Mediaboss Marketing

While they prepare the bill for floor action, majority party leaders are deciding whether to pair the must-pass funding package to avoid a shutdown with a measure to tackle the approaching debt cliff a plan Republicans vehemently promise to reject. A bill that addresses both fiscal threats would likely pass the House, but its odds are highly questionable in the Senate, where all but four GOP lawmakers have promised to vote against raising the debt limit.

The premise that Republicans are not going to vote in any way, shape, form or fashion for a debt limit increase is a correct premise. That would not happen, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) warned this week.

Democrats would be remiss to pass the funding bill without debt limit action, since the Treasury Department is expected to run out of borrowing ability sometime next month a breaking point likely to trigger economic turmoil. Majority party leaders can maximize their leverage over Republicans by coupling the issues, forcing GOP lawmakers to either fall in line or go on record against billions of dollars in disaster aid, preventing a government shutdown and avoiding debt default.

"The debt limit is something that we should do almost automatically," Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) said this week. "So any opportunity that we have to pass it, the sooner the better. ... Wherever we can get a bill in, I hope we can get the debt ceiling included in it."

A cap on the nations ability to borrow money was reinstated on Aug. 1. The Treasury Department has since implemented a number of workarounds to keep paying the governments bills on time, but Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned those measures could be exhausted as soon as next month a scenario that would wreak unparalleled economic havoc.

Earlier this week, some Senate Republicans indicated a willingness to support a stopgap bill that includes billions of dollars in hurricane and flood relief requested by Biden, citing their own needs in states rocked by Hurricane Ida and other storms throughout the year.

But any measure to raise or suspend the debt limit must be left off, GOP lawmakers said, insisting that Democrats handle a typically bipartisan issue alone, since the majority party is pursuing multitrillion-dollar spending plans without Republican support.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) bluntly said Monday that he would not support a continuing resolution that includes disaster aid and action to stave off a debt default.

This debt limit is all justifying their robbing the bank to spend a whole bunch of new social programs that are going to feed the fires of inflation, he said.

See original here:
Biden dials top Democrats as shutdown countdown begins ...

House Democrats want to raise taxes on the largest corporations and wealthiest Americans to help pay for the $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation package. The series of proposed tax code changes are set to spark heated debate on Capitol Hill as Republicans and some centrists Democrats push back on the sweeping spending proposal that tackles a range of President Biden's policy priorities.

The House Ways and Means committee tasked with drafting the funding proposal unveiled its text on Monday. It comes as the committee is set to mark up the legislation on Wednesday, the same day Speaker Nancy Pelosi has set as the deadline for all committees to complete their drafted portions of the legislation.

House Democrats are proposing increasing the corporate tax rate to $26.5% up from 21% for businesses that have incomes above $5 million. At the same time, they've proposed lowering the tax rate even further for the smallest businesses making up to $400,000 to 18%. Corporations with incomes falling in the middle range would not see corporate tax hike.

This comes out just below President Biden's own proposal unveiled this spring. He called for the tax rate to be increased to 28% after it was slashed from 35% to 21% under President Trump in 2017.

The proposal also revamps the tax brackets for the wealthiest Americans, increasing the top income tax rate to 39.6% from 37% which applies to individuals with a taxable income of more than $400,000, married individuals filing jointly with taxable income over $450,000 and heads of households with taxable income over $425,000.

Under the proposal, the top capital gains rate would increase from 20% to 25%. This is less than the President's proposal which included nearly doubling it to 39.6% rate on households with an income of more than $1 million. Instead, the proposal includes a 3% surtax on individuals making more than $5 million.

Another proposal in the drafted legislation increases the tax rate on tobacco products.

White House spokesman Andrew Bates praised the proposal, noting it "makes significant progress towards ensuring our economy rewards work and not just wealth by cutting taxes for middle class families; reforming the tax code to prevent the offshoring of American jobs; and making sure the wealthiest Americans and big corporations pay their fair share" and meets two of the president's core goals.

While the legislation includes changes to the tax code, it also includes $80 billion in funding for the IRS over the next decade which would increase enforcement on the wealthiest Americans.

According to the Treasury Department, the top 1% have avoided paying an estimated $163 billion in taxes a year. The full tax gap between what is owed and what is actually collected is an estimated $600 billion annually and could reach an estimated $7 trillion over the next ten years. The increase in funding to the IRS would allow the collection of an additional $200 billion over a decade, the Congressional Budget Office estimates.

According to a document on the House Democrats' tax proposal circulated among lawmakers and obtained by CBS News, the series of tax changes and provisions would raise an estimated $2.9 trillion in revenue including an estimated additional trillion from the wealthiest individuals and another $900 billion from corporations.

Along with the White House's estimated $600 billion in growth, the document states, the proposal would pay for the $3.5 trillion spending plan, which includes provisions such as expanding Medicare, extending the monthly Child Tax Credit, implementing a 12-week paid family and medical leave policy nationally, providing universal pre-K to all 3- and 4-year-olds, making two years of community college tuition free and more.

But the tax-and-spend agenda has a long way to go on Capitol Hill. On Tuesday and Wednesday, the House Ways and Means Committee will continue its work marking up its portion of the legislation, known as the Build Back Better Act. In a statement, Chairman Richard Neal said its investments can all be funded "responsibly" and taken together, the proposals "expand opportunity for the American people and support our efforts to build a healthier, more prosperous future for the country."

But over the weekend, Senator Joe Manchin continued to pour cold water on the $3.5 trillion reconciliation package, saying Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer would not have his vote on a package of that size. The West Virginia Democrat suggested Congress needs to scale down its number to meet urgent needs, putting him at striking odds with progressive Democrats such as Senator Bernie Sanders, who said Sunday whittling down the package to $1.5 trillion was "absolutely not acceptable" to him.

Democrats have 50 seats in the Senate leaving no room for dissension. The Senate returns from recess Monday.

See original here:
Democrats' new tax proposal takes aim at corporations and ...

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Denouncing the thousands of Haitian asylum-seekers who are camped out under a South Texas bridge as an "invasion," Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick accused Democrats of allowing their entry into the country for political gain.

"[Democrats] are allowing this year probably 2 million [immigrants], that's who we apprehended, maybe another million, into this country," Patrick said on Laura Ingraham's Fox News show. "At least in 18 years even if they all don't become citizens before then and can vote, in 18 years if every one of them has two or three children, you're talking about millions and millions and millions of new voters and they will thank the Democrats and Biden for bringing them here. Who do you think they're going to vote for?"

He said President Joe Biden and Democrats had begun a "silent revolution" to take over the country by winning over the votes of migrants.

"This is trying to take over our country without firing a shot," he added.

Patrick's rhetoric mirrors a far-right theory started in France known as the Great Replacement, which says that elites are replacing white populations with nonwhite populations through mass migration and demographic growth. These writings influenced the worst mass shooting of Hispanics in recent U.S. history in El Paso in 2019. The shooter, who killed 23 people and injured 23 others, ranted about a Hispanic invasion and told police he came to the city to kill Mexicans.

Patrick has repeatedly called the increase of migrants at the border an "invasion" throughout the year.

State Rep. Chris Turner, D-Grand Prairie, who leads the House Democratic Caucus said blasted Patrick for his comments.

"These comments are not only vile, they are incendiary and dangerous," Turner said on Twitter. "Leaders have a responsibility to not incite with their words & actions - Patrick fails that test, again."

Patrick, a two-term Republican, was responding on Thursday to the thousands of asylum-seeking migrants most of them from Haiti who are waiting under an international bridge in Del Rio. The Caribbean country experienced a 7.2 magnitude earthquake last month that destroyed thousands of homes.

State and federal government butted heads on how to handle the migrants' arrival, with Gov. Greg Abbott backpedaling on an order to close the ports of entry after U.S. Customs and Border Protection said the agency had not asked the state to do so. Abbott has blamed the Biden administration for the increase of migrants on the border this year.

Patrick told Ingraham the state received a "call for help" from U.S. Border Patrol, which led Abbott to order the closure of the ports of entry. A Customs and Border Protection spokesperson said the agency had no information on Abbott's decision to close the ports.

"Then we found out that Border Patrol did not have permission from Homeland Security or the president, and so they came out and said 'No, we didn't say we needed any help. We didn't say that,'" Patrick said. "Someone in the administration flip-flopped on the issue, Texas did not take a back step."

Patrick urged Republican-led states to tell the White House they were being "invaded," adding that Democrat-led states did not care.

"This is not authorized by the state of Texas," he said. "It's not welcome by the state of Texas or any other Republican state that I know and they're not invited."

Patrick invoked Article IV of the Constitution, which guarantees states protection from invasion.

"What's a republican form of government? It's defined as a government that focuses on citizens running their government," he said. "We now will have illegals in this country denying citizens the right to run our government. Because our government, our representatives that we elect, can't even stop them from coming."

"This is denying us our government that's run by our citizens with illegals who are here who are going to take our education, our health care, all [of it]," he said. "This is selling out our country."

Join us Sept. 20-25 at the 2021 Texas Tribune Festival. Tickets are on sale now for this multi-day celebration of big, bold ideas about politics, public policy and the days news, curated by The Texas Tribunes award-winning journalists. Learn more.

See the original post here:
Dan Patrick warns Democrats are allowing in immigrants for silent revolution, mirroring language of far-right extremists - The Texas Tribune

The big headline is that the California recall failed. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom gets to keep his job. He handily fought off the Republican challenge.

But there is a worrisome detail in the data, one that keeps showing up, one that Democrats would do well to deal with: Black and Latino men are not hewing as close to the party line as Black and Latina women.

There are, of course, issues with exit polls, and results often change as more votes are counted. But that said, the California exit polls do seem to reflect what polls have shown for some time now.

In CNNs exit poll, nearly half of the Hispanic men surveyed and nearly a quarter of the Black men voted to support the recall. The largest difference between men and women of any racial group was between Black men and Black women.

Even if these numbers are later adjusted, the warning must still be registered.

For many of these men, saying Republicans are racist or attract racists or abide racists isnt enough.

For one thing, never underestimate the communion among men, regardless of race. Men have privileges in society, and some are drawn to policies that elevate their privileges.

For instance, many Black and Hispanic men oppose abortion.

Some men liked the bravado of Donald Trump and chafed at the rise of the #MeToo movement. Some simply see trans women as men in dresses and want to carry guns wherever they want.

The question for Democrats is how do they lure some of these men back without catering to the patriarchy. From a position of principle, the party cant really appeal to them; it must seek to change them.

Add to the patriarchal issues a sense of disillusionment with the Democratic Party and its inability to make meaningful changes on the issues that many of these men care most about, such as criminal justice reform and workplace competition. Democrats often resort to emotional appeals in election season, telling minorities that they must vote for liberal candidates as a defense, to prevent the worst. But many of these men believe that the Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans.

The idea of always playing defense and never offense is, well, offensive.

Instead, Democrats have to craft a message of empowerment and change. They have to say to these men that they dont have to operate from a position of weakness and pleading, holding back the forces that would otherwise overwhelm them.

To be honest, a robust, offensive messaging campaign would resonate with all people who tend to vote Democratic men and women.

The truth is that in a two-party system, voters have only two choices, so protest votes are self-defeating, as is sitting out elections or supporting the opposition to scare your favored side into better behavior.

In a two-party system, if you dont want the Trump Republicans to win, you must vote Democratic. You are trapped in that way, and no one likes the feeling of being trapped.

But trapped is not an inspiring campaign message, particularly to people who spent a lifetime feeling trapped and have tired of it, as these men have.

Yelling at them isnt going to work; neither is shaming them or thinking that you are educating them.

My fear is that these men will continue to drift away from the Democratic Party, not because the Republican Party is the most welcoming of spaces, but because Democrats cannot or will not do more to appeal to Black and Latino men.

To my mind, the Democratic Party must do a few things:

Admit that it makes many promises to Black people in election seasons that it not only doesnt accomplish, but sometimes doesnt even take up.

Acknowledge that many of these men feel that the system itself has failed them, that the status quo has failed them.

Give the plight of Black and brown men the same prominence that both parties have given the plight of working-class white men.

Black and brown men need to feel that they are being seen as more than victims of a predatory justice system or part of the so-called immigrant crisis. They need to be rendered in full and seen as whole.

When they are not, it leaves an opening for Republicans to exploit, and conservatives have done a clever job of doing just that in recent elections.

If you are like me, you are thinking: These men should know better. They are voting in ways that invite injury or not voting at all. They shouldnt be coddled. The world is sick of coddling selfish men.

But we, too, are stuck in this two-party system, and as such, we must do whatever it takes to prevent calamity and eke out progress.

In that world, when men of color vote against the interests of people of color and out of the male ego, we must gingerly talk them down rather than aggressively chant them down.

Read the original here:
Opinion | Democrats Continue to Struggle With Men of Color - The New York Times

Mint Images - Tim Robbins

As Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill work to bring their new reconciliation bill across the finish line, a proposal to keep the expanded child tax credit could be changed.

A more generous child tax credit was authorized earlier this year by President Joe Biden and Congress to help give families additional financial relief in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic.

It has provided millions of families with direct monthly payments of up to $300 per child that started in July.

But the more generous child tax credit representing total sums of up to $3,600 per child is only in place for this year.

House Democrats unveiled their proposal last week to keep the expanded credit in place through 2025.

More from Personal Finance:House Democrats' tax plan would increase marriage penalty for wealthy couplesWhat the proposed paid family leave policy in the U.S. could look like House Democrats propose extending expanded child tax credit to 2025

But in a recent interview, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said he would prefer the terms of the credit include some kind of work requirement in order for parents to receive it.

"Don't you think, if we're going to help the children, that the people should make some effort?" he said during a Sunday interview on CNN.

Democrats are looking to move the changes through under a process known as reconciliation, which requires a simple majority vote in the Senate.

"Democrats need 100 percent support in their ranks to pass this through reconciliation, so if Senator Manchin feels it's a priority, it will be a priority," said Shai Akabas, director of economic policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

The expanded child tax credit includes up to $3,600 per child under age 6 and $3,000 per child ages 6 through 17. Previously, the credit was $2,000 per child under 17, and will revert back to that if the temporary changes put in place for 2021 are not extended.

With the expanded child tax credit, lawmakers also created monthly direct payments for the first time. Starting in July, families received payments of up to $300 per month for children under 6 and $250 per month for those ages 6 to 17.

Those monthly payments are slated to continue through December. Families can claim the remaining money when they file their tax returns next year.

The more generous credit applies to families under certain income thresholds $150,000 for married couples who file jointly and $112,500 for unmarried parents.

Also, parents do not need a certain level of income before they can qualify. Previously, the credit started phasing in at $2,500 in earned income. Now, parents can qualify even if they have $0 in income.

In addition, parents can now receive the full sums as refunds, versus a limit of $1,400 previously.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) speaks during a news conference on families helped by the Child Tax Credit at the U.S. Capitol July 20, 2021 in Washington, DC.

Win McNamee | Getty Images

The expanded child tax credit has been met with enthusiasm by advocates who say it has dramatically reduced child poverty.

One thing could get in the way of approving the proposed extension is costs.

Manchin has also said that he will not support the $3.5 trillion overall price tag.

Democrats could compromise to bring the cost of the expanded child tax credit lower, Akabas said. That could include making part of the credit fully refundable in the form of an allowance that is paid monthly throughout the year, and another part that is closer to the previous child tax credit structure that starts phasing in at a low level of earnings, he said.

The Bipartisan Policy Center has drafted its own proposal for how a new permanent expansion of the child tax credit could work in coordination with changes to the earned income tax credit, which also serves as an anti-poverty program.

Ultimately, there is a balance between providing universal support to families and encouraging work force participation for those who are struggling to make ends meet, Akabas said.

"That is how ultimately they are going to be most economically successful," Akabas said of work force participation.

As Democrats negotiate over a long list of priorities, it is too soon to tell exactly how the expanded child tax credit could end up. Some Democrats are opposed to tying it to earnings.

"That will be a debate they will have in the coming weeks," Akabas said.

Read more here:
Democrats look to extend the expanded monthly child tax credit payments through 2025. The terms could still be up for negotiation - CNBC