Every Dem voted against the BBB and it imcluded a $1000 child tax credit increase

In real life, last year when R’s had the chance they blocked it from even advancing and every D voted for it. Even that one included typical weak D negotiating by giving away tax breaks to corporations and the wealthiest. Then R’s giggled as they shot it down after all that wrangling.

The usual excuses: “They’ve lost me on the pay-for,” Tillis said. That bill was $78B or so. It wasn’t until it was included with $3T debt that the same R’s now love it.

Tillis did indeed vote against the new, much worse version, so I guess he was at least consistent on this one issue. But then he of course ran for the hills.

 

Is the timeline for expiration the same for the no taxes on tips, overtime and SS??? I believe it is 3 years while the billionaire corporations tax cut is permanent.

Meanwhile one of the most comprehensive bipartisan border bills wasn't even voted on because there were some things in there the repugs didn't like?

 

I don’t have a problem with income inequality. I’d argue such inequality is what drives people to work harder, work smarter, compete to reach higher levels of income and opportunity. It’s the American Way, and has been for over a century.

But this bill strips the services and care that poor people need. It’s not about income inequality, it is about human decency and the civic obligation to provide fundamental services.

For all the people that applaud the deprivation of such services to the poor, I really urge you to spend time in organizations that provide services to the community, particularly those in need. Meet the people. See how much they want their children to have better opportunities than they have. It’s not a “Libbie” thing to do, it’s a civic duty that we all should take part, at least for some point in our lives.

 

Plus, if this bill was such a boon to the middle class and working poor how come things don’t kick in until AFTER the midterms? You’d think MAGA would want to run on their largesse to the underlings.

 

Good points.

Even after DOGE got insider access, we still haven't seen massive numbers of indictments for fraud in these programs. Maybe that explains a pivot to the suggestion that huge numbers of people are lawfully taking advantage of them and that we just can't do anything about it. Speaker Johnson recently referenced healthy 29 year old males sitting on the couch playing video games, and I found that particularly odd since Medicaid dollars are paid to providers and not individuals - and since healthy 20-somethings likely account for a very small percentage of health care expenditures. Of course, I'm sure there are a handful of healthy young people out there who just really enjoy going to the doctor for no reason.