By David Mansheim, Parkersburg

I was disgusted by the rude and insulting behavior from most of the Republican members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee at the confirmation hearings for Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court.

The ranking minority member of the committee is Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, and as such he has substantial influence over his own committee members. He chose, however, to allow the thuggish disgraceful behavior emanating from Senators Graham, Cruz, Hawley, Cotton, Lee, Blackburn, and Cornyn toward the witness.

There is only one word to describe the shameful vituperations directed against this extremely well-qualified and first Black woman ever nominated to the Supreme Court – McCarthyism.

McCarthyism refers to tactics employed by Sen. Joseph McCarthy in 1953 to bully witnesses, convict them by innuendo, and attempt to destroy their career. It is the perfect synonym to describe the kind of unsubstantiated demagogic attacks waged by Grassley’s committee members.

And for that, I can only echo Joseph Nye Welch. Senator Grassley, “Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”

___

This Letter to the Editor first appeared in The Courier on March 27, 2022.

By David Mansheim

Dorothy could be forgiven for mistaking Iowa for Kansas these days.

The Kansas experiment in trickle down economics is famous for lowering taxes and cutting state expenditures to such an extent that the state nearly ceased to function.  Iowa legislative Republicans seem determined to follow the same path off the cliff.

Parkersburg is unable to recruit and hire a new or additional police officer, a prevalent condition all over Iowa.  We have such a shortage of correction officers in Iowa that the job is unsafe for those on the job.  Iowa is dead last (pun intended) of all fifty states in bridge safety.  Iowa used to rank number one in education but after years of underfunding we are now ranked 38^th.

So, what is the thinking under the Golden Dome of Wisdom in Des Moines?  How do we make Iowa a more desirable place to live and work?  Why, tax cuts, of course.

Thanks to a lot of Federal Covid money and niggardly spending, Iowa government has a surplus of over a billion dollars.  The Iowa Department of Natural Resources announced today that it is planning to close the park ranger houses in 23 Iowa state parks because we can’t afford the estimated one million dollars in repairs.  But instead of spending on needed improvements, our representatives have decided to give the surplus away.

The Republican trifecta controlling the Governor’s office and both houses of the legislature means they can do as they please so they are currently considering three different plans to lower taxes on corporations and the wealthy who will in turn show their gratitude with even more campaign contributions, a true symbiotic relationship.

The Republican leadership argument is that lower taxes will entice more business to Iowa.  Yet we can’t find the workers needed for the jobs we have now and businesses consistently do not rate low taxes as a priority when relocating.  Quality of life, an educated workforce, infrastructure, and even recreation rank much higher.  Low taxes do not benefit us if no one wants to live here.

Three Republican plans involve a so-called “flat tax” or the elimination of state income tax altogether.  A flat tax is not simpler; the tax rate chart is only one page; it is the determination of what is income and the multitude of possible credits and adjustments that make taxes complex.

Nor is a flat tax more fair.  The Iowa income tax as it stands now is mildly progressive, meaning that CEO’s pay at a higher rate than their secretary.  The sales tax is regressive; it is a tax on living expenses.  Middle- and lower-income people spend almost all of their money on necessities subject to sales tax but higher-income people spend less as a percent of their income.  When Iowa’s overall tax structure is considered, the progressiveness of the income tax makes up for the regressiveness of the sales tax but a flat tax would shift the structure to very regressive.

A flat tax is only fair in the sense that people are treated equally but not equitably.  Having the lame run the same footrace as the fleet may be treating people equally but that is not fairness by anyone’s definition.   Progressive taxation is Biblical; those to whom much is given, much is required.  Regressive taxation is not; it is just letting the fat live off the poor.

Let’s try to learn from the failed Kansas experiment.  We don’t need to pee on the electric fence to learn for ourselves.

____

This editorial originally appeared in The Gazette on March 2, 2022. David Mansheim is a retired lawyer, educator, and businessman living in Parkersburg.

By David Mansheim

Senator Chuck Grassley is a Butler County neighbor of mine in nearby New Hartford. He has been in elected office for 62 years, the last 46 years in Washington D.C. He is now in his seventh U.S. Senate term. He is no longer for term limits, at least for himself.

Chuck Grassley is 88 years old and insists on running for yet another six-year term even though most Iowans have said they don’t want him to. (D.M. Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll, 6-19-21) After 46 years in Washington, it is time to consider what his legacy will be.

A lot has changed while Grassley has been in Washington. Inequality has risen to extreme levels and the American dream of upward mobility has diminished. The highest tax rate went from 70 to 28 % so now the extremely wealthy are taxed at the same rate as a secretary or plumber. Last year, I paid more in U.S. Income Tax than Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk combined because they paid nothing. The astounding upward transfer of wealth during Grassley’s tenure is not an accident.

46 years ago, my dad actually owned the hogs he raised and was not a swine herdsman for China. There were more farms and they produced a diversity of crops and animals for a market not dominated by agribusiness oligopolies. Before Grassley went to Washington, a family could live comfortably on one income, have a decent car, afford a vacation, likely get a pension when retired, and the kids could work their way through college if they wanted.

Grassley stood by while automation and globalization hollowed out the middle class and tax incentives promoted “off-shoring”. He participated in the destruction of unions but gave huge tax giveaways to corporations and the rich.

Grassley contributed to the growing resistance of facts, science, and climate change. If anyone in his party could afford to stand up and tell the truth about the big lie of the 2020 rigged election consuming his party, it is Grassley, but he prefers instead to bask in Trump’s endorsement. He has done nothing to help unify us throughout our disintegrating national solidarity over heightened divisions of race, religion, and gender.

As a McConnell sycophant, he fosters Congressional gridlock and the skyrocketing use of the filibuster. He constantly puts his party above the interests of the country and when the other party is in power, he is on sit-down-strike to prevent government from functioning. He has destructively politicized our Courts, denied Democratic nominees but rushed Republican appointments through even if they have never been in a courtroom.

You may remember Grassley opposed the Affordable Care Act by saying it would “pull the plug on grandma.” It now provides 20 million Americans including lots of grandmas with health insurance they didn’t have before.

He has consistently opposed common sense gun legislation getting an “A” rating from the NRA. He opposed making it illegal to sell guns to those on the terror watch list but voted to expand gun access to the mentally ill. Just recently he prevented the Senate from even debating background checks.

Grassley could run to burnish his legacy, educate and reform his party, end the obstruction, and lead people to the better angels of their nature rather than pandering to their baser instincts. But old dogs don’t learn new tricks. He will be opposed this fall by either Congresswoman Abby Finkenauer, Dr. Glenn Hurst, or Admiral Mike Franken.

____

This editorial originally appeared in The Gazette on January 12. 2022. David Mansheim is a retired lawyer, educator, and businessman living in Parkersburg.

President Biden campaigned on a promise to “build back better” and his COVID-19 vaccination distribution and economic stimulus package are in fact rebuilding the economy. Recently, he proposed The American Jobs Plan to rebuild America’s aging infrastructure.

The infrastructure we need to be competitive with other advanced nations encompasses more than just some concrete for roads and bridges. It should include public transportation, broadband, adjusting to climate change, transitioning to electric vehicles, capital spending on schools, job training, and research and development.

We also need to invest in the government’s own infrastructure to make it more responsive and efficient. The Reagan tax cuts, the Bush tax cuts, and the Trump tax cuts have succeeded in mainly exploding our national debt while making the rich richer and the poor poorer. We are left with bargain basement-government that doesn’t work well, like an understaffed and technologically obsolete IRS that leaves trillions on the table uncollected, or the U.S. Postal Service that is demoralized, underfunded, and underperforming.

The latest Biden program is the American Families Plan about child care, education, and paid family and medical leave. It includes two years of preschool available for every 3- and 4-year-old child and two years of free community college for every admitted student. We have had the K-12 system for over 100 years but the knowledge needed in today’s more complex world demands a pre-K-14 system. Every tax dollar spent on community college returns $6.80 to the economy. 70% of Americans favor federal spending to expand pre-K enrollment.

This pandemic has been brutal. The kids are not all right. One in every six children lives below the poverty level, 30% for Black children and 24% for Latino children, according to the Children’s Defense Fund. Making the expanded child tax credit permanent which is payable monthly will dramatically cut child poverty. Not only is it the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do. Moody’s Analytics estimates Biden’s Jobs and Families plans are likely to pay for themselves in 15 years and raise real GDP by nearly $1 trillion in 15 years.

There are big returns to helping children and their parents, even more than the return on physical infrastructure. Study after study has concluded programs like food stamps, earned income credit and Medicaid have made better educated, healthier, longer, and more productive lives which makes our economy stronger. We know diet, medical care, and intellectual stimulation at the beginning are crucial to physical, emotional and cognitive development. Children enrolled in early education programs are more likely to go to college, earn more money, have better health, and not receive public assistance.

Currently, Early Head Start serves only 11% of eligible children and Head Start serves only 36% of eligible children. 60% of parents say preschool and day care expenses are a financial drain. Child care eats up 14% of the income of middle-class families and 35% for lower income families. Public spending on children in the U.S. is well below average of other countries with advanced economies. While the U.S. spends approximately $2,500 a year on child care and early education per child, the average in Europe is $4,700 and over $10,000 in Norway and Sweden.

I do not understand the logic of those who argue providing child care is bad because it is a liberal plot to force mothers to leave home and take jobs, but giving families aid is also bad because it allows mothers to stay at home and not work. If we really support family values we can and should reduce child poverty. If we want a better society tomorrow, we must pull today’s kids out of poverty.

Republicans seemingly agree that investments in children’s health and education might help your family, but they say those programs constitute big government so we should reject them. Instead of worrying whether government is too big or too small, decide first what it is that we want it to do, then decide what is the right size to get the job done. Government needs to be the size it needs to be to effectively and efficiently accomplish what the people decide they want, need, and vote for.

The U.S. is the only advanced economy without legally mandated paid maternity or paternity leave policy, yet 82% of Americans are in favor of it (YouGov poll April 1, 2021). If a government consistently refuses to deliver what the people want and need, in what sense is it a democracy?

Butler County Democrats member David Mansheim recently had this column appear in The Courier.