John Cassidy of The New Yorker describes the most important broken promise in the Trump budget proposal. We should all fall to our knees and thank whatever deity we choose that the Democrats won control of the House of Representatives last fall. It is doubtful that even his own party would want to own these budget proposals, which slash the social safety net that so many millions of Americans depend upon. This budget enhances the Trump administration’s well-established reverse Robin Hood approach, robbing from the middle class and the poor while giving to the rich and corporations.
I’ve noted before that Donald Trump lives by a famous dictum from Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propagandist: “When one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it.” (Goebbels attributed this tactic to the English.) And the President has outdone himself with his Administration’s new budget proposal for the 2020 fiscal year, which is entitled “A Budget for a Better America: Promises Kept. Taxpayers First.”
“Promises kept” has a particularly nice ring to it. Almost as nice as what Trump said on that fateful day, June 16, 2015, when he descended the escalator at Trump Tower. “Save Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security without cuts,” he declared. “Have to do it.” Throughout the Republican primary campaign, Trump repeated this pledge many times and also accused his G.O.P. opponents of wanting to slash the three big entitlement programs. In the general-election campaign, he stuck to the same mantra. A few days before Election Day, he suggested that Hillary Clinton wanted to “destroy” Medicare, the public health-care system for the elderly, which she had vowed to expand, and claimed that he alone would “protect” it.
So how does the “Budget for a Better America” treat Medicare and the other programs that Trump vowed to safeguard at all costs? By calling for even larger cuts to them than the White House proposed this time last year, when it formally abandoned Trump’s campaign pledges. The budget for the 2019 fiscal year called for five hundred and fifty billion dollars in cuts to Medicare over ten years. With the budget deficit skyrocketing as a consequence of the Trump-G.O.P. tax bill, the 2020 budget would reduce spending on Medicare by eight hundred and forty-five billion dollars over the next decade. Even in Washington, that’s a lot of money.
The cuts to Medicare would be imposed as the budget allots billions of dollars a year in extra spending to the Pentagon and another $8.6 billion for Trump’s wall along the southern border. The economies would be achieved largely by reducing payments to doctors, hospitals, and other health-care providers, which could affect benefits and drive some providers to leave the program. Rather than spelling this out, the document adopts the language of Newspeak: “The Budget proposes to reduce wasteful spending and incentivize efficiency and quality of healthcare in Medicare, extending the solvency of the program for America’s seniors consistent with the President’s promise to protect Medicare.”
The budget treats Medicaid, the federal health program for poor people and children, in even more draconian fashion. Reflecting a long-standing priority of the Republican Party, the budget would convert Medicaid into a decentralized system administered by the states and financed by federal block grants. By indexing these grants to the consumer price inflation, which rises more slowly than inflation in the health-care sector, the budget would substantially reduce the federal-spending commitment going forward. In addition, it would eliminate funding that the Affordable Care Act provided for individual states to expand Medicaid to more recipients—funding that more than thirty states have taken advantage of in recent years.
Even for an ardently conservative administration like this one, you might think that would be enough cuts to health-care spending. No. The budget also proposes to eliminate some federal subsidies that the A.C.A. provided for the purchase of private insurance plans by people who aren’t quite poor enough to qualify for Medicaid. “The budget overall would cut funding for Medicaid and ACA subsidies by $777 billion over ten years, compared to current law,” Hannah Katch, an analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank, noted.
How long will poor Americans in red states continue to vote against their own interests? As long as they remain ignorant. The Democratic Party needs to do a much better job of EDUCATING THE VOTERS ON THE ISSUES.
Don the Con, true to form
Bob, Trump’s strategy is possibly more diabolical than any of the comments below have mentioned. He clearly needs a way out of the legal morass to win the next election and keep his presidential protections.
Step 1 – Attack Medicare
Step 2 – Excuse this by saying that we need to spend the money more urgently to defend the country in a time of “national emergency.”
Step 3 – Democrat’s react by running even harder on “Medicare for All” than they currently are doing.
Step 4 – In the 2020 election, the conservative war machine ramps up the “how do we pay for all this?” theme. “Death panels,” “trips to the doctor will be like trips to the Dept, of Motor Vehicles” and other attacks on “socialized medicine” will follow. Memory of Trump attacking Medicare is quickly drowned out.
Step 5 – add “Medicare for All” to proposals to “tax the rich, break up Apple and other tech companies,” etc., and the really big money comes out against the Democrats… even some tech money that would normally support them!!
Step 6 – add in public debates in which scores of Democratic candidates savage each other to become “The One.” In the case of Bernie Sanders winning the nomination, I recall Anderson Cooper’s comment in 2016 that the attack commercials against him “almost write themselves.”
Step 7 – the Democrats splinter and Trump’s “base” (note that there are multiple meanings to that word) re-elects him.
I might even end by calling these seven steps a “basket of deplorables” 😉 !!!
If we try to cure all of our country’s ills at once, I am very worried that we will end up re-electing this guy… Making progress incrementally may be preferable to failing completely in a grand attempt to solve everything at once.
So what to do? The Dems should stick relentlessly to the theme of detailing Trump’s transgressions and getting him out of office. Leave the policy debates for after the elections. There will be plenty of time to fight about this stuff then AFTER one has the power to do something constructive!!
Makes sense. But I think that there are some policies that people feel strongly about and that can be decisive. Healthcare, for example.
We’ll see how it plays out. I don’t have a crystal ball either, but I am obviously very concerned about the Democrats overplaying their hand, thereby doubling Trump’s time to do damage.
I’m concerned that the Democrats keep losing elections because they believe, falsely, that they have to pretend to be Republicans in order to win the general election. No. What they need to do is show some spine and leadership. Some women in the party are doing just that. The populace is often way to the left of the leaders on a lot of issues–marijuana legalization, universal healthcare, gay marriage–to take a few examples. When the leadership finally gets the courage to align with the people on what was traditionally considered a left-wing issue, things change quickly. The gay marriage issue is an instructive example. For decades, the people, in poll after poll, were saying, we’re fine with it. But people kept making the argument that one couldn’t stray from the middle and still win elections. Here’s the thing: you can, if enough people are behind you. One of the factors at play is the herd effect. A number of researchers have shown that it takes only 10 percent of the population being really committed and vocal on an issue to sway a majority. Another example. Al Gore thought that Clinton was too controversial. Didn’t allow Clinton to stump for him. But Clinton had really high approval ratings, despite the Lewinsky scandal. His “can’t alienate the middle” caution lost him the race. I’m convinced of this.
All good points. I will counter that in our screwed up election process, convincing the majority is not sufficient. Hillary learned this lesson the hard way…
PS – I referred carolmalaysia later in this section to my response to you. Please also see what I said to her, so that I don’t have to retype. Thanks.
will do, David
David, Trump plays two themes now: 1) he is the victim of “presidential harassment”; 2) the Democrats are wild-eyed socialists who are red to the core
Exactly, and that will only be amplified in the months to come.
PS – by sticking to just two themes, as I mentioned to Carol below, he may prove to be more astute/successful than those promoting a complicated policy agenda.
“Voting against one’s interest”… this is our lens on it, by which we mean, e.g., supporting legislators whose tax policy favors corporations at the expense of public services. We can blame rw media for pandering to it, but they didn’t create it. I grew up in ’50’s rural NYS : rock-ribbed Republican, like most rural areas. There was little media. The closest thing to rw screeds were John Bircher pamphlets; we were too far north to get Bible Belt radio.
Most people’s generational memory was of very modest small-biz or agrarian income, anchored by a few mid-size factories in the larger region providing working-class income. Fed govt meant the tax man; folks stayed off the grid as much as possible. Fed govt was seen primarily as support for lazy folks “on the dole.” There was great animus against Gov Nelson Rockefeller, who doubled state taxes for such things as the state highway system, seen as a profligate union boondoggle that mostly served downstaters.
In a nutshell, state & fed govt were forces done to you, not for you– taking money from your meager bottom line to help cheats and leeches. That culture has mellowed some in 50 yrs, but the attitude is slow to change. It’s about fear of poverty, & a history of needing all one’s wits to avoid it. Industry there has been in slow free-fall since the decline of the Erie Canal; small farms have steadily lost ground to big ag located elsewhere. Just one example of this rural lens: the local economy benefits tremendously from universities… but town-gown is a resentful relationship: these institutions own huge swaths of land and do not pay into the property tax base.
Very cogently argued!!!
And well written!
I used to think that people vote their pocketbook.
I now realize that they vote their values, not their pocketbook.
Many will vote against their economic self-interest so they can vote against abortion, gays, and socialism (which might actually benefit them).
Just when I thought I couldn’t possibly despise this execrable worm any more than I do.
IQ45, Prez Pinocchio, “You starvelling, you eel-skin, you dried neat’s-tongue, you bull’s-pizzle, you stock-fish–O for breath to utter what is like thee!-you tailor’s-yard, you sheath, you bow-case, you vile standing tuck!”
Words fail utterly to express just how vile this man is.
you forgot worsted stocking knave, also the son and soul air of a mongrel….
oh, yes, that too! The bluestockings would go well with the orange, I think. Complementary colors. Tell me, would an orange prison jumpsuit on Trump be too matchy matchy?
And yes, this (almost) sole heir of Fred Trump’s fortune (the one who claimed to the American people that he started with a small loan, not the three-quarters of a billion that he actually got from Daddy) has, if he has a soul at all, one composed of nothing but hot air.
And (with apologies to Monty Python), “a malodorous, toffee-nosed pervert.” Hell, why not “stinking git” while we’re at it.
stinking git. that works
And thanks, Bob.
And now, from the child-man who brought you Trump University and had no business in Russia. . . .
Hey Seniors, poor people, the Dapper Don, Cheeto Trumpbalone, master of “the art of the deal” has a deal for you. . . .
Tell us how you really feel, Bob! You have a way with words! Love it!
Diane does not allow that sort of language on her page.
This is, of course, exactly what Trumpty Dumpty’s enabler, Mitch McConnell, promised. Cut taxes, big time, for the wealthy and for corporations, thus driving up the deficit, and then cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=SaAxcPCmBOc
Did I say “his enabler”? I meant, o course, his Senate crew caporegime
Bob Shephard has done a good job on this. The Trump party will probably go along with some of this budget which has been constucted in part to show a deficit reduction over ten years achieved by cuts in Medicare and Medicaid with Social Security the next prospect. No cuts in military spending, and more than ever for his WALL. I notice also that Betsy Devos is determined to send federal money to support religious schools and believes the courts will be on her side.
“A Budget for a Better America: Promises Kept. Taxpayers First.”
“When one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it.” President Trump has made 9,014 false or misleading claims over 773 days” by Glenn Kessler, Salvador Rizzo and Meg Kelly at WaPo.
Dump is: Making America GRATE.
Anyone notice that the Catholic church is about HUMILIATION, FEAR, and PUNISHMENT and not much else? 45’s parents sent him away probably because they couldn’t stand him. He went to a now defunct Military Boarding School, then off to a Catholic University, Fordham. HORRORS.
We need people in charge who graduated from public schools not only in elementary, middle, and high school, but we also people who graduated from public universities as well.
yvonne:Anyone notice that the Catholic church is about HUMILIATION, FEAR, and PUNISHMENT and not much else?
I’m a ‘used to be Catholic’. If you die with a mortal sin you will burn forever in hell. You must go to a priest and ask for forgiveness. If you die with a venial sin, you must confess it and ask for forgiveness or you will spend time in purgatory, which is a dreary place without God.
The purpose of that fear is to keep people from ever leaving the church. I have three friends who have also left the church.
It hardly seems surprising that the proposed budget is so outlandish. For many years, none of these proposals mean anything. neither party wants to believe anything on paper, lest their opponent I the next election make them look like a _______.
Taking it that way then, it seems the thing Trump wants to do is to assure some group that he is all in for undoing the social programs. will his voter desert him in 2020? or will he be able to make the democrats look like Joseph Stalin with a Hitlerian misinformation campaign?
I guess the GRU will have to get busy again. Trump knows that if he doesn’t stay in office, he’s going to jail, so this coming election is Yhuge for him. Is Vlad getting his money’s worth? Well, Trump is pushing for US allies to pay the entire cost plus 50 percent for US bases in their countries, which would reduce American strength worldwide and really upset those allies. So, I suppose that he is.
https://www.stripes.com/news/report-trump-wants-germany-japan-and-others-to-pay-full-cost-plus-a-premium-for-us-troops-1.571839
If traditional European allies perceive little benefit from the presence of US military, they will not want to cough up more cash. If countries in Eastern Europe are cognizant of a potential Russian threat, they will advocate for a stronger US military presence. As a Putin acolyte, this dichotomy will prove unappealing to Trump. Thus, we bear witness to the twilight of the American Empire.
It never ceases to amaze me that a pathological liar such as our “dear President” can con so many people and continue to con them after he has been shown multiples times that’s he lies “like a rug” time after time. The “Newspeak” is so much gobbledygook that I doubt even their author of this gibberish could translate. It sounds so similar to the “edu-speak” I used to hear from administrators trying to force a new “reform” down our throats…we didn’t”t buy it then, so why should we buy this garbage now?
Why do Americans keep voting against their own best interests, why do they keep stabbing themselves in the back? All the other developed democracies have some form or version of universal health care but not the richest country on earth. Too many Americans have been brain washed by the right wing media, hate wing radio, Fox News, Sinclair Media and libertarian “think” tank glop. Universal health care is socialism, communism, Stalinism, blah, blah, blah. The few great social programs we do have are under threat mainly by the GOP and the dunder-head-in chief. Instead of moving towards Medicare for all, we are regressing and going backwards to Medicare for none. We can afford universal health care but obviously we are too stupid as a nation to do the right thing.
Joe Jersey: Well stated.
I’ve often wondered the same thing. Why is it so hard for this country to progress? People keep voting against their own best interests. They listen to hate radio [Alex Jones & Rush L.] , Fox, Sinclair and KNOW that Medicare for All will turn us into Venezuela.
We have poverty NOT because we can’t afford to feed/clothe/educate the poor but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Relax everybody. the Democrats will get nothing done on their ambitious agenda. Which will be a problem in 2020 as they supposedly ran on getting things done for the American
people. If the Democrats held the Senate we would witness the same Dog and Pony show that we saw in 2009. I never expected them to get anything done. I voted for them to check and go after Trump. But Pelosi pretty much raised the bar.
But what they will get done is preventing cuts to social programs by holding the House. The depression since the election has been that the American people will not remember even one progressive bill out of the House. The Gun Control bill, the Democracy bill any attempt at improving ACA or moving to single payer will be an exercise in futility. None of them will even make it into committee in the Senate no less to the floor for a vote.
Republicans revel in low ratings for Congress which translates to low ratings for Government. The government that their goal is to shrink to a pinhead. A government that can not tax or regulate is their goal. This has been the case since Reagan said Government is the problem. Come 2020 the Republicans will point to the failure of Democrats to legislate and will say both parties are the same. So vote on God Gays and Guns or their latest “American values. be happy. (all Lofgren 2011)
Blame it all on the Connecticut Compromise. Thirty percent of the country now controls
70% of the seats in the Senate. The compromise I knew about; the fact that I learned this weekend that it was 5 to 4 with 1 abstention; is the first positive thing I have heard since the election. The Senate has been weaponized by the Republicans and the only way things will improve is if when Democrats take power they blow through the filler buster and flood the courts. Not very likely to come out of the party afraid to say impeachment. At least not likely without a Black Swan Event of Biblical proportions.
Well argued. But it seems they are pinning their hopes on raising the spectre of the Socialist bogeyman.
I am taking a Lenten class on civil discord. I plan to make a copy of this “discussion” and give it as an example of the rhetoric that I so often see in this column. Thank you, Bob
At your service!
Watching Brian Williams before hitting the sack and was struck by a comment made by Politico editor on Twitter about Individual-1’s inane tweet about the 737 Max mess. Probably one of the best summations I’ve yet read:
From @MikeGrunwald:
“The dumb airline tweets are fun to mock but this is #actually how Trump won: Ignore data that prove things have gotten better, insist things have gotten worse, appeal to nostalgia for mythic era before modernity when things seemed simpler. (For some people.)”
It really sums up just about everything this idiot is doing.
that appeal to a mythic golden past, very common among demagogues
Trump is fine with attacking seniors and the poor so that the wealthy can get more. He is a worthless scum bag. How much damage is going to be done before his loyal followers recognize that he doesn’t care one twit about any of them? Thank goodness for the Dems in the House. Now we need progressives and Pelosi isn’t one of them. Medicare for All is the only prescription for healthcare for everyone. If other countries successfully have government plans then the US certainly can afford one. Democrats can win if they stand for something meaningful. Moderate increments means nothing and too many Dems fit into this model. People are upset because Congress doesn’t do anything to help people. Of course hate radio and Fox are busy working stupid people against ‘socialism’.
…………………………………………….
“The new White House budget imposes arbitrary and blunt Medicare cuts to hospitals who care for the nation’s most vulnerable. The impact on care for seniors would be devastating. Not to mention that massive reductions would drastically reduce resources critical to care for low-income Americans and cripple efforts to stave off the looming physician shortage,” said Federation of American Hospitals President and CEO Chip Kahn in a statement.
“Hospitals are less and less able to cover the cost of care for Medicare patients, it is no time to gut Medicare.”
Carol, yes we can afford “Medicare for All” IF we give up being the world’s policeman and make significant cuts to the military. European countries can get away with their medical plans in part because we are paying a lot of their defense bills. I don’t think that we can afford to do both. Unfortunately having inserted ourselves into this role as the world’s cop, we need to think carefully of the consequences should we suddenly withdraw. That is a really complicated question. Personally I am not sure what the outcome would be, but this question should make any thoughtful person pause at the very least.
What if we pull back and China decides to retake Taiwan or North Korea attacks the South? Or, less dramatically, Chinese “merely” presses harder on its claims to the South China sea. The ASEAN countries would have no counterbalance.
I really wish we had followed the advice in George Washington’s farewell address and stayed out of entanglement in foreign affairs, but after two world wars, that is sadly no
longer a viable option. Eisenhower’s warning has come true with a vengeance…
David Kristofferson: The US needs to tax corporations who often receive money back from the government after making billions in profits. The wealthy also need to be taxed. How about taxing financial transactions? The wealthy and corporations are the ones profiting from our current economic stagnation and they should be paying more.
The US is now militarily involved in over 70 countries in the world. This is not acceptable. How about not ‘needing’ a Space Force? I doubt that aliens are coming from outer space any day soon. How about cutting the always available money for the NSA? They are given money and there never is any discussion..it just passes.
Carol, please read my two responses to Bob’s very first comment above. As teachers we should know that it is best to focus on a limited number of ideas in a lesson….
The thing about universal, single payer is that it is CHEAPER than our current system is. We are currently spending on healthcare, per capita, over TWICE the average in the OECD, whose member countries mostly have single-payer systems. Again, it’s not a matter of taking the money out of people’s budgets elsewhere. They are ALREADY paying it, out of pocket, not in taxes. But they are paying a premium in the form of the profits of insurance companies, pharma, private hospitals, and other RICO outfits. The CDC estimates that in 2015 health expenditures per-person were almost $10,000 per capita in the US and that the total was about $3.2 trillion or 17.8% GDP, or roughly 70 percent MORE than the OECD median. And those countries have better health outcomes–lower infant mortality, higher longevity, and lower rates of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc. So, that’s a central myth that the Democrats must attack and dispel. single-payer is LESS expensive, not more so.
Paying for Medicare for All is not magic. Again, almost every other country in the OECD has done it. The same argument–that it’s too expensive–was made in Canada 70 years ago. But that argument rests on a fallacy–that you are not already paying for it in other ways. This is a matter of reorganizing HOW it is paid for, to make that more equitable. Also, Bernie Sanders’s white paper on how to pay for universal single-payer is an instructive read. Unfortunately, as things now stand, pulling back from a world presence is “no longer a viable option.”
Bob, do you have a link to Sander’s whitepaper? If not handy, I’ll Google it.
https://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/options-to-finance-medicare-for-all?inline=file
Thanks, Bob!
Reading it now. First interesting point:
“Today, the traditional Medicare program only spends two percent of its costs on administration. That’s less than one-sixth the administrative costs of private health insurance companies.”
Heard this a LOT but when I went to a detailed meeting on this issue previously, a speaker mentioned that this difference in cost is also due to the insurance companies doing much more fraud investigation. AARP acknowledges that Medicare fraud is massive, and the feds need to devote more money to combat it.
At the same time there is no question that the insurance companies are racking up big profits that also drive up costs. Still haven’t seen a precise breakdown of these two factors.
Still reading…
“Moreover, the United States pays, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs because Congress has done nothing to regulate the price of medicine. If the U.S. joined the rest of the industrialized world and negotiated with the pharmaceutical companies to lower prices, our country could save up to $113 billion per year.”
I worked in biotech startups for years and know first hand how ridiculously expensive drug research is. The landscape is littered with failed or acquired companies of that nature.
I agree that US citizens are screwed by paying higher prices and we see constant cases like that frat boy CEO who acquired drug rights only to make a killing. I am also aware that big pharma makes obscene profits.
HOWEVER, I also know that the opportunity for obscene profits is what drives a lot of people to take the often losing gamble to fund the research in the first place. Then problem with the statement above is that if someone, currently US citizens, doesn’t pay these obscene prices, we do not know what the impact will be on drug R&D.
The current world pharma infrastructure has been able to respond relatively quickly in coming up with items like vaccines against dangerous illnesses, e.g., flu and Ebola. There are dangers if we throw a wrench into the works unintentionally.
This does NOT mean do nothing, but it DOES mean that we should NOT “move fast and break things.”
Every time I look into problems like this in more detail, it reminds me of “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.” You start by asking one question and it just keeps leading to more unfortunately…
Look at how much innovation in the US has been driven by government-funded research. Also, we can use tax incentives to support R&D.
Yes, my whole graduate and postdoctoral career was funded by both NIH and private grants. Am well aware of this.
PS – one final quick note; as I said NIH funds a lot of research but a lot of innovation also comes from small biotechs. These companies rely on VC money. Take away the VC money seeking those obscene big returns and that industry may die. I subsisted on NIH grants for a long time. While a fairly good system, it is also subject to professors establishing fiefdoms and getting on grant review committees.
Can’t be sure about the following conclusions, but most modern economies have evolved to a public-private mix for valid reasons. I wouldn’t want to eliminate private biotech ventures and rely solely on NIH. We shouldn’t forget that Soviet Union central planning did not turn out to be a rousing success.
“
If every major industrialized nation on Earth can make health care a right, provide universal coverage to all, achieve far better health outcomes in terms of life expectancy and infant mortality, while spending far less per capita than we do, it is absurd to suggest the United States of America, the wealthiest nation in the history of the world, cannot do the same.”
This argument is very persuasive sounding and I have used it myself to score debating points, but please see my earlier response to carolmalaysia about our world policeman role, Once again a complicated issue…
But if it’s CHEAPER than the current system, and it is, then what’s the issue?
There is no issue if the above is true and one can get from here to there without screwing up something important. I have to run, but I always heard that providing better preventive care would bring costs down, but I think I read an Oregon study recently showing that people actually went to the doctor more often and costs went up. Don’t remember where I saw that.
I am not going to resolve all this today, and have to run now. The only point that I wish to leave with is that these are all VERY complicated issues that can lead easily to confusing propaganda wars.
KISS – “Keep it …”
Focus on getting rid of Trump. Later when in power spend the time to research this stuff thoroughly. Even Sanders paper begins the tax proposal section by saying that more input is needed.
Don’t confuse everybody with complicated issues and get Trump re-elected!!!!
The rest of Sanders’ white paper details a number of tax proposals. I do not have the expertise to evaluate the details and impacts of these proposals unfortunately, and that is the problem that partisans on both sides can always exploit with the public. Everybody always wants someone else to pay.
I agree completely that income inequality is completely out of control in this country and that a more progressive tax code is needed. You will find many Silicon Valley types as well as Warren Buffett who surprisingly will also agree.
As to whether the proposals in Sanders’ paper will work as advertised, I am just not capable of answering that question today or in the near future.
This is where we need to be able to trust our public officials and their staff to do their jobs and analyze these issues carefully …. and I think you can easily see where that comment might lead. Unfortunately I have used up my allowance for blogging time this AM and have to move on to other things.
We will get nowhere on the healthcare debate until people are EDUCATED about this, about the costs THAT ARE ALREADY BEING PAID, and how much of that cost is siphoned off, in our system, into profits, mostly by insurance companies.
I’ve heard this argument many times, but I’d like to see details. Hopefully Sanders’ white paper provides them.
My reply to Sanders’ white paper is several comments above this comment. Sorry that WordPress commentary gets out of order when replying to multiple notes.
Subject: Thought you might like this petition: Fight Citizens United
I just told Congress to fight Citizens United by exposing secret corporate political spending, and I think you should, too.
https://act.credoaction.com/sign/disclose-corporate-political-spending?sp_ref=478775389.4.194539.e.627280.2&referring_akid=.1912996.EeJyXP&source=mailto_sp
Willie Sutton, if memory is correct, said, when asked why he robbed banks said:
that is where the money is.
Today the money is in the U. S. government;s hands.
ERGO
Rob the poor, give to the rich.
Who says Fox isn’t Trump’s private ‘news’ organization? Trump figures out what to think when he watches Fox. What a creative, intelligent way to ‘lead’. Go from Fox ‘news’ directly to Trump’s administration.
……………………
John Bolton Made $569K as a Fox News Contributor
The Hollywood Reporter on Wednesday revealed the Fox News salaries of at least 10 former network contributors and employees who since served in Donald Trump’s administration. According to the financial disclosure forms, Trump’s current national security advisor John Bolton made a whopping $569,423 salary as a Fox News contributor. Anthony Scaramucci, who lasted a mere 11 days in 2017 as Trump’s top flack, raked in $88,461 as a Fox Business commentator. Other notable disclosures: Heather Nauert, Trump’s current nominee to become U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, earned $485,000 as a Fox host; ex-Trump aide Sebastian Gorka made $4,320 in his one month as a Fox analyst; and Trump’s recently ousted comms chief Bill Shine made $1,460,000 as co-president of Fox News.
Read it at The Hollywood Reporter
The US ranks 51st in gender equality. Notice that we used to be 19th in 2018. Is this something Trump can brag about? Women have fallen in economic participation, political representation, education and health. Misogyny is on the rise. [Hail to our leader who wants to make budget cuts so that men can join women on the bottom.]
……………….
Why This Country Is The Best Place In The World To Be A Woman
Iceland is often celebrated for its geothermal pools, breathtaking glaciers and amazing views of the northern lights. But it has another claim to fame: It is apparently the best place in the world to be a woman.
For the last decade, the nation of roughly 350,000 people has topped the World Economic Forum’s annual gender gap report, which ranks countries’ progress toward gender equality across areas including economic participation, political representation, education and health. For comparison, the United States came in 51st last year, sandwiched between Mexico and Peru. Iceland also consistently performs well in The Economist’s “glass ceiling index,” which rates the best countries for working women. It placed first in the index in 2016 and third in 2018 (the U.S. came in 19th)…
Article: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/iceland-women-world-best-place_n_5c7d39ace4b0614614dcf2d4
[“We need that wall.”] This bit of nonsense comes directly from the WH:
1600 Daily
The White House • March 13, 2019
Video of the day
January 16, 2019: 247 illegal migrants rush the U.S. border in New Mexico. Night vision footage captures the scene—one that U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers must confront week after week in areas where border barriers are insufficient or run-down.
Congressional Democrats and too many of their allies in the media would rather you not see videos like these. That’s because it’s much tougher to keep pretending that there’s no crisis on our southern border if Americans actually know what is happening there.
This is what a national emergency looks like
One month ago this Friday, President Donald J. Trump signed a national emergency declaration to address the humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border. In the weeks since, the absolute worst of Washington’s irresponsibility has been on full display.
There has been virtually no debate about policy or solutions. There has been no discussion of how our broken immigration system fails citizens and newcomers alike. There has been no acknowledgement of Congress’ years of failure to act—or the undue burden that failure has placed on law enforcement every single day.
In other words, once again, there has been no accountability.
The price we pay is steep. Human smugglers exploit our broken border and profit off the migrants they trick into making the treacherous journey north. About 300 Americans die each week from heroin—90 percent of which flows across our southern border. And 266,000 criminals arrested over a two-year period by immigration officials were responsible for 100,000 assaults, nearly 30,000 sex crimes, and 4,000 murders.
While the statistics are sobering, the images are worth a thousand words:
This is what a lethal dose of fentanyl looks like—and how easy it is to smuggle in.
During the recent deployment of the National Guard to support border security, troops assisted with the arrest of 23,034 illegal immigrants and the seizure of more than 35,000 pounds of drugs.
The heartbreaking truth is that 1 in 3 migrant women is sexually assaulted on the dangerous trek to the southern border.
That America’s immigration security could look like this in 2019 should be a source of national embarrassment for Congressional Democrats with no solution.
“Trampling over our fences, the drug dealers tearing down our gates—that is immoral. And we’re tired of it. We need that wall.”
Tomorrow, the U.S. Senate will vote on whether to stop or uphold President Trump’s national emergency declaration. In doing so, they will decide whether to acknowledge a crisis that went unanswered by America’s political leaders for far too long.
Americans will remember if the only real action Congress takes is attempting to stop the President from enforcing its own duly passed laws.
Trump is mentally loosing it. He makes no sense at all.
………………………….
“No, I don’t think they’re cruel, I think they’re the opposite of cruel,” he said. “They become cruel because they’re so ridiculous and it hurts people. It actually does the reverse of what they’re supposed to be doing. But no, they’re actually meant to be the opposite. And they’re hurting people, they’re really hurting people. A lot of people.”
The reporter tried to get a second question in, but Trump cut him off.
“I think we’re doing an incredible job,” he said. “We’re apprehending record numbers of people. But if we had border security and we had the wall, if we had a proper wall, which we’re building now as we speak, and we’re getting a lot more funding for it, as you know, with what we’re talking about with the vote today, whether it’s positive or not, I’m vetoing it, unless I don’t have to veto, I think that’s unlikely, I’ll do a veto, it’s not going to be overturned. But we have done a great job at the border through apprehension.”
Video: Trump baffles reporters with bonkers immigration rant
Brad Reed
Published on Mar 14, 2019