Trump Blurts Out Damning Admission of Iran Blunder as GOP Panic Grows
As
the president reveals too much about his handling of Iran, a writer
tracking Trump’s bungling explains how his megalomania won’t allow for
any good way out of this fiasco.
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
Donald Trump has declared the war “terminated,” but he’s still rejecting Iran’s peace proposals while again threatening it with massive war crimes. And in an interview, Trump declared that he would never have approved
an offer that was made to Iran by his negotiator, Steve Witkoff. This
is a damning admission: He seemed to blurt out that he has no idea what
his own representatives are offering—showing deep disengagement from the details of the talks—while demonstrating
that anything his negotiators do offer should not be believed.
Meanwhile, Republicans are beginning to break with Trump: Politico reports that he “could soon face far more resistance,” and The Timesreports that the GOP is feeling “increasing nervousness.” We talked to MS NOW’s Steve Benen. He explains why Trump’s admission was so self-incriminating,
why it reveals something much bigger about our crisis, why the GOP is
showing fresh signs of panic, and what to look for next. Listen to this
episode here. A transcript is here.
While the idea of a special tax on millionaires is hotly debated
across the country, Maine state Rep. Cheryl Golek characterized her
state’s new tax as a modest and reasonable step toward fairness.
That’s because, she said, working- and middle-class households in
Maine — including teachers, firefighters and nurses — are paying
effective state income tax rates similar to or higher than those of the
highest earners.
“Those who benefit the most from our economy do so because of the
people, infrastructure and communities that support that success,” said
Golek, a Democrat. “Asking for a small additional contribution from the
wealthiest in our state is a reasonable and widely supported step toward
a fairer system.”
The legislation signed by Democratic Gov. Janet Mills this month will
add a 2% tax to households whose income exceeds $1 million per year.
Maine and Washington, which enacted its own law last month, are among
the latest Democratic-led states to ask for more tax dollars from the
rich as national wealth inequality widens and states face heightened
budget pressures. They follow the lead of other states including New
Jersey and Massachusetts that have implemented specific taxes for the
rich.
The idea is gaining traction as lawmakers in at least a dozen states,
including Illinois, Minnesota, Rhode Island and Virginia, have proposed
new taxes for the wealthiest taxpayers. In California, advocates this
week announced they gathered enough signatures for a ballot initiative
that would impose a one-time tax on billionaires. But these proposals
often stir yearslong battles.
The taxes can take different forms — taxing annual incomes above a
certain threshold or taxing capital assets, including high-value stocks
and real estate. Earlier this month, New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and
Gov. Kathy Hochul, both Democrats, proposed a new pied-Ã -terre tax for homes valued above $5 million when owners have a separate primary residence outside of New York City.
In neighboring New Jersey, those earning over $1 million per year
face an income tax top rate of 10.75% in addition to a so-called mansion
tax on the sales of high-value homes.
Proponents say these moves can help balance state tax structures that
are tilted against lower earners. The left-leaning Institute on
Taxation and Economic Policy says the tax systems of 40 states favor the
wealthiest earners. But opponents argue that these measures levy new
taxes on business owners, dissuading local investment and encouraging
rich residents to move away — especially risky during a time when many
other states are slashing taxes.
“When the outlook of our population growth is stagnant and we should
be attracting people to Maine, it puts a disincentive to people to call
Maine home,” Patrick Woodcock, president and CEO of the Maine State
Chamber of Commerce, said during a news conference ahead of the state House vote on the tax.
The rising push to tax the wealthy in liberal states comes as some red states are moving to more regressive tax systems, which put a higher burden on lower earners.
“You increasingly have two poles where you have a larger number of
states with fairly low income taxes and a smaller but still significant
number of states that have doubled down on high rates, particularly high
rates on high earners,” said Jared Walczak, senior fellow at the
conservative-leaning Tax Foundation.
He said increasing income taxes pushes wealthy people and employers
to low-tax states. Even if individuals don’t directly move because of
taxes, they follow businesses to other states, he said.
And some progressives are wary of going too far: California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is opposing the
ballot initiative that would impose a one-time 5% tax on those whose
net worth exceeds $1 billion. Hochul, who pushed for the new tax on
second homes in New York City, has warned that more tax increases on the
millionaires and billionaires could hollow out a crucial portion of the
state’s tax base.
Walczak said only a handful of in-demand places can afford to impose
higher taxes for the same reason that people pay higher rents.
“It’s worth it to a lot of people,” he said. “People are willing to
pay very high rent, but there’s a limit. In the same way, they’re
willing to pay higher taxes to live in New York, but there is a limit.”
Rising wealth inequality
The gap between the rich and poor has been widening for decades.
Wealth for the bottom fifth of American households has barely moved
in recent decades, while the top 0.1% have seen their wealth increase by
nearly $40 million each, according to an analysis by the anti-poverty nonprofit Oxfam America.
Between 1980 and 2022, the share of national income going to the top
1% doubled, while the share going to the bottom 50% fell by a third,
Oxfam reported.
Recent federal policy changes have only exacerbated the need for
progressive state tax changes, said Amber Wallin, executive director of
the State Revenue Alliance, which is lobbying for higher taxes for the
wealthy across multiple states.
President Donald Trump’s major tax and spending bill, often called the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, slashed funds for safety net programs including food stamps and Medicaid. At the same time, it provided tax cuts that largely benefit the wealthy.
“So we know millions will lose access to healthcare, millions will
lose food assistance, and states all across the country will see funding
cuts for key programs,” she said. “We know that people power a strong
economy, not tax cuts for the wealthy, and when the rich pay their fair
share of taxes, we all benefit.”
Since Massachusetts voters in 2022 approved a 4% surtax on annual
incomes above $1 million, that Fair Share Amendment has provided the
commonwealth with $6 billion in transportation and education funding.
But Jim Stergios, executive director at the libertarian-leaning
Pioneer Institute, said it’s not just the ultra-wealthy who are paying
that tax. People who record a one-time sale of a business or a home can
face the tax even if they’re not earning over $1 million every year, he
said.
Attribution: Jack Ohman/Tribune Content Agency
He said the tax is pushing residents out of the state and dampening
business investment. Federal data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows
Massachusetts lost more than 33,000 residents to other states last year,
though Democratic Gov. Maura Healy noted the overall population did
increase because of foreign immigration. Stergios noted lawmakers are
still facing challenges balancing the state budget even with the new
revenue.
“So over the long term, it’s not going to have a salutary effect,” he
said. “We’re going to continue to have budget problems. We do have
budget problems even with this.”
Proponents and opponents of the state’s millionaire’s tax have touted recent IRS data in
their arguments: Residents leaving Massachusetts took a total of $4.2
billion in adjusted gross income with them in 2023, the first year of
the new tax, Bloomberg reported. Yet the number of residents moving out
of Massachusetts who reported income of $200,000 or more fell after the
tax was implemented.
“There’s no real evidence of millionaire out-migration. I’m sure
there’s some isolated anecdotes, but the actual data don’t show it,”
said Phineas Baxandall, director of research and policy analysis at the
left-leaning Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center.
He said one piece of evidence that the wealthy remain in
Massachusetts are the proceeds of the tax itself, which are funding
major priorities including free community college and expanding
childcare subsidies for thousands.
“Massachusetts is rightfully fearful of the federal cuts that are
happening,” Baxandall said, “but we’ve been able to still move forward
with real, transformational investments.”
Multiyear efforts
Though interest in raising taxes on the rich is growing across the
country, the idea faces considerable skepticism and often requires years
of organizing.
In March, Michigan advocates announced they would suspend their campaign to put on the statewide ballot a 5% tax on individual incomes over $500,000 and joint incomes over $1 million.
“We always knew that we were going to face strong headwinds from
billionaires who don’t want to pay their fair share,” Rachelle
Crow-Hercher, president of the Invest in MI Kids steering committee,
said in a statement to Michigan Advance. That coalition plans to eye the
2028 election cycle instead, she said.
Last week, Illinois House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch announced he
would drop a push for a new millionaire’s tax as Democrats came up short
of the necessary supermajority needed to put the issue on this fall’s
ballot.
Welch believes the issue will come before lawmakers again, but after
missing a key legislative deadline it won’t be eligible for a statewide
vote until 2028. He said it remains popular among voters. Lawmakers
proposed using proceeds of a new tax for schools and property tax
relief.
“I believe that we should tax the rich and the rich should pay more,” he said. “To those who much is given, much is required.”
Meanwhile, the newly enacted Washington tax faces a lengthy, though expected, court challenge.
The legislation signed
last month by Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson imposes a 9.9% tax on
household income above $1 million a year. Opponents argue that income is
property and thus must be taxed uniformly because of state
constitutional requirements.
In addition to the constitutional concerns, Republican state Rep. Jim
Walsh said the new law opens the door for lawmakers to eventually
expand income taxes to more households — not just the rich. Instead of
raising revenue, he said Democratic lawmakers should focus on cutting
spending, noting the state operations budget has more than doubled in the past decade.
“The problem is not the financing mechanism of the state’s
operations,” he said. “It’s the rate at which far-left advocates in the
legislature have been increasing state government spending in the state.
It’s ridiculous.”
To Democratic state Sen. Noel Frame, the legislation brings the
state’s regressive tax code more in line with Washington’s progressive
politics. With no statewide income tax, sales and property taxes leave
lower income earners to cover more of the cost of state services, making
Washington’s one of the nation’s most regressive tax systems.
“For all the things that we do that are good, big, bold economic
policy — to have the tax code that we have is just an embarrassment, and
it’s completely out of line with our values as a state,” Frame said.
Like the push for a $15 minimum wage started in liberal cities and
states, Frame expects the millionaire tax movement will spread into more
conservative areas.
Already, some conservative states, including Idaho, Indiana and Florida, have made moves to reject some of last year’s federal tax changes that benefit corporations and the wealthy.
“The people are demanding better,” Frame said. “And the more that
people understand the deep connection of tax policy to income and wealth
inequality, the more engaged they become.”
Daily Kos is free for everyone—no paywall, no barriers. Help keep it that way
Daily Kos is committed to keeping all our content free. That's why
we don't have a paywall, and never will. However, Daily Kos' revenue is
down, and we may not be able to continue producing the quality of work
you have come to expect from us. Donations from our readers are our
largest source of income. If you value independent, accessible,
paywall-free journalism, please consider making a donation today.
