Category: Today’s News?

Trump Administration Reverses Ban on Elephant Trophy Imports

EcoWatch

Trump Administration Reverses Ban on Elephant Trophy Imports

Lorraine Chow      November 16, 2017

https://resize.rbl.ms/simage/https%3A%2F%2Fassets.rbl.ms%2F15046714%2Forigin.jpg/1200%2C630/1yTbcYiSthOLHLDH/img.jpgHwange National Park, Zimbabwe. Steven dosRemedios / Flickr

The Trump administration has agreed to allow the remains of elephants killed in Zimbabwe and Zambia to be brought back to the U.S., a reversal of an Obama-era ban.

In 2014, the President Obama’s administration banned the imports of elephant trophies to protect the species. “Additional killing of elephants in these countries, even if legal, is not sustainable and is not currently supporting conservation efforts that contribute towards the recovery of the species,” they said at the time.

African elephant populations had once numbered between three to five million in the last century, but have been severely reduced to its current levels of 415,000 animals due to hunting and the illegal ivory trade, according to the World Wildlife Fund.

But the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), an agency within the Department of Interior, said Tuesday that reversing the ban would help preserve the species.

“The hunting and management programs for African elephants will enhance the survival of the species in the wild,” a FWS spokesperson said.

“Legal, well-regulated sport hunting as part of a sound management program can benefit the conservation of certain species by providing incentives to local communities to conserve the species and by putting much-needed revenue back into conservation.”

Under the new change, hunters who legally hunt or hunted an elephant in Zimbabwe from Jan. 21, 2016 to Dec. 31, 2018, or in Zambia between 2016 to 2018 can apply for a permit to import their trophy into the U.S.

Incidentally, the policy switch was first announced by Safari Club International, a hunting advocacy group that teamed up with the National Rifle Association to sue to block the 2014 ban.

“These positive findings for Zimbabwe and Zambia demonstrate that the FWS recognizes that hunting is beneficial to wildlife and that these range countries know how to manage their elephant populations,” said Safari Club International President Paul Babaz.

“We appreciate the efforts of the Service and the U.S. Department of the Interior to remove barriers to sustainable use conservation for African wildlife.”

But Elizabeth Hogan, World Animal Protection U.S. Wildlife Campaign Manager, said she was “appalled” at the decision by the Department of the Interior and is urging the Trump administration to reconsider.

“Trophy hunting causes prolonged, immense suffering for elephants and fuels demand for wild animal products, opening the door for further exploitation,” Hogan said.

“The U.S. must do all we can to ensure the genuine protection of African elephants, a species listed under the Endangered Species Act. The stalking, chasing and killing of animals for game hunting is abhorrent, and we should not prop up this sordid industry of trophy hunting. Wild animals belong in the wild—not targeted and killed in the name of entertainment.”

Wayne Pacelle, the president and CEO of The Humane Society, similarly condemned the new policy.

“Let’s be clear: elephants are on the list of threatened species; the global community has rallied to stem the ivory trade; and now, the U.S. government is giving American trophy hunters the green light to kill them,” he wrote in blog post.

Pacelle also criticized Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke’s department for forming the so-called International Wildlife Conservation Council—an advisory group that he said “would allow trophy hunters an even more prominent seat at the table of government decision-making, ignoring the copious science that trophy hunting undermines the conservation of threatened and endangered species.”

But Sec. Zinke, an avid hunter, said the council will “provide important insight into the ways that American sportsmen and women benefit international conservation from boosting economies and creating hundreds of jobs to enhancing wildlife conservation.”

President Donald Trump’s sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, are also hunting enthusiasts. Trump’s sons have been criticized by animal rights’ groups for posing in photos with their exotic and endangered big game catches such as elephants and leopards.

EcoWatch @EcoWatch

Trump Sons Auctioning Off $1 Million Hunting Trip to Celebrate Inauguration. OMG  http://ow.ly/K5bG307jdOP  @HuffPostGreen @greenpeaceusa       8:50 PM – Dec 20, 2016

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/928980726204153856/Js9SdBYK?format=jpg&name=600x314

African Americans Disproportionately Suffer Health Effects of Oil and Gas Facilities

EcoWatch

African Americans Disproportionately Suffer Health Effects of Oil and Gas Facilities

David Leestma       November 15, 2017

https://resize.rbl.ms/simage/https%3A%2F%2Fassets.rbl.ms%2F14993599%2Forigin.jpg/1200%2C630/7aVA7%2Fen2LL2Ne73/img.jpgTeens play basketball at a public park in Port Arthur, Texas. Karen Kasmauski / International League of Conservation Photographers

African American communities face a disproportionate risk of health issues caused by gas and oil pollution, according to a report issued Tuesday by two advocacy groups.

The report from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Clean Air Task Force noted the importance of Obama-era U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations that finalized standard for methane and ozone smog-forming volatile organic compound (VOCs). The report states that if the Trump administration’s dismantling of environmental regulations continues, the situation for African Americans will worsen.

The study found oil and natural gas facilities were built or currently exist within a half-mile of more than one million African Americans, exposing these communities to higher risks of cancer due to toxic emissions. “African-Americans are exposed to 38 percent more polluted air than Caucasian Americans, and they are 75 percent more likely to live in fence-line communities than the average American,” the report said, referring to neighborhoods near to gas and oil facilities.

Counties located in the Gulf Coast Basin are home to the most counties with oil refineries and higher percentages of African Americans. Michigan, Louisiana and Tennessee, the report found, have the highest percentage of African American residents living in oil refinery counties. Texas and Louisiana, both in the Gulf Coast Basin, were home to the largest African American individuals at risk for cancer, with nearly 900,000 living in areas above the EPA’s level of concern.

“The effects of oil and gas pollution are disproportionately afflicting African Americans, particularly cancer and respiratory issues, and the trend is only increasing,” said Dr. Doris Browne, the National Medical Association President.

The report also found that oil and natural gas industries violate the EPA’s air quality standards from natural gas emissions-related ozone smog in numerous African communities, causing more than 130,000 asthma attacks among school children. This results in more than 100,000 missed school days each year.

Defending the environmental protections finalized during the Obama administration and advocating for additional protections against pollution from the oil and gas industry will help improve the health of many African American communities, the study noted.

But the Trump administration has already begun to dismantle Obama-era EPA steps taken in 2016 that aimed to clean up toxic air pollutants such as benzene, formaldehyde and sulfur dioxide. It is also taking aim at 2016 EPA actions that address the 1.2 million existing sources of methane pollution and other airborne pollution. The White House claims these regulations are unnecessary industry burdens. The Trump administration’s moves are being challenged in courts around the country.

“What this administration is discovering as it attempts to undo vital health and environmental protections is that these sensible standards cannot simply be wished away, only to the benefit of the oil and gas industry,” said Sarah Uhl, program director of short-lived climate pollutants for Clean Air Task Force.

“Not only do we have the law on our side, we also have the medical and scientific communities who will help ensure that our air, and our health, particularly in fence-line communities, are protected to the full extent of the law.”

North Korean Defector had 10-Inch Parasite in His Stomach, Unlike Anything Surgeon Had Seen Before

Newsweek

North Korean Defector had 10-Inch Parasite in His Stomach, Unlike Anything Surgeon Had Seen Before

Sofia Lotto Persio, Newsweek      November 16, 2017

An experienced South Korean surgeon operating on a defector from North Korea has described his shock upon finding dozens of unusual parasites inside the man’s stomach, suggesting widespread health issues among the population of the secretive state.

The patient, who has not been named, was critically injured as he fled North Korea under a hail of bullets fired from his former comrades through the Joint Security Area (JSA) at the demilitarized zone (DMZ) border area between the two countries on Monday. Doctor Lee Guk-jong has now operated twice on the man to treat his injuries, with the presence of parasites adding complications to the surgery.

“We are struggling with treatment as we found a large number of parasites in the soldier’s stomach, invading and eating into the wounded areas,” Lee said at a press briefing following a three-and-a-half-hour operation on Wednesday, quoted in the Korea Biomedical Review.

The doctor described the patient as been 5 feet 5 inches tall and weighing 132 pounds, suggesting he may suffer from malnutrition.

Among the parasites was a species of roundworm that can be contracted by eating vegetables fertilized with human feces or, more generally, in areas with poor sanitation. The longest parasite found in the North Korean soldiers’ stomach measured 27 centimeters (10 inches), local media reported. Experts say that many North Koreans could be infected with the same kind of parasites.

“I have been doing surgery for more than 20 years, but I have not seen such parasites. I will not be able to find them in [South] Korea,” said Lee, who is a respected trauma specialist in the country. He previously successfully treated the captain of the South Korean chemical freighter Samho Jewelry who was shot six times when his vessel was seized by Somali pirates in 2011.

https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/Pin2VsRlTfY.OpoxTr4m8w--/YXBwaWQ9eW15O3c9NjQwO3E9NzU7c209MQ--/http://media.zenfs.com/en-GB/homerun/newsweek_europe_news_328/46f2f9d901b237df07d544622e7cc54bA South Korean soldier talks with a surgeon at a hospital where a North Korean soldier who defected to the South after being shot and wounded by the North Korean military is hospitalized, in Suwon, South Korea, November 13, 2017. Hong Ki-won/Yonhap/via Reuters

The abdomen wounds were only some of the injuries suffered by the North Korean soldier, who was also hit on his elbow, shoulder and chest area and has not yet fully regained consciousness. According to Lee, it was only thanks to the U.S. air medics applying first aid treatment while he was being airlifted on a Black Hawk helicopter that the man is still alive.

The technique used to evacuate the soldier from the JSA to the specialized trauma center at the Ajou University Hospital south of Seoul, is known as MEDEVAC or “Dust Off,” an acronym for “Dedicated Unhesitating Service To Our Fighting Forces.” First devised to rescue soldiers in Vietnam in 1962, U.S. forces still regularly practice these air casualty evacuations.

The North Korean defector’s identity has not yet been publicly disclosed. The South Korean intelligence agency identified him as a man in his 20s holding the rank of staff sergeant, according to lawmaker Kim Byung-kee, who attended a closed-door briefing, quoted in the Korea Herald.

The United Nations Command, which supervises the implementation of the 1953 Korean War armistice along the 151-mile long DMZ, agreed to release CCTV footage of the soldier’s escape, which was described as “movie-like” by some lawmakers who were briefed on the incident on Tuesday.

But officials from the South Korean Ministry of Defense blocked release of the 26-second clip on Thursday, citing concerns that the video would spark speculation over the South Korean troops’ handling of the event. The officials suggested releasing a longer video, news agency Yonhap reported.

Reports of the incident suggest that North Korean soldiers, who were chasing after the defector, fired at him even after he crossed the border line into South Korea. Firing towards the South Korean side of the border would be violating one of the terms of the armistice, sparking a debate in South Korea over the rules of engagement in the region.

More from Newsweek

Democrats Will Need More Than Resistance to Govern

The Nation

Democrats Will Need More Than Resistance to Govern

And that means running candidates who do more than oppose Trump.

By Robert L. Borosage     November 15, 2017

https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/new-jersey-phil-murphy-ap-img.jpg?scale=896&compress=80Phil Murphy, governor-elect of New Jersey, speaking at a campaign rally in October 2017. (AP Photo / Michael Brochstein)

Sweeping victories in last Tuesday’s elections provided a bracing tonic for Democrats. “If case there was any doubt,” tweeted former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau, “the Resistance is real.” Tuesday’s victories should buoy Democrats but not mislead them. The reaction to Trump is fierce, but not sufficient to consolidate a new ruling coalition that can make the changes we need.

Turnout in Virginia, which featured the marquee gubernatorial matchup on Election Day, was at presidential-year levels. Democrats, people of color, and self-described liberals came out in large numbers. Women voted Democratic by large margins. The Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Ralph Northam—a charismatically challenged, eminently decent, experienced, establishment figure—didn’t light that fire. Middle-class voters in the Virginia suburbs braved a driving rainstorm to deliver a stunning rebuke to Trump, and to the vile “Trumpism without Trump” campaign run by former Republican lobbyist Ed Gillespie.

Democrats won big down-ballot as well, capturing 15 seats in the House of Delegates and coming close to erasing the previous 32-seat Republican advantage in the state House completely. This represents the most sweeping shift in control of the state legislature since the Watergate era. Insurgents also won, including Democratic Socialist Lee Carter, who took out the Republican majority whip, and Danica Roem, the first transgender candidate to win a state legislative seat in the country.

Virginia was not alone. Democrats also took back the governorship in New Jersey, won full control in Washington State, and elected the first Democratic mayor of Manchester, New Hampshire. Charlotte, North Carolina, elected its first African-American female mayor. In Maine, voters overwhelmingly voted to extend Medicaid under Obamacare.

Pollsters increasingly see the Republican majority in the House as endangered. Fury at Trump has mobilized Democratic and independent voters. The absence of Trump on the ticket may depress Republican turnout. The Republican Congress is even less popular than Trump.

In some ways, the more interesting race occurred in New Jersey, where the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Philip Murphy, an irrepressible happy warrior, also won big as expected. Murphy is yet another former Goldman Sachs banker, but sought to rise above it. (Twenty-nine percent of voters said his Goldman Sachs background made them feel worse about him; only 8 percent said it made them feel better, and they were probably Republicans.)Murphy presented himself as a progressive champion. He endorsed a $15 minimum wage, the creation of a public bank, and investment in infrastructure. He called for legalization of pot, embraced unions, and supported making New Jersey a sanctuary state.

Exit polls showed that Murphy, unlike Northam, won the male vote, losing white men by only 50-46 percent. Unlike Northam, he won a majority of those without college degrees. Like Northam, he had overwhelming majority among people of color, women and the young.

Murphy’s more progressive message was vital to his victory in the primaries and certainly didn’t hurt him in the general. New Jersey is bluer than Virginia, although not as diverse. Its voters were disgusted with departing Governor Chris Christie, and corruption was the biggest concern of voters. Fifty-four percent of New Jersey voters strongly disliked Trump and voted for Murphy 88-10. Thirty percent were from union households, and voted Murphy 64-35, accounting for much of his better showing among the non-college-educated.

Despite those results in New Jersey, there is a danger that Democrats ultimately will see hostility to Trump as the simple solution to their woes. Democrats, concluded Jonathan Chait, “don’t need to take a radical left-wing stance to oppose the GOP agenda. They can defend the prerogatives of fairly affluent voters who are still getting hurt at the expense of the super-rich. It is a very favorable position.” Or as Lee Drutman put it in The New York Times, reflecting the view of the party’s professionals, “the key to Democrats’ fortunes in 2018 and 2020 will be to execute on the fundamentals—pick quality candidates who don’t mess up, make sure to get voters to the polls, and take advantage of President Trump’s low approval numbers and the inevitable turn against Republicans. Ride the wave. Don’t get too fancy.”

That dramatically underestimates the task before Democrats. Democrats won in Virginia, New Jersey, Washington State, and Maine, but so did Hillary Clinton. Northam essentially followed the Hillary Clinton strategy in Virginia, building a majority grounded on the middle-class suburbs, the college-educated, women, people of color, and the young. That strategy worked for Clinton in Virginia and New Jersey in 2016, and Trump’s serial outrages fueled a fury that made it even more powerful in 2017.

Northam ran better than Clinton in almost every demographic and every region, but still lost Trump counties big-time. Northam’s call for civility and for working together didn’t succeed in appealing to white working people, particularly in rural areas. It succeeded overall in Virginia, a remarkably diverse and relatively affluent state. Exit polls reported that 33 percent of the electorate were people of color (who voted 80-19 for Northam). Fifty-eight percent were college educated, voting 60-39 Northam, while those without a college degree went 52-46 for Gillespie. Northam lost the white vote, particularly white men by 63-36. He lost whites without a college degree by a stunning 72 to 26.

Tuesday’s elections give Democrats obvious momentum. Democratic committees can expect a surge of fundraising. Candidate recruitment will get easier. Republican retirements have already accelerated.

With the architects of Democratic failure still in control of the party’s apparatus—the DNC, the party committees, the consultants, and contractors all remain pretty much the same—resistance is a tempting default position. It’s possible, as Ron Brownstein has suggested, that the furious reaction to Trump and the failed Republican Congress will suffice to let Democrats take back the House.

But resistance alone won’t suffice to consolidate a governing majority, much less provide a mandate for the reforms this country desperately needs. That coalition can only be built if Democrats work to enlist working people across lines of race, reflect their anger at an economy rigged against them, challenge business as usual, and build an agenda for real change. A recent in-depth study of the 2016 results found that 45 percent of the electorate were whites without a college degree. Democrats can’t write off that vote and hope to build governing majorities. The challenge, as David Leonhardt aptly phrased it, is that Democrats have to “get the white working class to focus on the working-class part of their identity rather than the white part.” And that won’t happen without a populist economic message and an agenda with real bite.

The fight about the party’s direction that began in the wake of defeat won’t end in the wake of Tuesday’s victories. Insurgent candidates—supported by organizations like Our Revolution, the Working Families Party, People’s Action, Democrats for America, and others—enjoyed remarkable success in down-ballot races on Tuesday. Centrist Democrats—like California Senator Dianne Feinstein and West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin—already face primary challenges from the left. The party pros will decry the internal divisions, but the fact that grassroots activists are putting energy into electoral politics as well as protest movements, and are operating inside the party rather than outside in third parties, may well be the best hope for the Democratic Party’s renewal.

Support Progressive Journalism. If you like this article, please give today to help fund The Nation’s work. Get unlimited access to The Nation for as little as 37 cents a week!   Subscribe

Robert L. Borosage is a leading progressive writer and activist.

Four Countries Leading on Climate

EcoWatch

Four Countries Leading on Climate

A dose of positivity!

Read more positive news: http://bit.ly/2jttSIm

via NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council)

A dose of positivity!Read more positive news: http://bit.ly/2jttSImvia NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council)

Posted by EcoWatch on Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Two U.S. Senate Republicans critical of party’s tax plan

Reuters

Two U.S. Senate Republicans critical of party’s tax plan

By David Morgan and Amanda Becker, Reuters       November 15, 2017

 https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/zwEOaaJ2_7YetUEzGfTPBg--/YXBwaWQ9eW15O3E9NzU7dz00NTA7c209MTtpbD1wbGFuZQ--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2017-11-16T004544Z_1_LYNXMPEDAF026_RTROPTP_2_USA-TAX.JPG.cf.jpg

The Senate Finance Committee is seen during a markup on the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., November 15, 2017. REUTERS/Aaron P. Bernstein

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A Senate Republican tax plan that would repeal the Obamacare mandate and give permanent tax cuts only to U.S. corporations drew fire from two Republican lawmakers on Wednesday in what could be a sign of trouble for the sweeping measure.

Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin said he would not support the current Senator proposal, or a separate tax bill being debated in the House of Representatives, because he believes they unfairly benefit corporations over other kinds of enterprises, including small businesses.

Senator Susan Collins, one of three Republicans who opposed a Republican Obamacare repeal effort earlier this year, warned that some middle-income taxpayers could see tax cuts wiped out by higher health insurance premiums if the repeal of the Affordable Care Act’s mandate goes through.

Their views could signal problems for Senate Republicans, who want to pass tax legislation by December but can afford to lose no more than two votes from their ranks because they have only a 52-48 majority in the Senate. Democrats have called the Republican tax plans a giveaway to the rich and corporations.

“Neither the House nor Senate bill provide fair treatment, so I do not support either in their current version,” Johnson said in a statement, adding he would still work with his Republican colleagues to produce better legislation.

Senate Republicans produced a new plan late on Tuesday that would guarantee permanent tax cuts for corporations but only temporarily lower tax bills for individuals and small businesses, while tying the overall package to an effective repeal of a key part of Obamacare, former Democratic President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law.

Exposing the tax-cut initiative to the same political risks that wrecked a mid-2017 anti-Obamacare push by Republicans, Senate tax committee chief Orrin Hatch unveiled an amendment that he defended as helpful to the middle class.

Collins, a Maine Republican, told reporters that adding the mandate repeal was a mistake. “This is going to be difficult and I just don’t know why we had to complicate it by bringing up the ACA,” she said.

Several moderate Republicans including Collins and John McCain have not said if they support the tax plan.

The new Republican plan, Hatch said at a committee meeting, would expand the child tax credit and slightly reduce some middle-class tax rates. Taken together, those changes “will let us channel even more tax relief to the middle class,” he said.

But those changes would be temporary, while a deep cut in the corporate tax rate would be permanent under Hatch’s plan, which was widely expected to become the main vehicle for Republicans efforts to revamp the tax code before year end.

The effort is seen by Republicans as critical to their prospects of retaining power in Washington in the November 2018 congressional elections. So far, Republicans and President Donald Trump have no major legislative victories from 2017 to show voters despite controlling the White House and Congress.

They are hoping the tax cut will fix that problem and have made progress in recent days while Trump toured Asian capitals. He returned late on Tuesday and was scheduled to meet with lawmakers on Thursday.

The House began debating its tax bill on Wednesday, with a full vote expected on Thursday.

The Senate and House tax plans must eventually be reconciled and merged into a final plan that can pass both chambers before it goes to Trump to sign into law.

Excluding Democrats

By including an effective repeal of Obamacare’s individual mandate, Senate Republicans likely ended any possibility of gaining support from Democrats.

“This is not just another garden variety attack on the Affordable Care Act, or ACA. This is repeal of that law,” said Senator Ron Wyden, the finance committee’s top Democrat. He blasted Republicans for setting a “double standard” by guaranteeing permanent tax cuts only for corporations.

The individual mandate clause of Obamacare requires healthy younger people to buy insurance or pay a federal penalty. The aim is to hold down coverage costs for those sick or older.

By repealing that penalty, Republicans would raise more than $318 billion over a decade to pay for tax cuts, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, a nonpartisan unit of Congress.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office separately estimated last week that repealing the mandate would increase the number of uninsured Americans by 13 million by 2027.

Trump backed the inclusion of the mandate repeal in the tax bill, as do Republican conservatives in the Senate and House.

U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan told CNBC on Wednesday that while the House tax plan did not repeal the mandate, Republicans in that chamber would likely approve a final measure hammered out with the Senate that included it.

Hatch’s Senate plan would also expand access to deductions for “pass-through” businesses and increase the child tax credit to $2,000 from the earlier proposed $1,650. But those benefits would expire at the end of 2025.

The changes would still allow the measure to comply with a deficit requirement that must be met if Senate Republicans are to pass the legislation with a simple majority. The Senate tax plan is required to add no more than $1.5 trillion over 10 years to the federal deficit and national debt. Otherwise, Senate Republicans would need 60 votes.

(Additional reporting by Susan Heavey, Susan Cornwell, Katanga Johnson and David Alexander; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Peter Cooney)

Trump’s top economic adviser can’t contain his surprise after CEOs say his tax plan won’t make them invest more

The Independent

Trump’s top economic adviser can’t contain his surprise after CEOs say his tax plan won’t make them invest more

Clark Mindock, The Independent      November 15, 2017

  https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/gdhCBO_9fNLc6Cdr8v9zWg--/YXBwaWQ9eW15O3c9NjQwO3E9NzU7c209MQ--/http://media.zenfs.com/en-GB/homerun/the_independent_635/d0567ae28826eb0bc3e8f42bcf403be4 White House economy adviser Gary Cohn appeared perplexed this week when a room full of CEOs said that the Trump administration’s tax plan wouldn’t inspire them to increase capital investments, but experts say that their reluctance to say they would should come at no surprise at all.

During an event for the Wall Street Journal’s CEO Council, an editor at that newspaper turned to ask the room a question: “If the tax reform bill goes through, do you plan to increase investment — your company’s investment, capital investment?” Prompted to raise their hands if so, very few shot their palms into the air. Mr Cohn, the White House Economic Council director, smiled uncomfortably at the response.

“Why aren’t the other hands up?” he asked, making a joke out of the spectacle.

But experts say that it isn’t hard to figure out why corporations might not want to take savings from cuts to the corporate tax cut and pump it back into their companies — all you have to do is look at who actually benefits financially from the cuts.

Citing a recent Moody’s report that estimate that the Trump tax plan would yield just a 0.3 percent economic growth rate for 10 years before a likely decline, Brooking Institute senior fellow William Gale noted that business leaders might be expecting declines in the long term.

“The reason there is so little growth to come out of the plan, and the reason why the executives were not so enthused to invest more, is that one of the biggest effects of the corporate tax rate cut is to provide a windfall gain to the owners,” Mr Gale told The Independent in an email.

“The rate cut rewards *old* investment, the returns to which are coming due now and being taxed as corporate income,” Mr Gale continued. “This is a very inefficient way to stimulate investment.”

In their efforts to pass a sweeping tax overhaul, Republicans have proposed a permanent and large tax cut for big businesses, even while American families would only receive a temporary tax cut that could expire as soon as 2023 (if the current House bill is approved) or 2026 (through the Senate’s current bill).

The corporate tax rate, currently at 35 per cent, would be cut to 20 per cent, which Republicans have argued will lead to faster growth, and more jobs.

In a call with reporters last month, Kevin Hassett, the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, said that the cuts to the corporate tax rate would boost wages because it would make it less expensive for businesses to invest in capital assets, like machines.

“More assets like machines let workers produce more, and when workers can produce more, businesses can afford to pay their workers more,” he said.

The response from Americans to the tax plan has been, generally, that the US population thinks the tax overhaul is meant to help out the rich, not the middle class. Public opinion polls, like the Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday, show that just 16 per cent of Americans think the overhaul will reduce how much they pay in taxes.

Meanwhile, a full 61 per cent say that they think the wealthy in America will benefit the most.

Social Security on the chopping block: How the GOP plans to fix its own budget mess

Salon

Social Security on the chopping block: How the GOP plans to fix its own budget mess

Republicans are going back to their dream: Cutting Social Security and Medicare

Charlie May         November 15, 2017  

https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/mBJIttctviJY__QJW44fUQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW15O3E9NzU7dz02NDA7c209MQ--/http://l.yimg.com/yp/offnetwork/60c7b0ca049e94d4b442d9e969a0655dSocial Security on the chopping block: How the GOP plans to fix its own budget mess

Amid the impending GOP tax reform bill there has been plenty of talk about the estimated $1.5 trillion slash in taxes, but there has been almost no discussion of how the Republicans — who regularly tout the importance of the federal deficit — plan to pay for their proposed cuts.

On Tuesday, House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., insisted that the national debt is a serious issue, and that in order for it to be fixed, entitlement programs would have to be gutted in order to pay for the tax cuts.

“You cannot get the national debt under control, you cannot get that deficit under control, if you don’t do both — grow the economy, cut spending,” Ryan said during a town hall event in Virginia for Fox News.

Ryan claimed that the Republican tax plan “grows the economy” but that the party has “a lot of work to do in cutting spending.”

Democrats have said the Republican tax plan is nothing more than a grab for social safety nets.

“This is a nasty, two-step strategy that has long been the holy grail for hard-right Republicans,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., told The New York Times. “If this bill passes, you can bet the Republicans will immediately sharpen the knives for middle-class benefits.”

The national debt surpassed $20 trillion in September, the highest mark in U.S. history. During this time, the nation has embedded itself in numerous conflicts abroad — a major driver of the massive debt — but has still dedicated more federal funds to the military than ever before.

The Congressional Budget Office “warned that the tax bill could set off an arcane budget rule” which would drastically cut funding for Medicare over the next decade and as much as $25 billion next year, according to Times:

The pay-as-you-go law requires that legislation that adds to the federal deficit be paid for with spending cuts or other offsets. If that does not happen, automatic cuts to programs like Medicare kick in. The Medicare cuts, which are capped at 4 percent of the program’s annual spending, could reach almost a half trillion dollars over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

While bipartisan legislation could potentially be passed to avoid the Medicare cuts, it’s not clear if the Republicans would work towards making that happen.

“I can’t believe how quickly the deficit hawks in the Republican Party flew away after they saw the $1.5 trillion,” Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, the top Democrat on the Finance Committee, told the Times. “We’re sure that they will start making their way back when we see the deficits.”

President Donald Trump has widely proclaimed, both on his campaign and since he’s assumed office, that his tax agenda would provide relief for middle class families and that the plan would close loopholes and not benefit him or other wealthy elites.

As it turns out, Trump and his top economic adviser, a key architect of the plan, Gary Cohn, the former Chief Operating Officer at Goldman Sachs, have been demonstrably incorrect in their claims that the middle class will be the primary beneficiaries of the tax plan and that the wealthy won’t be showered with tax relief. Some Republicans have even argued that it doesn’t benefit the rich enough.

On Wednesday, during an event for the Wall Street Journal’s CEO Council, the crowd was asked by the WSJ, “If the tax reform bill goes through, do you plan to increase investment — your company’s investment, capital investment?”

After there was little participation by the crowd of CEO’s, Cohn asked, “Why aren’t the other hands up?”

https://pbs.twimg.com/ext_tw_video_thumb/930475469354471424/pu/img/YfgCRfCXyz2Z1EdK.jpg

Everything is going as planned for the GOP!

Charlie May is a news writer at Salon. You can find him on Twitter at @charliejmay

Shep Smith Breaks From Fox News Coverage, Tears ‘Uranium One’ Scandal To Shreds

HuffPost

Shep Smith Breaks From Fox News Coverage, Tears ‘Uranium One’ Scandal To Shreds

Alana Horowitz Satlin, HuffPost         November 15, 2017 

Fox News anchor Shep Smith broke from his network’s hyperventilating coverage of the “Uranium One” pseudo-scandal to debunk allegations of wrongdoings by Hillary Clinton.

Smith, never one to blindly toe the party line, took to task President Donald Trump ― and, implicitly, his cable news network of choice ― over the “inaccurate” portrayal of the sale of a Canadian mining company with major U.S. holdings to a Russian company.

“Here’s the accusation,” Smith explained Tuesday. “Nine people involved in the deal made donations to the Clinton Foundation totaling more than $140 million. In exchange, Secretary of State Clinton approved the sale to the Russians — a quid pro quo.”

It’s a claim that has dominated Fox News in recent weeks after The Hill published a deeply flawed report about a “Russian bribery plot” involving the sale. Following pressure from the president and several Republican members of Congress, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced earlier this week that the Justice Department would consider appointing a special counsel to review the deal as well as other matters involving Clinton and other Democrats.

There’s never been any evidence that Clinton acted inappropriately and, as Smith notes, “the Clinton State Department had no power to approve or veto that transaction. It could do neither.” Indeed, the State Department was just one of nine agencies that signed off on the deal and Clinton herself wasn’t even on the committee.

“The accusation is predicated on the charge that Secretary Clinton approved the sale,” Smith said. “She did not. A committee of nine evaluated the sale, the president approved the sale, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and others had to offer permits, and none of the uranium was exported for use by the U.S. to Russia. That is Uranium One.”

Since Smith’s segment, Uranium One has been mentioned over 40 times on various Fox News shows.

Related:

Newsweek

Fox News Anchor Destroys Conspiracy Theory About Hillary Clinton and Uranium One

By Graham Lanktree, Newsweek        November 15, 2017   

Updated | Fox News anchor Shep Smith dismantled a conspiracy theory about Hillary Clinton and the 2009 sale of the company Uranium One that has been promoted by network hosts Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson.

Fox’s opinion show hosts have been echoing President Donald Trump and several Republicans in the hard-right Freedom Caucus urging the Department of Justice to launch a special counsel to investigate Clinton. This week, members of the caucus wrote an opinion piece for Fox News calling for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to investigate Clinton or “step down.”

They charge Clinton, who was then Secretary of State, got $145 million in kickbacks to the Clinton Foundation from Uranium One’s investors after the Canadian company was sold to the Russian state-owned atomic energy company, Rosatom.

http://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/full/public/2017/11/15/1115clinton.jpgFox News has promoted a conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton received kickbacks for approving the sale of a uranium company to Russia. Aaron P. Bernstein/Reuters

“The accusation is predicated on the charge that Secretary Clinton approved the sale. She did not. A committee of nine evaluated the sale, the president approved the sale, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and others had to offer permits, and none of the uranium was exported for use by the U.S. to Russia. That is Uranium One,” Smith summed up at the end of a six minute takedown of the conspiracy theory Tuesday. “It was unanimous, not a Hillary Clinton approval.”

“Most of those donations were from one man, Frank Giustra, the founder of the company in Canada,” said Smith. “He gave $131 million to the Clinton Foundation. But Giustra says he sold his stake in the company back in 2007. That is three years before the uranium/Russia deal and a year and a half before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state.”

The day before Smith’s takedown, Attorney General Jeff Sessions sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee chairman stating the Department of Justice is looking at whether there is merit to investigating Clinton and the deal.

“Uranium deal to Russia, with Clinton help and Obama Administration knowledge, is the biggest story that Fake Media doesn’t want to follow!” Trump tweeted at the end of October. Days later, Trump said that the approval of the uranium sale is just one reason why Clinton should be investigated and, in a tweet, urged Republicans to “DO SOMETHING!”

During a private meeting with Trump in the Oval Office on November 1, Fox News host Jeanine Pirro insisted he should appoint a special counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton, according to The New York Times. “Everything I said to President Trump is exactly what I’ve vocalized on my show, Justice With Jeanine,” Pirro said. Fox News opinion show hosts Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity have also promoted the Uranium One deal as a scandal.

After Smith’s segment on the Uranium One conspiracy theory Tuesday, Fox News host Tucker Carlson ran a piece on his show titled “Real Russia Scandal” with a picture of Clinton. During the segment Carlson argued the sale of Uranium One was a national security threat as it ceded control of American uranium to Russia. Treaties signed by Russia and the U.S. prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and Russia has used the uranium in its nuclear energy reactors.

Late last week, members of the Freedom Caucus argued in congress that the Uranium One deal disqualifies special counsel Robert Mueller from leading the investigation into whether the Trump campaign assisted Russia in its efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.

The group said Mueller has a conflict of interest because during the Uranium One deal he was heading the FBI while it was investigating corruption at a subsidiary of the Russian state-owned atomic energy company Rosatom that bought Uranium One.

“We are at risk of a coup d’état in this country if we allow an unaccountable person, with no oversight, to undermine the duly-elected President of the United States,” said Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz from the chamber floor.

“It is far past time to thoroughly investigate this [Uranium One] deal, the Obama administration’s actions, and the Clinton family’s role,” said California Rep. Scott Perry.

This article was updated to remove references referring to Shep Smith as a Fox News host. He is an anchor on the network.

CBO: House GOP tax plan triggers $25 billion in Medicare cuts

Yahoo – Finance

CBO: House GOP tax plan triggers $25 billion in Medicare cuts

Ethan Wolff-Mann      November 14, 2017 

https://s.yimg.com/lo/api/res/1.2/moyLCed2rqJ4QQaJmGtmCg--/YXBwaWQ9eW15O3c9NjQwO3E9NzU7c209MQ--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/homerun/feed_manager_auto_publish_494/0d9d222859937f980469f8cc78322f2eHouse Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md. clarified effects of the current House GOP tax legislation with the Congressional Budget Office. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

If the House GOP tax plan passes, it is projected to cut revenue significantly, likely increasing the deficit by $1.456 trillion from 2018 to 2027, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation and Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

With a number that large, Congress’s “pay as you go” rules that prevent unchecked spending would fall into place, a move that could cut Medicare’s budget by as much as $25 billion for 2018.

In a letter to House minority whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the CBO explained that without any more money to offset the fall in revenue, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) would be required to issue a “sequestration order” to reduce spending in 2018 by $136 billion.

The effects of this sequestration order would trigger automatic cuts to various programs, including Medicare. According to the CBO, this could be as much as 4% for Medicare, which amounts to $25 billion in 2018. Furthermore, all non-exempt programs would be eliminated, which include some farming subsidies, border security, and student loan help. Others, like Social Security, would remain untouched.

At the same time, the tax plan’s changes to the estate and gift taxes would cut revenue $151 billion from 2018 to 2027, according to the JCT. Only 4,700 estates were large enough to be subject to the estate tax as the 2017, since the exemption is over $5 million.

Because of the rules exempting or limiting how much can be cut from certain programs, the CBO also estimated that the reductions would not make up for the need for money to pay for what Congress “bought.”

Touching Medicare has been traditionally considered explosive, and some have noted the “pay as you go” rules give Democrats leverage in the tax bill debates.

In a response to the CBO’s letter, Rep. Hoyer issued a statement, noting the broad impact beyond the deficit on the program cuts, adding that he actually wrote the “pay as you go” law, and called for a bipartisan lawmaking process.

According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the “pay as you go rules” were passed with bipartisan support.

Ethan Wolff-Mann is a writer at Yahoo Finance.