Nancy Pelosi Pushes Proposal Detrimental to Progressive Ideas

[Ahso!]

In an attempt to make it sound like the idea is a progressive one by freezing taxes paid by low earners, it is actually a very bad idea that handcuffs progressive initiative. Some might say that It would appear Nancy Pelosi is doing her job at pleasing her corporate contributors by bssically providing neoliberals on the right and *cough* left veto power. Good one, Nance!

According to a list of Democratic proposals obtained by the Washington Post, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)—who is currently fighting back against efforts to prevent her from becoming House Speaker—is pushing for a rule that would "require a three-fifths supermajority to raise individual income taxes on the lowest-earning 80 percent of taxpayers."

In response, MoveOn.org called the proposal "a staggeringly bad idea."

Though the proposed rule is framed as an effort to protect the financial well-being of middle-class Americans, Eric Levitz of New York Magazine pointed out that "while progressives are committed to increasing the discretionary income of the bottom 80 percent, that does not necessarily mean keeping their tax rates frozen at historically low levels."

"A bill that required those households to pay a new, smaller monthly sum to the government—so as to fund a single-payer system that would actually reduce their cost of living by delivering radically cheaper healthcare services—could hardly be called regressive," Levitz notes. "And the same can be said for legislation establishing universal child care, paid family leave, or any other program aimed at easing the middle class's financial burdens."




https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/ ... rogressive

[yaaarrrgg]

Yeah it's weird that democrats are aping the GOP and making tax cuts a core platform idea.

I'd like to see a new speaker. Not that Pelosi is a bad person, but not sure she has any new ideas. It's not meant to be a lifetime appointment.

[Ahso!]

It seems the most prevalent argument in support of NP as speaker is that she's an effective fundraiser, which, of course, means that she's got lots of corporate money behind her, which means she's liked by a lot of neoliberals.

I've noticed that she has the backing of the corporate media. Politico wasted no time skewering Fudge as soon as she threw her hat in the ring for speaker.

[Snooz]

yaaarrrgg;1521436 wrote: Yeah it's weird that democrats are aping the GOP and making tax cuts a core platform idea.

I'd like to see a new speaker. Not that Pelosi is a bad person, but not sure she has any new ideas. It's not meant to be a lifetime appointment.


I read somewhere (and I'm too lazy to find the article) that Pelosi plans to only spend two years as speaker while she trains her replacement, whomever that might be. Personally, I think that's a great idea.

[Ahso!]

I wonder why she hasn't done that sometime over the past 8 years. It would have been the perfect opportunity to.

[AnneBoleyn]

Snooz;1521442 wrote: I read somewhere (and I'm too lazy to find the article) that Pelosi plans to only spend two years as speaker while she trains her replacement, whomever that might be. Personally, I think that's a great idea.


Her term as Speaker will be two years as the Congressionals term is two years, then they come up for reelection. Their entire terms are spent running for the next one.

[Snooz]

Sounds a lot like Trump's time as president. The only significant "work" he's done are his constant rallies.