Democrats in the news

christiefan915 said:
Link up.
Click to expand...


Linked.

Yes, many Democrats expressed significant anger and frustration specifically over the means Trump used—reallocating congressionally appropriated funds without legislative approval—rather than the goal of paying service members. They viewed it as an unconstitutional executive overreach that undermines Congress's "power of the purse" under Article I of the Constitution. However, there was broad bipartisan support for ensuring troops were paid, and Democrats did not oppose the end result itself. Here's a breakdown:Key Criticisms from Democrats
  • Legality Concerns: Multiple Democratic lawmakers called the action "illegal" or "questionable." For instance:
    • Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), a senior appropriator, stated: "But, as usual, they find the most illegal way to do everything."
    • Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) said on CBS's Face the Nation: "Well, probably not [legal]. ... I think to pay the military during a shutdown would require legislation."
    • Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, accused the administration of "violating the law left and right" by moving appropriated funds without authorization.
  • Power Grab Fears: Experts and Democrats warned this sets a "dangerous precedent" for executive spending. A lawyer from Protect Democracy noted it "compromises the most fundamental tenet underpinning Congress’s power of the purse." Even some Republicans expressed private skepticism about the legality, though publicly they defended it.
  • Threats of Action: Democrats threatened lawsuits but have not pursued them aggressively, partly because challenging it in court (e.g., proving standing under the current Supreme Court) is seen as politically risky and unlikely to succeed given public support for troop pay.

 
FastLane said:
WRONG!
AI Overview


The "One, Big, Beautiful Bill" (BBB) includes permanent tax cuts for the middle class by making certain individual tax reductions from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) permanent

So those previously temporary tax cut have now been made PERMANENT by the BBB. So the BBB contained PERMANENT TAX CUTS FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS.
.
Click to expand...

The middle class needs a tax cut: Trump didn’t give it to them​

October 16, 2018​

"At a recent rally in Montana, President Trump claimed that “Republicans passed the biggest tax cuts in American history, the biggest in American history. Everybody in this room is better for them. Everybody is better for them.”

Unfortunately, this isn’t true. Everybody is not better off from the recent tax cuts, which have only served to increase the federal budget deficit—now $779 billion for FY 2018 according to new data released by the Treasury Department. To be sure, the middle class gets help temporarily, but over the longer run, the middle class will be worse off."

The 2017 tax law doesn’t help the middle class​

The middle class is seeing slower income growth than both the rich and the poor​

The Middle Class Has Had the Slowest Income Growth​

By 2027, The Tax Law Makes the Middle Class Worse Off​


Details here
 
Diogenes said:
Linked.

Yes, many Democrats expressed significant anger and frustration specifically over the means Trump used—reallocating congressionally appropriated funds without legislative approval—rather than the goal of paying service members. They viewed it as an unconstitutional executive overreach that undermines Congress's "power of the purse" under Article I of the Constitution. However, there was broad bipartisan support for ensuring troops were paid, and Democrats did not oppose the end result itself. Here's a breakdown:Key Criticisms from Democrats
  • Legality Concerns: Multiple Democratic lawmakers called the action "illegal" or "questionable." For instance:
    • Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), a senior appropriator, stated: "But, as usual, they find the most illegal way to do everything."
    • Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) said on CBS's Face the Nation: "Well, probably not [legal]. ... I think to pay the military during a shutdown would require legislation."
    • Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, accused the administration of "violating the law left and right" by moving appropriated funds without authorization.
  • Power Grab Fears: Experts and Democrats warned this sets a "dangerous precedent" for executive spending. A lawyer from Protect Democracy noted it "compromises the most fundamental tenet underpinning Congress’s power of the purse." Even some Republicans expressed private skepticism about the legality, though publicly they defended it.
  • Threats of Action: Democrats threatened lawsuits but have not pursued them aggressively, partly because challenging it in court (e.g., proving standing under the current Supreme Court) is seen as politically risky and unlikely to succeed given public support for troop pay.

Click to expand...
BOOM!
 
christiefan915 said:

The middle class needs a tax cut: Trump didn’t give it to them​

October 16, 2018​

"At a recent rally in Montana, President Trump claimed that “Republicans passed the biggest tax cuts in American history, the biggest in American history. Everybody in this room is better for them. Everybody is better for them.”

Unfortunately, this isn’t true. Everybody is not better off from the recent tax cuts, which have only served to increase the federal budget deficit—now $779 billion for FY 2018 according to new data released by the Treasury Department. To be sure, the middle class gets help temporarily, but over the longer run, the middle class will be worse off."

The 2017 tax law doesn’t help the middle class​

The middle class is seeing slower income growth than both the rich and the poor​

The Middle Class Has Had the Slowest Income Growth​

By 2027, The Tax Law Makes the Middle Class Worse Off​


Details here
Click to expand...
Regardless Christie the received PERMANENT TAX CUTS with the BBB. So stop trying to cover for your blatant LIE!
 
Diogenes said:
Linked.

Yes, many Democrats expressed significant anger and frustration specifically over the means Trump used—reallocating congressionally appropriated funds without legislative approval—rather than the goal of paying service members. They viewed it as an unconstitutional executive overreach that undermines Congress's "power of the purse" under Article I of the Constitution. However, there was broad bipartisan support for ensuring troops were paid, and Democrats did not oppose the end result itself. Here's a breakdown:Key Criticisms from Democrats
  • Legality Concerns: Multiple Democratic lawmakers called the action "illegal" or "questionable." For instance:
    • Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI), a senior appropriator, stated: "But, as usual, they find the most illegal way to do everything."
    • Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT) said on CBS's Face the Nation: "Well, probably not [legal]. ... I think to pay the military during a shutdown would require legislation."
    • Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, accused the administration of "violating the law left and right" by moving appropriated funds without authorization.
  • Power Grab Fears: Experts and Democrats warned this sets a "dangerous precedent" for executive spending. A lawyer from Protect Democracy noted it "compromises the most fundamental tenet underpinning Congress’s power of the purse." Even some Republicans expressed private skepticism about the legality, though publicly they defended it.
  • Threats of Action: Democrats threatened lawsuits but have not pursued them aggressively, partly because challenging it in court (e.g., proving standing under the current Supreme Court) is seen as politically risky and unlikely to succeed given public support for troop pay.

Click to expand...
Three names and the word "many." :laugh:
 
FastLane said:
Regardless Christie the received PERMANENT TAX CUTS with the BBB. So stop trying to cover for your blatant LIE!
Click to expand...
Weasel your way out of this.

Search Assist
Yes, many provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which benefited the middle class, are set to expire at the end of 2025 unless extended by new legislation. This includes lower tax rates and increased standard deductions that currently help middle-income families.

Expiration of 2017 Tax Cuts​

The tax cuts enacted under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 are set to expire at the end of 2025 unless extended. This includes several key provisions that directly affect middle-class taxpayers.

Key Provisions Impacting Middle-Class Taxpayers​

Standard DeductionIncreased to approximately $30,725 for married couplesReduced to about $16,525
Child Tax CreditIncreased to $2,000 per childReduced to $1,000 per child
Income Tax RatesLowered rates for most income levelsRates revert to pre-2017 levels
State and Local Tax (SALT) DeductionCapped at $10,000Full deductibility restored
Deduction for Small Business Income20% deduction availableDeduction eliminated

[th]
Provision

[/th][th]
Current Status

[/th][th]
Status if Expired in 2026

[/th]

Implications of Expiration​

If these provisions expire, many middle-class families could face significant tax increases. For example, the standard deduction would be halved, and the child tax credit would decrease, reducing overall tax relief for families.
Legislative efforts are ongoing to extend these tax cuts, but the outcome remains uncertain as discussions continue in Congress.
 
christiefan915 said:
Weasel your way out of this.

Search Assist
Yes, many provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which benefited the middle class, are set to expire at the end of 2025 unless extended by new legislation. This includes lower tax rates and increased standard deductions that currently help middle-income families.

Expiration of 2017 Tax Cuts​

The tax cuts enacted under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 are set to expire at the end of 2025 unless extended. This includes several key provisions that directly affect middle-class taxpayers.

Key Provisions Impacting Middle-Class Taxpayers​

Standard DeductionIncreased to approximately $30,725 for married couplesReduced to about $16,525
Child Tax CreditIncreased to $2,000 per childReduced to $1,000 per child
Income Tax RatesLowered rates for most income levelsRates revert to pre-2017 levels
State and Local Tax (SALT) DeductionCapped at $10,000Full deductibility restored
Deduction for Small Business Income20% deduction availableDeduction eliminated

[th]
Provision

[/th][th]
Current Status

[/th][th]
Status if Expired in 2026

[/th]

Implications of Expiration​

If these provisions expire, many middle-class families could face significant tax increases. For example, the standard deduction would be halved, and the child tax credit would decrease, reducing overall tax relief for families.
Legislative efforts are ongoing to extend these tax cuts, but the outcome remains uncertain as discussions continue in Congress.
Click to expand...
CHRISTIE DID THE BBB INCLUDE PERMANENT TAX BREAKS FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS YES OR NO?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top