Irons Presents Common Sense Ideas for Tax Reform
John Irons of the Center for American Progress has laid out ideas for a comprehensive tax code overhaul which he says is overdue. [Washington Post]

Internet muse.
Daring, bold, never sold.
My daily weblog of politics, humor, philosophy...and a constant and nagging reminder of the existence of universal love....
"There is no more dangerous thing for a democracy than a foreign policy based on presidential preventive war.
Maybe President Bush, who seems a humane man, might be moved by daily sorrows of death and destruction to forgo solo preventive war and return to cooperation with other countries in the interest of collective security. Abraham Lincoln would rejoice."
- Arthur Schlesinger Jr., Bush's Thousand Days, seen in today's Washington Post
From Think Progress-Still, they lied to all of us, including the members of our House and Senate.
Tonight on 60 Minutes, Tyler Drumheller, the former chief of the CIA’s Europe division, revealed that in the fall of 2002, President Bush, Vice President Cheney, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and others were told by CIA Director George Tenet that Iraq’s foreign minister — who agreed to act as a spy for the United States — had reported that Iraq had no active weapons of mass destruction program. Watch it here
What can be done to build up financial assets for those who are "just a bank account away from America?"
We can discuss big ideas, keeping an honest eye on the fact that we are facing an incredible mountain of national debt, thanks to five years of the Bush administration's policy of giving billions of dollars in tax breaks for the wealthiest 1% of Americans and the delivery of subsidies for just about any corporate interest you can imagine. Let's not forget that when the Republican-led majority in Congress decided to trim the debt with sweeping budget cuts last fall, hardly a dime of the tax cuts for millionaires and breaks for Big Energy and Oil was touched. President Bush and his rubber-stamping Congress have rewarded wealth and turned their backs to the rewarding of hard work done by the willing hearts and calloused hands of the poorest Americans. Alleviating poverty and lifting all boats on a rising moral tide will take belief, commitment, cooperation, and caring from us all.
I have heard Senator Edwards offering solutions in the form of policies that will reward work by creating and increasing assets of the poorest working Americans. He has said that there is an asset gap in America that is every bit as important as the income gap.
A direct way to build assets for low-income workers is by expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). Since 1975, the expansion of this federal tax credit has provided an income supplement to low-wage workers. In the 1990s, the EITC helped move 7 million Americans out of poverty and into the middle class. As one of the biggest cash-transfer programs for low-income families, the EITC reflects congressional and public preferences to support increased work efforts and self-sufficiency and less dependency on welfare programs for low-income population. One of the chief aims of the EITC is the "rewarding of work." The EITC promotes and rewards low-wage work by reducing the taxes that low-wage workers pay on their earnings and by supplementing their wages. Senator Edwards wishes to make this tax credit more available to single workers and to get rid of the marriage penalty that presently exists. Female heads-of household can especially benefit from an expansion of the EITC. In a Grogger study (2003), it was found that the EITC may be the `single most important' policy parameter for explaining recent declines in welfare and increases in work and earnings among female-headed families. [source: tc.umn.edu]
Work bonds would help by setting up accounts for low income families to the extent that workers would be saving money while the government would match any savings they could manage to accrue. This would help them save to buy homes and send their children to college. Low-income working families would receive an extra credit of up to $500 per year that would be directly deposited into a new account held by a bank or a safe stock fund with low fees. If families put away more, the amount in the account would grow, and it would be available not just for retirement, but also for a small business or a personal emergency. [source: Senator Edwards' speech at CAP, September 19, 2005]
Senator Edwards suggests an enhancement of housing vouchers for the poorest workers and setting aside up to $1,000 in an account to help low-income workers entering the workforce to make home payments for the first five years they are working. After five years, they will have up to $5,000 for a down payment on a home of their own. Senator Edwards has also stated his aim to crack down on predatory lenders and their shameful practices because they prevent low-income workers from building assets.
In Britain, there is a program that issues Baby Bonds for low-income families. They set up an account for a child when they are born and then by the time the child reaches 18 years of age, they make that money available to them. Whether they want to go to college, buy a house, or start their own small business, they can use that money to do so. Senator Edwards has proposed similar ideas to help all Americans build their savings for the future. [source: One America Committee blog/Serb Hall celebrator]
All of these strategies are about investing in people and rewarding their hard work. The creation and building of assets for low-income families would be a direct investment in the American people. By bridging the asset gap, it would not be only their lives that would be beneficially affected. The communities where they live and work would also be enhanced by the increased opportunity. When Senator Edwards says he's fighting to alleviate poverty, I also hear him asking us to develop the political will to invest in American workers and allow them to live up to their full potential. This is so directly tied to the benefit of the entire American population that we can no longer sit back in silence as we see our elected representatives turn their backs on those who want to learn and to work hard to earn their piece of America.
*This entry was cross posted from the One America Committee blog.
"He got us into it. He owes it to the American people to get us out."My American Street colleague Jenny Greenleaf of Oregon was in New Orleans for the DNC spring gathering. She compares the work that she and fellow DNC volunteers were doing in New Orleans to "moving a sand dune with a teaspoon" (Hey - that rhymes):
The DNC, meeting here in New Orleans, wanted to make this about more than political machinations. DNC members are fanning out around the city to clean up devastated homes, pack food at the food bank, and sort and distribute clothes, food and hygiene products in Plaquemines Parish. I helped salvage in a commercial kitchen/pantry for Food For Friends, which prepares and delivers meals to AIDS/HIV patients. When I signed up, I imagined scrubbing shelves and polishing the stove. This place was way beyond that: our task was to save what files we could, throw away trash, and remove the refrigerators still full of food from the building, which will not be repaired anytime soon. Fortunately Food for Friends has been able to resume operations elsewhere.[..]..It’s wonderful to do something to help, but it feels like trying to move a sand dune with a teaspoon. The need here is so immense.
protectionism would have disastrous consequences for growth and would help limited numbers of exposed workers rather than the majority of poor and middle-income families. But the pressure to close borders, bash corporations and experiment with ineffective social programs will continue until government addresses inequality in a serious way.I think both ideas, "protectionism" and "social programs", have to take on a new meaning here in 2006. The American people still expect decent and fair treatment from the companies that do business here in America, even while hundreds of thousands of jobs are outsourced to foreign shores. The American people still expect a poor child to grow up to be be able to have as much opportunity to succeed as a kid from the upper middle class right here in this country.
..[Better management and marketing] will help, but they almost certainly will not be enough to rescue [Bush's] presidency from its low approval ratings and loss of public confidence.Judging from all I've seen so far from this President, we will likely get more marketing and management...long after the product has lost its sales appeal with the American public. What happens when everyone decides to mute the Oval Office commercials? You don't watch ads for cover-up when what you know you really need is an able physician. Most Americans understand we don't need cheap cosmetics. We need major surgery.

An ex-senior agency officer who keeps in contact with his former peers told me that there is a “a big swing” in anti-Bush sentiment at Langley. “I've been stunned by what I'm hearing,” he said. “There are people who fear that indictments and subpoenas could be coming down, and they don't want to get caught up in it.”.[...].Scott Horton, a human rights activist who has become a principal spokesman for the New York City Bar Association in evaluating the Bush Administration's tactics, said that he's also hearing stories of growing dissent at the CIA. “When the shit hits the fan,” he explained, “the administration scapegoats lower-level people. It doesn't do a lot in terms of inspiring confidence.”While right-wing Newsmax, in ho-hum 90s-style, is still headlining blame toward former President Clinton for anything they can (in this case for being responsible for CIA's low morale), Bush has nearly destroyed the integrity of the institution with his policy (or looking the other way for too long) on torture and teh scapegoating of CIA on the Iraq WMD dupe.
"...cracks definitely have developed in the Administration's relationship with the Armed Forces. Most recently, several active duty senior commanders who spoke on the record at the “Current Strategy Forum” that ended here last week were critical to a point that walked a fine constitutional line of disloyalty to the political leadership.....[What I think is going on here is serious concern among officers to protect the integrity of the institution."Rumsfeld and the Bush administration have done "a number" on our military with the entire Iraq debacle. The way I'm seeing it, either Rumsfeld will step down or, if you go along with former President Gerald Ford's opinion, the entire Bush administration will sink down the sewer of history together in one loyal turd-like lump. One columnist has said that
- part of a 2004 quote from an unnamed source at the Naval War College
Bush cannot afford to fire Rumsfeld, certainly not at this moment, since such an action would then turn the generals' guns (and those of their supporters elsewhere) against the president himself.Former US ambassador to the United Nations Richard Holbrooke has categorized what has been dubbed as The Revolt of the generals, as “the most serious public confrontation between the military and an administration since President Harry S. Truman fired Gen. Douglas MacArthur in 1951”.
"In our view Mr. Rumsfeld's failures should have led to his departure long ago. But he should not be driven out by a revolt of generals, retired or not." [WaPo editorial 4-18-06]
For all his mistakes, Rumsfeld is not some alien creature operating as a loner sabotaging the otherwise reasonable policies of his bosses. President Bush is the commander in chief. Vice President Cheney is on record as having made outlandishly optimistic predictions before the war started about how swimmingly everything would go. Rumsfeld is Bush's guy, which is why the president resists firing him. Letting Rumsfeld go would amount to acknowledging how badly the administration has botched Iraq.
The appeals court ruled that the manner in which the city has enforced the ordinance has criminalized "the status of homelessness by making it a crime to be homeless," and thereby violated the 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. City officials had no immediate comment on the ruling, but it appeared that the decision could have significant ramifications for the city's policy on the burgeoning problem of homelessness..
..In her ruling, Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw said that Los Angeles' Skid Row has the highest concentration of homeless individuals in the United States. She said that about 11,000 to 12,000 homeless people live in Skid Row, a 50-block area, bounded by Third, Seventh, Main and Alameda Streets.
"Because there is substantial and undisputed evidence that the number of homeless persons in Los Angeles far exceeds the number of available shelter beds at all times, including on the night" the plaintiffs were arrested or cited, "Los Angeles has encroached upon" the plaintiffs' 8th Amendment protections "by criminalizing the unavoidable act [my emphasis] of sitting, lying or sleeping at night while being involuntarily homeless," Wardlaw wrote..

"We have sacrificed a great deal for this nation, and now to turn their back on us and cut us off would be un-American," said Benny Rousselle, [lower Plaquemines parish president.] "We're fighting for our survival."
"No one has the least doubt that you are the economic leader and the military leader to the world, but I have heard a lot of doubts regarding the moral and political leadership of the United States."I'm glad that Mr. Walesa has spoken clearly on this matter. I want to be proud of my leadership once again. The strength of our democracy is that we know that can elect new leadership in due time. The People want more than they have gotten from the morally bankrupt majority in Washington D.C. November can't come too soon for us.
Charles J. Hanley has had his hand in some big stories...As Hanley reported, when inspectors returned to Iraq, they visited the Al Tuwaitha site and found no evidence to support Bush’s claim. “Since December 4 inspectors from [Mohamed] ElBaradei’s International Atomic Energy Agency have scrutinized that vast complex almost a dozen times, and reported no violations.” The same was true of site after site, as Hanley reported:In almost two months of surprise visits across Iraq, U.N. arms monitors have inspected 13 sites identified by U.S. and British intelligence agencies as major “facilities of concern,” and reported no signs of revived weapons building, an Associated Press analysis shows.Hanley’s story should have been one of the most important of the pre-war period. By debunking the very claims that had been advanced as proof of an Iraqi threat, Hanley’s analysis ought to have cast severe doubt on the White House’s entire evaluation of the Iraqi threat.
In 2004, they proved the power of the Internet as a great equalizer when they confronted the house of CBS and Dan Rather over Bush's military records.[..]Two years later, we have -- ready, fire, aim -- the Jill Carroll affair. These attacks raise the question of what bloggery is going to be when it grows up. An Internet op-ed page? Or a polarized, talk-radio food fight?Power must be used wisely. I recall being blasted by Jim Geraghty on the NRO website when the bloggers were piling on Eason Jordan. Jim Geraghty had written about my comment:
I tend to be blunt, but I also consider myself to be a principled and conscientious human being. I can see what is directly in front of my eyes, and what I saw was a concerted effort to ruin a professional journalist's integrity for speaking out on behalf of fellow professionals. I am a "little" blogger with a voice that was big enough to cause Jim Geraghty to feel that he had to defend himself. Why? Because I hit a sensitive spot. I can never assign motives to one person, but I could clearly see the overt motives of the blogmob. I don't get on my blog with the fierce determination to "gun" for Brit Hume's professional integrity. (He does a good job of ruining it all by himself by simply opening his mouth on Fox News each day).“Those who are hot on Eason’s trail are only those who wish to inflict some political damage on the few in the mainstream media who still possess extreme courage of conviction.”He said:
You know, I try (and sometimes fail) to refrain from speculating about others’ motives. I would appreciate it if others extended the same courtesy to me. Everybody, Ms Camwell? Mickey Kaus? Jay Rosen? Glenn Reynolds? They’re all trying to attack “the few in the mainstream media who still possess extreme courage of conviction”? Come on.
"This was a guy caught up in the tension of the moment. He deserves the benefit of the doubt."David Gergen, referring to Eason Jordan who had just returned from Baghdad and was still "deeply distraught" over the journalists who'd died in Iraq. [WaPo 2-8-05]
People from disparate Hispanic nations coalesced around the debate on illegal immigration. It took a radical step by the House -- giving serious thought to dragnet arrests of all illegal immigrants and charging them with a felony -- to achieve this. To some, the level of hatred and racism against immigrants seemed to match that once directed against blacks in this country.Well done, Tancredo and Company. Bush got over 40% of the Hispanic vote in the last election. I'll wager you won't see that same enthusiasm for Republicans in future elections.
..we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country. Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.Kerry was rather cagey when he was asked about Russ Feingold's move for censure of the president, stepping around the real issue and saying that Americans are looking forward to how the government will lead them. [see this diary from the One America Committee about Senator John Edwards' position].
"I call on the Senate minority leader to end his blocking tactics and allow the Senate to do its work and pass a fair, effective immigration reform bill."Most Americans look at Bush today and understand that if he's moving his lips, it's a lie based on the one thing that has counted the most to him throughout his presidency: his own political gain and that of the Republican party. The rest of us are chopped liver. We're nothing to George W. Bush except punching bags with minds and mouths he regrets we were born with. This is just one more example that he will do or say anything to divide America for his own political benefit. But it's backfiring. If he thinks we're buying it and that the Republican party has no responsibility or accountability for the divided part they've played, not only do I think he's despicable, but frankly I think he's tetched.
"I think Iran has a secret nuclear-weapons program—I believe it, but I don’t know it." - Richard Amrmitage to Seymour Hersh during G.W. Bush's first term
"Everyone is on the same page about the Iranian bomb, but the United States wants regime change," a European diplomatic adviser told me. He added, "The Europeans have a role to play as long as they don’t have to choose between going along with the Russians and the Chinese or going along with Washington on something they don’t want. Their policy is to keep the Americans engaged in something the Europeans can live with. It may be untenable.."[..]"If the diplomatic process doesn’t work, there is no military ‘solution.’ There may be a military option, but the impact could be catastrophic." [my emphasis]If you remember the lead-up to the Iraq war, you will be very disturbed to see what is currently happening in D.C.:
In recent weeks, the President has quietly initiated a series of talks on plans for Iran with a few key senators and members of Congress, including at least one Democrat. [my emphasis - and gee, I wonder if that lone Dem might be Joe "Hawk-o" Lieberman of Connecticut?] A senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, who did not take part in the meetings but has discussed their content with his colleagues, told me that there had been “no formal briefings,” because “they’re reluctant to brief the minority. They’re doing the Senate, somewhat selectively.” [my emphasis - as always, keeping our representatives out of the loop based on partisan considerations]This is no way to lead our country to another possible war. The method is secretive, unAmerican and wanton. I'm beginning to think that the President is truly deranged - he certainly cares little for the rule of law or the spirit of the Constitution - and I am extremely worried for our nation. Those who do not voice objections are either gutless or codependents in his Messiah complex.
The House member said that no one in the meetings “is really objecting” to the talk of war. “The people they’re briefing are the same ones who led the charge on Iraq. [my emphasis] At most, questions are raised: How are you going to hit all the sites at once? How are you going to get deep enough?” (Iran is building facilities underground.) “There’s no pressure from Congress” not to take military action, the House member added. “The only political pressure is from the guys who want to do it.” [my emphasis] Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”
“The whole internal debate is on which way to go”—in terms of stopping the Iranian program. It is possible, the adviser said, that Iran will unilaterally renounce its nuclear plans—and forestall the American action. “God may smile on us, but I don’t think so. The bottom line is that Iran cannot become a nuclear-weapons state. The problem is that the Iranians realize that only by becoming a nuclear state can they defend themselves against the U.S. Something bad is going to happen.”Deja vu all over again?
The Administration’s case against Iran is compromised by its history of promoting false intelligence on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. In a recent essay on the Foreign Policy Web site, entitled “Fool Me Twice,” Joseph Cirincione, the director for nonproliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote, “The unfolding administration strategy appears to be an effort to repeat its successful campaign for the Iraq war.”Michel Samaha, a veteran Lebanese Christian politician and former cabinet minister in Beirut, told Mr. Hersh that an Iranian retaliation against a U.S. attack might be focused on exposed oil and gas fields in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates.
“They would be at risk,” he said, “and this could begin the real jihad of Iran versus the West. You will have a messy world.”
"John Kerry deserves credit for continuing to take himself so seriously, despite the fact that no one else does."You might think a representative of the party of Bush might be a tad more cautious and realistic at a time when the levels on the public confidence meter are eating dust. But no. She's appealing to the three people who still trust Bush. Maybe she's pissed off about the Harry Taylor thing in Charlotte yesterday. The bruises are showing.
Chinese Vice Premier Wu Yi is leading a delegation of Chinese companies to the United States on April 6 that intend to sign contracts totaling $15 billion with U.S. companies. Among the U.S companies China is looking to do business with are Boeing Co., General Electric Co., Microsoft Corp., General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler AG. This move comes after U.S. President George W. Bush's demand that China increase its investment in U.S. goods and services to attempt to even out the U.S.-China trade deficit.More from China Daily.
China. Nuclear.From Investors.com:
The Energy Department predicts China's nuclear energy will double between 2010 and 2015, outpacing single-digit growth in mature economies. General Electric, (GE) Siemens (SI) and Mitsubishi are chasing deals with Chinese power companies in Shanghai and the southwestern industrial city of Dongfang. Says Chi Ping Chen of Cap Gemini in Beijing: "With more than 25 sites planned for the 15 years . . . China is the center of the global nuclear power industry."Oy. The blind trust is brethtaking, in light of all we hear from the Bush administration about mushroom clouds and evildoers.
Australia on Monday signed an agreement with China, allowing the Asian giant to buy uranium to feed its fast-developing nuclear energy sector. Because uranium also can be used to fuel nuclear weapons, the deal is a sensitive one, and the Australian government sought to play down concerns that the sale would have any impact on China's nuclear arsenal. Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said supplying China with uranium would not make "the slightest difference" to Beijing's nuclear weapons program. [Yeah. Right.

"No human being is ever to be reduced to being totally or even primarily identified by the color of their skin, their country of origin, their legal status or any other external characteristic. Every human being is first and foremost a person. "
Colorado Republican Representative Tom Tancredo, chairman of the 96-member House Immigration Reform Caucus, called the compromise "miserable public policy."Nicholas Johnson also shows how these Republicans just cannot be trusted - not even by their own statesmen-colleagues.
"I do not believe that a plan of this nature can pass the House," he said.
Senate Democrats said they would support the Senate compromise as long as it isn't undermined by amendments that are too harsh and they have commitments that it won't be significantly changed in negotiations with the House."
"We're trying to figure out some mechanism by which we can have an assurance that the bill that we've agreed to is actually the bill that gets voted on and is the bill that the president signs,'' Democrat Barack Obama of Illinois said.
Before the debate, there was a dinner for about 75 sponsors – mainly middle-aged-to- older Jewish couples. Between dinner and dessert Ann and I were to each make three minutes of remarks. I had planned to open with my usual at such Jewish events: "I'm going to start by answering the question I've been asked most tonight – Yes, I've had enough to eat."There's a copy of his speech at his Midwest Values PAC blog.
But Ann went first, and set her tone for the entire evening. "It was fascinating being here for the demonstrations this weekend," she said with a snotty Darien sneer. "I guess that's why I didn't get clean towels in my hotel room this morning."
There was an audible gasp from the Jews. Ann continued: "I haven't seen so many agitated Mexicans since the World Cup Soccer Games were in L.A." As offended as the diners were, the waiters were pissed. Ann was actually dumb enough to drink her coffee afterwards.
I answered by saying that I hadn't seen so many agitated Mexicans since 1846 when James K. Polk invaded Mexico because he thought Santa Ana had weapons of mass destruction. I wasn't sure of the year, but I thought the different approaches to our "agitated Mexican" jokes might give everyone an idea of what to expect.
In a court filing late Wednesday responding to requests from Mr. Libby's attorneys for government records that might aid his defense, Mr. Fitzgerald shed new light on Mr. Libby's claims that he was authorized to provide sensitive information to the Times reporter, Judith Miller, at a meeting on July 8, 2003.According to the court filing, a legal counsel to the vice president named David Addington had indicated to Mr. Libby that President Bush's permission to disclose the estimate "amounted to a declassification of the document."
"Defendant testified that he was specifically authorized in advance of the meeting to disclose the key judgments of the classified NIE to Miller on that occasion because it was thought that the NIE was 'pretty definitive' against what Ambassador Wilson had said and that the vice president thought that it was 'very important' for the key judgments of the NIE to come out," Mr. Fitzgerald wrote.
Mr. Libby is said to have testified that "at first" he rebuffed Mr. Cheney's suggestion to release the information because the estimate was classified. However, according to the vice presidential aide, Mr. Cheney subsequently said he got permission for the release directly from Mr. Bush. "Defendant testified that the vice president later advised him that the president had authorized defendant to disclose the relevant portions of the NIE," the prosecution filing said.
The court papers filed by Mr. Fitzgerald do not make clear whether Mr. Bush knew the disclosure was destined for Ms. Miller, though they indicate Mr. Cheney knew that fact. Mr. Libby is also said to have testified that five days later Mr. Cheney authorized the release to the press of information about a cable about Mr. Wilson's trip.An important question to ask is why the President felt it was important enough to declassify this extremely sensitive information and leak it. And why did Bush (if he knew) or Dick Cheney (who knew) have leaked it to Judith Miller of the New York Times? Doing something just because you can does not relieve anyone - especially the President - of the responsibility to do what is right.
When the White House press corps had an opportunity this morning to ask Press Secretary Scott McClellan questions [regarding this story], they didn’t ask him about it.It's all over the internet already.
In one telling footnote in the filing, Fitzgerald notes that even after Bush authorized the dissemination of the intelligence data, White House national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley was "active in discussions about the need to declassify and disseminate" the information.
"There is an institutional interest and ultimately a public interest in having these decisions documented," said Ronald D. Lee, a Washington lawyer and former general counsel to the super-secret National Security Agency. "You can't have a government where everything is sort of done in people's heads."
Half of the service members listed on the Vietnam Memorial Wall died after America's leaders knew our strategy would not work. It was immoral then and it would be immoral now to engage in the same delusion. We want democracy in Iraq, but Iraqis must want it as much as we do. Our valiant soldiers can't bring democracy to Iraq if Iraq's leaders are unwilling themselves to make the compromises that democracy requires.We definitely need to get tougher on this lax dragfoot Iraqi leadership group. More wisdom from Senator Kerry:
Iraqi politicians should be told that they have until May 15 to put together an effective unity government or we will immediately withdraw our military.The girly men of the Bush admistration have been letting these Iraqis play 'Philadelphia 1780s-style' while our kids are dying for their dog and pony show. The time for public tolerance of this folly is over. Its been over for quite some time now.