Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: December 2017

No Doubt


If there was ever any doubt about the Trump agenda and by extension the GOP’s political track, the soon to be in effect Tax Bill will clarify them. This is the same smoke and mirror scenario put out By 2 previous GOP administrations and the State of Kansas. I make every effort to remain as apolitical as I can but sometimes one has to call B.S. when it appears. There is nothing that this administration has done to benefit the oft cited American people and the neer do well Congress has followed the script towards 2018 where they hope to remain in power. It is pathetic that these miscreants treat the population as if they (we) are all idiots. It is important to remember that we now have a legislative body who in a C.Y.A. move will present a flawed bill to a Flawed CIC and allow the blame to fall on his shoulders while the ill effects descends on the American people who they have often cited as their main concern. If as citizens you ascribe to this administration’s extreme use of “alternate facts” and extreme media talking heads then it probably time to re read history during the Nixon Presidency. There are no honest politicians only folks with an agenda that coincidentally helps the public.

Ending Net Neutrality ‘Would Cause Immediate Harm’


 

 

Internal FCC Report Shows Republican Net Neutrality Narrative Is False

The story of net neutrality as an Obama-led takeover of the internet was refuted by an Inspector General investigation whose findings were not made public prior to Thursday’s vote.

Jason Koebler

Jason Koebler

Dec 18 2017, 10:34am

Image: Alex Wong/Getty

A core Republican talking point during the net neutrality battle was that, in 2015, President Obama led a government takeover of the internet, and Obama illegally bullied the independent Federal Communications Commission into adopting the rules. In this version of the story, Ajit Pai’s rollback of those rules Thursday is a return to the good old days, before the FCC was forced to adopt rules it never wanted in the first place.

“On express orders from the previous White House, the FCC scrapped the tried-and-true, light touch regulation of the Internet and replaced it with heavy-handed micromanagement,” Pai said Thursday prior to voting to repeal the regulations.

But internal FCC documents obtained by Motherboard using a Freedom of Information Act request show that the independent, nonpartisan FCC Office of Inspector General—acting on orders from Congressional Republicans—investigated the claim that Obama interfered with the FCC’s net neutrality process and found it was nonsense. This Republican narrative of net neutrality as an Obama-led takeover of the internet, then, was wholly refuted by an independent investigation and its findings were not made public prior to Thursday’s vote.

First, some background: The FCC is an independent regulatory agency that is supposed to remain “free from undue influence” by the executive branch—it is not beholden to the White House, only the laws that Congress makes and tells it to regulate. This means the president cannot direct it to implement policies. In November 2014, President Obama released a statement saying that he believed the FCC should create rules protecting net neutrality, but noted that “ultimately this decision is theirs alone.”

“We found no evidence of secret deals, promises, or threats from anyone outside the Commission, nor any evidence of any other improper use of power to influence the FCC decision-making process”

This statement kicked the Obama-is-taking-over-the-internet talking point into overdrive (fringe conservative groups had already been calling net neutrality “Marxist” in emails to Republican mailing lists).

In early December 2014, the FCC, then led by Tom Wheeler, announced it would delay tackling net neutrality until 2015. Conservatives attributed this delay to Obama’s meddling, and pointed to a Wall Street Journal article noting that there were “unusual, secretive efforts inside the White House, led by two aides,” that led to the FCC adopting the regulations.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee called in Wheeler to discuss the FCC’s relationship with the White House. Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz said Obama’s statement caused Wheeler to “radically alter course,” asked Wheeler if the FCC had secret meetings with the White House, and demanded that the FCC’s Inspector General investigate: “I think there’s enough smoke here that it’s really worth looking at,” he said.

Using a Freedom of Information Act request, Motherboard obtained a summary of the Inspector General’s report, which has not been released publicly and is marked “Official Use Only, Law Enforcement Sensitive Information.” After reviewing more than 600,000 emails, the independent office found that there was no collusion between the White House and the FCC: “We found no evidence of secret deals, promises, or threats from anyone outside the Commission, nor any evidence of any other improper use of power to influence the FCC decision-making process.” This document is embedded below.

The summary was sent by Jay Keithley, an assistant inspector general, to David Hunt, who has been the FCC’s acting inspector general since 2009 (Hunt remains the IG today). The memo is dated August 22, 2016. The FCC OIG did not immediately respond to a question from Motherboard about why the memo had not been previously released to the public, but Wendy Hadfield, a paralegal at FCC OIG who processed the FOIA request in just one day (an extraordinarily fast turnaround time for a FOIA request) told me in an email that the agency “appreciate[s] the newsworthiness of this information” and attempted to process the document “in a useful timeframe.”

The FCC and Chairman Pai’s office did not respond to a request for comment sent Monday morning. This story will be updated if I hear back.

The report also found that the regulations were delayed in 2014 not because of Obama-administration meddling but because they simply weren’t ready yet: “While our teams have been working around the clock to try to be ready, there are significant obstacles to preparing a legally sustainable order in the time remaining,” Julie Veach, then-Chief of the FCC’s Wireline Bureau (which was working on the regulations), said in an email sent November 6, 2014 to Wheeler and other high-level FCC employees.

Republicans sold the public a narrative that wasn’t true, then used that narrative to repeal the regulations that protect the internet

The Inspector General’s report also notes that the record it reviewed did not support the analysis in a separate Senate probe titled: “Regulating the Internet: How the White House Bowled Over FCC Independence.”

“Nothing we found refuted the factual findings in the Senate Staff Report,” the IG wrote (bolding by agency). “More importantly, nothing we found in the complete, unredacted record evidenced any undue influence that would have militated in favor of a more comprehensive investigation.”

What the Inspector General found, then, were career public servants doing their job: “Nothing in these, or in any other emails appeared to indicate there was pressure to delay the Order from the December meeting from any source other than concerned FCC staffers,” the report found, adding that there was “no indication” that a draft of the net neutrality regulations had been circulated improperly.

Wheeler maintained through the whole process that Obama’s public statement had been entered into the public comment alongside comments by telecom companies, nonprofits, and millions of concerned citizens: “We will incorporate the President’s submission into the record of the Open Internet proceeding,” Wheeler said. The IG report noted that “while one could reasonably challenge the Chairman’s claim … our investigation has found no evidence to refute it.”

Since 2014, Republicans have pointed to net neutrality as an idea primarily promoted by President Obama, and have made it another in a long line of regulations and laws that they have sought to repeal now that Donald Trump is president. Prior to this false narrative, though, net neutrality was a bipartisan issue; the first net neutrality rules were put in place under President George W. Bush, and many Republicans worked on the 2015 rules that were just dismantled.What happened, then, is that Republicans sold the public a narrative that wasn’t true, then used that narrative to repeal the regulations that protect the internet.

Please Donate

A Guide to Why the Trump-Republican Tax Plan is a Disgrace (for When you Confront Your Republican Uncle Bob During the Holidays)


Noted economist Robert Reich explains Tax Plan.MA

Robert Reich

Saturday, December 16, 2017
Here are the 3 main Republican arguments in favor of the Republican tax plan, followed by the truth.
1. It will make American corporations competitive with foreign corporations, which are taxed at a lower rate.
Rubbish.
(1) American corporations now pay an effective rate (after taking deductions and tax credits) that’s just about the same as most foreign based corporations pay.
(2) Most of these other countries also impose a “Value Added Tax” on top of the corporate tax.
(3) When we cut our corporate rate from 35% to 20%, other nations will cut their corporate rates in order to be competitive with us – so we gain nothing anyway.
(4) Most big American corporations who benefit most from the Republican tax plan aren’t even “American.” Over 35 percent of their shareholders are foreign (which means that by cutting corporate taxes we’re giving a big tax cut to those foreign shareholders). 20 percent of their employees are foreign, while many Americans work for foreign-based corporations.
(5) The “competitiveness” of America depends on American workers, not on “American” corporations. But this tax plan will make it harder to finance public investments in education, health, and infrastructure, on which the future competitiveness of American workers depends.
(6) American corporations already have more money than they know what to do with. Their profits are at record levels. They’re using them to buy back their shares of stock, and raise executive pay. That’s what they’ll do with the additional $1 trillion they’ll receive in this tax cut.
***
2. With the tax cut, big corporations and the rich will invest and create more jobs.
Baloney.
(1) Job creation doesn’t trickle down. After Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush cut taxes on the top, few jobs and little growth resulted. America cut taxes on corporations in 2004 in an attempt to get them to bring their profits home from abroad, and what happened? They didn’t invest. They just bought up more shares of their own stock, and increased executive pay.
(2) Companies expand and create jobs when there’s more demand for their goods and services. That demand comes from customers who have the money to buy what companies sell. Those customers are primarily the middle class and poor, who spend far more of their incomes than the rich. But this tax bill mostly benefits the rich.
(3) At a time when the richest 1 percent already have 40 percent of all the wealth in the country, it’s immoral to give them even more – especially when financed partly by 13 million low-income Americans who will lose their health coverage as a result of this tax plan (according to the Congressional Budget Office), and by subsequent cuts in safety-net programs necessitated by increasing the deficit by $1.5 trillion.
***
3. It will give small businesses an incentive to invest and create more jobs.
Untrue.
(1) At least 85 percent of small businesses earn so little they already pay the lowest corporate tax rate, which this plan doesn’t change.
(2) In fact, because the tax plan bestows much larger rewards on big businesses, they’ll have more ability to use predatory tactics to squeeze small firms and force them out of business.
***
Don’t let your Uncle Bob be fooled: Republicans are voting for this because their wealthy patrons demand it. Their tax plan will weaken our economy for years – reducing demand, widening inequality, and increasing the national debt by at least $1.5 trillion over the next decade.
Shame on the greedy Republican backers who have engineered this. Shame on Trump and the Republicans who have lied to the public about its consequences.

Please Donate

Political Correctness-Truth or Fiction?


According to Wikipedia this just one of many definitions or explanations of “political correctness”. Political correctness or politically correct has been a subject of controversy for many years going back to 1934 America and before that in Colonial England. For the purpose of this posting the 2016 election is covered.

2016 US presidential election.
In 2015 and 2016, leading up to the 2016 United States presidential election, Republican candidate Donald Trump used political correctness as a common target in his rhetoric. According to Trump, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were willing to let ordinary Americans suffer because their first priority was political correctness.
In a column for the Huffington Post, Eric Mink characterized Trump’s concept of “political correctness”:
Political correctness is a controversial social force in a nation with a constitutional guarantee of freedom of expression, and it raises legitimate issues well worth discussing and debating. But that’s not what Trump is doing. He’s not a rebel speaking unpopular truths to power. He’s not standing up for honest discussions of deeply contentious issues. He’s not out there defying rules handed down by elites to control what we say. All Trump is defying is common decency.
In the light of the sexual assault allegations and the criticism the alleged victims faced from Trump supporters, Vox notes that after railing so much against political correctness they simply practice a different kind of repression and shaming: “If the pre–“political correctness” era was really so open, why is it only now that these women are speaking out?” Following the 2016 election, Los Angeles Times columnist Jessica Roy wrote that “political correctness” is one of the terms used by the American alt-right
As a conspiracy theory.
Some conservative commentators in the West argue that “political correctness” and multiculturalism are part of a conspiracy with the ultimate goal of undermining Judeo-Christian values. This theory, which holds that political correctness originates from the critical theory of the Frankfurt School as part of a conspiracy that its proponents call “Cultural Marxism”, is generally known as the Frankfurt School conspiracy theory by academics. The theory originated with Michael Minnicino’s 1992 essay “New Dark Age: Frankfurt School and ‘Political Correctness'”, published in a Lyndon LaRouche movement journal. In 2001, conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan wrote in The Death of the West that “political correctness is cultural Marxism”, and that “its trademark is intolerance”.

I would offer that political correctness could be defined as “honesty” (certainly an oxymoron these days). Many Trump supporters eschew “political correctness for “telling it like it is” (another oxymoron). “Telling it like is” is in the eye of the beholder and not necessarily true or false but more skewed to suit the situation. This assumption of bullying, name calling and pointing fingers as a political platform is not new but really should have no place in modern politics as all information on anyone’s political bent and beliefs is readily available to all if one wants to know. The key to good government is in the hands of the people not in someone running for election. It is wise to remember that many candidates will and have lied to gain an office. It is well to remember that election campaigns have become expensive and we (supporters pay just a small portion) while the larger share is put forth by deep pocket entities that have an agenda that does not usually bode well for the normal voters. Looking at the rash of executive orders signed with great flourish by our TOTUS, there is no careful consideration just the idea of repealing anything Obama no matter what good comes from it. What is apparent to me is we have an administration that has no true direction beyond advancing the ego trip the TIC is on while governing goes by the wayside or worse left in the hands of 535 neer do wells assisted by unqualified Cabinet members with no ability to fulfill the duties of the office they are tasked with administering.

Know Your Base


I have learned or I think I have learned that most politicians do not know their base (or what they perceive as their base). It is apparent that the proposed tax act or reform does not take into account the effect this action will have on the middle to lower income people who are the “base” that these neer do wells cite on a regular basis. Trickle down has and never will work. It did not work under Reagan, it did not work in Kansas and is not working in Wisconsin. There is no way in any circumstance that decreasing the tax on large companies will generate jobs unless the bill specifically states that this must be a result of the cut. Small business will get little and the average American will get less. The hype over increased deductions is just that hype since there are other changes that increase the tax burden on middle to lower income Americans. The quick look : Corporate tax cuts are permanent and the tax cuts for most Americans subset ( ends). This push for tax reform is solely for retaining support in the next election cycle and that support is all about donations from the recipients of the biggest tax cuts. The political structure has real idea of who their base consists of beyond numbers at the polls. This article from the Daily Beast is one example of what politicians don’t know or perhaps do not want to know:

The Sewer System Crisis About to Hit the Heartland
4 / 14
The Daily Beast
Lyndsey Gilpin
The city of Louisville, Kentucky, sits low in a valley along the Ohio River. When it rains heavily, water can quickly rise, overflowing the storm water drains and submerging parts of downtown, low-income neighborhoods near the river, and the local college campus.
Louisville is nowhere close to the coastal areas in Florida and Texas that have received the lion’s share of attention for the effects of climate change. But it’s at increasing risk for sewer system overflows and more frequent flooding, thanks to a perfect storm of aging storm water systems and climate change.
“We are racing against the clock,” said Eric Friedlander, Louisville’s chief resilience officer, told The Daily Beast. “When you talk about massive infrastructure we are putting in place, and the construction time schedule, it feels to me there is still time—but we’re up against it.”
Louisville residents are reminded of flooding threats with signs that mark how high water reached during the Great Flood of 1937, when nearly three-quarters of the city was underwater. Inevitably, an event like that will happen again. An Army Corps of Engineers study found that warmer temperatures and changing weather patterns will lead to more frequent storm surges from the Ohio River, consequently increasing flooding in low-lying areas like Louisville (PDF).
Other inland communities, from Baton Rouge, Louisiana to rural West Virginia, have also seen a surge in flooding. The most recent National Climate Assessment suggests heavy downpours are more frequent and inland floods cause more damage than any other severe weather event. Another study showed that thunderstorms in the Southeast could dump 80 percent more rain in some areas, causing flooding to be four times worse by the end of the century, said Andreas Prein, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
“It is one of the most severe consequences of climate change inland in the U.S.,” Prein said.
The stress of increased water flow is wreaking havoc on the nation’s stormwater systems, which are reaching the end of their lifetimes (PDF). Unable to handle the intensity of heavy rainfall and storm surge, water backs up and causes flooding, “There’s so much more water to get rid of in a city,” Prein said. “It needs a sophisticated drainage system, which we don’t have.”
Flooding is not just a nuisance—it’s also a public health and safety issue. Combined sewer systems in hundreds of communities, from Memphis to Oklahoma, backup during heavy rains, allowing millions of gallons of untreated sewage and storm water runoff to flow into streets and waterways.
Old wastewater treatment plants are flooding more frequently too, releasing contaminated water into rivers and bays. Heavy rains in Tampa this summer caused 329,000 gallons of sewage to spill in a river.
Chronic flooding takes an economic toll too, said Maria Koetter, director of Louisville’s Office of Sustainability, adding that it can cause businesses to lose money and affect tourism. “This is the real deal,” she said. “We have to put up the money to make sure these systems don’t fail.”
But no one wants to pay for it. Louisville’s Metropolitan Sewer District says it needs $4.3 billion over the next two decades to upgrade the city’s collapsing brick pipes, many installed after the Civil War. Some cities are trying to finance upgrades with increased property taxes or sewer fees.
“A lot of these projects are very big, and taking that on is costly,” said Laura Lightbody, project director for Pew Charitable Trust’s flood-prepared communities program. “Some of these projects are put on hold while the city tries to grapple with and piece together the financing.”
And stormwater management is only part of the solution. To be climate resilient, Lightbody said, cities should take a holistic approach, requiring green infrastructure, preventing development in floodplains, redirecting or elevating roads, and building levees or flood walls.
In addition to its major stormwater project, Koetter said Louisville requires water catchment like rain gardens for construction projects and is doubling its tree canopy to absorb water and keep the city cooler. In Nashville, buildings must be four feet above base flood elevation, and the city has been buying out homes in floodplains for decades to prevent development where it consistently floods. Brevard, North Carolina, requires a “no adverse impact” certification so development does not catalyze erosion.
Most initiatives happen at the local level, but the federal government needs to provide guidance to incentivize cities, Lightbody said. Under the Trump administration, however, that’s becoming more difficult: 10 days before Hurricane Harvey hit in August, the president repealed an Obama-era rule that mandated infrastructure projects like roads and bridges be designed to survive rising sea levels and storm surge.
Cities face dire consequences if they don’t improve these systems, but it’s a massive, long-term undertaking.
“It’s almost like we’re reverse engineering our cities,” Lightbody said. “We built them up and poured a lot of concrete, and now we’re trying to figure out how to bring green space because we’ve seen the economic and flood benefits of it.”

Try contacting your representatives and hope to receive a real answer instead of politispeak.

Please Donate

Politics


POLITICS
12/14/2017 12:09 pm ET Updated 17 hours ago
Jesse Watters’ Mother Is ‘Distraught’ About Her Son’s Views
“You have moved ever closer to that imaginary line that cannot be crossed,” the Fox News host’s mom admonished.

By Jenna Amatulli

If you’ve ever been distraught by something that Fox News host Jesse Watters said, you’re not alone. Apparently, his mother feels the same way.
In a segment on “The Five” on Wednesday, Watters featured texts from his mother, whom he calls a “liberal Democrat,” critiquing his performance on the show.
Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com
“When you are good you are so very, very good and when there is a performance like last night’s I become so distraught that you have moved ever closer to that imaginary line that cannot be crossed,” his mom wrote in one text.
“Please don’t become a talking head that is predictable … your colleagues roll their eyes and grown [sic] aloud with their pre-game knowledge of what your position and point is going to be,” reads another.
Download
Watters is best known for his connection to ex-Fox host Bill O’Reilly and the guerilla-style video series that launched with O’Reilly’s show, “The O’Reilly Factor.” The series, “Watters World,” featured Watters interrogating the homeless and making blatantly racist remarks, among other things. After Fox News ended its two-decade partnership with O’Reilly amid sexual misconduct allegations, Watters switched to “The Five” as a co-host.
In addition to his bizarre interviewing tactics and racism, Watters has taken fire for possibly outing college coeds when he “covered” a party at Brown University, and for being an active climate-change denier.

FOX NEWS

Watters’ mother, along with his father and sister, have spoken out against their extremely conservative family member before, including in a letter explaining why they walked in the Women’s March in January.
“I feel both blessed and deeply appreciative that in this country I can march … for equality and dignity and justice,” Watters’ mother wrote in the letter. “I think that women in particular, in light of so many statements made throughout the campaign, are at risk regarding rights, safety and basic liberties.”
It’s certainly not easy when your political views are drastically different than your family members, so we can only imagine holidays at the Watters household are probably not a great time to discuss current events.
Still, we hope Mrs. Watters keeps up her messages. Someone has to be the family voice of reason.

Please Donate

Trump’s ‘forgotten men and women’ are still forgotten


One of the clearest explanation of the “Tax Reform, Tax Act” or what ever it is called! MA

The lobbyists are winning. And there are no lobbyists representing the “forgotten men and women” President Donald Trump vowed to help while campaigning for president in 2016.
The major tax-cut legislation speeding through Congress is likely to be Trump’s biggest policy achievement, whether he’s in office for four years or eight. And that legislation is getting close to final form that will ultimately face a vote in the House and Senate. Odds are high, and improving, that Republicans who control Congress will have a bill on Trump’s desk within weeks. Of course, he will sign it.
Here’s what that tax legislation is likely to do: Sharply cut the tax rate for big businesses. Cut the rate less, but still substantially, for smaller, privately owned businesses. About 75% of roughly $1.5 trillion in tax cuts over a decade will go toward businesses, which are well-represented in Washington by lobbying groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and the National Federation of Independent Businesses. Those lobbyists are earning their money.
On the individual side, the GOP tax cut plans will lower the tax burden for a majority of taxpayers. But low-income workers will see modest gains at best, and some families earning less than $30,000 a year might actually end up with lower take-home pay. The top 20% of earners will reap 62% of the total tax savings on the individual side, according to the Tax Policy Center. The middle fifth will garner 13% of the cut and the lowest fifth will enjoy 1% of the total cut. The average tax break will be nearly $1,300 in 2019 — but it will be $5,740 for the top 20% of earners and just $850 for those in the middle.
[Podcast: How the Trump tax cuts will affect you.]
Critics of this sort of “distributional analysis” point out that top earners in the United States pay the majority of taxes, so it’s only logical that they would benefit the most from tax cuts. On the lower end, some families in the bottom brackets pay no federal tax at all, and you can’t give a tax cut to somebody whose tax bill is $0. Those arguments are generally correct.
Argument for “trickle up” tax cuts
But it’s also true that if your primary goal were to help the working and middle class, you could structure tax cuts that lowered the tax burden for those families with no change for top earners or businesses. Ed Kleinbard of the USC Gould School of Law, who was former chief of staff for Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation, argues in favor of “trickle up” tax cuts that put more money in middle-class pockets — and stop there — with the expectation that the middle class will spend more and help businesses that way. You could extend such cuts to families with annual incomes of $200,000 or even $250,000, to include coastal households with kids who might earn more than average, but still consider themselves middle class. This sort of approach would directly benefit typical workers in tangible ways, with the haves waiting for it to reach them.
Instead, Congressional Republicans have crafted traditional trickle-down tax cuts that directly benefit the haves who really don’t need the help, in the belief that it will generate more economic activity beneficial to those who need more help. But there’s a waiting period. White House economist Kevin Hassett argues that cutting business taxes could boost middle-class incomes by at least $4,000 per year — but it will take three years in the best scenario, and 10 years in the worst.
Meanwhile, Congress has skipped the opportunity to help working families in other ways. The Tax Policy Center recently found that “very few tax-lowering changes in the bill are targeted at families with children—and none at families with very young children.” The tax-cut legislation does include an increase in the child tax credit, but that’s somewhat offset by other changes, including the elimination of deduction for each dependent child. Overall, says the Tax Policy Center, the legislation “delivers no significant benefits to families with children, including families with children younger than 3, in the lowest two-fifths of the income distribution.”
Senate’s bill also ignores those in need
In the Senate’s tax-cut bill, most tax cuts for individuals would expire in 2025, which is necessary to limit the amount of federal revenue the government would lose. But the business tax cuts, which would account for at least three times as much money as the individual cuts, are permanent. If the focus were on those most in need of a helping hand, this would probably be reversed. There’s also an inflation-related provision that would gradually increase the tax bite over time. Well-run companies employ hedging strategies to guard against such eventualities. Working- and middle-class families often focus the entirety of their efforts on paying today’s bills, today.
Maybe Trump has other plans to fulfill his promise to “the forgotten men and women” of America. But if that whole campaign pledge amounts to a few bucks’ worth of temporary tax cuts, they might have to ask Trump’s successor if he or she can do better.
Confidential tip line: rickjnewman@yahoo.com. Encrypted communication available.

Please Donate

Quote


“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts”
Daniel P. Moynihan

The above quote sums up the current administration and the Neer do well Congress. All other issues aside from the National and worldwide problems caused by this administration, they have and continue to lie and compound their lies with the straightest of faces. I am no longer surprised by what comes out of Washington and their supporters mouths. What surprises me is the people who follow or believe them. It appears that the public is so desperate for change that they have thrown their lot in with a consummate liar and bigot whose sole purpose is to serve himself. This along with a never honest Majority Congress led by two of the biggest hucksters since P.T. Barnum. This Congress had 8 plus years to assist in making America “great” as it were but instead they obstructed and denied. They had ample opportunity to improve the Tax system and  healthcare yet they chose to obstruct. Under the guise of what they stated was good for the “American People” , they have handed the reins of government over to a fast talking used car salesman. Under the cover of this administration’s outrageous comments, the Congressional leaders are pushing through legislation that will eventually harm all of us. All of the while other forces (big money donors) are working as if they have nothing to fear. We as voters have the ability to initiate a correction by voting in 2018 for other people who we feel will make a difference but only if WE get the facts on who is running. We must ignore the hyperbole and correct “sounding” statements. Campaign rhetoric is not the same as the truth. The truth is gathered by the diligent listening and reading of multiple sources of information. The campaign rhetoric of the past 10-15 years has folks believing information that at once suspect and true, this is called half truths or plausible truth. There appears to no honesty in politics but facts are always facts!

Please Donate

Read More »

Trump’s Treasury Dept embarrasses itself with one-page ‘analysis’


Once again the TOTUS menagerie jumps through hoops.MA

12/11/17 12:57 PM—Updated 12/11/17 01:55 PM

By Steve Benen
As regular readers know, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin assured lawmakers and the public that he had dozens of officials working on creating a detailed analysis of the Republican tax plan he helped craft. The report, Mnuchin added, would be available before Congress voted.
None of that was true. The New York Times reported two weeks ago that officials inside the Treasury’s Office of Tax Policy claim to have been “largely shut out of the process” and haven’t “worked on the type of detailed analysis” that Mnuchin described.

The Rachel Maddow Show, 11/30/17, 9:17 PM ET
Treasury Secretary Mnuchin fails to deliver promised tax report
Two weeks later, the good news is that Donald Trump’s Treasury Department has prepared an analysis and made it available to the public. The bad news is, it’s so absurd, I almost feel sorry for the officials who work there. Politico reported:

The Treasury Department said Monday that the GOP tax plan currently before Congress would need an assist from other Trump administration priorities to pay for itself.
Tax cuts alone aren’t enough, Treasury said in a one-page analysis, citing welfare reform and infrastructure spending as additional boosts to the economy.
The entire document is online here (pdf).
There are three key angles to this, and let’s start with the substance of the Treasury’s document. Congressional Republicans and the Trump administration have sworn up and down that the GOP’s tax package would pay for itself, ignoring the conclusions of every independent analysis, including data from Congress’ own Joint Committee on Taxation.
The Treasury Department argued this morning that the Republican promise will prove to be true if (a) we assume that the regressive tax breaks supercharge the economy; and (b) policymakers also agree to pass Trump’s non-existent infrastructure plan, Trump’s non-existent welfare reform plan, and wait for Trump’s regulatory reform plan to work wonders.
In other words, the Trump administration is conceding that Republicans are wrong about one of the core promises of the party’s own tax plan. The Treasury effectively declared this morning, “The tax plan will pay for itself if everyone agrees to pass a bunch of other proposals, which haven’t been written, and which have nothing to do with the tax plan.”

Second, let’s not skip past that “welfare reform” tidbit too quickly. Trump’s Treasury Department is now saying, in writing, that Republicans can pay for tax breaks for the wealthy, not only by raising taxes on the middle class, but by cutting benefits to the nation’s most vulnerable. The document is describing class warfare at its most depraved – taking money from food-stamp beneficiaries, and giving it to millionaires.
And third, the entire Treasury Department analysis literally fits on one page. If we exclude the headline, the document isn’t quite 400 words (by comparison, the blog post you’re reading right now is 622 words).
What the Trump administration released this morning isn’t an analysis of tax legislation; it’s a joke. Treasury officials had plenty of time to do a thorough policy review, even massage the numbers in a favorable way, and produce something that wasn’t laughable, and all they ended up producing is a one-page document that further contradicts the Republican line about the GOP tax plan paying for itself.
Maybe Treasury did a real analysis and Mnuchin threw it away because it was a political disaster. Maybe qualified officials were told what to write, but they couldn’t defend the indefensible. Either way, today’s report is an embarrassment.
Postscript: I’m thinking about starting a new “one-page” franchise, counting the instances in which Trump World keeps important documents to a single page. The White House’s original tax “plan,” for example, was one page. Four months later, Republican officials released a revised tax blueprint, which was even shorter. Trump also reportedly likes to keep intelligence briefings to one page.
Policy depth isn’t exactly this gang’s top priority.

Please Donate

Deceptive Practice


The quote “Oh! What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive” refers to how complicated life becomes when people start lying. It originally referred to a love triangle in the play “Marmion” by Sir Walter Scott. Currently this has been the practice of our Congress. This group of people have used every rosy sounding bit of tripe available to them to forward their agenda. They are no more than con men in nice suits. With the advent of TOTUS they have used his Tweet storm as a cover for their own nefarious deeds. His cabinet choices were at best poor but this Congress granted them access to push their personal agendas in healthcare, education, EPA (our air and water quality). Now the recent speedy crafting of Tax Reform and cuts will give us another gut punch while the lies keep flowing. All of this because they do not give a damn about the oft cited “American People”. Since they never asked or explained in plain words what this legislation was or would do gives rise to many questions. Several questions involving the actual effects of the cuts , why are the cuts for the middle and lower income folks saddled with an expiration date while the higher earners cuts continue?  The deceptive practices of this Congress should be a chargeable offence under the law but since this Body is untrustworthy, there will nothing done unless we the voters do and say something about it. Our course of action is call, write, tweet our representatives and let them know our feelings about this poor legislation.  Our own elected officials have apparently taken to scamming us about legislation and we have never as far as I know taken them to task for it. Looking back a few years: The lied about the ACA and would not support it, they ignored Trumps unfitness to serve (so they could get their own agenda moving), they obfuscated the truth about the economy (which is growing however slow) and they dislike the Dodd Frank act since it offers consumer (us) protection against the deceptive practices of financial institutions. Apparently these actions are more about appearing to be true to their word ( which we should already know is worthless). Given the current circumstances and potential harm to us, why do we want to keep these folks in office?

Please Donate