DENVER – The Trump administration's tax proposals would not benefit all taxpayers or states equally, according to new analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

Matt Gardner, a senior fellow with the institute, says the richest 1 percent of taxpayers would receive more than 60 percent of the tax benefits.

He adds that poorer states, largely in the South and Southeast, would get a portion of the tax cuts lower than their share of the U.S. population.

"Richer states tend to do better, poorer states tend to do worse – in a way that mirrors what's happening nationwide, with richer Americans getting the lion's share of the benefits and poorer Americans being comparatively left out in the cold," Gardner states.

Proponents of Trump's proposal say all Americans will see their taxes reduced, and maintain the move will boost revenues by stimulating economic growth.

Gardner disagrees, and notes the nation's top earners will get an average of $145,000 in tax breaks, compared with just $130 for the bottom 20 percent of earners.

Gardner adds there's no evidence to support the supply side argument that tax cuts can pay for themselves. He says the tradeoff on nearly $5 trillion in lost revenues would likely be cuts in health care, education and food assistance programs.

"Under any realistic view of the economic consequences of this plan, we're going to see larger budget deficits,” he stresses. “First on the chopping block would be federal aid to low-income Americans."

The White House also has proposed cutting SNAP benefits, the program formerly known as food stamps, by 25 percent over the next decade.

Orgul Ozturk, an associate professor of economics at the University of South Carolina, says in the wake of the last recession, and the continued drop in real wages, SNAP is a lifeline for the nation's working poor.

"There's this new group of SNAP recipients – not the elderly, not the children – but working poor, who just can't make enough,” she states. “Even though they are working, they cannot earn enough to be over the poverty threshold."

Ozturk says nearly 70 percent of SNAP recipients are children, seniors and people with disabilities, and more than 20 percent work full-time, are caretakers or are enrolled in training programs.





get more stories like this via email

A new survey shows there's been an increase in the number of police officers on the streets since the COVID-19 exodus, but some Americans are still behaving badly when they think no one's looking.

A survey by the Police Executive Research Forum shows more sworn officers were hired in 2023 than any of the previous four years, and fewer officers overall resigned or retired.

Lance LoRusso, founder of the Blue Line Lawyer Institute, said bad behavior is still evident in communities where not enough officers were available to patrol parks or other public spaces.

"There is a segment of the population that if they don't believe there's consequences for their actions, they will not act in a lawful manner," LoRusso asserted. "They don't, because there's nobody making sure that they're taking care of their obligations and they're treating each other in a civil manner."

More than 200 law enforcement agencies responded to the survey. It showed that while small and medium departments had more sworn officers than they did in January 2020, large departments are still more than 5% below earlier staffing levels.

In March, New Mexico's Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department announced a crackdown on drivers traveling at excessive speeds, which LoRusso said became a problem during the pandemic coast to coast and has not subsided in some areas. He says citizens should not hesitate to report such incidents.

"People racing cars is dangerous. It's completely anti-social, unlawful, dangerous behavior that shows a complete disrespect for the other people in your community. And yet, it's tolerated," he said.

Car break-ins also increased during the pandemic, which LoRusso said might feel like an isolated incident, but is usually indicative of a larger problem.

Missouri residents are gaining new insights into the powerful role of food in health care as experts and organizations advocate for a shift toward food-as-medicine initiatives.

Kelsey Gardiner, assistant professor of nursing and health studies at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, emphasized the critical link between access to healthy food and improved health outcomes. She noted individuals facing food insecurity often experience higher rates of chronic diseases, highlighting the urgent need for systemic changes to enhance food access.

"There are things we can do and there are certain shifts nationally that are happening, whether that be through policy or through infrastructure changes," Gardiner pointed out. "We can be doing more in the state of Missouri in order to help increase access to healthy food that can directly tie into better health outcomes."

Gardiner underscored the potential of food-as-medicine interventions in preventing chronic conditions and reducing health care costs. She said recent studies show such interventions can lead to $13.6 billion over one year in cost savings and several improved health outcomes, making them a valuable addition to health care strategies.

Kael Martin, people impact strategist for the Health Forward Foundation, said focusing on communities affected by structural racism, socioeconomic challenges and limited health care access is paramount. Food as medicine is seen as a strategic approach to promote health equity, particularly in areas where systemic barriers hinder optimal health.

"We know that eating healthy can prevent chronic disease, but it can be a treatment option as well," Martin stressed. "To have that connection within our health care system, to really integrate these interventions, can be really impactful for many patients."

While progress is underway nationally and in other states such as Massachusetts, California and North Carolina, Missouri is still developing its approach to integrate food as medicine into health care systems and policies. Efforts to push for legislation supporting these initiatives are in progress, with some federal legislation around medically tailored meals garnering support.

As many Wyomingites await their 2023 federal income tax refunds, a new National Priorities Project report breaks down how the money they won't get back is being spent.

Co-author Lindsay Koshgarian, program director for the National Priorities Project, said this year's Tax Receipt shows that - while many school districts in Wyoming and across the U.S. are facing major budget cuts - the average taxpayer is contributing thousands of dollars to military contractors, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon.

"So whereas the average Wyoming taxpayer was giving almost $2,300 to corporate pentagon contractors," said Koshgarian, "they were giving only $455 for public education in our K-12 schools."

The average American household paid over $5,000 for militarism and support systems, but invested just $110 in the Child Tax Credit - which cut child poverty in half during pandemic era changes.

The Pentagon has failed to account for money spent in audits for the past six years. But its defenders argue tax dollars create jobs and maintain global security in the face of competitors, including China.

Koshgarian said corporate contractors can create jobs, especially in key Congressional districts.

She pointed to Brown University research showing that $1 billion in military spending adds roughly 11,000 jobs.

By comparison, $1 billion would add nearly 27,000 education, and 17,000 healthcare jobs.

"But if we put that same money into other things like education or infrastructure or healthcare," said Koshgarian, "we could actually create more good jobs with the same amount of money."

The U.S. Department of Defense has known about the existential threat of climate change for decades, and wildfires now cost upward of $394 billion in damages each year.

But the average taxpayer invested just $14 in wildfire management.

Koshgarian said she believes concerns about protecting international security, which largely serve corporate interests, are overblown.

"The U.S. is already the top military spender in the world by far," said Koshgarian. "We spend more than the next 10 militaries combined. We have the most capable military by far in the world, and no one disputes that."




get more stories like this via email