JimofPennsylvan
Platinum Member
- Jun 6, 2007
- 953
- 715
- 910
Essentially the Republican Senate Reconciliation bill is as bad as the Republican House bill at the core of the problem is that Republican leaders aren't thinking that they will not be in power in Washington forever and when the power pendulum swings the Democrats are going to do exactly what they are doing and indulge the extreme ideology in the Party and when they do they are going to reverse a huge portion of this bill and go on a tax rampage against the wealthy and big business. Republicans need to stop with the false choice when they say the American people can only have this big monstrosity of a bill or a three trillion dollar tax bill; Washington can pass a bill that extends the 2017 individual tax rates so people won't get a big tax bill this year and then add a modest size bill with largely uncontroversial cuts!
Republicans need to stop with the economic plan for the country to grow the economy by giving big tax breaks to the wealthy and big business; ordinary people see it as unfair and take it to mean they will be hurt to pay for these tax cuts. One example is this tax loophole that Republicans created in 2017 and want to extend now where they let wealthy taxpayers shelter twenty percent of their income from individual tax rate; the truth of the matter is that this tax provision primarily benefits the wealthy not struggling small business owners like Republicans try to package the tax provision. If you want to help struggling small business owners, implement a policy like this only small businesses where sales from the business are less than seventy-five million dollars per year and have less than two dozen owners can deduct twenty percent of their income from their taxable income if and only if they leave that twenty percent in the business and use that separate account only for the purposes of the business.
Republicans need to stop with their extremism in cutting and raising revenue it taints the bill in the public eye where the public doesn't focus on the good reforms. Put together a simple strongly defensive bill; I can't believe you have the public against extremely responsible reforms because of the House version which used a meat cleaver where a scalpel was needed. The Senate version on Medicaid is good a work requirement where there are only two checks a year and curtailment of the scheme where states tax Health care providers then use that money to pay their portion of a program where the Federal government matches state contributions to a provider payment program. The problem is that this payment program is vital to rural and poor hospitals; the Senate should have come up with a design where it maintains the current payment rates for rural and poor hospitals but just requires states to not use this corrupt scheme to raise the revenue it uses to pay its share of the program costs, states have many ways to raise revenue. Once the Senate gets this solid program it should than sell it to the public because now the narrative is that the Republicans are throwing off an abundance of deserving people from Medicaid and the Republicans will put an abundance of rural and needy hospitals out of business.
This bill paints the Republicans as tone deaf, take for instance the changes to the SNAP/Food Stamp program. The House plan was atrocious, and the Senate plan isn't that bad, yet it is just really dumb. The Senate plan is to penalize states who put ineligible people in the program and the number of ineligible people they put in the program triggers cost sharing and at ever higher numbers. What do you think this policy plan will do it will cause states to be aggressive about excluding people from the program to avoid an ever higher cost sharing bill which will lead to eligible and needy people not getting to participate in the program and some states may drop out of the program altogether to avoid these new costs. For the bill's provisions reducing the Federal government's funding of the administrative costs of the program to 25% from 50% this is a cost of $3.5 billion per year to the states, to knowledgeable people this is an onerous burden to be putting on states Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot with policy changes like this!
The Senate bill raises budget deficits over the next ten years by $3.5 trillion per the CBO you can say what you want about dynamic scoring and how because of the growth in the economy deficits won't be nearly that bad. First off in many people's minds growth in the economy won't change tax receipts that much further the people's opinions that really matter on this issue are sovereign debt investors and these type of deficit projections are a problem. These sovereign debt investors will keep treasury interest rates high which will keep interest rates across the board higher which will undermine the value of this bill to ordinary people who will be paying more in mortgage and car payments. Republicans would be doing better for themselves and the American people by making a bill much less expensive. Republicans if you want to improve the economy pass substantive legislation that significantly helps like pass legislation that stops future Presidents from what President Biden tried to do which is force auto manufacturers to stop making combustion engine cars but rather EV cars at an accelerated time table. A law should be passed that allows an ample selection of combustion engine cares to be made through 2050, let the consumer decide if they want an EV or a combustion engine car when the consumer is in the drivers seat EV cars will get much better because auto manufacturers will want to sell these cars which manufacturers have invested so heavily in and so they will make them better!
Republicans need to stop with the economic plan for the country to grow the economy by giving big tax breaks to the wealthy and big business; ordinary people see it as unfair and take it to mean they will be hurt to pay for these tax cuts. One example is this tax loophole that Republicans created in 2017 and want to extend now where they let wealthy taxpayers shelter twenty percent of their income from individual tax rate; the truth of the matter is that this tax provision primarily benefits the wealthy not struggling small business owners like Republicans try to package the tax provision. If you want to help struggling small business owners, implement a policy like this only small businesses where sales from the business are less than seventy-five million dollars per year and have less than two dozen owners can deduct twenty percent of their income from their taxable income if and only if they leave that twenty percent in the business and use that separate account only for the purposes of the business.
Republicans need to stop with their extremism in cutting and raising revenue it taints the bill in the public eye where the public doesn't focus on the good reforms. Put together a simple strongly defensive bill; I can't believe you have the public against extremely responsible reforms because of the House version which used a meat cleaver where a scalpel was needed. The Senate version on Medicaid is good a work requirement where there are only two checks a year and curtailment of the scheme where states tax Health care providers then use that money to pay their portion of a program where the Federal government matches state contributions to a provider payment program. The problem is that this payment program is vital to rural and poor hospitals; the Senate should have come up with a design where it maintains the current payment rates for rural and poor hospitals but just requires states to not use this corrupt scheme to raise the revenue it uses to pay its share of the program costs, states have many ways to raise revenue. Once the Senate gets this solid program it should than sell it to the public because now the narrative is that the Republicans are throwing off an abundance of deserving people from Medicaid and the Republicans will put an abundance of rural and needy hospitals out of business.
This bill paints the Republicans as tone deaf, take for instance the changes to the SNAP/Food Stamp program. The House plan was atrocious, and the Senate plan isn't that bad, yet it is just really dumb. The Senate plan is to penalize states who put ineligible people in the program and the number of ineligible people they put in the program triggers cost sharing and at ever higher numbers. What do you think this policy plan will do it will cause states to be aggressive about excluding people from the program to avoid an ever higher cost sharing bill which will lead to eligible and needy people not getting to participate in the program and some states may drop out of the program altogether to avoid these new costs. For the bill's provisions reducing the Federal government's funding of the administrative costs of the program to 25% from 50% this is a cost of $3.5 billion per year to the states, to knowledgeable people this is an onerous burden to be putting on states Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot with policy changes like this!
The Senate bill raises budget deficits over the next ten years by $3.5 trillion per the CBO you can say what you want about dynamic scoring and how because of the growth in the economy deficits won't be nearly that bad. First off in many people's minds growth in the economy won't change tax receipts that much further the people's opinions that really matter on this issue are sovereign debt investors and these type of deficit projections are a problem. These sovereign debt investors will keep treasury interest rates high which will keep interest rates across the board higher which will undermine the value of this bill to ordinary people who will be paying more in mortgage and car payments. Republicans would be doing better for themselves and the American people by making a bill much less expensive. Republicans if you want to improve the economy pass substantive legislation that significantly helps like pass legislation that stops future Presidents from what President Biden tried to do which is force auto manufacturers to stop making combustion engine cars but rather EV cars at an accelerated time table. A law should be passed that allows an ample selection of combustion engine cares to be made through 2050, let the consumer decide if they want an EV or a combustion engine car when the consumer is in the drivers seat EV cars will get much better because auto manufacturers will want to sell these cars which manufacturers have invested so heavily in and so they will make them better!
Last edited:
