To refresh your memory, here is the list of major items in the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill:
- Makes the increased Obamacare subsidies from January's coronavirus bill permanent.
- Provides universal pre-K for 3- and 4-year-olds.
- Provides funding for long-term care done at home.
- Provides two years of free community college.
- Makes the increased child tax credit permanent.
- Adds dental, hearing, and vision benefits to Medicare.
- Funds various climate initiatives.
Since Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are demanding that the cost of the bill be reduced, much of the conversation has been around which items to keep and which to abandon. To my dismay, but not to my surprise, my #1 item appears to be on no one's keeper list.
The reason for this is obvious but rarely discussed: Democrats are so committed to helping the poor that they ignore practically everyone else. The increased Obamacare subsidies would primarily help the middle class, which means they have very little support compared to other items on the list.
This is admirable, but it can also become self-defeating. Over the past few decades, the only help the middle class has gotten from anyone has been in the form of tax cuts from Republicans. That hasn't benefited the middle class a lot, but it's better than nothing—which is roughly what they've gotten from Democrats.
Democrats desperately need to address this. They spend a lot of time scratching their chins and wondering why the white working/middle class doesn't vote for them, and inevitably they decide that it's all about racism or religion. And some of it is. Somehow, though, Democrats never manage to acknowledge that they do virtually nothing to help middle-class voters. They're keen on helping the poor; and the disabled; and the elderly; and the marginalized—but not the broad middle class. After all, "they should quit griping, they're still better off than the poor."
This is a recipe for electoral disaster, which is pretty much what's happened. Democrats have abandoned the middle class and then seem perplexed when the middle class abandons them. The middle class deserves better, something that Democrats used to know. They need to relearn it.
I totally disagree. Number 1 is a certain stay. It's Medicare expansion which will be toast. It's really unpopular. I mean, you didn't think this post through very well.
I have a feeling Kevin follows the goings on in Washington, DC a little more closely than the people who live in your head.
(Yes, just fed the troll, sorry!)
Nope, I have my sources as well. Kevin is wrong. Rational is wrong the "Climate initiatives" as being lumped together. The issue right now is the total number, which is on Pelosi's head. The Senate asked for 2 7 and the morons in the house gave 3.5 trllion. Senate is basically saying no, reduce that number. Pelosi's goons won't budge.
The climate initiative can go
Dems are not serious about it anyway - nor is anyone else. If they were we would have much more in there for it and the initiatives would be global in scope. We could cut emissions to 0 and climate would still change albeit more slowly. And what if the rest of the world decides "Ah, the United States did it all for us" and they don't take ANY action?
We are a reactive people - and always have been
#5 and #7 can go
Medicare coverage for vision, hearing and dental would change the game though. Employers would be clamoring for the eligible age to be dropped to 50 to take the insurance burden off of THEM.
And yes I am on Medicare, and TriCare, and NC Retirees HC plan.............
It wouldn't change the game. It would create a mess. It's toast. 5,6 are probably gone. I suspect 7 stays with some reductions to appease fossil fuel man.
5 is curiously unpopular. My view on how the economy runs today vs the past, may make it ineffective(as Europe has shown). A more socialistic, manly economy based around rationing and production, it probably would work better.
"And what if the rest of the world decides "Ah, the United States did it all for us" and they don't take ANY action?"
Two points about this: 1. How "The US is doing nothing, why should we?" I think we are in a better position to pressure other countries if we put some serious effort in first. And we are in fact the worst climate sinners if you count per capita emissions--which is the fair way to compare.
2. Morally speaking it follows from the fact that we are the worst sinners we are obligated to do more than others. Since we are the biggest wasters of energy it is also quite easy to achieve substantial reductions in emissions. Just stop wasting so much.
azum......
I agree with everything you said believe it or not. We lead the world in auto technology development which then of course gave way to more pollution than any of us can imagine.
But on a global scale per capita becomes a useless metric and lets the other countries off the hook when in fact, some of our pollution is a direct result of supplying THEM with grain, petroleum by products, and oil for THEM to consume. So we generate the pollution to make the products for THEM. We are damned if we do and damned if we don't. The global economy is so intertwined that it's hard for any one country to accept responsibility for something that has after affects throughout the planet.
Has anyone considered the environmental damage done by mining minerals for batteries? Or in the making of solar panels? etc? We talk of these things with great fervor, yet history tells us that many of the inventions we have made turn out to be not so good for us after all.
Morally? OK lets try this. Stop all exports of products for poor countries and see what happens to our emissions of bad stuff into the air. No grain, no oil or gas, no coal made for export. If our emissions go down is it MORE moral to protect the planet? Or help poor countries?
As a Christian I believe that helping someone else is paramount, however that Christian belief in itself has turned into huge money making pollution generating businesses. Agriculture is a leading cause of environmental damage - do we cut back to protect the planet? Or feed the hungry? Do we give Rev Copeland his new jet so he can spread the word? While he pollutes the atmosphere with the private jet exhaust?
We NEED to look at the NET affect of our efforts. Measure just the enviro costs. If we cut back on gasoline exhaust by 8 tonnes but the exhaust in making batteries increase to 5 tonnes we only save 3 tonnes of exhaust (not a real measure only an example). At THAT point does it become economically feasible? Or is it environmentally feasible?
I put "Climate" at number one, and it's non-negotiable. Yet more bennies for the geezers? Admittedly, they're the only ones who vote anymore, but it's still a bad look.
I agree that Democrats need to woo back the working class. These are the folks that Saint Reagan managed to talk into voting against their own interests, and most have never looked back. They're currently being bought with that Old Tyme Religion (not found in the Bible) and racism, having their worst impulses encouraged. Is there no longer any idealism, sense of community that Democrats can touch?
Stop virtue signaling to nonwhites and campaigning in white peoples areas would be a start, especially up north. Funny how Democrats started doing this nauseas after Obama's election, yet Obama campaigned the opposite way. Party elites have been out of touch for 10+ years. Obama didn't need one colored voter to win ohio.....twice.
Shouldn't inequality be decreased? If so, then those at the low end should be getting more. Kevin's graph does not show the actual relative incomes, just the increase (there is no real reason to do it this way). Of course the ones at the very top are those who have been really making out. The income of the top 1% has been increasing much faster even than the top 20%. In order to give to both the middle and lower income groups, it will be necessary to curtail the income of those at the top. The tax policies to do this are currently being thwarted by the "moderates", not by the Democrats as a whole, or even the majority of them. When Kevin (or anybody) has figured out how to replace these people with more progressive Democrats they will have a political strategy.
You should do things that result in broad electoral support that then allows you to do more.
Or you can do exactly what Drum IDes...
Louns
Agree
But we cannot legislate by polling either
Medicare expansion - vision, hearing, dental - is wildly popular and would be even more popular if it were to er enacted. Then propose lowering the age to 55 than to 50 and employers would jump on board because it;s taking the healthcare burden off of them. THAT's when they would push for M4A.
Kinda like the COVID vaccine. Republicans hate mandates - but when it came right down to it they went oddly silent when big businesses imposed their own mandates. This just-in-time, Six Signa, do more with less - we have to make everyone more productive push has resulted in a situation where even if there were just plain call outs some businesses get hurt badly. (Food processing in particular). So they mandate vaccines to protect their bottom line and the republicans didn't say boo.........
M4A would also provide for a HUGE increase in disposable income that previously went for medicare co pays. And SENIORS do spend their money.
The ONLY thing that pre-K schooling would do is allow for some more people to return to the work force that might not have or can afford Pre-K now. Given our declining birth rate I'm not sure this would be a big mover in the economy.
I think they could whittle the package down and STILL sway lot of opinions as to whether D's or R's do more for the most people. The bulk of our society is older. Do more for them
Better childcare options might possibly encourage more folks to have children in the first place.
Hokie-
The problem here is that with the exception of the last election people young enough to have kids were the worst performers when it came to voting
Get the seniors MORE onboard with a DEM agenda. They LOVE their social security and their Medicare. Improve Medicare and THEN reap the rewards of having more democrat votes.
Child care is important for many reasons - from parents working to possibly making having more children more affordable. But even in a limited fashion I think that if we think of Pre-K as EDUCATIONAL enhancement as opposed to the term day care then we could pour more resources in it once we are ready for it.
Over the past few decades, the only help the middle class has gotten from anyone has been in the form of tax cuts from Republicans.
Wait, what? There was this thing called “Obamacare” that helped the middle class — and the working class, and the poor — ENORMOUSLY. Pre-existing conditions, preventive care, keeping kids on policies til 26, and of course subsidies for people who for one reason or another have a drop in income (eg are laid off) up to 400% — these have made a huge difference in very many middle-class people’s lives.
Of course, they ALSO benefit the poor, and there I think is the rub. Republicans since Reagan have managed to convince large numbers of middle-class Americans that the poor are poor because of their own failings and therefore don’t deserve help, while the rich are ipso facto virtuous and to be emulated, and they deserve whatever they can grab.
Republican tax cuts help the “deserving,” including a paltry few crumbs for the middle class. Obamacare helps the middle class and the “undeserving,” which makes it almost shameful in itself to accept. Recall that in many states people would happily sign up for their state’s implementation of Obamacare but were adamant that they didn’t want “Obamacare.”
The problem, in other words, is not the Democrats’.
The problem is that Obamacare cuts out in the middle of the middle class, leaving people who are comfortable but not secure in a lurch. This leaves a lot of people out in the cold suddenly paying 24K/year for insurance that they can't really afford.
Agreed except: it's not really a large number of people as a percent of the electorate. The "fairly high paid self-employed" cohort just isn't that big. MOST people at the income levels in question work for employers who provide coverage.
True enough. But I don't think the coverage provided by employers is as robust as it used to be (at least mine is not, having to take on a very large deductible). So really that's just another increase in health care costs. That's not Obamacare's fault per se, but it is not something that was addressed by it either. (And I get the politics of all that, which really Obamacare was as good as it was going to get and still get passed. But it still could be another area where the middle class may feel like they weren't really helped out.)
Also, I forgot to mention this, but at least at my company, the new benefits of the plan was presented as something that the company was doing to improve the plan, not as something that was required by law because of Obamacare. So it could be that many don't even realize that some of their benefits are actually the result of Obamacare.
I think they should keep the expanded Obamacare subsidies. But I don't think that affects enough people to make a large difference.
Medicare expansion is just a backdoor attempt at MFA. You better believe ACA expansion is important. Biden, fossil fuel boy and lesbo all campaigned in 2018/20 on it.
For a first child, sure. Second, perhaps. Third or later, no way. Not for any born 12 months after the bill is passed anyway.
Sanders sounds really willing to dump that. It's pretty telling how unpopular it is.
I will add three items and address them as to what I think is good for the nation, what would be political winners for democrats overall and my guess what manchin might accept.
New items
8.paid federal leave
9. Negotiating drug prices
10. A bunch of other crap pork stuff that is always stuffed in any big bill and do not realize till it is passed. Do not know the details but gauranteed it is there .
In my preference, one big factor is we have huge debt , huge budget deficits and look to maybe be sliding toward serious problems because of that . Things that you might otherwise like to do should not be done now until we get things under control there.
So
1. Obamacare subsidies extension. Not a fan of obamacare itself but it is political reality. And what these additional subsidies do is smooth out the income cliffs so you do not have people being worse off for making more money.
So I can support this as it makes the obamacare structure more logical and less economically distorting.
Politically, although yes it helps a limited number , that is winner as those it does help will know it . And big enough to change those votes some. Political best is concentrated winners among those in political middle and diffuse costs among those who are stronger partisans. This works that way.
I expect manchin will support.
2. Universal pre k.
To me one of the nice things that we just cannot afford now .
Politically not sure if it works that well with cost.
Manchin will likely be wiling to drop this
3. Long term care at home
This may end up saving more money than it costs by reducing Medicare or other expenses. So OK by me.
Politically probably winner as such a big thing to those affected.
I expect manchin will support as seems tailor made for w va.
4.2 years of community College
I am hard in opposition to this. Those who want to go to college so they can get an education and earn more should pay for it out of future wages. And how is this fair to the person who goes to work right out of high school in a low wage job and works hard at it. We need those people too and cannot just keep importing illegal immigrants to do it. I prefer subsidizing the low wage citizens instead.
I do not see this as a political winner compared to cost.
I am not sure re manchin .
5. Child tax credit
I am just unsure re this myself. Generally do not like tax credits as they just disguise spending as lower taxes . But can see as useful as our birth rate is too low. But iffy in effectiveness and another probably not worth the cost now.
Politically probably a winner.
And would think manchin would be OK.
Will follow with a post on other items.
As someone who actually has a middle class job, I object to this list. These things are irrelevant.
Once again, these changes will not affect middle class life.
Savushkina Street pays a living wage?
Hmm, I'm in hard opposition to forcing college students to pay for college out of future wages. At least in opposition to the status quo. We need college educated workers for all sorts of professions, some of which do not pay well yet require high education such as social workers, teachers, public interest lawyers off the top of my head.
Isn't paying for college out of future wages what we do now, though?
CLD yes that's is what we do for too many folks. And it's turning out to be a really bad idea.
Yes. We should definitely punish the small number of children born after two previous siblings. Because, why not?
The youngest is always the demon spawn.
As told in the documentary film the Omen.
The Antichrist is the exception that proves the rule.
There is no policy, no action, no gift of money or services which would convince the middle class to support democrats. You might as well punish them.
The middle class already has support with Democrats. Drum is talking about free agent white voters in swing states. Let's be honest. Most of them value production over consumption. Yet the DNC elites do not. This got exposed during Obama's tenure and is causing friction between Hispanics/Blacks.
Going on
6. Adding dental vision to Medicare.
I oppose although I am close and it would greatly help me ( especially vision as that costs me over 1000 per year). We just cannot afford more right now .
Politically iffy or negative . Everyone thinks doing stuff for seniors is good politically but they ignore that seniors tend to be politically set in their ways and not likely to change their votes . And younger voters are catching on they are getting screwed and be left holding the bag.
Manchin though should support as his state is old.
7. Climate issues .
Some of these are solid and worthwhile like some of the forest programs and are not really some leftist green new deal thing. Some are climate change which are things that only make sense if rest of world are doing too ( i.e. China and India). Others are just left wing stuff disguised as climate.
They are all lumped together it seems and will stand or fall together.
So I oppose as a group, they are political losers and manchin will surely oppose .
Realistically these are dead.
8. Paid leave.
I oppose as not something govt should be doing and especially not federal and too costly and inequitable to those who do not take leave.
Politically dubious and expect manchin opposes.
9. Negotiate drug prices.
I oppose . Somehow you think you can just lower drug prices and still get drugs researched by private companies? This will be " paid for " by those unknowns who die when they might have been saved by an undeveloped drug. I do think we need to focus on the fact the USA is being played for chumps as other nations free ride . So maybe usa drug companies just cannot charge more that x % over what they charge other nations to force other nations to pay their fair share .
Political winner as public does not understand this and mamchin will agree.
10. Other pork crap.
Or course I oppose.
Big picture political lower as details like " Bridge to no where " make great opposition ads. But helps to buy votes. Whose vote? Manchin.
And you might notice one theme in my posts.
From manchin's politics, I think he would support a lot . But he wants it cut way back supposedly. But has not said exactly how .
I think democrats should ask manchin to put up or shut up and say specifically what he wants to cut out and then he has to own that .
That we agree. Fossil fuel boy needs to place his alternative plan out in public. I figure privately, he already has. Then hash it out with Biden bringing it home.
I am not sure he has privately or wants to do so.
Easy politically to just say you want to spend less and get political credit for that. But hard to be the one taking the candy away and being the one that gets blamed for those specifics.
I think progressives have to grow up and just realize they do not have the political power to get what they want. So manchin and sinema basically get to decide ( along with other behind the scenes democratic moderates).
But then THEY have to publicly decide and be the ones stopping things.
And did not include sinema in my analysis as I just have a harder time reading where she is.
Heh. If you get answers, they'll be different every day. Manchin is just a publicity whore. If both of these bills fail, the Bipartisan Mini-Bill and the Build Back Better reconciliation bill, Manchin's constituents will get nothing, repeat nothing. But he won't need to run for re-election until 2024, so why should he care? He's undoubtedly set up a soft landing for himself as part of the GQP caucus.
Pingback: Balloon Juice | Screwing the Middle Class
To my dismay, but not to my surprise, my #1 item appears to be on no one's keeper list.
That's dismaying if true. I suspect one reason it's not going to be kept is that the sheer number of people affected aren't that large as a percentage of the population? In country of a third of a billion souls, you're bound to find fairly large numbers of everything in absolute terms. But at the income levels affected, I'm pretty sure the vast bulk of persons have employer-provided health insurance. Still, healthcare has long (supposedly) been a key driver — maybe THE key driver — of domestic policy for Democrats. I wonder how long the subsidy increase from the previous legislation lasts. That could be another factor: maybe Democrats feel they can fix this problem in a later bill, before the expiration. But that's a big gamble.
Democrats suck more than any party on the planet. Except for the other guys.
The proposal (by Biden admin or Congressional Democrats) to help pay for the $3.5 trillion bill by having banks report all transactions over $600 to the IRS is political genius. Corporations pretending to operate in Cyprus and the estate tax's stepped-up basis are best left alone.
Reporting transactions over $600 is what the Middle Class wants. It's the kind of vote-getter we need heading into a critical 2022 election.
$600 is a transaction amount that practically everybody does, and they'll like being scrutinized by the IRS for small-scale tax evasion.
Even better is the amount. $500 or $1000 gets lost in memory because we live in a base-10 world. But not $600. That won't be forgotten.
So:
Memorable amount.
Affects almost everybody.
Under the IRS microscope.
Not closing loopholes that the wealthy use.
Whoever said the Democrats are the stupidest party of modern times should admit they are wrong.
There is no 3.5 reconciliation bill.
I think KD underestimates how many working- and middle-class families would benefit from universal pre-K, ACA subsidy increases, long-term care, the child tax credit and free community college.
RT: Just why is it that you think that the United States can't afford services that most other OECD nations provide, many of which have lower per-capita GDP? And what signs do you see that the country is "sliding toward serious problems because of" the federal debt? See e.g. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYOIGDA188S
Because we have a huge deficit now and just spent an enormous amount because of covid ( more than we should have imo but that is past history).
Consider a family making their budget who have more debt than assets . A serious unexpected illness occurs and they have a lot of unplanned medical costs increasing their debt . Is that the time take an expensive vacation and buy a new car ? No , you put that stuff on hold until you get your budget under control again.
Responsible governing is trying to balance the budget when you can in order to have the room to run a deficit when needed like a war or pandemic.
And that chart gives an incorrect impression. Looking at nominal interest as % of gnp is silly. You need to look at real interest as % of gnp or total debt as % of gnp.
Does Germany have a better social welfare safety net than the USA? I don’t know, but they seem to have a balanced budget more often than not.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/624187/germany-budget-balance-in-relation-to-gdp/
How is that possible?
Mostly much higher middle class taxes . And also way lower military spending, which is easy when you can be a free rider on other nato nations.
My family, my children who are both adults all fit into the white middle class. We would be enormously helped by these policies.
2 of us, older just moved to Medicare with retirement would love to have the drug price negotiation, added dental, etc.
The married one, who has 2 kids under 5, both her & spouse work part time dovetailing hours so they don't have to have childcare. The tax credit has helped amazingly--they can now afford a little bit of babysitting, and are trying to save for down payment on a house.
The other is early 30s, has a good-paying career as film editor, but it is all contract short-term labor so depends on ACA. Income is over the subsidy level. Any improvement in ACA helps. Especially lower drug prices.
A nephew just entered the middle class after scraping by to get education--now has engineering masters and got a job paying triple what his old blue-collar job paid. Was helped by community college (took 3 years as he had to work nearly full time while going). Then state university for bachelor's and masters.
Education, childcare, and medical help is a program that greatly aids the group I think of as middle class, broadly 40K-150K household income.
And, it's important to think of family/social connections when thinking of aid to those at the lower end of the middle class. If you are doing okay, but your adult children or nieces & nephews are struggling with college loans, lack of childcare, etc--there is at least some stress on you, because you want to help them get by financially (or with childcare).
Same with adult children having older parents--any help for them, helps the adult children on whom they depend.
In other words, some programs that aid the currently lower-paid groups also aid their extended family by reducing family burden and stress.
It improves the society as a whole. And frees up money for other economic activity.
"They spend a lot of time scratching their chins and wondering why the white working/middle class doesn't vote for them, and inevitably they decide that it's all about racism or religion."
They don't scratch their chins & decide that it's all about racism & religious bigotry. They take polls that show - over and over and over and over and over - that it's all about racism and religious bigotry. If the people you call the middle class want relief, they need to stop voting for the party that only cares about the rich. See, e.g., the SALT deductions.
The problem is, polls lie. If you don't try and campaign for certain voting blocs, you don't get votes. Lazy morons like you don't get it.
Kaiser is a great polling firm that is getting hoodwinked by certain groups telling them they are vaccinated, when they are not. It makes the poll worthless.
A little less on the insult side, hun, please. This kind of new injection of malice into the conversations makes reading good thoughts, or, the whole thread more difficult to read.
Thanks,
Best Wishes, Traveller
I disagree a little bit. The proposed Medicare dental, hearing, vision coverage helps the retired middle class. Universal day care relieves a huge cost from middle class parents. Ditto for the CTC. A lot of middle class families are struggling with long term care costs.
Rather than childcare subsidies, I'd prefer we provide a benefit which allows parents to stay home and raise their children. It seems like we have this backwards.
We have worker shortages, so that's a really bad idea. Also bad for single parent households.
If someone would rather raise their children, making them work at some dead end job seems like the bad idea to me.
You do realize that the traditional middle class is arguably no more than a plurality, and a declining one.
Quoting the Pew Research Center:
Fully 49% of U.S. aggregate income went to upper-income households in 2014, up from 29% in 1970. The share accruing to middle-income households was 43% in 2014, down substantially from 62% in 1970.2
You can pick out what to cut, which will cause a certain amount of squabbling no matter what, or you can pick out what to keep. Hopefully the latter will generate quite so many Dems in Disarray headlines. My number one priority -- bar none -- is child/day care, from pre-K up to ... well, we can talk about that later. The fact is, it's become depressingly obvious over the last eighteen months that a significant portion of the electorate views public schooling as 'free' (or at least, government subsidized) daycare. Rather than award everyone a B for just showing up (as opposed to the 'D' it used to be back in the day), why don't we just square this circle once and for all? Plus, it's high time to recognize that this sort of service should be recognized as the highly-paid profession it in fact is. Anyone can grow tomatoes. Broccoli? That's a little bit harder.
Sidebar: There's a lot of agreement on what's easy to grow. Maybe not so much on what's hard. I've never tried to cultivate them, but artichokes seem to be difficult. Onions are nominated from time to time (though I've never experienced any particular difficulty.) And so on and so forth. If you're thinking I'm groping for a rather clumsy metaphor when it comes to growing kids, why, yes, I'll cop to it 🙂
My talent, such as it is, is growing cacti and other succulents. This translates very badly to growing children, and the results have spoken for themselves.
Wealth transfers to the lower income classes finance transactions for goods and services that become revenues for middle income classes.
The majority of Democrats want to do a lot of things, including all those on Kevin's list. But currently what will get on the final bill, if there is one, depends on a few "moderates" who have their own ideas. Or actually many of them have on their minds the interests of big-money supporters. Or since some are not even specifying what they want to cut, maybe they are partly just posturing not to seem too Democratic (Manchin for example must get Republicans to vote for him if he wants to be reelected). So the process is somewhat haphazard. It's not a matter of a solid body of Democrats making up a single mind about what will be kept.
Pingback: Democrats and the middle class – Kevin Drum
My takes...for what they are worth:
1. I agree with KD's emphasis on extending OCARE subsidies, but not for the reasons he cites. Helping the "poors" (who vote overwhelmingly for Democrats-you know, politics 101) helps all of us. The "middle class" already has a truly amazing array of "help" (home mortgage deduction which see). Many of the other policies in the Biden proposal would be of great help to them....and quite directly.
2. We have arrived at a tipping point where the continued political obstruction of the "moderates" is really starting to play badly for them. This is really good to see.
3. Despite decades of discussing the economics of the national debt and deficits it is truly disappointing to see somebody trot out that old canard comparing fiscal policy to the finances of a single family. Actually, it is quite astounding.
We have worker shortages
I really do not understand this claim when it is asserted in what is claimed to be a "free market" economy. If the labor market is truly "free" (in the microeconomic sense) then there is no shortage as the market is "always" (cough, cough) trending toward equilibrium where prices clear. I most markets, when the price is low, supply offered is also low. Isn't that the way it is supposed to work? Employers seem to think they are price makers and not price takers.