We’re inhabiting a new world; much has changed since September 11. There’s anthrax in the mail. Though the actual threat seems minor, the fear is real and who knows what terrorists will do next. Our public health services, under-funded, under-staffed, and unprepared, are gearing up to prepare for the worst. Yet, the flags are flying and people are coming together to raise money for the 9/11 victims. Kids, athletes, entertainers, ordinary people are all pitching in.

In Afghanistan the Administration has changed its strategy from going directly after bin Laden and his terrorist network to overthrowing the Taliban who we accuse of protecting him. There’s a tough logic to this course, but also the potential for human disaster. Rightly, we consider the Taliban an illegitimate government oppressing its own people. But, since we are bombing from high altitudes in order to protect our airmen, many of the bombs are falling on civilians. The logic of that is we are punishing the innocent for the evil of their oppressors.

What happened on September 11th is going to cost us big money. We have to clean up and rebuild an important part of New York. We have to increase the budget for public health and safety. The war itself is not going to be cheap. Millions of Afghanis face starvation. President Bush’s idea of kids raising money for Afghani children is a nice gesture, but irrelevant in terms of what Afghanistan really needs. Disasters often bring out the best in people, and, for the most part, that is what is happening here. Most Americans are willing to assume the financial burden of protecting our country and, out of national self-interest if not moral obligation, rebuilding what we’ve destroyed in Afghanistan.

Most people, but not all people. Using the flag as a cover and the war as an excuse, the Bush Administration and House Republicans yesterday passed a tax bill that mocks patriotism and insults the generous and selfless spirit of so many Americans. The bill passed by two votes, 216-214. Three Democrats joined the Republicans to give the Administration its majority. Seven Republicans broke with the Administration and joined the other Democrats and Vermont's independent Bernie Sanders in opposition.

The bill does one good thing, and this is what the Bush Administration will be touting. It extends the $300 tax rebate, first suggested by Sanders and his Progressive Caucus, to low-income people who were not previously eligible for it. It will also give $12 billion to the states in order to help people who have been laid off from work because of the economic downturn. The Democrats argue that this is too little and, in the Senate, will likely up that amount.

At the heart of the Republican legislation are huge tax giveaways, worth $70 billion, to the wealthiest Americans and the richest corporations. One of its major provisions repeals the corporate alternative minimum tax (AMT) that was created in 1986 to make sure that companies could not exploit tax loopholes to avoid paying taxes. The House bill not only repeals the AMT but it allows companies to claim refunds, totaling $25 billion, for the alternative minimum taxes they’ve paid in the past. According to the Congressional Research Service, seven corporations would receive $3.3 billion in instant tax rebates; fourteen corporations would receive over $100 million each from this one provision. General Motors, for example, would receive $832 million and General Electric $671 million if the Senate passes the House bill and enables Bush to sign it into law.

The bill also includes a cut in capital gains worth an estimated $10 billion in 2002 alone (with three quarters of that going to the wealthiest one percent of the population). The Republicans cannot wait to give their wealthy pals a rebate of tax money. The reduction of the 28 percent income tax rate to 25 percent, slated to take effect in 2006 under the tax-cut enacted earlier this year, would be accelerated to 2002 if this bill becomes law.

This House Republican bill represents a brazen effort to redistribute wealth upward to the rich from the poor. According to Citizens for Tax Justice , 41% of the tax-cuts would go the wealthiest one-percent of all taxpayers; each would receive, in 2002, an average tax-break of $27,000. By comparison, 60% the of taxpayers representing the lower end of the income spectrum would receive only 7 percent of the money.

The Republicans argue that these tax breaks will encourage companies to invest in the new equipment needed to get the economy going. "Investment is the driving engine of the economy," says Republican House leader Dick Armey. But the economy was in trouble before September 11 not for lack of investment but because of an over-valued stock market and over-production. Giving the rich money to buy frivolous luxuries or invest in the stock market compounds this problem. Conservatives often argue that small business is what creates jobs and stimulates the economy, but this tax-cut gives very little to small business; it’s the big guys that are getting the money.

The Bush tax-cuts, unprecedented in war time, are morally obscene and economically destructive. When federal expenditures are going up for national security, it is not the time to cut taxes and diminish government revenue. The post 9/11 economy is in crisis because people fear job lay-offs, fear for their future, and, yes, fear public places. What the economy needs is a dose of confidence, a sense of sharing, and a belief that all Americans are in this together. The Bush tax-cut undermines that spirit. Like the attack on civil liberties being rushed through Congress in the name of anti-terrorism, it’s stealth legislation. The distraction of war is being exploited to further a very selfish, extreme, and partisan agenda.

Marty Jezer's books include Abbie Hoffman: American Rebel. He writes from Brattleboro, Vermont and welcomes comments at mjez@sover.net.

###