child tax credit / poverty

belated 8 22 gop let lapse

see food stamp

see social safety net

see eitc

https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/the-ftc-is-investigating-intuit-over-turbotax-practices/

===

4 24 judd

Yesterday was the last day for Americans to file their 2023 taxes on time. What is the biggest difference between Tax Day this year and Tax Day in 1980? Millionaires pay a lot less.

Between 1945 and 1980, American households that made $1 million or more paid an average of 50.1% of their income in federal taxes, according to a new report from Americans for Tax Fairness. This period following World War II was characterized by "substantial economic growth and broadly shared prosperity" with rapid income growth "at roughly the same rate up and down the income ladder." Higher taxes for the wealthy funded "public investments that helped build a thriving economy for all: constructing the interstate highway system, improving public education, facilitating mass home ownership, expanding healthcare coverage."

According to the most recent IRS data, American households with more than $1 million in income now pay an effective tax rate of just 26%. Yes, because of inflation, $1 million has less purchasing power today than it did 44 years ago. But $1 million still exceeds the income of 99.5% of American households.

While millionaires have seen their tax rates halved, the tax rate for non-millionaires has been fairly consistent. Between 1945 and 1980, the average effective tax rate for non-millionaires was 12.6%. Today, it is 11.5%.

In 2001, the IRS started tracking the effective tax rate of American households that make $10 million or more. They have a slightly lower effective tax rate than other millionaires.

The gap in effective tax rates between those American households that make $10 million or more and those that make seven figures likely reflects how the tax code imposes higher taxes on work than wealth. Seven-figure earners typically earn much of their revenue through income from high-paying jobs, and the top marginal income tax rate has ranged between 35% and 39.6% over the last two decades. Those who earn $10 million or more commonly derive some or all of their income through investments, which have been taxed between a 15% and 23.8% rate over the same time period. That's why the top 0.0001% — the 1500 richest households in America that make $118 million or more — pay an effective rate of just 23%. That's less than the regular millionaires.

The reality is that today, the American tax code barely qualifies as progressive. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) produced a study this month that looked at taxes paid at all levels (federal, state, and local) by income. ITEP found that the wealthiest 1% of American households collected 20.1% of total income and paid 23.9% of total taxes. The poorest 20% of American households collected just 2.6% of total income but paid 1.5% of total taxes.

grph

While the federal tax code, despite the dramatic reduction in rates for millionaires over the last several decades, remains progressive, "state and local taxes in most states are regressive, meaning they take a larger share of income from the poor than from the rich." Many states and localities impose sales taxes and "low-income families have little choice but to spend all their income to cover basic needs." High-income families "can save and invest most of their income, avoiding sales taxes."

Using impoverished children as political pawns

In 2021, as the pandemic still raged, Congress instituted a historic expansion of the Child Tax Credit (CTC). The CTC was increased from $2,000 per child to $3,600 for each child aged five or younger and $3,000 for each child aged 6 through 17. (The credit phased out for couples making $150,000 or more and individuals making $75,000 or more.) The credit was also made fully refundable, which means even families with little or no income could benefit. It was paid out monthly so that families did not have to wait until Tax Day to see the benefit.

The policy was a smashing success. Child poverty plunged to 5.2%, a record low. But due to the opposition from corporate lobbyists, Republicans in Congress, and Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), the CTC expansion expired at the end of 2022. Child poverty quickly increased, spiking to 12.4% in 2022 — that meant 5.28 million additional children living in poverty.

Since then, there has been bipartisan interest in reviving at least some of the CTC expansion. Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-OR) and House Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (R-MO) struck a deal to make the credit refundable for more families. It is a modest and technical change, but it would help about 16 million low-income families with children, with an average benefit of about $630. To attract Republican support, the deal included some business tax cuts, passed in 2017, that had expired or were close to expiring.

The Wyden-Smith package cleared the House at the end of January by a vote of 357-70. But for months, the Senate has done nothing.

Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID), the senior Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, claims to be "negotiating" the package, which was already the product of a bipartisan negotiation. Crapo reportedly wants more generous corporate tax cuts and fewer benefits for impoverished children. But efforts to tweak the proposal have not changed Crapo's opposition or the other Senate Republicans following his lead. Wyden's impression is that the proposal is not "something that Senate Republicans wanted to do."

Why? Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) said he opposed the package because "passing a tax bill that makes the president look good… [and] means he could be re-elected." In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) said that expanding the CTC now means "all Republican leverage will be lost" on tax issues regardless of who wins the election. Defeating the Wyden-Smith package would "extend the bulk, if not all, of the Trump tax cuts" in the future. At the end of 2025, Trump's tax cuts for individuals would expire, raising the top income tax rate from 37% to 39.6%.

Crapo and other Senate Republicans, however, have not simply cut off negotiations because harming impoverished children for a chance to help corporations and the wealthy is not a good look politically. But the route they are taking has the same effect. They are killing a modest expansion of the CTC by running out the clock.

The lobbyists who want you to keep paying to file your taxes

Earlier this year, the IRS launched its first-ever free tax filing program, Direct File, in 12 different states. The program, which is funded by the Inflation Reduction Act, is still in its pilot stage.

At least 100,000 taxpayers used the program to file their federal income taxes this tax season, and so far, the results are fairly encouraging. It’s estimated that in five years, “Direct File would save the average user $160 in filing fees and hours of their time each year, which saves Americans a total of $11 billion annually between filing fees and time costs,” according to a study by the Economic Security Project.

Direct File also makes it easier to claim credits like the CTC. According to the Economic Security Project, the program would “deliver up to $12 billion each year in additional tax credits to low-income families currently missing out.” The group also calculated that the program would generate at least $300 million in savings for the IRS.

Despite its immense potential and early success, tax preparation companies “are continuing to blast Direct File as unpopular and unnecessary.” A lawyer for the American Coalition for Taxpayer Rights – a trade group that represents tax prep giants like TurboTax and H&R Block – told the Washington Post that there is “not a real demand” for the program. But this is misleading. More than70% of taxpayers said they would be interested in filing their taxes through a free, IRS-provided online tool, according to the IRS’ 2022 Taxpayer Experience Survey. Polls across different states also show that a “massive majority” of Americans, including both Democrats and Republicans, support a free IRS tax return system.

For years, tax prep companies have spent millions of dollars blocking efforts to make tax filing free and easy. In 2019, ProPublica reported that Intuit, the maker of TurboTax, spent 20 years blocking an IRS-provided e-file service – all while tricking low-income taxpayers into paying for services the company was federally obligated to provide to them for free. Last year, the company spent a record $3.8 million lobbying the federal government. “[M]any of Intuit’s disclosures say it lobbied on the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act,” Sludge and More Perfect Union reported.

So far, there has been some accountability. In 2022, Intuit agreed to pay a $141 million settlement to roughly 4.4 million Americans, most of whom were low-income. Most recently, in January, federal regulators ordered the company to “stop marketing its services as free, unless they are free to everyone or exceptions are clearly disclosed.”

Still, problems persist. This month, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) wrote a letter to the Federal Trade Commission, urging the agency to continue investigating the tax prep software. “Despite lawsuits and settlements stemming from Intuit’s deceptive ‘free’ advertising practices, the company continues to relentlessly upsell TurboTax users,” Warren wrote. “The TurboTax website attempts to divert taxpayers away from free filing options early in the process – and continues to do so throughout their federal and state tax filings.”

===

---

an 2 24

The U.S. House late Wednesday passed legislation that would modestly expand the child tax credit for low-income families while reviving significant business tax breaks, a trade-off that some progressive lawmakers rejected as far too lopsided in favor of corporations.

The Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act of 2024 passed the House in an overwhelming 357 to 70 vote, with 169 Republicans and 188 Democrats supporting the measure.

Nearly all of the 23 House Democrats who voted against the bill are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), a roughly 100-member coalition whose chair backed the $78 billion legislation.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said following Wednesday's vote that she opposed the bill because it is "deeply inequitable—at a time when we have seen the greatest rise in inequality with the biggest corporations making super profits at the expense of the consumer."

The American Prospect's David Dayen has estimated that "in the time period when all the tax credits are actually in place, the business tax changes are five times more costly than the CTC changes."

"It is a mockery of who representative government works for," DeLauro argued. "This bill delivers massive tax cuts for the biggest corporations while denying middle class families the economic security they had under the expanded, monthly child tax credit. This is a reversal of the largest middle-class tax cut in history. The bill provides millions of dollars in tax relief for the wealthy and pennies for the poor."

Unlike the 2021 child tax credit expansion that eliminated the program's regressive phase-in and drove the U.S. child poverty rate down to a record low before expiring at the end of that year, the legislation passed by the House on Wednesday would exclude families with less than $2,500 in annual income—the very poorest.

The bill, which now heads to the closely divided U.S. Senate, would also not restore the monthly payments that families received under the 2021 expansion. Eligible families would claim the CTC when filing their annual tax returns.

---

===

https://truthout.org/articles/universal-school-meals-programs-are-being-cut-despite-1-in-8-kids-going-hungry/

an 2 23 edit bd

The Iowa Republican party is proposingdraconian new restrictions on what food can be purchased with the state’s food stamps, or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

This attack on the poor at the state level is coming at the same time as the national GOP has successfullyblocked the continuation of the Child Tax Credit, a program which substantially, demonstrably reduced child poverty.

The GOP’s priorities are clear. They don’t want to reduce poverty. They want to police, control and torment the poor. The party that constantly touts liberty doesn’t want liberty for all. They want liberty for the powerful to impose their will on the most vulnerable.

Republican ire

SNAP is a crucial safety net and the country’s most effective anti-hunger program. In 2021, itensured that 41 million Americans — 12 percent of the population — could afford an adequate diet every month.

SNAP also provides valuable emergency economic stability. SNAP enrollment increases in downturns, putting money into the economy to combat recession and boost recovery.

Despite its importance, or because of it, SNAP has long been a target of Republican ire.

Matthew Gritter’s 2017 monographUndeserving: SNAP Reform and Conceptions of the Deserving Poor chronicles how politicians have moved to regulate food stamps in recent decades. They’ve tried to put limits on what foods could be purchased and to prevent people without disabilities or dependents from getting aid.

They’ve also pushed drug testing — an ideaintroduced by former KKK leader and Louisiana Senator David Duke, and instituted in states like Florida and Utah.

Gritter concludes in an earlier paper that the goal of these interventions appears to be to replace “a safety net of last resort” with “a costly method to impose punitive measures on the poor.”

“Evidence suggests that reforms will reduce enrollment without changing the circumstances that led people to seek assistance,” he says.

Iowa is the latest attempt to target SNAP.

Canned tuna and salmon

The new bill,House File 3, would putharsh limits on what low-income families could purchase in Iowa when receiving federal SNAP food stamp funds for healthy food options.

It wouldrestrict purchases to those covered by the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, which uses federal funds for food assistance to pregnant people and new parents.

According to theIowa Hunger Coalition, “this bill would restrict SNAP participants’ ability to make their own food choices, take food away from Iowans, and increase hunger and food insecurity in our state.”

Families under House File 3 could no longer buy white bread, American cheese, coffee, snack foods, canned fruit and vegetables, bottled water, crackers and more.

They also couldn’t buy any meat except canned tuna and salmon. This despite the fact that meat, poultry and seafood is thetop expenditure category for SNAP recipients, accounting for 19 percent of money spent on food.

The Iowa GOP also wants a limit of $2,750 on household assets for receiving SNAP benefits; the cap is raised to $4,250 in assets if one family member is over 59 or is disabled. Houses and one vehicle would be excluded. Children’s savings accounts would not.

These low caps mean that people could not save for emergencies, because doing so would mean they would lose SNAP benefits. Nor could they own a second vehicle — a necessity for getting to work in many rural areas.

Historic low

The assault on SNAP is ugly because we have just conducted a sweeping experiment demonstrating that no-strings assistance to the poor is wildly successful at lifting children out of poverty with virtually no downsides.

The expanded Child Tax Creditinstituted in 2021 provided monthly cash payments to low-income families with children. It closed a loophole that prevented the poorest families from receiving assistance, and increased payments for everyone.

The result? Child poverty dropped to a historic low of 5.2 percent.

Lawmakers allowed the expanded CTC to expire.

Inevitably, child poverty rateswent back up.

Lawmakers refused to renew the expanded CTC in part because, mirroring attitudes towards SNAP, they believed that the people receiving the money were not deserving.

West Virginia’s conservative Democratic Senator Joe Manchin saidhe was worried parents would use benefits to buy drugs. He also wanted to institute work requirements for recipients.

But increasing restrictions prevents the neediest people from receiving benefits. It also mayprevent people from working.

A study of those in line to receive CTC funds found that recipientsbelieved the additional money would allow them to pay for childcare and increase their work hours.

Sure enough, in studies of the program conducted after it expired, there wasno evidence that CTC payments reduced workforce participation.

Undeserving

We know that SNAP is effective at reducing hunger. We know that simply giving people money, without conditions, is an incredibly effective means of pulling children out of poverty.

But conservatives don’t care. That’s because they’re not actually concerned with helping the poor.

They are concerned with policing them.

Conservatives want a poverty policy that is focused onpreventing people from accessing benefits. The goal is to punish the undeserving. And all poor people are assumed to be undeserving.

The success of the CTC shows that poverty and hunger are not intractable problems. They are deliberate policy choices.

The wealthy and powerful impose misery on the poor because they believe desperate people are more tractable and less able to organize.

Or perhaps they attack the poor simply because they don’t like the poor and believe they should suffer.

In any case, the expiration of the CTC, and the Iowa GOP’s assault on the SNAP program, shows that neither the pandemic nor the 2022 midterms have changed Republican commitments. GOP politicians like to cosplay as champions of the working class.

But the truth is they hold people of modest means in contempt and relish the chance to take food out of their mouths.

:{===

12 22 an

omg 10% up for DoD, many x more $

:{ :(style="font-variant-numeric:normal;font-variant-east-asian:normal;vertical-align:baseline;white-space:pre-wrap"):}:

:{https://www.alternet.org/how-republicans-immiserate-their-states/

Joe Biden and the Democrats are desperately trying to salvage the Child Tax Credit expansion, which pulled millions of children out of poverty.

Reducing child poverty is especially beneficial to families in red states, where poverty is most entrenched. Yet opposition to the expansion has come from Republicans and from red-state Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

Pundits and Republicans often claim that Democrats are out of touch with the working class and need to cater more to rural red-state voters. Yet it is red state politicians who are working tirelessly to impoverish children in their own states. In this, as in many things, the GOP is not the party fighting for red states. It’s the party fighting to immiserate them.

A most hopeful policy

As I’ve said before in the Editorial Board, the Child Tax Credit — or Social Security for children — was one of Biden’s most successful and hopeful policies.

The Child Tax Credit (CTC) was instituted in 1997 in limited form. But the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 turned the program into what was essentially a sweeping basic-income provision for poor families with children.

Annual payments increased from $2,000 to $3,600 per child under 6 and $3,000 per child ages 6-17. A loophole excluding parents with the lowest incomes was closed. And checks were sent monthly, rather than at the end of the year in a lump sum.

The program only lasted for six months. But in that brief time, child poverty cratered. Food insufficiency went down by a quarter. Three million children were kept out of poverty for each month the program continued.

Then the CTC ran out and could not be renewed because of opposition from Manchin and the GOP. Quickly, 3.7 million children fell back into poverty.

Manchin’s opposition is especially painful because West Virginia has the fourth-highest child poverty rate in the nation; 23.1 percent of children live below the poverty line.

Mississippi has the worst poverty rate for children at 27.6 percent. Louisiana is second with 26.3 percent. Others in the top 10 are Alabama, Kentucky, Arkansas, South Carolina and Tennessee. The only blue state on the list is New Mexico, in third place at 25.6 percent.

Reducing child poverty is obviously good in itself. But there is reason to believe that the policy had strong additional benefits, especially in red states where child poverty is most entrenched.

The libertarian Niskanen Center projected that the expanded credit could increase consumer spending by $27 billion since families who received the money were not in a position to save it, but would quickly spend it on necessities. They estimated state and local tax revenues would rise by $1.9 billion.

The consumer spending boost would be greatest overall in large states like Texas, Florida and California. But the states that would benefit most proportionally were those with the lowest average incomes like Mississippi, Arkansas, and Idaho.

More like excuses

Despite the fact that red states would likely see disproportionate benefits, Republicans are still opposing the CTC while Democrats are attempting to find some way to renew it.

House Appropriations Chair Rosa DeLauro, a Connecticut Democrat, said that Democrats were trying to include the CTC in a bill intended to make it easier for businesses to get a tax write-off for research and development expenses.

Meanwhile, Biden has indicated a willingness to negotiate with Manchin, who has insisted he would block the CTC program unless it has work and income requirements.

Manchin says he’s worried the CTC will lead people to stop working and will encourage laziness. But it’s not clear why we should punish children because of the behavior of their parents. And in any case, there’s no evidence that the CTC reduced employment among those who received it.

On the contrary, employment declined after the CTC was withdrawn, possibly because parents could no longer afford to pay for childcare or lost access to transportation.

Manchin and Republicans have also expressed concerns about the possible inflationary effects of CTC. This is a case, though, where we know that the neediest people — children in poverty — are substantially helped by the policy. An increase in inflation seems like a small price to pay for pulling children out of poverty.

And if spending is a concern, we could couple the CTC with a tax on the wealthy in order to ensure revenue neutrality.

Republican objections sound less like reasons backed by evidence or strong moral principle, and more like excuses.

The politics of cruelty

We have a program that is proven to quickly lift millions of children out of poverty with virtually no downside. Why are people from states with the worst child poverty problems determined to kill that program?

The question answers itself.

Republican politicians have long devoted themselves to entrenching poverty and crushing those in need in their own states.

They oppose the CTC for the same reason that they have fought to prevent Medicaid expansion under the ACA, contributing to rural hospital closures and exacerbating the covid health crisis.

They oppose it for the same reason that they have repealed abortion rights, even though denying women abortion access impoverishes them and their children.

Manchin’s determination to keep children of West Virginia in poverty is in line with the longstanding and successful Republican effort to keep the people of Mississippi, Louisiana, West Virginia and other red states poor, ill and desperate.

Republicans claim to speak for authentic rural America. But the policies they promote very deliberately keep rural people and their children in desperate circumstances.

The people in power in red states keep hold of it by enforcing a brutal hierarchy. Poor people, women and Black people must be constantly crushed and humiliated to keep Manchin and his GOP cronies in office.

The politics of cruelty have a stronghold, and Republicans are not likely to lose power in Mississippi anytime soon.

But we should be clear that their politics are not based on some sort of true understanding of the needs of working people. They’re built on refusing to help those who need help in their state, and on forcing children into poverty.

===

mma 8 22

no lnx audiopolitico puff piece on GOP congressman poised to head House investigations leaves out key factsRep. James Comer is expected to chair the powerful House Oversight Committee if Republicans take the House in the midterm electionsWRITTEN BY JOHN KNEFEL PUBLISHED 08/12/22 There’s a concept in journalism of a “beat sweetener,” a puff piece about a powerful person or organization that is usually designed to ensure that a reporter or outlet gets exclusive scoops in the future because the subject is about to become very influential and therefore newsworthy. Outlets publish these types of stories all the time, often reading like a press release aiming to smooth over any prior negative coverage. Politico published a textbook example of the genre on August 11, profiling Rep. James Comer (R-KY), who is expected to chair the powerful House Oversight Committee if Republicans win back the majority in the November midterm elections. Before laying out who Comer is, what he believes, and recent comments of his, it’s worth examining how embarrassingly flattering and uncritical this profile is in describing “the GOP's future king of Biden investigations.” “It’s easy to see why” Comer has “charmed many on the Hill,” Politico writes. Comer is “a sharp and affable colleague” with “personal appeal” and quick “to crack a well-timed joke that’s often at his own expense.” He’s not just a nice guy, though – “it’s his priority to ensure the oversight panel’s work remains ‘credible.’” Politico tells us Comer is “particularly well-suited to the task according to more than two dozen” of his Republican colleagues, in fact. Politico then gave Comer a chance to tell readers just how serious and professional he is. “I’m not going to be chasing some of these right-wing blogs and some of their conspiracy theories,” he told Politico. He added that he wouldn’t pursue any investigations “unless we have proof."The rest of the piece goes on like that until the 18th paragraph, with only a single, mild, passing criticism offered as balance, namely that he “lean[s] into partisan talking points, like describing the intelligence community as a ‘deep state’ on Newsmax after the FBI’s search of Trump’s home on Monday.”But alas, there is a lot about Comer that Politico left out. Although he may claim that he’s not chasing far-right conspiracy theories, his record shows otherwise. Particularly of note is that last month Comer appeared on Sean Hannity’s radio show and appeared to endorse the racist, antisemitic “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory.“We believe there are a lot of nongovernment organizations who are working with this administration to transport these illegals all over the United States,” Comer said. “And I believe that this is part of their political business model to try to repopulate many of these states to be able to regain control or pad their margins.” Rep. James Comer on Hannity's radio show: NGOs are trying to "repopulate" states with "illegals" JULY 20, 2022 CitationFrom the July 20, 2022, edition of Premiere Radio Network's The Sean Hannity ShowAfter a break, Hannity and Comer returned to the topic, at which point Hannity was even more explicit in his belief in the racist theory. “Is this that the Democrats want to offer something of great value to people that don't respect our laws, our borders, our sovereignty – and that being citizenship?” Hannity asked. “Because it sounds like it, and it sounds like they are doing: ‘So hey, we'll give you citizenship. We hope you vote for us.’ That's what it sounds like to me.” Comer agreed with the host. “That's what it sounds like to me, and I think most Americans are seeing that,” Comer said. “If 3 million illegals have crossed over to the United States, just since Joe Biden's become president – Sean, that's four new congressional districts. Four new congressional districts. So this is political. This is a political plan for the Democrats.” Comer then argued that undocumented people, including children, are a drain on scarce resources, before underlining the conspiratorial nature of what he believes is happening. “They've got some kind of handshake agreement behind closed doors in a smoke-filled room that, you know, this is gonna be good for the Democrat Party long-term,” he concluded.Rep. James Comer: NGOs and Democrats are bringing immigrants to the US because it's "good for the Democrat Party long term" JULY 20, 2022 Audio file CitationFrom the July 20, 2022, edition of Premiere Radio Network's The Sean Hannity ShowAlthough the Politico profile also touches on possible future investigations of President Joe Biden’s son, the piece completely misleads its readers about Comer’s deep obsession with him. And though Comer has saidHunter Bidenwould likely get subpoenaed in the event of a declined invitation to the committee next year, he doesn’t want to appear trigger-happy with issuing subpoenas, either. “This isn’t a dog-and-pony show. This isn’t a committee where everybody’s gonna scream and be outraged and try to make the witnesses look like fools,” he said, before nodding at House Democrats’ past probes of the Trump campaign and Russian election interference. “Unlike Adam Schiff, we’re gonna have something concrete, substantive on Hunter Biden or I’m not going to talk about Hunter Biden.”The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank covered that topic in May, finding that Comer has claimed Hunter Biden is tied to nearly every single domestic or international news story in some way or another.Specifically, Comer has accused Hunter Biden of being responsible for supposed increased levels of fentanyl smuggling at the U.S. southern border, helping China’s battery market, protecting Russian oligarchs from sanctions, and impeding an investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 virus.As Milbank lays out, each of these claims lies somewhere between gross exaggeration and pure fabrication, yet Comer has vowed to be “all over Hunter Biden” when he becomes chair of the House Oversight Committee.Comer’s far-right conspiracy theories don’t stop with Hunter Biden, however. He has also suggested that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) may have been partially responsible for the January 6 fascist riot by not requesting sufficient security.“I want to find out what did Nancy Pelosi know, and when did she know it?” Comer said on fringe cable outlet OAN about a month after the riot. Comer also supports run-of-the-mill conservative cruelty. Last June, for example, he claimed that the child tax credit was “really doing more harm than good.” In fact, the policy lifted more than 3 million children out of poverty before it expired at the end of 2021.He also supports the casual, anti-LGBTQ bigotry that’s ubiquitous in the Republican Party. According to two reporters present at the event that Politico attended, Comer used anti-trans rhetoric about “men” being able to give birth as a laugh line. That line didn’t make it into the Politico piece. Comer’s bigotry extends beyond the LGBTQ community. In July 2019, Donald Trump made racist comments about The Squad – four women of color in the House of Representatives – singling out Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), a Black woman born in Somalia, saying she should “go back.” When asked about Trump’s tweet, Comer justified it and embellished Trump's racist argument. Somehow, that didn’t make it into the Politico piece either.Comer is poised to become incredibly powerful if the Republicans win back the majority in November. Stories like this one serve to rehabilitate his image and whitewash his history of far-right extremism.