#sen requirements

[cillianmurphysdimples]

I am the parent of two autistic children. Neither has an EHCP at this time and they both attened a local mainstream school, the same school they have been attended since pre-school nursery.

With my eldest child, the school has been a phenomenal place of support. As his mother, and from the outside looking in as a stranger, with my oldest you will see supportive practices, honouring of his difficulties and differences, and adaptations such as communication cards to ask for things due to selective mutism. They provided an emotional support course, involving a dog, which worked on building up his ability to confidently use his voice around others and authoritatively. They have been supportive and communicated well with me during a recent 10 day absence and couldn't have been more willing to do whatever he needed to return to school.

For my youngest, though, who's behaviours are sometimes a little more difficult to manage than his brothers, this school fails at some many hurdles. From his first day at nursery, where he was shouted at by a staff member and was observed cowering and crying, to the time our SENCo caused so much home upset with a lie she told that he refused to attend school for an entire week because he was led to believe that 'everybody says I'm bad'. I requested, before the summer, that either I, or the SEN budget allocations, provided a Dizzy Fish spinner for him for school as a regulation tool. We use this at home and he spends a lot of time getting the vestibular input he needs from this tool. The SENCo was all for this, and when I said I would pay she made references herself to looking at it along the SEN budget. I received no futher communication from her at all regarding this and since school has started, she has spoken to an advocate (still not me) where she has apparently told them that the school cannot provide a "SEN provision for just one child".

Why not? There's a *£6,000 SEN budget per child with identified SEN needs each year to each school in England. I'm asking for £100 of that for a fucking spinning chair. I even said I'd pay for it myself and provide it. So why can't that be done? What's £100 in a budget of *£6,000 per child (they have AT LEAST 30 children identified with SEN requirements and so they that budget at least 30 times)?!

Outside looking in? He's a handful and he's just "naughty" and they don't see a point. As his mum? They've taken a dislike to me and it's a punishment being handed down on my more "difficult" child just to piss me off.

Can someone explain this to me, like I'm a five year old, because I fail to see what the fucking problem is?!

(*£6,000 according to my last awareness of the budget allocations)

[sincerely-sofie]

*Skitters up to you on all fours and drops this in your lap, then scrambles up the walls and onto the ceiling and immediately falls asleep*

Comic time! Lucky wakes up in the middle of the night and has a chat with Sen in this one.

[postcard-from-the-past]

Bishop Pierre-Marie-Etienne-Gustave Ardin protesting in front of the Sens Cathedral against the 1909 Separation of the Church and State law's inventory requirements, Champagne region of France

French vintage postcard

[bitchthefuck1]

Literally without fail every couple of weeks my manager will be like "this communication should have gone out already, why have you not sent it???" and I have to find a polite way to be like, girl YOU didn't approve it

[capitalismwasamistake]

That is certainly a stance you can take if you want, but I believe it is the wrong one if you wish to live in a world free of oppression.

Providing people with the widest possible array of options and freedoms so that they can pursue their goals free from stigma and prejudice is a fundamental aspect of true democracy. I suggest reading Elizabeth Anderson's essay What is the point of equality (1999) for a detailed argument on how achieving equality in capabilities (what state of being a person is able to achieve) destroys social hierarchies and secures what she calls "democratic equality" - a state of affairs which realises egalitarianism's goal of freedom from oppression. I can send you a pdf if you want (that applies to anyone else too, hit me up, I got the goods). This supports my claim that freedom in personal choices works towards liberation (not just uncritical wish fulfillment, mind, but providing people with the freedom and information to make informed decisions about themselves). Allowing people to have as many capabilities as possible and (importantly) equal capabilities to each other, requires that conditions such as universal free healthcare, universal basic income, compensation for domestic labour etc, be met - these things advance liberation.

Regardless, universal free healthcare is a desirable state of affairs (unless you're a conservative, I suppose, let me know if we need to roll the debate that far back) and I already made the argument above that restricting its coverage only to things you (or somebody else) considers "necessary" is paternalistic and fundamentally against freedom. You repeating that you think restrictions to availability should apply does not respond to my argument. You need to either say you believe freedom is not desirable (and justify that claim), or claim that paternalism is necessary (and justify that claim). Or, as mentioned above, deny that universal free healthcare should be a thing altogether (and justify that claim).

The last option will be difficult if you also claim you want a world free of oppression (this claim is supported with my point about Anderson's democratic equality above, which is why I brought it up, I can expand on that point if needed).

Lastly, about the tag "trans entitlement". My argument is quite general - yes, the point it largely about bottom surgery in the context of this post, but I specifically brought up IVF and body modifications such as tongue piercings as examples. I'm arguing for a large bundle of freedoms to handle one's own body that do not stem from medical emergency, and reducing my point to "trans entitlement" is dishonest engagement with what I am saying. Unless you want to say universal, no questions, on demand IVF is trans entitlement as well. I'd love to see that justification. I am arguing that freedom and a world without oppression necessitates the availability and accessibility for every individual to do with their body as they please - the fact that this happens to include trans people stems from the fact that they're individuals, not from any desire to cater to them specifically.

Anyone should be able to get bottom surgery for any reason, and it should be free.

Cis guy wants a vaginoplasty but nothing else, and still identifies as a cis guy? ABSOLUTELY.

Cis girl wants phalloplasty? WITHOUT QUESTION.

People should be allowed to have whatever relationship with their bodies and identities makes sense for them.

(this post MUST be reblogged by EVERYONE)

[labelleizzy]

It's important to know what is going on.

Written by US Senator Chris Murphy (D - CT)

Report from the Senate Floor:

Last night in the Senate, something really important happened. Republicans forced us to debate their billionaire bailout budget framework. We started voting at 6 PM because they knew doing it in the dark of night would minimize media coverage. And they do not want the American people to see how blatant their handover of our government to the billionaire class is.

So I want to explain what happened last night and what we did to fight back. The apex of Republicans’ plan to turn over our government to their wealthy cronies is a giant tax cut for billionaires and corporations. And they plan to pay for it with cuts to programs that working people rely on. Popular and necessary programs like Medicaid, Medicare, and SNAP, are all being targeted.

In order to pass the tax cut, Republicans have to go through a series of procedural steps. Last night, they took the first step which requires them to pass an outline of their plan, but with it, any senator can offer as many amendments as we want. So my Democratic colleagues and I did just that.

Now, we knew that Republicans would largely unanimously oppose them, but we had two objectives here. One, Republicans were forced to put their opinion on record — many for the first time — on the most corrupt parts of Trump and Musk’s agenda. Two, as I’ve been saying, I am going to make every process and procedure as slow and painful as possible for as long as my colleagues choose to ignore the constitutional crisis happening before our eyes.

So what did we propose? We proposed no tax cuts for anyone who makes a billion dollars a year. We made them vote on whether or not Elon Musk and DOGE should have limitless access to Americans’ personal data. We made them vote on whether to protect IVF and require insurers to cover it. Every single amendment Democrats proposed was shot down. On almost every single amendment, Republicans universally opposed it. Every Republican voted against our proposal to prevent more tax cuts for billionaires. The corruption and theft is happening in the open here.

The whole game for Republicans is taking your money and giving it to the wealthiest corporations and billionaires — even if it means kicking your parents out of a nursing home or turning off Medicaid for the poorest children. They know what they are doing is deeply unpopular. They are offering a tax cut to the most wealthy that is 850 times larger than what they are offering working people. Oh and by the way, any tax cuts for working people are going to be washed out by higher costs for basic necessities, like health care and food. It’s a fundamental injustice.

Thanks to your pressure and support, many of my Democratic colleagues have joined my effort to do everything we can to make sure they cannot destroy democracy and steal your money in the dark of the night. We are being loud about what is happening. I’m going to continue to grind the gears of Congress down as much as possible to make it that much harder and slower to get away with this corruption. That’s why the votes lasted until nearly 5 AM.

This is a five-alarm fire. I don’t think we have two years to plan and fight back. I think we have months. It’s still in our power to stop the destruction of our democracy with mass mobilization and effective opposition from elected officials. So we can’t miss any opportunity to take advantage of opportunities to put Republicans on the record and shine a light on what is happening.

And you have a role to play in this as well. I need you to amplify what’s happening, support the leaders who are fighting for you to make sure they can continue speaking truth to power against Musk and Trump’s billionaire cronies, and show up at rallies and town halls. Use every tool at your disposal to send a message loud and clear about how you expect my colleagues to lead and fight in this moment.

Every best wish,

US Senator Chris Murphy (D - CT)

[musicalyikes]

got an email with the university i got for my exchange semester and 👩‍💻👩‍💻👩‍💻 now realising i need to find some kind of accommodation or be subjected to staying in dorms with i assume mostly 18yr olds when im over 21? i’d really rather not 💀💀

[theonion]

In an effort to curb unauthorized traffic to adult websites within the state, Indiana lawmakers passed new legislation Thursday requiring all potential viewers of online pornography to register as sex offenders before they could access sexually explicit material. 

“This law will ensure that no resident of Indiana encounters harmful, X-rated content on the internet without first providing proof that they are legally considered a sexual predator,” said bill co-sponsor Sen. Liz Brown (R-Fort Wayne), explaining that under the new measure an unclosable pop-up window would send users to a third-party website where they would be prompted to verify their permanent status on the sex offender database, waive their right to a trial, and submit to a mugshot before any graphic content could be displayed. 

Full Story

[memecucker]

“This latest bill is part of a continued effort by the [California] Legislative Jewish Caucus to impose ideological constraints upon ethnic studies as a field to disallow the critical teaching of Palestine within K-12 education in California,” Christine Hong, a professor of critical race and ethnic studies at the University of California (UC) Santa Cruz and co-chair of the UC Ethnic Studies Faculty Council (UCESFC) told Truthout.

While AB 1468’s authors are Democrats who have condemned the Trump administration’s attacks on public education, Lara Kiswani, executive director of the Arab Resource and Organizing Center (AROC), said the proposed bill would have similar effects as efforts in Republican-controlled states and on the federal level seeking to whitewash K-12 and college curricula and turn back the clock on civil rights progress.

“The Democrats and others who are championing these bills may not explicitly say themselves or even identify as part of the far right MAGA agenda, but it’s indisputable that what they are doing is in alignment with the broader attack on public education and the attack on anti-racist education, in particular,” Kiswani told Truthout.

AB 1468’s lead sponsor is the Jewish Public Affairs Committee of California (JPAC), one pillar of whose policy framework is to “maintain a strong California-Israel relationship,” including through “combat[ing] campaigns to delegitimize and demonize Israel.” JPAC lists the Anti-Defamation League and other Zionist organizations among its members.

Last year, members of the California Legislative Jewish Caucus proposed a raft of bills meant to stifle Palestine-related speech in public schools and on college campuses. Among those was AB 2918, a predecessor to AB 1468. When a diverse coalition of educators and advocates mounted a pressure campaign and succeeded in having it shelved, sponsors vowed to reintroduce it this year. “AB 1468 is AB 2918, but on steroids,” Guadalupe Cardona, a high school educator and member of the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Consortium, told Truthout.

The new bill would require all ethnic studies curricula, instruction and instructional materials to undergo public hearings, be vetted by the state, and be posted on the Department of Education’s website. AB 1468 also outlines standards according to which ethnic studies materials should be reviewed, including mandating that instruction focus on “domestic experience and stories” and not cover “abstract ideological theories, causes, or pedagogies.”

In the proposed legislation, “there are so many layers of policing and surveillance that no other academic area has,” Tricia Gallagher-Geurtsen, co-chair of the San Diego Unified School District Ethnic Studies Advisory Committee and a lecturer in critical race and ethnic studies at UC Santa Cruz, told Truthout. “It’s absolutely unprecedented overreach, and it’s an arm of the state trying to censor what our children are learning [and] censor the truth of our students’ realities.”

Under AB 1468, the body responsible for vetting ethnic studies materials would be the California State Board of Education’s Instructional Quality Commission, whose current members include Sen. Ben Allen and Anita Friedman. Friedman is a board trustee of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and executive director of Jewish Family and Children’s Services, an organization known for its efforts to silence discussions of Palestine and anti-Zionism in schools.

[batboyblog]

President Donald Trump’s “government efficiency” cheerleader Elon Musk proposed simply ignoring all federal regulations during a public call shortly after midnight Monday morning. 

Musk, whose newly formed “Department of Government Efficiency” team has in recent days executed a dramatic power grab at several government agencies, called for “wholesale removal of regulations.”

The public call was hosted on his website X, formerly Twitter, and included two senators and the Trump ally Vivek Ramaswamy. 

“Regulations, basically, should be default gone,” Musk said. “Not default there, default gone. And if it turns out that we missed the mark on a regulation, we can always add it back in.” 

“These regulations are added willy-nilly all the time. So we’ve just got to do a wholesale, spring cleaning of regulation and get the government off the backs of everyday Americans so people can get things done,” Musk said, adding later: “If the government has millions of regulations holding everyone back, well, it’s not freedom. We’ve got to restore freedom.”

Later, Ramaswamy — who briefly co-led Musk’s White House DOGE project — said, “I think it’s possible now, it’s actually possible” thanks to Trump’s second term and a conservative-dominated Supreme Court. 

Musk replied, “If it’s not possible now, it’ll never be possible. This is our shot. This is the best hand of cards we’re ever going to have. And if we don’t take advantage of this best hand of cards, it’s never going to happen, so we’re going to do it.” 

“Now or never,” Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and Ramaswamy agreed. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) also spoke on the call.

Federal regulations, which are enforced by the executive branch agencies, govern everything from pollutants to construction safety to banking requirements. Musk, the world’s wealthiest man and a key player in several industries, would benefit immensely from the ability to pick and choose which regulations to follow. 

Musk on the call also appeared to claim credit for the shutdown of the U.S. Agency for International Development, the U.S.-funded aid agency that oversees humanitarian projects around the world, calling it a corrupt “ball of worms.” Shortly after the call, he wrote on X that “We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper.” 

He said on the call that “we’re shutting it down” and that Trump “agreed that we should shut it down” — though the executive branch’s legal authority to do so without congressional action is highly in doubt, as the agency’s existence is established in law. Trump on Monday said he didn’t need an act of Congress to shut down USAID.

USAID’s homepage has been shut down for days, as is its X account. Dozens of career staff at the agency have been put on leave, and hundreds have been shut out of agency computer systems. Musk aides have gained access to classified USAID information over the objection of agency security personnel, who were subsequently placed on leave, The Associated Press reported.

One of Musk’s aides — a small group of 20-somethings reportedly are his primary foot soldiers in the war for “government efficiency” — emailed USAID staff over the weekend to tell them not to come into the office Monday, as it would be closed. A protest featuring several members of Congress formed outside the building on Monday. 

Capping off the apparent takeover of the independent agency, Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday asserted that he was himself the acting administrator of USAID.

The X call came after a week straight of Musk and his aides, acting with Trump’s blessing, asserted aggressive and potentially unlawful control over a series of choke points in the executive branch. 

At the Office of Personnel Management, Musk aides reportedly have not only gained access to federal human resource databases that contain sensitive personal information — and locked career officials out of the systems — but reportedly also have installed their own commercial server, presumably without a required privacy impact assessment.

Musk aides also have been granted access to the Treasury Department’s federal payment system. The career civil servant who had overseen the system was put on leave and then suddenly retired after resisting Musk’s team being granted access, The New York Timesand others reported.

On Friday, the X account for “DOGE” claimed to have canceled $1 billion of federal contracts.

And on X in recent days, Musk has publicly bragged of shutting down payments that, presumably, were specifically approved by Congress and the president — indicating numerous potential violations of the Impoundment Control Act.

[reasonsforhope]

"Legislative momentum against PFAS has surged this year, as at least 11 states enacted laws to restrict the use of “forever chemicals” in everyday consumer products or professional firefighting foam.

The legislation includes bans on PFAS in apparel, cleaning products, cookware, and cosmetic and menstrual products. Meanwhile, lawmakers in some states also passed measures that require industries to pay for testing or cleanup; order companies to disclose the use of PFAS in their products; and mandate or encourage the development of PFAS alternatives, according to Safer States, an alliance of environmental health groups focused on toxic chemicals.

In total this year, at least 16 states adopted 22 PFAS-related measures, according to the group. Since 2007, 30 states have approved 155 PFAS policies, the vast majority of them in the past five years.

The thousands of chemicals categorized as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, do not naturally break down and are found in the blood of 97% of Americans. Some PFAS compounds can harm the immune system, increase cancer risks and decrease fertility...

Earlier this year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released new standards limiting PFAS in drinking water. Water systems have five years to comply with the rules. Even before the EPA action, 11 states had set their own limits on PFAS in drinking water, starting with New Jersey in 2018.

Water utilities and chemical manufacturers are challenging the new EPA standards. But states also are heading to the courthouse: So far, 30 states have sued PFAS manufacturers or key users for contaminating water supplies and other natural resources, according to Safer States...

Sarah Doll, national director of Safer States, said one reason states have been so successful in enacting PFAS limits is that more companies are willing to stop using the chemicals.

“When California restricted PFAS in textiles, all of a sudden you saw companies like REI saying, ‘We can, we’re going to do that. We’re going to move to alternatives,’” Doll said.

In Vermont, state lawmakers in April unanimously approved a measure banning the manufacture and sale of PFAS in cosmetics, menstrual products, incontinence products, artificial turf, textiles and cookware.

“The same as everyone else, like Democrats, we want to make sure that we remove PFAS and get it out of products as soon as we can,” said Vermont Republican state Rep. Michael Marcotte, who said his district includes cosmetics manufacturer Rozelle Cosmetics, in Westfield.

Democratic state Sen. Virginia Lyons, the chief sponsor of the Vermont bill, said it is particularly important to get PFAS out of products that are essential to consumers.

“There are some consumer products where you can say, ‘I don’t need to buy that, because I don’t want PFAS,’” Lyons said. “But it’s really tough to say that [about] a menstrual product.”

California’s latest PFAS measure, which Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed last month, specifically bans the use of PFAS in menstrual products. Democratic Assemblymember Diane Papan, the author of the bill, said it was particularly strong because it covers both intentional and unintentional uses of PFAS, so “manufacturers will have to really be careful about what comes in their supply chain.”

While more states enact laws focused on specific products, Maine is preparing to implement the world’s first PFAS ban covering all consumer goods. The Maine law, which is scheduled to take effect in 2030, will include exceptions for “essential” products for which PFAS-free alternatives do not exist. Washington state has also taken a sweeping approach by giving regulators strict timelines to ban PFAS in many product categories.

[postcard-from-the-past]

Bishop Pierre-Marie-Etienne-Gustave Ardin protesting in front of the Sens Cathedral against the 1909 Separation of the Church and State law's inventory requirements, Champagne region of France

French vintage postcard

[beauty-funny-trippy]

In a late-night purge, Donald Trump fired 17 independent watchdogs at multiple US government agencies, eliminating a critical oversight component and clearing the way for the president to replace them with loyalists. The dismissals appear to violate federal law, which requires the president to give both houses of Congress reasons for the dismissals 30 days in advance. These firings are in addition to Trump sidelining more than 150 national security and foreign policy officials. Sen. Elizabeth Warren called Trump’s action a “purge of independent watchdogs in the middle of the night. President Trump is dismantling checks on his power and paving the way for widespread corruption." Sen. Chuck Schumer called the firings “a chilling purge... This is Donald Trump’s way of telling us he’s terrified of accountability.” Many politically appointed leaders of agencies and departments come and go with each administration, but due to the independent nature of the position, inspectors general often serve under multiple presidents. During his first term, Trump fired five inspectors general in less than two months in 2020. Now, he's fired 17 in less than two hours. Clearly, Trump is implementing Project 2025's plan to fire federal employees and replace them with MAGA loyalists. Inspectors general are the independent watchdogs whose job it is to blow the whistle on corruption and abuses of power. So, what do you think? Will Trump's sycophant "watchdogs" expose corruption in his administration — or are they more likely to cover it up?

[neurodivergent-mermaid]

Tips for autistic higher support needs OCs!

Writing:

•many many violent meltdowns very often very inconvenient and very disabiling

•if you write an nonverbal charecter then if they can they should probably have high tech AAC and not sign language (unless Deaf or other specific circumstances maybe,

but remember sign language like BSL and ASL is part of Deaf culture,

its not a quick fix its an entirely new language

and it requires good fine motor skills

most nonverbal people struggle with atleast one of those)

and not just "does fine with no communication"

•challenging behaviors like elopment, SIB, harming others, feacal smearing, destructive behaviour

•make sure level 3s are severely impaired in communication,

because a level 3 would not be just not able to speak and no other communication issues

they would have severe impairing issues in language aswell and in initiating communication!

Much more complex than simply a lack of speech,

and remember a level 3 could be verbal but they must be severely impaired in communicating

Drawing:

•have a G tube,

complete or most food refusal is actually quite common in autistic people and in autistic babys

and a G tube is often for long term

NG/NJ tube also can be really overwhelming and intolerable

•visible comorbidies like Down syndrome for example or FASD

•drooling

•lack of eye contact/not looking at the direction of the people seeing your drawing

•headphones/ear defenders if the OC would be able to cope with that feeling

•a stuffie!

•SEN buggy, or wheelchair for elopment or other reasons such as a delay in walking, a gait trainer, walker and other mobility aids too

•wearing elopment harness

•wearing bright colours so if runs into traffic when eloping people can see

•wearing a top with a puzzle piece or im autistic on or something like that

[dostoyevsky-official]

The Crypto Plot Against America’s Gold Reserves

The crypto “industry” was one of the biggest spenders in the 2024 election. It practically single-handedly bought a U.S. Senate seat in Ohio, turfing out labor’s most reliable senator, Sherrod Brown, with $40 million in advertising. And it convinced Donald Trump to make a 180 with a big sack of campaign contributions. Back in 2021, Trump said crypto was a “scam,” but now he has his own coin, his media site is in discussions to buy a crypto exchange, and he’s fully bought into the claims that the industry is overregulated.

So now that crypto has bought great political influence, it’s time to cash in. How might this happen? The basic idea is to turn the American government into the biggest crypto bag-holder of all time. If the plan goes through, hundreds of billions of dollars of public assets will be spent or leveraged to buy a million Bitcoins, allowing the tiny minority of Bitcoin moguls to finally cash out their holdings into real money. It would be one of the biggest upward transfers of wealth in world history.

[...] Crypto shill Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) proposes the Treasury issue new gold certificates based on the market price [of American gold reserves], and use the resulting cash—$677 billion at current prices—to buy up Bitcoins. In total, her bill would require the government to buy up 200,000 Bitcoins a year for five years, until a “strategic reserve” of a million would be accumulated.

This is revealing on several levels. The whole ideology of cryptocurrency is that it’s supposed to be outside the alleged corruption of governments or the extant financial system. Instead of transactions taking place on platforms run by Wall Street and regulated by the D.C. swamp, fiercely independent crypto entrepreneurs would build new businesses doing … something … out in a fresh economic Wild West.

So why on earth would buccaneering crypto people want the government scooping up a million Bitcoins—or about 5 percent of all that exist? The reason is obvious: so paper Bitcoin billionaires can cash out their holdings into real money without tanking the market. [...] The fundamental value of Bitcoin is zero. Even by crypto standards, the coin is terrible.

[...] Therefore, for early Bitcoin adopters sitting on vast piles of purely speculative assets, there is a huge structural need to get new suckers into the market. For anyone concerned about the corrosive role of money in politics, think about what this means: The crypto industry spent something on the order of $100 million in this election to install a government that will lure sacrificial lambs to a digital asset slaughterhouse, and make a handful of big Bitcoin hoarders generationally wealthy in the exchange.

[...] No one has deeper pockets than the federal government. No need to directly pick the pockets of suckers looking for a get-rich-quick scheme if you can pick everyone’s pockets indirectly by looting a vast store of treasure held in trust for the American people. It’s a logical end point for a technology whose sole meaningful use case is enabling criminal extortion and money laundering: finally carrying out the bank robber’s dream of draining the value in Fort Knox.

[robertreich]

The Truth About Trumponomics

Trump and Republicans want to wreck your bank account. Here are 5 things you need to know about Trumponomics.

1.Trump wants tax cuts for the rich, at your expense.

Trump’s tax cuts for the rich and big corporations added about $1.7 trillion to the national debt, with few benefits trickling down to the middle class — in fact, it raised taxes for more than 10 million American families.

Now Trump and Republicans want to make the tax cuts for the rich permanent, blowing up the debt even further. And then they’ll use that debt to justify this:

2. Trump would cut Social Security and Medicare — programs you’ve been paying into!

In every year of his presidency, Trump submitted a budget that tried to cut Social Security and Medicare. And he knows that’s the only way he can even begin to pay for extending his tax cuts for the rich.

3. Trump and his allies are pro-junk fee.

When the Biden administration issued a rule capping credit card late fees at $8, Sen. Tim Scott, a Trump surrogate, tried to overturn it in the Senate. And then a Trump-appointed judge issued a temporary injunction that blocked the rule from taking effect. Eliminating that rule would cost American families an estimated $10 billion a year.

And when the Biden administration required airlines to issue automatic refunds for canceled flights, Trump’s allies in Congress fought to block that too.

When Trump was in office, his administration fought against efforts to rein in airline junk fees.

Corporations nickel and diming us like this makes inflation worse. If Trump gets back in the White House, buckle up for more junk fees.

4. Trump would send health care costs soaring.

Republicans have committed to repealing the Inflation Reduction Act, which would strip Medicare of the ability to negotiate drug prices, and let Big Pharma send the price of insulin and other life-saving medicines back through the roof.

And Trump is still fixated on repealing Obamacare, with no plan to replace it.

TRUMP: Obamacare is a disaster. We’re gonna do something about it.

That would strip coverage from tens of millions of Americans, drive up premiums, and let insurers charge more or deny coverage to people with preexisting conditions.

5, If you’ve got student debt, you’re out of luck with Trump.

In contrast to President Biden, who’s canceled more than $160 billion of student debt so far, Trump is against student debt relief. In his first term, he tried to eliminate the popular Public Service Loan Forgiveness program for people like teachers and nurses, and he’s called the idea of debt relief “unfair.”

What’s unfair, is how student debt hurts not just the roughly 40 million Americans burdened by it, but the entire economy, since Americans with debt have less money to spend, are less likely to start a business, less likely to buy a home, and more likely to rely on government assistance.

The MAGA agenda would make nearly every aspect of your life more expensive, while making the richest Americans even richer.

Teddy Roosevelt’s economic plan was called the Square Deal. Franklin Roosevelt’s was the New Deal.

What Trump is offering is simply a Raw Deal.