NEXT ON IVORY TOWER --- IT'S ALL ABOUT WORDS THAT BEGIN WITH P-- THE LATEST PRIMARY, A PARENT PROSECUTED FOR HER SON'S MASS SHOOTING AND A TAX CREDIT FOR THE POOR.

STAY TUNED.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> WELCOME TO IVORY TOWER.

I'M BARBARA FOUGHT, FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY.

JOINING ME THIS WEEK ARE SARAH PRALLE, FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, ANIRBAN ACHARYA FROM LEMOYNE COLLEGE, RICK FENNER FROM UTICA UNIVERSITY, AND BEN BAUGHMAN FROM GANNON UNIVERSITY MANY PEOPLE THOUGHT THE QUEST FOR THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION FOR PRESIDENT WOULD BE OVER THIS WEEK WITH FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP AS THE WINNER.

WHILE THE UNOFFICIAL TOTALS SHOW HE GAINED 54% OF THE VOTE IN THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY --- FORMER UN AMBASSADOR NIKKI HALEY EARNED 43% AND BOLDLY ANNOUNCED SHE'S STAYING IN THE RACE.

YOGI BERRA FAMOUSLY SAID, "IT'S NOT OVER, TIL IT'S OVER."

BUT ANIRBAN, ISN'T IT REALLY OVER?

>> I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BY OVER, BUT POLITICS IS THE ART OF POSSIBILITIES.

IT MIGHT BE THE CASE THAT NIKKI HALEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CLINCH THE NOMINATION BUT WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSCORE IS THE PUNDITS WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW LARGE THIS MARGIN WOULD BE.

HOW IT WILL BE LIKE REALLY, YOU KNOW, 20-POINT MARGIN AND SO ON.

BUT IT DIDN'T, RIGHT?

WE ENDED UP WITH 11-POINT MARGIN AND THERE WAS SOME CHATTER IN THE NEW YORK TIMES I WAS READING ABOUT THAT PEOPLE WERE COMPARING THIS TO THE 1992 NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY WITH PAT BUCHANAN AND GEORGE BUSH SR. AND HE HAD A LARGER LEAD AND IT WAS A REAL UPSET.

IN SOME WAYS IT WAS AN UPSET FOR TRUMP IF YOU LOOK AT THE SMALL MARGIN.

AFTER WE GET OUT OF THE PRIMARY BUBBLE, I THINK IT WILL BE AN INTERESTING THING TO SEE BECAUSE IT BASICALLY SHOWS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY THAT'S KIND OF FRACTURED YOU CANS DIVIDED AND DIVIDED PARTIES HAVE DIFFICULTY TO WIN AS WE HAVE SEEN IN AMERICAN POLITICS TIME AND AGAIN.

>> I WOULDN'T SAY IT'S OVER.

WOO-- SHE HAS ABOUT A MONTH BEFORE SOUTH CAROLINA WHERE SHE WON TWICE TO BE GOVERNOR.

WE ARE GOING TO HAVE NEVADA BEFORE THAT, THAT SHE IS GUARANTEED TO WIN THE PRIMARY THERE.

AND THEN AFTER SOUTH CAROLINA, THERE IS ABOUT 10 DAYS BEFORE SUPER TUESDAY.

SO I THINK WE ARE GOING TO KNOW WHETHER IT'S REALLY OVER WHEN SOUTH CAROLINA HITS, BUT I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF SHE DIDN'T STAY IN IT UNTIL AFTER SUPER TUESDAY.

>> IT'S OVER.

I THINK THAT TRUMP HAS SHOWN THAT HE HAS A LOCK ON A MAJORITY OF REGISTERED REPUBLICANS BUT THAT DOESN'T ANSWER A LOT OF BIG QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE SUCH AS WHAT IS NIKKI HALEY'S END GAME?

WHAT IS SHE STILL IN IT FOR?

IS SHE AIMING AT 2028?

IS SHE AIMING TO BE PART OF TRUMP'S TEAM AS VICE PRESIDENT?

SO THOSE ARE THE TYPE OF QUESTIONS I HAVE.

I THINK SHE IS GOING TO STICK AROUND AS LONG AS HER MONEY CONTINUES TO FOLLOW HER.

BUT I THINK TRUMP, BARRING SOME VERY, YOU KNOW, UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES, HAS WRAPPED UP THE NOMINATION.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT HALEY.

SARAH, SHE HAS GOTTEN AS FAR AS ANY WOMAN IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS TOWARD THE PRESIDENCY.

>> YEAH, I MEAN I GIVE HER CREDIT FOR RUNNING.

I'M NOT SURE SHE RAN VERY WELL.

LIKE RICK'S SUGGESTING, IT WASN'T REALLY CLEAR WHAT SHE WAS DOING.

SHE NEVER SEEMED TO BE RUNNING AGAINST TRUMP EXCEPT AT THE VERY END, PRIOR THE DAYS BEFORE NEW HAMPSHIRE.

SHE SEEMED TO BE RUNNING AGAINST DeSANTIS WHICH DIDN'T SEEM LIKE A VERY GOOD STRATEGY AT ALL.

BUT, AGAIN, GIVE HER CREDITED FOR RUNNING.

ONLY FIVE OTHER REPUBLICAN WOMEN THIS CENTURY HAVE RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY UNDER THE REPUBLICAN TICKET AND IT KIND OF POINTS TO A LARGER PROBLEM, WHICH IS THAT WOMEN, WHEN NECESSITY DO RUN-- WHEN THEY DO RUN, TEND TO BE JUST AS SUCCESSFUL AS MEN IN TERMS OF WINNING ELECTIONS AND RAISING MONEY, NOT AT THE PRESIDENTIAL LEVEL BUT AT THE CONGRESSIONAL AND STATE LEVEL.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT NOT ENOUGH WOMEN ACTUALLY RUN FOR OFFICE SO THERE IS NOT A PIPELINE.

AND THE RESEARCH SHOW IS THAT ONE OF THE REASONS THAT IS BECAUSE GIRLS AND WOMEN ARE NOT ENCOURAGED TO RUN.

UP THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL THEY TEND TO EXPRESS AS MUCH INTEREST IN POLITICS AND RUNNING FOR OFFICE AS BOYS DO BUT ONCE YOU GET TO COLLEGE, YOU SEE A BIG GAP AND BOYS AND MEN ARE ENCOURAGED TO RUN FOR OFFICE, WHEN WOMEN SAY THEY ARE NOT QUALIFIED, THEY, IF THEY DON'T THINK THEY'RE QUALIFIED, THEY DON'T RUN.

WHEN MEN DON'T THINK THEY'RE QUALIFIED, THEY STILL WILL PUT THEIR HAT IN THE RING.

>> YEAH, AND JUST TO PUSH BACK A LITTLE BIT, SHE IS OBVIOUSLY YOUNG AND SHE WILL RUN IN 2028 IF SHE IS NOT SUCCESSFUL THIS TIME.

BUT SHE IS IN IT TO WIN IT.

RUNNING A PRIMARY IN EITHER PARTY IS DIFFERENT THAN THE GENERAL ELECTION.

AND SHE SAW HOW OTHER CANDIDATES THAT DROPPED OUT SOONER THAN SHE DID, DID PUSH BACK WITH TRUMP AND HOW THAT WORKED OUT.

IT WAS A NEGATIVE RESPONSE WITH THEIR VOTERS.

SO THAT'S PART OF THE STRATEGY THAT SHE HAS HAD TO NAVIGATE.

I THINK SHE IS IN IT TO WIN IT.

WE WILL SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN SOUTH CAROLINA OF WHETHER OR NOT SHE HAS A ROAD FORWARD.

>> I WANTED TO SAY I SAID THAT HE HAS A LOCK, TRUMP HAS A LOCK ON THE NOMINATION.

BUT I THINK NEW HAMPSHIRE SHOWED, AS ANIRBAN SAID, THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT TRISM GOING AHEAD.

NIKKI HALEY DID VERY WELL WITH SUBURBAN WOMEN AND INDEPENDENTS AND THESE ARE VOTERS THAT TRUMP IS GOING TO NEED IF HE IS GOING TO BEAT BIDEN IN STATES LIKE GEORGIA AND ARIZONA.

>> SHE ALSO HAS THE ABILITY TO PUSH TRUMP'S BUTTONS TO INVOKE OR PROVOKING SEXIST COMMENTS FROM HIM THAT FURTHER TURNS OFF THE VOTERS.

THAT'S A GOOD STRATEGY.

THE BROADER THING, YOU LOOK AT McCAIN AND OTHERS, HALEY'S CAMPAIGN WAS MUTED.

SHE COULD HAVE GONE WAY MORE.

HER RALLIES ONLY HAD FIVE QUESTIONS.

SOMETIMES SHE DIDN'T TAKE QUESTIONS.

THERE COULD BE A CHANGE IN STRATEGY TO BE MUCH MORE, YOU KNOW, IN THE FOREFRONT, TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUES AND MEETING VOTERS MUCH MORE OFTEN THAN SHE HAD BEFORE.

>> I'M FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE AND THAT WAS THE WHOLE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE PRIMARY.

YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO GO AND MEET INDIVIDUALS AND TALK TO THEM AND I GUESS SHE JUST WASN'T HOLDING MANY EVENTS.

LIKE YOU SAID, SHE WASN'T TAKING QUESTIONS.

IT'S SORT OF-- I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND HER STRATEGY IN THE LAST FEW DAYS.

>> OUR CO-PANELIST LUKE PERRY WAS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE AND SHE JOTTED ME SOME NOTES ABOUT IT.

HE DID GET TO TALK TO HER AND SAID SHE HAD SOLID RETAIL POLITICAL SKILLS.

HER STUMP WAS PRETTY GOOD HE THOUGHT.

AND HE INTERESTINGLY SARAH SAID NOBODY THAT HE TALKED TO WAS REALLY TALKING ABOUT THE GENDER ISSUE.

AND THAT SURPRISED ME AMONG NEW HAMPSHIRE FOLKS.

RICK.

I'M WONDERING, YOU SAID MONEY IS THE KEY.

ARE THE BIG DONORS GOING TO HANG WITH HER?

>> THAT'S THE QUESTION.

AND I THINK WE'LL FIND, AS WE GET CLOSER TO SOUTH CAROLINA, WHETHER THEY WILL.

IF THEY DON'T, THAT'S GOING TO MAKE GOING FORWARD VERY DIFFICULT FOR HER.

>> BUT ALSO MONEY, I MEAN MONEY WOULD KEEP HER IN THE RACE BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN MONEY IS GOING TO WIN HER THE RACE.

SHE SPENT TWICE AS MUCH MONEY IN NEW HAMPSHIRE AND IOWA AS TRUMP.

>> JUST REAL QUICK.

IT'S NOT JUST MONEY.

IT'S THE MONEY BACKING HER LIKE KOCH.

THEY DON'T JUST GIVE MONEY.

THEY HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE TO HELP CANDIDATES WIN.

>> WELL, WE WILL CONTINUE TO WATCH THIS, AS YOU KNOW, OVER THE COMING WEEKS.

A TRIAL BEGAN THIS WEEK IN MICHIGAN IN WHICH THE MOTHER OF A MASS SHOOTER IS CHARGED WITH INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER.

IT'S THE FIRST TIME A PARENT HAS FACED THAT CHARGE.

JENNIFER CRUMBLY AND HER HUSBAND BOUGHT THE GUN FOR THEIR 15-YEAR-OLD SON.

THEY DIFFER WITH HIM ABOUT WHETHER IT WAS LOCKED UP.

HE TOOK THE GUN TO SCHOOL AND KILLED FOUR TEENS AND WOUNDED SEVEN OTHERS.

HE'S NOW SERVING A LIFE SENTENCE AFTER PLEADING GUILTY.

SARAH, IS IT GOOD PUBLIC POLICY TO BRING CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST A PARENT HERE?

>> WELL, I THINK THE PROSECUTOR IN THIS CASE SEEMS REALLY PASSIONATE ABOUT GUN CONTROL AND TRYING TO TACKLE WILL THE PROBLEM OF GUN VIOLENCE IN THE UNITED STATES.

I JUST DON'T THINK USING THE CRIM LAW TO PROSECUTE PARENTS FOR WHAT THEIR KIDS DO IS THE BEST WAY TO DO IT.

I MEAN IT'S NOT A POLICY.

THAT'S THE THING.

WE DO NEED POLICIES, BUT WE NEED GUN POLICIES.

AND THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO RETROACTIVELY HOLD PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR THINGS THAT ARE UNPREDICTABLE.

I MEAN, LET'S FACE IT.

WHO THINKS THEIR KID IS GOING TO BE A MASS SHOOTER?

WHAT IS PREDICTABLE IN THIS COUNTRY IS THAT WE ARE GOING HAVE MASS SHOOTINGS AND WE HAVE ON AVERAGE MORE THAN ONE A DAY.

OVER 630 MASS SHOOTINGS IN THE UNITED STATES LAST YEAR.

WE CAN PREDICT THAT.

WE CAN'T PREDICT WHO IS GOING TO DO IT, WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT, WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT.

AND SO WE NEED LAWS THAT TRY TO GET A HANDLE ON THE GUN PROBLEM.

MICHIGAN, INTERESTINGLY, DIDN'T PASS A GUN SAFETY LAW UNTIL AFTER THIS MASS SHOOTING, ALONG WITH THE MICHIGAN STATE MASS SHOOTING.

NOW THEY HAVE A LAW THAT REQUIRES PARENTS TO LOCK UP THE GUNS IF THEY HAVE MINORS IN THE HOUSE.

THEY DIDN'T EVEN HAVE THAT BASIC GUN LAW.

THAT'S, WHAT I THINK, WE MEADE TO FOCUS ON, NOT USING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM THIS WAY.

>> BEN, WITH YOUR LAW ENFORCEMENT BACKGROUND, I'M REALLY INTERESTED IN WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THIS?

>> THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED ABSOLUTELY.

AND THIS IS A UNIQUE CASE WHERE NOT ONLY DID THEY KNOW THAT HE WAS HEARING VOICES, THEY ALSO DIDN'T PROVIDE HIM ANY COUNSELING, DOCTORS LEADING UP TO THIS EVENT WHERE THEY WENT AND BOUGHT HIM A GUN ON BLACK FRIDAY.

THEY WENT AND TOOK HIM SHOOTING ON SATURDAY.

MONDAY HE IS IN CLASS LOOKING FOR AMMO.

TUESDAY THEY SEE THE PICTURE THAT WAS VERY DISTURBING.

IT HAD VIOLENCE, SHOWED A PERSON BLEEDING OUT.

IT HAD ON THEIR THAT HE IS HEARING VOICES.

>> SOMETHING HE SCRIBBLED ON HIS HOME WORK.

>> HE HAD DRAWN IN CLASS AND THANKFULLY THE PICTURE WAS A TEACHER TOOK A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PICTURE BECAUSE HE TRIED TO SCRIBBLE IT OUT AND SAY HE WAS DESIGNING A VIDEO GAME AND ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT THINGS.

BUT TEND OF THE DAY, THE PARENTS SHOWED UP.

THEY KNEW ABOUT THE GUN.

THEY DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE GUN THAT EVENTUALLY WAS IN THE BAG-- NOT EVENTUALLY, BUT WAS IN THE BAG.

THEY DIDN'T EVEN BRING UP THE FACT THAT HE HAD BEEN HAVING ISSUES.

THEY DID THE 48 HOURS THING TO GET HIM COUNSELING.

THEY KNEW IT WAS AN ISSUE AND THEY TOLD THE PARENTS THEY RECOMMENDED HIM TO GO HOME.

THE PARENTS SAID NO, WE WANT HIM TO STAY IN SCHOOL.

AND DIDN'T BRING UP THE GUN.

NOT EVEN HOURS LATER, LESS THAN HOURS LATER, HE WAS LEAVING A BATHROOM, SHOOTING UP 11 DIFFERENT PEOPLE, HUMAN BEINGS, FOUR OF THEM DECEASED.

>> I AGREE, TO ME THIS IS NOT A GUN CONTROL ISSUE.

I KNOW PART OF THE CHARGES ARE NEGLIGENCE IN THAT THEY DID NOT, YOU KNOW, SECURE THE GUN AT HOME, BUT AS SARAH SAID, THAT WASN'T EVEN PART OF THE LAW.

AS BEN SO CLEARLY STATED, THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO PREVENT THIS.

THEY WERE IN THE SCHOOL.

THE SCHOOL PRESENTED THEM WITH THE EVIDENCE AND THE WOORDZ WORDS THAT HE HAD WERE "THE THOUGHTS WON'T STOP.

HELP ME."

THEY COULD HAVE HELPED HIM IF THEY HAD SAID SOMETHING.

WHY DIDN'T THEY ASK, DOES HE HAVE ACCESS TO A GUN OR SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

BUT THE PARENTS WITH HELD INFORMATION THAT IF THEY HAD SIMPLY SAID, NOW WE JUST BOUGHT A GUN, MY GUESS IS THEY WOULD HAVE SEARCHED HIS LOCKER AND BACKPACK AND THIS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED.

>> THE WHOLE STORY IS IMPORTANT.

>> I THINK I AGREE THAT THERE IS A MORAL RESPONSIBILITY FROM THE PARENTS PART BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH IT CAN EXTEND, AS SARAH WAS SAYING, TO THE LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY, RIGHT?

LET'S TAKE A SCENARIO AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE PARENTS WERE NOT RONG WRONG.

THEY WERE MORALLY WRONG.

SAY IT WAS A CAR AND THE SAME THING HAPPENED AND THE GUY TOOK OUT A CAR AND KILLED A BUNCH OF PEOPLE.

RIGHT?

SO IS IT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE AWAY THE CAR KEYS.

AND IF I HAD NOT TAKEN AWAY THE CAR KEYS FROM MY SON OR MY DAUGHTER, THEN I AM LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE?

AND SECOND, HE WAS TRIED AS AN ADULT.

IF SOMEONE IS BEING TRIED AS AN ADULT, HOW CAN I BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AN ADULT?

SO IT WAS 24-YEAR-OLD, THEY WOULD NOT COME AFTER THE PARENTS, RIGHT?

YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.

YOU CAN'T TRY A PERSON AS AN ADULT AND THEN SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, HE IS ALSO A VICTIM AT THE SAME TIME.

I'M BLURRY ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT.

>> TO YOUR FIRST POINT, IF YOU ARE AT A PARTY, AND I GIVE YOU ALCOHOL AND I ALLOW YOU TO LEAVE THAT PARTY AND DRIVE AND YOU KILL PEOPLE, WELL, WE'VE SEEN THAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE BEING HELD RESPONSIBLE.

SO IN THIS CASE, I THINK IT'S SIMILAR TO THAT, WHERE THEY KNEW THAT THERE WAS A CHANCE, A GOOD CHANCE THAT HE WAS GOING TO USE THIS GUN BECAUSE OF THE PICTURES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO I WOULD SAY THAT WE DO HOLD PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE IF THEY CONTRIBUTE TO CRIMES LIKE THAT.

>> THERE IS A LOT OF RISK FACTORS LEADING UP TO THIS, INCLUDING HIM PLEADING FOR HELP AND SEEING A DOCTOR WITH HIS PARENTS FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE THE PICTURE DAY.

AND IF WE FOCUS ON JUST THE PICTURE DAY AND THE GUN NOT BEING LOCKED UP, WE ARE MISSING THE POINT.

WE ARE MISSING A BIG SECTION OF THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHY THEY GOT CHARGED AND WHY THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED.

>> THE SON DID SAY AT HIS TRIAL, WE ARE HERE TODAY BECAUSE OF WHAT I DID.

MY ACTIONS AND WHAT I THOSE TO DO.

AND IF YOU ARE WONDERING IF THE FATHER, HE IS GOING TO BE PROSECUTED IN A CASE IN A FEW MONTHS SO BOTH PARENTS ARE BEING HELD RESPONSIBLE.

LET'S MOVE TO OUR THIRD TOPIC.

WE HEAR A LOT ABOUT THE INABILITY OF CONGRESS TO GET ANYTHING DONE.

WELL, LAST WEEK THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE FORGED A COMPROMISE ON TAX LEGISLATION THAT INCLUDES A CHILD CARE TAX CREDIT.

IN THE PAST SUCH CREDITS CUT CHILD POVERTY RATES IN HALF.

RICK, IS THIS PROPOSAL A GOOD ONE AND CAN IT PASS?

>> YES, I THINK IT'S A VERY GOOD PROPOSAL.

AS YOU SAID, PRIOR USE OF THE CHILD TAX CREDIT HAS SHOWN THAT IT CAN REDUCE THE POVERTY RATE OF CHILDREN.

WHAT IS INTERESTING HERE IS, YOU KNOW, ORIGINALLY IT WAS A WAY TO HELP MIDDLE-CLASS FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN.

BUT THEN IT WAS IN THE 1920s-- IN THE 2020s, WE ADDED REFUNDABILITY, THAT MEANS THE PEOPLE THAT DON'T OWE TAX, THEY CAN STILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS, AND THEY ACTUALLY GET A CHECK FROM THE GOVERNMENT.

SO IF YOU OWE ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS OF TAX, AND YOU QUALIFY FOR $2,000 TAX CREDIT, YOU GET A CHECK FOR ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS.

THIS, IN 2024, THE BIPARTISAN PROPOSAL EXPANDS THE AMOUNT OF REFUNDABILITY.

IT INCREASES, BY INFLATION, THE AMOUNT OF THE TAX CREDIT.

AND I THINK GOING BACK, AS YOU SAID, THIS HAS SHOWN TO SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE CHILD POVERTY.

>> IT WON'T REDUCE IT AS MUCH AS THE ORIGINAL, OBVIOUSLY.

SO I THINK THE ESTIMATES ARE ABOUT 400,000, WHICH, STILL, WE SHOULD DO IT.

I AGREE.

BUT I THINK IT BRINGS UP THIS POINT, TOO, OF HOW THESE POLICIES ARE SOMETIMES DESIGNED AND THEY'RE DESIGNED IN A WAY THAT IF YOU ARE RICH, YOU ACTUALLY GET MORE OF A TAX BREAK THAN IF YOU ARE POOR.

SO THE WAY THIS CHILD TAX CREDIT IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF OUR WELFARE PROGRAM, BUT THE IRONY IS THAT IF YOU ARE REALLY POOR, YOU DON'T GET IT BECAUSE IT HAS THESE REQUIREMENTS OF ABOUT WORK AND ABOUT MINIMUM INCOME.

SO THIS HELPS CORRECT SOME OF THAT.

I THINK IT'S DEFINITELY NOT AS GOOD.

I ALSO LIKED THE 2021 CHILD TAX CREDIT BECAUSE IT PUT THE MONEY MONTHLY DIRECTLY INTO PEOPLE'S ACCOUNTS AND FIRST OF ALL, IT HELPS PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK.

BUT IT ALSO REALLY, I THINK, IS MORE VISIBLE TO PEOPLE, SO THEY UNDERSTAND THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS HELPING THEM AND IT WORKS FOR PEOPLE LIKE THEM WHEN IT'S A SORT OF MORE DIRECT AND VISIBLE BENEFIT.

SO THAT WAS MUCH SUPERIOR.

THIS CHILD TAX CREDIT ALSO COMES WITH CORPORATE REINSTATING SOME CORPORATE TAX CUTS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY GIVEAWAYS TO BIG BUSINESSES.

BUT THAT'S HOW POLICY WORKS.

AND HAVE YOU TO COMPROMISE AND CHANGE HAPPENS INCREMENTALLY.

IT'S A STEP FORWARD.

AND THE FACT THAT IT IS TIED TO INFLATION, IT INCREASES AS INFLATION GOES UP, I THINK, IS A REALLY GOOD FEATURE OF IT.

>> YEAH, MY QUESTION WOULD BE, THIS IS PROPORTIONAL?

BECAUSE WE KEEP SAYING THE RICH ARE GETTING OFF OR GETTING TO GET MORE MONEY.

BUT IS IT PROPORTIONAL TO WHAT THEY'RE PAYING IN PERCENTAGE WISE WHEN THEY PAY TAXES EACH PAYCHECK WHEN THEY GET PAID?

IS IT PROPORTIONATE TO THAT WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE TAX BREAK THAT THEY'LL GET IN RETURN?

>> WELL, A GOOD CHUNK OF PEOPLE ARE PAYING NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE THEY EARN SO LITTLE THAT WE THINK THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO EVEN, YOU KNOW, BE ABLE TO FEED AND SHELTER THEIR FAMILIES.

SO THIS IS GOING TO MAKE IT A MORE PROGRESSIVE TAX POLICY WHICH IS GOING TO GIVE MORE OF THE MONEY TO LOWER INCOME AND LESS TO HIRE INCOME BUT I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING.

>> SO WE GO BACK TO THE EARLIER 3600 THAT WE SAW OR IS IT GOING TO BE THE 2000?

>> 2000.

>> AND THEN THE 200,000 FOR SINGLE PERSON, 400,000 FOR A FAMILY.

SO YOU WERE SAYING THAT IT IS SORT OF-- SO PEOPLE WHO HAVE EARNED HIGHER INCOME WILL GET A BIGGER TAX BREAK.

WHY IS THAT THE CASE?

>> BECAUSE THEY START-- YOU HAVE TO HAVE EARNED AT LEAST $2500 TO GET ANY OF THE TAX BREAK AND THE AMOUNT OF TAX BREAK INCREASES, ACTUALLY, AS YOUR INCOME GOES UP TO A CERTAIN LIMIT AND THEN IT STARTS TO DECLINE SO IT'S NOT A STRAIGHT LINE.

SO, YES, THIS IS GOING TO GIVE HIGHER BENEFITS TO WEALTHIER AND LESS TO POOR, BUT BETTER THAN IT WAS LAST YEAR BEFORE THIS AGREEMENT.

>> AND THEY DO TRY TO PHASE IT OUT, TOO, FOR HIGHER INCOME PEOPLE, WHICH THIS BILL DOES NOT DO, RIGHT?

I DON'T THINK PEOPLE EARNING $200,000 TO $400,000 REALLY DESERVE ANY CHILD TAX CREDIT BUT THAT'S THE WAY IT IS DESIGNED.

>> THIS IS GOING TO HOWEVER, ADD TO THE DEFICIT, RIGHT?

ANIRBAN?

>> THE OFFSET HERE IS THEY'RE ELIMINATING AND USING MONEY FROM THE EMPLOYEE RETENTION CREDIT, WHICH WAS A VERY WELL INTENTIONED BUT POORLY DESIGNED PROGRAM THAT WE ARE FINDING OUT HAS HUGE AMOUNTS OF FRAUD AND IT HAS SUSPENDED AND THEY'RE USING THE MONEY THAT WOULD HAVE GONE INTO THAT.

SO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE GREATLY TO FUTURE DEFICITS.

>> SARAH, WHAT IS THE LIKELIHOOD OF THIS PASSING BECAUSE CONGRESS IS IN A MUDDLE THESE DAYS.

>> THESE JUST TRYING TO GET A BUDGET PASSED AT THIS POINT AND NOT SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT.

SO I THINK IT'S SLIM, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY GOTTEN FURTHER, I THINK, THAN A LOT OF PEOPLE THOUGHT.

AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IT QUICKLY THOUGH I THINK IF THEY WANT TO GET IT THROUGH.

IF IT DOES GO THROUGH, IT IS A MIRACLE THEY'RE GETTING ANYTHING DONE AT THIS POINT SO I GIVE THE FOLKS CREDIT.

>> OTHERS HAVE SHOWN THE STUDY OVER THE LAST PANDEMIC THAT THIS CHILD CREDIT WAS SUPREMELY INSTRUMENTAL IN REDUCING CHILD POVERTY AND INCREASING CHILD NUTRITION AND SO ON.

SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD MOVE.

AGAIN, THE 33% TAX BREAK, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE IT IS GOING.

MAYBE THERE IS SOME OTHER DAY WE CAN TALK ABOUT FOCUS ON THE TAX BREAKS FOR BUSINESSES AND SEE WHERE THAT IS GOING.

BUT THERE WAS TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF FRAUD WITH THE PAYCHECK PROTECTION PROGRAM.

SO IT'S GOOD TO KNOW THAT THAT IS GONE.

>> WE HAVE TO LEAVE IT THERE BECAUSE IT'S TIME TO OPEN UP THE GRADEBOOK.

SARAH, YOUR F. >> MY F THIS WEEK GOES TO NEW YORK CONGRESSMAN BRANDON WILLIAMS.

I WAS ON A TELEPHONE TOWN HALL HE HOSTED TUESDAY NIGHT AND LASTED ABOUT FIVE MINUTES N. THAT SHORT TIME, HE MADE AT LEAST HALF A DOZEN OR MORE FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT ISSUES RANGING FROM THE CRIME RATE IN NEW YORK TO THE STATE OF THE ECONOMY.

AND THEN HE GOT A QUESTION ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND HIS ANSWER WAS EXTREMELY INCOHERENT.

HE EXPRESSED CONCERN BUT THEN WENT ON TO OUTLINE AN ENERGY POLICY LARGELY BASED ON FOSSIL FUEL BURNING.

LIKE HE DOESN'T GRASP THE BASIC FACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE.

>> OKAY.

NEXT IS ANIRBAN.

>> MY F GOES TO THE GROCERY CHAIN WEGMAN'S DECISION TO REMOVE ALL RESCUE MISSION COLLECTION CENTERS FROM ITS PROPERTY ON THE STRANGE AND DISINGENUOUS REASONING OF MAINTAINING CONSISTENCY ACROSS ALL WEGMAN'S.

>> OKAY.

AND RICK.

>> MY F GO IS TO WHAT MAY BE THE END OF SPORTS ILLUSTRATED.

ICONIC SPORTS PUBLICATION LIKE MOST PRINT MAGAZINES HAS BEEN IN DECLINE FOR YEARS, THESE PAST FEW MONTHS HAS BEEN DEVASTATING.

IN NOVEMBER, IT CAME OUT THAT SOME OF THEIR STORIES WERE BEING WRITTEN USING A.I., RATHER THAN WRITERS.

AND THEN LAST WEEK THE COMPANY ISSUED LAYOFF NOTICES TO MOST OF ITS STAFF.

AT ONE TIME S.I.

EMPLOYED THE BEST WRITERS AND PHOTOGRAPHERS.

LET'S HOPE IT CAN BE SAVED.

>> LET'S HOPE.

>> BEN, YOUR F. >> MY F IS GOING TO A SOCIAL MEDIA MOVEMENT CALLED DOOR KNOCK CHALLENGE.

UNLIKE THE RING AND RUN THAT SOME OF US MAY HAVE DONE WHEN WE WERE A LITTLE BIT YOUNGER, THIS CASE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, WHAT THEY'RE CHALLENGED TO DO IS TO GO UP TO A DOOR AND BANG ON IT IS ALLOWEDLY AS THEY CAN, SOMETIMES USING A FIVE GALLON WATER JUG.

AND THE PROBLEM WITH THIS IS NOT ONLY ARE THE PEOPLE INSIDE BECOMING DISTRESSED BECAUSE THEY'RE BEING WOKEN UP, BUT THEY COULD BE-- IN THEIR GROGGY STATE, COULD THINK THEIR HOUSE IS GETTING BROKEN INTO WHICH COULD LEAD AT KIDS GETTING SHOT AT AT THE VERY LEAST IF NOT SHOT.

>> SOUNDS DANGEROUS.

SARAH, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING GOOD FOR US.

>> YES, SEEKING ADDITIONAL DAMAGES FROM FRONTER TRUMP FOR DEFAMING HER IN 2019 WHEN HE DENIED HER ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT.

SHE IS A MODEL FOR HOW TO STAND UP TO A BULLY MULT MULTIPLE TIMES EVEN THOUGH SHE IS RISKING HER PERSONAL SECURITY AND SHE DRESSED VERY SHARPLY.

>> ANIRBAN.

>> MY A GOES TO ALL OUR FELLOW SYRACUSEANS WHO WORK OUTDOORS IN THE COLD TO KEEP THE ORDER OF THINGS FUNCTIONING DAY AFTER DAY.

CNY CENTRAL HAD DAN REED AND JIM FOSTER, THE LEAD GROUNDS KEEPER AT LeMOYNE COLLEGE MAKING SURE THE CAMPUS IS SAFE FOR TRAVEL.

SO DAN AND JIM, FOR PEOPLE LIKE YOU, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

AND RICK.

>> MY A GOES TO RICHARD MORGAN, RECENTLY TURNED 93.

HE IS AS FIT AS A 40-YEAR-OLD HIS DOCTORS SAY AND HE DIDN'T START EXERCISING UNTIL HE WAS IN HIS EARLY 70s.

NEVER TOO LAILT LATE TO START.

MIXES AEROBIC TRAINING ON A ROWING MACHINE AND WEIGHT TRAINING.

BARBARA, I HAVE A NEW ROLE MODEL.

>> AND MAYBE I SHOULD AS WELL.

BEN, WHO HAS DONE WELL.

>> WELL, I'M GOING TO GIVE MY A TO THE DAILY SHOW WHO, THEY'RE BRINGING BACK JON STEWART AS HOST AND EXECUTIVE PRODUCER AFTER 10 YEARS OF BEING AWAY.

STARTING FEBRUARY 12, HE WILL BE ON MONDAY NIGHTS ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

WELCOME BACK HUMORIST DISCOURSE.

>> I HEARD THERE WAS SOMETHING NEW FOR HIM.

HE IS ACTUALLY GOING TO HOST.

>> EVERY MONDAY.

>> BUT JUST FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION YEAR?

>> CURRENTLY.

I'M HOPING THAT HE GETS THE TASTE OF BEING BACK IN THAT SEAT AND REALLY-- HE IS VERY WELL AT NOT ONLY BEING ENTERTAINING BUT THE AMOUNT OF WISDOM THAT HE IS ABLE TO SHARE ACROSS THE BOARD.

>> HE IS A SMART GUY.

AND YOU ARE SMART.

THANKS FOR WATCHING US TONIGHT LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT OUR DISCUSSION TONIGHT.

YOU CAN WRITE US AT THE ADDRESSES ON YOUR SCREEN.

NEXT WEEK--- DUE TO THE TRAVEL AUCTION - ON FRIDAY AT 8 WE'LL BE ON WCNY-WORLD BUT SATURDAY AT 5:30, WE'RE ON THE MAIN CHANNEL.

YOU CAN FIND ALL THE SHOWS ARCHIVED AT WCNY.ORG.

STAY SAFE AND GOOD NIGHT.