The Political Scene | The New Yorker

Episode Summary: “The Lies of Trumponomics” (November 30, 2017)

Overview

In this episode, host Dorothy Wickenden (Executive Editor, The New Yorker) is joined by staff writer and political columnist John Cassidy to dissect the GOP's tax reform bill that was swiftly moving through the Senate at the time. The conversation frames this plan as a revival—albeit a distorted one—of Reagan-era tax reform and explores its deviations, impacts on inequality, fiscal responsibility, and the cynical political calculations driving it. They highlight the likelihood of ballooning deficits, the fate of bipartisanship, and the broader economic and political implications of so-called "Trumponomics."

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Comparing 2017 Tax Reform to Reagan’s 1986 Overhaul

• The current GOP tax push is self-consciously modeled on Reagan-era reform, but with clear differences:
  • 1986 bill was bipartisan and had extensive public hearings.

    “The other big difference from the 80s is the Democrats controlled the House when Reagan was in office, and so they had to deal with the Democrats. That's why it was a bipartisan bill, and that's why there were proper hearings and everything.” —John Cassidy (03:05)

  • The Reagan bill was “deficit neutral”; current plan will increase deficit by $1.5–$2.2 trillion over 10 years.
  • The 1986 bill offset lower corporate rates by cutting deductions; today’s plan includes “gimmicks,” with little real offset.
• The ideological consensus has faded. Today’s Republican Party moves unilaterally and prioritizes speed over scrutiny.

2. Deficit Concerns: The Disappearing “Hawk”

• Once vocal about deficits, Republicans largely ignore them when in power. The promise of "deficit neutrality" was quickly abandoned.

  • “The deficit hawk wing of the Republican Party is just getting a lot smaller. But it's large when they're in opposition...once they got into power...they basically abandoned that pledge.” —John Cassidy (05:59)

• Some senators (Bob Corker, John McCain) had histories of deficit concern, but most acquiesced.

3. Bipartisanship, Policy Design, and Political Expediency

• Past tax reform gained Democratic support by aiming for fairness and addressing corporate taxes with broad offsets.
• The 2017 bill is different: cuts are not fully offset, benefits are skewed to the wealthy and corporations.
• GOP rationale: Must deliver broad individual cuts for public appeal, but doing so bloats the deficit.

4. The Distributional Impact and Political Rhetoric

• Cassidy and Wickenden underscore that most individual tax cuts are temporary, while corporate cuts are permanent—despite rhetoric suggesting otherwise.

  • “There are some giveaways for everybody...but the personal tax cuts are all temporary. The corporate tax cuts are all permanent.” —John Cassidy (09:00)

• Trump’s campaign pledges to help the middle class are undercut by actual policy design.

  • “Trump, he only tells the truth by mistake. I think the bill couldn't have been engineered more explicitly to help people like Trump.” —John Cassidy (16:04)

• Example: Elimination of the Alternative Minimum Tax, hugely beneficial to wealthy individuals (including Trump).

5. Tax Cuts, Inequality, and the Welfare State

• Reagan-era personal tax cuts helped ignite the modern surge in inequality.

  • “The big personal tax cuts in the Reagan era, the start of the Reagan era, were really the beginning of the sort of modern surge in inequality that we've seen.” —John Cassidy (10:08)

• New proposals perpetuate or exacerbate trends in wealth concentration; little interest in genuine redistribution.
• Past efforts (like the ACA) made progress via redistribution, but were politically downplayed.

6. The Strategic “Bait-and-Switch” on Deficits and Entitlements

• Cassidy points out a conscious GOP strategy: cut taxes, increase the deficit, then use deficit concerns to justify cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security.

  • “Karl Rove...basically admitted this in his Wall Street Journal column this week. And he acknowledges that there's going to be a rise in the deficit...he says the way to address that is not to change the taxes...We're going to have to tackle spending...Medicare, Social Security.” —John Cassidy (12:33)

7. Democratic Response and Political Calculus

• Democrats have held firm in opposition; unlike the ‘80s, none appear poised to cross party lines.
• The bill’s regressive character could be a potent campaign issue, but reversing tax cuts is always politically difficult.

  • “Who wants to run on raising taxes?...you’ve all got $1,000 more in your pocket this year than you did last year.” —John Cassidy (15:04)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “The only way that Republicans think they can get these unpopular policies through is by doing it quickly, before there's...media scrutiny, much public outrage, and much time for the opponents to get organized.”
  —John Cassidy (03:05)

• “If you cut tax rates, especially if you cut tax rates at the top...it gives them a big incentive to increase their own salaries, et cetera.”
  —John Cassidy (10:08)

• “Trump, he only tells the truth by mistake. I think the bill couldn't have been engineered more explicitly to help people like Trump.”
  —John Cassidy (16:04)

• “The only thing left really in the American tax code that catches people with huge deductions...is the alternative minimum tax. And they're getting rid of that too...just a huge giveaway to very wealthy people with clever accountants.”
  —John Cassidy (16:50)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 01:16 — Introduction by Dorothy Wickenden; framing the episode’s focus on tax reform
• 02:47 — John Cassidy compares Reagan’s bipartisan approach with the current GOP strategy
• 03:57 — Deep dive: economic and policy context then vs. now
• 05:01 — Paul Ryan’s deficit promises and the current reality
• 06:53 — Bipartisanship: why 1986 was different and why no current Democrats will support the bill
• 08:16 — The GOP’s plan: why they can’t keep it deficit neutral and the myth of trickle-down growth
• 10:08 — Rising inequality as an enduring legacy of tax reform
• 11:14 — How the ACA tried (quietly) to reduce inequality
• 12:21 — The strategic setup: tax cuts now, spending cuts later
• 13:32 — Democratic strategy and the prospects for reversal or political backlash
• 15:56 — Trump’s messaging: selling the bill with misleading populist rhetoric
• 16:04–17:19 — Discussion of Trump’s personal stake and the alternative minimum tax

Overall Tone

Candid, deeply analytical, and pointedly critical—especially regarding Republican cynicism, the abandonment of deficit principles, and the degree to which the bill serves elite interests under the mask of Trumpist populism. The discussion’s tone is informed but skeptical, foregrounding facts, history, and the unvarnished politics of the moment.