Letters: The Big Beautiful Bill won't allow us to build strong communities
While many citizens see the act of voting as an opportunity to elect officials into office based on their own needs, values and station in life, we need to remember that a strong community breeds strong opportunity and strong people. It is this community that elected officials need to tend to, not the needs of a few individuals (including themselves).
Nearly every word in the recently passed big, heinous bill undermines the most basic building blocks of a strong community — opportunities for health, education and ability to amass wealth. I pray that in the midterms and the next presidential election, we walk into the voting booth actively considering a community perspective and get back to what our ancestors dreamed for each of us.I wish to acknowledge the cowardice and inhumanity exhibited by the Republicans in the U.S. House and Senate. As a result of their obsequious behavior, they passed a bill in which 17 million Americans will lose health care. Rural hospitals are already closing. Cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, could affect 40 million people.
I don't want a tax break if it means less for my fellow Americans. I don't want Americans dying for lack of care or hunger on my watch. I don't want detention camps built on swamps. I don't want people of color swept off the streets without due process.
We all should acknowledge where this autocratic behavior leads. This is not my America. The one word that sums up this bill is cruelty. Remember this when you cast your ballot in 2026.If you really want to make America great again, bring back the tax rate of the middle of the 20th century. Instead of raising the national debt by trillions of dollars, we would actually reduce the national debt by trillions of dollars.
Instead of giving the billionaires a major tax cut with the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' they would actually help out the country by paying more taxes.The doomsday predictions about President Donald Trump's tariffs haven't come true. Trump's method of negotiation is brass-knuckle businesslike. Nobody complains about the way the health care industry forces us to pay high prices for low-quality service.
People blame high prices on whoever is the president, no matter which party, but they rarely blame the real perpetrators of inflation: the greedy business leaders who worship the almighty dollar.
When was the last time the corporate office of Kroger and Albertsons was picketed for the high prices of groceries or the Prime Healthcare and Ascension headquarters saw protesters pleading the case for better health care choices and lower costs?
I live within walking distance of a large CSL Behring complex that provides great, high-paying jobs for the community. CSL Behring charges high prices for its products, but the facility sees no protesters.
We have a president who is fighting successfully for the U.S. consumer, and the Tribune Editorial Board is complaining.Is there a single actual conservative in the Republican Party any longer? My father campaigned for Barry Goldwater, and I have not seen a single Republican whom Goldwater would have voted for since Ronald Regan!The GOP has fallen to another low. A new Louisiana law rebrands natural gas as 'green energy,' which is a horrifying result of the indebtedness of leaders of Republican states to the petroleum industry. The word 'rebranding' makes it seem like a box of cereal, not the air we breathe.
Louisiana, Indiana and Tennessee have all passed legislation calling natural gas 'green energy.' Clearly, these governors and the state legislators believe their constituents who voted them into office are so gullible that facts and truth are unnecessary. It is indisputable that natural gas is a fossil fuel contributing to the greenhouse effect. The problem is that the entire earth shares the effect.The U.S. Agency for International Development just formally closed its doors after 60 years of global humanitarian operations. Recently, the noted medical journal Lancet published a study that concluded that the loss of this funding could lead to 14 million unnecessary deaths abroad by 2030.
How could President Donald Trump do this? Fourteen million dead people! Obviously, regarding foreign affairs, the first 'A' in MAGA stands for 'America (only).'
In that view of the world, deaths in African countries and other poor areas are simply not important. They are not Americans; they are not part of 'Make America Great Again.'
Notably, a previous Republican president, George W. Bush, had the opposite view of the world. Many believe that Bush's greatest accomplishment was his PEPFAR program, which financed HIV treatment and relief in 50 countries. PEPFAR reportedly saved around 25 million lives.
Bush responded appropriately to the USAID closing in a message to its-now unemployed workers: 'You've showed the great strength of America through your work — and that is your good heart. Is it in our national interests that 25 million people who would have died now live? I think it is, and so do you.'
Thank goodness for Bush's good heart.As I drove around the south suburbs on America's birthday, I saw many flags proudly displayed. Unfortunately, I saw one flag that was flying upside down, which is the universal sign of distress, particularly in instances of extreme danger to life or property as outlined in the U.S. Flag Code.
While I understand that these are deeply emotional times for many,.it made me think about all of the soldiers, police, firefighters and many others who risk their lives every day. Our flag represents all of those heroes who may make the ultimate sacrifice for our safety, well-being and freedom.
If you are not happy with America's current government, policies, or politics in general, then by all means please get involved with the local, state or federal governments and make your voice heard. That flag represents sacrifice, and it is an insult to those heroes and their families when it is flown upside down.
Please consider the broader impact of this particular symbol and treat it with respect and care, even in times of political dissatisfaction.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
White House defends firing of jobs official
White House economic advisers have on defended President Donald Trump's firing of the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, rejecting criticism it could undermine confidence in official US economic data. Trump had BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer sacked on Friday, despite no evidence of any wrongdoing, after a report showed hiring slowed in July and was much weaker in May and June than previously reported. Trump, in a post on his social media platform, alleged that the figures were "RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad". Trump again criticised McEntarfer on Sunday, saying he would name a new commissioner in the next three or four days. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told CBS that Trump had "real concerns" about the BLS data, while Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, said the president "is right to call for new leadership". Hassett said on Fox News Sunday the main concern was Friday's BLS report of net downward revisions showing 258,000 fewer jobs had been created in May and June than previously reported. Trump accused McEntarfer of faking the jobs numbers, without providing any evidence of data manipulation. The BLS compiles the closely watched employment report as well as consumer and producer price data. The BLS gave no reason for the revised data but noted "monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors". McEntarfer's firing added to growing concerns about the quality of US economic data and came on the heels of a raft of new tariffs on dozens of trading partners, sending global stock markets tumbling as Trump presses ahead with plans to reorder the global economy. Critics, including former leaders of the BLS, slammed Trump's move and called on Congress to investigate McEntarfer's removal, saying it would shake trust in a respected agency. "It undermines credibility," said William Beach, a former BLS commissioner and co-chair of the group Friends of the BLS. "There is no way for a commissioner to rig the jobs numbers," he said on CNN's State of the Union. Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers also criticised McEntarfer's firing. "This is a preposterous charge. These numbers are put together by teams of literally hundreds of people following detailed procedures that are in manuals," Summers said on ABC's This Week. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
State lawmakers left en masse in a bid to block a GOP map that would tilt the playing field in Republicans' favor.
Dozens of Texas Democratic lawmakers skipped town on Sunday in an extraordinary maneuver seeking to prevent a redistricting attempt pushed by President Donald Trump. By heading out of state, the lawmakers effectively denied the Republican-led state House the quorum needed to conduct business, temporarily halting the effort to redraw congressional maps. A vote on the draft map—which could give five additional seats to the GOP in next year's midterms—had been scheduled for Monday as part of a special session that began on July 21.
Miami Herald
32 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Tariffs are making money. That may make them hard to quit.
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump's extensive tariffs have already started to generate a significant amount of money for the federal government, a new source of revenue for a heavily indebted nation that American policymakers may start to rely on. As part of his quest to reorder the global trading system, Trump has imposed steep tariffs on America's trading partners, with the bulk of those set to go into effect Thursday. Even before the latest tariffs kick in, revenue from taxes collected on imported goods has grown dramatically so far this year. Customs duties, along with some excise taxes, generated $152 billion through July, roughly double the $78 billion netted over the same time period last fiscal year, according to Treasury data. Indeed, Trump has routinely cited the tariff revenue as evidence that his trade approach, which has sown uncertainty and begun to increase prices for consumers, is a win for the United States. Members of his administration have argued that the money from the tariffs would help plug the hole created by the broad tax cuts Congress passed last month, which are expected to cost the government at least $3.4 trillion. 'The good news is that Tariffs are bringing Billions of Dollars into the USA!' Trump said on social media shortly after a weak jobs report showed signs of strain in the labor market. Over time, analysts expect that the tariffs, if left in place, could be worth more than $2 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade. Economists overwhelmingly hope that doesn't happen and the United States abandons the new trade barriers. But some acknowledge that such a substantial stream of revenue could end up being hard to quit. 'I think this is addictive,' said Joao Gomes, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. 'I think a source of revenue is very hard to turn away from when the debt and deficit are what they are.' Trump has long fantasized about replacing taxes on income with tariffs. He often refers fondly to American fiscal policy in the late 19th century, when there was no income tax and the government relied on tariffs, citing that as a model for the future. And while income and payroll taxes remain by far the most important sources of government revenue, the combination of Trump's tariffs and the latest Republican tax cut does, on the margin, move the United States away from taxing earnings and toward taxing goods. Such a shift is expected to be regressive, meaning that rich Americans will fare better than poorer Americans under the change. That's because cutting taxes on income does, in general, provide the biggest benefit to richer Americans who earn the most income. The recent Republican cut to income taxes and the social safety net is perhaps the most regressive piece of major legislation in decades. Placing new taxes on imported products, however, is expected to raise the cost of everyday goods. Lower-income Americans spend more of their earnings on those more expensive goods, meaning the tariffs amount to a larger tax increase for them compared with richer Americans. Tariffs have begun to bleed into consumer prices, with many companies saying they will have to start raising prices as a result of added costs. And analysts expect the tariffs to weigh on the performance of the economy overall, which in turn could reduce the amount of traditional income tax revenue the government collects every year. 'Is there a better way to raise that amount of revenue? The economic answer is: Yes, there is a better way, there are more efficient ways,' said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and a former Biden administration official. 'But it's really a political question.' Tedeschi said that future leaders in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, may be hesitant to roll back the tariffs if that would mean a further addition to the federal debt load, which is already raising alarms on Wall Street. And replacing the tariff revenue with another type of tax increase would require Congress to act, while the tariffs would be a legacy decision made by a previous president. 'Congress may not be excited about taking such a politically risky vote when they didn't have to vote on tariffs in the first place,' Tedeschi said. Some in Washington are already starting to think about how they could spend the tariff revenue. Trump recently floated the possibility of sending Americans a cash rebate for the tariffs, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recently introduced legislation to send $600 to many Americans. 'We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt,' Trump said last month of the tariffs. Democrats, once they return to power, may face a similar temptation to use the tariff revenue to fund a new social program, especially if raising taxes in Congress proves as challenging as it has in the past. As it is, Democrats have been divided over tariffs. Maintaining the status quo may be an easier political option than changing trade policy. 'That's a hefty chunk of change,' Tyson Brody, a Democratic strategist, said of the tariffs. 'The way that Democrats are starting to think about it is not that 'these will be impossible to withdraw.' It's: 'Oh, look, there's now going to be a large pot of money to use and reprogram.'' Of course, the tariffs could prove unpopular, and future elected officials may want to take steps that could lower consumer prices. At the same time, the amount of revenue the tariffs generate could decline over time if companies do, in fact, end up bringing back more of their operations to the United States, reducing the number of goods that face the import tax. 'This is clearly not an efficient way to gather revenue,' said Alex Jacquez, a former Biden official and the chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal group. 'And I don't think it would be a long-term progressive priority as a way to simply collect revenue.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Copyright 2025
