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.
Did you know Obama's health care bill contained a $20 billion a year tax on the richest Americans? I didn't until I stumbled onto a mention of this the other day, although writing about politics is my life and I knew enough to be angry at the gutting of a national public option. I asked a dozen other friends, half of whom work in health care or health care policy and most of whom are fellow political junkies. None of them knew either.
Did you know Obama's health care bill contained a $20 billion a year tax on the richest Americans? I didn't until I stumbled onto a mention of this the other day, although writing about politics is my life and I knew enough to be angry at the gutting of a national public option. I asked a dozen other friends, half of whom work in health care or health care policy and most of whom are fellow political junkies. None of them knew either. If those who follow these issues intensely don't know about something that all of us would cheer as a step toward getting the wealthiest to pay their fair share, most American voters sure aren't going to know either.
The tax supports Medicare and low-income health care subsidies. Beginning in 2013,it will bring in $210 billion over 10 years by charging households that make over $250,000 a year 3.8% on everything over that amount. The provision also applies to investment and dividend income, a key precedent toward ensuring that billionaires pay at least the same share of taxes as self-employed carpenters. It got some modest coverage when it passed, and accountants certainly know about it. But the rest of us don't, and that makes me mad.
I don't remember any point when Obama highlighted it, even as his base and the American public and his own base became steadily more demoralized from a sense that his administration was more willing to fight for Wall Street then Main Street. This doesn't completely erase his caving on temporarily extending the Bush tax cuts. But it begins to cut the other way, requiring the top 1% (well actually the top 2%), to carry a bit more of their share. For most people, though, it might as well never have happened, because Obama neglected to tell them.
I don't know why he hasn't highlighted this success story. Maybe he considered it too wonkish. Maybe Rahm Emanuel convinced him that the issue was a political loser, though polls consistently support higher taxes on the wealthy. Maybe it's Obama's reluctance to take controversial stands. But if he wants to convince ordinary Americans that our fates are indeed tied together, he'd better start embracing those moments where his administration has actually made progress, while continuing to talk about how far we have to go. Since Occupy Wall Street, Obama's started to speak out more forcefully, as in his powerful recent Teddy Roosevelt speech aboutAmerica's economic divides. Yet here's an example, and I know there are others, where he's actually required those at the top to start carrying a bit more of their fair share, yet said next to nothing to let the rest of us know. It's long overdue that he begin.
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Did you know Obama's health care bill contained a $20 billion a year tax on the richest Americans? I didn't until I stumbled onto a mention of this the other day, although writing about politics is my life and I knew enough to be angry at the gutting of a national public option. I asked a dozen other friends, half of whom work in health care or health care policy and most of whom are fellow political junkies. None of them knew either. If those who follow these issues intensely don't know about something that all of us would cheer as a step toward getting the wealthiest to pay their fair share, most American voters sure aren't going to know either.
The tax supports Medicare and low-income health care subsidies. Beginning in 2013,it will bring in $210 billion over 10 years by charging households that make over $250,000 a year 3.8% on everything over that amount. The provision also applies to investment and dividend income, a key precedent toward ensuring that billionaires pay at least the same share of taxes as self-employed carpenters. It got some modest coverage when it passed, and accountants certainly know about it. But the rest of us don't, and that makes me mad.
I don't remember any point when Obama highlighted it, even as his base and the American public and his own base became steadily more demoralized from a sense that his administration was more willing to fight for Wall Street then Main Street. This doesn't completely erase his caving on temporarily extending the Bush tax cuts. But it begins to cut the other way, requiring the top 1% (well actually the top 2%), to carry a bit more of their share. For most people, though, it might as well never have happened, because Obama neglected to tell them.
I don't know why he hasn't highlighted this success story. Maybe he considered it too wonkish. Maybe Rahm Emanuel convinced him that the issue was a political loser, though polls consistently support higher taxes on the wealthy. Maybe it's Obama's reluctance to take controversial stands. But if he wants to convince ordinary Americans that our fates are indeed tied together, he'd better start embracing those moments where his administration has actually made progress, while continuing to talk about how far we have to go. Since Occupy Wall Street, Obama's started to speak out more forcefully, as in his powerful recent Teddy Roosevelt speech aboutAmerica's economic divides. Yet here's an example, and I know there are others, where he's actually required those at the top to start carrying a bit more of their fair share, yet said next to nothing to let the rest of us know. It's long overdue that he begin.
Did you know Obama's health care bill contained a $20 billion a year tax on the richest Americans? I didn't until I stumbled onto a mention of this the other day, although writing about politics is my life and I knew enough to be angry at the gutting of a national public option. I asked a dozen other friends, half of whom work in health care or health care policy and most of whom are fellow political junkies. None of them knew either. If those who follow these issues intensely don't know about something that all of us would cheer as a step toward getting the wealthiest to pay their fair share, most American voters sure aren't going to know either.
The tax supports Medicare and low-income health care subsidies. Beginning in 2013,it will bring in $210 billion over 10 years by charging households that make over $250,000 a year 3.8% on everything over that amount. The provision also applies to investment and dividend income, a key precedent toward ensuring that billionaires pay at least the same share of taxes as self-employed carpenters. It got some modest coverage when it passed, and accountants certainly know about it. But the rest of us don't, and that makes me mad.
I don't remember any point when Obama highlighted it, even as his base and the American public and his own base became steadily more demoralized from a sense that his administration was more willing to fight for Wall Street then Main Street. This doesn't completely erase his caving on temporarily extending the Bush tax cuts. But it begins to cut the other way, requiring the top 1% (well actually the top 2%), to carry a bit more of their share. For most people, though, it might as well never have happened, because Obama neglected to tell them.
I don't know why he hasn't highlighted this success story. Maybe he considered it too wonkish. Maybe Rahm Emanuel convinced him that the issue was a political loser, though polls consistently support higher taxes on the wealthy. Maybe it's Obama's reluctance to take controversial stands. But if he wants to convince ordinary Americans that our fates are indeed tied together, he'd better start embracing those moments where his administration has actually made progress, while continuing to talk about how far we have to go. Since Occupy Wall Street, Obama's started to speak out more forcefully, as in his powerful recent Teddy Roosevelt speech aboutAmerica's economic divides. Yet here's an example, and I know there are others, where he's actually required those at the top to start carrying a bit more of their fair share, yet said next to nothing to let the rest of us know. It's long overdue that he begin.