts for corporations are forever. Don’t just take it from me, the facts have been clearly laid out by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation: This bill increases the debt by more than $1 trillion and the biggest beneficiaries are millionaires and big corporations. And when this bill is fully phased in, the small tax cuts for families expire while the big tax cuts for corporations are forever. In fact, ten years from now American families who make less than $75,000 will be paying higher taxes, on average, in order to pay for a permanent tax cut for multinational corporations—including a huge tax cut for foreign stockholders.It’s shameful that the greatest deliberative body in the world just prioritized a windfall giveaway to multinational corporations and billionaires while real priorities like CHIP, community health centers, disaster relief, the Dream Act, TPS, pension security, and funding our government remain unresolved.

Posted by Chris Van Hollen on Tuesday, December 19, 2017

I’m angry. I just got back from witnessing one of the biggest legislative heists in American history. For days, Republicans were huddled behind closed doors, surrounded by lobbyists for the rich and powerful. And now, under the cover of darkness, Senate Republicans voted to ram this tax scam through the Senate. Do you know why they don’t want to wait to read the bill? Because the more the public sees their plan, the more they hate it. The faster they rush it, the easier it is for them to score a political win with their donors—which a Republican Congressman conceded was the goal of their bill.

And despite what Republicans have promised, this legislation will not spur economic growth—it will cause our national debt to explode and slow economic growth as time goes on. The claim that workers will get a $4,000 pay raise will soon be shown for the farce that it is. Meanwhile, millions of middle-class families will pay more. And for those middle-class families who do get tax cuts, they will be puny compared to the $70,000 a year average tax cut for millionaires. Moreover, the tax cuts for families will be temporary while the giant tax cuts for corporations are forever. Don’t just take it from me, the facts have been clearly laid out by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation: This bill increases the debt by more than $1 trillion and the biggest beneficiaries are millionaires and big corporations. And when this bill is fully phased in, the small tax cuts for families expire while the big tax cuts for corporations are forever. In fact, ten years from now American families who make less than $75,000 will be paying higher taxes, on average, in order to pay for a permanent tax cut for multinational corporations—including a huge tax cut for foreign stockholders.

It’s shameful that the greatest deliberative body in the world just prioritized a windfall giveaway to multinational corporations and billionaires while real priorities like CHIP, community health centers, disaster relief, the Dream Act, TPS, pension security, and funding our government remain unresolved.

Socialism Comes to Iowa

The Nation

Socialism Comes to Iowa

An unusual coalition may be a template for the growing American left.

By Nicolas Medina and Rebecca Zweig       December 20, 2017

Iowa gubernatorial candidate Cathy Glasson, second from left, at a campaign event in September. (Photo via Facebook)

Iowa City, IowaOn the morning of Labor Day, a crowd gathered outside Mercy Hospital in Des Moines to hear health-care workers speak about their worsening labor conditions. After a number of hospital employees had spoken, Mike Carberry, a Democrat serving as supervisor for Johnson County, took the stage.

“Do we have any good liberals here?” he asked.

Carberry was met with tepid applause.

Then someone shouted: “We’re communists!”

The crowd exploded in cheers.

“Okay! Communists and socialists!” Carberry conceded.

The rally was a joint action between organizers of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the local chapter of Fight for $15, which earlier that morning organized a strike at a local Burger King. But the event of the day was a speech by Cathy Glasson, a recent entrant to the Democratic gubernatorial primary. 

“If you work in healthcare in Des Moines, you probably work two jobs,” Glasson told the crowd. “That’s why I’m here with you, to fight for $15 and a union!”

Glasson’s path to the governor’s mansion is far from clear. Her rivals in the primary include business-friendly centrists with close ties to establishment Democrats. But Glasson is the farthest left candidate in recent memory to mount a serious campaign for the state’s highest office.

She is betting on her campaign’s ability to build a coalition of unlikely conspirators: service workers, many of whom are immigrants and people of color; members of manufacturing unions, many of whom are white and some of whom supported Trump; and young members of the ascending Democratic Socialists of America.

Glasson and her staff are full of youthful energy, blending “Iowa Nice” with political rage. Yet their approach is old-school. They conceive of electoral politics as an extension of labor organizing, hoping to use the techniques that once made the Midwest a hotbed of union activism in order to convince voters to support progressive politics.

If proven right, the prairie progressives could augur a path forward for the American left.

Iowa was once a true swing state, where conservative farm owners and organized workers vied for power. Over the last decade, however, the state has drifted rightward: Though Democrats controlled the governor’s mansion and the two houses of the state legislature between 2007 and 2010, Republicans have held the governorship since 2011 and took over the legislature in 2017.

Narratives about “flyover country” often attribute this shift to the supposedly intractable bitterness of uneducated white voters. But local political observers insist that the state’s transformation was due in large part to state Democrats’ support for Big Agriculture and their neglect of workers’ concerns.

In an attempt to attract independent voters, Iowa Democrats have toed a centrist line, alienating voters who have grown tired of unfulfilled promises to enact progressive economic policies. The result is a vicious cycle: Republicans enact policies that harm the working class; Democrats prove inept at addressing that harm; and Iowa workers either stop voting or turn to Republicans.

Today, the state is in shambles. Manufacturers have left. Iowa’s once affordable public universities plan to raise tuition by 40 percent over the next five years. The state has the lowest-paid nurses and has some of the unhealthiest drinking water in the nation. Even Iowa’s famously fertile fields are dying: Researchers from Iowa State University recently found that parts of the state are losing topsoil at a rate 12 times faster than what the US Department of Agriculture considers tolerable.

Glasson conceives of her candidacy as a response to the apathy bred by moderate politicians. Her progressive populism owes much to Bernie Sanders, but it is equally a product of state political dynamics that brewed for decades before Sanders rose to national prominence.

“Centrist politics aren’t going to get us out of this mess,” Glasson recently told us in an interview. “Iowans are working hard and not feeling it in their pocketbook. They aren’t just Democrats, they’re Republicans too. We have career politicians in Des Moines who try to fix issues with half measures, and it’s not working.”

Glasson, who is white, was born in 1958 in the northwestern farming community of Spencer, Iowa. In 1982 she earned a nursing degree from the University of Iowa, and spent 20 years working in intensive care at the university hospitals.

In the 1990s, the Clinton administration began to push “managed-care” health-care reform, which proposed policies to reduce costs for taxpayers and patients. In practice, Glasson said, the policies damaged the working conditions of nurses.

Concerned for their jobs and the quality of patient care, Glasson and some of her co-workers decided to form a union. The challenge then became convincing their colleagues.

“I put a lot of miles on my car and spent hours talking to my fellow nurses,” Glasson said. “The reception was good, but organizing is difficult. By publicly supporting a union, you’re putting your neck on the line.”

Nurses had reason to be tentative. In Glasson’s telling, the hospital resorted to strategies intended to intimidate organizers.

“They hired an outside security firm to keep people like me from talking to nurses,” Glasson said. “A nurse told me she saw an armed security guard walk into a unit where patients were being cared for, just to make sure there wasn’t any subversive activity going on.”

(A spokesperson for the University of Iowa said the hospital occasionally retains external security firms, but not ones that “arm their employees.” He said the school could not confirm whether it hired security at the time of Glasson’s union drive, because it does not keep records for more than five years. He added that the university “follows all labor relations laws.”)

The hospital’s tactics backfired. In 1998, the University of Iowa’s hospital workers voted to join the SEIU. Glasson was elected president the following year and has since remained in the position.

The experience of union organizing proved foundational to Glasson’s political worldview. In contrast to some mainstream Democrats, who appear to assume voters’ convictions are stubbornly correlated to demographic markers, Glasson believes that people can be persuaded to change their minds.

In 2016, the Clinton campaign neglected areas where statistical models suggested few would support her. Glasson wants to run her campaign like a union drive, sending volunteers to conduct one-on-one conversations with all kinds of voters, even those who might initially reject her message.

“I know this sounds corny, but we need to have conversations with people,” Glasson said. “We need to ask them, ‘What are you worried about?’ We need to listen to them and help them realize what’s in their best interest.”

On October 7, Glasson’s campaign headed to Ottumwa, a city of 25,000 in south-central Iowa. Once a powerhouse of meatpacking and manufacturing, Ottumwa embodies the dynamics that have decimated Iowa Democrats. Many of the city’s factories have closed, reducing the city’s median household income to roughly $38,000—$16,000 less than the state average, which is close to the national figure.

This collapse of living standards had consequences. Wapello County, of which Ottumwa is the seat, voted Democrat in every presidential since 1976. In 2016 it cast nearly 60 percent of its ballots for Trump.

Steve Siegel, a social worker and former Wapello County Supervisor, attributed part of Ottumwa’s political shift to Republican positions on gun rights and abortion, but emphasized Trump’s opposition to free trade agreements.

“People were attracted by Trump’s message about jobs, how he was going to bring them back by getting rid of NAFTA and TPP,” Siegel told us.

The mood at the Oktoberfest parade, however, was festive. Residents lined the streets for miles, cheering for the high-school marching band, the American Legion, and employees from local businesses such as a restaurant that calls itself “the originator of the Pizza Taco.”

Glasson marched alongside the members of United Auto Workers Local 74, which represents machinists at John Deere Ottumwa Works. The union doesn’t usually participate in the parade, but this year its members decided to make community events a priority. The state legislature recently passed a law reducing collective-bargaining rights for public-sector employees (including our union United Electrical Local 896, which represents graduate instructors at the University of Iowa), and the UAW workers are worried they’re next.

Holding the union’s banner was Tim Walker, a 52-year-old native of Ottumwa who has worked at the plant for more than a decade. Walker, who is white, told us he didn’t vote for Trump, but some of his co-workers did.

Walker said many of his colleagues had grown frustrated not just with Democrats but also with the leadership of their union, which they felt was increasingly powerless in negotiations with management. The company, according to Walker, has taken to hiring “college kids,” many of them from countries like India and France, who “wave their engineering degrees” and side with their superiors in hopes of promotion and relocation. (John Deere did not respond to a request for comment that included questions about how many foreign employees work at the Ottumwa plant.)

“The people who voted for Trump felt he was going to clean the house,” Walker said. “Just like we did with our leadership. We voted almost all of them out back in May.”

Unlike the presidential election, Local 74’s protest vote pushed union leadership to the left. Their new president, Chris Laursen, a 47-year-old native of Ottumwa, is a self-described socialist with big plans for his union.

Laursen, who is white, joined the army at 17 and served in the first Gulf War. By the time he came home to work at John Deere, he was convinced the conflict had only served to enrich the military-industrial complex. Last year, he went to the Democratic National Convention as a “Bernie-or-Bust” delegate. To say Clinton’s nomination disappointed him would be an understatement. “I couldn’t vote for her,” he said. “She’s a warmonger in bed with big business.”

Laursen went on to run Jill Stein’s Iowa campaign, but after Trump’s election he decided third parties weren’t the answer. One of his first actions as president was to “go rogue” and announce his support for Glasson, breaking with the common practice of UAW locals to wait for an endorsement from their national leadership. (The UAW did not respond to a request for comment)

“The national union betrayed us when they supported Clinton despite her stance on TPP,” Laursen said. “We don’t need more corporate Dems.”

Ottumwa has become increasingly diverse in recent years. The 2000 Census recorded its population as 95 percent white, with less than 3 percent of its residents identifying as Hispanic. Ten years later, the survey found that 90 percent of the town identified as white, while 11 percent said they were Hispanic.

None of the white residents of Ottumwa who spoke to us felt that they harbored animosity toward immigrants. Walker, the UAW member, insisted that his problem with the engineers who work at his plant had nothing to do with their nationality. Siegel, the former Wapello County Supervisor, said he didn’t think that “immigration was a big problem” in Ottumwa, because the city has welcomed recent arrivals.

But members of Ottumwa’s Latino community tell a different story. Ramon Lopez, the 43-year-old proprietor of a Mexican grocery store, told us that he has felt a marked increase in racial tensions since Trump’s election. He has also noticed an uptick in deportations, which brings back dark memories.

Before Lopez lived in Ottumwa, he ran a grocery store in Marshalltown, a city in central Iowa that in 2006 was witness to one of the worst immigration raids in US history. The decimation of his community proved so traumatic that Lopez returned to Mexico, returning to the United States only years later. Now, he worries that another Marshalltown is in the works.

“If people in New York or Washington are listening,” he told us in an interview conducted in Spanish, “would ask them to please see if there’s anything they can possibly do to stop the raids.”

Glasson and her supporters are acutely aware of the role that anti-immigrant sentiments have played in Iowa’s rightward turn. In a visit to her hometown of Spencer, the candidate witnessed a survey in which people used corn kernels to signal key voting issues. Education came first. Immigration came second.

To build a winning coalition, Glasson needs to convince large swaths of Iowa’s electorate to set aside anti-immigrant views. She believes this can happen through the same personal conversations that can persuade hesitant workers to support a union.

“There isn’t a one-size-fits-all way to talk about immigration that doesn’t turn people off,” she said. “But we need to help people understand that ‘They are taking our jobs’ is a Republican lie.”

Laursen, the UAW president, has a similar line. He recently formed a labor action committee and is taking steps to politically educate his mostly-white membership. The discussions focus on labor, but he believes that convincing people to move to the left on workplace issues will result in broader political conversions.

Glasson also needs to earn the support of the growing number of immigrants eligible to vote in Iowa. But her campaign and supporters, many of whom are white, face challenges in reaching Latinos. Laurens said he has tried to organize Ottumwa’s Latino community by advertising political events in immigrant business, but the response was not what he expected.

“Nobody showed up,” Laursen said. “We didn’t have a translator.”

Still, there’s reason to hope. Some of Glasson’s staunchest supporters are members of Fight for $15. Though the group does not endorse electoral campaigns, its organizers advocate for pro-union candidates who support increases to the minimum wage.

Angelica Serrano heard about Glasson’s campaign through Fight for $15 organizers. Serrano, a 47-year-old US citizen of Mexican origin, said she came to Des Moines 26 years ago, 19 of which she has worked at McDonald’s. Despite her seniority, she makes $10.50 an hour and has no vacation, paid sick days, or health insurance.

“I think the Hispanic community is going to come out strong for Cathy,” Serrano said. “She has joined us our demonstrations and strikes. I think she’ll make a great governor.”

Though a newcomer, Glasson is a disciplined candidate. Asked whether she believes she can overtake her better-funded rivals, she answers without hesitation: Of course she can win.

Iowa’s electoral peculiarities could give solidity to her bravado. To choose their nominees, state Democrats first hold caucuses in neighborhood districts, then a primary. If a candidate wins with more than 35 percent of the vote in the election, the caucuses are rendered obsolete. But if the primary proves too close, the party holds a convention, in which delegates from each district support their caucus’s candidate. In a crowded election—10 candidates are currently running—this unpredictable system can transform a long-shot candidate into a strong contender.

Yet Glasson works hard to de-emphasize the office of governor. She often tells voters that the only way to change Iowa is to build a movement at every level of government. No office is too small: She wants progressives to take over city councils and school boards.

Her message has an optimistic implication: Even if Glasson doesn’t win, her run will have served to build connections among the Iowa Left. Activists who had been working in isolation are coming together in her campaign. And, as Serrano put it, “entre más seamos, más fuertes seremos.” Numbers make us strong.

Many liberals and leftists bristle at the idea of engaging white working-class voters who may have reactionary views on social issues. Some people of color rightly feel disinclined to put themselves at risk to reason with people who may wish them ill, but white progressives often appropriate that discourse as a cop-out. The possibility that progressives could win red states by promoting the idea that working class people of all backgrounds deserve good jobs then falls by the wayside.

Glasson and her supporters, in part because they come from a progressive tradition that emphasizes action over theory, are less afraid to have frank conversations with people who, to misquote Ronald Reagan’s dictum about Latinos, are leftists who don’t know it yet. As the American left rallies around the realization that it has nothing to lose, its members on the coasts should emulate the prairie progressives.

“I like the DSA kids a lot,” Laursen said. “But you can’t just sit in the library sipping coffee and talking about Marxist theory. You have to get out there and convince people to stop voting against their own interests.”

Happy Democratic New Year!

New Year (2018), Will Be ______???

Please fill in your own “best” words.

John Hanno       December 19, 2017

We’re approaching the one year mark for the trump administration. Depending on your position on the left – right political spectrum, the score board results are utterly controvertible.

Those on the Ult-Right, believe trump’s been a smashing success. They believe he’s been especially adept at seeming to overturn reams of Obama era accomplishments in the fields of healthcare, the environment, workplace protections, consumer protections and sensible regulations and legislation aimed at supporting all of the above and more.

Old School Republican’s, who use to populate the party’s middle – but have now been mostly relegated to center right history, are more than sick and tired of holding their noses, shaking their heads and making excuses for leaders who have traded principled opposition, thoughtful governance and true conservative ideals, for political “winning” at any cost. Those still in congress are retiring in unprecedented numbers before the chicken-shit comes home to roost.

Progressive and moderate democrats are atypically unanimous in expressing their shock and disgust at what this toxic administration and their spineless enablers in the Republi-con congress have substituted for constructive problem solving and effective leadership.

Trump’s best and brightest, who he touts to this day, have been found disqualified, fired, forced out, indicted, plead guilty or fled the trump train wreck; more than two dozen of these characters departed in just the first year.

Trump points to a Wall Street story praising trumps choices for the federal courts, even after his own Republi-cons in the senate judicial committee have had enough of his nominees who are beyond unqualified.

After Senate Chairman Grassley asked the White House to pull two nominees, they relented and withdrew the nominations of Brett Talley and Jeff Mateer.

Talley, who was picked to be a federal judge in Alabama, had never tried a case before in court and was rated by the American Bar Association (ABA), as unanimously unqualified.

Senators discovered after Talley was voted out of committee that he was married to White House counsel Donald McGhan’s chief of staff. Talley didn’t list his wife, on his Senate questionnaire, as a family member who might represent a potential conflict of interest.

Mateer, nominated for a seat on a federal district court in Texas gave speeches in which he compared homosexuality to bestiality and described transgender children as a part of “Satan’s plan.”

Even worse was the questioning of Matthew Petersen, nominated for the District Court for the District of Columbia, by Republican Sen. John Kennedy (La.), that went viral. It painfully revealed Petersen never conducted any type of trial, only “helped’ conduct a couple of depositions and couldn’t answer simple questions that a 2nd year law student could answer. He didn’t even know what a motion in limine’ is, a routine motion that every litigant must argue before every trial.

Polls are fairly consistent. Trump’s approval rating is a whopping 32%, lowest in U.S. history. 69% of us think Trump’s first year has been a complete bust and 52% think the country is headed in the wrong direction. 72% think trump has done something illegal or unethical concerning the “Russia / Trump thing.”

The closer special prosecutor Robert Mueller and his team get to the top of this dung heap, the more desperate Trump, the Ult-right wing-nuts and the Trump alternative reality TV and media, spew outrageous alternative fact theories. They’re now crying that America’s democratic institutions, and the liberal fake news media, are planning a coup of the Trump autocratic regime. Don’t fall for this Putinesque propaganda.

Trump and the pandering republi-con’s only accomplishment in the last year has been to make the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), more popular than ever.

And now this sham Republi-con tax bill transfers $1 trillion from America’s poor and middle class, to the wealthy and the well connected (like Trump, Corker and all of Trump’s cabinet) and stock holders, 30% of which are foreign investors.

Senator Corker, who just two weeks ago said he wouldn’t vote for this tax bill if it added one penny to the deficit, has now flip-flopped, even though the Repub’s have somehow made the bill worse by giving even more cuts to the wealthy and driving up the debt by $1.455 trillion (final CBO score).

Senator Rubio, who was holding out for a larger refundable portion of the child care credit in the bill, is now happy with the few crumbs (another $300) left over from the large swaths of chocolate cake given to the wealthy and corporations.

Trump, Mnuchin and the Republi-cons keep propagating the lies that this is tax reform that benefits primarily the middle class and will increase jobs and wages, boost the GDP and fully pay for itself.

Lets be clear; this is not legitimate tax reform. This is a whopping tax break for the wealthy and well connected, including for Trump Inc. and for all of his toxic predatory capitalist buddies. There are $1.6 trillion in tax breaks taken every year; this tax bill will only eliminate $400 billion of those tax breaks. And one of the biggest tax break scams, the carried interest exemption – granted mostly to hedge fund managers, survived this phony “Tax Reform.” Trump (dozens of times) and every Republi-con running in the campaign, repeatedly promised they would eliminate this tax dodge. A large portion of the eliminated tax breaks, fall on the 98% of voters who don’t contribute to the Republi-cons, especially in the blue states, who always contribute the most to the federal treasury.

This tax bill will clearly have winners and losers, something true thoughtful tax reform is designed to eliminate. No doubt we needed true tax reform. This was a perfect opportunity to level the fiscal “paying” field, to correct the inequities in the tax system built in over the last 3 decades, a chance to balance the burden between businesses and folks who faithfully pay their fair share, and predatory slugs like Trump and some corporations who enjoy all the benefits of America’s commons but refuse to pay even a small portion of their share to pay for them.

This tax hustle was rushed through in only 6 weeks, with no public hearings, no expert testimony from tax experts and without input from the Democrats, who represent a large majority of Americans. Is it any surprise that only 26% of Americans approve of this flim-flam and 50% believe their tax bills will actually go up. Experts say 83% of the tax cuts will go to the top 1% by 2027 and 60% go to the top 1/10 of 1%. But most of the Republi-cons in the house and every single Republi-con in the senate are all in. After the Obamacare fiasco, these incompetents need some kind of legislative win, even if it’s the worst tax bill in history. And many in congress, like Sen. Corker, have LLC’s that will benefit from this bill.

But where are all the conservative deficit hawks, who railed daily during the Obama administration when President Obama was forced to run up the debt, after the Republi-cons crashed the economy. All the experts told the President that if he didn’t bail out the banks, the deep Republi-cession would morph into a full blown depression. He also bailed out the auto industry, saving more than 200,000 good paying jobs. The auto companies paid back all of that money with interest. But those were mostly union jobs, so the predatory capitalist Republi-cons in congress opposed both bail-outs and to this day, demonize saving the auto industry and their unions.

It appears they have enough votes to pass the bill with just Republi-con votes, unless a few republicans find the courage to honor their oath of office and vote for what’s best for America instead of what’s best for themselves and their failed party. Will Sen. Corker vote for the Corkerkickback and against the people of Tennessee and against what he’s believed in about deficit spending during his entire senate career? Will Susan Collins renege on her promises to the middle-class folks back in Maine to protect their healthcare and tax benefits? Will Sen. Jeff Flake do the right thing for the folks back in Arizona, who depend on Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security?

The best thing John McCain could do to burnish his legacy is to stay in the hospital and take care of his treatments. Just on principle, after he made a point while addressing the senate during the ACA debate, about the Senate getting back to regular order and the necessity for bipartisanship, he should send a letter that could be read to the senate before they vote, asking them to vote their conscience, instead of their own best interests.

We know that before the ink is dry on this bill, the “starve the beast” Republi-cons and the deficit hawks just waking up after the holidays, will be back at work lickety-split, proposing cuts to middle-class American entitlements and safety net programs for the poor. But don’t be fooled. They will claim we need the savings for our crumbling infrastructure. But these sharks don’t want to contribute to those programs that could make America more competitive.

America is waking up to this shell game. And progressives should take a few 2017 bows. Victories in Virginia and New Jersey are good signs; and the remarkable victory in Alabama portend great things for the 2018 elections. Democratic Senator Doug Jones, from the deep red state of Alabama, is the real deal. Maybe with his help, we can slow down the damage this toxic administration is inflicting on our environment, our healthcare system, our economy, American labor, our public schools, the separation of church and state and our democratic institutions.

Mr. Jones and his energized supporters, especially African-American women and the 25,000 moderates and old school Republicans who refused to vote for Moore and wrote in someone else, overcame Bannon’s Trump miracle, who the white evangelical christian right still believes, is a gift from God; and who believe if “their God” can forgive all of trump’s transgressions and flaws, then who are they to question such a divine anointing. That is not true Christianity.

By 2027, 107% of the tax benefits in this bill will go to the top 20% of Americans. How can that be you ask? Because the bottom 80% will eventually get tax increases. This is a Republican donor payback tax gift to those who need it the least. The generous gifts to pass through real-estate businesses (many of which are owned by those in congress voting on the bill) will have unintended consequences and create an entire new tax avoidance industry. And more importantly, this will only worsen the growing income inequality for our middle-class and the poor. Hopefully those beguiled by the flim-flam will show their anger in November 2018.

If this tax bill is passed, those responsible for the provisions that enrich themselves and their benefactors and for the unrealistic promises, bold-faced lies, and unintended consequences, will be rewarded with losing control of congress in 2018.

Yes, I believe…This New Year (2018), Will Be a much better year for America! As long as we continue to Resist!

 

Image may contain: 1 person

HuffPost

63 Percent Of Americans Believe Donald Trump Tried To Obstruct Russia Probe

Mary Papenfuss, HuffPost     December 17, 2017

A new poll has found that 63 percent of Americans believe President Donald Trump has tried to “impede or obstruct” the investigations into Russian interference in the U.S. election and possible links between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin.

A new poll has found that 63 percent of Americans believe President Donald Trump has tried to “impede or obstruct” the investigations into Russian interference in the U.S. election and possible links between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin.

Additionally, 40 percent are convinced Trump did something “illegal” with Russia, according to the Associated Press-NORC poll, while 32 percent believe he has done something “unethical” concerning Russia.

Among those polled, 38 percent believe the Russia investigation is very or extremely important. Yet 54 percent are not confident that congressional investigations into the Russia issue will be fair and impartial. Forty-two percent aren’t confident that the Justice Department’s investigation led by former FBI director Robert Mueller will be fair and impartial.

The poll found the president had only a 32 percent approval rating, with 67 percent disapproving of the way Trump is handling his job as president. Those numbers mimic the findings of an earlier Pew Research poll.

That makes Trump the most unpopular first-year president on record.

The Russian results were based on surveys conducted Nov. 30 through Dec. 4 among 1,444 adults with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.

 

The World Bank will stop funding all new oil and gas development

BREAKING: The World Bank will stop funding all new oil and gas development, firmly acknowledging that the fight against poverty and the fight against climate change are one and the same. What do you think? #WeCanSolveThis #YEARSproject

We Can Solve This: The World Bank

BREAKING: The World Bank will stop funding all new oil and gas development, firmly acknowledging that the fight against poverty and the fight against climate change are one and the same. What do you think? #WeCanSolveThis #YEARSproject

Posted by DeSmogBlog on Tuesday, December 19, 2017

What’s missing from the GOP tax bill? Just about anything that would help the working and middle classes

Los Angeles Times

What’s missing from the GOP tax bill? Just about anything that would help the working and middle classes

President Trump discusses tax reform in the Grand Foyer of the White House on December 13th in Washington. (Olivier Douliery / TNS)

Doyle McManus     December 17, 2017

You’ve probably read plenty about what’s in the tax bill that House and Senate Republicans agreed to last week: A big cut in corporate taxes. Generous tax cuts for the wealthy, including a reduction of the top individual tax rate. More modest cuts for anyone who makes less than $200,000 or so.

Equally striking is what’s missing. There are many different ways to cut taxes, but they all require making choices. Not everyone benefits equally.

This bill put corporate tax cuts first; that’s where roughly 70% of the benefits go. There’s not much in the bill for the working poor — those who earn less than $40,000 a year. Most of those folks pay no federal income tax, but they do pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, which were not cut.

The tax bill doesn’t expand the Earned Income Tax Credit, part of the tax code that supplements the income of low-wage workers. A full-time single worker who earns the federal minimum wage of $14,500 a year currently gets an EITC of only $37; an increase would have made a difference.

It isn’t easy to make a tax cut unpopular. But Trump and Republican leaders in Congress have turned a bill that should have been political gold into lead.

The EITC is beloved by Democrats. Some Republicans — including House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin — support it, too. But an expansion didn’t make it into this year’s bill.

The working poor did get one break: Republican Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Mike Lee of Utah insisted on an increase in the refundable part of the child tax credit. Under the bill, workers who don’t pay income taxes can claim up to $1,400 per child. (Workers who do pay taxes can claim $2,000 as long as their income is below $400,000.)

But Rubio and Lee didn’t get the biggest change they wanted, which was to apply the credit to low-wage workers’ entire income. Under their proposal, a minimum-wage worker making $14,500 would get a $494 tax credit; under the current bill, she’ll get only $75, according to the liberal Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

Another missing item: President Trump’s promise to get rid of the carried interest loophole. “Carried interest was unfair, and it’s gone,” Trump said last spring.

But that odious tax break isn’t gone. It’s just been tweaked a little.

Under current law, when managers of private equity funds, venture capital funds and hedge funds reap a share of their investors’ profits, they pay taxes at the low rate that applies to capital gains, not the higher rate that applies to ordinary income.

Under the new law, the fund managers still get that break, as long as they hold the underlying investment for at least three years. Tax experts say most of the managers who claim the loophole won’t find that to be a problem.

Also lost in the shuffle: Simplicity.

When the House of Representatives started work on the bill, it eliminated many tax deductions, including medical expenses, state taxes and local taxes. Some of those deductions turned out to be popular, and they were revived in the negotiations between the House and Senate. As a result, plenty of middle-class taxpayers will have to figure their taxes under two systems, both with itemized deductions and without.

One final notable absence is a pot of money to finance better roads, bridges and airports.

When the tax debate started, one popular proposal — popular among policy wonks, anyway — was to pay for infrastructure with taxes from repatriated profits.

U.S. companies have trillions of dollars parked overseas, and the tax bill would allow them to bring that money home at a reduced tax rate. The added revenue could reach $298 billion over 10 years, according to Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation.

But the money has already been spent. The bill commits the revenue to pay for its cuts to corporate and individual income taxes. There’s nothing left over for roads and bridges.

The biggest missing items are the unfulfilled populist promises of Trump’s presidential campaign.

“Tax reform will protect low-income and middle-income households, not the wealthy and well-connected,” the president said last spring. “They can call me all they want. It’s not going to help. I’m doing the right thing, and it’s not good for me. Believe me.”

When he came to the White House, Trump and his aides promised that the wealthy wouldn’t get a tax cut. His populist advisor, Stephen K. Bannon, even suggested socking the rich with a tax increase. That didn’t happen.

“The Republican establishment has no interest in Trump’s success on this,” Bannon complained after he left the White House in August. “They’ll do a very standard Republican version of taxes.”

It isn’t easy to make a tax cut unpopular. But Trump and Republican leaders in Congress have managed a feat of negative alchemy: They’ve turned a bill that should have been political gold into lead. Polls have found that fewer than one-third of voters, on average, think this tax bill is a good idea. That’s less popular than Obamacare was when it passed in 2010.

The reason it’s unpopular? Most voters think the bill is so tilted in favor of corporations and the wealthy that there’s nothing left over for them. And they’re right.

Republicans at state level fret over GOP tax overhaul

The Hill

Republicans at state level fret over GOP tax overhaul

By Reid Wilson   December 16, 2017

Republicans at state level fret over GOP tax overhaul© Getty

CORONADO, Calif. — While Congress races to pass a massive tax overhaul by the end of the year, Republicans in state capitals across the country find themselves in a bind as they plan their own state budget requirements.

On one hand, Republicans at the state level say their party must prove it is able to handle the responsibilities of leadership by notching legislative victories that voters will be able to judge next November.

On the other, some legislative leaders say the tax package being pushed by congressional Republicans will undoubtedly impact their states in a negative way, foisting new uncertainty into the budgetary process as tax collections have already begun to sag.

“The Republicans have got to show they can do something, they can do something good, and they can get it done while they have the power so people can judge for themselves,” said Brent Hill, the Republican president of the Idaho state Senate.

“If Republicans go into [the midterm elections] without having accomplished anything, people get impatient, and they’re going to be looking at another way.”

Iowa House Speaker Linda Upmeyer (R) said in an interview that “we’re affected in different ways by different pieces” of the tax-reform package.

“We’re waiting to get excited about it until we figure out what’s in it moving forward,” she said.

State legislators said they will closely examine key elements of the tax overhaul released Friday by members of the congressional conference committee.

The agreement appeared all but guaranteed to have the necessary support to pass next week after Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Bob Corker(R-Tenn.), two key holdouts, backed the bill on Friday.

But state legislators had not yet seen the final bill, which was released Friday evening. And the details matter, because many states make their tax codes conform to the federal code. That means a change in Washington will necessitate changes in capitals across the country.

“I think we’re all grappling with the uncertainty of the federal government,” said Joyce Peppin, the Republican majority leader in the Minnesota state House.

What makes the balancing act more difficult is that the overhaul in the federal code will mean some states will be guessing about the fiscal impact those changes will have on their budgets.

Forty-nine states have constitutional requirements to balance their budgets, and making significant changes can lead to an imbalance quickly.

“When you’re guessing, you don’t have to be off very far to find yourself with a shortfall,” said Hill, a retired accountant.

Many states are teetering on the brink of budgetary crisis even before the tax package passes.

State and local government tax revenue increased by 1.8 percent in the second quarter of 2017 compared with a year before, a significant slowdown from the 2.2 percent average growth rate for the prior four quarters, according to a new report from the Rockefeller Institute of Government. Eleven states showed a decline in total state tax revenue.

Other Republicans said the tax overhaul might inadvertently harm small businesses in their states. Deb Peters, a Republican state senator from South Dakota and president of the National Conference of State Legislators, said she worried there would be “unintended consequences” from provisions relating to pass-through corporations.

“They’re going to see an automatic increase in jobs because people are going to have to close their small service business and get a job because the tax liability is going to go through the roof. It’s not going to be affordable,” Peters said.

The political consequences of passing the Republican tax overhaul is uncertain as well.

Some Republicans warned that members of their party in Washington simply had to secure a major legislative win before their first full year of government control came to an end.

“If Republicans cannot get their act together in Congress, there will be a trickle-down effect on our states,” said David Long, the Republican president of the Indiana Senate.

Others point to poll numbers that show the plan is deeply unpopular. A Harvard CAPS-Harris survey found 64 percent of Americans oppose the tax plan, including seven in 10 independents. More voters in that survey said they thought the plan would raise their taxes than said it would lower them.

CBS News poll last week also found that 76 percent of Americans believed the plan would benefit corporations, and 69 percent said it would help the wealthy. Just 35 percent said they backed the plan.

The opposition does not come solely from Democrats and independents.

In the Senate, Corker had long been concerned about the bill adding to the deficit, while Rubio wanted higher child tax credits before signing off on the plan.

Hill, the Idaho Republican, said he too was concerned about deficit spending.

“Not all Republicans are really all that happy about the tax reform and the way that’s going, too,” he said.

Why depression and suicide are rampant among American farmers

New York Post

Why depression and suicide are rampant among American farmers

By Salena Zito             December 16, 2017

Retired physician Jeffrey Menn

NORWALK, WIS. — Not long ago, a local farmer here plunged into a depression so intense that he could barely muster the strength to leave his bed.

The 40-something father of eight went dark for weeks, despite the enormous amount of daily work needed to keep his family farm going.

“If you are running a small farm, you still have to get up and milk the cows. You got to go put the crops in. There are demands that nature doesn’t let you forget,” explained Jeffrey Menn, a farmer and doctor who was familiar with his friend’s crisis. “His massive depression immobilized him. He couldn’t even get out of bed for two or three weeks. Young guy, but he got himself worked into a hole.

“It’s his wife who’s taken over the operation, and she has, let me tell you. She’s a force of nature. This woman, she gets things done. You know, eight kids, mountain of debt, but she’s out there busting her butt to make things happen.”

It could have been worse for his friend, said Menn. “Depression can lead to suicide. He’s recovered from the deeper parts but in terms of the leadership in the family, that’s now been transferred to his wife.”

A retired physician, Menn is known locally as the “cowboy doctor” for his love of riding horses and western attire. In 37 years of practice, he has become all too familiar with the impact that depression and suicide have had on the lives of farmers and their families in the western counties of Wisconsin, where he works full-time at the Neighborhood Family Clinic.

He is also a farmer.

Menn sees the crippling impact of depression several times a week at the clinic. The first thing he does is make sure visitors are getting counseling “and then we utilize medication like SSRI’s (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) . . . which makes it harder for the patient to get to the darkest point of depression,” he said.

When he heard about the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study released in 2016, which showed farmers take their lives more often than people in any other occupation in this country, including the military, he was not surprised. “There is particularly a lot of depression in rural society. It happens for a lot of different reasons. A lot of it is our roller-coaster economics. People outside of farming, I think, understand that farming is hard work. What they don’t understand is the depth of the lows that can hit you at any one time, with just one small problem that can lead to hundreds of little problems.

“I just had the discussion today with my son-in-law,” he explained. “We sold feeder steers. We missed by about 50 pounds what we were hoping to get. Well, that was about another $15,000 worth of income we’re not going to have. That’s a big deal, because the margins are so tough.”

His brother, who works on the ranch and keeps the books, told him that their diverse operation of crops and livestock should bring in enough money to keep the 3,500-acre ranch going next year. “You know, pay taxes, make sure you have money to pay people, pay for your seed, your fertilizer. And hope to hell no big catastrophes hit you in the side of the head.”

The 2016 CDC study of approximately 40,000 suicides reported in the US in 2012 — the most recent year for which statistics are available — showed that the rate for agriculture workers is 84.5 per 100,000. The next occupation most at risk were construction, extraction, installation, maintenance and repair workers who had a suicide rate hovering around the 50 per 100,000 mark. Meanwhile, the suicide rate among American male veterans is 37 per 100,000, according to a 2016 study by the Veterans Affairs department.

The CDC research suggested that farmers’ exposure to pesticides might affect their neurological system and contribute to depressive symptoms, but for those in the Driftless area of Wisconsin, where Menn has his ranch, organic farming is thriving.

“So that is not a factor,” he said. But constant pressure of financial ruin and a cultural mindset that you should tough something out rather than seek mental-health treatment all contribute to the problem.

Societal changes, leading to a sense of isolation, are also to blame. It used to be that people knew their neighbors and went to church together while their kids attended the same schools.

“That sense of community — physically, spiritually and culturally — has sort of gone out the door,” Menn said.

All across rural America picturesque farms dot our landscape. These are the people who essentially provide the feasts that we will indulge in this Christmas season. The good news is that — like Menn — farmers still love what they do and love being part of this life.

“There’s just something great about seeing the land, seeing it as it is now in the brown and white season. Then it comes to life, and life just comes out of what looks like dead ground. It’s always amazing.”

As we enjoy the fruits of farmers’ labor in the coming days, we should remember their hard work. And never forget their sacrifice.

Trump officials decline to extend ObamaCare sign-up deadline

The Hill

Trump officials decline to extend ObamaCare sign-up deadline

by Peter Sullivan     December 16, 2017

Trump officials decline to extend ObamaCare sign-up deadline The Trump administration declined to extend the ObamaCare sign-up period amid the last-minute surge of enrollees, a break with the precedent set under the Obama administration.

The enrollment period ended Friday at midnight. The Obama administration in previous years consistently extended the deadline for a few days to accommodate the high number of enrollees who wait until the last minute to enroll.

However, the Trump administration this year declined to give such an extension.

Officials declined to say whether there would be an extension for most of the day on Friday, but on Friday night the official healthcare.gov Twitter account wrote that there would not be.

For people who called the call center before the deadline and could not get through, though, there is a grace period where a representative will call them back after the deadline and they can still enroll, a practice consistent with that of the Obama administration.

Congressional Democrats had pushed for an extension of the deadline, not just for a few days but all the way to Jan. 31, which would put the sign-up period at the same length as previous years.

The period was about half as long this year, and the Trump administration cut back on outreach funding, part of the reason that experts expect fewer sign-ups this year. The final number is not yet available.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which oversees ObamaCare, said that there was an uptick in applicants near the deadline, as in previous years, but that the website worked well and an online waiting room did not need to be deployed.

“Our team worked day-and-night to help consumers have a seamless open enrollment experience,” a CMS spokesperson said. “Despite the increase in volume, both HealthCare.gov and call center operated optimally and consumers were able to easily access enrollment tools to compare plans and prices.”

This Tax Bill Is a Trillion-Dollar Blunder

Bloomberg

This Tax Bill Is a Trillion-Dollar Blunder

Congress and President Trump put politics ahead of smart reform.

By Michael Bloomberg       December 15, 2017

The hour is late, but the fight is not over.  Photographer: Andrew Harrer / Bloomberg

Last month a Wall Street Journal editor asked a room full of CEOs to raise their hands if the corporate tax cut being considered in Congress would lead them to invest more. Very few hands went up. Attending was Gary Cohn, President Donald Trump’s economic adviser and a friend of mine. He asked: “Why aren’t the other hands up?”

Allow me to answer that: We don’t need the money.

Corporations are sitting on a record amount of cash reserves: nearly $2.3 trillion. That figure has been climbing steadily since the recession ended in 2009, and it’s now double what it was in 2001. The reason CEOs aren’t investing more of their liquid assets has little to do with the tax rate.

CEOs aren’t waiting on a tax cut to “jump-start the economy” — a favorite phrase of politicians who have never run a company — or to hand out raises. It’s pure fantasy to think that the tax bill will lead to significantly higher wages and growth, as Republicans have promised. Had Congress actually listened to executives, or economists who study these issues carefully, it might have realized that.

Instead, Congress did what it always does: It put politics first. After spending the first nine months of the year trying to jam through a repeal of Obamacare without holding hearings, heeding independent analysis or seeking Democratic input, Republicans took the same approach to tax “reform” — and it shows.

The Treasury Department claimed to have more than 100 professional staffers “working around the clock” to analyze the tax cut. If true, their hard work must have been suppressed. The flimsy one-page analysis Treasury released — which accepts the White House’s reality-defying economic projections in order to claim that the tax cuts will pay for themselves and then some — is a politically driven document that amounts to economic malpractice. So does the bill itself.

The largest economic challenges we face include a skills crisis that our public schools are not addressing, crumbling infrastructure that imperils our global competitiveness, wage stagnation coupled with growing wealth inequality, and rising deficits that will worsen as more baby boomers retire.

The tax bill does nothing to address these challenges. In fact, it makes each of them worse.

EDUCATION: The bill, by limiting the deduction for state and local taxes, will make it harder for the localities to raise money for education. The burden will fall heaviest on cities with poor students, making it harder for millions of children to escape from poverty — and leaving more and more businesses with fewer qualified job applicants.

INFRASTRUCTURE: Restricting state and local tax deductions will also mean less local investment for infrastructure, and by raising deficits, the bill will constrain federal infrastructure spending. Our airports, railways and roads are in desperate need of modernization, and our energy grids are vulnerable and inefficient. Yet spending on those and other needs, which acts as a catalyst for private investment, will become more difficult.

INEQUALITY: If Congress wanted to raise real wages and reward work, there is a simple and proven way to do it: expand the earned income tax credit. Instead, it seems to believe that lower corporate tax rates will magically lead to higher wages, which fundamentally misunderstands how labor markets work.

In addition, by eliminating the requirement that individuals buy health insurance, many young and healthy people will drop out of the marketplace, causing health insurance premiums to rise for everyone else. This is nothing more than a backdoor tax increase on health care for millions of middle-class families that will leave them with less disposable income for savings, investment and spending.

DEFICITS: The bill’s cost — $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion — makes it more difficult for taxpayers to afford Medicare and Social Security for the baby boom generation, which is now hitting retirement. Republicans didn’t grapple with those costs. Instead, they kicked the can down the road. Ignoring the bill’s price tag, or pretending we needn’t worry about deficits, is like ignoring climate change or pretending we needn’t worry about its effects. I’ll say one thing for Republicans in Congress: They’re consistent.

In effect, the tax bill achieves four main things:

  • It takes money away from schools and students.
  • It restricts our ability to invest in infrastructure.
  • It does nothing to boost real wages while making health insurance more expensive.
  • It makes it harder to control the costs of Medicare and Social Security without cutting defense and other spending — or further exploding the deficit.

To what end? To hand corporations big tax cuts they don’t need, while lowering the tax rate paid by those of us in the top bracket, and allowing the wealthy to shelter more of their estates.

To be clear: I’m in favor of reducing the 35 percent corporate tax rate as part of a revenue-neutral tax reform effort. Right now, the corporate code is so convoluted, and rates so high relative to other nations (thereby creating an incentive to keep profits offshore), that the real rates companies pay can be wildly divergent. This is neither fair nor efficient. Eliminating loopholes and reining in the off-shoring of profits can and should be done in a revenue-neutral overhaul of the tax code.

Republicans in Congress will have to take responsibility for the bill’s harmful effects, but blame also falls on its cheerleader-in-chief, President Trump. A president’s job is to get the two parties in Congress to work together. Yet Trump is making the same mistake that Barack Obama made in his first two years in office — believing that his party’s congressional majority gives him license to govern without the other side.

The tax bill is an economically indefensible blunder that will harm our future. The Republicans in Congress who must surely know it — and who have bucked party leaders before — should vote no.

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
David Shipley at davidshipley@bloomberg.net

ALS Patient Asks Arizona Senator McCain To Help Save His Life

“Senator John McCain, you’re fighting for your life just like I am.” – Ady Barkan, who went viral for his conversation with Senator Jeff Flake on a plane, now pleads with John McCain to vote NO on the GOP tax plan.

Arizonians, tell Senator John McCain to do the right thing by the American people, and vote down this tax bill: (855) 378-7316

ALS Patient to Sen. McCain: Keep Your Promise

"Senator John McCain, you're fighting for your life just like I am." – Ady Barkan, who went viral for his conversation with Senator Jeff Flake on a plane, now pleads with John McCain to vote NO on the GOP tax plan.Arizonians, tell Senator John McCain to do the right thing by the American people, and vote down this tax bill: (855) 378-7316

Posted by MoveOn.org on Friday, December 15, 2017