Category Archives: Letters

Correspondence on Social Security and Medicare

This is an email by me to a Lake County constituent and shared with Ambassador Nancy Soderberg, Clint Curtis, and others discussing Social Security and Medicare as “entitlements” versus earned benefits, and on policy points regarding FICA taxes and funding Social Security in perpetuity rather than cutting benefits as Trump, Waltz, and the GOP now want to do.

January 31, 2020

Re: Liberal super PAC to run digital ads slamming Trump over Medicare comments

I love your points, Grace! Of course there was that SCOTUS decision saying that paying FICA taxes does not confer property rights, but we all know it is only fair that people who have paid in their whole life have earned their benefits. The GOP talking points are all about pitting people against each other, and they are very good at using psychological gamesmanship as the people who are most vocal and upset about so-called welfare queens (which is based in racism; see Dow, 2014) and having to pay for others’ so-called laziness are the ones who actually are living paycheck-to-paycheck possibly below the federal poverty line. They would most benefit from Democratic rather than Republican policies and many are actually going without health insurance or are affected by tariffs now but turn a blind eye to it.
FICA payroll deductions are 15.3% of gross income so many Americans pay more toward this than they do in federal income tax. The idea that SS/Medicare are bankrupting us is ridiculous. Those who earn over approximately $132,000 per year do not pay anything more toward these programs. If we got rid of the cap it could be fully funded ad infinitum. Some will say this is not doable but we used to have much higher federal income taxes at the top bracket. Of course many high-earners do not get most of their money from wages. Wage-earners do not have the luxury of long-term capital gains tax at lower rates with no FICA deductions, getting to time when they take their profits, tax loss harvesting, 1031 accounts for real estate, and so many other advantages.

I believe the top tax rate is in California for income about $1,000,000 per year being taxed at 14% which is on top of 37% top federal bracket for 51% total, so FICA being extended to all income would raise this to 60% or so for the portion of earned income in excess of $1 million per year. There would probably need to be a modification whereby such high earners are capped on the outgoing end in what they can receive per month in retirement despite contributing more. Pundits’ ideas that this will ruin the system by making high earners have to subsidize low earners is overblown… Progressivism requires such sacrifices and we all know the USA is, has long been, and will continue to be the best country for entrepreneurship, small and large businesses alike, and upward mobility (although we need to extend these opportunities to everyone!).

Most people don’t know their employer is paying half the FICA behind the scenes. You could actually just get rid of the cap on the employer portion and leave the $132,000 cap in place on the employee portion and it might fund SS/Medicare in perpetuity without anyone really feeling it. Already, if someone works for multiple employers they have to file a tax form to get the portion of their personal employee FICA taxes back on income that exceeded $132,000 when combined between all their jobs, but the employers themselves are individually subjected to the cap with respect to that employee, so there are some employer FICA taxes being paid for individuals in excess of the annual cap in income already.

Best regards,
Richard Thripp, Ph.D.
Democratic Candidate for U.S. Congress (FL-06)
Adjunct Faculty, University of Central Florida

Correspondence About My Candidacy to a Voter–Candidate and Journalist; New & Improved Business Card

An email by me regarding the importance and potential of my candidacy for FL CD6 to a fellow voter/candidate and local journalist:

Hi Richard and Mark,

Remember that Obama won both Flagler and Volusia counties in 2008… pretty surprising given the huge margin Trump won these counties by in 2016. Some blame a lack of ground game among the Democrats, among other factors.

Why would I run in another district or as an NPA? NPA would split the race 3 ways. I was born in Daytona Beach and have lived in Volusia county my whole life. It makes no sense to run in another district. CD4 is much less favorable (R+17 compared to R+7 here) yet Donna Deegan is running a serious campaign with over $200,000 raised and has primary challengers. The only person presently running against me is Clint Curtis and I have a better shot than him, I think. It will be national news when I win the Democratic nomination for CD6 (assuming a corporate candidate does not emerge).

I don’t think this is a waste of time and money. I’m influencing the dialog. I also think Michael Waltz has been doing much more social media and district events lately because of me. Ambassador Soderberg failed to hammer him on his having the “guts” to cut Social Security and Medicare. I think this is a very important issue to voters here. Waltz also has many skeletons according to what I’ve heard, and did anti-Trump TV ads in 2016. He and many other Republicans have basically changed parties, even though they are still R’s, being that they are all Trump-bots now.

Sincerely,
Richard Thripp, Ph.D.
Democratic Candidate for U.S. Congress (FL-06)
Adjunct Faculty, University of Central Florida


Also, check out this new business card my wife and I designed! I gave these away at today’s Welcome Back event at Daytona State College’s main campus (January 29, 2020). Please share with others.

New Thripp business card, 1/29/2020

In Opposition to FL HB 265 and SB 404 on Abortion and in Support of Expanding Medicaid

Dear Representatives Fetterhoff and Olivia and Senators Simmons and Galvano,

As a resident of Florida House District 26 and Senate District 9, I am writing in opposition to Florida House Bill 265 and Senate Bill 404 that require parental consent for minors 17 and under to terminate a pregnancy.

These proposals to require a notarized signature from a parent for girls 17 and under to have an abortion will affect girls of color with disproportionate adversity, including girls whose parents actually might boot them out from home, thereby making multiple generations homeless.

Parents can easily refuse, and some children don’t know or live near their parents for valid reasons such as parental drug/alcohol use or other issues.

Going from parents merely being notified to requiring their approval is ridiculous and was already struck down by the Florida Supreme Court in 1989.

I encourage you to withdraw support for these bills, to vote against them, and to persuade your colleagues to do the same.

I would also ask, in the interest of Floridians, to focus on accepting a federal expansion of Medicaid for Floridians and once again to allow retroactive eligibility for 90 days. Access and funding of healthcare is undeniably pro-life, and we have hundreds of thousands of adult Floridians who cannot qualify for Medicaid nor an Affordable Care Act subsidy.

Other state governors and legislatures are expanding Medicaid even in deeply Republican states. Florida is one of only 14 states who are still refusing the expansion, which is already part of U.S. public law and is over 90% federally funded if we simply agree to accept it. The tide of public opinion even among constituents opposed to Obamacare is turning on this issue. It is time that we make healthcare affordable and available to all Floridians living in poverty.

Sincerely,
Richard Thripp, Ph.D.
Democratic Candidate for U.S. Congress (FL-06)
Adjunct Faculty, University of Central Florida
me@thripp.com | 386-232-8172

On Student Debt, Democracy, Unions, and a Wealth Tax

I recently received an email from a man in my district with several pertinent questions on student debt, democracy, unions, and a wealth tax. Here are my responses, which also serve to further explain my perspectives on lawmaking and federal policy.

1. I owe over $180k in student debt, over $70k of it is private loans. My monthly payments are $500 a month, but will jump up to $850 a month next year once I finish my free associate’s degree (through my union). Even though I’ve been making payments since end of 2016, my interest rates are so high that they’ve pushed up student loans by an extra $20k since when I first left college. What’s your plan to address the Student Loan Debt Crisis?

I agree it is a crisis. I think we need to be thoughtful about forgiving student loans at a massive scale, but for people like you it would at least make sense to stop charging interest on the balance of both federal subsidized and unsubsidized loans, and to refund any interest that has already been charged. I think private student loans should be dischargeable in bankruptcy and would recommend this brief podcast episode on the topic: The Loan Ranger on The Indicator by Planet Money. We need to make public K–12 and public higher education a higher priority, at state and federal levels. Private institutions of higher education should not be allowed to mislead and rip off students with degrees that go nowhere, or even packing up shop in the middle of your degree so you are left with debt and no way to finish. They also do sneaky things like high tuition but everyone gets a generous “scholarship” admission offer. There is certainly an educational component needed for this too, but also legislative/policymaking action is needed. If we just forgive all student loans, though, it will benefit the wealthy and those with high incomes more (in raw dollar terms) than the working class, so we need to be selective about it.

2. Our democracy is healthiest the more that people participate in it. Do you have a stance on Ranked Choice Voting, Open Primaries, Election Day as a Holiday, Expanding Prisoner Voting Rights Restoration, Overturning Citizens United, ending gerrymandering, etc.?

I think prisoners should be able to vote and there are some states (Maine, Vermont) where this is already the case. For ranked choice voting, I think what Florida does for nonpartisan offices makes a lot of sense, having a primary and then a run-off for the top two candidates if no one gets more than 50% of the vote the first go-round. Yes, I support making Election Day a holiday… as well as fighting voter suppression such as what occurred in Georgia’s 2018 gubernatorial race. We should probably replace Columbus Day with Election Day, although it will be important that private employees actually get the day off to vote as most do not for Columbus Day. Gerrymandering is a travesty and I support whatever we can do to stop this practice, either Congressionally or in federal courts or at the state level. Citizens United v. FEC was decided as a 1st-amendment issue which makes it difficult to “overturn,” but I agree that campaign finance reform is sorely needed. As a Congressional candidate I am a long shot with no funds, and in the prior race we saw incumbent Michael Waltz raise $2.0 million compared with $3.2 million from Democratic opponent Nancy Soderberg plus several million from Michael Bloomberg’s PAC toward the end of the race. This is ridiculous. Most people would not be making these contributions if they do not expect to curry favor and get something in return. Florida also has egregiously high ballot access fees, so I have to pay $10,440 to get on the ballot or collect 5,479 petitions, which is a big barrier to entry that should be reduced or eliminated as it particularly affects women and minorities who might otherwise run for office.

3. As a Union Organizer/Rep, unions are very important to me. We’ve been playing defense for so long that we’re slowly losing all of our rights and the 40-hour work week to live off of is essentially a joke now. What’s your plan on strengthening unions to be as strong as they were before the Reagan Presidency?

I think the German model might be a good model for unions here, where they cooperate rather than giving take-it-or-leave-it offers as we have seen recently from the State of Florida regarding teacher pay increases. My American grandmother’s 2nd marriage was to a General Motors retiree, so I saw firsthand that even after being widowed in 2003 (she passed away in 2017), she had such excellent health insurance the likes of which most Americans will never see again. I think her in-network out-of-pocket annual maximum was $400 and out-of-network was $800. Of course, United Auto Workers was a tremendous cost to GM, but what we are seeing now is a dereliction of responsibility from both employers and the government. They keep telling us that right-to-work and being fired at the drop of a hat is capitalistic, competitive, and produces better outcomes for talented employees, which is a victim-blaming arrangement where people who can’t afford their bills are blamed for not being valuable enough to their employers in order to be paid better. I agree with Professor Robert Reich’s ideas that unions should be easier to form, companies should be held accountable, and we should move away from “right-to-work.” I’ve read plenty of accounts in the news of employees of TESLA or Amazon who lost a finger, hurt their back, have chemical burns or eyesight problems, and the companies covered it up not even filing OSHA paperwork and then set them out to pasture. Unions can help as a check on this sort of abusive illegal behavior, as can Congress and our federal agencies, but right now they aren’t doing a whole lot.

4. Would you support a wealth tax so that the less fortunate are not the ones carrying society on their backs and the wealthy will pay their fair share?

Yes, I support a wealth tax. In a prior article I suggested it should be on the top 0.1% by wealth. Many of America’s wealthiest have significant holdings of shares in public corporations they founded or have been closely involved with since the beginning. I would not suggest that they be forced to liquidate their shares, but that the U.S. Treasury department takes ownership of wealthy individuals’ corporate equity and other securities (in coordination with revised tax laws and the IRS), while allowing them to maintain their shareholder voting rights on ceded shares. Of course, what we are talking about here is unlikely to be accomplished by a president, let alone a new member of the U.S. House who is only 1 of 435, but I think it’s appropriate to move the dialogue in this direction. Really, a wealth tax tries to make up for our dereliction of duty when it comes to taxation over past decades, but especially with the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act of 2017 which I have dubbed the greatest robbery in modern American history. The estate tax exemptions are now ridiculously high, and there are all sorts of tricks for the super-rich to pay a lower percentage than the rest of the upper class and middle class Americans. If you think about it, we already have a wealth tax that is called state property tax. If your millage rate is 20, this means each year you are paying 2% of the value of your house, or $4,000 if it’s worth $200,000 (not considering exemptions and non-ad valorem assessments). That’s a wealth tax. We just don’t treat corporate equity in the same way, which is unfortunate. A wealth tax on the top 0.1% could address this, and the assets of the top 0.1% are also easier to value because they are often publicly traded or subject to rigorous accounting standards. I do not think we should be proposing wealth taxes on small businesses or anything that disenfranchises the working class, middle class, or even much of the upper class from their livelihoods. One of my campaign issues is to expand the IRS, in funding, technology, and manpower, including highly skilled employees such as lawyers and high-level accountants. Right now, even under existing tax law we are leaving at least $131 billion on the table or possibly even more. It is so disappointing to see headlines like The IRS Admits It Doesn’t Audit the Rich Because It’s Too Hard, while working-class American parents are having to go through getting audited for the Earned Income Tax Credit because they are easy targets.

Sincerely,
Richard Thripp, Ph.D.
Democratic Candidate for U.S. Congress (FL-06)
Adjunct Faculty, University of Central Florida