The GOP Threw Unborn Children Into the Senate Tax Bill 

By Whitney Kimball  |  December 2, 2017 | 7:32pm
Politics

While we can reliably find some levity in Donald Trump’s boundless ability to mimic a spray-tanned ball sac, the past couple of weeks have been truly scary. The commander-in-chief put a man who has called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau “a joke” in charge of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. This morning at around 2 AM, the Senate passed its sinister tax bill, which, according to the New York Times, awards the majority of the cuts to the richest 1/5th of Americans and cuts corporate tax rates from 35 percent to 20. It raises taxes for people making $30,000 per year and less, PBS reports, and by 2027 will raise them for everybody making $75,000 or less. It will likely raise the deficit by over $1 trillion.

If that’s not terrifying enough, hours before the bill’s passage–hardly any time to read it–the GOP scribbled in literally hand-written notes to add to the nearly 500-page Republican wishlist.

PBS reports that these changes include:

  • A shout out to the pro-life movement: Includes abortion-related language in regards to using a college savings account for “an unborn child.” This was previously allowed, but the bill takes a detour to include and define the phrase “unborn child,” for no apparent reason other than to show a governmental pro-life stance.
  • A door between church and state: Lifts the ban on non-profits engaging in political activism, a ban which Trump has said unfairly blocks churches from participating in politics.
  • Environmental devastation: Clears a path for oil and gas drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
  • A blow to the Affordable Care Act: It eliminates the Affordable Care Act’s mandate that the majority of Americans have health insurance or pay a fine.

Guess who thought this was a great idea, according to the GOP? One person who might be made-up, retired academics, and an in-house economist at Bank of America, via the Intercept.

 
Join the discussion...