The Daily Change

RepublicanAi??pollster Harper Polling has just released a new poll it conducted of Montanans finding that former Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) leads all of his potential Democratic and Republican Senate challengers in the primary and general.

Schweitzer holds the highest favorability rating of any of the public figures polled, with 54 percent of Montanans saying they have a favorable view of him. The poll found that Montanans would favor Schweitzer for the Senate seat over Mark Racicot, a former Republican governor, by four points. Schweitzer’s lead over Montana Rep. Steve Daines (R) is even greater — ten points. Former Republican State Senate Minority Leader Corey Stapleton is bested by Schweitzer 54-29.

Within his own party, SchweitzerAi??handilyAi??bests Denise Juneau, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, 78-14.

All of this is in a poll where, when respondents were asked who they would vote for in a hypothetical election, a generic Republican leads a generic Democrat 42-34.

This is encouraging news for progressives because Schweitzer is an awesome economic populist. Read our top ten reasons why and click here to join our Draft BrianAi??SchweitzerAi??for Senate campaign.

(OrAi??donate $3 that Brian will receive on Day OneAi??of his campaign, so he can hit the ground running.)

The problem of lack of public services and health care access in America is often talked about in the abstract, but it has a very real human cost. For one example, take a look at the National Mobility Awareness Month Local Heroes contest, put on by the National Mobility Equipment Dealers Association, which is partnering with Chrysler, Toyota, and other auto companies for the event.

In this contest, you can nominate a disabled American you know as a local hero and say why you think they deserve to win a wheelchair accessible van. Web visitors then vote on these individuals and whoever receives the most votes will win a van.

The stories are heartbreaking. Consider this one from Rami Dechmand, who cares for his two younger brothers. He entered the contest to win the van for his younger brother, Dillon, who has had Cerebral Palsy since birth. This is how he explained his family’s need for the van:

As Dillon gets older and grows bigger, it gets harder and harder to lift him in and out of the car. I feel that soon he will get to the point where he is bigger than me and it will be nearly impossible for me to do this, and I would no longer be able to care for Dillon. Having an accessible van for Dillon will allow our family to better provide the care Dillon requires.

Or consider the case of Walter Edwards, Jr. Here’s why a relative entered him into the contest:

My father, Walter ai???Sonnyai??? Edwards, Jr., turned 80 in November, 2012. He and my mother (his caretaker), live on social security. We have been trying for years to get them a van with a side lift but canai??i??t …

Earlier this month, Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) went to bat for the NRA by being only one of four Democratic senators to vote to kill expanded background checks for gun purchases.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is responding to Baucus’s move by launching a new ad featuring Montana gun owner and grandmother Claire Kelly, who herself was a victim of a home invasion and says that gun ownership can protect Americans. Kelly warns, however, against guns being in the wrong hands, which is why background checks are needed.

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow covered the ad on her show tonight. Watch Maddow’s coverage:

Click here to pitch in a few dollars to run the ad in Montana.

Momentum continues to build against President Obama’s proposed chained CPI cut to Social Security and veterans benefits, with 40 Members of Congress endorsing the Grayson-Takano letter rejecting any cut to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits.

The think tank Global Policy Solutions released a report today that should cast further doubt on chained CPI. It finds that, if enacted, chained CPI “will disproportionately harm African Americans who have dramatically fewer sources of wealth to draw upon compared to whites.”

The reason why is because African Americans are more likely to rely on Social Security benefits as a large portion of their income. One example the report uses is “forty-seven percent of African American seniors rely on Social Security for more than 90 percent of their income in retirement, compared to 33 percent of their white counterparts.” It also notes that Obama’s proposed exemptions for the very old would be less likely to benefit African Americans, because average life expectancy for African American men after the age of 65 is two Ai??years shorter than white men, making Ai??them less likely to be eligible for the proposed exemption for the very old.”

Click here to tell President Obama you wonai??i??t stand for Social Security benefit cuts.

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.

Austerity — the policy of restraining public spending and focusing on deficits — is being practiced in Europe, and to a lesser extent, the United States. A new book out this week by medical researchers David Zuckler and Sanjay Basu says this austerity is not only bad for the economy, but for human health.

Zuckler and Basu looked at the impact of austerity in the U.S. and Europe and found devastating effects. These range from 10,000 people in Britain made homeless thanks to budget cuts to over five million Americans losing health care coverage thanks to the recession and reductions in public health care spending.

Some of these cuts have had lethal effects, too. The researchers estimated an uptick of 10,000 suicides across the U.S. and Europe, and in Greece, HIV infection has increased by 200 percent.

The researchers note that progressive labor and social policies have helped some countries escape this damaging austerity. They note that in Sweden, suicides actually fell during the recession, thanks to generous unemployment programs.

Also, they looked back at U.S. history and estimated that the New Deal helped save American lives, writing that “each extra $100 of relief spending from the American New Deal led to about 20 fewer deaths per 1,000 births, four fewer suicides per 100,000 people and 18 fewer pneumonia deaths per 100,000 people.”

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.

Despite overwhelming support by the public, expanded background checks for gun purchases went down during their first vote in the U.S. Senate. The proposal has also been defeated in a number of state legislatures. Most blame the power of the gun lobby, represented by the National Rifle Association.

A group of activists in Washington state — where the proposal died in the legislature — plans to bypass lawmakers altogether by putting the proposal on the ballot. TheAi??Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility will today launch a drive to get 300,000 signatures to place universal background checks for gun purchases on the ballot in November 2014. Watch a local news report on the ballot drive:

With the news that Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) is retiring, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee has launched a campaign to draft former Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer (D) to run for the spot.

As of this writing, over 15,000 Americans have signed onto the campaign, and have donated over $21,000Ai??Ai??to a draft fund that will go to Schweitzer on Day One of his campaign

Here’s why you should too –the top ten things that make Brian Schweitzer an awesome economic populist:

He Unequivocally Endorses Medicare-For-All, Single Payer: Schweitzer is an advocate of expanding Medicare to all Americans, and even sought a waiver from the Affordable Care Act to allow his own state to pursue single payer. Schweitzer explainedAi??his support for Canadian-style single payer health care like so: “Imagine if you went to a gas station, and you looked over at a car with a Canadian license plate. They were paying $1 a gallon for gas, and youai??i??re paying $2. Wouldnai??i??t that make you mad? Thatai??i??s exactly whatai??i??s happening. Iai??i??m mad for all the people in the country.”
He Calls Out Corporate Control Of Our Government — And Fights It: Ai??In an interview last year, Schweitzer said that ai???corporations are controlling not just our governments but our everyday lives.ai??? How many Democrats are willing to state that truth? Schweitzer alsoAi??has blasted Citizens United, supports a constitutional amendment to ban corporate money, and is especially passionate about this issue since the Supreme Court struck down Montana’s ban on corporate money in elections.
He Stands Up To Big Drug Companies:Ai??Schweitzer sought a waiver from federal law to allow Montanans to buy cheaper pharmaceutical drugs from Canada. Big Pharma lobbying has made it illegal for Americans to buy this cheaper medicine from …

Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives — despite opposition from both Democrats and Republicans — passed the the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), Ai??which would expand the government’s ability to spy on you without a warrant and shield technology companies from lawsuits when they participate in this spying.

CISPA’s path to passage has been much smoother than the similar Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), at least partly because the bill was crafted in a way to avoid opposition from massive tech giants like Google and Facebook, which mobilized against SOPA.

As the bill heads to the Senate, many Americans don’t even know about this new attack on our civil liberties. This is because the major news media has failed to cover the bill at all. We ran a media search going back to March 22nd, and found only a handful of news mentions on the topic — and no mention at all from CBS, ABC, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, or Fox News.

The networks that did cover the bill were local news networks, which featured segments critical of the legislation. Watch one segment here from Fox 19 in Kentucky:

FOX19.com-Cincinnati News, Weather
CSPAN covered the issue twice over the past month, once while featuring an advocate for the bill. RT, the english language news station funded by the Russian government, also aired several segments critical of the bill.

So why is it that the major news media has failed to talk about the bill? Certainly while the bill was being passed in the House last week, there were other major news items that could’ve crowded it out — from attacks in Boston to the massive fertilizer plant disaster in West, Texas. But the bill has been in play in …

Last week’s defeat of expanded background checks served as a reminder of special interest influence in Congress, and as we noted, Senators who voted against background checks received 8 times as much money from the gun lobby.

Here’s another piece of the puzzle as to why background checks went down. The Center for Public Integrity notes that the National Rifle Association spent a huge amount lobbying Congress in the first quarter of 2012, spending “at least $800,000 lobbying the federal government during theAi??first quarter ai??i?? moreAi??than any year covering theAi??same period, according to federal records..”

We’re running newspaper ads in the states of the four Senate Democrats who helped kill expanded background checks. Click here to pitch in $3 to run them.

The failure of the Manchin-Toomey legislation yesterday to expand background checks for gun purchases has been blamed on a variety of factors. But one key detail is the fact that the gun lobby — consisting of the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, and other groups funded by the gun industry — was a major fundraiser for Senators that opposed the reform bill.

The Center for Responsive Politics laid out donors to senators who both supported and opposed Manchin-Toomey, and found that lawmakers who opposed it received nearly eight times as much funding from the gun lobby. Meanwhile, it found that only $5,000 came from pro-reform groups (to the “yes” side):

Click here to sign our petition in support of background checks for gun purchases.

Ai??Click here to join our Take Back Democracy campaign to help kick money out of politics.

Last night, four pro-NRA Senate Democrats joined most Senate Republicans in killing the Manchin-Toomey proposal to expand background checks for gun purchases. This defeat came despite the fact that 90 percent of Americans support universal background checks.

This morning, civil rights hero and Georgia Congressman John Lewis (D) took to the floor to condemn the Senate for its failure:

LEWIS: Mr. Speaker, what happened on the floor of the other body yesterday, is a shame and a disgrace. Leaders of this country must be headlights and not taillights. Leaders must lead. More than 90% of American people say they want us to put strong background checks in place before someone buys a gun in this country. This is not about preserving Second Amendment rights. It is about saving lives. How many more little babies, how many more little children, how many more American citizens must die of gun violence? How many more funerals must we attend before we act? The blood of the innocent is crying out to us. Where is our courage? What happened to our heart? When will we have the guts to do What is right? We need to pass a strong gun bill and pass it now. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Watch it:

Click here to sign our petition in support of background checks for gun purchases.

Ellison introducing his bill today.

Six years ago, Wall Street’s misdeeds led to a global recession that plunged over 60 million people into poverty worldwide. Since then, the Big Banks and their profits have only grown.

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, today introduced legislation to make Wall Street pay America back. The “Inclusive Prosperity Act” would tax the following financial transactions in the following ways:

A 0.5 percent tax rate on stocksAi??
A 0.1 percent tax rate on bondsAi??
A 0.005 percent tax rate on derivatives or other investmentsAi??

Additionally, the bill would provideAi??an offset for households with incomes below $75,000 a year and individuals whose incomes are $50,000 or less.

ai???A lot of people in Washington like to talk about reducing the debt and deficits. Well if you really care about reducing the deficit, how about asking Wall Street speculators to pay their fair share?ai??? Ellison said in a released statement. ai???This bill will add a tax of a fraction of a percent on transactions made by the same Wall Street firms and stock traders who crashed our economy in 2008. This tax alone will generate up to $300 billion a year in revenue, stabilizing the deficit and allowing us to invest in the things that matterai??i??education, roads and bridges, and health care for our seniors and veterans.ai???

As progressive, senior, and veterans groups mobilize against the chained CPI — a recalculation of veterans and Social Security programs that would result in a benefits cut — a new poll finds that a majority of Americans opposes this change.

The Washington Post/ABC News poll finds that 51 percent of Americans oppose chained CPI and only 37 percent support it. Parsing out the results further, the Washington Post notes that the major group supporting the change is American who earn six-figures, and that middle and lower-income Americans are most hostile to the policy:

Income is also a dividing line in tolerance for Social Security cuts. Americans with annual incomes of at least $100,000 back the proposal by a 53 to 39 percent margin, but support plummets to 38 percent among those making $50,000 to under $100,000 and to 33 percent among those with incomes below $50,000. Support bottoms out at 25 percent among those with lower incomes who are over the age of 50.

Click here to tell President Obama you wonai??i??t stand for Social Security benefit cuts.

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.

Ai??

Today is tax day, the deadline for filing your tax return. While millions of Americans are doing their patriotic duty and paying their taxes through the year, wealthy individuals and corporations have made an art out of dodging their tax responsibilities.

Here’s one example, taken from the new documentary filmAi??Tax Free Tour,Ai??which looks at corporate tax dodging. In 2012, the computer electronics maker Apple shifted many of its profits overseas, parking $36 billion globally. Yet at the same time, it only paid a 1.9 percent tax rate on these profits.

How did it accomplish this? As the clip below explains, it parked the money in Ireland, where the corporate tax rate is 12.5 percent. But that’s still six times what it ended up paying, so in order to get the lower rate, it dropped it profits in the Netherlands, where the corporate tax rate hovers at around one percent. It also placed some of its profits in the British Virgin Islands — where there are no taxes on corporate profits:

This egregious tax dodging has a negative impact on the average taxpayer in the U.S. A report released earlier this month estimated that the average taxpayer must pay $1,000 extra thanks to the taxes that Big Business fails to pay (which amounts to $90 billion a year).

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.

President Obama has proposed enacting chained CPI, which would reduce spending on Social Security benefits by $200 billion over the next ten years. This has provoked outrage from progressive groups, and from groups representing seniors and veterans (whose benefits are also impacted by this change).

But something that has gotten less attention is the fact that President Obama’s budget also gives twice this much money — $400 billion — to the Pentagon over the next decade, by reducing sequester cuts down to $100 billion rather than $500 billion over the next ten years.

That means that Obama is essentially cutting Social Security’s budget by $200 billion while giving twice that much money to the Pentagon. Last night,Ai??former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean tweeted that this sort of deal is enough for him to become an independent.

Click here to tell President Obama you wonai??i??t stand for Social Security benefit cuts.

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.

Rep. Carol Shea Porter (D-NH)

New Hampshire Congresswoman Carol Shea Porter (D-NH) released a statement this week saying that she cannot vote for any budget that includes chained CPI, as Obama’s does:

ai???I believe a budget should reflect Americaai??i??s values of fairness and opportunity. It should create jobs, strengthen the middle class, and keep our commitment to seniors.

ai???There has been a lot of talk recently about chained CPI, and I want to make one thing abundantly clear to the middle class families and seniors I represent: I will not vote for a budget that supports chained CPI and cuts benefits that seniors have earned through a lifetime of hard work.

ai???Together with Medicare and Medicaid, Social Security embodies the moral fabric of our country. These programs are the foundation of economic security for Americaai??i??s seniors and the most vulnerable. […]

ai???I am proud to support legislation to ensure the long-term viability of Social Security. The Protecting and Preserving Social Security Act, which I cosponsored, would create long-range solvency and improve benefits, and it would ensure greater economic security for Americaai??i??s seniors.

ai???I urge the President to consider the approach taken in the Van Hollen budget, legislation that would reduce our deficit in a balanced way, invest in programs that help our economy grow, and maintain our commitment to seniors.

ai???I look forward to working with the President to create jobs, strengthen the middle class, and keep the American dream alive for generations to come, but I remain steadfast in my opposition to balancing the budget on the backs of seniors, veterans, or the middle class.ai???

At least 40 Members of the House of Representatives have said they will not vote for chained CPI.

Call your Member of Congress and ask them to sign onto the Grayson-Takano letter vowing to …

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) announced his opposition to a budget proposal with chained CPI today. Here’s a statement he issued on the matter:

“I made a promise to the people of Rhode Island that I would always oppose cuts to Social Security, and Iai??i??m going to keep that promise. Social Security is fully solvent for the next twenty years, has not contributed to our budget deficits, and has no place in this debate over federal spending. The so-called ai???chained CPIai??i?? proposal included in President Obamaai??i??s budget is nothing more than a benefit cut disguised behind technical jargon. While I commend the President for including some smart provisions in his budget like investments in infrastructure and the Buffett Rule for tax fairness, I cannot support a proposal that would force seniors to pay for deficits Social Security had no part in creating.”

Click here to tell President Obama you wonai??i??t stand for Social Security benefit cuts.

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.

Chained CPI gives Republicans a political opening.

By introducing a proposal to use chained CPI to cut Social Security and veterans benefits, President Obama is handing the Republican Party a rallying cry to run on in 2014. In the past 24 hours, leading Republican lawmakers, right-wing pundits, and conservative activists have latched onto the chained CPI proposal to attack Democrats:

Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee:Ai??Walden appeared on CNN to claim Obama is “trying to balance this budget on the backs of seniors and I just think it’s not the right way to go.” Watch it:
Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY): Collins opposes chained CPI and says it would “pinch our seniorsAi??who, come the end of the month, the stories I hear, are having troubleAi??putting food on the table.”
Right-wing activist Grover Norquist: Norquist blasted chained CPI as a violation of his anti-tax pledge.
Fox News personality Bill O’Reilly:O’Reilly complained that chained CPI would harm the lives of low-income seniors like his mother.

All of this demonstrates that by agreeing to chained CPI Democrats would not only be violating the historical principles of the Democratic Party, but they would be opening themselves up to an onslaught of Republican attacks in 2014.

There are, however, a number of Democrats who are not falling for this trap. Here’s a small list:

Ai??Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI):Whitehouse said that he “cannot support” a proposal that includes chained CPI because it “would force seniors to pay for deficits Social Security had no part in creating.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA): In her statement opposing chained CPI, Warren called it a “fancy way” to say “cut benefits for seniors, the permanently disabled, and orphans.”
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI):Pocan said he will “I will not support [chained CPI]. I will not …

Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA)

Yesterday, Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA)Ai??vowed to vote against chained CPI, issuing a statement saying, “While there is much in the Presidentai??i??s budget to admire, I strongly oppose chained CPI, and I will vote against these benefit cuts should they come before the House.”

That puts the number of Members of the House of Representatives who have vowed to vote against chained CPI at 35.

Click here to tell President Obama you wonai??i??t stand for Social Security benefit cuts.

AndAi??call your Member of Congress and ask them to sign onto the Grayson-Takano letter vowing to vote against any cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits.

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) just sent out an email to her supporters responding to President Obama’s budget, which includes a chained CPI that would cut Social Security and veterans benefits.

Warren says she’s “shocked” by Obama’s proposal, which would amount to a “fancy way to say ‘cut benefits for seniors, the permanently disabled, and orphans.’” Read Warren’s full e-mail below:

Hi Mindy,

My brother David has always had the special spark in our family.

Like our two older brothers, David served in the military. When he got out, he started a small business — and when that one didn’t work out, he started another one. He couldn’t imagine an America where he wasn’t living by his wits every single day.

Year after year, my brother paid into Social Security. He never questioned it. He figured he was paying so that he — and a lot of other people — could have a secure retirement.

Today my brother lives on his Social Security. That’s about $1,100 a month. $13,200 a year.

I’m telling you my brother’s story not because it’s unusual, but because it’s like the story of so many other people. I can almost guarantee that you know someone — a family member, friend, or neighbor — who counts on Social Security checks to get by.

That’s why I was shocked to hear that the President’s newest budget proposal would cut $100 billion in Social Security benefits. Our Social Security system is critical to protecting middle class families, and we cannot allow it to be dismantled inch by inch.

The President’s policy proposal, known as “chained CPI,” would re-calculate the cost of living for Social Security beneficiaries. That new number won’t keep up with inflation on things like food and health care — the basics that we need to live.

In short, “chained …

Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI)

Yesterday, progressive organizations representing tens of millions of people rallied outside the White House to present a petition signed by 2.3 million AmericansAi??calling on President Obama to back off of Chained CPI.

Freshman Congressman Mark Pocan (D-WI) spoke at the event, and not only condemned chained CPI but vowed to vote against it.

POCAN: I am here to say that if we do any chained CPI to Social Security we will break our promise that we’ve made to our seniors and others who rely on Social Security. I will not support that. I will not vote for any bill that includes that.Ai??And I stand with the 2 million-plus people who say that here today.

Watch it:

As of today,Ai??35 Members of the House of Representatives have said they will vote against Chained CPI.

Click here to tell President Obama you won’t stand for Social Security benefit cuts.

AndAi??call your Member of Congress and ask them to sign onto the Grayson-Takano letter vowing to vote against any cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits.

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.

Last night, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly covered the progressive rally against the chained CPI outside the White House yesterday.

While O’Reilly spent much of the segment disagreeing with progressives about various issues, he explained why he thinks they “may have a point” about opposing chained CPI.

O’REILLY: Let’s be honest about this for a minute. […] My mother Mrs. O’Reilly, without her son Bill, who helps her out, big time, needs that Social Security bump. If I wasn’t here she would need it, alright, to keep paying her property taxes which are exorbitant, in Nassau County, to stay in the home. She’s 90. If the President is going to take Mrs. O’Reilly’s [Social Security] and every body else, seniors who don’t have any money away, then those left-wing groups may have a point.

Watch it: (Relevant section starts at 3:23):

It shouldn’t be surprising that even a hardcore conservative like O’Reilly is troubled by chained CPI. Polling conducted by the AARP finds that even 60 percent of Republicans over the age of 50 oppose using chained CPI to cut Social Security benefits.

Click here to tell President Obama you won’t stand for Social Security benefit cuts.

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.

Today at 12:30 PM ET, organizations representing tens of millions of Americans — including the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Social Security Works, MoveOn, CREDO, Ai??the National Organization of Women, Democracy for America — are presenting a petition signed by over 2 million Americans to the White House asking President Obama to back off of his support for chained CPI.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) — who said he would do everything in his power to block this policy — will be speaking, as will Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA). There will also be remarks by former Obama supporters and seniors currently on Social Security. Watch a livestream of our rally and press conference at 12:30 PM ET:

The PCCC is preparing to push back against this cut to Social Security benefits, but we need your help.Ai??Sign our emergency petition against benefit cuts. AndAi??call your Member of Congress and ask them to sign onto the Grayson-Takano letter vowing to vote against any cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits.

Last week,Ai??the press reportedAi??that President Obama will include the ai???chained CPIai??? in his budget proposal, which would cut Social Security and veterans benefits. Since this proposal was revealed,Ai??nationalAi??progressiveAi??groups have campaigned against it and will deliver over 1 million petition signatures to the White House tomorrow asking the President to back off of chained CPI.

As the grassroots has mobilized against the proposal, more congressional Democrats are declaring their opposition.

This morning, Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME) released a statement condemning Chained CPI and vowing to vote against it:

“No matter what you call it, a chained CPI is a cut to Social Security benefits.Ai?? For someone who retirees today, that cut would mean they would be getting $650 less a year when they are 75 and over $1,100 less a year when they reach age 85.Ai?? Seniors shouldn’t be facing cuts to the benefits they have earned while millionaires and billionaires are getting a tax break.Ai?? Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are vital to the economic security of Maine people and I will vote against cuts to benefits in these programs.”

Pingree is joined by many other Members in her opposition:

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and independent who caucuses with Senate Democrats, tweeted that he’d do “everything in his power” to block chained CPI:

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR):

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA):

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY):

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA):

Progressive Caucus Co-ChairsAi??Reps. RaA?l M. Grijalva (D-AZ) and Keith Ellison (D-MN), in a statement emailed …

Corporations often park their profits overseas to avoid paying taxes on them. The U.S. Public Interest Research Group released a report yesterday detailing the costs that this has on the average U.S. taxpayer and on small businesses.

Here are some of the report’s key conclusions:

Based on the $150 billion in avoided taxes, the average U.S. tax filer filling out their 1040 form would need to pay $1,026 in additional taxes to make up for lost revenue from tax havens. Thatai??i??s enough money to feed a family of four for a month. […] To pick up the tab for the $90 billion multinational corporations avoid, the average small business in the United States would need to pay an average of $3,067 each in additional taxes. Large multinational corporations that use tax havens also gain an artificial competitive advantage over responsible small business owners.

ai???As this timely report shows,Ai??taxAi??haven abuse takes an immense toll on the vast majority of American taxpayers who donai??i??t employ armies of lawyers and accountants to avoid paying theAi??taxesAi??they owe,” said Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) in a statement made in support of the U.S. PIRG report.

You should follow BoldProgressives on Twitter here.