Tag: tax cuts
At GOP Town Halls, Furious Voters Condemn Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill'

At GOP Town Halls, Furious Voters Condemn Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill'

Forget Elon Musk—congressional Republicans are facing new fury from voters, this time for voting in support of President Donald Trump’s "One Big, Beautiful Bill Act,” which proposes slashes the social safety net to pay for tax cuts for the rich.

Two Republicans brave enough to hold town halls—Reps. Mike Flood of Nebraska and Ashley Hinson of Iowa—were both met by angry voters who questioned their support for a bill that would strip away health insurance, food aid, and more from millions of Americans.

Hinson was booed by the audience in her deeply Republican district after she said that she was "proud" to vote for the bill.

"This is a generational investment …” Hinson said, trailing off as the boos drowned her out.

And when Hinson claimed that judges who rule against Trump are engaged in "egregious abuses,” she was met by chants from the audience calling her a "fraud.”

Meanwhile, Flood also faced angry voters in his heavily Republican district, with Flood unable to defend certain provisions in the bill, including a last-minute addition that would make it harder for federal judges to enforce contempt rulings.

“This provision was unknown to me when I voted for the bill,” Flood said, admitting that he didn’t read the bill, which GOP leadership put up for debate in the middle of the night just minutes after releasing the amended text.

Given that House Republicans passed the dogshit bill right before Memorial Day weekend, few other GOP lawmakers have had time to hold town halls to see if this anger is widespread.

But polling shows that voters do not support cutting Medicaid and food stamps to fund tax cuts for the rich. So these displays of rage could be just the beginning for GOP lawmakers—most of whom have been hiding from their constituents by either holding heavily scripted events or eschewing town halls altogether.

Now House Republicans are trying to blunt the backlash by lying about what the legislation does. After the bill passed, the National Republican Congressional Committee, which seeks to elect Republicans to the House, issued a memo falsely claiming that it wouldn’t cut Medicaid.

“The One Big, Beautiful Bill is more than a messaging opportunity; it’s a midterm roadmap. Republicans must drive this contrast, simplify our message, and target Democrats every day. This is about fraud vs families. This is about taxes vs take-home pay. This is about securing the border vs subsidizing chaos. This is about putting working families first, not last,” the memo said.

Of course, independent analyses show that millions of Americans will lose Medicaid coverage and Affordable Care Act subsidies. And the lowest income brackets will actually see their take-home pay decline thanks to the bill, should Trump sign it into law.

Indeed, House Democrats are already gearing up to use this vote to hammer Republicans in the 2026 midterms.

“As the economy is tanking, consumer confidence is at historic lows, and millions are struggling to make ends meet, House Republicans decided to ignore it all… and advance an astonishingly detrimental bill – the GOP Tax Scam – that raises costs on working families while benefiting the wealthiest few,” the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee wrote in a memo.

“It’s a vote that every single vulnerable House Republican will come to regret next year,” it said.

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans are now having their turn to amend the legislation, and they’re doing their usual performance of claiming that they won't back the bill because it adds to the deficit.

“In the House, President Trump can threaten a primary. Those guys want to keep their seats, I understand the pressure. He can’t pressure me that way," Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who says he won’t vote for the bill because it increases the deficit, told Punchbowl News.

But given how cowardly Republicans continue to prove themselves to be, there’s no doubt that they’ll fall in line with Dear Leader.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Trump rally, Tulsa

Suddenly, MAGA Is Feeling Doubt About Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill'

With House Republicans narrowly passing President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act—which is designed to blow up the national debt, cut taxes for the rich, and partially pay for that by gutting programs for the poor and working class—you’d think MAGA conservatives would be cheering. But many of them aren’t.

Let’s back up.

Trump defied historic voting patterns in 2024 by winning voters making under $50,000 a year, 50 percent to Democratic nominee Kamala Harris’ 48 percent. He tied her among voters making over $50,000, at 49 percent. And when the threshold was raised to $100,000, the income divide got starker: Trump won the under-$100K crowd, 51 to 47 percent, while Harris won the over-$100K vote, 51 to 47 percent.

That flipped the old partisan narrative. In general, Republicans were the party of the working class, and Democrats the party of those with more money.

While culture-war hysteria around transgender people and immigrants drove much of Trump’s support, his promise to lower prices “on Day 1” clearly resonated with economically desperate voters. Exit polls back this up. He won 76 percent of those who had faced “severe hardship” from inflation in the previous year, and 52 percent of those who’d faced “moderate hardship.” Meanwhile, Harris dominated among those who said they’d faced “no hardship,” winning 78 percent of them.

As former Daily Kos reporter Kerry Eleveld once said in our old podcast, “Democrats are the party of voters who don’t have to look at prices when grocery shopping.”

That’s why we see so many variations of “this isn’t what we voted for” in all these “Leopards Ate Faces” stories. Yes, we could scream, “IT WAS ALL THERE IN PROJECT 2025!” But let’s be honest: Most voters aren’t policy wonks. For those doing price math in the grocery aisle, politics isn’t a priority. Trump’s promise may have been absurd, but it was simple and seductive.

But falling for those lies has a cost. On the economic front, Trump and the Republican Party are governing like they always have—for the ultrawealthy, connected, and powerful, at the direct expense of their own voters. As I’ve written repeatedly, it’s like Trump is trying to hurt his base.

Early Thursday morning, House Republicans voted to gut Medicaid, which disproportionately helps rural Americans. Their tax cuts for billionaires effectively raise taxes on low-income voters—i.e., their core voters in last year’s election. MarketWatch, reporting on a University of Pennsylvania analysis of a close-to-final draft of the GOP tax bill, noted:

  • The top 0.1 percent of households would rake in over $390,000 in after-tax income.
  • The top 1 percent would gain $44,190.
  • Households making $51,000 to $92,999 a year would get an additional $815.
  • The lowest-income households, though, will see their after-tax income shrink by $940.

Yes, that voter making under $50,000, they get to deal with Trump’s price-raising tariffs and a tax hike.

On Reddit’s r/conservative subreddit, the reactions to the House passing the bill were surprisingly muted.

Some echoed traditional deficit concerns, such as the commenter who noted, “Conservatives are supposed to want less government spending and less debt. This bill will add trillions of dollars of debt over the next 10 years. We're not even kind of moving in the right direction.”

But a surprising number took umbrage at the gutting of Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as food stamps.

One top commenter the subreddit—i.e., not a troll—wrote, “I'm all for cutting waste fraud and abuse on Medicaid and SNAP, but … I think if the medicaid/SNAP changes go through as is, GOP will get mauled in the mid-terms.”

Another top commenter noted, “[I]t's not that I like high taxes, it's that I think high taxes on the lower, middle, and upper-middle-class are much more damaging than high taxes on the ultra-rich. It's both about keeping taxes low on most people, and about preventing the concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny number of people. It's also frustrating because Trump has repeatedly spoken out in favor of such tax hikes on the richest taxpayers as a way of making budgets and tax breaks work.”

This commenter also called the Medicaid provisions “cruel,” and on SNAP, they said, “[I]t's going to deny benefits to some people we would probably prefer have them. for example the people who are going to be hit hardest are the people who live in areas where jobs are scarce, who have difficult lives with a lot of barriers to getting anything done, and who have other life responsibilities like caring for family members or doing something else important in their community that they don't get paid for.”

If only there was a party that worked to protect such people …

All over social media, Trump voters are realizing they’re the ones being labeled as “fraud and waste.” Like this gem on Threads:

Again, we can point to Project 2025—the Heritage Foundation’s agenda for a second Trump administration—and note how it promised to gut SNAP and Medicaid. Yes, we warned them. But pointing fingers now isn’t useful.

What is useful? Turning this betrayal into motivation.

No, we won’t win over all Trump voters. Many are too far gone. It’s a cult.

But we don’t need all of them. We don’t even need most. We just need a small shift.

In Pennsylvania, Trump won last year by 120,266 votes. In Michigan, it was 80,103. And in Wisconsin, 29,397. Altogether, that makes for just 229,766 votes in an election where 155,512,532 were cast—or just 0.15 percent of all ballots. That’s how small of a shift we’re talking about, though obviously, the bigger the better.

I can’t recall ever seeing a party so eagerly swing a baseball bat at its own voters—many of them new to the Republican coalition.

The pain is real. And yes, most of us are impacted in some way. But if we can turn that pain into political clarity for even a slice of those voters, we can begin to reverse the damage—and take back our future.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Trump's 2017 tax cuts

Trump's Tax Cut Will Lead To Fiscal Disaster

First off, let's drop the Republican claim that not extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts is a tax increase.

Many of these tax cuts were purposely designed to expire and for a sneaky reason. Making them permanent would have hiked the bill's cost by more than $1.5 trillion over 10 years. Add to that the interest payments tied to the higher borrowing, and the number rises to $2 trillion.

The ugly bottom line is this: Trump's "big, beautiful" tax and spending bill is expected to tack another $3.8 trillion to budget deficits over the next decade.

Recall Elon Musk's vow to cut $2 trillion in spending a year ago? The amount actually cut was about $100 billion. Sorry to throw more numbers at you, but that's only 5% of $2 trillion.

Balancing the federal budget without added borrowing can be done. It was done when Bill Clinton, a Democrat, was president. Clinton had raised some taxes, notably on the wealthy, in his 1993 budget. Republicans demagogued those tax hikes, which helped them win big in the midterms that followed.

By 1998, the federal budget was in surplus. Republicans rightly insist that they helped by forcing lower spending. But the added tax revenue brought in more money than the spending cuts saved.

Most Americans got richer under Clinton. Despite higher tax bills, the rich got richer, too. They benefited from a stock market lifted in large part by the growing belief that the federal government had become a responsible financial steward.

During Clinton's presidency, the S&P 500 stock index rose a legendary 208 percent. Had dividends been included and reinvested, the total return would have been higher.

George W. Bush took over the presidency in January 2001 and squandered the surplus with tax cuts and dramatically higher spending. He also oversaw the reckless deregulation that led to the financial collapse at the end of his two terms — and a 40% drop in the S&P 500.

Anyone who has done a household budget knows that two numbers matter. One is for spending; the other is for money coming in. For the federal government, money coming in is the tax revenues.

Ronald Reagan bought into the idea that tax cuts would pay for themselves through greater economic growth. He quickly saw that his 1981 tax cuts didn't come close to covering the lost revenues plus higher defense spending. To his credit, Reagan acted to stabilize the financial picture by signing a tax increase the following year and then other increases in 1984 and 1986. Nonetheless, the national debt tripled during his eight years.

Trump is pushing hard for both tax cuts and higher spending. And that has the financial markets fearing a new era of financial irresponsibility. Moody's has just lowered its credit rating for the United States from triple-A to double-A. That's contributed to a global selloff of U.S. Treasury debt, as it is no longer seen as the ultra-safe investment it was. The U.S. must now offer higher returns to compensate for the higher risk. Our annual interest payments, meanwhile, now surpass the defense budget.

All this doesn't fully count the growth-killing effects of Trump's tariff plans. JPMorgan Chase chief executive Jamie Dimon says investors may not have fully digested how much of a threat to their portfolios the tariffs pose.

Trump's tax-and-spending bill has a long way to go — the Senate after the House. But the financial markets obviously don't like what they are seeing.

Republicans should not be extending and adding to the 2017 tax cuts. Responsible lawmakers would just let them expire as they were scheduled to do. Alas, they clearly don't have it in them to be responsible.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Fox Strains To Justify Trump Extending His Tax Cut For Wealthiest

Fox Strains To Justify Trump Extending His Tax Cut For Wealthiest

Fox News personalities have gone all in supporting President Donald Trump’s plan to extend his unpopular 2017 tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, offering a hodgepodge of justifications for why it’s necessary to keep taxes low for rich people and businesses as Congress moves to slash billions in social safety net programs.

Fox’s charm offensive comes as congressional Republicans debate the fine points of the looming budget, including how deeply they’ll reduce spending on Medicaid and nutrition assistance programs for working class families to offset the lost tax revenue. The two chambers have passed separate budget outlines, and both have Medicaid and other social safety net programs in their sights.

Extending Trump’s 2017 giveaway to the ultrawealthy

If the Republican Party were a factory, perhaps its only reliably produced widget would be regressive tax legislation. During Trump’s first term, his tax law — the main legislative achievement prior to the COVID-19 pandemic — primarily benefited the wealthy, with the astronomically rich realizing the greatest gains.

According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, the top one percent of taxpayers were expected to pay about $61,000 less in taxes on average as a result of the law, and the top 0.1 percent could expect an average of about $252,000 in tax savings. By contrast, the bottom 60 percent of tax filers were expected to average less than $1,000 in relief — with the bottom 20 percent averaging a paltry $70 in tax savings.

Expert analysis shows that making Trump’s first term tax cuts permanent would exacerbate wealth inequality and mainly benefit the richest people in the United States. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found that if Congress made the 2017 law permanent “the richest 1 percent of Americans would receive $44.1 billion in tax cuts” as a class, and would benefit from “an average tax cut of nearly $26,000.” As with the 2017 bill, the bottom 60 percent would save about $1,000 or less per year.

Large corporations also laughed all the way to the bank. A separate ITEP report found that Trump’s 2017 cuts meant that the country’s “largest, consistently profitable corporations saw their effective tax rates fall from an average of 22.0 percent to an average of 12.8 percent.” That same group of 296 firms saved a cool $240 billion in taxes from 2018 to 2021 relative to what they would have paid absent Trump’s giveaway.

Now, as Trump’s tariff policies threaten the domestic and international economy, Fox News appears determined to ensure the richest people in the country continue to benefit at the expense of working people.

Fox personalities oppose increasing top tax rates on moral grounds

All signs suggest that the eventual tax policy Trump and congressional Republicans enact will be a boon for the wealthy. Still, several Fox News figures reacted with horror to leaks from the White House that the president was potentially considering an increase in tax rates for top earners. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon has been pushing to let the tax cuts expire for those in high-income brackets, and some within the White House have argued in favor of raising taxes on people who take home more than $1 million per year.

That outcome was always exceedingly unlikely — Trump put the notion to bed during a recent Oval Office presser — but even a whiff of progressive taxation was too much for Fox pundits.

On April 15 — Tax Day — Fox Business host and former Trump economic adviser Larry Kudlow appeared on Special Report With Bret Baier and offered a familiar argument against raising taxes on the wealthy.

“I thought the Republicans wanted to reward success, not punishing it,” Kudlow said. “This loose talk about a higher top — another new bracket for millionaires — I don’t think it’s a crime to be a millionaire by the way, small businesses would pay this top bracket. I do not understand this.”

“I can't believe Mr. Trump is going to go along with this,” Kudlow added. “He campaigned on, you know, extending his tax cuts.”

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World