gracchusdixit

The Republican Party is about to be granted its most fervent wish, a tax bill that will dramatically reshape the economic and social landscape of the nation.  The only hurdle remaining is for the two separate bills already passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate to be reconciled, whereupon Donald Trump will undoubtedly sign the final bill into law.

No matter what tweaks may be made before this legislation lands on Trump’s desk, it will bring about one of the most dramatic redistributions of wealth in American history.  Most Americans will eventually see their taxes rise, their incomes decline, or both, because of sweeping cuts to a host of programs they depend upon to make ends meet.   On the other hand, corporations and their shareholders will get a windfall; the richest one percent will get a huge tax cut; and the top one tenth of one percent will enjoy nothing less than a bonanza.  The certain result of all this is that the level of economic inequality in our country will become even more grotesque than it already is.

In public, Republicans have justified this financial land-grab by claiming that it will stimulate the economy, raise wages, and pay for itself by increasing the overall tax revenues that will supposedly result from a rising tide of prosperity.  Nobody but an idiot believes this fairy tale, and, although the Republican Party has more than its fair share of idiots, its leaders know better—or at least, they should.

The last major overhaul of our tax code occurred in the 1981, during the Reagan administration, which Republicans have been idolizing ever since. Unfortunately, those cuts, as the Brits say, “came a cropper”.  They neither generated more revenue nor paid for themselves.  On the contrary, the federal deficit doubled, and the national debt tripled.  To right the fiscal ship before it capsized and sank, Reagan reversed course and raised taxes—repeatedly.

In private, many Republicans admit that their desperate urgency to pass this bill has nothing whatever to do with economic results but is, instead, a political calculation.  In their view, the party needs a “win” (any “win” will do), if it is to have any hope of surviving the 2018 mid-term elections.

There are others who say this bill is even more cynical, that it is nothing less than a quid pro quo for the party’s richest donors, who have made their intentions clear:  either cut their taxes or they will shut off the financial spigot.

These various theories of the case undoubtedly contain elements of truth.  But there is another explanation for the Republican Party’s stubborn determination to pass a tax bill that is not only deeply unpopular but likely to hurt them at the polls.  The explanation is that this bill is, in the end, not a question of economics, public policy, or even political calculation; it is an act of pure ideology, an act of condemnation, punishment and retribution.

If there were any doubt on that front, it disappeared this week when two of the most senior Republicans in the Senate inadvertently dropped their masks and revealed their true beliefs.

The first was Chuck Grassley, the Senior Senator from Iowa, who defended the idea of eliminating the estate tax—a change that would benefit a mere two tenths of one percent of Americans—in these words:

I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing, as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.

The blatant prejudice underlying that remark was so repugnant that Grassley felt compelled to defend himself.  In the process, he only made matters worse:

My point regarding the estate tax, which has been taken out of context, is that the government shouldn’t seize the fruits of someone’s lifetime of labor after they die.  The question is one of basic fairness, and working to create a tax code that doesn’t penalize frugality, saving, and investment.  That’s as true for family farmers who have to break up their operations to pay the IRS following the death of a loved one as it is for parents saving for their children’s college education or working families investing and saving for their retirement.

Fewer than 100 “family farmers” pay estate taxes in any given year, let alone taxes that require them to “break up their operations”.  The assertion that taxing estates larger than $5 million somehow penalizes “parents saving for their children’s college education or working families investing and saving for their retirement” is simply laughable.  If Chuck Grassley can’t distinguish between “frugality” and egregious wealth, between “working families” and multi-millionaires, it is high time that he stepped aside and made way for someone who can do the math.

The comments of Orrin Hatch, the Senior Senator from Utah and the longest-service Republican in Congress, were even worse.  On the floor of the Senate, he was asked why he wasn’t prepared to continue funding for “CHIP,” a program that helps needy families get insurance for their sick children.  Hatch responded with positive outrage, as if his personal honor had been called into question:

I have a rough time wanting to spend billions and billions and trillions and trillions of dollars to help people who won’t help themselves, won’t lift a finger, and expect the federal government to do everything.  Unfortunately, the liberal philosophy has created millions of people that way, who believe everything they are or ever hope to be depend on the federal government rather than the opportunity that this great country grants them.

There you have it:  as clear a statement of the cold, cruel ideology of the Republican Party as you are ever likely to find.  After voting for a bill that would borrow two trillion dollars to fund a tax cut for the richest Americans, Orrin Hatch proclaims that he would “have a rough time wanting to spend billions and billions and trillions and trillions of dollars to help people who won’t help themselves”.

Republicans like Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch truly believe that the rich deserve their riches and their tax cuts, while the poor do not.  To the likes of Grassley and Hatch, if you are rich, you are ipso facto productive and industrious, a maker rather than a taker.  In their world view, there are no crooked speculators on Wall Street, no bribe-paying billionaires, no lazy, lucky rich kids like Donald Trump’s two witless sons and his sanctimonious daughter.

If, on the other hand, you are poor, sick, or simply down on your luck, you are a lazy taker, who expects “the federal government to do everything,” someone who turns your back on “the opportunity that this great country” has granted you.

Orrin Hatch frequently talks about their humble beginnings, and in Hatch’s case, those beginnings were indeed humble.  But like so many of his fellow Republicans, he seems utterly incapable of understanding that the “opportunity this great country” granted to him was infinitely greater than the opportunity it grants to those of its citizens who don’t happen to be white men.

It is doubtful that Orrin Hatch, Chuck Grassley, or any other Republican member of Congress, for that matter, has spent a day, an hour, or a minute talking to the teachers and kids in a crumbling public school in rural Alabama or Mississippi.  It is unlikely that they have ever walked the streets of East LA or the South Side of Chicago.   It is even less likely that they have bothered to ask themselves why thousands of Americans spend their nights sleeping on sidewalks, on beds made of cardboard boxes, wrapped in rags and old newspapers.  To Republicans, these are not fellow human beings in need of help; they are misfits who “won’t lift a finger” to help themselves and therefore deserve what they get.

After decades of pretense and prevarication, we should be grateful to Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch for dropping their mask at last.  They have revealed the Republic Party to be what it truly is:  soulless, heartless, and cruel.