The Corker Handout (not Kickback) by David Leonhardt

Topic: The Corker Handout (not Kickback) Writter:  David Leonhardt Publish Date: 19 December 2017 Published on : The New york times The Corker Handout (not Kickback) I tend to believe the more innocent explanation for Senator Bob Corker’s late vote switch on the tax bill. Yet I still find that explanation to be terribly damning.

The less innocent explanation is that Corker changed his vote from no to yes last week because his colleagues inserted a real-estate provision that would personally benefit him. This notion led to the talk of a #CorkerKickback on social media.

Corker insists that he hadn’t even been aware of the new provision when he announced his support, and a couple of his colleagues have backed him up, saying they asked for the new provision. So far, there is no evidence to the contrary.

And there is another plausible explanation for the vote change: John McCain’s illness meant that Corker could become the deciding vote. While Corker was willing to grandstand against the bill, he wasn’t actually willing to block it.

Which is exactly what I find so damning.

Corker had previously said that if the tax bill added “one penny to the deficit,” he wouldn’t support it. He also denounced the budget gimmicks in previous versions of the bill that were designed to obscure its true fiscal effects. Yet he is supporting a final version of the bill that will add something like $1 trillion to the deficit over 10 years, according to independent analyses, even before taking into account its blatant budget gimmicks.

Not only that, but the rush to pass it — without the months of hearings that accompany most complex legislation (yes, including Obamacare) — means that it’s likely full of surprises, like the so-called Corker Kickback, even if it was only a handout instead of a kickback. “The wealthy and well-advised are going to have a field day with all the loopholes created by this bill,” N.Y.U.’s Lily Batchelder said yesterday on Twitter.

Corker is retiring from the Senate after this term, in part, it seems, because he is disturbed by Trump’s behavior as president. His retirement from politics could have freed him to vote his conscience. Instead, he’s violating his own principles, or at least what he calls his principles. It’s sad, and it’s damaging to the country.

But, hey, at least he will be even more financially comfortable in retirement.

Related: Steven Mnuchin claimed on Jake Tapper’s CNN show that “Actually, rich-people taxes will be going up.” This is a lie.

The Tax Policy Center released an analysis yesterday of the latest version of the bill. A brief summary might be: Actually, rich-people taxes will be going down. A lot. More than anyone else’s.

Susan Collins’s disappointing performance on the tax bill continues. Collins, the Maine senator, claimed yesterday that the bill would produce “more revenue for the government.” There is not a single credible analysis that suggests this to be true.

E.J. Dionne calls the bill “a dishonest power and money grab by — and on behalf of — the already powerful.” Michael Linden explains how the bill could hurt economic growth and job growth, in a pithy series of tweets. Ezra Klein tries to solve the mystery of why Congress is willing to ignore public opinion, which remains solidly opposed to the bill.

In the Times, David Brooks is fine with some parts of the bill but appalled by other parts.