Associated Press Laments Tragic Plight Of The Very Wealthy

By Igor Volsky/Think Progress

The Associated Press’ Stephen Ohlemacher is out with an article lamenting the tax burden levied on the richest Americans who are “paying some of their biggest federal tax bills in decades even as the rest of the population continues to pay at historically low rates.”

The piece, which seeks to contextualize the political debate surrounding the deficit in economic data, devotes its first eight paragraphs to “the poor rich,” characterizing the current tax structure as a great burden on higher income Americans. It’s not until paragraph 16 that Ohlemacher departs from the article’s opening premise to mention that the income gap between the rich and everyone else has exploded, helping to create the difference in tax rates.

Ohlemacher kicks off his article about the “new analysis” from the Tax Policy Center by lamenting that “families with incomes in the top 20 percent of the nation will pay an average of 27.2 percent of their income in federal taxes,” while “The average family in the bottom 20 percent of households won’t pay any federal taxes” and can claim “more in credits than they owe in taxes.”

A quote from a fellow at the Center, which is described as a nonpartisan “research organization,” succinctly sums up the problem: “My sense is that high-income people feel abused by being targeted always for more taxes,” Roberton Williams tells Ohlemacher. “You can understand why they feel that way.”

To learn if middle class families feel “abused” in the current economy or why high income families pay as much as they do, the reader must skip past seven full paragraphs of political context about President Obama calling on Congress to close a “bunch of tax loopholes that are benefiting the well-off and the well-connected” (an idea that sounds absurd in light of the already unbearable tax burden), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) rejecting that premise, and Democrats proposing a tax on “people making more than $1 million” to replace the sequester.

In paragraph 24, Ohlemacher finally presents a reason for the higher tax rates — though even this is delivered as an opinion from “Liberals and Democrats” and is not accorded the factual tone of Williams’ observation that the rich feel “abused.”

“Liberals and many Democrats say rich families can afford to pay higher taxes because their incomes have grown much more than incomes for middle- and low-income families,” Ohlemacher writes, quoting CBO data showing that “after-tax incomes for the top 1 percent of households more than doubled from 1979 to 2009, increasing by 155 percent,” while “incomes for those in the middle increased by just 32 percent during the same period.”

The author then consults Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, who, he points out is employed by “a liberal think tank.” Marr finally explains that higher taxes on the rich are the result of “three decades in the United States where we had a tremendous increase in inequality” and tells Ohlemacher that this “disparity in income is a big reason why tax bills for the rich are approaching 30-year highs. As the rich get richer, a greater share of their income is taxed at the top rate, he said.”

It’s almost as though the author is upset to learn of this simple explanation, for he immediately follows it up with a quote from a representative from the Heritage Foundation, who predictably argues that “raising taxes again on the wealthy would reduce their incentive to save and invest, hurting long-term economic growth.”

With that, the conventional wisdom is restored and Ohlemacher can tell his readers that raising revenue is a liberal solution that will hurt the rich, while tough spending cuts to entitlements and discretionary programs are necessary to stabilize the national debt.

GOP Senate Nominee John Raese: ‘I Made My Money The Old-Fashioned Way: I Inherited It’

By Scott Keyes Following the death of Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) this summer, a special election was called to serve out the remainder of his term in the Senate. The November contest will pit Gov. Joe Manchin (D) against perennial candidate John Raese (R). Recent polling has shown a competitive race in the Mountain State.

Yesterday, Raese appeared on the Matt Lewis show, a conservative talk radio program. When Lewis asked Raese about his background and his life experience, Raese offered this straight-faced response:

LEWIS: Tell us a little bit about you and your business experience and how you got here.

RAESE: I made my money the old-fashioned way, I inherited it. I think that’s a great thing to do. I hope more people in this country have that opportunity as soon as we abolish inheritance tax in this country, which is a key part of my program.

Listen here:

Last year, all persons inheriting less than $3.5 million (99.75% of all Americans) were not affected by the estate tax. Apparently, Raese is also campaigning the old-fashioned way: catering to the ultra-rich.

Update On equality issues, Raese is opposed to the repeal of DADT and supports a Constitutional Marriage Amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Update Lowell Weicker, a former Republican congressman and independent Governor from Connecticut, said the state GOP “can’t find men or women that have come through the chairs to get to where they are. They find people with a wad of dough who just try to buy the office.” Linda McMahon, the wealthy former chief executive of World Wrestling Entertainment, is the Republican running for Senate in Connecticut.

Update The Politico has an article today discussing Raese's exorbitant wealth. They note that "Raese leads a lavish lifestyle that's included over 15 cars, boats and motorcycles, a home in Florida where his family lives full-time and where, records show, he paved the driveway with marble in 2008 as the economy was nosediving."

Rand Paul’s Answer To Kentucky’s Drug Epidemic: Help ‘Rich People’

By Tanya Somanader Last week, Kentucky Senate candidate and Tea Party darling Rand Paul (R) told the AP of his desire to cut federal funding for undercover drug investigations and drug treatment programs that are “badly needed” in his state. While recognizing drugs as a “scourge,” Paul didn’t think Kentucky’s high-profile drug problem was “a real pressing issue.” His Democratic opponent and Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway blasted Paul for being widely “out of touch with drug abuse woes” in the state, warning that “his policies would actually hurt the people of of Kentucky.” The AP suggested that he may lose votes over his stance.

In the face of the uproar, Paul is walking back his dismissal of the problem. In a local WYMT-TV interview yesterday, Paul insisted that, as “a physician and a father,” he is “very concerned” and thinks “we need to everything we can to stop drugs.” But, as the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent notes, “it’s unclear whether his clarification will help much.” Because Paul, in feeling that the government solution is “still failing,” went on to offer his own answer to drug problem – help rich people:

“I personally think we’ve been trying the government solution, and maybe there are some good aspects to it. But we’re still failing, and we’re not getting rid of the drug problem,” Paul said.

Paul says reinvesting money in the local economy will help ease the unemployment, which he says leads to more drug use.

“You want rich people because that’s what creates jobs. If you punish people, they won’t expand or create jobs,” Paul said.

While Paul touts the magical remedies provided by the rich, it is the poor Appalachian residents in eastern Kentucky that are facing a tough reality where a “higher proportion of people abuse prescription pain killers that in the rest of the nation.” In fact, while trafficking in pain killers is the “largest drug problem” facing the region, Kentucky is also a prominent hotbed for marijuana, cocaine, and methamphetamine, according to the latest DEA study. This year, local officials reported 114 overdose deaths in the region within the first two months alone.

And, rather than failing, government-run programs are producing unprecedented success. Conway’s inter-governmental task force to cut prescription pill trafficking busted over 500 people in an interstate drug pipeline and was part of the “largest prescription pill bust in Kentucky history.” Kentucky law enforcement recognize the need for similar federal programs. State Fraternal Order of Police President Michael “Spike” Jones said he “would not be able to keep up with drug crime” without federal assistance to “pay overtime logged by tracking down drug dealers.” “It would be impossible to stop” drug traffickers “without federal assistance, because of the dire straits” state economies are in, said another Appalachian drug enforcement official.

But Paul seems deaf to their needs. In offering further clarification to Sargent, Paul now says that while prevention and enforcement are important, aiding the rich to ensure healthy employment is still a better cure. His insistence in remaining out of touch with his state’s epidemic even leaves members of his own party perplexed. “‘Apparently (Paul) just doesn’t know, or he wouldn’t make that statement’ about drugs not being a pressing issue” said former County Judge-Executive Tommy Slone (R). “It’ll hurt him if he says that because there’s a lot of people up here that’s been affected by these drugs.”