Here’s a fun fact for those who haven’t been paying attention — the House Republicans-proposed tax plan would eliminate government tax breaks for middle class Americans buying homes, but not for rich ones.

According to reporting by Jordan Weissmann, Paul Ryan’s plan will eliminate tax deductions for any home mortgage that costs under $24,000 in mortgage interest annually. If you don’t pay that much each year, you get no tax break on you home.

So basically the Republican Congress only wants to keep mortgage tax breaks for Wall Street and Silicon Valley millionaires. Their luxury second homes in Martha’s Vineyard and investment properties in San Francisco will still be supported by the government, while workers who can’t afford multi-million dollar homes will have to pay a lot more for the privilege of owning the roof over their head.

This is obviously, self-evidently, a terrible idea. If mortgage tax breaks are a bad idea, then by all means get rid of them; if they’re a good idea, by all means keep them. But in what world does the government exist to make home ownership cheaper for the rich only?

The answer is obvious — the world the Republican Congress is building. They have no interest in punishing the bank executives who foreclosed on homes they didn’t own, they have no interest in punishing pharmaceutical executives who raise the price of life-saving drugs, they have no interest in punishing the white collar criminals whose misdeeds threw us into a global recession, but they immediately targeted the office that makes sure congressmen are following the law.

And that’s the one/two punch of our government now — tax breaks and government subsidies are for the rich, laws are for the poor. The only reason Congress wouldn’t want independent oversight is that more congressmen would like the opportunities to break the law.

Anyone who says they couldn’t vote for Hillary Clinton because they were concerned about her unethical behavior but gives the Republican Congress a pass on this never really cared about ethics. In fact, if you aren’t willing to turn on your party when they behave like crooks, you care about politics more than ethics.

Likewise, when the president refuses to put his assets in a blind trust and accepts gifts from a foreign government every time their ambassadors stay at his hotels, this is what an assault on the rule of law looks like.

Would the Clintons have done it? I don’t know, but I do know the Republican Congress would have ordered hearings and spent years going over the evidence. The fact that no one in government will investigate a flagrant violation of the Constitution by the commander-in-chief is what an assault on the rule of law looks like.

The people voted in a Congress that puts the money of the ultra wealthy, including the coastal elites, ahead of the needs of ordinary Americans. That is their right. But where have all the defenders of the Constitution and the rule of law gone, now that their party is in power? Where are the angry, angry people demanding fidelity to the Constitution when a president obviously violates the Foreign Emoluments Clause (Article I, Section 9)?

Maybe they just never cared about the Constitution at all, just like the Republican Congress never really cared about ordinary homeowners. Just a thought.

If I’m wrong, people will prove it by doing something about it.