Submit your forum questions below by end of day November 10, 2017:
Tag: MN03
Republican tax plan looks like boon to the wealthy, not so much for you
The following article by Cory Zurowski was posted on the CityPages website September 29, 2017:
Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-Eden Prairie) wasted no time. Less than 24 hours after GOP leaders announced a new tax cut plan that would largely benefit businesses and wealthy Americans, Paulsen came out with a big public thumbs up.
The conservative from Eden Prairie called it long overdue “reform” that’s sure to restore “the hope of prosperity for American workers.”
Rep. Jason Lewis (R-Woodbury) went into hyperbole mode: “This plan is about defending the American Dream — the right to fly as high as your wings will take you.”
Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Delano) also came out in support of the blueprint that’s big on cuts, scarce on details. It’s estimated to amount to a $5.8 trillion tax break while doing away with $3.6 trillion in deductions. That comes out to a $2.2 trillion net cut.
Whether America can afford it or not is another conversation.
Here’s what’s known: The corporate tax rate would drop from 35 percent to 20 percent, which in theory greases the wheels for multinational companies to bring money back into the U.S. In the past few years, America’s largest companies have been hoarding cash overseas to skirt their obligations to Uncle Sam.
It would also kill the estate tax, which currently charges as much as 40 percent when a dead person’s assets are transferred to their heirs. Yet this too would be a bonanza for the rich, since it only applies to estates of $5.5 million and greater.
The GOP bill provides another bonus to the financier caste, proposing to lower rates on investment income, which are presently taxed between 15 percent and 23 percent.
What would it mean to working Minnesotans earning $25,000 per year? Or $65,000? Not much.
It looks like a wash now, according to Mark Haveman of the Minnesota Center for Fiscal Excellence, a nonprofit that focuses on fiscal policy. But he’s quick to qualify that: “There’s a lot of details missing. There’s blanks to be filled in here.”
It promises to bump the child tax credit, which stands at $1,000. But doesn’t say how much. The three new tax brackets — 12, 25, and 35 percent — don’t show which income groups will be subject to the new rates.
Haveman points to the standard deduction, which would double to $12,000 for those filing singly and $24,000 for those filing jointly. At the same time, personal exemptions would be eliminated.
“That sure would take a lot of the benefit away from the doubling of the deduction,” says Haveman. “These benefits of the standard deduction are partially, potentially, and largely — and maybe in some circumstances — could be completely offset depending on the household size.”
In other words, some families might be paying more.
It promises to bump the child tax credit, which stands at $1,000. But doesn’t say how much. The three new tax brackets — 12, 25, and 35 percent — don’t show which income groups will be subject to the new rates.
Haveman points to the standard deduction, which would double to $12,000 for those filing singly and $24,000 for those filing jointly. At the same time, personal exemptions would be eliminated.
“That sure would take a lot of the benefit away from the doubling of the deduction,” says Haveman. “These benefits of the standard deduction are partially, potentially, and largely — and maybe in some circumstances — could be completely offset depending on the household size.”
In other words, some families might be paying more.
“I mean, really,” says Haveman with a laugh. “It’s really difficult right now to access what will happen, and how burdens will shift, and who wins and who loses because there’s so many important details yet to be determined.”
Like how to create massive cuts without adding trillions of dollars to the national debt.
For now, it looks suspiciously like a trickle-down plan the GOP has peddled since the days of Reagan. THey’ve led to an economy that harkens back to the 1920s, with wealth congregated in the hands of a few and stagnant wages for the rest.
Hamline University profession Joe Peschek looks to history for what lays ahead. President Ronald Reagan’s 1981 plan featured billions in lower taxes for corporations and slashed estate taxes. It reduced income tax rates for every bracket.
President George W. Bush’s tax plans in the early 2000s were essentially crafted in the same trickle-down mold, according to Peschek, who argues the GOP’s sales pitch in 2017 isn’t much different.
“If we look back through those two periods,” he says, “wages were pretty flat, there was sluggish growth, and economic inequality grew. It’s hard to argue these kind of tax cuts trickle down very much.”
Rep. Betty McCollum (DFL-St. Paul) offered the best summation of the Democratic view, calling it “a multi-trillion dollar giveaway to billionaires and big corporations” that leaves “working families footing the bill.”
View the post here.
Need to quit playing games
The Graham-Cassidy bill being considered on the Senate floor is a destructive and poorly thought out bill that, like its predecessors, looks to strip health care from millions.
It’s unethical and immoral. What’s worse, it is again being ram-rodded to a quick vote to save face with Republican constituents and gain a political “win.” The health of millions seems to be less important and only exist to these people as a bulletpoint from their corporate backers.
A working health care solution is a human issue that should not be defined by or designed for political gain. Political positioning should not determine accessibility and cost. Continue reading “Need to quit playing games”
Rep. Paulsen’s DACA Survey
Rep. Paulsen sent an email survey this afternoon asking those constituents who’ve been able to subscribe to his email newsletter to answer a poll on how he should handle the DACA/Dreamers situation. We’ve heard that many people have had problems subscribing to his newsletter. Just in case, we’re including a link to the poll below. (You will be joining his newsletter list by completing this.)
Click here to take Rep. Erik Paulsen’s DACA/Dreamers September 19, 2017 Survey
What is Paulsen’s definition of a town hall?
Sept. 6 marked six full years since the last town hall held by Congressman Erik Paulsen. He has stated several times that he’s held over 100 town halls, but that’s a distortion of the truth.
Through public statements by the congressman along with a conversation I personally had with his office, it can be determined that he considers the following to be “town halls”: unannounced pop-up appearances in supermarkets, corporate appearances, carefully controlled and unannounced conference calls, scripted videos and even emailed newsletters. Continue reading “What is Paulsen’s definition of a town hall?”
3rd CD Candidate Forum in Eden Prairie
Please join us Wednesday, September 27, in the Meeting Room of the Eden Prairie Library, 565 Prairie Center Dr, Eden Prairie, MN (across the street from Eden Prairie Center on the south side of the center), for our DFL candidate forum.
We will be joined by Adam Jennings, Alicia Donahue, Brian Santa Maria and Dean Phillips and Jim Haugen.
Doors will open at 6:00 PM. Forum will start at 6:30 PM.
Have a question for our candidates? Submit it below: Continue reading “3rd CD Candidate Forum in Eden Prairie”
Rep. Paulsen needs to hold town hall meetings
To the Editor:
In an April MPR interview, Rep. Eric Paulsen of Minnesota’s Congressional District 3 stated the following regarding his unwillingness to hold a town hall: “Certainly I think there are some that would prefer to have campaign-style events, with shouting, and that kind of thing. And that’s not just very good, it’s not Minnesotan,” he said. “Civility is probably the most important thing that we need right now.”
Does Rep. Paulsen realize it isn’t very civil to make assumptions about his constituents? His assumptions about shouting at town halls certainly aren’t from his own personal experiences holding them. Continue reading “Rep. Paulsen needs to hold town hall meetings”
There is no death tax
To the Editor:
Congressional District 3 Representative Erik Paulsen’s office recently distributed flyers touting how he is working to repeal the “death tax” on our behalf.
Just to be clear, the term “death tax” is used to scare people into thinking they are taxed for dying. This is ridiculous. What he is referring to is the federal estate tax. The estate tax only impacts people with an estate worth over $5.49 million.
If you are in that category, he’s working for you. If not, he’s working for someone else. Hint: The 1 percent.
Gail Porter, Brooklyn Park
Brooklyn Park Sun-Post, September 13, 2017
Minnesota set for pivotal House battles
The following article by Ben Kamisar was posted on the Hill website September 7, 2017:
Minnesota will be a pivotal battleground in the midterm fight for the House majority, featuring five of 2018’s most contentious races.
Rep. Tim Walz’s (D) decision to run for governor has created an open seat in the 1st District, while freshman Rep. Jason Lewis (R) will try to hold on to his swing seat.
Buoyed by President Trump’s strong performance in the state, Republicans plan to go on the offensive in two seats currently held by Reps. Rick Nolan (D) and Collin Peterson (D). But Democrats have their own plans in the state, aiming to win over well-educated suburban voters who could help them oust Rep. Erik Paulsen (R). Continue reading “Minnesota set for pivotal House battles”
Counterpoint: Diversity and transparency needed in Stras nomination, not a rubber stamp
The following commentary by Marie A. Faillinger, Kendra Brodin, Mike Essien, Ben Kwan and Larissa Maldonado was posted on the Star Tribune website September 2, 2017:
Sens. Klobuchar and Franken are right to be taking their time.
U.S. Rep. Erik Paulsen should not have called out U.S. Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken for “obstructionism” in the nomination of Minnesota Supreme Court Justice David Stras to fill retired Judge Diana Murphy’s seat on the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (“Partisan game-playing blocks an outstanding judge,” Opinion Exchange, Aug. 25).
To call their delay “obstructionism” is to say “let’s just move along with the process.”
Paulsen calls for a rubber stamp on a judicial nomination that was anything but open and transparent and that was not one that might yield the diverse court that the public needs.