| Media Search: |
The Republicans Who Will Stop Trump Forbes A month into the embryonic Presidency, the Trump locomotive is struggling to gain speed. Dealt the great fortune of a unified governmenta Republican controlled Congress and a soon to be restored conservative majority in the high courtthe president ... |
Read this article:
The Republicans Who Will Stop Trump - Forbes
Feb. 24, 2017, 3:40 p.m.
It was a cool and rainy day when elders of the Republican tribe recently gathered to honor one of their own.
The honoree, Stuart K. Spencer, was unmistakable in his white duck pants and a lime-green sport coat so bright it almost hurt to see. A reformed chain-smoker, he snapped merrily away on a wad of chewing gum.
The event marked Spencer's 90th birthday, but the mood beneath the surface conviviality was unsettled and gray, like the clouds fringing the mountains outside.
If the occasion was intended as a personal celebration, it also had the feel of a wake for a time in politics long passed.
Along with former Vice President Dick Cheney and former California Gov. Pete Wilson, veterans of the Reagan years turned out in force. It was Spencer, more than anyone, who took a political long shot and washed-up B-movie actor and helped transform him into the Reagan of legend.
Here is the original post:
The Republicans who made Reagan president mourn the party they once knew - Los Angeles Times
We are going to massively lower taxes on the middle class, reduce taxes on American business and make our tax code more simple and much more fair for everyone including the people and the business, said Donald Trump in his speech at CPAC today, with characteristic eloquence.
He didnt say much more on the topic, perhaps because the administration still hasnt figured out exactly what kind of tax reform it wants to pass. But there are two things you can count on.
First, Trump and his senior officials will repeat the words middle class over and over whenever they talk about it. And second, the vast majority of the tax cuts are going to go to the wealthy.Simply put, there is no higher priority for this or any Republican government than cutting taxes on the wealthy.
Back in November, future Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin made a bizarre promise: Any reductions we have in upper-income taxes will be offset by less deductions so that there will be no absolute tax cut for the upper class. This demonstrated Mnuchins lack of political experience. A more practiced Republican figure would have known that youre supposed to imply that the benefits of GOP tax cuts wont accrue mostly to the rich, then quickly change the subject. Its much more dangerous to make a concrete promise you have no intention of keeping.
Steven Mnuchin, a former Goldman Sachs banker and Hollywood financier, is President-elect Donald Trump's nominee for treasury secretary. He spoke at Trump Tower Nov. 30. (The Washington Post)
Yesterday, Mnuchin was at it again, only with language that gave him a little more wiggle room: Look, as Ive said before, were primarily focused on a middle-income tax cut and simplification for business. Andon the high end, if there are tax cuts, that they are offset with reduction of deductions and other things. Yes indeed, the collection of billionaires and Goldman Sachs alumni populating the Trump administration thinks of little apart from the interests of the middle class. Thats where theyre primarily focused.
We dont know exactly what the administration and congressional Republicans will produce, but we can get a pretty good idea from the plans theyve already floated. During the campaign, Trump put out a tax plan; heres what the Tax Policy Center concluded when they analyzed it:
The highest-income taxpayers (0.1 percent of the population, or those with incomes over $3.7 million in 2016 dollars) would experience an average tax cut of nearly $1.1 million, over 14 percent of after-tax income. Households in the middle fifth of the income distribution would receive an average tax cut of $1,010, or 1.8 percent of after-tax income, while the poorest fifth of households would see their taxes go down an average of $110, or 0.8 percent of their after-tax income.
Theres that focus on the middle class for you. Of course, any tax reform has to go through Congress, and there are already plans there waiting. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan has a plan, and the gifts it showers on the wealthy put even Trumps plan to shame. Heres the Tax Policy Centers analysis:
The top quintile or fifth of the distribution would receive an average tax cut of about $11,800 (4.6 percent of after-tax income). Three-quarters of total tax cuts would go to the top 1 percent, who would receive an average cut of nearly $213,000, or 13.4 percent of after-tax income. The top 0.1 percent would receive an average tax cut of about $1.3 million (16.9 percent of after-tax income). In contrast, the average tax cut for the lowest-income households would be just $50, 0.4 percent of after-tax income. Middle-income households would receive an average tax cut of $260, about the same relative to after-tax income 0.5 percent as for the lowest-income households.
And in 2025, a remarkable 99.6 percent of the benefits of the Ryan tax cuts would go to the top one percent. When Ryan gets asked about this, he says that even discussing the way his tax cut helps the rich is ridiculous, because People dont think like that.
So how can Republicans claim that theyre focused on the middle class? Its going to work the same way it did when George W. Bush passed two rounds of massive tax cuts, which youll recall supercharged the American economy just as Republicans predicted, leading to a period of unprecedented growth in GDP and wages. (Oh, thats not how you remember the Bush years? Strange.) First, they cut income tax rates across the board, which means that the middle class gets something, even if its only a couple hundred bucks. Most Americans actually pay more in payroll taxes (which fund the Social Security and Medicare systems) than they do in federal income taxes, but Republicans arent interested in cutting payroll taxes. The ones hit hard by income taxes are mostly the wealthy, and each percentage point you cut their taxes represents a much bigger giveaway.
Second, Republicans push a series of cuts to other taxes that are paid almost entirely by the wealthy, like the inheritance tax and the capital gains tax. Add them together, and the rich end up making out big league. But the fact that middle class people get some kind of cut becomes the centerpiece of the PR campaign to win support for the cuts.
Bush was particularly good at this. During his 2000 campaign hed pull up people he called tax families on stage, a waitress or plumber who he said would get a $500 or $1000 tax break under his plan, and everyone would cheer. He didnt mention the CEO whod be getting $1 million.
Then, in an absolutely brilliant move, once the first tax cut was signed, the Bush administration sent a letter to every taxpaying household in America, saying, We are pleased to inform you that the United States Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed into law the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, which provides long-term tax relief for all Americans who pay income taxesAs part of the immediate tax relief, you will be receiving a check in the amount of Then not long after, everyone got an actual check in the mail.
Later, when the Obama administration cut taxes, it decided not to do so in the same splashy way, because research indicated that a check like the one Bush sent was likely to be saved, while a few extra dollars in everyones weekly paycheck were more likely to be spent, having a greater effect on the economy. So the Obama administration got no public relations benefit out of their tax cut.
But Republican administrations arent really worried about maximizing the economic impact of their tax cuts. Their concern is fundamentally a moral one: they view wealthy people as more deserving and upper-end taxes as inherently evil. It would be perfectly fine if cutting them helps the economy, but if it doesnt (and it doesnt), then thats okay, too, because tax cuts for the wealthy are an end in themselves.
So when the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress start talking about how concerned they are about the middle class, look at the actual numbers. Thats where youll find the truth.
Common Dreams | In Final Pitches for Ellison, Progressives Say He's Exactly What Dems Need Now Common Dreams With just hours left before the 447 voting members of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) choose their next chair, leaders of progressive groups are making their final case for "the candidate who has most consistently been in the trenches with the ... Progressives Need A New Party, Not A New DNC Chair New Democrats Seek to Block Rise of Progressives to DNC Leadership Prepare for the Centrist Gambit at the DNC Race: "If You're Progressive, You're Supporting Trump" |
Excerpt from:
In Final Pitches for Ellison, Progressives Say He's Exactly What Dems Need Now - Common Dreams
Members of Congress returned to their districts this week for Congressional recess met by hordes of angry constituents. Of Oberlins three representatives, only Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown made it through the week relatively unscathed. Protesters accosted 4th District Representative Jim Jordan at a public event in Marion, Ohio, Monday, turning a routine appearance into an impromptu town hall. More Ohioans lined the streets outside a private Republican fundraiser featuring Senator Rob Portman as a keynote speaker Wednesday night in Fremont, Ohio. Yesterday, hundreds of constituents in Cleveland held a mock town hall in Portmans name, since he failed to schedule one for the week.
These actions are one prong of local activism that has been newly invigorated in the month since President Donald Trumps inauguration. Progressives who feel that they have no voice in Congress are doing all they can to shift their elected officials even slightly to the left, particularly on key issues like the Affordable Care Act and Trumps cabinet nominees. These local actions aimed at producing change at the federal level have proven effective, as evident in the slow and contentious confirmation process, during which several Republican senators broke party lines after getting hammered by constituents.
While local organizing to shift national politics has dominated the news this week, we cannot lose sight of the potentially more important form of activism: local actions to produce local effects. Human rights issues are determined at local levels just as much as they are in Washington. As Eleanor Roosevelt said, Where after all do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any map of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person.
It is in the districts themselves that true progressive action can occur during Trumps tenure, not in D.C., where Democrats lack agenda-setting power and are desperately clinging to existing legislation like the ACA. Trumps new executive order that transgender students must use the bathroom matching their assigned sex, for example, will be rendered largely irrelevant if school boards install single-use stalls instead. Similarly, Oberlin City Council is attempting to protect immigrants from deportation raids by reinforcing its resolution to make Oberlin a sanctuary city, vowing not to request residents immigration statuses. In op-eds this week, Jackie Brant explains different methods cities can use to protect immigrants and Johan Cavert suggests modes of grassroots environmental activism, since the Environmental Protection Agency may soon be gutted with Scott Pruitt at its helm. All of these are critical social justice issues and cannot be overlooked with all eyes on the Capitol and White House.
Those opposed to the Trump agenda also cannot afford to ignore local elections. Over the past 10 years, the Democratic Party and the left more broadly have failed to run candidates in many state legislative seats, giving Republicans free reign in state capitals across the country. While Republicans undermine voting rights and leverage gerrymandering in their favor, Democrats have been slow to the game. However, its encouraging that President Obama and Vice President Biden have both turned to organizing around local elections in recent weeks.
From protecting the right to choose to labor laws to energy policy, what happens in state government matters. Progressives must not become so distracted by the ghastly circus in the White House that they forget to focus on where they can make the most impact the places they live. This dismal state of affairs cannot stand.
Go here to see the original:
The Oberlin Review : Progressives Should Focus on Local Activism - The Oberlin Review