Why Rand Paul has no friends

By: Bella Dalba

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky appeared to stumble recently when he stepped into a controversy over vaccine mandates: but, surprisingly, that wasn’t his biggest blunder of the night. During an interview with Kelly Evans of CNBC, Paul became defensive when pressed on his proposal to give companies a temporary tax break to bring profits currently held overseas back to the United States. When Evans asked Paul about research showing that such a tax holiday would actually cost the U.S. Treasury more in the long run than it gained, he subsequently cut her off. "That's incorrect. Your premise and your question is mistaken," Paul interjected. "Once again, you're mischaracterizing and confusing the whole situation."

Paul, who has teamed up with Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) on the proposal, wants to fund infrastructure improvements with the short-term surge in tax revenue, as U.S. multinationals bring home profits now sitting overseas. Last year the Joint Committee on Taxation pointed to earlier so-called “tax holidays” to conclude that a similar proposal would cost the government money, in part because companies would simply hold future profits outside the United States in anticipation of another one-time tax break.

The Kentucky senator argued on CNBC that his proposal would solve that problem by providing for a five-year tax holiday that could be renewed if there was a net gain in revenue. He also said that he supported permanently lowering the tax rate on repatriated corporate profits.

Paul referenced a study on how much money a similar initiative had brought home in 2005. But when Evans interrupted to explain that she was discussing long-term costs, Paul shushed the reporter and told her to "calm down."

"Let me finish. Hey, Kelly, shhh," Paul said, as he raised a finger to his lips. "Calm down a bit here, Kelly. Let me answer the question."

“I have a piece of advice for aspiring presidential candidates: Don’t ‘shush’ female reporters while telling them to ‘calm down,’” says Mackenzie Lamb, a senior in the AP Government and Politics class at Seckman High School.

Evans apologized later in the interview, but it didn't get much better after that. When she asked about a Washington Post article that described how Paul received his ophthalmology board certification from a startup medical board composed of family members, the senator again accused her of asking a misleading question. As Evans tried to clarify that she was interested only in the potential conflict of interest, Paul began talking over her. "You've taken something and you've twisted it," Paul said. "You've taken an interview and made an interview into something where we've got no useful information because you were argumentative and you started out with many suppositions that were incorrect."

        The exchange quickly became news, as critics questioned whether Paul would have treated a male anchor the same way. Many took to Twitter to voice their concern, accusing Paul of attempting to contemptuously "mansplain" his position to the female reporter. “His performance is a master class in being patronizing. Overt ‘mansplaining’ is not a great idea for a candidate of a party known for missing the mark on women’s issues,” wrote Lark Turner, an author for Refinery29.com.

The increasing backlash suggests that he would face an uphill fight in appealing to women voters if he decides to run for president in 2016. “I think it’s a safe bet that Rand Paul won’t be the Republican presidential nominee,” predicts Lynn Price, the AP Government and Politics teacher at Seckman High School.