

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
“These tax cuts are not only fiscally reckless but also deeply inequitable."
A progressive think tank has found that America's wealthiest citizens aren't just benefiting from the federal tax cuts passed in Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill Act this past summer, but from tax giveaways offered by Republican-run states.
The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) released a new analysis on Thursday showing that five states—Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, and Oklahoma—this year have enacted income tax cuts for families that earn over $1 million per year that are projected to collectively reduce their state governments' revenues by $2.2 billion per year once fully implemented.
The two biggest tax cuts for the wealthy came in Mississippi and Oklahoma, both of which have voted to phase out their state's income taxes over the span of several years. Once the income tax is fully repealed in those two states, ITEP estimates that millionaires living in them will pay $130,000 less per year.
ITEP also poked holes in any Republican claims that the tax cuts they passed were a benefit for "working families," and showed how the GOP's policy is overwhelmingly tilted to benefit the wealthy.
"The average millionaire tax cut is more than 50 times the size of the average cut for non-millionaires in each of the five states included in this report," the think tank noted. "In Mississippi and Ohio the average tax cuts for millionaires are over 100 times the size of those for non-millionaires."
The group found that the tax cuts passed in Missouri were particularly egregious when it comes to benefiting millionaires. As reported by the Missouri Independent, Missouri lawmakers over the summer made their state the first in the nation to eliminate taxes on capital gains, which is estimated to slash state revenues by more than $100 million per year.
According to ITEP, this tax cut is projected to deliver a $43,000 average annual benefit to Missouri families making over $1 million per year, and an $80 average annual benefit to Missouri's non-millionaire households.
Aidan Davis, ITEP's state policy director, expressed dismay at how much these state governments were willing to give to their wealthiest residents, even as their own state budgets face significant cuts to programs such as Medicaid the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, both of which help low-income Americans.
"These tax cuts are not only fiscally reckless but also deeply inequitable," Davis explained. "At a time when state budgets are under immense pressure, it's indefensible to hand millionaires five- and six-figure annual tax cuts while too many families struggle with affording the basics."
Dylan Grundman O’Neill, senior analyst at ITEP, argued that these states' policies "double down on inequality" and "prioritize millionaires while putting critical services like education, healthcare, and infrastructure at risk for everyone else."
"If we make one wrong decision as the parents of a critically ill child, that could be the end of it," said one Louisiana mother about the added paperwork burdens being imposed by the GOP's budget law.
Several reports published on Tuesday highlighted the negative impacts that are expected from Medicaid cuts included in the Republicans' budget law.
The Medicaid cuts, which passed this past summer as part of the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, are estimated to total $1 trillion over the next decade and are projected to kick more than 10 million Americans off their health insurance. However, the cuts are also expected to have several other knock-on effects that could negatively impact the entire American healthcare system.
Rhian Lubin, a reporter for The Independent, recently traveled to Louisiana, where she met a 28-year-old mother named Hannah McDaniel who relies on Medicaid to pay for treatment for her two-year-old son, Myles, who suffers from an incurable heart defect.
As McDaniel explained to Lubin, she is already inundated with paperwork required to keep Medicaid paying for Myles' lifesaving care, and she fears that the new work requirements added by Republicans will only add to the burden and increase the risk that her son's care will be cut off.
"If we make one wrong decision as the parents of a critically ill child, that could be the end of it," said McDaniel, who added that when the GOP passed its budget package it felt like "the government had signed Myles' death warrant."
Lubin wrote that these cuts will make it especially hard for patients who live in rural communities, where local hospitals have for years been under financial strain and are in greater danger of closing thanks to the GOP's budget.
"Any cuts to that program are going to trickle down and impact children, whether that's pediatric practices who depend on Medicaid to be able to stay open or children’s hospitals," West Virginia pediatrician Lisa Costello told Lubin.
The impact of these cuts is projected to be felt nationwide, as The Idaho Statesman reported that nursing homes and hospice care facilities in the Gem State are also bracing for a catastrophic loss of funding.
The report highlighted Table Rock Senior Living at Park Place, an assisted living facility in the city of Nampa, which will see a cut in its reimbursement rates paid out by Idaho's Department of Health and Welfare in response to the GOP's Medicaid cuts. Gary Connell, who runs Table Rock Senior Living, told The Idaho Statesman that such cuts are "going to cause a lot of havoc" at both his facility and senior residences across the state.
Expected cuts to Medicaid reimbursement rates in the state are likely to force more facilities to decline Medicaid recipients as patients, which would in turn place higher burdens on emergency rooms.
"We're going to see serious access issues now, and then, what’s going to happen? They're going to go to the hospital emergency room," Democratic Idaho state Sen. Melissa Wintrow told The Idaho Statesman. "We can't refuse people at the hospital emergency room, and that's a higher cost of care, which means the legislature is going to take it on the chin in the end."
Over in North Carolina, local public radio station WHQR reported that dentists in the state are similarly fearful of lower reimbursement rates that would force them to cut off Medicaid recipients from care.
Before the GOP passed its budget law, North Carolina lawmakers were actually considering a bill that would have boosted the reimbursement rate from 35% to 46%. But with less money projected to come in from the federal government over the next decade, they abandoned the effort.
Dr. Robert Stowe, a dentist based in Winston-Salem, said that the North Carolina state legislature's current plan to slash reimbursement rates by an additional 3% this year would likely be a tipping point for many healthcare providers.
"You got a system that the reimbursement is so low now that you have providers who are seeing Medicaid dental patients that they're taking a loss on already," he explained to WHQR. "Then you're going to cut that fee by 3%—it's just untenable."
Finally, Ohio Capital Journal reported that the Medicaid cuts could come at great expense for many low-income Ohio military veterans who rely on the program.
According to the report, roughly 10% of US veterans use Medicaid for services for which they aren't eligible to receive through the US Department of Veterans Affairs, including some mental health treatment.
Dr. Forrest Faison, the former surgeon general of the United States Navy, told Ohio Capital Journal that many veterans who depend on Medicaid "because of job issues, disability, PTSD" may fall through the cracks due to the Medicaid cuts. He also emphasized that the cuts could fall particularly hard on Medicaid recipients in rural Ohio.
"A lot of these veterans, especially in Ohio, live in rural areas," he said, "where even if you've got some benefits, you may not have the services available."
"If you think it's absurd to regulate men, then you should think it's equally absurd to regulate women," said the author of an Ohio bill, who is also an OB-GYN.
Faced with relentless Republican attacks on reproductive freedom including efforts to give embryos and fetuses legal rights from the moment of conception, Democratic lawmakers in two states have recently introduced legislation that would ban men from ejaculating for purposes other than making babies, with some exceptions.
Last month, Mississippi state Sen. Bradford Blackmon (D-21) introduced S.B. 2319, the Contraception Begins at Erection Act, which would "make it unlawful for a person to discharge genetic material (sperm) without the intent to fertilize an embryo, effectively criminalizing certain male reproductive behaviors," according to an official artificial intelligence summary of the proposal. The bill—which died in committee last week—contains exceptions for "genetic material donated or sold to a facility for future embryo fertilization, and genetic material discharged using a contraceptive method intended to prevent fertilization."
"If you're going to penalize someone for an unwanted pregnancy, why not penalize the person who is also responsible for the pregnancy?"
"All across the country, especially here in Mississippi, the vast majority of bills relating to contraception and/or abortion focus on the woman's role when men are 50% of the equation," Blackmon explained, according to NBC News. "This bill highlights that fact and brings the man's role into the conversation. People can get up in arms and call it absurd but I can't say that bothers me."
Meanwhile in Ohio, state Reps. Dr. Anita Somani (D-11) and Tristan Rader (D-13) have introduced their own Contraception Begins at Erection Act, which would fine violators $10,000 per unauthorized discharge, with exceptions for when contraception is used during sex, or in cases of masturbation, and sex between members of the LGBTQ+ community.
"If you're going to penalize someone for an unwanted pregnancy, why not penalize the person who is also responsible for the pregnancy?" Somani, who is also a licensed OB-GYN, asked in an Ohio Capital Journal article published Sunday. "You don't get pregnant on your own."
Every Sperm is sacred! #equalrights #reproductiverights
[image or embed]
— Anita Somani District 8 OH ( @anitamd.bsky.social) February 4, 2025 at 5:19 PM
Responding to Republicans who have called her bill "absurd," Somani said, "If you think it's absurd to regulate men, then you should think it's equally absurd to regulate women."
While observers have questioned the seriousness of these bills—and with Somani and others giving nods to a famous number in Monty Python's 1983 black comedy The Meaning of Life—they come at a nadir for reproductive freedom in the United States.
Since the right-wing U.S. Supreme Courtcanceled half a century of federal abortion rights in the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling, a dozen states including Mississippi have also passed near-total abortion bans, while numerous other states have enacted restrictions on the procedure.
Eight states have also enacted or proposed restrictions on access to contraception, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Last year, Senate Republicans blocked consideration of the Right to Contraception Act. Republican President Donald Trump has signaled support for federal restrictions on contraception, and far-right U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has suggested that the tribunal "should reconsider" past rulings upholding the right to birth control.
In Ohio, voters decisively enshrined abortion rights in the state constitution via a 2023 ballot measure. Nevertheless, anti-abortion activists haven't given up—Republican activist Austin Beigel told the Capital Journal that GOP lawmakers are preparing to introduce legislation for a total abortion ban in the coming weeks.
"It just says human life begins at conception," he explained. "Therefore, all the protections that are offered to other people under the state law are also offered to the pre-born."
This isn't the first time that semi-satirical legislation has been introduced to highlight the hypocrisy of banning women from controlling their bodies. In 2019, a Democratic state lawmaker in Georgiaintroduced a "Testicular Bill of Rights" that would, among other things, have required men to get permission from their sexual partners before obtaining erectile dysfunction medication and enacted a 24-hour "waiting period" for men who want to buy porn or sex toys.