THE PROGRESS REPORT
by Christy Harvey, Judd Legum and Jonathan Baskin
with Nico Pitney and Mipe Okunseinde
April 15, 2005
ECONOMY
A Taxing Day
MEDIA
What You Don't Know Won't Hurt Them
UNDER THE RADAR
Go Beyond The Headlines
For news and updates throughout the day, check out our new blog at ThinkProgress.org.
Sign up Contact us Permalinks/Archive Mobile RSS Print
ECONOMY
A Taxing Day
Due to a series of tax cuts since 2001, middle-class Americans will save an average of $742 on their federal taxes this year. They will need it. Falling wages, exploding gas prices, soaring health care and education costs, rising food and energy prices, and increased state taxes to make up for gaping budget shortfalls are just some of the things Americans will need to pay for with their new money. And that's not even mentioning the $3,791 "budget deficit per household, which, along with all prior government debt, will be dumped in the laps of our children." For a better plan, check out American Progress's progressive approach to tax reform.
EMPTY BOAST: In preparation for tax day, the Bush administration released a fact sheet boasting that, as a result of the president's tax cuts, "110 million American taxpayers will see their taxes decline by an average of $1,716" in 2005. This will come as a shock to those in the middle and lower ends of the income spectrum. The fact sheet neglects to mention that in 2005 the wealthiest one percent will receive cuts of $34,948, about 47 times the $742 average tax cut that those in the middle 20 percent of the income spectrum will get. Ultimately, the average is driven up by millionaires, who stand to rake in an average of $103,086 from the cuts.
THE PAYROLL TAX PROBLEM: The Bush administration likes to focus on the federal income tax, calling it "highly progressive." By many measures, the income tax has become less progressive since President Bush took office. Perhaps more importantly, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) points out that most workers pay more in payroll tax than income tax. The payroll tax, which goes towards Social Security, places a "greater burden on low- and middle-income families than the income tax because it is levied at a flat rate on the first dollar of wages and does not apply to wages above $90,000." Wall Street executives may earn enough to finish paying their payroll taxes in less than a week, but most Americans pay all year long. President Bush has so far rejected the idea of making the payroll tax more progressive – by raising the $90,000 cap – to help pay for Social Security.
STATE TAXES GONE WILD: Budget shortfalls in many states have forced many local governments to find new ways to extract revenue from average Americans. Many cities and towns have had to "substantially raise property taxes to offset reductions in state aid," while others have increased fees that hurt families when they want to register their cars, get a fishing license or go to community college. A new study by CBPP shows many states also continue to tax low-income and poverty-level citizens at rates that make it difficult for them to make ends meet.
MILLIONAIRES BEWARE: So, what has Congress been doing to make the tax system more equitable? This week, House conservatives voted to repeal the estate tax. You probably won't notice on tax day, since the tax applies only to estates worth more than $1.5 million (double for married couples) and was paid last year by just 30,627 of the wealthiest Americans (less than 1 percent of everyone who died). A full repeal of the estate tax, however, would cost more than $1 trillion over the first ten years, likely another burden that would be shifted to the middle class.
MEDIA
What You Don't Know Won't Hurt Them
The Bush administration reacted with seeming outrage when it was revealed that its own Department of Education had used hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayers' money to pay conservative columnist Armstrong Williams to shill for President Bush's No Child Left Behind law. White House spokesman Scott McClellan tried to distance the president from the issue, while President Bush declared, "There needs to be a nice, independent relationship between the White House and the press, the administration and the press." Though the contract took place under then-Secretary of Education Rod Paige, the newly installed Education Secretary Margaret Spellings declared, "At this point, what I can say is that at a minimum, there were errors of judgments at the Department, and I am diligently working to get to the bottom of it all." However, once again it seems that the administration is all talk as it now stands accused of impeding the very same investigation it purported to be spearheading.
SHIELDING OFFICIALS: Investigators from the Department of Education "were denied the opportunity to interview some White House personnel," an issue brought to light by Rep. George Miller (D-CA). When asked about why the White House was "refusing to allow key White House officials to be interviewed" – one of whom could be the present education secretary – individuals at the Education Department "deferred questions to the inspector general's office." But the inspector general's office wasn't talking either, claiming "the agency does not comment on its ongoing work." Explanations from the White House were not much better: "By statute, an inspector general's jurisdiction is limited. An IG can request information from other federal agencies but not from the White House office." Essentially, the argument is that "such interviews could breach long-standing legal traditions," a defense that constitutional law scholars see as "thin" at best.
DELETING INFORMATION: Even if the White House was a more willing participant in the investigation, there is still the strong chance that the public may never be told the full story behind the controversial payments to Williams. Rep. George Miller has revealed that Education Secretary Margaret Spellings is considering invoking the "deliberative process privilege," which would "require information to be deleted when the final version [of the investigation] is publicly released." On the same day it came out that Spellings was debating whether to keep information from the taxpayers who unwittingly footed the bill for the propaganda contract, President Bush spoke to the American Society of Newspaper Editors and was asked his opinion on payments to journalists, fake video news releases, and "using government funds to promote true media in journalism." His answer? "It's deceptive to the American people if it's not disclosed."
MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING IN THE WATER: While the administration is ducking its responsibilities or any form of accountability, other officials are addressing the issue of government-funded propaganda head on. Yesterday, the Federal Communications Commission ruled that "broadcasters must disclose to viewers the origin of video news releases produced by the government or corporations when the material runs on the public airwaves." And by a vote of 98 to 0, the Senate passed an amendment that would "force federal agencies over the next year to disclose the origins of video releases." Unfortunately, these accomplishments do not necessarily mean that the White House will change its ways. Earlier this year, the Government Accountability Office "declared that video news releases – or prepackaged TV segments – that fail to reveal they were produced by the government constitute illegal propaganda." The Justice Department then turned around and took the "highly unusual" step of sending out a memo that told the administration to ignore the ruling. As the head of the GAO stated, "This is not just about what's arguably legal; it's about what's right. Taxpayers have the right to know if and when the government is trying to influence them with their own dollars."
Under the Radar
ETHICS - SINKING SHIP TAKES ANOTHER HIT: If House Majority Leader Tom DeLay "chose to resign as majority leader until these matters are resolved, that's probably not the worst idea." -- Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), Denver Post, 4/15/05
ECONOMY – A BANKRUPT POLITICAL SYSTEM: The House of Representatives yesterday sided with the powerful credit card industry and passed new legislation which will make it harder for Americans to climb out of debt. It's a devastating blow to Americans struggling financially due to job loss, medical expenses, divorce or military duty. The legislation, however, did nothing to curb the aggressive tactics employed by the credit card companies in targeting vulnerable individuals, making it a virtual windfall to the industry. And evidence shows credit card companies aren't shy about trying to make a buck off of easy targets. Quick to smell the blood in the water, the companies specifically target the newly bankrupt, swamping them with new credit card offers so they rack up even more debt. The right wing of the House manipulated the process in order to squelch any amendments which would soften the blow, including measures which "would have given extra bankruptcy protections to victims of identity theft and to military personnel returning from Iraq and Afghanistan." (The Washington Post shames the right-wing conservatives who shoved this bill through, saying even the bill's staunchest proponents "should be embarrassed that it was muscled through the House in this kind of Potemkin-democracy way.") How could legislation like this pass, you ask? Just follow the money. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the banking, credit card and retail industries flooded Congress with cash in the last election cycle, donating more than $56 million to political parties and candidates.
ENVIRO – CLEAN WATER GETS DRILLED: The House Energy Committee is all set to protect a dangerous drilling technique -- which threatens to contaminate America's drinking water -- from any future regulation. The dangerous technique, known as hydraulic fracturing, was developed by none other than Vice President Cheney's former company Halliburton. It involves drilling for oil by injecting pressurized diesel fuel and other fluids deep into the earth, where they then can seep into the water supply. The decision will be a huge victory for Halliburton and other big energy companies, which have fought regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act for years. Pointing to a positive Environmental Protection Agency study, the oil companies claim the technique "poses little or no threat" to drinking water. Don't give the study too much credit, though -- a 32-year veteran of the EPA has come forward claiming the study "did not use established agency standards and relied on a peer review panel dominated by energy industry personnel." Two lawmakers this week did stand up to try to modify the legislation to keep drinking water safe: Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) wanted to "require a scientific study of the practice before the exemption took effect." And Rep. Hilda L. Solis (D-CA) wanted to prohibit use of diesel fuel in underground injection. Both provisions were shot down by the right wing.
JUDICIARY – USING FAITH AS A WEDGE: Right-wing rhetoric over federal judges just got ratcheted up again. The New York Times reports that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist will join prominent members of the Religious Right in a telecast portraying opponents of President Bush's judicial nominees as "against people of faith." The event, which organizers hope will reach more than a million people via television, radio, and the Internet, is being promoted with a flier depicting "a young man holding a Bible in one hand and a gavel in the other," and compares today's Christian conservatives to African-Americans during the 1960s civil rights struggles. "The filibuster was once abused to protect racial bias, and it is now being used against people of faith," the flier reads. It's just the latest in a series of attempts by conservatives to turn religion into a political ramrod; remember the mailer sent out during last year's election season claiming that under "the Liberal agenda," the Bible would be "banned"? Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), ranking member on the Judiciary Committee, pointed out the obvious: "No party has a monopoly on faith, and for Senator Frist to participate in this kind of telecast just throws more oil on the partisan flames."
ETHICS – HOUSE VOTES TO CRIPPLE ETHICS COMMITTEE: Yesterday, in the face of Rep. Tom DeLay's growing web of corruption scandals, the House of Representative was given a fresh chance to stand up for an independent, bipartisan ethics process in Congress. They blew it. DeLay's political allies voted to kill a proposal by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to end the Ethics Committee deadlock. The vote came even after several prominent conservatives signaled their strong concerns about the cloud that DeLay's scandals have placed over Congress. The Associated Press reports that multiple conservative lawmakers expressed concern over DeLay at a closed-door meeting on Wednesday; Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA) even cautioned his colleagues "about using power arrogantly." Moreover, ten former members of Congress, all members of DeLay's party, joined in a letter on Thursday "to say they believed that revisions in House ethics rules this year were an 'obvious action to protect Majority Leader Tom DeLay' from investigation." They called on House leaders to "act to restore public confidence in the People's House
with Nico Pitney and Mipe Okunseinde
April 15, 2005
ECONOMY
A Taxing Day
MEDIA
What You Don't Know Won't Hurt Them
UNDER THE RADAR
Go Beyond The Headlines
For news and updates throughout the day, check out our new blog at ThinkProgress.org.
Sign up Contact us Permalinks/Archive Mobile RSS Print
ECONOMY
A Taxing Day
Due to a series of tax cuts since 2001, middle-class Americans will save an average of $742 on their federal taxes this year. They will need it. Falling wages, exploding gas prices, soaring health care and education costs, rising food and energy prices, and increased state taxes to make up for gaping budget shortfalls are just some of the things Americans will need to pay for with their new money. And that's not even mentioning the $3,791 "budget deficit per household, which, along with all prior government debt, will be dumped in the laps of our children." For a better plan, check out American Progress's progressive approach to tax reform.
EMPTY BOAST: In preparation for tax day, the Bush administration released a fact sheet boasting that, as a result of the president's tax cuts, "110 million American taxpayers will see their taxes decline by an average of $1,716" in 2005. This will come as a shock to those in the middle and lower ends of the income spectrum. The fact sheet neglects to mention that in 2005 the wealthiest one percent will receive cuts of $34,948, about 47 times the $742 average tax cut that those in the middle 20 percent of the income spectrum will get. Ultimately, the average is driven up by millionaires, who stand to rake in an average of $103,086 from the cuts.
THE PAYROLL TAX PROBLEM: The Bush administration likes to focus on the federal income tax, calling it "highly progressive." By many measures, the income tax has become less progressive since President Bush took office. Perhaps more importantly, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) points out that most workers pay more in payroll tax than income tax. The payroll tax, which goes towards Social Security, places a "greater burden on low- and middle-income families than the income tax because it is levied at a flat rate on the first dollar of wages and does not apply to wages above $90,000." Wall Street executives may earn enough to finish paying their payroll taxes in less than a week, but most Americans pay all year long. President Bush has so far rejected the idea of making the payroll tax more progressive – by raising the $90,000 cap – to help pay for Social Security.
STATE TAXES GONE WILD: Budget shortfalls in many states have forced many local governments to find new ways to extract revenue from average Americans. Many cities and towns have had to "substantially raise property taxes to offset reductions in state aid," while others have increased fees that hurt families when they want to register their cars, get a fishing license or go to community college. A new study by CBPP shows many states also continue to tax low-income and poverty-level citizens at rates that make it difficult for them to make ends meet.
MILLIONAIRES BEWARE: So, what has Congress been doing to make the tax system more equitable? This week, House conservatives voted to repeal the estate tax. You probably won't notice on tax day, since the tax applies only to estates worth more than $1.5 million (double for married couples) and was paid last year by just 30,627 of the wealthiest Americans (less than 1 percent of everyone who died). A full repeal of the estate tax, however, would cost more than $1 trillion over the first ten years, likely another burden that would be shifted to the middle class.
MEDIA
What You Don't Know Won't Hurt Them
The Bush administration reacted with seeming outrage when it was revealed that its own Department of Education had used hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayers' money to pay conservative columnist Armstrong Williams to shill for President Bush's No Child Left Behind law. White House spokesman Scott McClellan tried to distance the president from the issue, while President Bush declared, "There needs to be a nice, independent relationship between the White House and the press, the administration and the press." Though the contract took place under then-Secretary of Education Rod Paige, the newly installed Education Secretary Margaret Spellings declared, "At this point, what I can say is that at a minimum, there were errors of judgments at the Department, and I am diligently working to get to the bottom of it all." However, once again it seems that the administration is all talk as it now stands accused of impeding the very same investigation it purported to be spearheading.
SHIELDING OFFICIALS: Investigators from the Department of Education "were denied the opportunity to interview some White House personnel," an issue brought to light by Rep. George Miller (D-CA). When asked about why the White House was "refusing to allow key White House officials to be interviewed" – one of whom could be the present education secretary – individuals at the Education Department "deferred questions to the inspector general's office." But the inspector general's office wasn't talking either, claiming "the agency does not comment on its ongoing work." Explanations from the White House were not much better: "By statute, an inspector general's jurisdiction is limited. An IG can request information from other federal agencies but not from the White House office." Essentially, the argument is that "such interviews could breach long-standing legal traditions," a defense that constitutional law scholars see as "thin" at best.
DELETING INFORMATION: Even if the White House was a more willing participant in the investigation, there is still the strong chance that the public may never be told the full story behind the controversial payments to Williams. Rep. George Miller has revealed that Education Secretary Margaret Spellings is considering invoking the "deliberative process privilege," which would "require information to be deleted when the final version [of the investigation] is publicly released." On the same day it came out that Spellings was debating whether to keep information from the taxpayers who unwittingly footed the bill for the propaganda contract, President Bush spoke to the American Society of Newspaper Editors and was asked his opinion on payments to journalists, fake video news releases, and "using government funds to promote true media in journalism." His answer? "It's deceptive to the American people if it's not disclosed."
MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING IN THE WATER: While the administration is ducking its responsibilities or any form of accountability, other officials are addressing the issue of government-funded propaganda head on. Yesterday, the Federal Communications Commission ruled that "broadcasters must disclose to viewers the origin of video news releases produced by the government or corporations when the material runs on the public airwaves." And by a vote of 98 to 0, the Senate passed an amendment that would "force federal agencies over the next year to disclose the origins of video releases." Unfortunately, these accomplishments do not necessarily mean that the White House will change its ways. Earlier this year, the Government Accountability Office "declared that video news releases – or prepackaged TV segments – that fail to reveal they were produced by the government constitute illegal propaganda." The Justice Department then turned around and took the "highly unusual" step of sending out a memo that told the administration to ignore the ruling. As the head of the GAO stated, "This is not just about what's arguably legal; it's about what's right. Taxpayers have the right to know if and when the government is trying to influence them with their own dollars."
Under the Radar
ETHICS - SINKING SHIP TAKES ANOTHER HIT: If House Majority Leader Tom DeLay "chose to resign as majority leader until these matters are resolved, that's probably not the worst idea." -- Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), Denver Post, 4/15/05
ECONOMY – A BANKRUPT POLITICAL SYSTEM: The House of Representatives yesterday sided with the powerful credit card industry and passed new legislation which will make it harder for Americans to climb out of debt. It's a devastating blow to Americans struggling financially due to job loss, medical expenses, divorce or military duty. The legislation, however, did nothing to curb the aggressive tactics employed by the credit card companies in targeting vulnerable individuals, making it a virtual windfall to the industry. And evidence shows credit card companies aren't shy about trying to make a buck off of easy targets. Quick to smell the blood in the water, the companies specifically target the newly bankrupt, swamping them with new credit card offers so they rack up even more debt. The right wing of the House manipulated the process in order to squelch any amendments which would soften the blow, including measures which "would have given extra bankruptcy protections to victims of identity theft and to military personnel returning from Iraq and Afghanistan." (The Washington Post shames the right-wing conservatives who shoved this bill through, saying even the bill's staunchest proponents "should be embarrassed that it was muscled through the House in this kind of Potemkin-democracy way.") How could legislation like this pass, you ask? Just follow the money. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the banking, credit card and retail industries flooded Congress with cash in the last election cycle, donating more than $56 million to political parties and candidates.
ENVIRO – CLEAN WATER GETS DRILLED: The House Energy Committee is all set to protect a dangerous drilling technique -- which threatens to contaminate America's drinking water -- from any future regulation. The dangerous technique, known as hydraulic fracturing, was developed by none other than Vice President Cheney's former company Halliburton. It involves drilling for oil by injecting pressurized diesel fuel and other fluids deep into the earth, where they then can seep into the water supply. The decision will be a huge victory for Halliburton and other big energy companies, which have fought regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act for years. Pointing to a positive Environmental Protection Agency study, the oil companies claim the technique "poses little or no threat" to drinking water. Don't give the study too much credit, though -- a 32-year veteran of the EPA has come forward claiming the study "did not use established agency standards and relied on a peer review panel dominated by energy industry personnel." Two lawmakers this week did stand up to try to modify the legislation to keep drinking water safe: Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) wanted to "require a scientific study of the practice before the exemption took effect." And Rep. Hilda L. Solis (D-CA) wanted to prohibit use of diesel fuel in underground injection. Both provisions were shot down by the right wing.
JUDICIARY – USING FAITH AS A WEDGE: Right-wing rhetoric over federal judges just got ratcheted up again. The New York Times reports that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist will join prominent members of the Religious Right in a telecast portraying opponents of President Bush's judicial nominees as "against people of faith." The event, which organizers hope will reach more than a million people via television, radio, and the Internet, is being promoted with a flier depicting "a young man holding a Bible in one hand and a gavel in the other," and compares today's Christian conservatives to African-Americans during the 1960s civil rights struggles. "The filibuster was once abused to protect racial bias, and it is now being used against people of faith," the flier reads. It's just the latest in a series of attempts by conservatives to turn religion into a political ramrod; remember the mailer sent out during last year's election season claiming that under "the Liberal agenda," the Bible would be "banned"? Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), ranking member on the Judiciary Committee, pointed out the obvious: "No party has a monopoly on faith, and for Senator Frist to participate in this kind of telecast just throws more oil on the partisan flames."
ETHICS – HOUSE VOTES TO CRIPPLE ETHICS COMMITTEE: Yesterday, in the face of Rep. Tom DeLay's growing web of corruption scandals, the House of Representative was given a fresh chance to stand up for an independent, bipartisan ethics process in Congress. They blew it. DeLay's political allies voted to kill a proposal by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to end the Ethics Committee deadlock. The vote came even after several prominent conservatives signaled their strong concerns about the cloud that DeLay's scandals have placed over Congress. The Associated Press reports that multiple conservative lawmakers expressed concern over DeLay at a closed-door meeting on Wednesday; Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA) even cautioned his colleagues "about using power arrogantly." Moreover, ten former members of Congress, all members of DeLay's party, joined in a letter on Thursday "to say they believed that revisions in House ethics rules this year were an 'obvious action to protect Majority Leader Tom DeLay' from investigation." They called on House leaders to "act to restore public confidence in the People's House
posted by T. Scott Brineman at 6:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home