Former Clinton Labor Secretary made an excellent, short video that summarizes why our wages have fallen since 1980 despite economic growth – where did the money go? Reich uses a Sharpee magic marker to explain the 2008 economic downturn in two minutes.
Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks and MSNBC host expands on it.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
2012 Republican presidential hopeful and Tea Party favorite MIchele Bachmann was a major supporter of pork barrel spending, earmarks and subsidies. MSNBC’s Cenk Uygur breaks it down.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
Cenk Uygur MSNBC Video Transcript June 21, 2011. Author Jacob Hacker explains how the arrest of a 59-year-old man, who robbed a bank for just one dollar and hoped to be arrested, shows how divided the country is over taxes.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
O‘DONNELL: Coming up, the big Republican lie. Cutting taxes raises more money for the federal government. Bruce Bartlett is here to demolish that lie more powerfully than I ever could because Bruce Bartlett is a Republican who worked in the Reagan White House. Who better to kill an Republican lie than a Reagan Republican.
He‘s going to give you everything you will ever need to win the tax cut argument with your family, your friends, your co-workers—anyone else who buys that Republican lie. You need to see this. You and I are going to both learn a lot from Bruce Bartlett.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TIM PAWLENTY ®, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Once we unleash the energy of America‘s businesses and families and individuals, as we did in the ‘80s and ‘90s, a booming job market will reduce demand for government assistance and rising incomes will increase federal revenues. In the 1980s, revenues to the federal government increased by 99 percent.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Tim Pawlenty, like all the other Republican presidential candidates, pushes the great Republican tax lie, that tax cuts actually increase the amount of money the government collects in taxes. Republicans say the federal government will get more by taxing less because lower tax rates will make everyone work harder, they‘ll want to work harder, they‘ll make more money than before, the economy will be stimulated, and there will be more money in the total economy, subject to taxation. This is now a Republican article of faith.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: You cut taxes, and the tax revenues increase.
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN ®, ARIZONA: The fact is the tax cuts have dramatically increased revenues.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell has said, quote, “There‘s no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy.”
Much ignored by Republican politicians is what Republican economic experts actually think about this. Here is George W. Bush‘s Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson during his confirmation hearing in 2006.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HANK PAULSON, FORMER TREASURY SECRETARY: The general rule, I don‘t believe that tax cuts pay for themselves.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: President Bush‘s chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers was completely ignored when he said this in testimony to the Senate Budget Committee in 2006. Quote, “As a general rule, we do not think that tax cuts pay for themselves. Certainly, the data do not support this claim.”
And Alan Greenspan, who was first appointed to the Federal Reserve by President Reagan, said this David Gregory last year.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID GREGORY, NBC NEWS: You don‘t agree with Republican leaders who say tax cuts pay for themselves?
ALAN GREENSPAN, FORMER FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: I do not.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O‘DONNELL: Joining me now, returning from the show, is Bruce Bartlett, who served as executive director of the Joint Economic Committee as a senior policy analyst in the Reagan White House, and as a treasury, deputy assistant secretary for economic policy during the first Bush administration. He is now a columnist for the “Fiscal Times” and a contributor to “The New York Times.”
Bruce, thanks for joining me again tonight.
BRUCE BARTLETT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Happy to be here.
O‘DONNELL: Tim Pawlenty recently told Dave Weigel, “Slate” reporter, he said, when Ronald Reagan cut taxes in a significant way, revenues actually increased by almost 100 percent during Reagan‘s eight years as president.
You were there. What happened during the eight years of the Reagan presidency after the Reagan tax cut? What happened to how much revenue we collected?
BARTLETT: Look, what Pawlenty said is just factually untrue. And anybody who wants to find out can just go to CBO.com and look up the data at the Congressional Budget Office Web site for themselves.
The fact is that between fiscal year 1981 and 1989, revenues increased in nominal dollar terms, only 65 percent. But almost a good chunk of that was inflation. If you simply took the 1981 numbers and inflated them to 1989 numbers, the increase was only about 25 percent. And, of course, the population increased so—on a per capita a basis, revenues were only up about 15 percent.
But, at the end of the day, what really matters is revenues as a share of GDP and they were down about a percentage point, which means revenues were about $66 billion lower than they would have been if they had simply stayed constant as share of GDP.
O‘DONNELL: Bruce, we searched and searched, couldn‘t find any anybody in the Reagan administration, couldn‘t find any videotape of anyone in the Reagan administration saying these tax cuts will increase revenue to the federal treasury.
BARTLETT: Well, that‘s because nobody in the administration ever said that.
O‘DONNELL: Oh, OK. We‘ll stop searching then.
BARTLETT: If you go back to the documents that the administration sent to Capitol Hill in February 1981 they showed massive revenue losses based on standard revenue-estimating methodology. And if you check the CBO reports that came out around the same time, you will find that the CEO, which was then under Democratic control, had almost the same identical estimates.
Now, it turned out that revenues came in much lower than anybody expected, but that was mainly because inflation came down much more quickly than anybody expected, and inflation increases the size of the tax base. So, lower inflation reduces federal revenues.
O‘DONNELL: We—the studies that you have pointed out in your writing and others have indicated show that there is an effect, there is a stimulative effect to a tax cut. So, if you say, if you do, say, $100 billion in a tax cut, it will not generate $100 billion in new tax revenue, but it might generate as much as $30 billion, maybe $15 billion. There will be some stimulative effect to it. But the net loss is overwhelming.
We just heard Mitch McConnell say about the 21st century Bush tax cuts, that that same magic trick occurred, that we—that Bush cut taxes and we increased revenue. Where would he get that idea?
BARTLETT: Well, that‘s just complete nonsense. I really have no idea of what basis he‘s making that claim. Look, some very special type of tax cuts such as a cut in the capital gains rate can come very close to paying for themselves because taxpayers essentially decide for themselves whether to realize income or not. And in across the board tax rate reduction, may only lose 70 percent or so of the revenue that a static estimate would show.
But there are lots and lots of tax cuts and there were plenty of them in the Bush tax cuts, refundable child credits and things of that sort that just lose dollar for dollar revenue and have no feedback effects whatsoever.
O‘DONNELL: Feedback effects or what economists call that effective stimulative return to the Treasury, very small. There‘s a huge difference between what Republicans are saying is there‘s 100 percent or more feedback effect and what we found is way, way, way down into tiny numbers and then in many, many cases zero.
Bruce Bartlett, I can go on and on about this. I cannot thank you enough for coming on tonight and ruining this Republican lie. I hope you can still find some Republican friends in Washington to have dinner with tonight.
BARTLETT: All right. I will.
O‘DONNELL: Thank you very much for joining me tonight, Bruce.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
The american people are begging for jobs with politicians on both sides of the aisle have been obsessed with spending cuts instead. this past weekend, finally good news. we finally heard the revenue side of the equation being mentioned in regard to budget talks.
>> no one on the republican side will vote to raise taxes but i think many of us would look at flattening the tax code, do away with deductions and exemptions and take that revenue to help pay off the debt.
>> finally, revenues are on the table. now remember why this is so important. the less revenue that they raise, the more they are going to take out in spending cuts from the middle class and the poor. the rich should have to pay their fair share if we’re going to have to balance the budget. that is why revenue is so important. even senator mark warner says his colleagues in the gang of five are committed to including revenue.
>> rifly $3 in cuts and a dollar of that cut will be savings to $1 in revenue. that’s the framework we’re looking at.
>> i’m not sure i agree about the equation but that’s a start, great. how do they bring in more revenue with taxes.
>> the way we deal with revenue says not raising taxes. we are going back to the reagan approach which is lowering tax rates, getting rid of tax skejss.
>> exemptions.
>> are you kidding me? their idea for the revenue side is to lower taxes. so look, they might take away home deductions which hits the middle class pretty hard and lower rate in tax brackets. i got to be honest, i think these guys are jokers. that is a democratic telling you how they plan to redistribute wealth back up to the top as more. that is enough to make you lose faith in the party entirely. the republicans are much, much worse. they say, yes, lower taxes on the rich, what a good idea. one guy thinks we should look to the people, not politicses for leadership.
>> there has been a lot of angest about whether all of the promises are kept. whether we have change we can believe in. we aught not to think about people in washington as responsible for the change that we can believe in. we are responsible for the change that we can believe in. change does not come from washington, d.c. change comes from the bottom up and we will make change in our own communities and it will spread out wards.
>> that was this past weekend. of course i couldn’t agree with that idea more. but let’s talk about how we fight back against that d.c. machine. joining me now, that man arguing for the change, howard dean. governor dean, thanks for being here tonight, we really do appreciate it.
>> thanks for having me on.
>> all right. look, you and i totally agree. you can’t rely on washington politicians and you got fight from the bottom up. i hear oup that. but here they are in washington. both republicans and democrats. telling us, you know, we will probably raise the retirement age. social security, medicare. take away exemptions, subsidies, et cetera. how do you fight back against that?
>> nothing wrong with a good primary. tea party shows that. we don’t see the specific proposals yet. proposing raising the retirement on social security has already been done, first of all. secondly, proposing raising the eligibility for medicare is insane. all this does is kick more people off health insurance in a country where we don’t have nearly enough people with health insure towns begin with. this pro disposes this is about the politicians in washington. the problem is not healthcare or medicare or medicaid. the problem is the system. it is all over every system whether it is medicare, medicaid or private insurance. there is a very interesting column this past week, by paul krugman, saying that the insurance industry cost went up faster than medicare costs did. there are some ideas kicked around washington that probably makes sense, but there are a lot that don’t make any sense at all and we need really clear about what those are. we have to see their ideas first. i’m not willing to poopoo the idea because they haven’t put their ideas on the table. this idea they will reduce corporate taxes, especially since some big caps don’t pay taxes whatsoever, that’s a big starter.
>> every single hint out of that gang of five is going in that direction. they are talking about tax holidays from money they bring in from abroad, et cetera. it is frustrating because those are democrats. those are primaries. if you are talking about primaries against guys giving away corporate tax cuts et cetera, more me, mark warner, everything he said to me sounded absolutely republican. it would be crazy for progresives t progressive to let him run again. if you ask, how about the top dog, president obama.
>> i’m not a fan of primary egg president obama. i’m supporting the president. look, he hasn’t done everything we would like on the progressive side of the aisle. but he has two great supreme court justice. he asked the government to conform with kioto. i forget the date. but that’s an extraordinary step forward. we don’t have the health plan we should have but it is a big step forward. there is not any question that this president is a — you know, has been a president who has done some of the things he said. i think we will get out of iraq bit end of the year. that’s another one. maybe we will see a by the end of the week a troop we ducks in afghanistan. that’s another one. these things won’t happen under romney or bachmann. i’m not a fan of primarying the president at all.
>> let me throw out a wild card here. i hear you and historically primaries heard the president. i have agreed with that up until this moment. of course, having a bachmann or romney would be an abs disaster. i agree with all of that. i now think if they go in this direction and the president signs off on it and these are very conservative positions, i think a primary might help the president. it would force him to the left where the real country is at. if the country isn’t in favor of cutting social security and medicare.
>> no.
>> they aren’t under favor of raising taxes on the rich. maybe it helps them and doesn’t hurt them.
>> i don’t think the democrats and senate and house will vote for these kinds of crazy proposals that we’re hearing about lowering taxes for the people who make a million dollars a year or getting rid of home mortgage deductions. if you ask me, am i in favor for the first $500,000, yes, or first $400,000. if that’s what they are talking about by getting rid of home mortgage deduction or houses worth 4 or $500,000. that’s different.
>> yes.
>> we don’t know exactly what they are proposing so we ought to find out what they are talking about before we talk about primarying people. there are people we won’t name on the show but you will see democracy for america primarying some people and i will support some of those candidates.
>> there is no question about it. it is all in the nuances and how they do it. but all of the signs have been bad so far thp. i’m trying to get in front of it before they say this is a brilliant idea that the republicans want to do. that’s part of the reason to have that conversation now.
>> absolutely. that’s right. draw the line. but let me say something else, that we disagree on a little bit. i think it is okay to repay tree ought the prove ilts stashed abroad if they invest in research and development. all of it. you bring it out and pay it back in shareholder dividends. you bring it back and put jobs in america, then i’m okay with it. there are different ram if i fications and we don’t know what they are.
>> right. jobs are important. mitch mccon sell trying to put it on the president. let me show you a video and let’s talk about it.
>> do republicans have any plans to do anything on the unemployment front or are you going to let things take their course?
>> no. i think what we are doing is encouraging the president to quit doing what he is doing. quit overspending. we are hoping with the debt ceiling discussions we can discuss deficit and debt.
>> he admits it, we’re not doing a damn thing, right? so on the other hand, is the president making a mistake but not coming out with a big jobs bill and say, i’m for creating jobs and they are against that.
>> i think we aught to be really clear we are going to support jobs. that’s what this campaign is about. we have spent too much time talking about spending and not enough time talking about jobs. we have once again let the republicans set the agenda. this is about jobs. the republicans may believe if can you reduce deficit spending can you get jobs. that’s fine. but there is about jobs, not about spending. we aught not let republicans spend that agenda. they have no agenda. mcconnell says he has one thing on his agenda. that’s fine for the republican party. it doesn’t help the country very well. republicans are interested in power so they are their corporate patrons and sponsors like the koch brothers get more for themselves and middle class has less and less. the republicans are destroying the american dream. to rekindle the american dream we need more jobs. push the hate moners out of the way. i think we need a jobs bill but it is hard to get that because the republicans won’t vote for that either.
>> all right, howard dean, thanks for being with us tonight and thanks for shedding a light on it.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
Dan Pfeiffer, White House Communications Director: I know that there are levels of frustration with some of the decisions that have happened in this White House; frustation in the times that the pace of change has exceeded the level of expectation including our own….”
Cenk Uygur: Well, you got that right. There’s a lot of frustation in there. Now let’s bring in Sam Seder, the host of the Majority Host Report, and Ezra Klein, Washington Post Columnist and MSNBC Political Analyst to talk about it.
Sam, I don’t know if you saw the last segment, but I got a little worked up there because it looks like everybody in Washington now agrees that they are going to raise the retirement age on Social Security and Medicare. Am I the only one here that thinks that’s a disaster or do you think that’s going to make a lot of progressives angry?
Sam Seder: I think it’s going to make a lot of progressive angry. I think it’s going to make a lot of Americans angry. With all due respect to the Congressman [Earl Blumenhauer], the idea that the life expectancy is going to jump 10 to 20 years over the next 30 years. The bottom line is that the life expectancy used to be measured after the age of 65. And that has barely budged in the past 100 years, and particularly even less so for the people in the bottom half of the income distribution.
If you are going to raise the retirement age, you are cutting social security. And the idea that you are going to pretend that somehow we are going to be living to 140 years old, and everyone’s going to be doing this, and we are going to be able to work into our 70s, it’s simply not the case. And if you have to use those types of facts to justify it, then you have got a real problem with the argument.
Cenk Uygur: Ezra, what’s going on here. The country wants to know. People are watching the show. They want to know. How come 84% of the country says don’t cut social security benefits, and everybody in Washington, even the AARP that’s supposed to represent these people, now say, oh, yeah, we are going to raise the retirement age and cut benefits. What the hell is the matter with Washington?
Ezra Klein: It’s a popular argument here. I always think that what happens in Washington, if you look at a place like the Senate or if you look at the think tanks or other elements of the establishment, people like to work till about 75, 80, 85. You’ve got to take folks out of the Senate on a stretcher. So it sounds very reasonable to them that you would raise the retirement age above 65, and now it’s gone up to 67, and so maybe up to 68 or 69.
I’m not as opposed, I think, in all circumstances to benefit cuts as you are. But it is important to say that raising the retirement age is a particularly regressive way to do it. You could means test benefits so people who don’t need it so much get less from social security. You could even do a straight [across] the board benefits cut. At least you would more clearly the effects of the policy.
But essentially raising the retirement age essentially means that the people who have the worse jobs, the most menial jobs, the most physical labor, they are the ones who get hit hardest and that’s exactly what I think we should be worring about as we get near retirement age.
Cenk Uygur: Sam, that’s a great point by Ezra; it goes to the heart of the problem. It seems like they don’t look out for us. And you made the point that the people who are poorer don’t live as long as the people who are richer. So they get their benefits cut the most and they got to work the longest. As you look at it from up in your roost, tell me, is this feeling of frustration with people who are supposed to be on our side, the Democrats and the White House, is that palpable over there?
Sam Seder: I think my sense is that it’s been a little bit over reported that there is this type of frustration. Obviously it’s there. And I think people are starting to wonder what is it that we can do to fight this. And I think the idea is that we can’t look to our politicians.
And I think Ezra is absolutely right. Our establishment lives in a bubble; you can see over the past 30 years, I think a professor from Princeton has shown, regardless of who is in office, the policy preferences of the wealthy in this country have been more or less followed. And so we have a real problem.
This is just another aspect of a class war that’s being waged on the middle class. Really, we’re talking 60% of the country’s seniors rely on social security for over 50% of their income in retirement age.
And so when you are talking about social security, or when you are talking about Medicaid, because Ezra knows this, what happens to many elderly is they go into homes, they are on Medicare, and then they become too poor, and so they are on Medicaid for their homes. So this is a direct assault on nearly half, if not more, of the country.
Cenk Uygur: These are all great points. Ezra, when you go to taxes, you see where the problem is. We’ve got a massive redistribution of wealth. We’re at record low tax rates. And now the Republicans come along to Tim Pawlenty’s joke of a plan to reduce taxes to almost nothing for the rich. It costs us $11 trillion, the Pawlenty plan. Bachmann says that she’s pretty much in favor of it. Herman Cain, they all say they are in favor of it. So isn’t this a class war? Isn’t it the rich have declared war on the middle class and we just don’t know it?
Ezra Klein: Tim Pawlenty’s plan is sort of remarkable. I never thought that anyone would make George W. Bush look like Robin Hood. He’s pretty much managed that.
Is there a class war? There are competing preferences, and it is true, as it generally is, the rich have more sway in Washington.
That said, I think you do have an issue, where the Democrats in general have been terrified of the tax issue. And they have not been terrified just because the rich would spend against them, they’ve been terrified because they felt that they have lost on it and Barack Obama came right in and made this terrible promise never to raise taxes on anyone making less than $250,000. and if you are never going to do that, you are not going to retire much of the debt through taxes. That’s not really going to be a serious part of the solution.
And so you can’t just say it’s all the rich interests, it’s all us versus them. There’s sort of a bipartisan consensus in Washington right now that these vast majority of tax rates should not rise, and when you are not going to touch taxes, then you are going to have to hit things like Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid very hard. There are reforms that are need to happen in these programs anyway by the way, but you will have to hit them a lot harder if you are not willing to make revenues part of the solution.
Cenk Uygur: There is one line that I would disagree with. There is a bipartisan consensus but it is among the rich of Democrats and the rich Republicans who agree that the middle class shouldn’t have the money, the rich should.
Sam, last word.
Sam Seder: That’s exactly right. If there is a bipartisan consensus, that we can’t raise taxes on the rich, and that we should take it out of the hides of the middle class, then you are right, there is a class war.
Cenk Uygur: Sam Seder, Ezra Klein, you guys are great. Thanks for joining us tonight. We really appreciate it.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
All right, fun Friday, so we will squeeze in an “of course” segment and a “con job” segment in the last seconds of the show tonight. Let’s start with the “of course” segment.
We have front and center for a photo op celebrating a stimulus project, New York Congressman Richard Hannah, who didn’t like the stimulus when he was on the campaign trail.
“Seems that everyday, Congress finds new ways to spend and tax. A failed stimulus plan.”
Failed stimulus, right? But Hannah was more than happy to show up for ribbon cutting after building was renovated with? Stimulus money. And he joins a group of Republicans who have nothing good to say about the stimulus unless there a giant check and huge pair of scissors involved back in their home districts. More republicans talking out of both sides of their mouths on stimulus? Say it with me. Of course.
Now our “con job”. Paul Ryan claims his budget plan would help the American people but what it really helps is his bank account. That’s our con job of the day. The Daily Beast is reporting that Ryan would make a pretty penny if his proposal becomes law. He and his wife own four businesses that lease land. Ryan’s plan includes $45 billion in energy tax breaks and subsidies. What a wonderful coincidence. It turns out this government welfare could be used by the very companies leasing Ryan’s land.
Ryan’s office says he wasn’t thinking about his business when he crafted those tax breaks. Of course not. No, no, no. Financial records show Ryan made up to $177,000 from these leasing properties last year. The year before, he made up to $60,000. Of course we know it is not about profit for Ryan. It is about serious decisions.
“We need to make responsible choices today so our children don’t have to make really painful choices tomorrow.”
What he really means is we need to make responsible choices so he and his friends can go about his business as usual. So he just has to take away Medicare from you. He has to slash spending on the poor and middle class so his family can make a ton for money. He had to do it. The only responsible thing to do. Ryan possibly padding his own pockets while devastating families across the country with cuts is our con job of the day.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
Cenk Uygur: No more excuses. Anthony Weiner is gone and it is time for Democrats to stand and fight on issues that really matter. That’s our lead story.
While Democrats were wringing their hands over Weiner-gate, Republican were charging ahead with their radical agenda to devastate the middle class and working poor. The House GOP just passed a spending bill that cuts food aid for women and kids, cuts funding for food safety, cripples efforts to stop oil spectators, and blocks efforts to create healthier school lunches. That is an unbelievable list. The GOP is actually pushing an agenda that is pro hunger, pro obesity, pro oil, and pro E. coli.
I want to ask the Democrats one important question. Are you going to let them get way it? The Republicans are fighting to dismantle the very essence of our social contract. Paul Ryan wants to end Medicare, as we know it. The Wall Street Journal says both parties expect Medicaid to be the biggest source of cuts in the Biden budget talks.
And now it looks like House Republicans may even be making headway in their war against social security. Today a crushing report from the Journal: the AARP is “dropping its long-standing opposition to cutting social security benefits.” That is disastrous and totally unnecessary. In my opinion, it is a great betrayal of the members of AARP.
Now the leaders of that group have furiously been pushing back on that all day. But in the end the group admitted it is open to raising the retirement age and cutting benefits for future retirees. So that means the story is right and they are going to join the rest of Washington in trying to rob you blind of the benefits that you paid into your whole life.
Now this would be a pretty good time for leadership, from perhaps the White House. Well, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer was at the Netroots Nation conference in Minneapolis today when he was grilled on this very topic.
Dan Pfeiffer: “On social security, the president will do nothing that will slash benefits, privatize the program or change the nature of the program opinion. And on Medicaid. The same thing is true of Medicare.”
Question from someone: “So that means no raising the age limits?”
Dan Pfeiffer: “What it means is we are going to — we’re going to make sure that what however we strengthen it is done in way that does not change the final nature of the program.”
Question from someone: “So no raising age limits?”
Dan Pfeiffer: “I’m not going to have a negotiation with the Republicans here on the stage with you.”
Cenk Uygur: That’s a disaster. That was a great question. And you saw that he did not want to answer it. That is not a good sign.
Now let me ask you one more question. If the Democrats and the White House don’t fight for Medicaid, Medicare and social security, and more importantly for the people that voted for them, the people in the middle class that need to be fought for, when will they ever fight?
In a moment we will talk with Sam Seder, who is at Netroots Nation, along with Ezra Klein, who actually reports on all things budget related. But first let me bring in Congressman Earl Blumenhaur. He is a Democrat from Oregon, he serves on the Budget Committee and he is a member of the Progressive Caucus.
Congressman Blumenhauer, I have to be honest with you, what I’m hearing from the White House there, and what I am hearing from the AARP, and what I’m hearing about the Biden talks and how they are cutting Medicaid, that sounds terrible to me. Is that acceptable to the Democrats in Congress?
Congressman Blumenhauer: Well, it all depends on context, Cenk. I find it outrageous that there is a proposal here to pass the burden on, for example, in Medicaid to the poorest, most fragile elderly. What we are seeing in Medicare, as we have discussed before, is an effort that deals with the program that they don’t think government can afford, reduce it, in terms of its responsibility, and pass those on to seniors in the future.
I think we ought not to jump the gun in terms of what’s happening with AARP. You know, they have been put in the cross hairs by the Republicans because they have had the temerity to support some healthcare reform. I think that it is the notion that we are not ever going to make any changes, for example, in the age. I mean, I’m one of the baby boom generation that has known for 20 years, that there’s going to be a slight increase that’s — I think that that’s not something that everybody ought to reflectively just say no, never. But we want to look at the package that comes forward.
Cenk Uygur: Well, congressman –
Congressman Blumenhauer: Let’s be realistic about that.
Cenk Uygur: Congressman, I have to be honest with you. I have to respectively massively disagree. I will show you the statistics showing why. According to the Economic Policy Institute, if you raise the retirement age, for example from 65 to 70 years old, that’s a drop in benefits of 19%. The average American loses benefits of $63,573. Here is what I say to that proposal, hell no. I’m not going to come within a mile of considering it.
Congressman Blumenhauer: First of all, it’s already been raised. It is no longer retirement age of 65 starting with us baby boom generation and going forward. It has been raised to 67.
Cenk Uygur: I know, so do you want to raise it to 69 and take away another $10, $20, $30,000 from people?
Congressman Blumenhauer: Over the course of the next 40 years, when life expectancy may well increase another 10 or 20 years, that being part of something that includes being able to make adjustments in terms of the tax rate, the tax base. For in some cases maybe having a slightly different inflationary rate for the wealthier seniors—I’m not talking about all and having the progressive indexing— but for the top ten or 20%. You can put together a package that deals with the 25% shortfall that we’re going to be facing.
Cenk Uygur: No. No. No.
Congressman Blumenhauer: So we’re going to adjust that and I’m just saying if you’re looking at something that’s going to be phased in over the next 20 or 30 years, I’m not reflexively going to rule out increasing it, for example, another year. We did two years. The sky didn’t fall.
Cenk Uygur: This is a disaster. This is a disaster what I’m hearing from you. I’m not reflexively against reform. If you say hey, for example, we’ve got to increase the amount of people paying the payroll tax. So you go above $106,000. Okay, that makes perfect sense to me and there are reforms that you can do. But it is perfectly stable until 2037. It pays every single cent. And then above that it pays 75%. So why would you raise the retirement age. What I’m hearing from you, even a member of the progressive caucus is not going to fight for it. And these people are going to lose $10,000, $20,000.
Congressman Blumenhauer: No –
Cenk Uygur: Then I want you to tell me right now: no, no, no to raising the retirement age.
Congressman Blumenhauer: No, what I just said is that we are not going to have to do anything draconian for social security over the course of the next 25 years. But if the life expectancy goes up another 20 years, or ten years, raising the retirement age another year in 20 or 25 years from now, gradually, as part of a larger package, that includes other progressive reforms, I don’t think that’s crazy. And the majority of the American public doesn’t either.
Cenk Uygur: No, that’s not true at all. I’m sorry. Look, 84% of the American people, 84%, no question about it, say, do not cut the benefits. Don’t cut them. So what do you mean? 16% say cut them? 84% say don’t cut them.
Congressman Blumenhauer: As I can done, if you work with people and give them variables to put together a package, over the course of the next 25 years as a comprehensive package, having a slight increase in the retirement age is not something that freaks people out. We’ve done it before.
Cenk Uygur: It freaks me out.
Eric Blumenhaurer: Well, that’s fine.
Cenk Uygur: Congressman, here is another solution. Here is another solution. Right now our effective tax rate is at a mere record low: it’s at 14.4% –
Eric Blumenhauer: We don’t disagree on that.
Cenk Uygur: I know we don’t.
Eric Blumenhauer: We don’t disagree on that.
Cenk Uygur: So why don’t you insist on that. Why don’t you say, hey, listen, I am not going to cut a penny of social security until you get this to a reasonable level where the wealthy in this country stop robbing us blind. Where they take all the advantages. They take all the breaks, they take all the subsidies. And then they say, oh, but I have to cut your social security. Hell no.
Eric Blumenhauer: We’re obviously pushing and in terms of trying to — I’m not in favor of extending tax cuts for the wealthy. I’m working in terms of dealing with some of the unnecessary oil subsidies. But to sort of come unsprung and suggest you can’t have a comprehensive package over the next 25 years, you are going to rule everything out that you disagree with –
Cenk Uygur: Congressman, here is the guarantee I have for you. Whatever deal that you guys are going to make, Joe Biden, the White House, apparently Congressional Democrats, you’re not going to raise taxes on the rich. You’re not going to do it. And then you are going to tell me it is comprehensive when you touch Medicare, Medicare and social security. That ain’t comprehensive. You come back with Bush tax cuts. Take them away. Okay? We go back to the Clinton rates, okay, alright so now we are having a conversation. That’s comprehensive. Are you going to do that? You’re not going to do that, are you?
Eric Blumenhaurer: Well, what do you mean, am I going to do that? ? You know that I don’t have all of the power here. I am arguing for a position that does exactly what you’re saying in terms of many of those tax adjustments.
But the notion that that just because there are things that may be approached by Biden: you have copies of correspondence, letters, arguments we are making for the White House for things that we want to be on the table. Like making sure that we’re not surrendering on the tax cuts. Making sure that we are pushing in terms of the oil subsidies. But the notion that somehow we’re not pushing back, I think is wrong. But there are certain limitations in terms of what we can actually do.
I just disagree in terms of the notion that over the next 20 years, that we have to fight to never ever again make an adjustment to the age ruling it out before we get into dealing with a package. I don’t know that that’s the most appropriate way to go. We will just agree to disagree.
Cenk Uygur: Yes. We have a very healthy disagreement on that. Congressman Blumenhauer, we really do appreciate the conversation.
Eric Blumenhauer: That’s why it is fun to talk with you. And I always enjoy it.
Cenk Uygur: Yes, it is. And I agree with you on oil subsidies, by the way. And I agree with you on taxes. I wish we fight really hard for those. I know that you are in the progressive caucus and that you are trying to push them in the right direction. Thank you for joining us.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
UYGUR: Welcome to the show, everybody. Now to discuss some of today‘s biggest political stories, we bring in our Power Panel.
All right. With me now is MSNBC political analyst Michelle Bernard. Also joining the conversation, syndicated columnist Bob Franken. And Matt Lewis is our senior contributor from “The Daily Caller.” Good to have all of you here.
First up, is the GOP House about to cave in? Republicans and their right wing agenda are seeing a free-fall in our brand new NBC poll. I like that picture of Ryan. Sixty percent say that the Republicans in the House has brought little change, that‘s bad. Twenty three percent say, it‘s brought the wrong kind of change. And get this, only 13 percent say, it ushered in the right kind of change. That seems like a disastrous number. And the corner stone of the GOP agenda is getting crashed as well. The Ryan plan is more unpopular than ever before. It‘s negative rating has shot up nearly 10 points in the past two months. Matt, you‘re our conservative. Those numbers look terrible, don‘t they?
MATT LEWIS, “THE DAILY CALLER”: Yes. Well, look, it is tough to sell Paul Ryan‘s Medicare plan. Even though I think it‘s happen to be a good plan. It‘s easy—politically, it‘s easy to say, you‘re going to kill Medicare, and it‘s hard to explain well but the truth is it‘s going to—if we don‘t fix it—it becomes very nuance. But look, I would actually disagree with the premise which is that anybody is going to be thinking about a congressman from Wisconsin when the 2012 elections come around. I mean, just today the DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz said, we own the economy. The truth is, in 2012, Barack Obama is going to be at the top of the ticket. And at the top of everybody‘s mind is going to be the question, are you better off today than you were four years ago. I think it‘s going to be about the economy and about the unemployment rate, not about Paul Ryan.
UYGUR: Bob?
BOB FRANKEN, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Well, you know, that overlooks the reelection of Bill Clinton that most people attribute to the fact that Newt Gingrich had been the speaker of the house. This Congress with approval ratings on another poll for the second month in a row are nine percent are the kind of thing that just might re-elect Barack Obama even though his presidency in the minds of many has started to slip a little bit. We‘ve gone from the good old days of do nothing Congress to a Congress that many people would say, do nothing, please.
UYGUR: Now, Michelle, look, when you look at those numbers, 13 percent say they are going in the right direction, that‘s a terrible, terrible number. Do you every look at that and go, hey, maybe we are headed into the right direction? Or do they think, fantastic, let‘s go get them.
MICHELLE BERNARD, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, you know, quite frankly, when I look at those numbers, I would imagine that the Republicans and truth be told, Cenk. Democrats as well are looking at their numbers and they are saying, I hope they are saying, what are we doing wrong? I think if you would go out and talk to people who are truly independents, people who are just right the center, and left the center, the numbers for Democrats are probably not that much higher either. The bottom line is, the country is on, you know, in free-fall. When we talk about the economy, people are, I think, absolutely dreadfully tired of both Republicans and Democrats. I think that‘s why we see so many people.
UYGUR: Yes, no, I think.
BERNARD: Let me finish. Numbers will show you that we have more and more people self identifying as independents. And the reason they are doing is because they are disgusted with both parties. These are clearly not good numbers for Republicans but nobody is helping us.
UYGUR: Look, look, look. If you watch this show at all, you know how angry I get the Democrats. You just see two segments ago how angry I get at them, right? And so, I‘m certainly not their fan, right? Having said that, it is false to say, hey, let‘s just equate the two. OK, I‘ve got terrible poll numbers on Republicans, and so there must be terrible poll numbers on Democrats. There isn‘t. We‘re going to talk about President Obama next whose poll numbers are actually pretty good. Look, Bob, I think there is two different problems here. One is the Republicans have bad plans. When you ask the American people, they hate those plans. The other problems that the Democrats have is, they would actually fight for their plans. They would actually fight for things that are incredibly popular.
FRANKEN: Well, quite frankly, the criticism of the Democrats could be that they don‘t really have any plans. It is sort of like that old saying, if your opponent is shooting himself in the foot, or wherever, stand back and let them do it. And I think that there‘s a belief in the White House that the Republicans are going to implode. The problem is, is that they didn‘t implode in the last election and I think that that‘s a dangerous, dangerous strategy.
UYGUR: All right. But Matt, look, I want to play your clip from the debate of all the different candidates supporting the Ryan plan which is also polling even worse as we go along. Then I‘m going to ask you about it. Let‘s watch it first.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: We‘ve got to restructure those programs and the Paul Ryan approach I totally support.
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Why can‘t we opt out of whole system?
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: It is not financially solvent. We have to fix it.
We have to reform it.
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: We have to deal with this problem now. And what Paul Ryan has suggested, which I wholeheartedly support, is to use a program that is identical to what seniors already have. It is called Medicare part D.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
UYGUR: So come on, Matt, getting on board for a sinking plan like this, how is that going to help the Republicans run in their presidential race?
LEWIS: Well, look, I think it‘s a matter of political courage. There is no easy way to cut $6 trillion out of the national debt. But Paul Ryan‘s plan if we do that, if we don‘t do that, Medicare is going to end as we know it. But look, let me make a point that I think is interesting. No one else is really bringing this up. But Barack Obama needs to be really careful. I wrote about this at “The Daily Caller” yesterday, if you chart when George W. Bush‘s popularity imploded, it wasn‘t Katrina, it wasn‘t Abu Ghraib. It‘s exactly correlates to when the democratic primaries began in April of 2003. When they had all of these debates. And you had Howard Dean and everybody bashing Bush. This could happen to Barack Obama.
UYGUR: Right.
LEWIS: And so, I think that these debates should not be overlooked by Obama. This actually could have real consequences to him.
UYGUR: Right. Well, that‘s an interesting theory. It actually going to relate to our next topic, which is how is this guy still this popular? Referring of course to President Obama. Unemployment is at 9.1 percent but President Obama is still polling really strong. He‘s got 49 percent approval rating. Forty six percent disapproval of the job that he is doing as president. Now, that‘s better than Reagan and Clinton where at this stage in their presidency. So, is it going to be something right? Or is it going to last? So, those are the questions I‘ve got. Look, Michelle, you look at that, we talk about it a little earlier, those are good poll numbers even with stunningly high unemployment. Obviously, the country likes him to some degree, to a large degree.
BERNARD: You will not get any argument from me there. I think that this shows that people fundamentally like Barack Obama. They like his presidency. They like him as a person but still, I think that it would be very unwise to say, that Barack Obama is a shoo-in for 2012. Here are two things that the Obama administration and Democrats really need to look at. Whether people like the Paul Ryan plan or not, Paul Ryan came out with a plan.
He has put something out there that has given rise to some discussion about what we do about the economy. The unemployment rate in this country is nine percent. The unemployment rate, Cenk, in clarities (ph) of color particularly for African-Americans is 16.2 percent. If you go, if you listen to discussions, political analysts and some political talks on urban radio stations, black Americans are very, very angry with the president. They feel slighted. And the worry for the president is not that that population is going to suddenly go and vote republican, but that they are not going to turn out at all. And in the south in particularly, that‘s a problem for the 2012.
UYGUR: Right. I hear you Michelle. Look, on the first part you‘re saying about, hey, he is an shoo-in, I actually totally agree with that. And Bob, I want to ask you about that. But I want to give you some polls here. Again, this is from the new NBC News poll. When matched up against Romney, President Obama is still winning by six points. When matched up against Pawlenty is crushing him by 13 points. Romney is polling away actually from the rest of the field. He‘s at 30 percent among the Republicans. Far above anyone else. Look, 49 percent approval rating is fantastic at this point with this economy. Can he keep it up? Or does he have structural problems here that if Romney wins he can expose.
FRANKEN: Well, I mean, you could say that that is an approval rating for Barack Obama. Or you could say that it is sort of a reflected disapproval rating for the opposition right now. And as far as Mitt Romney is concerned, I think that he is leading in the yes, whatever category when it comes to Republicans. He is certainly not somebody who makes the blood boil of his supporters. The problem with Barack Obama might be that the last time around, he created an army of people really enthusiastic to make history and all that type of thing. His problem may be that because he‘s had to make the kind of compromises that any president has to make, that the passion may be gone in his followers who may stay home and leave the passion to those on the right wing.
UYGUR: All right. For my purposes, I think he‘s got to really watch those numbers. The longer unemployment stays that high, the bigger trouble he‘s in. We‘ll see if the Republicans have anybody that could take advantage of they‘re or if they keep going further and further right wing.
All right. Michelle Bernard, Bob Franken, Matt Lewis, you guys were all great. Thank you so much for the discussion.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
UYGUR: Welcome back to the show, everybody. For today`s biggest news that does not involve Congressman Weiner, we are going to bring out our Power Panel. Jonathan Capehart, editorial writer for The Washington Post and MSNBC contributor. Also with us Jane Hamsher, founder and publisher of FireDogLake.com. And finally, Josh Trevino, vice president of Communications at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, Think Tank.
First question for the panel. Do republicans have an authenticity problem? Today, Mitt Romney met with a group of unemployed people in Florida, when they finish talking about their situation, he said this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MITT ROMNEY, 2012 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, you know, I should tell my story. I`m also unemployed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
UYGUR: Ha ha ha, so funny. I`m unemployed. He is worth, as you see there, between 109 to $250 million. I don`t think that`s funny. Josh, do you think that`s funny.
JOSHUA TREVINO, TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION: It is certainly a category of jokes that multimillionaires shouldn`t be making. But what I do think is funny is that we actually got to see Debbie Wasserman-Schultz criticized somebody for a faux pas today, that`s funny.
UYGUR: All right. Nice deflection — OK. But Jane, come on. That has got to rub people in the wrong way, right? And that Mitt Romney`s problem. I mean, isn`t it like when he tries to come across as authentic, it comes off like ten times worse? How condescending did that sound?
JANE HAMSHER, FOUNDER, FIREDOGLAKE.COM: It sounded really condescending. It draws attention to the fact that Mitt Romney had been in capital made his money by selling off corporate assets and firing people. It is like Mitt Romney looks like the guy who fired your dad, no, Mitt Romney is the guy who fired your dad and it`s entirely ironic.
(CROSSTALK)
Exactly. And entirely ironic that the whole Tea Party movement came together to protests all over the bank bailouts and government being owned by the banks. And all now they are rallying behind Mitt Romney, the guy who ran the Hedge Fund.
TREVINO: The Tea Parties are rallying behind Mitt Romney?
HAMSHER: The polls have.
UYGUR: Josh, you got to see that poll. The last one that came out, Romney is at 30 percent. Way above everyone else.
TREVINO: Cenk, first of all, you and I both know the field is incomplete. And secondly, right now, the polls are measuring mostly name recognition. Mitt Romney is not a Tea Party choice. Nobody could.
UYGUR: All right. Fair enough. And look, the Tea Party has got issues with him. But Jonathan, let`s go to that point, right? So, here`s the guy who ran a Hedge Fund, basically, you know. Been in capitals, there is a lot of ways to categorize that. But he obviously worked with Wall Street. Here is a guy who is 47th in the country in creating jobs when he was in Massachusetts. And his main platform is creating jobs. Is it just that, you know, they are immune to facts or he is saying, I don`t know. I will turn my weakness into a strength by repeating it as many times as I can?
JONATHAN CAPEHART, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Oh, I don`t know if he is — well, look, he`s made the economy and jobs, you know, his number one issue. The number one focus of his campaign. Which politically speaking is the right thing to do. No matter if you agree — who the republican nominee is going to be. They have to go with the economy and jobs if they want to have any chance of hammering a weigh at President Obama and maybe taking the White House from him. But I think as the campaign goes along, the republican primaries go along, and we start seeing who his primary opponents will be.
I would be very surprised if you didn`t see one of his opponents come out there and start talking about his Wall Street connections and how committed he is to creating jobs when he was someone, you know, part of bank capital who got rid of jobs, who ended people`s jobs. And, you know, quite frankly, reading, I`m also unemployed, comes off differently than actually hearing the joke. I didn`t take it as condescending. But what I do take it as Mitt Romney being someone who is desperately trying to seem like an everyday regular guy and coming off as completely corny.
UYGUR: At least corny. By the way, I know why Jonathan pronounced the economy jonomy (ph). Because like Cenk, the C is pronounced like J in Turkish. So, I know you were just trying to be respectful. And I appreciate that. Right. Now, all right. I`m going to bring in another, you know, Republican into this mixed now. Huntsman came out with a video, for his campaign, where he is riding a bike across the desert and there is country music and he so super cool. Except we find out today, that wasn`t Huntsman. What is their problem? I mean, OK. I start again with you. Josh, I mean, that`s a bad idea, right? To put that out there like it`s him and then all of the sudden, we find out it`s not him?
TREVINO: Well, you know, the guy who made that video of course, is Fred Davis, who has a long and checkered history of making bizarre and sometimes, remember GOP campaign spots. Fred Davis, I`ve had many people who worked and described him as something like the Greek economy, he needs a strong outside hand to produce anything good. You know, those of us who were in California in 2010, remember the bizarre and crazy stuff that he did for the arena campaign.
UYGUR: Yes. The demon-ship.
TREVINO: Yes. Exactly, the demon-ship. He may be heading down that road with Huntsman. We`ll see.
UYGUR: OK. Look, there is the demon-ship with the crazy eyes. I love that ad.
TREVINO: An awful ad.
UYGUR: But Jonathan, we can`t just put this on Fred Davis. Huntsman obviously signed off on it. You know, it seems like when you go, when you turn over there, all you got is, you know, authentic.
CAPEHART: Well, look, Jon Huntsman, we`ll start seeing more and more of Jon Huntsman. He is supposed to announce on Tuesday at statue of liberty. And look, what our ads supposed to do, they`re supposed to create buzz, get you talking. And whether you like the commercial or not, we`re talking about the commercial, we`re talking about Jon Huntsman and insist another vehicle for Huntsman and his campaign to get his name out there and keep it out there. Because remember, I mean, we are talking about people who all share a stage in New Hampshire on Monday, he wasn`t there.
(CROSSTALK)
He`s isn`t as bad as you think, Cenk.
UYGUR: No, I hear you. And look, I get the value of that. At the same time, when we`re all talking about a what fake he is, I`m not sure that helps a lot. All right. But we have to move on to the next question.
CAPEHART: OK.
UYGUR: All right. Will Medicaid be the sacrificial lamb? Today, the Wall Street Journal`s both parties expects Medicaid to be the biggest source of cuts and budget negotiations. And democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller says, quote, “There has been an unsettling silence around Medicaid even from members of my own party. Medicaid suddenly looks like the sacrificial lamb.” And look, Medicaid`s cut, we`re kind of impact with that half. Do you know that Medicaid covers 68 million Americans? Coupled with the children`s health insurance program that is about one in four Americans. First, Jonathan, on the story itself. Do you get a sense that that is the direction that they are heading here in the Democrats are conceding to big Medicaid cuts?
CAPEHART: Well, look, I only know what I read in that Wall Street Journal article. In terms of politics and negotiating and what is happening with the Biden group and everyone trying to figure out what to do about the deficit, I`m not surprised in that regard. Look, I mean, as all of the shows on MSNBC and everyone`s talking about, you know, there are huge deficit, huge budget issues that have to be resolved. And, you know, kicking the can down the road and saying, no, you can`t cut mine, cut someplace else. That`s just going to have to end. It`s just a matter — things will have to be cut. It is just matter of how you cut. How responsibly you cut and right now, until someone produces a final document and shows where the cuts are coming from and how they`re being done, will we actually be able to know and talk intelligently, about whether those cuts are actually end up costing more money rather than saving.
UYGUR: Right. But let`s keep it real, Jane, right? They are cutting Medicaid, if the story is true and I believe it is. I think there`s good evidence. Senator Rockefeller wouldn`t say that if they, you know, if they weren`t cutting Medicaid and fairly deeply at that, right? And if they are, isn`t it an easy target? Aren`t they say, oh well, come on, you know, Medicare, Social Security, you`re going to, you know, anger older voters as a Senate. But with Medicaid, it is just the poor, you know? We can kick them any time we want.
HAMSHER: This was always the plan. Fully half of the expansion of coverage from the health care bill, came from the expansion of Medicaid. But they always knew that that was something to just get liberals to be able to support the bill. And that they would going to yank the carpet out from underneath them when it came time to deal with raising the debt limit and closing the deficit. So, basically, they were always planning to do this. And they are absolutely going to do it. And it means, what they are doing is calling the maintenance of efforts requirements that that states have to comply with in order to be able to get this money.
They have to guarantee certain enrollment and benefits within the state. But now they are saying, you can take the money, but all you have to do, but you don`t have to meet those any more. So, it means all of the old people who are currently in retirement, you know, in nursing homes, that that money is going to be cut. Dave Dayen today on FDL, called this the, you know, force your mother-in-law to move in with you act. And that really is what`s going to be.
UYGUR: Ezra Klein points this out all the time on the Washington Post about how Medicaid affects senior citizens a lot too. But Josh, one last thing here. You have to be ecstatic about this. So far, no tax cuts, I`m sorry, no tax increases, no revenues discussion yet, OK. But huge cuts in Medicaid. Republicans got to be ecstatic about it.
TREVINO: Well, it`s a good start and certainly I`m willing to sign on with Jane`s liberals always duped thesis. I`m happy to go with that. Look, one thing on the Medicaid though and one policy aspect that I think is driving it heavily that isn`t well reported, is that Medicaid, although it takes up, and correct me if I`m wrong in this. I think it takes up around seven percent-ish of the total federal budget with federal spending and matching addend. It takes over 20 percent of the average state budget. And of course, that goes a lot higher and a lot lower depending on the state. That is a major driver, what`s happening here. And we can`t ignore that when we talk about it.
UYGUR: I hear you. Well, we`re going to have to apparently talk a lot about it as they go to cut-in. So, Jonathan Capehart, Jane Hamsher, Josh Trevino, thanks for a great Power Panel, guys. We appreciate it.
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC, located in Berlin, Connecticut, offers quality accounting, auditing, tax, bookkeeping, and QuickBooks consulting services at fees of one-third of those of our competitors to individuals and businesses across a wide spectrum of industries throughout the entire United States. William Brighenti is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified QuickBooks ProAdvisor. For all of your accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax return preparation, tax planning, and QuickBooks services, please consider us: (860) 249-1323.
TRUMP TOLD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THERE ARE THE SECURITY STATE AGENTS WHO THINK THAT THEY RUN THE GOVERNMENT AND HE STOOD UP TO THEM AND CHALLENGED THEIR ORTHODOXIES AND PIETIES AND SHOWED AMERICANS, ESPECIALLY PEOPLE IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ON THE RIGHT, THAT THESE INSTITUTIONS ARE NOT NOBLE OR BENEVOLENT BUT ARE HIGHLY PERNICIOUS. THEY […]
Joe Biden said, if you're fully vaccinated, the chances that you can get severely ill, not even die just get severely ill, are very low. And the statistic that he gave is, out of every 160,000 people who have been vaccinated, only one ends up going to the hospital with a serious illness. So the […]
Glenn Greenwald: "So you have huge number of journalists who believe that, they have the right to lie and even when they get caught, they don't care because they know their audience won't hold it against them." Continue reading →
THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE USING JANUARY 6TH. IT'S DEMENTED TO COMPARE 9/11 AND JANUARY 6TH BUT IT'S SO CENTRAL TO THE AGENDA OF THE SECURITY STATE, THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, TO ESSENTIALLY INITIATE A SURVEILLANCE REGIME, A DETENTION REGIME, AGAINST PEOPLE ON THE RIGHT WHO ARE AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT. AND THEY’RE ALREADY DOING IT. AND THEY […]
Carlson: So now we’re arming the Taliban and marooning our own citizens in Afghanistan. Who could possibly have seen that coming. Glenn Greenwald is one of the few journalists who did see it coming. He writes for Substack where all … Continue reading →
And so that is what I call the birth of this woke industrial complex. It is a new leviathan, a new monster, that is far more powerful than what Thomas Hobbes might have envisioned 400 years ago, and it is the biggest threat to individual liberty today. It is not big government alone. Its conservatives […]
FBI CIA NSA are not only spying on American citizens but also are illegally unmasking their identities to journalists who support our fascist government Continue reading →
The government is instructing social media companies what should and shouldn't be allowed to be on the internet, these are the people least competent to judge what is misinformation. Continue reading →
Google, Facebook and Twitter should be treated as state actors under existing legal doctrines. Using a combination of statutory inducements and regulatory threats, Congress has co-opted Silicon Valley to do through the back door what government cannot directly accomplish under the Constitution. Congress is giving Big Tech immunity and more power in exchange for it censoring […]
THE SECURITY STATE HAS EXISTED SINCE THE END OF WORLD WAR II. THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING IN SECRET AND WITH NO DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EIGHT OR NINE DECADES NOW. DWIGHT EISENHOWER WHEN HE LEFT OFFICE WARNED THE COUNTRY ABOUT THE DANGERS THAT THEY POSE. Continue reading →
Darryl Cooper, AKA @MartyrMade, is a podcaster who had a Twitter thread go viral with 13k retweets and 20k likes of the first Tweet alone. This one is 36-Tweets long. It makes very cogent arguments of not only why millions of Trump supporters believe the 2020 election was stolen, but also why we are justified […]
COVID-19 antibodies have been found in blood samples as early as September, 2019. China knew about the virus' transmission to humans months before it announced such to the world. Why has the media and our government not investigated this gross negligence, if not mass murder? Continue reading →
Democrats and elites are making straight white men the enemy of their new world order. Blacks, hispanics, gays are now the good guys; straight white men are the bad guys. Continue reading →
This ruling class of administrative state, big tech, corporations: all of these people think that they can get rid of Trump and we'll go back to normal. They're wedded to a broken system that has sold out the American people. And now they're going to try to sell out the American people and the middle […]
The real threat is collusion. When journalists strike secret alliances with the very people they're supposed to be holding accountable, we are in deep trouble. Lies go unchallenged. Democracy cannot function. And that's what we're watching right now. Continue reading →
The CIA from the very first days of the Trump administration, even before he was inaugurated, devoted themselves to sabotaging the administration because Donald Trump questioned just a few of their pieties. And that can't be done in Washington. Whoever does that must be destroyed. And so the CIA and the Deep State operatives became […]
The problem is the corruption that is absolutely pervasive in the U.S. news media. There are newsrooms all throughout New York and Washington DC, where top editors are explicitly saying they do not want this story investigated. And they're being clear that the reason that they don't want to investigate it is because they think […]
So Apple isn't fighting for diversity. They're doing exactly what they appear to be doing: they're trying to keep wages down and keep their workers compliant by importing labor from abroad.This isn't about diversity. It's about exploitation. It always is Continue reading →
Accountants CPA Hartford, LLC
Accountants CPA Hartford Connecticut is an accounting firm in Hartford, Connecticut offering a variety of accounting & tax services.
10
Accountants CPA Hartford, LLC