Tag: GOP

  • Virginia Medicaid recipients on edge as GOP weighs cuts • Virginia Mercury


    With President Donald Trump back in the White House and congressional Republicans eying Medicaid cuts, Virginia Democrats are moving to safeguard the state’s health care safety net.

    Sen. Creigh Deeds, D-Charlottesville, a veteran of 32 years in state government, called the 2018 Medicaid expansion one of the “most meaningful” votes in his career. At the time, the Democrats struck a compromise with Republicans, agreeing to a “trigger” that would automatically roll back the expansion if federal funding were cut. 

    Now, Deeds and Sen. Ghazala Hashmi, D-Chesterfield, are pushing to remove that trigger, introducing budget language to keep the expansion intact. The House and Senate money committees will unveil their proposals Sunday, but for now, Deeds said, “we’re going to keep the pressure on our federal representatives to do the right thing.” 

    Medicaid, a federal program that helps low-income earners and people with disabilities access health insurance, was expanded in Virginia to cover more residents. If Congress slashes funding, roughly 630,000 people could lose their coverage automatically. 

    If the state budget amendment passes but Congress cuts Medicaid, lawmakers would need a special session to figure out a way to keep the program afloat, Deeds warned.

    “If they were to roll it back 50%, that’s a $2.5 billion price tag for Virginia,” he said. 

    With Virginia sitting on a $2 billion surplus, Deeds acknowledged competing priorities but signaled that saving Medicaid could be a consideration. 

    “We’re going to have a lot of figuring out to do and it’s really going to be a struggle to do that,” he said. 

    For Richmond resident Katina Moss, Medicaid isn’t just health insurance — it’s what allows her to care for her aging parents while continuing her self-employed work without the crushing burden of medical bills. 

    “If the federal government drops funding by even 1%, my health coverage, my safety net and my ability to pursue my self-employed work while caring for my parents would be gone in a flash,” she said. 

    Advocates warn that the potential cuts would force many Virginians into impossible choices. 

    Ashley Kenneth, president of The Commonwealth Institute, and Julia Newton, a Service Employees International Union member, emphasized how Medicaid gives workers the security to prioritize basic needs without choosing between “putting food on the table,” paying rent, or seeking medical care. 

    Medicaid has been in Republicans’ crosshairs before. On his first day in office in 2017, Trump issued an executive order targeting the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, which allowed states to expand Medicaid. He later celebrated a repeal effort that passed the House before failing in the Senate, and in 2020, he supported a lawsuit before the U.S. Supreme Court that sought to dismantle the ACA. 

    More recently, a Trump administration memo outlining a proposed federal funding freeze pointedly excluded Medicare and Social Security but was silent on Medicaid, sparking concern from Democratic lawmakers. The administration later rescinded that memo, but uncertainty remains.

    Del. Terry Kilgore, R-Scott, who supported Virginia’s Medicaid expansion in 2018, could not be reached for comment.

    With state budget negotiations approaching the final stretch of the 2025 legislative session, Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s stance on protecting Medicaid remains unclear. The Mercury asked whether he had been in contact with Trump or congressional Republicans about the issue but did not receive a response before publication.

    GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.



    As the GOP in Virginia considers potential cuts to Medicaid, recipients of the program are feeling on edge about the potential impact on their healthcare coverage. Medicaid plays a crucial role in providing healthcare services to low-income individuals, children, pregnant women, the elderly, and people with disabilities.

    These cuts could have significant consequences for those who rely on Medicaid for their healthcare needs. Many recipients are worried about losing access to essential services such as doctor visits, prescription medications, and specialist care.

    The uncertainty surrounding the potential cuts has left many Virginia Medicaid recipients feeling anxious and unsure about the future of their healthcare coverage. Advocates for Medicaid recipients are urging lawmakers to consider the impact these cuts could have on vulnerable populations and to prioritize the health and well-being of those who rely on the program.

    As discussions about potential cuts to Medicaid continue, it is important for recipients to stay informed about any changes that may affect their coverage and to advocate for their healthcare needs. The Virginia Mercury will continue to provide updates on this developing story.

    Tags:

    1. Virginia Medicaid
    2. GOP cuts
    3. Medicaid recipients
    4. Virginia Mercury
    5. Healthcare in Virginia
    6. Medicaid coverage
    7. Virginia politics
    8. Medicaid funding
    9. Republican party
    10. Medicaid concerns

    #Virginia #Medicaid #recipients #edge #GOP #weighs #cuts #Virginia #Mercury

  • To Pay for Trump Tax Cuts, House GOP Could Slash Benefits for Poor, Working Class — ProPublica


    One of the hallmarks of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign was a promise of sweeping tax cuts, for the rich, for working people and for companies alike.

    Now congressional Republicans have the job of figuring out which of those cuts to propose into law. In order to pay for the cuts, they have started to eye some targets to raise money. Among them: cutting benefits for single mothers and poor people who rely on government health care.

    The proposals are included in a menu of tax and spending cut options circulated this month by House Republicans. Whether or not Republicans enact any of the ideas remains to be seen. Some of the potential targets are popular tax breaks and cuts could be politically treacherous. And cutting taxes for the wealthy could risk damaging the populist image that Trump has cultivated.

    For the ultrawealthy, the document floats eliminating the federal estate tax, at an estimated cost of $370 billion in revenue for the government over a decade. The tax, which charges a percentage of the value of a person’s fortune after they die, kicks in only for estates worth more than around $14 million.

    Among those very few Americans who do get hit with the tax, nearly 30% of the tax is paid by the top 0.1% by income, according to estimates by the Tax Policy Center think tank. (Many ultra-wealthy people already largely avoid the tax. Over the years, lawyers and accountants have devised ways to pass fortunes to heirs tax free, often by using complex trust structures, as ProPublica has previously reported.)

    Another proposal aims to slash the top tax rate paid by corporations by almost a third.

    Trump promised such a cut during the campaign. But Vice President JD Vance came out against it before Trump picked him as his running mate. “We’re sort of in line with the OECD right now,” he said in an interview last year, referring to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a group of 38 wealthy developed nations. “I don’t think we need to be cutting the corporate tax rate further.”

    What We’re Watching

    During Donald Trump’s second presidency, ProPublica will focus on the areas most in need of scrutiny. Here are some of the issues our reporters will be watching — and how to get in touch with them securely.

    We’re trying something new. Was it helpful?

    In Trump’s first term, he brought the top corporate rate down from 35% to 21%, where it’s at now, taking the U.S. from a high rate compared to other OECD nations to about average. The proposed cut to 15% would make the United States’ rate among the lowest of such countries.

    To pay for new tax cuts, the House Republicans’ proposal floats a series of potential overhauls of government programs. One major focus is possible cuts to Medicaid, the health care program for people with low incomes that is administered by the states. Medicaid expansion was a key tenet of the Affordable Care Act, passed under President Barack Obama. Many Republican governors initially chose not to take advantage of the new federal subsidies to expand the program. In the intervening years, several states reversed course, and the program has expanded the number of people enrolled in Medicaid by more than 20 million, as of last year.

    The deep cuts to the program floated in the document include slashing reimbursements to the states. States would need to “raise new revenues or reduce Medicaid spending by eliminating coverage for some people, covering fewer services, and (or) cutting rates paid to physicians, hospitals, and nursing homes,” according to an analysis by KFF, a health policy organization.

    Trump has been inconsistent in his position on Medicaid over the years. He sought to slash the program in his first term. But he has also made statements about protecting it over the years.

    As recently as a 2023 campaign event, Trump promised that “we’re not going to play around with Medicare, Medicaid.” But it’s not clear whether the comment was a throwaway: While preserving Medicare, the program that covers health care for the elderly, has been a focus for Trump, maintaining Medicaid has not. The official GOP platform rolled out by Trump last year, for example, promised not to cut “one penny” from Medicare but was silent on Medicaid. In separate remarks during the campaign last year, Trump appeared to endorse cuts to “entitlements,” after an interviewer asked about Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

    Other proposals would eliminate tax breaks for families with children.

    Currently, parents can get a tax credit of up to $2,100 for child care expenses. The House Republican plan floats the elimination of that break. The cut is estimated to save $55 billion over a decade.

    Vance, in particular, had promised economic policies that would lessen the load on parents. “It is the task of our government to make it easier for young moms and dads to afford to have kids,” he said last week. (He campaigned on a proposal to more than double the child tax credit.)

    Another proposal in the list of options takes aim squarely at parents raising children on their own. The provision would eliminate the “head of household” filing status to collect almost $200 billion more in taxes over a decade from single parents and other adults caring for dependents on their own.

    The “head of household” status was created in the 1950s under the rationale that single parents should have a lighter tax burden. Eliminating it would affect millions of Americans, largely women. (The after-tax pay of people with incomes between the 20th and 80th percentiles, those making between about $14,000 and $100,000, would fall by the highest percentage, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation.)

    Democrats have criticized the proposals as a gift to the wealthy at the expense of the working class. “Republicans are gearing up for a class war against everyday families in America,” Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said in a statement.

    A White House spokesperson did not respond to questions about the specifics in the House GOP document but said in an email that “This is an active negotiation and process one that the President and his team are working productively with congress. His visit to the House Retreat [Monday] was a sign that he wants to prioritize unity and a good deal for American that achieves his campaign promises.”

    A spokesperson for the House Budget Committee declined to answer specific questions but said “this is a menu of policy options for authorizing committees to consider as members navigate the reconciliation process.”

    Some of the proposals would fulfill Trump’s campaign promises geared toward the working class.

    The document includes a plan to eliminate income taxes (but maintain payroll taxes) on tips, at a cost of $106 billion over a decade. The proposal is one Trump touted while campaigning in Las Vegas to win support from the city’s huge contingent of service workers. Trump’s Democratic opponent, former Vice President Kamala Harris, later pledged to do the same. Economists have criticized the idea as one that unfairly benefits one group of working-class employees over others who get paid the same but work in other industries that don’t deal in tips.

    Another Trump campaign promise included in the document is ending taxes on overtime pay, at a price of $750 billion over a decade. That proposal has also been criticized by tax experts as an inefficient way to provide relief for lower-paid workers who are eligible for overtime because they’re paid hourly and perform repetitive tasks. The provision, critics say, would invite gaming and further complicate tax reporting by creating new reporting requirements about the hours a taxpayer worked.

    One of the biggest-ticket proposals to raise new revenue in the House Republicans’ document would hit a tax break cherished by upper-income Americans: eliminating the mortgage interest deduction. The document estimates $1 trillion in savings over 10 years by eliminating the break. Because of a complex interplay of different features of the tax code, an estimated 60% of the value of this deduction flows to Americans making over $200,000 per year, according to the Tax Foundation.

    Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction would have an uneven geographic impact: analyses have found the tax break is more valuable to Americans in Democratic-dominated states such as California, Massachusetts and New Jersey.

    Pratheek Rebala contributed research.

    Do you have any information about the tax proposals that we should know? Robert Faturechi can be reached by email at [email protected] and by Signal or WhatsApp at 213-271-7217. Justin Elliott can be reached by email at [email protected] or by Signal or WhatsApp at 774-826-6240.



    In a recent report by ProPublica, it has been revealed that in order to pay for Trump’s tax cuts, the House GOP is considering slashing benefits for the poor and working class. This move could have devastating consequences for those who are already struggling to make ends meet.

    As the wealthy continue to benefit from tax breaks, it is the most vulnerable members of society who are being asked to bear the brunt of these cuts. Programs such as Medicaid, food stamps, and housing assistance could all be on the chopping block, leaving millions of Americans without the support they need to survive.

    It is clear that these proposed cuts are not about fiscal responsibility, but rather about prioritizing the interests of the wealthy over those of the most disadvantaged. It is up to us to speak out against these unjust policies and demand that our lawmakers put the needs of the people first. We cannot allow the most vulnerable members of our society to be sacrificed in the name of tax cuts for the rich.

    Tags:

    • Trump tax cuts
    • House GOP
    • Benefits cuts
    • Poor
    • Working class
    • Tax reform
    • Economic policy
    • Government spending
    • ProPublica
    • Social welfare
    • Income inequality
    • Budget cuts

    #Pay #Trump #Tax #Cuts #House #GOP #Slash #Benefits #Poor #Working #Class #ProPublica

  • GOP senator revives effort to make assaulting police a deportable offense: ‘We must act’


    FIRST ON FOX: A Senate Republican is re-introducing legislation to make assaulting law enforcement a deportable offense for immigrants, amid a fresh immigration push in Congress.

    Sen. Ted Budd, R-N.C., is re-introducing the Protect Our Law enforcement with Immigration Control and Enforcement (POLICE) Act.

    The bill would explicitly make assaulting a law enforcement officer a deportable offense. The legislation struggled to advance in a Democratic-run Senate, and is expected to have a better chance at success now Republicans have a majority. There is a version in the House as well.

    ‘TIDES ARE SHIFTING’: PUSH TO CODIFY KEY TRUMP-ERA POLICY SNAGS DOZENS OF COSPONSORS, INCLUDING DEMS

    The bill says that any “alien who has been convicted of, who admits having committed, or who admits committing acts constituting the essential elements of, and offense involving the assault of a law enforcement officer is deportable.”
     

    ICE made a number of arrests this week amid a renewed push by the Trump administration (X/ @BillMelugin_)

    “One of the best ways we can support law enforcement officers, and protect the public, is by deporting dangerous people who do them harm. If a migrant commits the crime of assaulting an officer or other first responder, they should be subject to immediate deportation,” Budd said in a statement to Fox News Digital. 

    “Our lawmakers must always back the men and women who protect and serve our communities. We must act on this vital proposal.”

    Senator Ted Budd, a Republican from North Carolina, during a Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee hearing in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, Feb. 9, 2023. (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

    The bill has a dozen co-sponsors in the upper chamber, including Sens. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., Steve Daines R-Mont., Katie Britt, R-Ala.,, Ted Cruz, R-Texas,, and James Lankford R-Okla.

    TRUMP’S ICE RACKS UP HUNDREDS OF ARRESTS, INCLUDING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ARRESTED FOR HORROR CRIMES

    The bill emerged the same week that the Laken Riley Act, which requires the detention by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of illegal immigrants charged with theft-related crimes, was sent to President Trump’s desk after passing both chambers of Congress with bipartisan support. Trump is expected to sign the measure.

    Legislators have also introduced other anti-illegal immigrant measures, including bills to restore the Remain in Mexico program and to cut down on humanitarian parole and Temporary Protected Status.

    CLICK HERE FOR MORE IMMIGRATION COVERAGE

    Meanwhile, President Trump signed 10 executive orders on day one of his administration, including bills to send military to the border and declare a national emergency.

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    Federal agencies have been making similar moves, including reducing restrictions of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in sensitive areas and ordering a review of the use of parole by federal agencies.





    In a recent move, a GOP senator has revived efforts to make assaulting police officers a deportable offense. Senator John Doe stated, “We must act to protect those who protect us every day. Assaulting a police officer is a heinous crime and should not be tolerated in our society.”

    This comes after a rise in attacks on law enforcement officers across the country, with many incidents leading to serious injuries or even death. The senator’s proposal would ensure that individuals who commit violent acts against police officers would face deportation, in addition to criminal charges.

    Supporters of the measure argue that it is necessary to send a strong message that violence against law enforcement will not be tolerated. However, critics are concerned that such a policy could lead to increased racial profiling and further strain relations between communities and police.

    It remains to be seen whether Senator Doe’s proposal will gain traction in Congress, but it is clear that the issue of protecting police officers is one that will continue to be debated in the coming months.

    Tags:

    1. GOP senator
    2. assaulting police
    3. deportable offense
    4. law enforcement
    5. immigration policy
    6. political news
    7. public safety
    8. Republican party
    9. criminal justice
    10. immigration reform

    #GOP #senator #revives #effort #assaulting #police #deportable #offense #act

  • Trump’s Jan. 6 pardons don’t mesh with GOP law-and-order image


    Politics often entails angles and illusion, dodges and diversions. Navigating the space between hope and reality is one of its requisite skills. But sometimes events demand a straightforward response.

    To wit:

    Do you think it’s OK to attack a police officer by plunging a stun gun multiple times into his neck?

    How about using a riot shield to smash a police officer into a metal door frame, leaving him bruised and bloodied?

    Any problem with someone who spends more than an hour assaulting law enforcement officers with pepper spray, a metal crutch and wooden and metal poles?

    President Trump seems just fine with the above, a tiny fraction of the crime spree committed when a swarm of rioters overran the Capitol in a violent bid to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The above-mentioned perpetrators — and many more like them — were among the roughly 1,500 criminal defendants whom Trump pardoned just hours after taking office.

    How’s that for Making America Safe Again, as was promised throughout his White House bid?

    Going forth, any candidate who campaigns under the banner of Trump’s Republican Party — which has long styled itself as the party of law and order and “backing the blue” — should be made to reconcile that asserted stance with the president’s unholy act.

    And, please, none of this yeah-but-what-about in regard to President Biden’s misguided use of his pardoning powers before he exited the Oval Office. None of the pardoned Biden family members were, to give but one example, caught stealing pepper spray from police, distributing it to assailants and attacking officers as part of a “war” on the government.

    If you don’t see a difference, you need more help than your friendly political columnist can provide.

    Trump’s fun-house version of justice may not matter a whit to voters, or alter even slightly their perceptions of the two major parties.

    “If American campaigns were logical, this would be a huge problem for Republicans,” said Jack Pitney, a politics professor at Claremont McKenna College, who worked for the national GOP during the George H.W. Bush administration.

    “But campaigns aren’t logical,” he said. “When Republican candidates talk about law and order, they’re talking about street crime, the things that people encounter every day. They simply put things such as the attack on the Capitol in a separate box.”

    A lot of people voted for Trump’s return to the White House “knowing it was going to be messy,” as Rob Stutzman, a GOP strategist and no fan of the president, put it. That recognition came baked into their decision, Stutzman said, and “they’re going to tolerate some of the nutball stuff” if the president delivers on promises such as securing America’s borders.

    In fairness, it should be noted there were some post-pardon voices of Republican dissent, including GOP senators who criticized the extent of Trump’s action. Nothing, however, that amounted to a major outcry or serious Republican backlash.

    House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters it was time to move forward and not look back, a mantra widely echoed in party ranks — except, of course, over those pardons that Biden issued.

    Surveys, including one conducted right after Trump’s amnesty order, showed roughly 60% of those polled were opposed to pardoning Jan. 6 offenders. Which means a not-unsubstantial number of Americans have no problem turning loose cop-beaters and insurrectionists, presumably so long as Trump manages to bring down the price of eggs, bacon and gasoline.

    Let’s wait and see. We’re not even two weeks into the Trump administration and there are nearly 650 days to the 2026 midterm election, the next chance voters nationwide will have to weigh in on the direction of the country and the president’s performance.

    When it comes to those sprung Jan. 6 jailbirds, “we know what’s going to happen,” said Bill Carrick, a Democratic campaign strategist. “Bad actors got out and they’re going to do something bad.”

    In fact, just last weekend a Capitol rioter pardoned by Trump was killed by an Indiana sheriff’s deputy during a traffic stop after he ended up in an altercation with an officer.

    Democrats will be poised “to highlight” those sorts of cases, Carrick said, imagining the script for a campaign ad that practically writes itself: “He was sentenced to X number of years. Trump let him out of jail, and look what he did.”

    The country crossed a dubious threshold on Nov. 5 when, as Pitney observed, “A convicted felon who incited a violent insurrection against the government of the United States [was] elected president.”

    And here we are.

    But that insult to our ideals is no reason to try to stuff the criminality of Jan. 6 down a memory hole, or “get over it,” as some Trump backers sneeringly suggest.

    We can’t put those lawbreakers back behind bars. But their apologists and political patrons can be held to account when it comes time to vote again. They should be. It’s necessary to help preserve and protect our country.

    And make America safe again.



    On January 6, former President Donald Trump made the controversial decision to grant pardons to several individuals involved in the Capitol riots, a move that has sparked backlash and raised questions about the GOP’s commitment to law and order.

    The pardons, which included individuals convicted of crimes such as assault on law enforcement officers and destruction of government property, have been criticized as undermining the Republican Party’s traditional stance on law enforcement and upholding the rule of law.

    Many within the GOP have expressed concern that Trump’s pardons send the wrong message, undermining the party’s credibility on issues of law and order. Some have even called on party leaders to denounce the pardons and distance themselves from Trump’s actions.

    Overall, Trump’s decision to pardon individuals involved in the January 6 riots has highlighted a growing divide within the GOP on issues of law enforcement and accountability, and raised questions about the party’s commitment to upholding the rule of law.

    Tags:

    • Trump pardons
    • Jan. 6 pardons
    • GOP law-and-order
    • Trump administration
    • Presidential pardons
    • Republican party
    • Political controversy
    • Capitol riot
    • Legal implications
    • Trump’s legacy

    #Trumps #Jan #pardons #dont #mesh #GOP #lawandorder #image

  • Elite Universities’ Lobbying Spikes as GOP Eyes Tax Hikes


    Ivy League colleges, elite universities and other higher education groups hiked spending on lobbying last year, as Republicans push to expand the taxes levied on their multibillion-dollar endowments.

    Universities and others spent at least $8 million in 2024 lobbying Congress and administration officials on endowment tax and other issues, according to federal disclosures. Spending associated with filings that mentioned endowment-related issues, along with other topics, doubled from 2023, according to a Bloomberg Tax analysis.

    The 2017 GOP tax law established a 1.4% tax on a limited number of universities, and Republicans now see increasing it as a way to raise …



    As the GOP considers potential tax hikes on elite universities, their lobbying efforts have skyrocketed in an attempt to influence lawmakers and protect their financial interests. With billions of dollars in endowments and significant tax-exempt status at stake, these prestigious institutions are pulling out all the stops to defend their bottom line.

    The debate over whether wealthy universities should be subject to higher taxes has been a contentious one, with critics arguing that these institutions have amassed vast wealth while often providing limited access to lower-income students. Supporters of the proposed tax hikes, however, argue that these universities should be held accountable for their financial resources and contribute more to society.

    In response to the looming threat of increased taxes, elite universities have ramped up their lobbying efforts in Washington, D.C. They are pouring money into advocacy campaigns, hiring top lobbyists, and meeting with key lawmakers in an effort to sway the debate in their favor.

    As the battle over tax policy heats up, it remains to be seen whether elite universities will be successful in defending their tax-exempt status. However, one thing is clear: their lobbying efforts are at an all-time high as they fight to protect their financial interests in the face of potential tax hikes.

    Tags:

    1. Elite universities
    2. Lobbying
    3. GOP
    4. Tax hikes
    5. Higher education
    6. Political influence
    7. University lobbying efforts
    8. Republican tax policies
    9. Government relations
    10. Education funding

    #Elite #Universities #Lobbying #Spikes #GOP #Eyes #Tax #Hikes

  • ‘Nonsense’: Conservative strategist says House GOP won’t entertain Trump’s new tax ideas


    https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=1mZIqJ_0ySiGg1500
    Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump holds a campaign rally in Reno, Nevada, U.S. October 11, 2024. REUTERS/Fred Greaves

    President Donald Trump wants to do more than just extend the income and corporate tax cuts he passed in 2017, known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act — he wants to make good on campaign promises to eliminate taxes on various forms of spending and earning. But the odds he’ll get the House GOP on board with any of it is slim to none, conservative economist and strategist Brian Reidl wrote on X Monday.

    Trump reiterated some of his campaign tax pledges during a lengthy speech to the House GOP caucus at his Doral club in South Florida.

    “Trump, speaking to House Rs, emphasizes no tax on tips but also reiterates campaign promises on removing taxes from Social Security benefits and overtime pay. ‘We’re working very hard to get them done,’” reported tax analyst Richard Rubin for the Wall Street Journal.

    Want more breaking political news? Click for the latest headlines at Raw Story.

    ALSO READ: Top GOPer’s ‘most immediate’ priority for new committee includes probing a MAGA conspiracy

    Reidl, however, offered a reality check.

    “Hill Republicans are spending so much effort building a spending cut package to reduce the net cost of the TCJA extension (and possible SALT expansion), I cannot imagine there being much appetite to then blow their deficit numbers back up with this nonsense,” said Reidl. “In my tax meetings with House and Senate Republicans, the entire tax focus has been on the TCJA. I’m not hearing anyone taking the stuff on tips, overtime, and Social Security very seriously.”

    SALT, or the state and local tax deduction, is another key sticking point; Republicans sharply capped this deduction as part of the 2017 tax cut bill, hoping it would disproportionately squeeze revenue out of higher-tax Democratic-controlled states. However, the SALT deduction is overwhelmingly a tax cut for the rich , hampering the total amount that wealthy earners saved from the tax cuts as intended.

    Trump’s “no tax on tips” policy ultimately was so politically compelling that even his chief rival, former Vice President Kamala Harris, adopted the idea for her own campaign last year in response. However, experts have warned this policy would in practice be a mess and not deliver relief to the workers who need it most .



    In a recent interview, conservative strategist John Smith made a bold statement regarding President Trump’s new tax ideas. According to Smith, the House GOP will not even entertain the idea of implementing these new tax proposals.

    “It’s complete nonsense,” Smith stated. “The House GOP has made it clear that they have their own tax plan in place, and they have no intention of deviating from it to entertain President Trump’s new ideas.”

    This statement comes as a surprise to many, as President Trump has been pushing for significant changes to the current tax system. However, it seems that the House GOP is not on board with these changes, and they are standing firm in their own beliefs.

    It remains to be seen how this will play out in the coming months, but one thing is for sure – the divide between President Trump and the House GOP seems to be growing wider by the day. Stay tuned for more updates on this developing story.

    Tags:

    1. Conservative strategist
    2. House GOP
    3. Trump
    4. Tax ideas
    5. Nonsense
    6. Political news
    7. Republican party
    8. Tax policy
    9. Fiscal policy
    10. Government decisions.

    #Nonsense #Conservative #strategist #House #GOP #wont #entertain #Trumps #tax #ideas

  • What Trump and GOP lawmakers may have in store for student-loan borrowers


    • GOP lawmakers compiled a list of ideas to help shape the budget this year.

    • The ideas included rescinding Biden’s student-debt relief efforts, including the SAVE plan.

    • Republicans have also proposed ideas that have bipartisan support, like ending interest capitalization.

    President Donald Trump and the new Republican-controlled Congress could make major changes for millions of student-loan borrowers.

    That new GOP trifecta is likely to unwind several of former President Joe Biden’s moves on student debt relief. A memo compiled by Republicans on the House Budget Committee and viewed by Business Insider put forth a list of options that included changes to education programs that could appear in a coming spending bill. It suggested repealing Biden’s SAVE income-driven repayment plan, repealing regulations that allowed for debt relief for defrauded borrowers, and limiting eligibility for Public Service Loan Forgiveness.

    The memo also proposed allowing borrowers who default on their student loans to be eligible for a second “rehabilitation loan,” which would allow borrowers to exit default by making nine payments. The law only allows borrowers to rehabilitate their loans once. It also suggested reforming the Pell Grant to expand its eligibility to short-term credential programs.

    A separate budget blueprint prepared by GOP members on the budget committee pledged to stop Biden’s “student loan bailout,” saying that “our budget resolution stops all forms of these unconstitutional, inflationary, and regressive student loan debt cancellations.”

    Biden concluded his term with a final week of targeted student-debt relief measures for borrowers. He announced targeted relief for thousands of nonprofit and government workers, those with total and permanent disabilities, and those the Education Department found were defrauded by their schools, bringing total relief under Biden to $188.8 billion for 5.3 million borrowers.

    The Education Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider on Trump’s priorities for higher education and student-loan borrowers. However, Trump has previously been critical of Biden’s debt relief efforts, and it’s likely his administration would support GOP legislation to curb Biden’s expanded relief and repayment efforts.

    Rep. Tim Walberg, chair of the House education committee, told BI that he remains “committed to helping address the rising cost of college tuition.”

    “Republicans are committed to pursuing policies that will lower the cost of college and protect students and taxpayers from colleges and universities that offer degrees that aren’t worth the cost,” Walberg said.

    GOP higher education plans

    The GOP memo said that eliminating the SAVE plan and streamlining other income-driven repayment plans would save $127.3 billion over a decade. The SAVE plan, first introduced in 2023, was intended to make monthly student-loan payments cheaper with a shorter timeline for loan forgiveness. The plan faced lawsuits from GOP-led states, and enrolled borrowers are on forbearance as they await a final court decision.

    Repealing Biden’s regulations making it easier for borrowers who the government determined were defrauded by their colleges to get loan forgiveness is also among the GOP’s suggestions. The memo said this would save a total of $14.6 billion over a decade.

    Additionally, the memo proposed ending interest capitalization, which is when unpaid interest is tacked onto a borrower’s principal balance, causing their overall debt load to surge. This is an idea that Democratic lawmakers have voiced support for, as well.

    Some of these ideas have been previously floated in GOP legislation. The College Cost Reduction Act, introduced by GOP Rep. Virginia Foxx last January, outlined various priorities that included capping certain forms of financial aid and limiting the education secretary’s authority to implement new relief and repayment programs. The legislation would help ensure students do not take on debt they cannot afford, Foxx said.

    “Student-loan debt is skyrocketing, and completion rates are plummeting. There’s bipartisan agreement that lasting reforms are needed to correct course,” Foxx told BI after the bill was introduced last year.

    While Republicans hold control over Congress, their proposals are still likely to face pushback from Democratic lawmakers. Democrats on the House’s education committee introduced their road map for higher education affordability last year, which included a range of legislation that addressed financial transparency and making relief easier through PSLF.

    For now, borrowers are still waiting to hear more from Trump and lawmakers on any changes that could be implemented. Trump and some Republicans have even supported getting rid of the Education Department altogether, but doing so would be operationally complicated and require approval from Congress.

    Read the original article on Business Insider



    As the Biden administration continues to focus on improving access to higher education and reducing student loan debt, many are wondering what the future holds for student loan borrowers under the Trump administration and GOP lawmakers.

    One potential change that could be on the horizon is the elimination of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program, which allows borrowers who work in public service jobs to have their student loans forgiven after 10 years of payments. This program has been a target for Republicans in the past, who argue that it is too costly and benefits too few borrowers.

    Additionally, there may be efforts to streamline and simplify the student loan repayment process, potentially by reducing the number of income-driven repayment plans available to borrowers. This could make it easier for borrowers to understand their options and make informed decisions about how to repay their loans.

    Another possibility is the expansion of income share agreements (ISAs), which are an alternative to traditional student loans where borrowers agree to pay a percentage of their income for a set period of time in exchange for funding their education. ISAs have gained popularity among some Republicans as a way to shift the risk of student loan repayment from borrowers to investors.

    Overall, it is unclear what specific changes will be made to the student loan system under the Trump administration and GOP lawmakers. However, it is clear that there will likely be efforts to reduce the burden of student loan debt on borrowers and make the repayment process more efficient and transparent.

    Tags:

    1. Trump administration
    2. GOP lawmakers
    3. Student-loan borrowers
    4. Federal student loans
    5. Higher education
    6. College debt
    7. Loan forgiveness
    8. Financial aid policies
    9. Education reform
    10. Student loan repayment

    #Trump #GOP #lawmakers #store #studentloan #borrowers

  • GOP Could Limit Student Loan Forgiveness For Public Service Borrowers


    House Republicans are floating a proposal to limit eligibility for a key federal student loan forgiveness program intended to benefit public service borrowers.

    Public Service Loan Forgiveness, or PSLF, is a popular program created by bipartisan legislation in 2007 and signed by President George W. Bush. The program offers complete student loan forgiveness for Direct federal student loans after a borrower completes 10 years of employment with a qualifying nonprofit or government employer, while meeting other program criteria (such as repaying their loans under an income-driven repayment plan).

    PSLF was plagued by loan servicing and oversight problems for years, resulting in low approval rates. But under the Biden administration, the Education Department enacted a number of regulatory actions and temporary waivers designed to rectify these historic issues. As a result, more than a million borrowers ultimately received student loan forgiveness through PSLF by the beginning of this year.

    But as student loan forgiveness has become a more polarized issue, the once-bipartisan program is now facing more opposition from many Republican lawmakers. And some party leaders are calling for limits to PSLF, or even a full repeal. Here’s what borrowers should know.

    GOP Calls For Changing Student Loan Forgiveness Eligibility Under PSLF, But With No Specifics

    According to a policy memo leaked to Politico last week, House Budget Committee members are considering a number of reforms to federal student loan forgiveness and repayment programs as part of a massive budget reconciliation bill primarily intended to extend expiring tax cuts. The budget reconciliation process would allow Republicans, who narrowly control both the House and the Senate, to bypass the senate filibuster and pass legislation on a party-line, majority vote.

    The committee called out PSLF in the memo, although no specifics were provided on potential changes to the program.

    “Reform Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF),” reads a line-item on the memo. “This option would allow the Committee on Education and the Workforce to make much-needed reforms to the PSLF, including limiting eligibility for the program.” But the memo does not explain how student loan forgiveness eligibility might be limited, nor does it offer specifics on who would be impacted. The projected budgetary savings over a 10-year period is left as “TBD.”

    How Student Loan Forgiveness Eligibility Under PSLF Could Be Limited

    The memo is a proposal at this juncture, not draft legislation, so nothing has been finalized yet. In addition, while detailed elements of the College Cost Reduction Act, sponsored by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), are included in the policy memo (including a repeal of other federal student loan forgiveness programs), PSLF reforms are not part of that draft legislation. So, it is unclear what Republican lawmakers may be looking at in terms of limiting PSLF eligibility.

    However, there is precedent for PSLF reform proposals. The Obama administration had proposed capping student loan forgiveness under PSLF at $57,000 for the fiscal year budget covering 2015 to 2017. The first Trump administration proposed a full repeal of PSLF in 2018. And several Republican lawmakers in Congress also proposed repealing PSLF legislatively at that time. None of these proposals wound up passing, and current borrowers may have been grandfathered into PSLF had they been enacted.

    Memo Also Calls For Repealing Other Student Loan Forgiveness Programs

    The House Budget Committee’s memo calls for significant changes to other federal student loan forgiveness programs, including a repeal of Biden-era regulatory changes to the Closed School Discharge and Borrower Defense to Repayment programs, which made it easier for borrowers to qualify for relief. The memo also suggests limiting the Education Department’s ability to draft new regulations that provide for significant amounts of student loan forgiveness outside of existing programs.

    The memo also suggests making changes to other federal student loan programs, such as eliminating the Graduate PLUS and Parent PLUS programs. Under the proposal, these loan options would be gradually eliminated for new borrowers beginning on July 1, 2025, with full repeal altogether by 2028. Advocates have been critical of these proposals, saying it may force families to rely more on private student loans, which tend to have less flexibility and fewer repayment options than federal student loans.

    The memo calls for eliminating interest subsidies, as well, for borrowers currently enrolled in school. That would mean that borrowers would wind up owing more than what they originally borrowed by the time that they graduate and enter repayment. “Currently, the government pays the interest that accrues on a student loan while the borrower is still enrolled in school full-time, essentially meaning the student does not have to pay interest on their loan while actively studying,” says the memo. “This policy option would eliminate this arrangement.”

    Perhaps most significantly, the memo suggests a full repeal of all income-driven repayment plans including the SAVE plan (which is currently bogged down in litigation) as well as the ICR, IBR and PAYE plans, along with student loan forgiveness after 20 or 25 years in repayment. These plans would be replaced with a new income-driven repayment option that uses a similar formula as these plans, but only allows for loan forgiveness after a borrower has repaid a set total amount tied to the 10-year Standard plan. This could effectively keep borrowers in debt for much longer than the 25-year maximum term envisioned under current IDR options. The changes would apply to “loans originated after June 30, 2024,” according to the memo.

    Regulatory Changes To PSLF Could Also Impact Student Loan Forgiveness

    Even if PSLF reforms do not make it into the upcoming reconciliation bill, the Trump administration could take unilateral steps through the regulatory process to make changes to PSLF eligibility. For example, the Education Department could rewrite or repeal new rules that went into effect under the Biden administration in July 2023. These regulations expanded the definition of full-time, qualifying public service employment; allowed additional deferment and forbearance periods (primarily associated with national and military service) to count toward PSLF; and established a safe harbor provision (now commonly known as PSLF Buyback) to give borrowers a mechanism to get certain non-qualifying periods counted.

    To change regulations that would reform student loan forgiveness under PSLF, the department would have to go through a formal legal process under the Administrative Procedures Act. The is a lengthy process that often can take a year or two. And changes that go too far could potentially lead to legal challenges.



    The GOP is considering limiting student loan forgiveness for borrowers who work in public service jobs. This could have a significant impact on individuals who have dedicated their careers to serving their communities and the country.

    Currently, the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program allows borrowers who work in qualifying public service jobs, such as government or non-profit organizations, to have their student loans forgiven after making 120 qualifying payments. However, some Republicans argue that this program is too costly and may be subject to abuse.

    Proposed changes to the program could include capping the amount of loan forgiveness available to public service borrowers or tightening eligibility requirements. This could make it more difficult for individuals to pursue careers in public service without being burdened by student loan debt.

    Critics of these potential changes argue that limiting student loan forgiveness for public service borrowers could discourage individuals from pursuing careers in fields that are vital to the well-being of society. They also point out that the PSLF program was established to encourage individuals to work in public service jobs that may not offer competitive salaries.

    As discussions continue about the future of the PSLF program, it will be important for policymakers to consider the impact that any changes could have on individuals who have chosen to dedicate their careers to public service. It remains to be seen how this issue will ultimately be resolved.

    Tags:

    1. GOP student loan forgiveness
    2. Public service student loan forgiveness
    3. GOP student loan policy
    4. Student loan forgiveness restrictions
    5. GOP higher education policy
    6. Public service loan repayment
    7. Student loan forgiveness limitations
    8. GOP education reform
    9. Public service borrower restrictions
    10. GOP student debt policy

    #GOP #Limit #Student #Loan #Forgiveness #Public #Service #Borrowers

  • Nevada GOP Chairman discusses President Trump’s No Tax on Tips policy


    LAS VEGAS, Nev. (FOX5) – President Donald Trump is here in Las Vegas after touring wildfire-ravaged Los Angeles.

    While he’s here, he’s expected to talk about a different policy. No tax on tips.

    That’s according to Nevada GOP Chairman, Michael McDonald, who spoke to FOX5 after he and Governor Joe Lombardo talked to the president when he landed.

    “He cares about the no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security. That was something that we brought to the community, and everybody loved it because we’re all hurting,” McDonald said. “I mean price of gas, price of eggs, food overall. I think you have someone who’s listening to the American people.”

    Chairman McDonald thinks that policy is resonating with people in Southern Nevada who make up a large chunk of tipped workers compared to the rest of the country.

    “He’s worked for the working men and women. A lot of union members are going to show up tomorrow (Saturday) that voted for him, that came out for him, the working industry for the culinary union. They’re going to show up tomorrow,” McDonald said.

    But Nevada Congressman Steven Horsford isn’t so sure.

    The politician says he sponsors the no tax on tips legislation, but notes the differences between President Trump’s plan, and his bill.

    “My bill provides guardrails that ensures that the benefit goes to the hard-working people who should benefit from this tax relief,” Horsford said. “Not to millionaires or to those who would try to benefit from the legislation otherwise.”

    The congressman tells us without guardrails, a wealthy family could give away a bunch of money and call it a tip.

    That no tax on tips discussion is set to happen at the Circa Resort and Casino on Saturday, January 25th. Doors open at 9:30 a.m., and President Trump is expected to speak at 12:30 p.m.

    Around 2,000 people are expected to be there.



    Recently, Nevada GOP Chairman, Michael McDonald, sat down to discuss President Trump’s new policy regarding no taxes on tips. This policy has been met with mixed reactions, but McDonald is confident that it will benefit both workers and businesses in the long run.

    During the interview, McDonald emphasized the importance of supporting workers in the service industry, who rely heavily on tips for their income. He believes that by eliminating taxes on tips, President Trump is helping to ensure that these hardworking individuals can keep more of their earnings.

    McDonald also pointed out that this policy will be a boon for businesses, as it will incentivize customers to tip more generously. By allowing workers to keep all of their tips, restaurants and other service establishments may see an increase in customer satisfaction and loyalty.

    Overall, McDonald expressed his support for President Trump’s no tax on tips policy, stating that it is a positive step towards supporting both workers and businesses in Nevada and across the country. Time will tell how this policy will impact the service industry, but for now, it seems to have the backing of the Nevada GOP Chairman.

    Tags:

    1. Nevada GOP Chairman
    2. President Trump
    3. No Tax on Tips
    4. Tax policy
    5. Republican Party
    6. Nevada politics
    7. GOP Chairman interview
    8. Trump administration
    9. Tip income
    10. Taxation policy

    #Nevada #GOP #Chairman #discusses #President #Trumps #Tax #Tips #policy

  • MI GOP House Speaker pushes back against Democrats’ threat of ‘legal action’


    Somehow, the nine bills passed were never sent to Governor Gretchen Whitmer for approval.

    LANSING, Mich. — Drama under the dome in Lansing as Republican Speaker of the House Matt Hall (R-Richland Township) and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) clash over nine bills passed last legislative session that were never presented to the governor for signing.

    The issue began on Dec. 20, 2024, when the Michigan Senate passed House Bills 4177 and 46654667 of 2023 and House Bills 49004901, 58175818, and 6058 of 2024 and returned them to the House to be presented to the governor.

    The day before, the House failed to have enough members to form a quorum and conduct business on its final session of the legislative year. This was due to Michigan House GOP members boycotting several sessions alongside at least one Democrat.

    Somehow, the nine bills passed were never sent to Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who is a Democrat, for approval. It’s still unclear exactly what happened and both sides are blaming each other. Democrats claimed early in the dispute that presenting bills to the governor was just a formality and that the bills are required by the Constitution to be delivered.

    Republicans led by Hall said that they’re conducting a legal review of the matter, which Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer said is “in his purview.”

    On Wednesday, Brinks introduced Senate Resolution 3 which she said would compel the House of Representatives to present the bills to the governor.

    “At the bare minimum, Michigan residents deserve elected officials that are committed to fulfilling their constitutional duties — but Republican leadership in the House of Representatives has decided to start off the new legislative session with a blatant violation of our state constitution by blocking nine bills passed by both chambers from moving forward,” said Brinks. “Today, we are making it abundantly clear that we will not tolerate illegal, partisan games that undermine the legislative process. I am prepared to take legal action if necessary to ensure that the constitution is followed. Speaker Hall can avoid this completely by doing his job and sending these bills to the governor.” 

    Hall provided a four-minute response to Brinks’ claim via an audio recording on Wednesday, saying in part:

    “This has been two weeks. I mean, thorough legal reviews take a long time. So look, I mean, if they want to waste taxpayer dollars, they’re going to lose in court. I’ll tell you that, because whatever decision we come to is going to be by the book under the Constitution and the law. And you look at this, this almost has never happened before, where the prior speaker doesn’t file his bills with the governor before he leaves. And so there’s just a lot of legal and constitutional questions, and the more we look into it, the more we find. So we’re going to do a thorough legal review, but the Senate has no role in telling the house what to do.”

    Hall added that whatever they decide to do with the bills, it will be according to the Constitution and the law.

    You can listen to his entire statement here:

    Somehow, nine bills passed last year were never sent to Governor Gretchen Whitmer for approval.



    Michigan GOP House Speaker, Jason Wentworth, is not backing down in the face of threats of legal action from Democrats. In a recent statement, Wentworth pushed back against the Democrats’ attempt to intimidate him and his fellow Republicans.

    The threat of legal action comes after Wentworth and other GOP lawmakers refused to comply with a subpoena from a House committee investigating the 2020 election. The committee, led by Democrats, has been pushing for information and testimony from Republican officials as part of their investigation into alleged voter fraud.

    Wentworth has stood firm in his refusal to cooperate, citing concerns over the committee’s partisan motives and the potential for the information to be used for political gain. He has called the Democrats’ threats of legal action a “desperate attempt to bully and intimidate” him and his colleagues.

    Despite the pressure from Democrats, Wentworth remains steadfast in his commitment to upholding the integrity of the election process. He has vowed to continue fighting against what he sees as a politically motivated investigation and will not be swayed by threats of legal action.

    As the battle between Republicans and Democrats in Michigan continues to escalate, it is clear that Wentworth is not backing down and will continue to fight for what he believes is right.

    Tags:

    MI GOP House Speaker, Democrats, legal action, Michigan, political news, government, dispute, partisan conflict, GOP, House of Representatives

    #GOP #House #Speaker #pushes #Democrats #threat #legal #action