Conservative myths about Medicaid

  Access to health insurance in the United States is one of the most hotly debated issues in the national discourse. Prior to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), 44 million Americans lacked health insurance, including many low-income nonelderly adults who did not fall within traditionally covered Medicaid eligibility groups, including pregnant women, disabled adults, and low-income children. Since the ACA went into effect in 2013, 11.9 million newly eligible people have gained coverage through Medicaid in states that chose to expand their programs. In addition to producing better health outcomes, Medicaid expansion has resulted in new enrollees having access to quality care without the threat of financial turmoil.

What Doug Jones’ win means for people in poverty

  Doug Jones’ victory in the Alabama Senate race is just a week old, but the hot takes are still pouring in. For some, the outcome is a signal that Democrats can win both houses of Congress in 2018. For others, it is an outlier—a race that a Republican not accused of sexually assaulting children would have easily won. And for the kind folks at Fox & Friends, it wasn’t much of a win at all—“a referendum on Harvey Weinstein, not on President Trump.”

  The only thing not up for debate is why Jones won: It’s because people of color—particularly African Americans from Alabama’s impoverished “Black Belt”—turned out to vote for him. But lost in the political discussion of the election is one key question: What does the election mean for the lives of Alabamans—especially those who voted for Doug Jones?

The Paul Ryan guide to pretending you care about the poor

  Once, at a town hall in Wisconsin, someone asked known anti-poverty crusader Paul Ryan (R-WI) the following question:

    “I know that you’re Catholic, as am I, and it seems to me that most of the Republicans in the Congress are not willing to stand with the poor and working class as evidenced in the recent debates about health care and the anticipated tax reform. So I’d like to ask you how you see yourself upholding the church’s social teaching that has the idea that God is always on the side of the poor and dispossessed, as should we be.”

Five reasons communities of faith should be alarmed by the tax bill

  President Donald Trump, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), and many other GOP lawmakers have continually referenced faith and religion when referring to public policy. President Trump’s public remarks have increasing been laced with religious rhetoric—from invoking the Lord to support his declaration of opioid addiction as a national health emergency to his appeal to God to bless the world after launching military strikes in Syria. Similarly, when a policy crisis on gun violence reemerged in the wake of the Sutherland Springs, Texas, massacre, Speaker Ryan immediately reverted to religious rituals urging prayer for the community, but stopping short of a call for legislation to address gun violence—something he is well positioned to do.

4 losers and 1 big winner in the House GOP tax plan

  On November 2, House Republicans released a tax plan that would provide an enormous windfall for corporations and the wealthiest Americans. In fact, of the more than $1.4 trillion in tax cuts included in the bill over the next decade, $1 trillion would go to businesses and corporations, and nearly $200 billion would go towards reducing, and eventually eliminating, the estate tax. Millionaires would enjoy the biggest tax cuts of all thanks to the corporate tax cuts, the elimination of the estate tax and alternative minimum tax, reduced tax rates on higher incomes, and the creation of a special new loophole on so-called passthrough business income.

The Mainstreaming of Trump’s reckless worldviews

  When former FBI Director James Comey testified before the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, he referred to conversations with President Donald Trump as “a very disturbing thing. Very concerning.” While politicians and pundits characterized the president’s alleged comments as obstruction of justice, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI) had another take. He defended the president by saying Trump is “new at this” and “learning as he goes.”

  In Speaker Ryan, the president has an expert partner willing to try to enact his plan to pay for his vision of government and America’s place in the world. Ryan, a former vice presidential candidate, is also a former budget committee chairman famous for his efforts to shred the social safety net while heaping tax breaks on the wealthiest few Americans; he knows a thing or two about writing a budget blueprint. While Trump’s initial budget proposal released earlier this year earned widespread criticism even from Republican lawmakers, the 2018 budget proposal released by House Republican leaders Tuesday reflects the president’s imbalanced approach to national security that slashes critical tools of American power.

Time to act on Russia sanctions

  On June 15, in a remarkable feat of bipartisan cooperation on a critical national security issue, the U.S. Senate passed tough Russia sanctions legislation by a stunning vote of 98-2. By taking this long overdue action, the Senate recognized clearly what the U.S. intelligence community described six months ago as Russia’s “unprecedented” attack on America’s democratic process during the 2016 elections and took the first step to a meaningful response.

Liz Kennedy: Congress tries to kill independent ethics watchdog, Americans fight back

  The Office of Congressional Ethics, or OCE, is an independent, bipartisan ethics panel and fact-finding agency that is crucial to protecting the public’s interest in honest services and fair representation from government officials. It has limited yet critical investigative authority and an essential role in publicizing and deterring corruption. The office has been instrumental in successful prosecutions of lawmakers who violated ethics laws instead of working for Americans.

  It is truly unfortunate that House Republicans attempted to start their period of unified control of the federal government by dramatically weakening one of the most effective anti-corruption and accountability tools that exists in Washington. Monday night in a secret vote during a closed party meeting, the Republican majority voted 119-74 to change the proposed rules for the next Congress and eviscerate the independent congressional ethics watchdog. Public outrage ensued, and after members’ offices were flooded with calls in a few short hours, the majority dropped its attack on the OCE—for now.

House GOP proposals would make health coverage less secure for all Americans

  Seven years after first promised, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI) has released a vague policy white paper that outlines how House Republicans would attempt to replace the Affordable Care Act, which has expanded health insurance coverage to more than 20 million Americans since 2010 at a cost of billions of dollars less than expected. The document is a comprehensive list of conservatives’ recycled, unpopular ideas. Instead of designing a health care system that works for all Americans, the paper outlines a plan to quarantine people who are old and/or sick in separate, more expensive, and unsustainable markets. These reforms would transfer assistance from low-income people to high-income people and from the sick to the healthy. They would not only raise costs for older and less healthy Americans but also would destabilize the entire health care system, shift costs to patients and families, and make everyone’s coverage less secure.

Sam Fulwood III: When words fail us

  Words fail.

  After the absolute horror of two black men being shot by police in separate incidents more than a week ago, the aftermath of both recorded in all-too-real and all-too-graphic cell phone videos, what more is there to say?

  Alton Sterling, 37, died in the early morning hours of July 5 after police shot and killed him outside a Baton Rouge, Louisiana, convenience store. An onlooker captured the incident on video.

  The next day, another black man, Philando Castile, 32, was fatally shot in suburban St. Paul, Minnesota, by an officer who stopped him for driving with a busted taillight. Castile’s girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, captured the moments immediately after the shooting in an excruciating video that circled the globe on social media.

A Blueprint for cutting poverty and expanding opportunity in America

  Many congressional Republicans—led by Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI)—have been talking a good game when it comes to tackling poverty. Speaker Ryan took an “anti-poverty tour,” released a white paper, and hosted a summit on poverty for the GOP presidential candidates along with Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) earlier this year. Most recently, Ryan announced the formation of a task force on poverty made up entirely of members of the House Republican caucus.

  Bipartisan interest in tackling poverty would certainly be a welcome development. Unfortunately, House majority leaders have not matched their new rhetoric with updated policies. The fiscal year 2017 House budget—which, once again, is a recipe for exacerbating poverty and inequality in America—provides a stark reminder of their priorities. While Speaker Ryan talks about his commitment to cut poverty, the House budget generates three-fifths of its spending cuts from programs that help low- and moderate-income Americans. If enacted, it would slash investments in nutrition assistance, tax credits for working families, child care, job training, education, health care, transportation, infrastructure, and more—all to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy.

Joe Valenti: A secure retirement demands limiting conflicts of interest

  Can you trust your financial adviser? Many Americans aren’t so sure. Thanks to a recent announcement from the U.S. Department of Labor, however, the answer may soon be “yes.”

  This week, the Department of Labor announced its final rule on conflicts of interest in retirement investment advice, also known as the fiduciary rule. Fiduciary is a five-syllable legal concept, but in practice, the intended effect of the rule is quite simple: All financial professionals selling retirement products will be legally required to act in the best interests of their clients rather than their own.

Sam Fulwood III: Poisonous rhetoric, then and now

  After a career spent cataloguing and commenting on the American political scene—nearly 30 years as a newspaper journalist and, more recently, as a public policy observer—I am rarely personally offended by anything that politicians say or do. But last week, two news stories exposed a level of political mendacity that set my heart racing and blood boiling.

  Even now, my anger has yet to abate after reading journalist Dan Baum’s April cover story in Harper’s Magazine. In that article, Baum quoted John Ehrlichman—a former aide to President Richard Nixon who served a year and half prison sentence for his role in the Watergate scandal—as saying the Nixon administration’s war on drugs campaign was deliberately designed to target black Americans.

How the House budget sides with the wealthy over everyone else—even Republican voters

  The fiscal year 2017 House budget introduced by Republican leaders in March 2016 calls for massive spending cuts that would devastate working families while protecting the wealthiest Americans and big corporations from any tax increases. This approach is deeply unpopular with the American people—including a majority of Republican voters—but it is popular among wealthy Republican donors.

  Large majorities of voters across party lines reject the cuts that Congress would have to make in order to address long-term fiscal challenges without any tax increases—particularly with regard to Social Security and Medicare. The wealthiest Americans, however, support these cuts. While the House budget attempts to avoid this tension by proposing a combination of unspecified and extreme cuts to other programs designed to benefit low-income Americans, Republican leaders in Congress have made clear that they are ultimately willing to side with the wealthy in cutting programs that otherwise enjoy broad public support.

Steve Flowers: Inside the Statehouse: Super PACs take center stage in primaries

  As our primary selection day approaches, it appears that we are seeing significant campaign attention from the presidential candidates. The move by the Alabama Legislature to make us an early primary state was a good one.

  As is generally the case, we are seeing negative ads. That is not unusual in politics. The reason that they are employed so often is because they work. Otherwise, the media consultants would not use them. The difference in this year’s presidential contests, however, is who is paying for the ads.

3 Facts you need to know about proposed child support rules

  In fall 2014, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Child Support Enforcement—after consulting with states, law enforcement officials, employers, and other stakeholders—published and sought public comment on a set of proposed changes that would modernize the federal rules that govern the child support system. These changes would strengthen the child support system in ways that would increase regular, on-time payments to families; boost employment and earnings for noncustodial parents; and increase the amount of time that noncustodial parents spend with their children.

The Ryan budget in sheep’s clothing?

  House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) recently put forward a plan to overhaul our nation’s safety net. Among other things, Rep. Ryan proposes consolidating multiple safety net programs into a single grant in a select number of states in the name of granting localities and community institutions greater flexibility. But while Rep. Ryan paints his plan as embracing bold, new reforms, his proposals are either another version of his radical budget—a wolf dressed up in sheep’s clothing—or a complete about-face on his commitment to balance the budget. Ryan can’t have it both ways.

The Ryan budget is a broken record of failed trickle-down economics

  For the past three years, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) has been trotting out the same conservative, top-down policies that have failed the nation’s middle- and working-class families, seniors, and the economy. The House Republican budget is built around the tenet that nearly everyone else must sacrifice in order to continue to give billions of dollars in tax breaks to millionaires, big corporations, and Big Oil. At every turn, the House Republican budget reveals its vision of an economy and government that only works for the wealthiest individuals and special corporate interests at the cost of everyone else.

Jacob G. Hornberger: Why federal spending continues to soar

  The Washington establishment, not surprisingly, is celebrating the budget deal that Republican Rep. Paul Ryan and Democrat Sen. Patty Murray reached. They’re calling it a great example of "bipartisanship."

  And why not? The deal calls for increases in federal spending, doesn’t it? What’s not to like about that, from the standpoint of the Washington establishment?

Budget agreement is imperfect, but a good first step

  Budgets are about choices. The budget agreement announced by Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-WA) and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) makes plenty of choices—many of them good, others less so—but the sum total of their choices results in a package that moves the country in a positive direction. The Murray-Ryan deal would, for the time being, put the seemingly constant fiscal crises to rest and roll back some of the damaging austerity spending cuts that have been undermining the economic recovery.