#while giving the president a 100k pay raise | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

patriotsnet · 3 years

Text

Who Taxes More Republicans Or Democrats

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/who-taxes-more-republicans-or-democrats/

Who Taxes More Republicans Or Democrats

Which Party Is The Party Of The 1 Percent

‘A higher tax rate looks more likely under Democratic leadership’: Strategist

First, both parties receive substantial support. Much of it comes from registered voters who make $100K+ annually. However, Democrats actually come out ahead when it comes to fundraising for campaigns. In many cases, Democrats have been able to raise twice as much in private political contributions. But what about outside of politicians? Does that mean Democrats are the wealthier party? Which American families are wealthier? Republicans or Democrats?

Honestly, it is probably Republicans. When it comes down to it, the richest families in America tend to donate to Republican candidates. Forbes reported out of the 50 richest families in the United States, 28 donate to Republican candidates. Another seven donate to Democrats. Additionally, 15 of the richest families in the U.S. donate to both parties.

How Would Bidens Tax Plan Change The Competitiveness Of The Us Tax Code

While the Biden campaign is certainly focused on increasing taxes on U.S. businesses and high-income earners, it is important that policymakers also understand what that reversal might do to U.S. competitiveness, and the competitive global environment in which U.S. companies and U.S. workers operate.

% Of Republicans Under 45 Back Increasing Public Spending Even If It Means Taxes Increase

President Joe Bidens COVID relief plan was popular with many Americans, but the latest Economist/YouGov poll suggests that other spending proposals might not fare as well, despite Americans claiming to prioritize financial investments in the economy over limiting spending.

The data comes as President Biden tries to appeal to Republicans to support his $2 trillion infrastructure package, which would provide advanced training for workers in manufacturing and other industries, invest in electric vehicles, and increase funding for rural broadband internet access, among other elements. Biden hopes to fund his infrastructure plan by raising taxes on corporations and wealthy Americans earning more than $400,000 annually.;

Three in five Americans support spending money on programs that could create jobs and improve the economy, even if taxes increase. About two in five would prefer to keep spending and taxes low.;;

There is a large difference in the opinions of Republicans and Democrats on this question. More than a third of Republicans overall say they are willing to support increased spending, even at the risk of higher taxes. But there is an age gap among Republicans. Seven in ten Republicans under the age of 45 would spend more, even at the risk of higher taxes, compared to 29% of older Republicans. Younger Republicans make up less than a third of all those who identify as Republicans.;;

Read Also: When Did Republicans And Democrats Switch Platforms

Why We Wrote This

For decades, Democrats feared being labeled as the party of tax and spend. But now, as calls grow for those at the top to pay a fair share, many believe there is a political opening to act.

GOP lawmakers argue that such tax hikes will disincentivize productivity and cut jobs, hurting average workers and the overall economy.

But polls show a majority of Americans have long agreed that corporations and the wealthy dont pay their fair share in taxes. According to;Gallup, 69% of those surveyed in 2019 believed that corporations pay too little the same number as in 2004. And many Democrats believe the pandemics exacerbation of economic inequality has given Mr. Biden an opening to press the argument.

Public opinion has been pretty consistent for the past 20 years, says Vanessa Williamson of the Brookings;Institution. What I think has changed is the willingness of Democratic leaders to put forward plans that are often really quite bold.

As President Joe Biden works to sell his massive infrastructure bill, hes making a big bet that tax hikes, which would pay for much of the plan, are no longer a political liability for Democrats.

Majority Of Americans Say Government Has Responsibility To Ensure Health Coverage

A majority of the public says that the federal government has a responsibility to make sure that all Americans have health care coverage, while 41% say this is not the governmentâs responsibility.

However, most of those who say the government does not have a responsibility to provide health coverage nonetheless favor continuing programs like Medicare and Medicaid. Roughly a third of the public holds this view. Just 6% say the government should not be involved in providing health insurance at all.

Among those who say it is the governmentâs responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage, there are differences over how to achieve this goal.

Overall, 30% of adults say government is responsible for ensuring that all Americans have health care coverage and that health insurance should be provided through a single national health insurance system run by the government. A similar share of the public thinks health care for all Americans is a government responsibility but supports providing health insurance through a mix of private companies and government programs.

Seven-in-ten Republicans and Republican leaners say it is not the governmentâs responsibility to make sure all Americans have health insurance. Among Republicans, conservatives are much more likely than moderates and liberals to take this view. Still, just 12% of conservative Republicans say the government should not be involved in health care at all.

Also Check: When Did Democrats And Republicans Switch Ideologies

Americas Top 10 Richest Families

Walton;Republican; The family owns the Walmart corporation.;The Walton family fortune is estimated to be about $130 billion.

Koch;Republican; Businessmen, owners of Koch Industries, a manufacturing company.;Koch brothers have a net worth of about $41 billion each .

;Republican; Own the Mars candy company.;The three children of founder Forrest Mars are worth about $78 billion together.

Cargill-MacMillan;Republican; The Cargill-MacMillan family owns 90 percent of the largest privately-owned corporation in the U.S.;The family, as a whole, is worth about $49 billion.

Cox;Democrat; The Cox family owns a number of auto consumer sites and services . They have an estimated net worth of $41 billion.

Johnson ;Republican; The Johnson family is known for their cleaning products and hygiene products.;They are valued at $30 billion.

Pritzker;Both; Founders of Hyatt.;The family has a combined value of $29 billion in 2017.

Johnson ;Republican; Overseers at Fidelity, ensuring the cash of millions of Americans.;The family has a combined net worth of $28.5 billion.

Hearst;Republican; The Hearst family owns one of Americas largest media companies.;The family is valued at $28 billion.

Duncan;Republican; The Duncan family works mostly with oil and pipelines.;The family is valued at about $21.5 billion.

Republicans Are Attacking Democrats Over The Bill As Both Parties Position Themselves For The 2022 Mid

Two senior U.S.SenateDemocrats on Friday unveiled a proposal to impose a 2% excise tax on corporate stock buybacks as lawmakers scrambled to find ways to finance President Joe Biden’s $3.5 trillion domestic investment plan. SenateFinance Committee Chair Ron Wyden and Senate Banking Committee Chair Sherrod Brown said the “Stock Buyback Accountability Act” would encourage large corporations to invest in their workers rather than enriching investors executives by boosting stock prices.

The proposal is among several floated by Wyden to boost government revenues, including imposing additional taxes on corporations that give out CEO pay that exceeds a certain multiple of the company’s average worker wages. Biden and congressional Democrats have already been pushing to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations to help pay the $3.5 trillion bill.

But resistance from moderate members of the party, including some who represent states or districts that supported former Republican President Donald Trump, have prompted Democrats to search for a new mix of revenue-raisers. Republicans are attacking Democrats over the bill as both parties position themselves for the 2022 mid-term elections which will determine control of Congress.

READ MORE ON:

Read Also: How Many Seats Did Republicans Gain In The House

These 3 States Offer A Model For How Republicans Look At State Tax Policy

Key Takeaways:

Republican state lawmakers generally deferred their tax policy agenda in 2021, but three states that did act exemplified the three approaches the GOP tends to take on the issue.

North Carolina pursued aggressive, across-the-board tax reductions; Florida worked on incremental, revenue-neutral changes; and West Virginia sought to eliminate the income tax with an aggressive reimagining of their tax code.

While all three states reflect Republicans inclination towards tax cuts, a growing number of conservative lawmakers are expressing interest in levying new taxes on Big Tech, which could break the traditional orthodoxy.;;

Last month we published an analysis of four states that represent a new trend in how Democratic state lawmakers are approaching tax policy. This month we are taking a look at how Republican-controlled states considered tax policy this year. While polarization trends are pushing both parties further from the center, this does not seem to be affecting Republicans and Democrats in the same way. While Democratic lawmakers are increasingly comfortable pushing for significant new taxes or tax increases, Republicans generally have not changed their perspective on ideal tax policy. Surveying a few GOP states which were active in the tax policy arena in 2021 demonstrates the different approaches that conservatives tend to take:

The Income Tax Arrives

Wanting more money for tax cuts, Republicans seek Obamacare individual mandate repeal

19011902190419061907 1908 190919101913A hand from Washington will be stretched out and placed upon every mans business; the eye of the Federal inspector will be in every mans counting house . . . The law will of necessity have inquisitorial features, it will provide penalties, it will create complicated machinery. Under it men will be hailed into courts distant from their homes. Heavy fines imposed by distant and unfamiliar tribunals will constantly menace the tax payer. An army of Federal inspectors, spies and detectives will descend upon the state . . . Who of us who have had knowledge of the doings of the Federal officials in the Internal Revenue service can be blind to what will follow? I do not hesitate to say that the adoption of this amendment will be such a surrender to imperialism that has not been since the Northern states in their blindness forced the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments upon the entire sisterhood of the Commonwealth.1914-19151916 19171918-1919Audio clip: McAdoo on the need for tax reduction, probably 1919.1920 Audio clip: George White, on Republican tax promises 1921 Andrew Mellon19241926against 19281929-1932whether

Don’t Miss: How Many Seats Did The Republicans Win In Senate

Tech Taxes Could Shifts Conservatives Fiscal Approach

In all three of these states, the policy goal was to keep tax rates as low as possible, but some Republican lawmakers are increasingly of the view that, when it comes to Big Tech, higher taxes may be preferable.;

As weve discussed before, 2021 saw a proliferation of bills seeking to levy new taxes on digital advertising, datamining, and social media companies, with legislation coming from both Democrats and Republicans. These bills sponsors often justified their proposals by saying that they were necessary to promote fairness in the tax system, an argument that is common among left-leaning politicians, but more unusual for the GOP. From state capitols to the halls of Congress, however, Republicans are increasingly arguing that conservatives are facing censorship or worse by tech platforms and that higher taxes could be a way of curtailing this trend.;

So far this rationale has only led to a handful of introductions across the country and none of these bills have become law, but recent statements from Texas Governor Abbott and Governor DeSantis could presage increased activity in the future.

Us Lobby Groups Write Battle Plan To Beat Biden Tax Hikes

U.S. President Joe Biden delivers remarks at the White House at a celebration of Independence Day in Washington, U.S., July 4, 2021. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo

WASHINGTON, July 6 U.S. business lobbying groups cheered a bipartisan $1.2 trillion infrastructure deal, but are gearing up to fight the corporate tax hikes looming in a separate but linked spending bill that Democrats aim to pass without Republican votes.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Retail Federation and other deep-pocketed lobby groups plan to use the same argument they employed in 2017 to secure huge tax cuts from Republicans: higher corporate taxes equal fewer jobs.

We dont know whats in that package, Rachelle Bernstein, chief tax counsel for the retail group, said of the Democrats’reconciliation bill expected to contain new social spending and tax hikes.

But we dont think it is good to use a corporate tax increase to finance spending, said Bernstein, whose group has spent $1.5 million on lobbying in the first quarter of 2021, according to watchdog OpenSecrets.org.

The Biden administrations pitch for reducing U.S. economic inequality and competing more effectively with China relies on using tax hikes on corporations and wealthy Americans to pay for some $4 trillion in new spending on transportation, communications, research, renewable energy, childcare, housing, education and healthcare.

LOBBYING FOCUS ON SINEMA, MANCHIN

Also Check: Are There Any Republicans For Impeachment

Biggest Influencers: Democrats Or Republicans

To understand who influences politics, you can easily find out who the wealthy support. For example, the Walton family, the owners of the retail giant Walmart, has traditionally donated to Republican candidates. Alice Walton, the daughter of Walmarts founder, hasnt strayed from that too much. That is, until the 2008 election. In 2008 and 2016 the Walton family donated to Hilary Clintons campaign.

She isnt the only person from a wealthy family to change tradition where politics are concerned either. Many of the younger individuals in Americas richest families have begun to sway from their familys political associations as well. Below youll find the affiliation and overall net worth of the top 10 richest families in America.

The Sneaky Tax Move Democrats Are Planning

Democrats swallowed the tax cuts for businesses and high earners that President Trump and his fellow Republicans passed unilaterally in 2017. They may even have tacitly supported reforms such as the elimination of the unpopular alternative minimum tax.

But Democrats loathed the new limit on state and local tax deductions Republicans passed as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The so-called SALT deduction used to have no limit, but the TCJA capped it at $10,000. Deducting state and local taxes from your federal income tax bill has more value in states and cities with higher taxes, which is why it disproportionately hit taxpayers in Democratic strongholds such as the east and west coastsas Republicans were fully aware. Ever since the $10,000 SALT limit passed, some Democrats have vowed to repeal it.

They now have their chance. With Democrats in slim control of both houses of Congress, some form of repeal of the SALT deduction cap seems likely. But Democrats want to draw as little attention to this move as possible. While affecting blue states more than red, the $10,000 SALT cap is also a de facto tax hike on wealthy Americans. Repealing or curtailing it would benefit the wealthy with little or no benefit for the working- and middle-class Americans Democrats say they truly want to help.

Recommended Reading: Do Republicans Support The Death Penalty

Republicans Cut Taxes For Rich People And Corporations In 2017 Biden Wants To Reverse Course

The full details of what Bidens tax proposal will look like are still a little fuzzy. According to , which recently reported on the presidents planned tax hikes, much of what he is likely to put forth is in line with what he campaigned on.

On the campaign trail, Biden proposed increasing the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 28 percent as well as increasing the income tax rate on families making more than $400,000. He proposed changing capital gains taxes meaning how taxes are applied when someone sells an asset, like a stock for people making more than $1 million, so that they would be taxed the same as income.

Also on capital gains, Biden proposed overhauling how they are taxed on a stepped-up basis after people die. Its a little wonky, but say youre Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and a lot of your money is tied up in Facebook stock your wealth goes up over the years, but as long as you dont sell the stock, you dont pay taxes on it. After you die, say $1 billion of the stock gains go to your kids, and they might turn around and sell it later for $1.1 billion. But they would only be taxed for $0.1 billion the difference between the cost when they got it and when they sold it not the full $1.1 billion. Bidens plan would change that.

Ahead of the 2020 election, the Tax Policy Center Bidens plan would raise $2.1 trillion over a decade. As notes, his White House proposal could be smaller.

‘we’re The Party Of Lower Taxes’

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said he “would not be surprised” if Republicans move to undo Biden’s tax hikes the next time they control Washington.

“They’re the party of big government. We’re the party of lower taxes and more freedom,” he said. “That’s kind of the problem with doing business this way on a purely partisan basis.”

Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., who is up for re-election next year, said avoiding sharp swings in policy is “a reason not to” govern on a party-line basis.

“We ought to avoid the ups and downs, the uncertainty that comes with a change after every election,” he said.

Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said it’s “absolutely crucial” for Democrats to emphasize the need for economic investments to voters and to make the case for tax “fairness” on top earners to set up a safety net that can stand the test of time.

“I say this to everyone: If you’re a nurse in Medford, Oregon, treating Covid patients, you pay taxes with every single paycheck no tax havens for you. If you’re somebody who’s a well-connected billionaire, it’s very different. It’s to a great extent optional,” he said. “People have never heard that. They say that’s not right. Everybody should have to pay their fair share.”

Rep. Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., said Democrats should ignore GOP warnings about taxes, arguing that they would seek to cut social programs and lower taxes on the wealthy no matter what Biden does.

Also Check: Why Did Democrats And Republicans Switch

0 notes

jswdmb1 · 7 years

Text

The Scientist

“I was just guessing At numbers and figures Pulling the puzzles apart”

- Coldplay

I feel a need to give an unsolicited opinion on the tax bill so I’m ending my break early to weigh in on this topic while things are still pending. Wait, you say, didn’t the bill pass the Senate ending the debate? While that is true, but the bill is a long way from becoming law and I do not think the debate is over. The Senate version still must be reconciled with the House version and then the consolidated bill has to be passed by both houses. Since the Republicans are doing this with no bipartisan support (they aren’t even giving Democrats a copy of the bill), they should be able to accomplish that task. But, you never know in this political environment as the Senate bill passed 51-49 and the House is much harder to control. There could be last minute provisions that were put into the Senate bill that a caucus of House members will balk at. There is also the minor technically of having the president sign the bill into the law. While at this point, I question his ability to read anything beyond 140 characters, and I’m certain he would sign a blank piece of paper if put in front of him, he is a true wild card and his support should never be considered a given.

But, let’s assume what we have in front of us graduates from bill to law (cue the Schoolhouse Rocks music!) and our tax code is revamped. I’ll start by saying that I’ve worked with governments in a finance and accounting capacity at many levels for a number of years; so, I at least think it is an informed opinion. I’ll also qualify my comments by saying I haven’t read the pending legislation cover to cover (it is unlikely few in Congress or the White House have either), but I have read enough about it to give a macroeconomic perspective. Finally, I’ll state, for the record, that while my social views would be defined by most as liberal, my stance on fiscal policy skews conservative. I do believe in a central government that provides basic services to its citizens, social safety nets to those that need it, and a federal system that aids in the conservation of our natural resources to ensure a future for our country. Those are good things for which to raise taxes. What I am against is waste, special interest spending that doesn’t contribute to the common good, and inefficiency.

With that background, I would be voting no against any current version of the tax bill. A simplified explanation for my stance would be that no thought has been put into this bill, but that is not true. Actually, quite a bit of design by Republicans has been taking place for a long time to get to this point. No credit for that should be given to the current president, who would sign any bill just to say he did it. But, seasoned Republicans have been working on this for years waiting for their moment and they have it with their patsy in the Oval Office. The problem is that there are a few Republican senators left who can’t stomach the fact that this bill does nothing to fix the real problem with the tax code or the bigger issue of the dysfunctional way governments in this country approach finance and accounting. If any of them had real courage, they would not just ask for simple rate rollback triggers or settle for the last-minute throw-ins they got to support getting something passed. Instead, they should be leading the charge for true tax reform in these three areas:

Tax Rates - I agree that rates could be reduced. I also think that elimination of the estate tax should also occur (if you have a fair system in place to get people’s money when they are alive then there is no reason to tax them after they die). A flat tax is regressive and hurts those in poverty terribly, but rates should be simplified. I would have personal rates at two levels: 0% and 20%. The first $100,000 you earn is on the house. Everything after that gets taxed at a flat 20%. That creates an effective flat tax without being regressive. Corporations get three rates. They still get the first $100K on the house. That helps really small business that are essentially passing through their income to the owner. Everything after that up to $1,000,000 is taxed at 10%. That will really stimulate the economy for the mid-sized companies that are the oil in our economic engine. Everything over a million goes to the 20% rate. I am also in favor of elimination of capital gains taxes and the alternative minimum tax. The first penalizes growth and investment and is unnecessary if you properly tax the initial income earned that was used for the investment. The second is plain and simple just a stupid political mechanism. The reason no one understands AMT is because it is non-sensical, and it is completely unnecessary if your tax code is logical in the first place. The current plans I have seen seem to unfairly skew the cuts to big corporations, special interests and the wealthy that feed the politicians piggy banks. There is enough to spread it around to give everyone a taste, so why not do it (that is a rhetorical question – they won’t do it because politicians do not care about anyone that doesn’t write them a check). That’s why growth under current plans is independently projected to only be 0.8%. If more money went back into the hands of consumers and small businesses that are really the backbone of the American economy that number would be higher and the shocking deficits being projected would be much lower.

Deductions - I’ll give you an insider tip: deductions are stupid. Really stupid. Think Kohl’s. They give you all these coupons and deals with 50% off but it’s all a marketing ploy to get you to buy marked up crap that you could probably get cheaper on a net basis somewhere else without all the markdowns. Deductions work the same way. They are just vehicles for politicians in both parties to give breaks to special interests. I would eliminate all deductions except for two - charitable contributions and the use of pre-tax earnings to pay for health insurance and flexible spending accounts. I keep those two not because I’m altruistic (though I think both are good things to encourage with a tax break) but because both directly keep costs down at the federal level by reducing the need for social services. That’s it - everything else is gone. This is where you start screaming at me through the computer (I can’t hear you by the way), but remember the first $100,000 is on the house in my plan. Most of us won’t need a deduction because most of what we make isn’t getting taxed. Tax code is complicated mostly because of deductions. Get rid of them, and that problem is solved along with the unfair nature of their use.

Revenue Expansion & Expense Reduction - We all look at taxes through the narrow prism of what we have to fork over, but income tax code is one of many components in the federal accounting of things. I’ve lost most of you already with this post, so I won’t lose the rest with a detailed explanation of the way governmental accounting works, but it comes down to revenues are pluses and expenses are negatives. If you have more of the first, you have a surplus. If the opposite is true, you have a deficit. If you end up with a deficit, you finance that with debt. The federal government’s primary mechanism for that is issuing treasury bills and notes. The amount raised through income tax is a huge source of revenue, but the federal government is leaving a lot on the table due to xenophobia and mock piety. By that I mean, a thoughtful immigration plan and legalization of drugs and gambling could boost revenues immensely. With immigration, having undocumented workers that may or may not pay their fair share leaves a decent amount of untaxed income a lot of which gets repatriated to their native countries and thus out of our economy. It’s dumb to not and try and make some of these folks legal and keep that money here and tax it accordingly. With the “sin” taxes available to allowing drugs and gambling to occur legally at the federal level, even more money could be raised. I hear the objections to both already, but they will be handled in separate posts for each that also take into account the social issues both bring. But, for the purposes of this post, it is a fact that our deficits could be greatly reduced if these untapped sources were brought into play. The other side of the equation is cutting expenses. I don’t know anyone who doesn’t agree that we have waste at all levels of government. Obviously, getting at this reduces the need for revenue and can allow for potentially more tax relief or reduction of debt. Again, there is a whole separate post coming on this topic that I think you will enjoy ignoring.

So, there you go – tax reform solved in one blog post. Don’t be fooled into being told it is more complicated than this. Remember, we didn’t have an income tax for a long time and it was never intended to be this complicated. If there is political will to really get something done that is useful to us citizens, burning the code and starting from scratch with a scaled down version can be easily accomplished. This will never happen in my lifetime, but don’t think I blame only the Republicans. Most Democrats hate this idea because they love to do two things: raise taxes and pretend that they didn’t. The current tax code gives them plenty of cover to do both. If you are really agreeing with me here, the best advice I can offer you is start looking at third parties who would be more inclined to take this into their platform. I think that is going to be true for almost every issue we talk about going forward as the two major parties sold themselves out a long time ago and they are never coming back.

I hope you enjoyed your first post after coming back from my break. Nice and dry, huh? I’d like to think dry like a fine white wine on a summer day, but I’m guessing it was more like the dry you feel when you eat a sleeve of Saltines (Yes, I have done that and don’t ask why. If I really want to tell you it will be coming in a post). Don’t worry, I’ll make sure there are posts that come after the dry ones that wash things down nicely.

Cheers,

Jim

1 note · View note

specialtreatment · 5 years

Text

2020 Democratic Primary Debate #1

Jose Diaz-Balart (JDB)

Chuck Todd (CT)

Rachel Maddow (RM)

Savannah Guthrie (SG)

Lester Holt (LH)

DEBATE #1

Elizabeth Warren (EW)

Cory Booker (CB)

Beto O’Rourke (BO)

Amy Klobuchar (AK)

Tulsi Gabbard (TG)

Bill De Blasio (BD)

John Delaney (JD)

Tim Ryan (TR)

Jay Inslee (JI)

ECONOMY & TAXES

SG: Warren: You’ve got a lot of plans, but 71% of Americans say the economy is doing well. Isn’t all this change risky?

EW: The economy is only doing well for a thin slice at the top. We have to make structural change to confront the corruption that’s been pulling us apart.

SG: Klobuchar: You’ve called programs like free college something for a “magic genie.” Are some of the government programs offered by other candidates giving people a false sense of what’s achievable?

AK: I get concerned about paying for college for rich kids. I’ll make community college free. I’d double Pell grants from $6k to $12k a year, and expand it to cover families who make up to $100k. And I want to make it easier for students to pay off their student loans.

SG: O’Rourke: Some Democrats want a marginal tax rate of 70% on people making more than $10 million a year. Do you support that, and if not, what would your top individual rate be?

BO: The economy is rigged towards corporations and the wealthiest. I support automatic and same-day voter registration. No PACs, no gerrymandering.

SG: I’ll give you 10 more seconds. Do you support a marginal tax rate of 70%?

BO: I’d support a fair tax rate – let’s tax capital and ordinary income at the same level. Raise corporate tax rate to 28%.

CORPORATE CONSOLIDATION

SG: Booker: Warren has a plan to break up big tech companies like Amazon. You’ve said we shouldn’t “point at companies and break them up without process.” What’s this disagreement?

CB: I don’t disagree. America has a problem with corporate consolidation. I introduced a bill about corporate consolidation in the agricultural sector. We’ve got to let the free market work.

SG: But you’ve said you don’t think it’s right to single companies out. Why?

CB: I’ll single out companies like Haliburton and Amazon that pay nothing in taxes. I’ll appoint judges who enforce anti-trust law. I’ll have a DOJ and Federal Trade Commission that will check this corporate concentration.

SG: Warren: Are you picking winners and losers?

EW: We have the laws in place but not the courage, because the system is corrupt. Monopolies shouldn’t be funding super PACs. I call out the names of monopolies to return the power to the people.

PAY EQUITY / INCOME INEQUALITY

LH: Castro: What would you do about the gender pay gap?

Castro: I’d pass the Equal Rights Amendment and pursue legislation for equal pay for equal work.

LH: Gabbard: What would you do for equal pay?

TG: I have a lot of military experience and understand the cost of war. I’ll invest tax dollars in healthcare, a green economy, good jobs, and protecting the environment

JDB: DeBlasio: Your city has one of the biggest wealth gaps between rich and poor. How will you address income inequality?

BD: We’ve raised wages in NYC with a $15 minimum wage, paid sick days, and pre-K for all. I support a 70% tax rate on the wealthy, free public college for young people, and breaking up big corporations that don’t serve our democracy.

JDB: Delaney: Do you agree?

JD: I want to double the earned income tax credit, raise the minimum wage, and create paid family leave. We also need to fix the public education system, as well as tech training programs.

JDB: Inslee: How would you address income inequality?

JI: I stand up for unions and have a plan to reinvigorate collective bargaining. I’ll put people to work in the jobs of the present and the future. Carpenters, machinists, can bring us into the future.

MANUFACTURING & JOBS

JDB: Ryan: Trump said manufacturing jobs were coming back in places like Ohio. Can you promise that?

TR: Yes. We lost 4,000 jobs at a GM facility, and then GM got a bailout from the President. We’re shipping jobs to Mexico and China. We need to dominate building electric vehicles and to dominate the solar industry.

JDB: Warren: Are these manufacturing jobs coming back?

EW: Our industrial policy has been to let giant corporations do what they want – but their loyalty is to profits. I propose we should lead on green technology, going tenfold in our research in this area. And any corporation can come use this research, but they have to manufacture their wares in America. Then let’s double-down and sell those products around the world.

HEALTH INSURANCE

LH: Who here would abolish their private health insurance in favor of a government-run plan?

Only Warren and DeBlasio raise hands

LH: Klobuchar: You want to keep private insurance alongside a government plan. Why is an incremental approach preferable?

AK: Obama liked a public option, and so do I. I don’t want to kick half of America off health insurance. Trump gave $100 billion in giveaways to pharma companies – so let’s do something about pharma.

LH: Warren: You signed on to Bernie’s Medicare for All plan. Would you support it as president?

EW: Yes. People go broke because of healthcare as a profit-driven business. When politicians tell you it’s not possible to change this, they’re saying they won’t fight for it. I will.

LH: O’Rourke: You used to praise a bill that would eliminate private insurance, but now you don’t. Why?

BO: I want to get to guaranteed, high quality, universal healthcare quickly. This should also give access to women to make decisions about their own bodies. With our plan, if you’re uninsured or insufficiently insured, we enroll you in Medicare – but if you’re in a union, you can keep what you have.

LH: Ten seconds to answer. Would you replace private insurance?

BO: No.

[BD jumps in]

BD: Private insurance isn’t working for tens of millions, when you consider all the extra costs.

JD: A lot of people like their private insurance. We should give everyone healthcare as a basic human right, but we should give them the option for private insurance. At the Medicare rate, hospitals would have to close.

LH: Gabbard: What do you think about this?

TG: Medicare for All is the way to go, and it’ll save money by reducing administrative and bureaucratic costs. Other countries have this available while also having some form of private insurance.

LH: Booker: Where do you stand on this?

CB: Kids who don’t have healthcare won’t succeed in school. Healthcare is a human and American right, and I like Medicare for All, but we have to do things quickly and provide better care. Private insurance has overhead of 15%, Medicare has overhead of 2%. I’m for more access and more affordable cost.

[EW jumps in]

EW: The insurance companies got $23 billion in profit from healthcare last year. This industry wants things to stay the way they are.

JI: Insurance companies shouldn’t be able to deny the right of choice for women. I’ve protected those rights. I’m the only candidate to pass a law for these protections and to pass a public option.

AK: We all share the goal of universal healthcare. I support a public option with an estimated 12 more million people getting covered. It’s a start.

ABORTION COVERAGE

LH: Castro: All of you support movement to some sort of government option and a woman’s right to choose. Would your plan cover abortion?

JC: Yes. I support reproductive justice, meaning women and trans should have the right to choose, even if they’re poor. I’d appoint federal judges who respect Roe v. Wade.

LH: Warren: Would you put any limits on abortion?

EW: Women should have access to the full range of reproductive services, including birth control and abortion. Also, the courts aren’t enough to protect us. Most voters support Roe v. Wade, and it needs to be federal law.

PHARMACEUTICALS

JDB: Booker: 14 of the 20 largest pharma companies are in your state. Should these companies be held criminally liable?

CB: Absolutely. This is why I don’t take contributions from pharma companies or executives or PACs. And we can’t arrest people to get them out of addiction.

JDB: Booker: How would you deal with these big pharma companies?

BDO: These companies have acted with impunity. It’s time to hold them to account.

IMMIGRATION

JDB: Castro: Last month, more than 130,000 migrants were apprehended at the Southern border. What’s your plan on this issue?

JC: I was the first candidate to offer a comprehensive immigration plan. I’d sign an executive order to remove Trump’s no-tolerance and metering policies. In my first 100 days, I’d put forward reform that would honor asylum claims and put migrants on a pathway to citizenship if they haven’t committed a serious crime. We also need a marshal plan for Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador so their people feel safe at home.

JDB: Booker: What would you do on the immigration issue?

CB: I’d end the ICE policies that violate human rights. I’d reinstate DACA and pathways to citizenship for those in protected status.

JC: Booker, Warren, and Inslee agree with me. I want to get rid of Section 1325 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. All other candidates should support this repeal.

CB: ICE isn’t just at the border, they’re ripping apart families in cities around the country.

BD: We all need to understand: immigrants have not created misery for those Americans who have fallen behind. The corporations and the 1% did that.

JDB: O’Rourke: What would you do Day One at the White House to address this issue?

BO: Follow our own asylum laws.

JC: But your policy already criminalizes the actions of these families. You need to repeal Section 1325.

BO: We wouldn’t detain any family fleeing violence. We’d implement a Family Case Management Program and then rewrite immigration laws to free Dreamers and make them citizens. Invest in solutions in Central America and work with the region.

JC: But Section 1325 is what makes their choices a criminal action, incarcerating the parents and separating the children. I have called to end that Section. O’Rourke hasn’t.

BO: I helped introduce legislation to protect those seeking asylum. I want a comprehensive rewrite of our immigration laws.

JC: But some migrants aren’t seeking asylum. You’ve said the reason you don’t want to repeal Section 1325 is because you’re concerned about human and drug trafficking — but those concerns are already covered by other parts of the US Code.

SG: Klobuchar: Castro wants it to no longer be a crime for people to cross the border. Should it be only a civil offense?

AK: I’ll look at his proposal, but we need to be able to go after law violators. We need immigrants and their ideas. I’d like to look at the 2013 bill that passed with GOP support and update it.

SG: Ryan: Should it be a crime or a civil offense?

TR: I agree with Castro. There are already provisions in the law, so there’s no need to repeat them in Section 1325. And the President should send doctors to take care of these kids at the border.

SG: Booker: If you’re President, what will you do with the families who are here? Will they be detained or not?

CB: We’d deal with this through a civil process, not a criminal one. No one should be profiting off their incarceration. We should make investments in the Northern Triangle. We should provide healthcare and dignity for those who come here.

SG: Inslee: What would you do on Day One for this issue?

JI: They should be released, pending hearings. Washington passed a law that prevents local law enforcement from being like ICE agents. I stood up against the Muslim ban. We welcome refugees in Washington.

IRAN

LH: Tankers have been attacked and a drone has been shot down. Who as President would sign onto the original 2015 nuclear deal with Iran?

All but Booker raise hands.

CB: It was a mistake to pull out of that deal, and Trump is leading us into a dangerous situation. We need to renegotiate a deal, but I can’t unilaterally say I’ll sign the old deal. If we can get a better deal, I’m gonna do it.

LH: Klobuchar: You said you’d negotiate yourself back into the Iranian agreement. Was it a good deal.

AK: It was for that moment, but it was imperfect. I would’ve negotiated a longer sunset period. Trump told us he was going to get us a better deal, and now we’re a month away from Iran saying it will blow the caps on enriching uranium. He makes us less safe. We need to stand with our allies and stop giving leverage to China and Russia. I would also go to Congress before any authorization of military force.

LH: Gabbard: You said you’d sign onto the 2015 deal. Would you insist it addresses Iran’s support for Hezbollah?

TG: Let’s deal with where we are. I served in Iraq. A war with Iran would be even more devastating and would exacerbate the refugee crisis. We need to stand up against war with Iran, get back into the agreement, and negotiate improvements to it.

LH: But what would your red line be for military action against Iran?

TG: An attack against our troops would demand a response.

GUNS

CT: Warren: You have robust plans to deal with guns, but what do you do about the hundreds of millions of guns already out there? Should the federal government play a role in that?

EW: Seven children die every day from gun violence, and it’s a national health emergency. We’ll do universal background checks, and we can ban weapons of war. But let’s also double down on research to find out what actually works to keep our kids safe.

CT: But should the federal government go and get guns?

EW: We need to treat this as a serious research issue. Guns in the hands of a collector is a different situation than guns that are sold and turned over quickly. This isn’t an across-the-board problem, it’s a public health emergency.

CT: Booker: You have a federal government gun buyback program in your plan. How will that work?

CB: We’ve let the corporate gun lobby frame this debate. It’s time for a bold agenda.

RM: Castro: School shootings are so common they don’t even always make the news. Will this problem get worse, or can you do something to turn it around?

JC: We don’t have to accept that. I think we’re gonna have a Democratic House, Senate, and White House. I think even though we haven’t seen legislative action yet, activism is working. If I have to choose between 60 votes, a filibuster, or passing common sense gun reform, I’ll choose the reform.

[TR jumps in]

TR: We need trauma-based care and socio-emotional learning in every school. Most shooters come from the school they shoot. We need mental health counselors in school.

CT: O’Rourke: You’re from a conservative state. What do you tell a gun owner who may agree with you on everything else but who believes Democrats will take his gun away?

BO: We know universal background checks save lives. We know assault weapons and weapons of war belong on the battlefield. We need red flag laws so people are stopped before it’s too late. These efforts have to be led by the young people who are making our democracy work.

CT: Klobuchar: If the government is buying back guns, is this a tough conversation to have?

AK: These proposals don’t hurt my Uncle Dick and his deer stand. Kids will lead this – as on gay rights, when kids talk to their parents, the parents listen.

MITCH McCONNELL / BIPARTISANSHIP

RM: Booker: Mitch McConnell says his biggest achievement was preventing Obama from filling a Supreme Court seat. You’ve served with Republicans on the judiciary committee. Do you believe they’ll support your nominees?

CB: If you need a license to buy a car, you should need a license to have a gun. Also, concerning the Supreme Court: we will get to 50 votes in the Senate. Our nominee needs to campaign in red states and secure Senate seats so we can pass an agenda America already agrees with.

RM: DeBlasio: As an executive, you’re used to saying what you want and then getting it. If you select a Supreme Court nominee and McConnell is still leading the Senate, what makes you think he’ll allow you to have a nominee?

BD: On the gun issue, we need a different relationship between the police and our community. I have a black son. On McConnell, the Democratic party needs to stop acting like the party of elites and go into red states to support Democratic nominees there.

CT: Warren: What is your plan for dealing with Mitch McConnell?

EW: The way a democracy is supposed to work is to be driven by the will of the people. Short of a Democratic majority in the Senate, we’ll still fight from the White House. We also have to push from the outside while having leadership on the inside.

CT: Delaney: McConnell doesn’t seem to operate in your bipartisan manner. Why would he conform to your style?

JD: We need to get things done. This country’s transformative history has happened through majorities of the American people being activated.

CT: Booker: How do you deal with Mitch McConnell?

CB: As a black man from a black community, when I got to the Senate people told me we couldn’t get a criminal justice bill. Today we passed the First Step Act. I’m able to accomplish things.

CLIMATE CHANGE

RM: Inslee: You’ve staked your candidacy on climate change. Does your plan save Miami?

JI: Yes, and we need to take the filibuster from Mitch McConnell. We’re the last generation that can solve climate change. In my state, we passed a 100% clean Electrical Grid Bill. I am the candidate making climate change the organizing principle for the US.

CT: O’Rourke: What’s your message to a voter who doesn’t want government telling them how to live concerning climate change?

BO: We’re going everywhere, listening to everyone. We’ll mobilize $5 trillion in this economy over the next 10 years and pay farmers for the environmental service they want to provide.

CT: Castro: Who pays for the mitigation to climate change? Is this a federal issue? How much should the government bail people out on this?

JC: My first visit as a candidate was to San Juan, Puerto Rico. I’m one of the few candidates with executive experience. When I was mayor of San Antonio, we moved our public utility from coal-fired plants to solar and renewables, creating more than 800 jobs. When I was HUD Secretary, we invested in communities rebuilding from natural disasters. First thing I’d do as President is recommit to the Paris Climate Accord.

CT: Ryan: If pricing carbon is politically impossible, how do we pay for climate mitigation?

TR: In a variety of ways. The Democratic Party needs to be less Ivy League and focus on the “forgotten communities” to get those workers back on our side.

[Delaney jumps in]

JD: I introduced the only bipartisan carbon tax bill in Congress. A carbon pricing mechanism works. I want to put a price on carbon and give a dividend back to tax payers, and I can get that done in my first year, with bipartisan support.

MINORITIES & CIVIL RIGHTS

CT: Gabbard: You issued an apology to the LGBT community for past statements on gay rights. Why should voters who care about this community trust you?

TG: My record in Congress shows a commitment to LGBT rights. I serve on the Equality Caucus and voted for passage of the Equality Act. I grew up in a conservative home and held views when I was young that I don’t hold today.

[Booker jumps in]

CB: Civil rights is a good place to begin. We do not talk enough about trans Americans, especially those of color, who are murdered. It’s not enough to be on the Equality Caucus – we need a President who will fight on this issue.

RM: Klobuchar: Democrats have long counted on African American turnout, and now the Latino community. What have you done for black and Latino voters?

AK: My career has been about economic opportunity. This means better childcare for all, better retirement, better schools, STEM jobs. One of the first of the 34 bills Trump signed where I was a lead Democrat was one making sure minorities could share in STEM jobs. In my first 100 days, I’ll work to make sure everyone can vote and will work towards criminal justice reform.

RM: Castro: Miami is a 70% Latino city, and you’re the only Latino running. Is Klobuchar’s answer enough to mobilize Latinos?

JC: We’ll also have to recognize racial and social justice and the ways in which law enforcement treats whites and POC differently. I’m the only candidate to put forward legislation to reform our policing system. No matter what your color is, you should be treated the same.

FOREIGN ENGAGEMENTS

LH: O’Rourke: Does America have a responsibility to protect other countries in the case of genocide or crimes against humanity, even when these atrocities don’t impact our core interest?

BO: Yes, but always with allies. This President has diminished our global standing by alienating us from allies. I’ll ensure we live our values in our foreign policy.

[De Blasio jumps in]

BD: What about the War Powers Act? We’ve too often gone to war without Congressional authorization. I think we should be ready to intervene, but not without Congressional approval.

RM: Ryan: Today the Taliban took responsibility for killing two American soldiers in Afghanistan. Obama and Trump both said they want to end involvement in Afghanistan. Why can’t we get out of there?

TR: I’ve been on Armed Services or Defense Appropriations Committees for 12 years. We have to stay engaged over there. But Trump doesn’t even have State Department appointments to deal with these issues.

[Gabbard jumps in]

TG: We need a better answer for families who have lost soldiers than “we need to stay engaged.” It’s time to come home from Afghanistan. That money should be directed to needs here at home.

TR: I don’t want to be engaged, but if we’re not, the Taliban will grow.

TG: The Taliban was there long before we came in and they’ll be there afterwards.

TR: When we weren’t there, they flew planes into our buildings.

TG: No, that was al Qaeda.

TR: I understand. The Taliban was protecting those who were plotting against us.

TG: Saudi Arabia is protecting al Qaeda right now.

CT: What is the biggest geopolitical threat to the United States?

JD: Biggest challenge is China, but the biggest threat is nuclear weapons.

JI: Donald Trump

TG: Risk of nuclear war

AK: Economic threat is China, but our major threat is Iran

BO: Climate change

EW: Climate change

CB: Nuclear proliferation and climate change

JC: China and climate change

TR: China

BD: Russia

THE MUELLER REPORT / IMPEACHMENT

CT: O’Rourke: The Mueller Report outlines multiple instances of potential criminal behavior by Trump. Pelosi resists any move to impeachment by the House. If the House doesn’t impeach, as President, would you do anything to address the potential crimes in the report?

BO: Yes. We can’t set a precedent that people with power are above the law. We should begin impeachment now. Under my administration, the DOJ will pursue accountability.

RM: Delaney: It’s possible Trump may be prosecuted for some of these potential crimes down the line. No US President has ever been prosecuted after office. Should Trump be the first?

JD: No one is above the law and this President is lawless. I support Pelosi’s current decisions, and she has more information on this than any of the candidates. The people aren’t overwhelmingly concerned with this: they’re concerned with healthcare and jobs.

AK: We need to do something about Russian interference in our elections.

CLOSING STATEMENTS

JD: America has been lost through infighting. We can find it through real solutions, not impossible promises.

BD: We need a candidate who has already taken actions on healthcare and minimum wage and pre-K, like I did in NY. Put working people first.

JI: I want to be able to tell my grandkids I did everything to protect them from the damage of climate change. I’m the only candidate for whom this is a top priority.

TR: I’ve represented a forgotten community. The powerful have divided the working class, and it’s time to bring people together, especially in industrial America

TG: The government hasn’t been of, by, and for the people. It’s been for the rich and powerful. We need healthcare and clean air and well-paying jobs.

JC: My grandmother was an immigrant, and now my brother and I are both in significant office. I’ll work towards good healthcare, education, and job opportunities no matter what part of America you’re in.

AK: I listen and get things done. I’ve passed over 100 bills as a lead Democrat. I win in deep red districts and swing states. I have no political machine, and I don’t come from money, and I don’t make big promises.

CB: Activists stood up for my family, and I’ve fought as a tenant lawyer, and I will beat Trump. I stand up to bullies, and I also want to call us to a common purpose for each other.

BO: I’m running for my daughter and for kids across the US. We need a new kind of politics with the urgency of the next generation. We need a movement like mine in Texas.

EW: I dreamt of being a public school teacher, but my family couldn’t afford college for me. The government helped me into a commuter college and expanded my life. Let’s make our government and economy work for all. I’ll fight for you as hard as I fight for my family.

DEBATE #2

Michael Bennett (MB)

John Hickenlooper (JH)

Bernie Sanders (BS)

Kamala Harris (KH)

Eric Swalwell (ES)

Kristen Gillibrand (KG)

Marianne Williamson (MW)

Pete Buttigieg (PB)

Joe Biden (JB)

Andrew Yang (AY)

ECONOMY

SG: Will taxes go up for the middle class in a Sanders administration, and if so, how do you sell that to voters?

BS: Under a Medicare-for-All system, the vast majority of Americans will pay less for healthcare than they are right now. They’ll have no premiums, deductibles, co-payments, or out-of-pocket expenses. So yes, they will pay more in taxes but less in healthcare for what they get.

SG: Biden: you’ve said “we shouldn’t demonize the rich. Nobody has to be punished, no one’s standard of living would change, and nothing would fundamentally change.” What does this mean?

JB: Donald Trump has put the middle class in a horrible situation with real economic inequality. We can make massive cuts in the $1.6 trillion in tax loopholes, and I would eliminate Donald Trump’s tax cuts for the wealthy.

SG: Warren: Do you think Democrats have a responsibility to explain how they’ll pay for their proposals?

KH: Where was that question when Donald Trump and the GOP passed a tax bill that benefits the top 1% and contributes $1 trillion to the country’s debt, which middle-class families will pay for?

I propose to change the tax code so every family making less than $100,000 a year will receive a tax credit of $500 a month. And on Day One, I will repeal the tax bill that benefits the 1%.

THE SOCIALISM LABEL

SG: Hickenlooper: Only one candidate identifies as a Democratic Socialist. What policies of your opponents do you think veer towards socialism?

JH: If we don’t clearly define that we aren’t socialists, Republicans will call us socialists. The Green New Deal goes too far – we can’t promise everyone a government job. We can’t eliminate private insurance.

SG: Sanders: How do you respond to the notion that nominating a socialist would re-elect Donald Trump?

BS: Last poll I saw has us 10 points ahead of Trump. America understands he’s a phony, a liar, and a racist. He lied during his campaign and hasn’t stood up for working families – instead he’s tried to throw 32 million people off their healthcare. We need to expose him as a fraud.

[KG jumps in]

KG: Companies shouldn’t care more about profits than about people. The NRA and gun manufacturers are greedy, the drug companies are greedy. But we don’t have to disagree in this party – capitalism is fine, just not corrupt capitalism.

SG: Bennett: You’ve said “it’s possible to craft proposals that have no basis in reality. You may as well call them candy.” To whom were you referring?

MB: I disagree with Bernie’s Medicare for All solution. I want to get to universal healthcare, and we do that through a public option. We’ll get to Medicare for All more quickly if we do that. Vermont rejected Medicare for All because of Bernie’s taxes.

[KG jumps in]

KG: I wrote the part in Bernie’s bill that merges Bernie’s and Bennett’s POV. If you have a buy-in, over a four- to five-year period, we get to single-payer more quickly.

JDB: Buttigieg: Why don’t you support free college, as others do?

PB: I believe in free college for low- and middle-income students. But those families shouldn’t subsidize wealthy families. It should also be an option to not go to college and still make your life affordable. We need to raise minimum wage to at least $15/hr.

[ES jumps in]

ES: We can’t count on the people who have been around for 30 years in government to solve this.

JDB: Yang: You want to give every adult $1,000 a month (or $3.2 trillion a year.) How?

AY: It’s hard to do when companies like Amazon are paying no taxes while closing 30% of stores. A value-added tax at half the European level would generate over $800 billion in revenue, and that money would trickle up and create jobs. We could increase GDP by $700 billion. We’ve automated away 4 million manufacturing jobs in key states, and it’ll get worse.

JDB: But wouldn’t the $1,000 gift just go right back into the value-added tax?

AY: No. You’d still increase the buying power of the bottom 94%. The average family of 2-3 adults would have an additional $24-36,000 a year.

JOBS

JDB: In this age of automation, what would you do to help people adapt?

ES: Invest in vulnerable communities. It’s time to pass the torch, and Joe Biden said that 32 years ago.

[JB responds]

JB: I want to focus on schools that are in distress. Let’s triple the amount of money spent on Title I schools. Let’s have universal pre-K, free community college. And if you get out of school and are making less than $25,000 a year, you shouldn’t have to pay school debt – the debt is frozen with no interest payment until you can pay it.

[BS jumps in]

BS: We’ve got to take on Wall Street, the fossil fuel industry, and big-money interests.

[KH jumps in with “food fight” line]

KH: People shouldn’t have to be working 2 or 3 jobs if Trump’s economy is so great. The stock market isn’t a full measure of the economy’s health.

HEALTH INSURANCE

LH: Who would abolish their private health insurance in favor of government-run insurance?

Only Sanders and Harris say yes.

KG: With me, anyone who doesn’t have access to insurance they like can buy in at a percentage of income they can afford. We need to get to universal healthcare and then to single-payer. You get there by creating competition with the insurers. If given the choice, people will choose Medicare, and then we’ll get to Medicare for All. Single payer can be an earned benefit, just like Social Security, and you’ll pay into it your whole life.

PB: I want to do Medicare for All Who Want It. Put it up as an option against the corporate options. Even in countries with socialized medicine (like England), there’s still another option. But we shouldn’t rely on corporations for our primary care.

JB: Let’s build on Obamacare and make sure everyone has options and can buy in on an exchange.

LH: Sanders: You want to scrap private insurance and replace it with a government-run plan. But states who have tried that have struggled. How can you do it at a national level?

BS: Every other major country does it and they’re spending 50% per capita of what we’re spending. The function of healthcare today isn’t care, it’s to make billions for insurance companies. I will cut prescription drug costs in half in this country. We’ll do this by bringing millions of people come together to fight for it.

LH: Williamson: How would you lower costs of prescription drugs?

MW: The government never should have made a deal with Big Pharma that they couldn’t negotiate. We’re not going to beat Donald Trump by having plans. He didn’t have a plan. We don’t have a healthcare system, we have a sickness-care system.

LH: Bennett: Is building on Obamacare enough to get us to universal coverage?

MB: Yes, and quickly. Canada has a much smaller population than we do. Medicare for All won’t work here. Bernie’s plan will make everything illegal but cosmetic surgery.

[BS responds]

BS: Medicare is currently the most popular health insurance plan in the country. Our plan allows people to go to any hospital or doctor they want.

[KH jumps in]

KH: Families shouldn’t have to fear going into the ER because they’ll be out a $5,000 deductible.

[ES jumps in]

ES: We’ve got to have a system where if you’re sick, you’re seen, and you won’t go broke.

SG: Would your plan provide coverage for undocumented immigrants?

All hands go up.

PB: Undocumented immigrants pay sales and property taxes, so this is not a free handout. We have 11 million undocumented people with no access to healthcare, and no path to citizenship. The majority of the American people support these pathways.

SG: Biden: Obamacare doesn’t cover undocumented immigrants. Are you in favor of change on this?

JB: Undocumented people contribute to our country and increase the lifespan of Social Security. They would also reduce the overall cost of healthcare because they wouldn’t be waiting until it’s too late to get care. We should also be putting pharma execs in jail for their misleading advertising.

IMMIGRATION

JDB: Harris: What would you do with the thousands in detainment looking for asylum?

KH: I’d start with DACA and reinstate DACA protection through executive action. I’d extend deferral of deportation for their parents and for undocumented veterans. I’d put in place a process for reviewing cases for asylum. I’ll release kids from cages and get rid of private detention centers.

JDB: Hickenlooper: What do you do for these migrants?

JH: What’s happening right now is kidnapping. We need sufficient facilities in place to keep families together. We need to reform ICE so it’s working in a humanitarian way – providing food, clothing, shelter, and access to medical care.

[MW jumps in]

MW: This is kidnapping and child abuse. State-sponsored crimes. Why aren’t we talking about healthcare and Latin American foreign policy?

JDB: Gillibrand: What would you do about the border?

KG: Fight for comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship. Develop a community-based treatment center for asylum seekers, giving them lawyers and real immigration judges. Fund border security. Trump has diverted the funds from stopping drug trafficking and has directed the funds towards for-profit prisons to lock up kids and asylum seekers.

JDB: Should it be a civil offense rather than a crime to cross the border without documentation?

All hands go up except Bennett and Biden (who puts up a “give me a second” finger)

PB: Criminalization of this is the basis for family separation. The GOP cloaks itself in religion, but you can’t put kids in cages and pretend to be religious.

JDB: Biden: Would you decriminalize migrants who come without documents?

JB: I’d send help to the region immediately. I won a bipartisan agreement to spend $740 million to deal with the problem, but Trump rolled that back. We would reunite the families.

JDB: But the Obama-Biden administration deported more than 3 million. If living in the US without documents is their only offense, should they be deported?

JB: Yes, if they’ve committed a major crime. Let’s fix why they’d leave in the first place and absorb those seeking asylum.

JDB: Yes, but should someone here without documents, and with no other offense, be deported?

JB: They should not be the focus of deportation.

[BS jumps in]

BS: I agree with Kamala. On Day One, with executive order, we should rescind everything Trump has done on this issue. Also, Honduras is a failing state with massive corruption. We need to invite the leaders of Central America and Mexico together to solve this.

JDB: Swalwell: If an undocumented person has no other offense, should they be deported?

ES: No. And Day One, for me, families are reunited.

JDB: Harris: If an undocumented person has no other offense, should they be deported?

KH: No, and I disagreed with the Obama administration on this. The policy allowed deportation of non-criminals, by ICE’s own definition. I directed my state not to comply, and to make decisions based on public safety. A rape victim should feel safe to report the crime against her without fear.

CHINA

LH: Bennett: US business says China manipulates currency and steals intellectual property. How would you stand up to China?

MB: Russia is a bigger threat than China. I think Trump is right to push back on China, but he should be doing it with the rest of the world beside us. Also, I wrote the immigration bill in 2013 that called for a path to citizenship.

LH: Yang: Are you worried about China taking jobs? What would you do?

AY: I agree Russia is a bigger threat. But the China trade war is punishing everyone. We need to crack down on Chinese malfeasance, but the trade war is the wrong way to do it.

LH: Buttigieg: What would you do about China?

PB: It’s is a serious challenge. Tariffs aren’t going to change China’s economic model – tariffs are taxes, and Americans are gonna pay $800 more a year because of them. Meanwhile, China is overwhelming us with better technological advancement. We need to invest in our own competitiveness.

RACE / DIVERSITY

RM: Buttigieg: The police force in South Bend is 6% black in a city that is 26% black. Why hasn’t that improved in your two terms as Mayor?

PB: I couldn’t get it done. There is a systemic wall of distrust, racially.

[JH asks to respond]

JH: Why has it taken so long to do something about it? When I was a mayor, we had a police shooting and so we created an office of the independent monitor, a civilian oversight commission, diversified the police force, and did de-escalation training.

PB: We’ve taken so many steps toward police accountability that the FOP just denounced me for too much accountability.

[ES jumps in]

ES: If the officer’s bodycam wasn’t on, and that was the police policy, you should fire the chief. You’re the mayor and someone died.

PB: It’s being investigated.

MW: This is all due to deep racial injustice. We should support reparations for slavery for this reason. Americans aren’t educated enough on race.

[KH jumps in]

KH: Biden, I don’t believe you’re a racist, but your comments about segregationists were hurtful. You worked with them to oppose busing. When I was AG, all my special agents kept their bodycams on.

JB: This is a mischaracterization. I was a public defender, not a prosecutor. And when I worked with Obama, we dealt with these issues. I support busing being a decision at the local level.

KH: But do you agree you were wrong to oppose busing then?

JB: I didn’t. I opposed busing being directed by the Department of Education.

KH: And that’s why the federal government must step in sometimes. There was a failure of states to integrate schools. We need the federal government – the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, the ERA. Sometimes the states fail to support all people.

JB: I supported the ERA from the start. I’ve fought against denial of access to the ballot box. I extended the Voting Rights Act for 25 years…

CT: Sanders: You’ve said voters should focus on what people stand for, not a candidate’s race or age or sexuality. Are you saying diversity doesn’t matter?

BS: No. Diversity is valuable and that’s what our party is about. But we also need to ask why workers aren’t making more money than they made 45 years ago, while the top 1% has massive income increases. We need diversity, and we also need to stand up to power.

KH: We have to go to the root of the corruption in politics if we want to solve any of these problems. I want publicly funded, clean elections.

JB: And I introduced the first Constitutional amendment to do that.

GRIDLOCK / BIPARTISANSHIP

CT: Bennett: Concerning partisan gridlock, Obama said that if he were elected, the parties would come together. That didn’t happen, and now Biden is saying the same thing. Will a Democrat magically solve gridlock?

MB: Not if Mitch McConnell is there. We need to run in all 50 states and win the Senate with broadly appealing policies. We need to end gerrymandering in Washington and overturn Citizens United. All this stuff happened while Biden was in the Senate.

CT: Biden: It seems as if you haven’t seen what’s happened in the Senate over the past several years. Why?

JB: We needed three votes to pass the recovery act to avoid Depression – I got three votes changed. I got Mitch to raise $600 billion in taxes. I sent billions into cancer research.

MB: But the deal Biden made with Mitch McConnell extended the Bush tax cuts permanently and was a victory for the Tea Party, after Democrats had been fighting against that for 10 years.

KG: GOP admitted the reason the Trump tax cut had to be passed is so the GOP could pay back its donors. I want clean, publicly funded elections to fight corruption.

ABORTION

RM: What is your plan if Roe vs. Wade is struck down while you’re president?

BS: I will never appoint any Justice who does not 100% defend Roe v. Wade. Constitutionally, we have the power to rotate judges to other courts, if we need to bring new blood in.

RM: But what if the court has already overturned Roe v Wade and it’s gone?

BS: Medicare for All will guarantee every woman in this country the right to an abortion.

[KG jumps in]

KG: Thirty states are trying to overturn Roe v Wade right now. During ACA negotiations, I had to fight to make sure contraception didn’t disappear. I’ve been the fiercest advocate for reproductive rights.

CLIMATE CHANGE

CT: Harris: What is your plan for climate change?

KH: I support the Green New Deal and will re-enter us into the Paris Agreement.

CT: Buttigieg: How will your climate change plan help farmers in the Midwest?

PB: I support a carbon tax and dividend in a way that is rebated out in a progressive fashion. Rural Americans, with the right kind of soil investment, can be part of the solution.

RM: Hickenlooper: You’ve said oil and gas companies can be part of the solution, but other candidates are moving away from that idea. Can oil and gas really help?

JH: Socialism isn’t the solution. In Colorado, we’re replacing some coal plants with wind and solar and batteries, and we’re working with the oil and gas industry to start the first methane regulations in the US. We shouldn’t be demonizing business.

RM: Biden: Democrats are arguing with themselves about climate change, but a lot of the GOP doesn’t believe it exists. How do you solve this with no support from Congress?

JB: Obama administration built the largest wind farm and largest solar farm in the world, and that drove the competitive price of both of those sources. I want 500,000 recharging stations across America to go to a full electric vehicle future by 2030. Let’s invest $400 million in new science and technology for an economy that will create jobs. And let’s rejoin the Paris Accord.

RM: Sanders: What would you do for climate change?

BS: We have 12 years before irreparable damage is done to the planet. Instead of spending $1.5 trillion on weapons and war, let’s transform away from fossil fuel to sustainable energy.

ES: Pass the torch.

MW: John Kennedy didn’t say he had a plan to get to the moon. He just said he’d do it. Gather the energy of the people.

TOP ISSUE

CT: Obama wanted to address both healthcare and climate, but only got to healthcare. If you only get one shot, what’s your issue?

ES: Ending gun violence

JB: Climate change and economic mobility

KG: Family bill of rights, national paid leave plan, universal pre-k, affordable day care, making sure women thrive at work

KH: Middle-class tax cut, DACA, guns

BS: Political revolution

JB: Obama brought together 196 nations to commit to deal with climate change. But my first issue is defeating Donald Trump

PB: Fix democracy

AY: $1000 freedom dividend for everyone age 18+

JH: Collaborative approach to climate change

MW: Call New Zealand

GUNS

RM: Swalwell: You propose mandatory government buyback of every assault weapon in America. How?

ES: The other candidates’ plans aren’t enough. I’ll approach it as a prosecutor and as someone who has voted on and passed background checks.

RM: Sanders: In an interview in 2013, you said, “Everything being equal, states should make decisions [on guns]. Has your view changed?”

BS: That’s a mischaracterization. In 1988, I ran on a platform of banning assault weapons. I have a D-minus voting record from the NRA. We need comprehensive gun legislation with universal background checks. We need to end the gun show loophole and the strawman provision. Assault weapons shouldn’t be on the streets. We will ban their sale and distribution.

ES: Will you buy them back?

BS: If the government wants to do that.

KH: I think Swalwell’s idea is great. As President, I’ll give Congress 100 days to put a bill on my desk. If they don’t, I’ll put in place the most comprehensive gun legislation we’ve had. I’ll have ATF take licenses from gun sellers who violate the law, and I’ll ban through executive order the importation of assault weapons.

RM: Buttigieg: You’re the only one on stage with military experience. Do you believe military families and vets will have a different take on this issue?

PB: Yes. Every part of my life experience informs this issue. Universal background checks are the right thing to do. Some weapons have no place in peace time.

JB: I’ve beaten the NRA nationally, getting the Brady Bill passed. We increased that during the Obama administration. I got assault weapons banned and the number of clips in a gun banned. I would buy back assault weapons. And we should have “smart” guns – no gun should be sold without biometric precautions. Our adversary is the manufacturers, not the NRA.

PB: But the manufacturers are giving orders to the NRA

FOREIGN POLICY

LH: What do you see as important early steps in reversing Trump’s damage?

MB: We have to restore democracy at home and restore the relationships he’s damaged with our allies.

CT: Which relationship with an ally would you most want to repair?

MW: European leaders.

JH: China

AY: China

PB: We have no idea who he’ll have pissed off by then

JB: NATO

BS: Rebuilding trust in the UN

KH: NATO

KG: Engage Iran

MB: European allies and Latin American countries

ES: Break up with Russia, make up with NATO

RM: Biden: Your foreign policy chops are central to the campaign, but you voted for the Iraq War. Why should voters trust your judgment?

JB: Because we got elected after Bush, and Obama told me to get the troops out of Iraq. We shouldn’t have combat troops in Afghanistan. I’ve pulled together alliances to combat terrorism – we should never go it alone.

BS: Joe voted for that war, which was a disaster, and I led opposition to it. I also led the effort for the first time to use the War Powers Act to get the US out of the humanitarian disaster of Yemen. And I’ll do all I can to prevent war with Iran.

CLOSING REMARKS

ES: Congress has been built for the wealthy, but this generation can change that

MW: We can beat Donald Trump not with plans but with love

MB: I bring people together, and we need a broad coalition to beat Trump

JH: I’m a scrappy businessowner and a successful governor in a purple state. No socialism!

KG: The rights of women are under attack. I stood up against the banks and the Pentagon

AY: I can beat Trump by solving the problems that got him elected, with a “trickle up” economy

KH: We need someone who can prosecute Trump. I have a “3 a.m. agenda”

PB: I’m a gay, married mayor and a vet. I want to be able to say I delivered solutions on racial equality, climate change, and endless war.

BS: We all have good ideas, but until we have the guts to challenge the system, nothing will change

JB: We need to restore the soul and backbone of this nation. I can unite America

0 notes

gibsongirlselections · 4 years

Text

There’s a Word for the Way Chicago is Run: Stupidity

Stupidity is not ignorance. Instead, it is the non-thought of received ideas.

Most of you who do not live in Chicago are ignorant of what goes on here. Maybe you’ve had a nice stay here once or twice but now you just read an occasional blurb about Chicago in the news. And, being news, it is probably bad.

For those who live in Chicago we cannot avoid the daily deluge of bad news. It’s been another especially deadly summer. The pandemic took a heavy toll on disadvantaged black and brown communities. The fiscal condition, already in deep trouble before, is in shambles now. Most Chicago leaders, while aware of these facts, don’t appreciate that the city is an outlier when it comes to many measures of municipal performance. They also don’t realize how freakish the city’s governance structure is. This is stupidity.

Our book, The New Chicago Way: Lessons from Other Big Cities, from which this essay is adapted, looks at Chicago through this informed lens. We start with the 15 largest U.S. cities and look at outcomes in a number of areas. Then we look at some of the key decisions that Chicago’s city government has made that led to such poor outcomes. Our research showed that consistently poor decisions are the result of a governance structure that gives the mayor total control over every aspect of government. This is an outdated structure that other cities have outgrown in the 120 years since the progressive movement at the turn of the previous century started cleaning up city government across the United States. This movement skipped over Chicago.

To get an idea of how we studied these differences, look at today’s hot topic of policing. The following table tells the story of Chicago.

Population 2016 Total officers Officers per 10k pop. Murder rate per 100k New York 8,537,673 36,228 42.3 3.4 Los Angeles 3,976,322 9,850 24.6 7.1 Chicago 2,704,958 11,954 43.9 23.8 Houston 2,303,482 5,182 22.2 13.3 Philadelphia 1,567,872 6,313 40.2 17.9 Phoenix 1,615,017 2,762 17.4 7.2 San Antonio 1,492,510 2,152 14.4 6.4 San Diego 1,406,630 1,815 12.8 2.6 Dallas 1,317,929 3,279 24.8 10.4 San Jose 1,025,350 939 9 2.9 Austin 947,890 1,807 18.9 2.5 Jacksonville 880,619 1,758 20 11.2 San Francisco 870,887 2,296 26.4 6.1 Indianapolis 855,164 1,612 18.6 17.1 Columbus 860,090 1,848 22.1 9.1

While these numbers are slightly dated, more recent figures are even worse. Chicago is headed for a repeat of 2016’s homicides but now has 13,000 sworn officers. So, Chicago has the highest homicide rate per capita of any major city and it is five times the combined rate of New York and Los Angeles. It also has the highest number of police officers per capita of any other major city.

This simple comparison reveals a stunning truth about Chicago. And it’s not just true for policing.

Across all aspects of Chicago governance: the council-mayor relationship, elections, schools, budgets, pensions, policing, corruption, and the entity that runs the city’s convention center, decades of poor decisions by all-powerful mayors have led to poor results.

Our book begins with the story of a midnight raid by Mayor Richard M. Daley in 2003 to destroy Meigs Field, the city’s lakefront airport. With no advance warning or approval from anyone in city, state, or federal government, the mayor was able to take such drastic action and get away with it.

We also tell the story of the 2008 deal that sold the rights to receive all parking revenue in the city for 75 years. The deal was done at a giveaway price and was rushed through the city council with 48 hours notice and no supporting detail. The result is an impairment that will last generations and cost taxpayers billions of dollars.

This happened because of how government is structured in Chicago. The council is composed of 50 aldermen, each of whom represent parochial ward interests and wholly depend on the mayor. Chicago is one of only two of America’s big cities where the mayor presides in the council meetings.

Another tool for mayoral control is the city’s municipal election, which discourages democracy. It takes place on the last Tuesday of February in years when there is no other state or national election. Ever been to Chicago in February? Predictably, turnout averages half of that for presidential elections. Among the top 15 cities no other has elections in February, and 10 of them are in November, several during presidential elections.

When it comes to finances, there are no controls on the decisions made by the mayor. As a result, Chicago has the highest debt per person of the top 15 cities and carries a junk bond rating. The debt level and rating are even worse for the Chicago Public Schools. A big part of this is pension debt, which totals $42 billion for the city and the agencies it controls . To pay off this debt will require payments of $170 billion over the next 40 years, $100 billion of which will be in the last half of that amortization period.

Our work is not a lament of all the problems with no solutions. Likewise, it is not an ad hominem screed lambasting this mayor or that. Our position is that it is the structure of governance that allows that mayor such a free hand in making unopposed decisions. The city could elect Pericles or Mother Teresa and they would still make the same mistakes.

Further, the book is not an ideological polemic. Many of the best practices we discovered were from heavily union and Democratic cities.

What these cities had in common was that, through reforms undertaken over decades, power had been distributed intelligently within the city so that the checks and balances and conflict made for wiser decisions. In Los Angeles, the police commission provided the professional oversight that insulated decisions from the political arena and allowed them to go from one of the worst police forces in the nation to one of the best in 20 years. Many cities keep their fiscal affairs in order because they require voter approval before they can borrow money or raise taxes. Big cities with elected school boards educated students at an average cost of $11,000 per pupil whereas in the four districts where the mayor controlled the schools, including Chicago, the average cost was $18,000.

Winston Churchill once said that “Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.”

In our research we found a book reporting the results of a 1953 Chicago blue ribbon commission on home rule. It called the governance structure of 50 ward aldermen an “anachronism.” Nothing has changed since then.

Perhaps the most startling finding we stumbled over was the idea of a city charter. If there is any single tool that citizens can use to change the governance of their cities, this is it. A charter is a written constitution that spells out how the city government is to run. It is developed and changed by a charter commission that is made up of civic leaders but no public officials. And then, to be legitimate, it must be approved by voters.

Of the top 15 cities all but two, Chicago and Indianapolis, had a charter and a robust process of revising it. A charter could be the way to make all the structural change Chicago so desperately needs. In our research we learned of the crucial charter revision in New York in 1989, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the city’s governance structure was unconstitutional. There was also the dramatic 1999 charter revision in Los Angeles, prompted by a movement by communities in the San Fernando Valley to secede from the city.

The 1953 study recommended that Chicago make changes via a charter. The Illinois Constitution does not provide for a charter. But it also doesn’t prohibit one.

If Chicago’s leaders would think about how other city governments are structured—and how those structures lead to better outcomes—they might change and turn the city around.

If they don’t think about them, what do you call that?

Ed Bachrach and Austin Berg are the authors of The New Chicago Way: Lessons from Other Big Cities published by the Southern Illinois University Press in 2019.

The post There’s a Word for the Way Chicago is Run: Stupidity appeared first on The American Conservative.

0 notes

shirlleycoyle · 4 years

Text

How Steve Bannon’s Alleged ‘We Build the Wall’ Scam Worked

Federal prosecutors in New York charged Steven Bannon and three others with conspiracy to commit fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering Thursday. At the center of the charges is We Build the Wall, a crowdfunded organization that promised to do what Bannon said Trump couldn’t: build a privately funded wall along America’s border with Mexico.

Bannon and his alleged co-conspirators built some short sections of wall in New Mexico and Texas, but prosecutors say they they also skimmed millions from the donations. “The defendants defrauded hundreds of thousands of donors, capitalizing on their interest in funding a border wall to raise millions of dollars, under the false pretense that all of that money would be spent on construction,” Acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Audrey Strauss said in a press release. “While repeatedly assuring donors that Brian Kolfage, the founder and public face of We Build the Wall, would not be paid a cent, the defendants secretly schemed to pass hundreds of thousands of dollars to Kolfage, which he used to fund his lavish lifestyle.”

Prosecutors allege Bannon raked in $1 million, and that one of his co-conspirators splashed out vast sums on high living, buying a golf cart, jewelry, and even plastic surgery. Kolfage alone allegedly skimmed $350,000 from the fund.

“Legally, this is a pedestrian accusation,” Jens David Ohlin, Vice Dean & Professor of Law at Cornell Law School, told Motherboard in an email. “It’s standard fraud in the non-profit context: diverting for personal use funds donated to a charitable cause. What’s striking here is the context. ‘Build the Wall!’ is an important political catchphrase for Trump, and Bannon allegedly weaponized it for his own personal profit.”

In December 2018, Air Force veteran and triple amputee Brian Kolfage started a GoFundMe campaign with a $1 billion goal. He called it We the People Build the Wall. “Democrats are going to stall this project by every means possible and play political games to ensure President Trump doesn’t get his victory,” We Build the Wall’s website said. “They’d rather see President Trump fail, than see America succeed. However, if we can fund a large portion of this wall, it will jumpstart things and will be less money Trump has to secure from our politicians.”

The campaign was one of the most successful in GoFundMes history and raised more than $20 million in a few weeks. As the funds came in, Kolfage repeatedly said he wouldn’t take a penny of the cash. “I take no salary whatsoever working on this project,” he said in a Jun 2019 tweet. “It’s completely volunteer and it’s how a nonprofit should be run.”

Early versions of We Build the Wall’s website promised that 100 percent of the donations would go to fund the wall and that, should the campaign fail, everyone would get their money back. As the months wore on, Kolfage constantly reminded his followers on social media that he wasn’t taking a dime from the project and asked for people to buy military themed coffee from another one of his businesses. He also offered branding opportunities for corporate donors who wanted to put their name on the wall.

After the GoFundMe had raised more than $20 million, GoFundMe stepped in and told Kolfage he either had to register as a non-profit entity or return the cash. Kolfage complied and, with the help of Steven Bannon and alleged co-conspirator Andrew Badolato, formed the 501(c)(4) We Build the Wall, Inc.

According to the indictment, Bannon and Badolato took control of the organization, “including its finances, messaging, donor outreach, and general operations.”

The original GoFundMe promised to give the cash it raised directly to the U.S. government. In January 2019, Koflage said he would, instead, use the money to build the wall privately. GoFundMe said that Kolfage wasn’t allowed to change the terms after people had already donated and threatened to refund everyone’s money. Crucially, Bannon and company set up a new website that would allow people who had donated to the GoFundMe to opt-in to redirect their pledge money to We Build the Wall without going through the crowdfunding site.

Bannon allegedly helped Kolfage set up a system where GoFundMe users could “opt-in” to redirect their donation to the new venture. At the same time, they posted by-laws on We Build the Wall’s website promising Kolfage would take no salary and “will personally not take a penny of compensation from these donations.”

The message that Kolfage wouldn’t take cash from the project was important to We Build the Wall’s image. In a text message Badolato sent to Bannon obtained by the feds, he said that it was important to emphasize this point because it “removes all self interested taint,” and “gives Brian Kolfage sainthood.” The messaging worked and by October 2019, We Build the Wall had raised more than $25 million for private construction of the border wall.

And build they did. In New Mexico, a small wall went up in the city of Sunland Park. The mayor tried to stop it, but was rebuffed. The wall’s construction is stalled in Mission, Texas where it could disrupt the National Butterfly Center, a 100 acre waterfront preserve and state park. In Florida, the Department of Agriculture and Services had been investigating We Build the Wall over its non-profit status.

Kolfage has been chronicling all of this on a pretty audacious YouTube page that has a mix of drone-shot wall-building updates and anti-immigration political messages, often set to soaring rock music. Titles of videos include "Fake Migrants BUSTED” and “Illegal smugglers caught by we build the wall drone team."

Small portions of the wall went up, but the indictment alleged that more than a million dollars went into the pockets of Kolfage, Bannon, Badolato, and fourth co-conspirator Timothy Shea. After the formation of the non-profit, as the group promised Kolfage wouldn’t take money, the four agreed in secret that Kolfage would get “100k upfront [and] then 20 [per] month,” according to the indictment.

To hide the paper trail, We Build the Wall sent money to a non-profit controlled by Bannon who would then use the non-profit to pay Kolfage. In a text to Badolato published in the indictment, Bannon said there would be “no deals I don’t approve.” Text messages published in the indictment show Bannon directing Badolato to wire money from We Build the Wall to Bannon’s non-profit in early February 2019. A week later, We Build the Wall allegedly sent Bannon’s non-profit $250,000 and the non-profit sent $100,000 to Kolfage. Koflage received the promised $20 a month, the following two months.

When Kolfage reached out to complain about declaring the pass through payments on We Build the Wall’s tax forms, Badolato replied texted back “Better than you or me lol.” To better conceal the payments, Badolato began paying Kolfage’s wife as a “media” contract worker, the indictment alleges.

Things got more complicated in April 2019. The four men allegedly began using shell companies, many of them controlled by Shea, to create false invoices that established a paper trail for money spent by We Build the Wall. In reality, much of the cash was going directly into Kolfage’s pocket, according to the indictment. The group continued to communicate through text messages about the scheme.

“‘600k comes in and [he] transfers 300k’ to Koflage, they could ‘create companies that…hired [Kolfage and Shea] …for a service’ like ‘consulting,’” the indictment said, quoting a text exchange.

According to federal prosecutors, We Build the Wall passed more than $1 million of its donations to Bannon’s non-profit company. Kolfage received around $350,000 of that. He allegedly used the cash to buy a boat, a luxury SUV, a golf cart, jewelry, and paid for plastic surgery, as well as paid off credit cards and his personal tax debt. Bannon, Shea, and Badolato also skimmed hundreds of thousands of dollars from the organization.

Kolfage even showed off his boat at a July 4 boat parade in Destin, Florida.

According to the indictment, Bannon, Kolfage, Badolato, and Shea learned We Build the Wall was under investigation sometime in October in 2019. They began using encrypted text messaging apps and attempted to cover up the crime they’d committed. But the crimes were already committed.

“Devising a fraud scheme and then using electronic communication to perpetrate it is a classic wire fraud charge,” Barbara McQuade, former U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Michigan told Motherboard in an email. “The strength of wire fraud charges are that an electronic paper trail of evidence can be used to prove the case.”

The real question, for both McQuade and Ohlin is what Steve Bannon — a man with intimate knowledge of the Trump White House — will do. “The big question in my mind is whether Bannon has information about other criminal conduct that he might trade in exchange for a deal with federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York,” Ohlin said.

“When a defendant is facing strong federal charges, his lawyer will naturally explore whether he can trade cooperation for leniency,” McQuade said. “Here, Bannon is in a position to know a great deal about the conduct of the Trump campaign because he was campaign manager in 2016. What makes this case different from most cases is that Trump may want to give Bannon the Roger Stone treatment—pardon him to prevent him from talking.”

GoFundMe did not immediately respond to Motherboard’s request for comment.

How Steve Bannon’s Alleged ‘We Build the Wall’ Scam Worked syndicated from https://triviaqaweb.wordpress.com/feed/

0 notes

coin-river-blog · 5 years

Link

The political tension in Venezuela has affected local cryptocurrency adoption. While there are roadblocks, many crypto-advocating projects continue to thrive in the country. News.Bitcoin.com takes a deep look at the current situation in Venezuela, crypto adoption efforts and how the recent political crisis affects them.

Also read: Indian Supreme Court Postpones Crypto Case at Government’s Request

Political Turmoil and Economy in Freefall

Cryptocurrency adoption in Venezuela has been affected by the recent political unrest following mass protests organized by Juan Guaido, president of the opposition-run National Assembly, calling for the military to help him end Nicolas Maduro’s reign. With the support of more than 50 countries including the U.S., Guaido declared himself acting president of Venezuela while Maduro insists he has been re-elected to a second six-year term. The incumbent still has the support of a number of countries including Russia and China.

During the years-long freefall of their country’s economy, many Venezuelans have turned to cryptocurrencies. Venezuela’s annual inflation rate reached 1,300,000% in the 12 months to November last year, according to the opposition-controlled National Assembly.

Venezuela’s two presidents: Nicolas Maduro (left) and Juan Guaido (right).

Widespread food and medical supply shortages are now the norm, with most Venezuelans struggling to afford basic items including food and toiletries. Although Venezuela is prime for crypto adoption, there are still many challenges in the way.

Crypto Adoption Remains Strong

Seemingly a natural fit for such a failing economy, cryptocurrency adoption is progressing in Venezuela despite some roadblocks. Matt Aaron, leader of Bitcoin.com’s efforts in the country, explained how the recent political situation and ongoing power outages have affected local merchant crypto adoption.

Citing the political unrest, the frequent and lengthy blackouts, and the skyrocketing prices of goods and services due to shortages of basic necessities, Aaron admitted that “It’s really affected the crypto adoption.” However, he emphasized:

I think it’s still strong, it’s just that in the short term, they’re in survival mode in certain parts. But the willingness to learn about crypto has not gone down.

A woman cooking during a power outage in Venezuela.

Despite political unrest, Venezuelans continue to trade cryptocurrencies. On over-the-counter marketplace Localbitcoins, 1,137 BTC were traded in the week ending May 4, only slightly less than the 1,228 BTC traded in the prior week. Bitcoin cash data is not provided by this platform but Bitcoin.com will soon launch Local Bitcoin Cash for anyone to directly exchange BCH.

Localbitcoins’ BTC volume for Venezuela.

How Cryptocurrencies Help Venezuelans

Many people in Venezuela have found refuge in cryptocurrency. Carlos Hernández, a Venezuelan living in Ciudad Guayana, has shared how cryptocurrencies saved his family. Citing hyperinflation, he divulged:

I don’t own bolívars, Venezuela’s official currency. I keep all of my money in bitcoin. Keeping it in bolívars would be financial suicide.

Ricardo Carasso is a Venezuelan who earns cryptocurrencies from freelance work online. He recently left his country because the constant blackouts made it impossible for him to work from Venezuela. He told news.Bitcoin.com Wednesday that, in the city of Merida where he lived, the power went out five consecutive days in March after it went out for two days the prior week.

“For a number of years now the Venezuelan government has been upholding a currency exchange control that does not let us freely access the international market,” Carasso described. In addition, the U.S. has employed sanctions as a policy tool in response to activities of the Venezuelan government and individuals for more than a decade. “Now that the Trump administration has blocked our financial access to the world even further,” Carasso opined: “Cryptocurrencies are super valuable because they allow us to bypass that … it’s also an asset that can gain in value and … if your minimum wage is less than $10 a month, you can see the potential for growth if you have crypto.”

Maduro Also Seeks Solution in Crypto

In an attempt to solve his country’s devastating economic problems, Maduro launched a new currency called the petro in February last year which he initially claimed to be a cryptocurrency backed by oil. However, he later declared that the petro was no longer fully backed by oil but was also partially backed by gold, iron, and diamond. Skeptics are calling his scheme a scam, pointing to several pieces of evidence such as the lack of wallet to hold the petro and the nonexistent block explorer.

Nonetheless, the National Superintendency of Cryptoassets and Related Activities (Sunacrip), the Maduro government-appointed regulator of crypto assets, has been selling the petro at its headquarters and issuing savings certificates to buyers. Recently, a crypto exchange authorized by Sunacrip, Amberes Coin, claims that the petro has been trading on its platform as well as over-the-counter on social media despite having no wallet or block explorer.

Petro savings certificates issued by Sunacrip in April.

In January, the Maduro government established the Integral System of Cryptoassets, as published in Official Gazette number 41.575. It empowers Sunacrip “as the top regulatory entity in this matter, reinforcing, in addition, the entire initial ecosystem that since 2018 has been formed to give solidity and confidence to the petro, the sovereign Venezuelan cryptoasset,” Sunacrip wrote on its website. The regulator immediately proceeded to start controlling crypto activities in the country and offering its own crypto remittance service. Scam or not, the petro represents the first time any government has run its own cryptocurrency and related services, thereby creating awareness of cryptocurrencies and legitimizing them to the public.

Two other crypto-related regulations were published by the Maduro government — one on Feb. 4 in Official Gazette number 41.578 and the other in Official Gazette number 41.581 on Feb. 7.

Airdropvenezuela

A number of nonprofit organizations such as Airdropvenezuela are using cryptocurrency to help people in need. The nonprofit’s website states that “Due to artificially-rigged government exchange rates, the banks in Venezuela are not used for remittance, payments, or donations,” asserting:

Venezuela needs better money. Venezuela needs cryptocurrency. Ten dollars can help a family purchase food, medicine, and scarce imported goods.

“Access to digital money can help introduce Venezuelans to cryptocurrencies, online freelancer platforms, ecommerce, investments, donations and other income generating web-based opportunities,” Airdropvenezuela believes.

The project aims to send $1,000,000 in digital money to 100,000 ID-authenticated Venezuelan Airtm users who log into their accounts between Nov. 27 last year and July 31. “The first 100k Airtm Venezuelan users to be verified and have logged into their account during the campaign period will be a recipient of $10 once we achieve our $1,000,000 USD equivalent goal,” the nonprofit announced.

In addition to U.S. dollars, donations can be made in a number of cryptocurrencies including BCH and BTC. They are sent directly to Airtm wallets which connect buyers and sellers to over 200 banking networks and e-money systems globally, including Venezuela’s.

As of this writing, $273,668 have been raised and 62,541 users have been verified, the project’s website reveals.

Airdropvenezuela’s funds and verified recipients.

Cryptocurrency totals less than $10,000 will be converted into U.S. dollars upon distribution, Airdropvenezuela clarifies. At the time of this writing, the nonprofit has raised the most in BCH, followed by U.S. dollars and BTC. Donations in bitcoin cash make up more than half of all donations received.

BCH donations got a kick start when Bitcoin.com CEO Roger Ver matched them for 24 hours on Dec. 10 last year. “Total funds raised have more than doubled since @Rogerkver announced yesterday that he would match BCH contributions. Congrats BCH community for jumping to #1 place in less than 24 hrs,” Airtm tweeted. “The bigger the network effect a currency has, the more useful that currency becomes. This is a great way to grow the network for Bitcoin Cash and help people in need at the same time,” Ver remarked.

150 Merchants Onboarded so Far

A growing number of merchants in Venezuela are now accepting bitcoin cash thanks to an initiative by Bitcoin.com to make the process easy for them. At the North American Bitcoin Conference in February, COO Mate Tokay unveiled the company’s ambitious goal to onboard 500 merchants per month to accept bitcoin cash.

Aaron confirmed that, while there are other projects Bitcoin.com is indirectly affiliated with, his primary focus is getting merchants to accept BCH, elaborating:

We’re focused in Caracas, have around 150 merchants so far … we’re teaching them how to use bitcoin cash, how to convert to dollars and bolivares, and to show them the advantages.

He proceeded to outline the benefits of accepting the cryptocurrency for merchants such as instant transactions, being able to accept payments without a payment processor, and avoiding high credit card processing fees of about 6%. In comparison, paying with BCH only incurs a network fee that is usually below one cent.

Store owners in Caracas accepting bitcoin cash.

“We have a support network on Whatsapp and Telegram” so “store owners can come to us with their questions,” Aaron continued, noting that shop owners have many questions about accepting bitcoin cash. He believes that this support structure sets his efforts apart from other similar initiatives, emphasizing that the first step is getting merchants to accept BCH before convincing more people to use it and considering other projects such as remittance payments. “So many things to do, we’re just in the very beginning,” he concluded.

To start accepting bitcoin cash, store owners simply download the Bitcoin.com Wallet which has now been downloaded over 4 million times. Merchants accepting BCH can be found on the Marco Coino map.

Feeding Venezuelans With Crypto

Another organization that relies on cryptocurrency to help Venezuelans is Eatbch. The nonprofit takes bitcoin cash donations and coordinates the purchases of ingredients to serve meals to people in six Venezuelan states. Eatbch celebrated its first year anniversary on Feb. 11. The organization also has a similar initiative in South Sudan.

Children in Venezuela fed by Eatbch.

During blackouts in Venezuela, Eatbch directs donors to visit Venezuela.Bitcoin.com to make donations. Funds sent to Eatbch can be easily tracked using the Badger wallet. BCH enthusiasts can also donate to the merchant adoption campaign in Venezuela. 100% of the donated funds will be used to help increase bitcoin cash adoption in the country through activities such as signing up merchants and educating them how to use the decentralized currency for commerce and remittance payments.

Victories in the war for cryptocurrency adoption in Venezuela may best be described as hard-fought, but lessons being learned by the local crypto community are plentiful. Regardless of how the political turmoil plays out, most every Venezuelan has learned the value of their money and now knows about cryptocurrencies, largely due to the Maduro government’s efforts to push the petro. Many of their lives have been touched personally by the efforts and projects like the ones listed above. It seems to be only a matter of time until crypto’s broad acceptance in the country finally arrives.

When do you think cryptocurrencies will finally be used by the mainstream in Venezuela? Let us know in the comments section below.

Images courtesy of Shutterstock, the BBC, ABC News, Coin.dance, Sunacrip, Airdropvenezuela, Airtm, Bitcoin.com, and Eatbch.

Do you want to start accepting BCH? Download the Bitcoin.com Wallet and start accepting bitcoin cash today!

Tags in this story

accept bch, BCH, Bitcoin, BTC, Crisis, crypto, Cryptocurrencies, Cryptocurrency, Digital Currency, Juan Guaidó, LocalBitcoins, matt aaron, Merchant Adoption, Nicolas Maduro, Petro, Political, Venezuela, Virtual Currency

Kevin Helms

A student of Austrian Economics, Kevin found Bitcoin in 2011 and has been an evangelist ever since. His interests lie in Bitcoin security, open-source systems, network effects and the intersection between economics and cryptography.

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = 'https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v3.2'; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

0 notes

ddebtconsolidation · 6 years

Text

Five Questions: Financial Obligation Month

Vacation costs hangovers make January a debt month for some of us so we are bringing you 5 questions on how to deal with debt.Question One Hey Andrew, I simply began listeningto the podcast just recently

and I’m delighting in the large range of subjects. You people may have covered this and I have not gotten to that episode yet.If not, my greatest problem is prioritizing my financial obligationpayment.

I believe it’s more of my frame of mind that I have to adjust instead of a strategy. I understand what I require to pay down initially, I am just hesitant to spendmy additional money towards that financial obligation. It feels better and more protected to hold.You do need a strategy to repay financial obligation. Just throwing loan at various debts randomly

won’t payitdown as quickly as utilizing a tested method of debt payment and for that reason will cost you more loan in interest.There are two popular approaches of debt payment methods; growing out of control and stacking. We committed a whole episode to this subject, you can find here. To summarize the two approaches: Snowballing methods listing all your debts in order of smallest to greatest dollar quantity then using any additionalcash to settle the tiniest balance while just paying the minimums on the others. If you have a$5,000 trainee loan at 4%interest, a charge card balance of$6,000 with 17 %interest, and a$10,000 vehicle loan with 9 %interest, you settle the student loan initially, followed by the credit card and finally the car.Once the smallest financial obligation is paid, you move to the next tiniest using the exact same technique and consist of the amount you were paying on the first financial obligation into your regular monthly payment on the next

. You continue to do this until all the financial obligations are paid, the largest being the last one to go.To utilize the stacking technique, you list your financial obligations in order of greatest to lowest rate of interest, despite the dollar amount of the debt.

You throw as much loan as you can at the debt with the greatest interest rate. If you have the exact same financial obligations we noted above, they would be ordered by doing this; the$ 6,000 charge card, the $10,000 vehicle loan, and lastly the $5,000 student loan.Once each debt is paid, you move down to the next highest rates of interest one, once again, using the cash you were paying to the last debt, and

do the same. So on and so on till all the debts are paid.I comprehend how sometimes it’s tough to do the ideal thing even when we understand it’s the best thing. Interest we’re paying on our financial obligation does not feel

as real to us as taking a look at our examining account balance and seeing a healthy dollar amount so it can be tough to let that money go to something that feels kind of abstract.So here are some genuine

numbers that may convince you. If you settled that$6,000 charge card expense at$ 100 a month, it would take 135 months, ELEVEN YEARS, to pay it off and you would pay, $7,486 in interest

alone. That’s more than you initially charged to the card.Now, if you swung into action and paid $500 a month, it would take you just fourteen months and youwould” only”pay $623 in interest. If that does not convince you, I don’t understand exactly what will!Question 2 Hey Andrew, I thought it might be fascinating to get

some advice/hear your thoughts on monetary preparation for young, high earnings earners in up-or-out industries.Personally, I’m a corporate partner at a large law firm– the kind where people stay for a few years

and lateral out to smaller sized firms or go all in and aim to make partner. The beginning wage for first-years now is$180,000 with approximately a 5.5%raise per year of seniority. We also have considerable market bonus offers, though less as our buddies in the banking/finance industry.Additionally, our company partners with a bank to re-finance student loans at a meager rates of interest of 1.95% (!), which we all consider as an incredible benefit to pay for law school debt. I am, fortunately, at a manageable student financial obligation quantity of$40,000. That refinancing advantage sticks with you even if you leave the firm.What I fight with is ways to stabilize payment of trainee loans and financial investments when my financial image may become

the inverse of the majority of peoples ‘photos– if I leave big law, my income will go down as I grow older, whereas the majority of people see a constant pay increase over their years of work.I also comprehend the principle of my financial investment efficiency outpacing that 1.95 %interest rate, however do not desire to be encumbered large month-to-month payments if my associate salary takes

a hit due to a move to a smaller firm.I currently conserve about 25%of my income, consisting of a maxed 401k without any company match (the downsides of a law practice being a partnership, however that’s a topic for another day) and a Vanguard brokerage account that I established to mirror Betterment’s financial investment technique, and put aside

$ 2,000/ month for trainee loans, that includes a monthly payment of$1225 and an extra voluntary principal payment of$775. I simply wish to make sure I’m maximizing my savings/debt reduction while I’m young and earning a huge law income, and attacking the two financial locations with the ideal tactics.Would love to hear you all do a few minutes of podcast on the subject generally, or give some ideas on the website. Just just recently discovered the show and feel like I’m learning cool shit every day. If you ever need a business attorney to join the podcast(for whatever reason), we have actually got people for you!Best, Brett R. Schroeder It seems your employer has actually even more incentivized you to not pay your trainee loans. Essentially, interest rates are the expense of cash. If I borrow$100 at 4%, the cost of that$ 100 is$4. If the rate goes up to 8%, the expense doubles and if it drops to 2%the cost halves. You’ll still need to pay back the loan no matter what, the question is what’s the most efficient thing to do?I ‘d encourage you to listen to this episode, even though we’re discussing home mortgages genuine estate the idea is the very same. I also believe this quote is extremely fitting: “Utilize is the factorsome people prosper and others do not.”– Robert Kiyosaki Think on that. It is how our “brilliant”president has actually built/maintained his wealth(minus a million personal bankruptcies and basic company incompetence ). I own simply shy of $1,000,000 in property, a privilege I owe to conserving only$200,000. However, the kicker is I earn earnings on the amount of the property and only pay the bank a little part of that. An absurd portion.Now, I’m not recommending that REI is towards thehome mortgage? If I take my$500 and ballpark$1000/mo for my wife’s company, we ‘d minimize our 30-year mortgage to 9 years and save about$152,000 in mortgage interest. Then, we could actually save for some rentals.I’m leaning to settling the mortgage at this moment. Thoughts?Thanks, Phil To start with, congratulations to your wife

on starting her own company. While I hope she will make$1,000 a month (and more ), it’s dangerous to depend on that earnings right now. I would await a few months to see how the organisation is doing before making any significant financial decisions.That said, I have become a huge fan of owning rental property. A possession is something that makes you cash. A home you own to reside in just ever costs you loan until the day you sell it and then only if the conditions are in your favor and you sold it for enough money to make

up for all the money you invested to own it; home taxes, upkeep, upgrades. Paying for those things does not end when your home mortgage does. Owning a the home of live in, even outright, never stops costing you money.The ideal rental property is putting money in your pocket from or almost from, the start. I remain in a

circumstance similar to your own. I own a house,

I have a home loan however I have actually just recently started buying rental homes. Everyone should have more than one earnings stream and a minimum of one of those streams should be passive, as rental earnings is.With that additional earnings, you may be able to settle the home mortgage on your home even earlier than nine years.

Once you see how things are choosing the brand-new organisation, I vote for purchasing rental property.Question Four My sweetheart has about$8,000 in credit card financial obligation along with $100k of trainee loan financial obligation from undergrad/grad school. What route should be required to eliminate the 8k (Lending Club?, transfer to another C.C?)and what must be done about the 100k loans due to the fact that her payments are earnings based and are practically$1,000 a month because of this?Demetrius H.There are some fantastic transfer balance charge card deals available today, a few of them offering 0 %APR for a tremendous 21 months. A few of them feature balance transfer charges, generally about 3%of the balance being moved so be aware of that. She also must pay off the$8,000 in complete prior to the 0%APR duration goes out or the staying balance will be subject to the regular APR which could be greater than exactly what she is currently paying.If she can’t get approved for a balance transfer, Loaning Clu b is a fantastic choice.

Your sweetheart will definitely be paying a much lower interest than she is presently but it will not the 0 %APR that she can get with a balance transfer card.With a loan that huge I hope she has a degree that is making her or will make

her in the future sufficient loan to have actually made securing student loans that huge a good investment.Income-based repayment strategies are currently one of the best choices for reducing monthly trainee loan payments, they are capped at a certain portion, generally 10 %of a person’s regular monthly earnings. She can look into refinancing the loans with a company like SoFi.

This may lower her rates of interest and she might choose to pay back the loans over a longer period of time. It would lower the monthly payment but it would imply payingmore in interest over the long term.She would likewise lose certain securities she has if her existing loans are federal so make sure she is aware of that. Some of the refinancing business provide securities too but they aren’t as thorough as those that are attached to the original loans.Question 5 How do you know when it’s the correct time to apply for additional charge card? My credit isn’t awful, however it likewise isn’t really stellar. I have 100%on time payments and one low limit charge card, howeverI also have one medical bill in collections, which I’m presently disputing.I wished to increase my readily available credit to decrease my utilization and tried calling Chase to ask for a limit boost, but they stated they ‘d need to run my credit to identify if I was eligible for an increase, so I balked. I figure if I need to get my credit run regardless, it’s better to obtain a brand-new card to increase the variety of

open accounts that I have, increase my variety of on-time payments, and increase my credit limit.I have no idea if I need to obtain a brand-new card now or wait up until the outcomes of the collection conflict are readily available to potentially increase my likelihood of getting authorized for the brand-new card– suggestions?Having an excellent credit rating is essential because it makes life more affordable. Your score is comprised of 6 elements. If you’re approved for a new card it will increase your rating in the areas of usage and overall accounts. It will reduce your rating in the locations of length of credit history and credit inquiries.Utilization makes up about 30 %, overall accounts about 10 %, credit history and credit questions make up about 5%each.

In your case

, it’s beneficial to apply for a brand-new card. Prior to you apply, discover your credit rating. You can get an estimate on a site like Credit Karma and some charge card supply it with your statement.Once you have that number, do some research on a site likeNerd Wallet to learn what cards someone with your credit history is likely to be approved for. Your score does take a temporary hit of less than five points when you get a new credit line. That isn’t awful however you’re aiming to enhance your rating so no sense requesting a Chase Sapphire Reserve when you have a credit report of 500. If you don’t get approved, wait till the dispute is settled in your favor and send documentation to

the three significant credit reporting firms revealing that bad mark was in mistake and ask that they remove it. All 3 firms, TransUnion, Equifax, and X have on-line websites that will take this information.Once that is fixed, you can attempt again to apply

for another card.Show Notes B.O.R.I.S. The Crusher Oatmeal Imperial Stout: A stout with a deep roasted, complete bodied flavor.The post 5 Questions: Debt Month appeared initially on Listen Loan Matters.

Source

Five Questions: Debt Month

The post Five Questions: Financial Obligation Month appeared first on Debt Consolidation.

Source: http://www.ddebtconsolidation.com/five-questions-financial-obligation-month/

0 notes

neptunecreek · 7 years

Text

Empowering Young Children through Philanthropy

Note from Beth: One of the things that I enjoyed most about IFCAsia was the networking opportunities to connect with other people in the region who share interests. One of them was Vincent Law who is doing interesting work with teaching young children about giving and philanthropy. When he told me the name of his program, I got excited because I had done a lot of research and writing about “PhilanthroKids” and he mentioned he was inspired in part by that post. He has taken the idea and created an amazing program. Read on for more. We know that young people like Generation Z are future donors, so programs that help introduce philanthropy at a young age will a big pay off down the road.

Empower Young Children through Philanthropy – guest blog post by Vincent Law, CEO and Founder at PhilanthroKids Academy

As you might know, the English word ‘Philanthropy’ has a Greek origin. It has two parts: ‘philos’ meaning ‘loving’ and ‘anthropos’ means ‘human being’. In other words, philanthropy means the love of mankind. Throughout history, philanthropy plays a very important role because it directly impacts our wellbeing. Different culture has different understanding of philanthropy and we use different words to represent various aspects of the concept. In most cultures, philanthropy existed a long time ago.

The world’s largest association in advancing philanthropy is probably the Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP) in the US. Founded in 1960, it has more than 30,000 members in over 240 chapters around the world. Not only as a professional member, I served as a chapter president and on International Board of Directors for the past 4 years. Each year AFP organizes an international fundraising conference, attracting more than 4000 professionals from 60 different countries to attend over 100 different sessions over 3 days. In 2010, the conference was held in Baltimore, Maryland. At one of the pre-conference master classes, I met 2 young women from Cairo. One of them was the curator of the world largest archaeological museum, Grand Egyptian Museum.

It was her first time to attend such a large conference. I was there as a new trainer. She came up to me and said she was very impressed by the history of American philanthropy and the AFP professionalism. I then said to her ‘Don’t you know that Egyptian has a longer history of philanthropy than the Americans?’ On the first page of the 300 page manual in your hand, it was written, Throughout history, since the Egyptian Book of the Dead 6,000 years ago, people have believed that helping others was a key to happiness and good works.’

So while we admire the wonders and success of others in philanthropy, we could have a look at our own culture and we might find a longer and more impactful history of philanthropy in our own society. Kids in Philanthropy

Among various kinds of philanthropy, I have a passion for children’s well-being especially the psychological aspects. So in 2006 I founded a charity called Child Psychoecology Foundation (CPF). Our aim is to promote the psychological well-being of young children in Hong Kong through parent-child activities using media such as art, music, drama and story-telling. We organize educational talks, workshops, exhibitions and public performances. In our 10th anniversary, CPF collaborates with AFP to develop a philanthropy program for young children aged 3-12. The purpose is to empower young children through engaging them in philanthropy. We call this program ‘PhilanthroKids’ or Kids In Philanthropy (KIP) because it complements their youth program ‘Youth In Philanthropy, which is designed for teenagers from aged 13-18 and this extends the professional training of fundraising practitioners to philanthropy education of young children and their parents. International Statement of Ethical Principles & 10 Principal Values of Philanthropy

The PhilanthroKids Programme is created based on values from the International Statement of Ethical Principles in Fundraising which was signed by more than 30 associations around the world in Holland in 2006. The Statement contains Five Universal Principles guiding professionals engaging in philanthropy which are Honesty, Respect, Integrity, Empathy and Transparency. These international standards not only are recognized by practitioners, they are also valued by philanthropists.

Based on the Five Universal Principles, we develop the Ten Principal Values of Philanthropy which include Kindness, Honesty, Respect, Openness, Generosity, Gratitude, Sympathy, Empathy, Responsibility and Trustworthiness. These fundamental values help children develop their philanthropic characters in life. Of course there are many important life values but these values are essential to philanthropy and transcend across different culture, race and faith.

Lead by Actions

American writer and Polymath Benjamin Franklin once said, “Tell me and I will forget, teach me and I may remember, involve me and I will learn.”

To help young children understand, we tell international folk stories to illustrate our ten values. These stories come from all over the world such as US, China, Russia, Japan, etc. For example we use the Chinese folk story, The Empty Pot to teach kids about honesty. The story was about the Chinese Emperor looking for his successor from a group of children. All were given a seed to go home to grow but they did not know that all the seed were cooked beforehand. Nobody could have grown anything however all children came back with tall and healthy plants. Only one boy who showed honesty by not replacing with other seeds was later declared by the Emperor as the future King.

But for older children who are cognitively advanced and understand geography and landmarks, we use real life philanthropy stories. We tell a story about the Statue of Liberty and how the little children helped to raise money to build the pedestal stone for the status in 1886.

The statue given by the French people was ready but it lacked the money to build the foundation. Joseph PULITZER, renowned for his International Prizes in Journalism later on, was the owner of newspaper The World. He pledged that anyone who donated would have the name printed on the newspaper. So in 5 months, they raised the $100K. About 121,000 Americans donated (most of it in less than $1). There were a lot of children names. This real story tells us how children could be mobilized to participate with the help of the adults.

1000 Action Tasks

Knowing the values is only the beginning. Ultimately, putting them into practice regularly and eventually make it a habit is what we want. That is why we need to show them clear instructions and reward them with praises. So based on each of the 10 Philanthropic Values, we list out 100 different tasks they can do daily. These tasks span across 3 main areas in children’s lives, such as at Home, in School and within Communities. So in total we created over 1000 different action tasks for children to follow. So it is the action tasks that we engage children to do that completes the learning cycle. In PhilanthroKids Programme we encourage 3T Giving. 3T stands for Time, Talents and Treasure. We want children to learn to be aware of their various kinds of resources and put them to good use in philanthropy.

International development

Ever since the launch of the PhilanthroKids Programme last year, I have spoken many times in Hong Kong and in international conferences in Beijing and Tokyo. Over than 2000 people have learnt about the program internationally. In Hong Kong we have implemented the PhilanthroKids Programme in schools as well as at our center. We are now working with an university in Hong Kong to include this program in the training of kindergarten teachers. One of the largest NGOs from China with tens of thousands of family members came recently to Hong Kong to study the feasibility of implementing it in Shanghai and other cities. In Japan, we not only discussed how we can learn from each other through international collaboration but also set up networks of PhilanthroKids and even Awards within the region.

Summary

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, The Archbishop of South Africa, Desmond TUTU, was a keynote speaker of the AFP conference. He called fundraising ‘a noble profession’. I believe each of us has a higher calling. My calling is to empower children through my knowledge of philanthropy. And whatever good work you do, please make teaching young Korean children philanthropy a priority.

At last I want to share with you the story about a young Canadian boy Bilaal Rajan who was awardee of the AFP Outstanding Youth In Philanthropy at 13. He volunteered at UNICEF and raised $6,000 to help children affected by tropical storms in the Caribbean. He later initiated the UNICEF Canada Kids Earthquake Challenge, through which Canadian children raised $1.8 million dollars. He is the now the UNICEF Ambassador. His desires to help other children started when he was only 4. At the age of 17, he was addressing over a big group of full time professionals with decades of working experience. He asked them a question. ‘Put up your hand if you think that children are the leaders of tomorrow.’ Over half the audience, several hundreds put up their hands. But he said, “No! Children are not the leaders of tomorrow. Children are the leaders of today!”

If the children are the leaders of today, we should empower them with philanthropy to become good leaders.

Vincent Law is fundraising professional with 27 years of solid working experience and the founder of PhilanthroKids Academy.

from Beth’s Blog http://ift.tt/2v8C9pI

#Beth’s Blog

0 notes

ronaldmrashid · 7 years

Text

The Worst Landlord Horror Story: You’ll Never Want To Own Property Again

Real estate is wonderful isn’t it? You get to buy a property with other people’s money at a dirt cheap interest rate. Your costs are largely fixed while rents keep on going up thanks to inflation. You get plenty of tax deductions. And you get to earn a $250,000/$500,000 tax free profit upon sale in America, depending on if you are single or married. No wonder why real estate is my favorite asset class to building long term wealth.

But I haven’t done a good enough job over the past eight years telling you about the negatives of owning real estate. The main reason why is because I’ve been bullish on the asset class – coastal city real estate in particular. What a shame it would be to have convinced you out of buying years ago, like some doom and gloom sites who only focus on the negatives because their author missed out.

After a massive run up in property prices, my bullishness has turned neutral-to-slightly-negative. Supply is rising. Valuations are expensive. Rents are falling in places like NYC and SF (where I’m a landlord). While mortgage rates may finally tick up, although they’ve continued to remain low despite the Fed’s moves. Therefore, I’d like to share a reader’s horror story about being a landlord in the last down cycle. I’ve shared my own horror story, which sounds like a first class trip to Paris in comparison.

Taking A Vegas Gamble

$250K janitors. $9K/month direct deposit easy rental income. It all sounds so wonderful, but it applies to a tiny part of the US, metro areas with concentrations of educated professionals with very high incomes sipping lattes and driving their Priuses to the wine country on the weekends to stay in a nice B&B.

I moved from the Bay Area to Las Vegas in 2004. I thought I was so smart to sell my Bay Area townhouse for $425K, enabling me to buy a single story LV house here for $220K. Then I bought two rental townhomes, new construction for $200,000 each. Cash.

I didn’t see the point of borrowing money and paying interest if I could afford cash. I was going to be a happy landlord, collecting rents and capital gains on my investments. I would trade my one abode in the Bay for a nicer abode here, plus two rental streams. I had retired, early.

By 2007, the builder of the townhome complex had filed bankruptcy with 157 of 300 units empty, and all the other units which peaked at about $250K were being abandoned by people walking from their mortgages.

The banks would often leave them in limbo, vacant, and vagrant squatters would break in and live in some units (new construction, remember). As foreclosures were slowly processed, the going price to buy a unit similar to mine on the courthouse steps for cash was $50K.

All the units that had been purchased with financing were abandoned, there was no point to continue paying a mortgage for even $150K on a unit worth only $50K. The new purchasers at the foreclosure auctions were mostly absentee landlords, out of state, many from CA, but many Canadian, Australian etc. They simply wired money over and instructed realtors to buy some and get them rented.

The median income in this town was under $50K per household, and these people mostly bought a house. The tenant pool was much poorer. And vacancies were off the scale, so lots of property with hungry landlords needed income. Therefore, very poor quality tenants got great deals.

Realtors then told their out of state landlords that the best way to get a tenant who could pay and not have to be evicted would be to Section 8. Get a poor person with a government voucher to move in, and the government pays you 80% of the rent. You collect the remaining 20% from the tenant, except they usually do not pay. A landlord can evict, and lose his income stream, but most often landlords simply take the 80% payment from the government and write off the rest.

Commercial property prices/demand has leveled off

A New Owner In Town

When the builder filed for bankruptcy, the court ordered sale of the remaining 157 units were bought in bulk by an investor for $9M. That works out to about $60K per. They rent for approximately $1K per month, creating an astounding 20% gross rental yield.

That investor experienced high vacancy rates as well so they took in Section 8, and this new construction complex in a new and up and coming area quickly started looking like an inner city housing project. Crime, drugs, idle people milling around all day, sitting in their garages smoking pot, tons of kids everywhere. Domestic disputes. Continuous police presence, you name it. Have you seen The Wire?

The HOA fees started at $42/mo but over a couple years, and three managers later, they were raised to $145/mo. Common areas were destroyed by tenants. A swimming pool bathroom was lit on fire. Pool furniture was thrown into pool. An unsupervised toddler drowned in a pool while mom was passed out in a unit from drugs. Gangs of unsupervised thug kids terrorized residents for fun. The pool has been chained closed for five years due to lack of funds to open it plus the scepter of repeated vandalism. Water to external landscaping was turned off years ago to let the landscaping die, due to lack of money to pay for water.

Landlords experienced continuous turnover and breaking of leases. No one would live there, except people who had no other choice. Lowest credit quality applicants, Section 8’s whose past history caused other landlords to turn them down but desperate landlords would take them here. Gang symbols were spray painted on buildings and fixtures.

Here’s What Happened To My Rentals

I have owned these rentals since 2005. Today my $200K purchases have returned to about $130K in current value from a low of $100K. I have evicted twice, and repeated repairs and turnovers.

The latest blow is that it turns out the HOA was managed for many years by a local community manager who didn’t have a license. The reserve study shows it should have $1.6M in reserves, but has about $200K instead. A $900K construction defect lawsuit was won against the builder’s insurance co, which should have provided some relief, but all that money was ‘spent.’ Legally spent, by overcharging by managers, contractors and other helpers. The State Dept of RE has ordered audits, fined the HOA, and has a case pending against the board president who it turns out started a pest control company then and made sure to get a $6K contract for his little company from the HOA. All the absentee out of state landlords pay their dues and really have no idea what is going on.

I suspect soon I will get a letter saying a new manager or receiver has been appointed. He’ll turn around and tell us the HOA is woefully underfunded and special assessments of an extra $1K a month are now required to keep the HOA afloat.

More supply in these six cities than in any time during the past 20 years

Profiles Of My Tenants

My tenant applicants have been: DJ, prostitutes (legal), exotic dancer, cab driver, etc. Here are the financials for one example: he earns $1700/mo and has $700/mo car payment. No thank you.

Another application was for roommates, three young people each with incomes of $1000/mo (McDonald’s) who wanted to pool their resources to rent for $1000/mo. Big question is how do you afford this if one of you moves out? Uh. No idea. When I pointed out that move in cost would be one month rent plus one month as deposit, and each of the three would need $660 cash they realized they couldn’t afford to move in.

These are not isolated examples, this is reality. This is the tenant pool in this market. They simply do not have the income.

My own home that I bought in 2004 for $220K is again worth roughly $220K today. At the bottom it was worth $100K and many around were foreclosed. At that time I bought two more, at $100K, and so clearly I have a gain there, which offsets my losses on the townhome disasters.

My point is this happy landlord dream with continuous work, toilet repairs and many other repairs (yes I do it all myself) has earned me perhaps a break even on capital, and perhaps a rental yield of 5%. And the break even required gains on the townhomes I bought in 2012 to offset the ones I bought in 2004/5.

It all sounds so wonderful in blog land. So happy, effortless. I gather that many of the people who have discovered the joys of this investing have never seen a crash or downturn. Or a destroyed unit. Evictions. Tenants threatening your life by calling in the middle of the night firing guns to scare you, because you filed to start eviction and they have no money to pay. Maybe it will never happen in La La Land. But maybe it will, and you’ll question why on Earth you tied up so much of your capital and your life to an extremely illiquid asset.

The production boom in Seattle looks abnormally high

Buyer Always Beware

I hope this reader’s story gives you a clear idea of what could go wrong when the real estate cycle turns south. Here’s a property owner who paid cash for three properties in 2004 and had to buy two more properties in 2012 just to break even 13 years later! What’s worse is the amount of stress and heartache he had to go through to manage the properties. If he had to stretch to buy all those properties with a mortgage, I’m pretty sure his entire retirement nest egg would have been wiped out.

If you’re close to retirement or in retirement, the last thing you want to do is spend your free time worrying about your assets. I’d much rather go on an around the world cruise and earn income 100% passively. Sure it sounds like the reader could have hired a property manager, but if you’re already bleeding cash, you aren’t as amenable to bleeding even more cash.

The longer you are an investor, the higher the chance you will experience bad times. It’s easy to feel good about your investments after such a prolonged bull run. Just know that when the storm hits, the floor drops out as the herd gets scared. At that time, you’ll wish you had a tremendous amount of liquidity like the investor who bought 157 units for a mere $9M with a 20% yield (BURL in effect!).

Ranking The Best Passive Income Investments

Real Estate Investing Rule To Follow: Buy Utility, Rent Luxury (BURL)

Always Work On Improving Cash Flow For Financial Independence

Any readers out there want to share their own real estate horror story?

from http://www.financialsamurai.com/worst-landlord-horror-story/

#Financial Samurai

0 notes

realestate63141 · 7 years

Text

250 Donors Shelled Out $100k Or More For Trump’s Inauguration, Providing 91 Percent Of Funds

by Ashley Balcerzak

What does it take to stage a welcome-to-the-neighborhood blowout? President Trump raised $107 million for his inaugural festivities, shattering previous records. The former titleholder, Barack Obama, raised half that, $53.2 million, in 2009 — though Obama imposed far stricter limits on amounts and sources of donations.

At least 47 people or organizations gave $1 million or more to the Trump welcome wagon, and more than 250 gave $100,000 and above; those 250 provided 91 percent of the inaugural committee’s funds. Obama had 82 six-figure donors in 2013, and four that hit $1 million.To see all donors who gave more than $100,000 for this year and past inaugurations, view the data here.Small donors didn’t play much of a role in funding the party: Trump collected just $653,602 from people giving $200 or less. By contrast, in 2013 Obama collected nearly $4.6 million in such contributions.Seven-digit donors could get especially interesting perks this time around: Those giving at least $1 million could nab tickets to a “leadership luncheon” also attended by Cabinet appointees and congressional leadership, as well as a dinner with Vice President Mike Pence and his wife, Karen, and tickets to a “ladies luncheon,” where donors could meet “the ladies of the first families.”

So who anted up for the schmoozefest with the new gang at the top? Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson was most generous, giving $5 million to the inaugural committee – perhaps to atone for the paltry $5,400 he gave Trump’s effort during the campaign. Other familiar megadonors included hedge fund managers Steven Cohen, Paul Singer and Robert Mercer. Cohen and Singer gave not a cent to the Trump campaign or his supporting super PACs. Mercer was another story: He invested more than $15.5 million in super PACs backing Trump. He and his daughter, Rebekah, had major influence behind the scenes during the campaign and continued to be big players in the early days of his administration.

Five of the million-dollar donors are NFL owners: Robert Kraft of the New England Patriots (through Kraft Group LLC), Bob McNair of the Houston Texans, Dan Snyder of the Washington Redskins, Stan Kroenke of the Los Angeles Rams (and also of Arsenal, the Premier League soccer team) and Shahid Khan of the Jacksonville Jaguars. Of those, Kraft, Kroenke and Khan hadn’t previously sent any money Trump’s way, while Snyder gave a mere $534. McNair, however, was all in, giving more than $2 million to the campaign and super PACs.

Former Iranian ambassador to the U.S. Hushang Ansary (now a U.S. citizen) gave $1 million, and his wife, Shahla, did the same, doubling the family contribution. They, too, had neglected Trump before their inaugural donations.

Corporate donors who gave $1 million included AT&T, Bank of America, Boeing, Dow Jones and Qualcomm. American Action Network, a dark money political nonprofit that’s linked to the main super PAC supporting House Republicans, also shelled out $1 million.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s alma mater, Exxon Mobil, gave $500,000 (he was CEO before being tapped for the Cabinet). A few companies gave in-kind contributions, such as Wynn Resorts, which funded the Make America Great Again! Welcome Celebration, where country starts like Toby Keith and Lee Greenwood performed at the Lincoln Memorial; it was valued at $729,000. General Motors provided $500,000 worth of vehicles, while Coca Cola ($300,000) and Pepsi ($7,000 out of $257,000 given) donated food and beverages.

Other highlights: Republican megadonors Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein gave a combined $500,000 (Uihlein earlier gave $108,000 to Trump’s campaign and super PACs).

Energy Transfer Partners CEO Kelcy Warren forked over $250,000, having given just $3,000 to the campaign effort; but Warren received a major gift shortly after Trump took office, when the president reversed Obama and gave the go-ahead for the Dakota Access Pipeline, a project of Warren’s company.

Billionaire investor Peter Thiel, a climate change skeptic, and Carla Sands, a chiropractor who now heads her late husband’s investment firm, each gave $100,000. Sands’ earlier giving was limited to just $5,400, while Thiel gave more than $1 million to pro-Trump efforts pre-election. Still, both made their way into Trump’s administration: Sands as a controversial economic advisor and Thiel as a controversial advisor whose portfolio is indeterminate.

Private prison companies GEO Corrections Holdings Inc. and CCA of Tennessee (Corrections Corp of America, now rebranded as CoreCivic) each gave $250,000 to the cause; GEO also gave $225,000 to a pro-Trump super PAC before the election. Both companies stand to benefit from Trump’s immigration plans., and in February the Justice Department rescinded an Obama-era order to end the use of private prison contracts by the Bureau of Prisons.

LLC Donations to Trump’s Inauguration

The identities of some donors are a little less clear, shrouded behind innocuous-sounding LLC names (the letters stand for “limited liability corporation”). Often, though, the people behind them are familiar, if sometimes unexpected: HFNWA LLC ($1 million) is linked to Democratic megadonor and real estate mogul Franklin Haney. Haney’s family donated $109,000 in 2016, all to Democrats. He and his wife each gave $33,400 to the DNC, while his family gave $12,800 to Hillary Clinton and $32 to Bernie Sanders.

Papa Doug Trust ($1 million) is tied to Doug Manchester, chairman of Manchester Financial Group. “Papa Doug” didn’t back Trump in 2016, though he spent more than $16,000 supporting Trump’s GOP rivals Carly Fiorina and Scott Walker.

Gordon Sondland, the chairman of Provenance Hotels and a big supporter of the extended Bush family (including former President George W.), gave $1 million to the inaugural committee through four LLCs: BV-2 LLC, Dunson Cornerstone LLC, Buena Vista Investments LLC and Dunson Investments LLC. Sondland gave $2,700 to the early favorite to capture the GOP nomination, Jeb Bush, and $22,000 to Bush’s super PAC, Right to Rise, last cycle, but none to Trump.

Reasons for donating through an LLC vary, but in some cases individuals are attempting to keep a low profile. That may have been the case with Palmer Luckey, the designer of virtual reality device Oculus Rift. He owns Fiendlord’s Keep LLC, which in turn owns Wings of Time LLC, which gave $100,000 to the inaugural committee. While he didn’t give to the usual pro-Trump efforts pre-election, news outlets have reported he donated $10,000 to Nimble America, a pro-Trump nonprofit that posted memes blasting other candidates. In response, virtual reality developers pulled support for Oculus, with some issuing statements condemning Luckey’s actions.

Louisiana brothers Shane and Chad Guidry are behind HGIM LLC Corporate and HGF DB Fund LLC, which each provided $250,000 to the committee. Shane is the head of Harvey Gulf International Marine, which serves offshore oil and gas companies — and, in an unusual arrangement, is also special assistant to state Attorney General Jeff Landry, making $12,000 a year for efforts that include overseeing the criminal investigations unit’s operations. Meanwhile, last year, federal agents were reported to be investigating whether kickbacks were paid by Guidry’s company in an offshore catering deal, according to local press reports; Guidry has not been accused of wrongdoing in the matter.

(Guidry’s father, Robert, however, was convicted of paying bribes to former Gov. Edwin Edwards and his family for a riverboat casino license; Robert later testified against Edwards and avoided prison time. Robert, Shane and Chad were all charged with battery in a 2001 brawl involving a rival for the casino license; Shane is now estranged from his father.)In 2016, Chad gave $1,000 and Shane $3,000 to Trump’s campaign. Jeb Bush was their favored candidate, though, receiving $5,400 directly from the Guidrys and another $22,000 in help through Right to Rise.

Other entities in this category are less mysterious: The Witkoff Group, LLC, which gave $300,000, is owned by Steven Witkoff, a New York City real estate investor and old friend of Trump’s, though he gave only $5,400 to Trump’s electoral effort.

Skybridge Capital, LLC was founded by Anthony Scaramucci; it donated $100,000 the day after he stepped down as partner. A week earlier, Trump announced he would appoint Scaramucci to the director of the White House Office of Public Liaison and Intergovernmental Affairs, though he eventually appointed George Sifakis instead: Scaramucci had recently sold SkyBridge Capital to HNA Group, a Chinese conglomerate that reportedly has strong ties to China’s ruling Communist Party, and clearing him of potential ethics conflicts would have taken months. Scaramucci and his wife, Deidre, gave Trump’s campaign $5,400, while pro-Trump super PAC Rebuilding America Now received $100,000 from them. They also gave $5,400 each to Bush and Walker.

Pilot Travel Centers LLC’s gift of $300,000 to the committee brings the Haslam family total to at least $500,000; besides the LLC donation, James and Susan Haslam each gave $100,000. James doled out $620,000 to various candidates, party committees and outside spending groups in 2016, without a penny going to help Trump. His father, also James, donated $888,000 in the cycle, but just $5,400 made it to Trump. The couples gave almost $100,000 to boost Bush, though, and $14,000 to help another Republican presidential candidate, Marco Rubio.

At least two members of Congress also pitched in: Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) with $300 and Rep. Lou Barletta (R-Pa.) with $1,300.

For context on Trump’s big donor appeal, the current president’s report is only 500 pages, compared to Obama’s in 2009 that came to more than 7,000 pages for donations totaling half Trump’s haul. That year, Obama set limits on who could donate, capping contributions from individuals at $50,000 (still ten times the limit they could give during the election) and banning donations from corporations, PACs, unions and lobbyists. Four years later, the president allowed corporate contributions and took away the limit for individuals, though he raised only about $43.8 million. For more on Obama’s donors, see here for 2009 and here for 2013.

Given that Trump’s inaugural festivities were relatively toned-down even though his fundraising was so successful, it’s likely that there is money left in the pot. Consider that in 2009, Obama’s $53 million was enough to cover a far busier schedule of events — 10 official balls compared to Trump’s three, for example. However, the committee is not required to report how it spent the money, how much remains or how the overage is disposed of. The committee has said it would donate the excess funds to charity, but that it has not yet chosen the lucky recipients.“The 58th Presidential Inaugural Committee will begin the winding down process of the organization,” according to a statement from the committee. “As part of this process, PIC will identify and evaluate charities that will receive contributions left from the excess monies raised. This information will be released at a later date when the organization’s books are fully closed.”

Researchers Alex Baumgart, Robert Maguire and Ben Berliner, along with reporting intern Niv Sultan, contributed to this post.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

from DIYS http://ift.tt/2oQnrhg

#DIYS

0 notes