For as much as the Democrats have been screaming about a need to return to civility naming the act after a private citizen, richest man or not, is too funny. C

For as much as the Democrats have been screaming about a need to return to civility naming the act after a private citizen, richest man or not, is too funny. Compared to - say - the legislation resulting from the sub-prime crisis - in which powerful individuals at the head of national and global banking systems (and governments) almost ended the world as we know it. Anyways, of course the actual brief doesn't actually reference how much Amazon employees are currently being subsidized (vs referenceing Walmart's $6.2b), because this isn't about the dollars and cents, it's about rushing something through on the back of bad press and Trump's tweetstorms. The government grows unto itself, shoot first, aim later.