Well, given we don't know where all the f-35 money has gone to, maybe, investing in children might be a good thing.
1
Guns may not make society safer but when terrorism, a thief, or big bad government comes for us we sure wouldn't want to be unarmed. Let's leave it that way and just get the guns away from the crazies. Now that's still an agenda worth a Democrats vote.
2
alas JB, not bold ENOUGH...
1
This agenda needs to include an incentive of some sort for workers to re-unionize. The road to oligarchy/tyranny/fascism is paved with the flattened corpses of dead union organizers. The willingness and the opportunity for people, the many, to act in concert to oppose the excesses of the few is an essential to Democracy that we have almost lost.
Put it back.
Put it back.
7
Since no Democrat-drafted legislation will see light of day until 2019 at least, the Democrats need to not only come up with an agenda but publicize it. Print synopses of draft laws in local newspapers and social media across the country, with links to websites providing the full text and FAQs. Start now to show the country what you would do different. The country may remember in November 2018.
8
How about if the Democratic Party first defend democracy, which is in such peril? It is daily being undermined by growing income inequality with its attendant plutocracy, by unbridled dark money in our common policy deliberations, by gerrymandering, and by voter suppressors who no longer even seek to hide their real intentions.
5
Why does EVERY conversation about political ideas and ideals have to talk about "donors"? Shouldn't the appeal of the ideas attract the donors, and not the other way around?
After all, if you are creating an agenda based on what will attract the most money, are you really running a political movement or a business???
After all, if you are creating an agenda based on what will attract the most money, are you really running a political movement or a business???
11
Demand side economics. Use that to draw a clear line with that of the GOP who are all about supply side economics, then point out that the supply side always leads to collapse.
5
The Hillary wing of the Democratic party is dead as a do-do. Its a no go. If it couldn't beat an imbicile like Trump, with all the media and all the elite behind it, including much of the elite from the opposing side, it means its dead. Sure rich banksters want it and maybe a few elites in the establishment of minority identity politics groups but identity based minority politics is set up to create a reaction in identity based majority politics, which happens also to be a majority - get it - it can't win. Hillary had every major minority group and still lost.
Hillary's real problem was she loved banksters and hated workers. And she's not too fond of millenials either.
Bernie dome is the future. The Hillbots can take over the right wing when the reactionaries in the GOP collapse.
Hillary's real problem was she loved banksters and hated workers. And she's not too fond of millenials either.
Bernie dome is the future. The Hillbots can take over the right wing when the reactionaries in the GOP collapse.
7
These proposals try to fix the problem of unfairly low wages by after-th-fact fixes. They are perfectly applicable to the unemployed, but the working poor need to get a raise. We need an excess profits tax based on a company's W2 and SEC earnings filing history. The allocation of corporate gross profits can best be controlled by capping a corporation's ratio of earnings to wages to its past history. This will stop things from getting even worse. Then we can slowly reduce those caps proportionally in order to restore worker total wages to 50% of GDP. This would stop the redistribution upward of corporate profits to the tune on over $1.2 trillion a year by adding over $1,000 a month to the average worker's paycheck. This would provide enough increased taxes to finance infrastructure and also induce a secondary increase in incomes of $900 million per year. The increased purchasing power would stimulate economic growth and put us back on a solid economic footing. Everyone can win, just as they did from 1948 to 1972.
7
Paying people to have children before they have accumulated the necessary resources would would incentivize the wrong behavior: greater and earlier fertility. Instead, pay people to delay having children until they do have the resources to provide quality food, clothing, shelter, education, and medical care. While people remain childless, pay benefits directly into something like an IRA that can be accessed later for the intended purposes if they do eventually have children or can be rolled into a retirement fund if they do not ever have children.
13
No white blue collar worker in America will ever vote for a Party that would have his taxes pay Blacks and Hispanics to have more children. Such policies may make economic sense and may also benefit white lower middle class families and society in general, but anyone who has discussed politics with their contractors knows that it is a non-starter. Such proposals could only come from think-tank or academic economists, and only underscore why such people should be banned from serious public policy discussion. A column in the NYT indeed!
7
The Democrats are sheepishly addressing the minimum wage issue. The Living Wage concept is just that, a concept whose $15/hour idea is already behind today's times.
Even if the $15/hour were the new federal poverty level baseline, it's not enough. The current baselines are ridiculous, a single person $12,060, a family of 4, $24,600 (https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines).
The national poverty levels could be set at $50,000 for a family of four and that family would still be in a dire situation should anything out of "normal" occur.
I'll continue to share my math on this $15/hour idea that folks seem to hate:
Minimum wage $15/hour x 2080/hrs is $31,200/yr. before taxes.
Estimating a small life expense set:
Rent $900/mo=$10,800/yr;
Food $200/wk=$10,400/yr;
Utilities $500/mo=$6,000/yr;
Petrol $50/wk=$2,600/yr;
Auto Ins. $$120/mo=$1,440/yr… I can’t go any further adding other regular expenses because I’m already $40 dollars to the negative; remember, this is BEFORE TAXES!
"The bold minimum wage increase has 152 supporters in the House and 31 in the Senate." I challenge those that do not support the $15 minimum wage to attempt to live on $31,200 a year and report back in a year.
Even if the $15/hour were the new federal poverty level baseline, it's not enough. The current baselines are ridiculous, a single person $12,060, a family of 4, $24,600 (https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines).
The national poverty levels could be set at $50,000 for a family of four and that family would still be in a dire situation should anything out of "normal" occur.
I'll continue to share my math on this $15/hour idea that folks seem to hate:
Minimum wage $15/hour x 2080/hrs is $31,200/yr. before taxes.
Estimating a small life expense set:
Rent $900/mo=$10,800/yr;
Food $200/wk=$10,400/yr;
Utilities $500/mo=$6,000/yr;
Petrol $50/wk=$2,600/yr;
Auto Ins. $$120/mo=$1,440/yr… I can’t go any further adding other regular expenses because I’m already $40 dollars to the negative; remember, this is BEFORE TAXES!
"The bold minimum wage increase has 152 supporters in the House and 31 in the Senate." I challenge those that do not support the $15 minimum wage to attempt to live on $31,200 a year and report back in a year.
5
The unemployment rate is at 4% yet all the commenters want the government to create jobs.
The government is meant to govern. Job creation is not in their purview. Can't find a job?, join the army or learn shoe repair or be a home health care giver but please don't just sit and belly ache and expect the government to be your mothers.
The government is meant to govern. Job creation is not in their purview. Can't find a job?, join the army or learn shoe repair or be a home health care giver but please don't just sit and belly ache and expect the government to be your mothers.
3
The true future lies in a whole new take on being a progressive. Look at the crowds that turn out almost daily in protest. It is organized NOT by the wealth Democratic establishment and their $ 1000k+ per seat fundraisers. Rather the NEW agendas are brought to action by a Group like Indivisible.org and others. This is the wave of the future, inspired by Bernie Sanders who would have been our nominee had the Establishment Dems not thwarted any chance he ever had. And I will never vote Democratic again ...at or at least until Super Delegates are HISTORY.
6
Trump fatigue gives Democrats a real opportunity to win over disappointed Republicans and independent voters. Democrats should hammer on the red-hot issue getting folks involved and off their butt - ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE - and build an agenda around that core, central issue for the 2018 mid-term elections.
Plan for Progress -
1. HEALTHCARE FOR ALL - promise that NO ONE will be denied health care due to financial burdens or pre-existing conditions. Fix the ACA, because America is not heartless - America takes care of its own.
2. RAISE WORKER WAGES - raise minimum wage, and propose a new law where executive pay increases must fall in line with worker pay.
3. LOWER TAXES for middle class, RAISE TAXES for millionaires - call it the FAIR TAX proposal, because taxes have been unfair to the middle class for a long, long time, while helping the rich get richer. This will greatly lower the deficit, and protect social security and medicare.
If every Democrat in Congress repeats the "Plan for Progress" over and over up until election day, they will have a very good chance of winning the majority, despite the gerrymandered districts, and overwhelming odds.
Question: "What are you going to do if elected?" Answer: "I'm going to fix healthcare, raise wages, and lower taxes. It's the Democrat Plan for Progress."
Simple.
Don't screw this up Democrats. Stay out of the weeds, and stop attacking Trump. He will implode without your help - focus on the voters.
Plan for Progress -
1. HEALTHCARE FOR ALL - promise that NO ONE will be denied health care due to financial burdens or pre-existing conditions. Fix the ACA, because America is not heartless - America takes care of its own.
2. RAISE WORKER WAGES - raise minimum wage, and propose a new law where executive pay increases must fall in line with worker pay.
3. LOWER TAXES for middle class, RAISE TAXES for millionaires - call it the FAIR TAX proposal, because taxes have been unfair to the middle class for a long, long time, while helping the rich get richer. This will greatly lower the deficit, and protect social security and medicare.
If every Democrat in Congress repeats the "Plan for Progress" over and over up until election day, they will have a very good chance of winning the majority, despite the gerrymandered districts, and overwhelming odds.
Question: "What are you going to do if elected?" Answer: "I'm going to fix healthcare, raise wages, and lower taxes. It's the Democrat Plan for Progress."
Simple.
Don't screw this up Democrats. Stay out of the weeds, and stop attacking Trump. He will implode without your help - focus on the voters.
13
Paying people to have more children is Trump-level stupid. Seriously. I would pay more to pay for birth control, free of charge, for anyone that wants it. The planet is too full, now. Use your brain, not just your " sex parts".
14
Almost every crisis we face globally - communicable disease, climate change, war, and terrorism, famine- would be vastly improved by reducing the number of people on the planet. If only major populous nations and all major religions rewarded small families and those who choose to remain childless, provided free birth control to every one who wanted it, made abortion safe and available. Why is population control never mentioned as a climate change solution?
5
There are too many people now! Let's care for the ones we have. Talk about incremental.....NO! Up people's wages and they will have the money to care for their kids, give them free birth control and they won't have so many. This is a sick, stupid idea.
8
Epic drug abuse, esp among poor whites, is just one result of the insanity of our healthcare system. Impossible to get a bed in a rehab place without private dollars. Fix healthcare, then we can talk about education, then criminal justice reform, then MAYB minimum wage and child care relief.
2
We could indeed save $1.5 Trillion by going to single payer. However, the big pharma, health insurance, and health care ghouls that are currently sucking up that money for CEO compensation, "shareholder value", lavish dinners, retreats, and business "entertainment" events, will have to be dragged kicking and screaming from the trough of the common person's misery at which they've been gorging themselves, and they will not give up their ill gotten gains easily. Nor will the Republican congressmen that are financed by these self interested and selfishly interested despicable upper crust bottom feeders.
Single payer would deprive the parasites of the horrific sums of money they have been extracting from the 99% of US citizens who are not in their club. That's why it would take a bloody revolution to get them to give that money up. They own the government, they own the police, they own the military, and increasingly, they own all of us.
Single payer would deprive the parasites of the horrific sums of money they have been extracting from the 99% of US citizens who are not in their club. That's why it would take a bloody revolution to get them to give that money up. They own the government, they own the police, they own the military, and increasingly, they own all of us.
7
The Democrats need to come up with our version of Reagan's "welfare queen" in reverse - the ultimate "takers".
- A spoiled brat who has never had to work for a living, and instead sucks of a trust fund.
- A parasite who lives off the dividends and interest of inherited or accumulated wealth, but contributes nothing to society.
- A leach who jets off to Aspen or Miami Beach on a whim.
- And this TAKER wants yet another tax cut?
The type of people I have in mind?
Ivanka, Don Jr., and Eric Trump
- A spoiled brat who has never had to work for a living, and instead sucks of a trust fund.
- A parasite who lives off the dividends and interest of inherited or accumulated wealth, but contributes nothing to society.
- A leach who jets off to Aspen or Miami Beach on a whim.
- And this TAKER wants yet another tax cut?
The type of people I have in mind?
Ivanka, Don Jr., and Eric Trump
13
Democrats need to look at the policies of FDR. He had a sociologist on his team that helped him realize that people deserve the dignity of a job. Not all of FDR's programs were successful but he had 3 major programs that focused on creating jobs until the private sector improved. Joe Biden is the only Democrat I've heard who understands this fact due to his father's experience.
Democrats lost because saying "I'm not him" isn't good enough. You must have a vision for Americans to support. Americans will support social issues if their basic needs are being met so focus on a 50 state solution to what needs to be corrected in this country. Otherwise we're not going to remain the land of opportunity.
Democrats lost because saying "I'm not him" isn't good enough. You must have a vision for Americans to support. Americans will support social issues if their basic needs are being met so focus on a 50 state solution to what needs to be corrected in this country. Otherwise we're not going to remain the land of opportunity.
10
can we pay for this with a carbon tax please?
3
Voters agree with Democrats on issues.*
But Republicans win on successful political tactics.
Dear DNC and Tom Perez,
1. Where is the 50 state strategy to run good candidates and win local and state offices?
2. What is the plan to take back state governments before the 2020 Census and redistricting, and reverse the GOP gerrymandering?
3. Where are the energetic, visionary, and articulate Democratic voices on the Sunday morning shows, and other media outlets?
4. Where is the grass roots voter registration drive - to counter GOP voter suppression and Kris Kobach voter roll purges?
We need to win, before we can govern.
We need a grass roots, bottom-up rebirth of the Democratic Party. We need to be ready to win the House and Senate in 2018, and to be full steam ahead by 2020. I'm willing to work for it. Mr. Perez, are you?
* Well, clearly not the ill-conceived subsidy for having children that Mr. Bernstein proposes in this op-ed, but otherwise voters generally do like Democratic ideas.
But Republicans win on successful political tactics.
Dear DNC and Tom Perez,
1. Where is the 50 state strategy to run good candidates and win local and state offices?
2. What is the plan to take back state governments before the 2020 Census and redistricting, and reverse the GOP gerrymandering?
3. Where are the energetic, visionary, and articulate Democratic voices on the Sunday morning shows, and other media outlets?
4. Where is the grass roots voter registration drive - to counter GOP voter suppression and Kris Kobach voter roll purges?
We need to win, before we can govern.
We need a grass roots, bottom-up rebirth of the Democratic Party. We need to be ready to win the House and Senate in 2018, and to be full steam ahead by 2020. I'm willing to work for it. Mr. Perez, are you?
* Well, clearly not the ill-conceived subsidy for having children that Mr. Bernstein proposes in this op-ed, but otherwise voters generally do like Democratic ideas.
12
"Where are the energetic, visionary, and articulate Democratic voices on the Sunday morning shows, and other media outlets?"
This past Sunday (and recently), you trotted out:
- John Kerry (weak)
- Al Gore (actually pretty good - but only for environmental issues)
- Nancy Pelosi (sometimes strong, but polarizing)
- Chuck Schumer (weak)
- Susan Rice (pretty good, but can be polarizing)
- Why not try Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Corey Booker?
- Even better, I hope there are other young rising stars in the national Democratic Party. Give them a chance.
This past Sunday (and recently), you trotted out:
- John Kerry (weak)
- Al Gore (actually pretty good - but only for environmental issues)
- Nancy Pelosi (sometimes strong, but polarizing)
- Chuck Schumer (weak)
- Susan Rice (pretty good, but can be polarizing)
- Why not try Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Corey Booker?
- Even better, I hope there are other young rising stars in the national Democratic Party. Give them a chance.
3
I am a lifelong democrat but these are mostly bad ideas and I don't think the majority of democrats will support them. The federal government paying poor people to have more kids doesn't make any sense. This isn't a winning proposition. How about universal health care for all? That is something the country can get behind. Democrat leadership needs to get smarter in order to win 2018 and 2020.
10
How many wealthy Democrats can afford $40,000 to $80,000 a year for concierge Healthcare while millions can't afford basic insurance? This isn't about a return to a failed Democratic Platform anymore that is thrown under the bus after a win as in decades past. Your days as a Party are numbered unless you DROP the 1% and help the 99.
12
This is the kind of economic progressivism that most Hillary supporters here (WA) are very much in favor of. Her supporters here were always in favor of these, throughout the presidential election. In that light, I don't altogether understand why Jared thinks of them as "emerging."
The present situation could give Democrats several opportunities. For instance, if Trump and the Republicans pass a cruel health care plan, then that could open the door to universal health care. Republican excesses in other areas could open other doors. E.g., excessive deregulation could result in the reinstatement of reasonable regulation.
The present situation could give Democrats several opportunities. For instance, if Trump and the Republicans pass a cruel health care plan, then that could open the door to universal health care. Republican excesses in other areas could open other doors. E.g., excessive deregulation could result in the reinstatement of reasonable regulation.
2
The 'hard-right' ideology is a 'failure' for another reason: fundamentally, it is NOT based on electoral reality. There simply are NO national voting majorities for the current incarnation of the Republican Party or its agenda.
Yes, the GOP is in the congressional majority. Yes, the GOP candidate 'won' the presidency. Yet each political victory is handicapped by it's own version of electoral subterfuge that is showing those 'wins' as Pyrrhic victories. Control of each respective institution was won, but at the price of being able to govern with anything resembling a national mandate.
The Republican congressional majority was won through it's 2010 "Red Map Strategy", essentially a national strategy to gerrymander congress. But in doing so, the GOP lost any center, with intra-party feuding between the new, radical, hard right, and what's left of the moderates. At the same time, victory is tempered by the reality that, in spite of being the majority in Congress, it is that in name only: the total number of votes for Republicans running for Congress in 2012, 2014, and 2016 was LESS than the total number of votes for Democrats in each cycle. We effectively have a national minority hijacking our public institutions to masquerade as a majority.
In winning the presidency, the GOP got a candidate to 'break all the rules', but which also broke with any political decorum or trust, inflaming the opposition rather than accommodating it, thereby continuing gridlock.
Yes, the GOP is in the congressional majority. Yes, the GOP candidate 'won' the presidency. Yet each political victory is handicapped by it's own version of electoral subterfuge that is showing those 'wins' as Pyrrhic victories. Control of each respective institution was won, but at the price of being able to govern with anything resembling a national mandate.
The Republican congressional majority was won through it's 2010 "Red Map Strategy", essentially a national strategy to gerrymander congress. But in doing so, the GOP lost any center, with intra-party feuding between the new, radical, hard right, and what's left of the moderates. At the same time, victory is tempered by the reality that, in spite of being the majority in Congress, it is that in name only: the total number of votes for Republicans running for Congress in 2012, 2014, and 2016 was LESS than the total number of votes for Democrats in each cycle. We effectively have a national minority hijacking our public institutions to masquerade as a majority.
In winning the presidency, the GOP got a candidate to 'break all the rules', but which also broke with any political decorum or trust, inflaming the opposition rather than accommodating it, thereby continuing gridlock.
4
Nice comment. In short, the Republican Party is fractured, and it is eating itself.
In attempt to understand Trump voters, I have spent a lot of time since the election reading comments on Breitbart. The internal splits I have seen there, especially between the far right and the establishment RINOs, confirm what you have written. As does the failure of the first "Health Care" bill in the House.
In attempt to understand Trump voters, I have spent a lot of time since the election reading comments on Breitbart. The internal splits I have seen there, especially between the far right and the establishment RINOs, confirm what you have written. As does the failure of the first "Health Care" bill in the House.
2
Tom Perez,
Where is the 50 state strategy for Democrats to take back state governments before the 2020 census, and the next redistricting?
I'm waiting . . .
Where is the 50 state strategy for Democrats to take back state governments before the 2020 census, and the next redistricting?
I'm waiting . . .
4
@MidtownATL
Apologies...my first take answering this was for a slightly different question re: 2020 census. As for the DNC's 50 state strategy? Haven't heard much about it yet either.
Apologies...my first take answering this was for a slightly different question re: 2020 census. As for the DNC's 50 state strategy? Haven't heard much about it yet either.
3
Uhh, why is universal health care (Medicare for all?) not anywhere in this piece?
8
The free market economy works where the openly and fairly elected government balances and levels the playing field by helping the less successful players in the economic competition with minimum wages and basic human needs........as best exemplified in the Scandinavian countries.
In the US the Republican party openly favors the self made ,successful and rich supporters, and calls on the not so successful to vote Republican as the best opportunity to achieve success. The Democrats traditionally represent the working masses but are dominated by the same successful and rich as the Republicans,perhaps a different faction......but with the same goals....to control the government primarily for the benefit of their own elite through a populist Democratic agenda that purportedly benefits the labor and downtrodden minorities through redistribution and sharing of wealth.
Reaganomics,the Clintons economic success,the Supreme Courts" election"of Bush, the Bush wars,the new "security state" of the military industrial complex,islamophobia arising from the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the Citizens United decision .........all confirm the tragic flaw in Keynsian capitalism................the inevitable economic failure of the elitists corporocratic state as led by undisguised greed of Donald Trump .
In the US the Republican party openly favors the self made ,successful and rich supporters, and calls on the not so successful to vote Republican as the best opportunity to achieve success. The Democrats traditionally represent the working masses but are dominated by the same successful and rich as the Republicans,perhaps a different faction......but with the same goals....to control the government primarily for the benefit of their own elite through a populist Democratic agenda that purportedly benefits the labor and downtrodden minorities through redistribution and sharing of wealth.
Reaganomics,the Clintons economic success,the Supreme Courts" election"of Bush, the Bush wars,the new "security state" of the military industrial complex,islamophobia arising from the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the Citizens United decision .........all confirm the tragic flaw in Keynsian capitalism................the inevitable economic failure of the elitists corporocratic state as led by undisguised greed of Donald Trump .
1
Once the Democrats develop an agenda they will manage to distill it down to a slim 100 page document filled with 30 word sentences of 5 syllable words. You gotta love those Democratic sound bites that run a tight 3 minutes and 40 seconds.
7
True that. ;)
Here's my attempt at bumper stickers and bullet points:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/opinion/democratic-party-inequality-c...
Here's my attempt at bumper stickers and bullet points:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/opinion/democratic-party-inequality-c...
1
This would be called, demsplaining.
2
Unfortunately, it's all to true!
The wealthy can't pay for everything we want. Huge new "give-away programs" were feasible when competing nations were in ruins after WWII, but those days are gone forever. The American worker must now compete with workers globally. They need marketable skills, motivation, a clean drug screen, and trousers that don't fall down when they're working with both hands. Labor unions are not a substitute.
It is indeed time for a single-payer health system, but this will be a tough fight. The Democratic proposal must be kept simple so voters can understand it and get behind it. We also need to not pay for very high-cost/low-benefit medical treatments, and to end tobacco marketing and treat tobacco use as addiction treatment.
Most importantly, the Democratic Party must end its approach based on "benefits to our base," and focus on education, competitiveness, efficiency, and avoiding more stupid wars.
It is indeed time for a single-payer health system, but this will be a tough fight. The Democratic proposal must be kept simple so voters can understand it and get behind it. We also need to not pay for very high-cost/low-benefit medical treatments, and to end tobacco marketing and treat tobacco use as addiction treatment.
Most importantly, the Democratic Party must end its approach based on "benefits to our base," and focus on education, competitiveness, efficiency, and avoiding more stupid wars.
3
You're right, basically. Its just that every time some begins with the argument not to tax the rich, before long we're dispensing with the basic needs of millions of people. We still need to think in terms of meeting those, even if we can't think of "huge giveaways".
1
Here's the message:
1. The Democrats are the party of the people who work for a living, including the middle class.
2. The Republicans are the party of the rent seekers. They collect unearned income from the dividends and interest on accumulated wealth. They contribute nothing to society. -- And, they want another tax break. Enough!
---
Demcratic Agenda: Jobs, jobs, jobs:
- Medicare for All (job mobility, freedom to start a small business)
- Living Wage (the dignity of work allows you to pay your bills)
- Rebuild America (infrastructure = jobs)
On the revenue side:
- Tax capital gains and dividends as ordinary income
- End the step-up basis for inherited stocks
- Why should people who work for a living and earned wages be penalized by our tax code, and people who live off of accumulated wealth be favored?
1. The Democrats are the party of the people who work for a living, including the middle class.
2. The Republicans are the party of the rent seekers. They collect unearned income from the dividends and interest on accumulated wealth. They contribute nothing to society. -- And, they want another tax break. Enough!
---
Demcratic Agenda: Jobs, jobs, jobs:
- Medicare for All (job mobility, freedom to start a small business)
- Living Wage (the dignity of work allows you to pay your bills)
- Rebuild America (infrastructure = jobs)
On the revenue side:
- Tax capital gains and dividends as ordinary income
- End the step-up basis for inherited stocks
- Why should people who work for a living and earned wages be penalized by our tax code, and people who live off of accumulated wealth be favored?
18
Benefits to the working poor will be denied by the R party. Finding a single poor recipient of government funding on a 'per child' basis who personally wastes funds will doom the program (Instead of a welfare Queen, need we vilify a welfare Princess?)
Hundreds of millions of $$ of corporate and high wealth/income benefits, however, are justified regardless of the lack of promised 'trickle down' revenue growth and in spite of repeated criminal activity by that class.
Hundreds of millions of $$ of corporate and high wealth/income benefits, however, are justified regardless of the lack of promised 'trickle down' revenue growth and in spite of repeated criminal activity by that class.
5
"Instead of a welfare Queen, need we vilify a welfare Princess?"
We Democrats need to vilify the tax-cut trust fund princess -- the taker who lives off unearned dividends from inherited wealth, has never worked a day in her life, and wants yet another tax cut.
We Democrats need to vilify the tax-cut trust fund princess -- the taker who lives off unearned dividends from inherited wealth, has never worked a day in her life, and wants yet another tax cut.
3
Have you still got your heads in the sand? The world, and the country, are overpopulated. We need birth control! A child subsidy, Yes, up to 2 children. Deductions for children for the wealthy also limited to 2 children. And more for health care and education.
5
Years ago, Ronald Reagan of all people proposed eliminating welfare by providing X number of dollars to every citizen. The idea got shot down, but it's not a bad plan if combined with a tax system that gets the money back from those who don't need the support. A minimum wage job doesn't cut it, but $1000 a month (to pick a number) from the Federal Government would make working that minimum wage job economically sensible. And if everybody gets the $1000 per month, the whole "welfare freeloaders" argument loses some punch.
4
I am suspicious of these "universal income" type proposals. Too many on the far right (like Charles Murray) seem enamored with them. And the silicon valley oligarchs are now starting to talk about this as well.
If this has worked well in practice in some country, I'd be willing to look at it with an open mind.
But for now, as a liberal Democrat, I would support
- Medicare for All
- Housing safety net (Section 8 vouchers)
- Food safety net (SNAP)
- Clear policy goal to help people find a living wage job and get off the housing/food safety nets
If this has worked well in practice in some country, I'd be willing to look at it with an open mind.
But for now, as a liberal Democrat, I would support
- Medicare for All
- Housing safety net (Section 8 vouchers)
- Food safety net (SNAP)
- Clear policy goal to help people find a living wage job and get off the housing/food safety nets
2
I have voted Democratic and supported the party for over 45 years but I'm not sure I can do so any longer. In the last election, they had one job: Keep the worst human being in the country out of the Oval Office and they failed. The GOP has been eating the Democratic Party's lunch for decades at almost all levels of government and now they control most state houses, most governorships, the Senate, the House of Representatives and now the Presidency. As the author says, progressives are going to be on the defensive for decades. Unfortunately, I don't think we have anywhere to turn for direction, leadership and strategy and we are just adrift while dark forces solidify their hold on government and society. I find it very difficult to maintain any hope with the situation as it is.
5
Don't give up on us yet Steve. Remember America twice voted in a BLACK President.
Never ever ever did I believe the American voters could be so enlightened. America was sooo cool with President Barak Obama. America shined so brightly. I was so proud to be an American. I have hope. All those Obama voters did not disappear. I have hope.
Never ever ever did I believe the American voters could be so enlightened. America was sooo cool with President Barak Obama. America shined so brightly. I was so proud to be an American. I have hope. All those Obama voters did not disappear. I have hope.
1
Once again a bunch of wonky ideas that miss the point. This should be the Democratic message:
1. Full employment at a living wage.
2 Medicare for all.
3. No more "nation building" abroad.
1. Full employment at a living wage.
2 Medicare for all.
3. No more "nation building" abroad.
9
Here's the realistic Democratic Agenda, for 2018-2020:
MEDICARE for ALL
National Federal Minimum WAGE: Minimum 12.00 per hour, starting in 2019. Level rising, in increments, to 15.00 per hour, by 2023. States are free to require higher minimums, but no states can allow lower.
These two items are the most desired, and workable, and FAIR for the largest number of people. Stop being the GOP lite. We can really help solve major, life threatening problems, with JUST these changes. This is what voters want, and NEED.
MEDICARE for ALL
National Federal Minimum WAGE: Minimum 12.00 per hour, starting in 2019. Level rising, in increments, to 15.00 per hour, by 2023. States are free to require higher minimums, but no states can allow lower.
These two items are the most desired, and workable, and FAIR for the largest number of people. Stop being the GOP lite. We can really help solve major, life threatening problems, with JUST these changes. This is what voters want, and NEED.
5
Twelve dollars an hour. No matter the task, the employer, the location nor the skills needed? Really. If I were in the robotics/POS automation field, I would be ecstatic. Everyone else, not so much.
Might I suggest that a more focused and generous child benefit - like the one we have in Canada - would both be more progressive and also reduce child poverty more effectively than the universal child allowance proposed by Mr. Bernstein.
The "realists" in the party have an agenda- but the progressive, ultra-liberals have hijacked any form of compromise. Again- transgender car dealerships and free college education for undocumented immigrants will not win elections. It needs to be about universal healthcare and jobs- all the other stuff [albeit equally important] can wait. We can't drum circle and poetry slam our way out of this mess either. The DNC needs to focus on voter registration at the local and state levels - the surge over will follow them to national elections. If that doesn't work then let's just bite the bullet and run Tom Hanks and George Clooney in 2020 and get it over with- If Trump can win- so can liberal, iconic Hollywood figures. That's pretty much what our nation has evolved to anyway- Fight fire with fire.
10
Here is the definition of the so called Free Market society and Capitalism: I've got your money and even if you catch me, well too bad for you.
Let the government do it, then it will be fair for all. Never privatize anything as it always costs more and rips off everyone. Letting the government run everything works in civilized countries not masochistic sadistic heartless countries such as this country. Tax the rich, tax the corporations, tax all Republican'ts and their supporters and voters out of existence. More unions. More socialism no more austerity. More laws and regulations. Not less or fewer. Health care and education are rights not privileges because it is progressive and moves everyone ahead not just a few.
Regarding the deplorables and the Trumpet voters and supporters, next time stay home and don't vote as you're not smart enough.
Let the government do it, then it will be fair for all. Never privatize anything as it always costs more and rips off everyone. Letting the government run everything works in civilized countries not masochistic sadistic heartless countries such as this country. Tax the rich, tax the corporations, tax all Republican'ts and their supporters and voters out of existence. More unions. More socialism no more austerity. More laws and regulations. Not less or fewer. Health care and education are rights not privileges because it is progressive and moves everyone ahead not just a few.
Regarding the deplorables and the Trumpet voters and supporters, next time stay home and don't vote as you're not smart enough.
2
What is Tom Perez doing for the Democrats?
He's got his hipster goatee and his fiery indignation speeches.
But does he truly represent the future of the Democratic Party?
He's got his hipster goatee and his fiery indignation speeches.
But does he truly represent the future of the Democratic Party?
7
The proposal for a child allowance referenced in this article would replace the existing child care credit and it sounds like a good idea. But in either case--allowance or credit--the subsidies should be limited to two children per household. With the human population already greater than what our planet can sustainably support, it is time we stop encouraging large families through the tax code. Rich or poor, public policy should discourage parents from having many children while enabling them to physically and intellectually nourish those that they do have.
10
My job as well as my employers position on the issue don't allow me the time or funds to have a life outside of work, much less a family. So why should my taxes support yours???
2
This is too New Deal-ish for me. A more effective (and broadly palatable) path is for the Democrats to stop pushing more federal intervention and instead promote government partnership - with big business and small business, regional associations and state and city governments, with entrepreneurs, with genuinely new programs based on hard data about what people in our hugely diverse country really need and want. The Democrats will regain power if they promote government as a collaborator, not a dictator (or "re-distributor") - and a collaborator open to all constructive partners.
Democrats need a message of justice and solidarity: Single payer baseline health care with affordable added insurance riders. Ensure educational affordability and excellence by restoring Pell grants and low cost tuition; additional room, board and technology cost could be determined on a sliding scale. End the student debt scam; offer prudent financial advice and set interest rates lower than the housing rate; similar to a mortgage, students could contract to emerge from debt in five - fifteen years after graduation; interest charges and repayment schedule should commence nine months after graduation (or dropping out) with reasonable, fair negotiation possible only if absolutely necessary. Forget the child care allowance - it is a non-starter, but increase funding for low income housing, WIC and food stamps. Nobody -not even a Trumpster-wants to see hungry, homeless children in this country! Maybe forget about subsidizing Planned Parenthood because it is too controversial, but fold its services into a women's health care package. Emulate European democracies on abortion rights; frame abortion as a health care rather than lifestyle issue - and emphasize responsible parenthood. Expose the prison for profit industry for its cruelty and injustice. Support veterans and unions. Clean up the environment. Forbid lavish campaign contributions and seek out decent candidates who respect the constitution and communicate well with voters. We can do it!
7
"a monthly stipend for all families with children"
This is why Trump won. The Democrats need to focus on the plight of the middle class and the need for better jobs, better education and better health care. The stipend idea wouldn't even fly in California, an all blue state. It sounds like what it is: something cooked up by an out of touch in DC think tank.
This is why Trump won. The Democrats need to focus on the plight of the middle class and the need for better jobs, better education and better health care. The stipend idea wouldn't even fly in California, an all blue state. It sounds like what it is: something cooked up by an out of touch in DC think tank.
10
1. Single payer health care, upgrade the NIH and CDC (remember Ebola? We got lucky on that one, let's not count on being lucky again).
2. Infrastructure, especially modernizing and hardening our aging, patchwork electrical grid and water systems, which will face increasing threats from cyberattacks and storms.
3. Slim down defense spending by focusing on the threats we are most likely to face, such as cyberattacks, terrorists with improvised explosive devices, or possible chemical or biological attacks. Less expenditure on big, shiny toys that are much less likely to be needed to protect Americans on US soil. (I would think differently in Europe but I really doubt Russia or China will ship their armies here). Much less involvement in military conflicts elsewhere, better care for our wounded soldiers.
4. Definitely raise the cap on Social Security-taxable income. Treat all income the same whether from wages, investments, or capital gains.
Sure, there are a lot of other priorities I'd like to add (education, climate change, marijuana legalization and drug offense sentencing reform to name a few). But the four above are the ones most likely to resonate with moderate and left wing Democrats, Independents, and moderate Republicans alike. Any benefits added must go to everyone, and any costs must (theoretically) be paid by everyone (although in reality, lower- and middle-income people won't pay much more since they have little income that is not already taxed wage income).
2. Infrastructure, especially modernizing and hardening our aging, patchwork electrical grid and water systems, which will face increasing threats from cyberattacks and storms.
3. Slim down defense spending by focusing on the threats we are most likely to face, such as cyberattacks, terrorists with improvised explosive devices, or possible chemical or biological attacks. Less expenditure on big, shiny toys that are much less likely to be needed to protect Americans on US soil. (I would think differently in Europe but I really doubt Russia or China will ship their armies here). Much less involvement in military conflicts elsewhere, better care for our wounded soldiers.
4. Definitely raise the cap on Social Security-taxable income. Treat all income the same whether from wages, investments, or capital gains.
Sure, there are a lot of other priorities I'd like to add (education, climate change, marijuana legalization and drug offense sentencing reform to name a few). But the four above are the ones most likely to resonate with moderate and left wing Democrats, Independents, and moderate Republicans alike. Any benefits added must go to everyone, and any costs must (theoretically) be paid by everyone (although in reality, lower- and middle-income people won't pay much more since they have little income that is not already taxed wage income).
9
These ideas are not electoral winners. They aren't bold, they're a stereotype of what most non-political people think Dems are - tax & spend. We need *new* ideas that can be communicated simply. Like:
1) Whatever your ideology, you think medical & dental costs should go down. Dems should be the party of reducing medical costs. No more $400 bills for strep throat.
2) Whether you're pro-choice or pro-life you think the number of abortions should go down. Dems should be the party of less abortions, principally through making birth control free and as available as a Big Mac. Child spacing is an economic & moral right.
3) Dems should steal the tax issue from the other side. Introduce legislation that looks at total tax burden (federal, state, local, property, sales, etc.) and progressively tie that total burden to total wealth. And win back the estate tax/death tax issue. How is it moral that Baron Trump's future child is already more wealthy than yours?
1) Whatever your ideology, you think medical & dental costs should go down. Dems should be the party of reducing medical costs. No more $400 bills for strep throat.
2) Whether you're pro-choice or pro-life you think the number of abortions should go down. Dems should be the party of less abortions, principally through making birth control free and as available as a Big Mac. Child spacing is an economic & moral right.
3) Dems should steal the tax issue from the other side. Introduce legislation that looks at total tax burden (federal, state, local, property, sales, etc.) and progressively tie that total burden to total wealth. And win back the estate tax/death tax issue. How is it moral that Baron Trump's future child is already more wealthy than yours?
17
If the Dems run on single-payer health care and impeachment, we'll get single-payer health care and impeachment.
3
I find the article and the comments laughable. The reactions to this article remind me of kids at a party when the Ice Cream arrives. Gimme! Gimme! Gimme!
I've shown this to a few friends and we can't stop laughing. What a bunch of losers.
I've shown this to a few friends and we can't stop laughing. What a bunch of losers.
3
Yes, this article is out of touch, and many commenters agree.
Many others, like myself, are focused on jobs and the middle class.
Medicare for all, a Living Wage, and Infrastructure.
Here's my Democratic Agenda, and how to pay for it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/opinion/democratic-party-inequality-c...
Many others, like myself, are focused on jobs and the middle class.
Medicare for all, a Living Wage, and Infrastructure.
Here's my Democratic Agenda, and how to pay for it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/opinion/democratic-party-inequality-c...
3
When Mitt Romney made his "50% of Americans receive benefits" statement, rather than "50% of Americans are lazy blood-sucking leeches", I read it to say, "a small group of people are eating a giant slice of the American pie, and the government is having to step in to try and keep people out of poverty." A workable minimum wage would move more of the pie onto less affluent plates, at least for the immediate future. Note that the 0.1% are going to resist this tooth and nail. After all, everyone who is anyone has a golden toilet.
"If we want to help places with too little labor demand, we must implement direct job creation policies, meaning either jobs created by the government or publicly subsidized private employment"
This is exactly the kind of policy prescription that got Donald Trump elected. It's flat crazy! We have been subsidizing private sector businesses for decades with our too low minimum wage that requires the taxpayers to kick in billions so that even full-time workers at mega rich giant corps. like MacD and Walmart (much less Mom and Pops enterprises) can get enough food and medical care to survive. Can't Mr. Bernstein see that we are fed up with this public expense for private profit system? On this subject I'm a hard nosed conservative: Owning a profitable business is NOT a right guaranteed by our constitution. If a business model cannot earn a profit w/o taxpayer subsidy to their workers, THEY ARE NOT A BUSINESS!
This is exactly the kind of policy prescription that got Donald Trump elected. It's flat crazy! We have been subsidizing private sector businesses for decades with our too low minimum wage that requires the taxpayers to kick in billions so that even full-time workers at mega rich giant corps. like MacD and Walmart (much less Mom and Pops enterprises) can get enough food and medical care to survive. Can't Mr. Bernstein see that we are fed up with this public expense for private profit system? On this subject I'm a hard nosed conservative: Owning a profitable business is NOT a right guaranteed by our constitution. If a business model cannot earn a profit w/o taxpayer subsidy to their workers, THEY ARE NOT A BUSINESS!
7
The Democratic Party needs to make healthcare front and center:
Medicare for All
Let me explain why. I am 47. Three years ago, I went to the ER with sudden extreme pain. I have never been sick or in a hospital in my life. Long story short, I did not come home for a month. They did emergency surgery and remove most of my intestine. I was in a coma, and in the ICU for 3 weeks. The doctors told me this was bad luck, and not due to lifestyle or bad choices. I survived, completely recovered, and am thankful to be alive. I am once again a contributing member of society and a taxpayer.
The total bill was $500,000. I was fortunate to have good insurance through my job, and paid $13,000 out off pocket (which I was also fortunate to have).
What if I worked full time for $15/hour as a line cook, or a dishwasher, or a landscaper -- and had no insurance? For most of my life until recently, I was self-employed, and did not have health insurance due to the cost.
I don't think the hospital would have let me die. But this would have wiped out all my savings, and then I would have declared bankruptcy. And society would have paid for this $500,000 - through higher medical costs to everyone else and taxes that partially funded the hospital. So this cost would have been socialized, regardless.
My life is not worth more than the life of a cook or landscaper. They work and pay taxes and contribute to society. Why should they be financially ruined by a medical emergency when I was not?
Medicare for All
Let me explain why. I am 47. Three years ago, I went to the ER with sudden extreme pain. I have never been sick or in a hospital in my life. Long story short, I did not come home for a month. They did emergency surgery and remove most of my intestine. I was in a coma, and in the ICU for 3 weeks. The doctors told me this was bad luck, and not due to lifestyle or bad choices. I survived, completely recovered, and am thankful to be alive. I am once again a contributing member of society and a taxpayer.
The total bill was $500,000. I was fortunate to have good insurance through my job, and paid $13,000 out off pocket (which I was also fortunate to have).
What if I worked full time for $15/hour as a line cook, or a dishwasher, or a landscaper -- and had no insurance? For most of my life until recently, I was self-employed, and did not have health insurance due to the cost.
I don't think the hospital would have let me die. But this would have wiped out all my savings, and then I would have declared bankruptcy. And society would have paid for this $500,000 - through higher medical costs to everyone else and taxes that partially funded the hospital. So this cost would have been socialized, regardless.
My life is not worth more than the life of a cook or landscaper. They work and pay taxes and contribute to society. Why should they be financially ruined by a medical emergency when I was not?
23
Still no word from dems about the war on drug users.
Just like the republicans, all they want to do is get elected.
So, the task is to fool the voters, just as Obama did.
Both parties feed on voter ignorance, and the ease with which they are fooled.
Remember, the dems brought us the war on Vietnam...
Think for yourself?
Just like the republicans, all they want to do is get elected.
So, the task is to fool the voters, just as Obama did.
Both parties feed on voter ignorance, and the ease with which they are fooled.
Remember, the dems brought us the war on Vietnam...
Think for yourself?
3
With a horrendous overpopulation of humans ravaging the planet, let's do exactly nothing to encourage people to make even more humans.
9
But will the Dems be capable of getting their message out? Will they do what they always do and expect voters to find it...on a website someplace...? Make reference to the great ideas...but not speak them out loud?
They also need some spokespeople...and that list should never include Pelosi, or Schumer...
They also need some spokespeople...and that list should never include Pelosi, or Schumer...
5
In the preamble of the constitution it lays out two specific tasks. Provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare. While we do the former in spades, we, and the GOP in particular is anathema to the latter. Medicare for all, a progressive consumption tax (rather than income), guaranteed public schooling need to be the goal posts. These things would have the most direct on the working class and poor and should be the goals of all American trying to make our collective experience great.
2
The Republicans have won the small government war that Reagan started. Republicans no longer care about deficits or fiscal responsibility. Today, they stand for nothing but tax cuts for the rich. The evidence is the rise of wealth and income inequality since 1980.
Democrats need to remember this. Every Republican plan today is simply another tax cut for the rich -- either blatantly obvious or thinly veiled (e.g., Trumpcare). While we decimate our social safety net and deficits spiral out of control.
Mr. Bernstiein's tired and small proposals (especially subsidies for having children) are not going to fly. And are political suicide for Democrats.
The Democratic Agenda needs to be jobs, jobs, jobs:
- Medicare for All (job mobility, freedom to start a small business)
- Living Wage (dignity of work allows you to pay your bills)
- Rebuilt America (infrastructure = jobs)
On the revenue side:
- Tax capital gains and dividends as ordinary income
- End the step-up basis for inherited stocks
- Why should people who work for a living and earned wages be penalized by our tax code, and people who live off of accumulated wealth be favored?
Democrats need to remember this. Every Republican plan today is simply another tax cut for the rich -- either blatantly obvious or thinly veiled (e.g., Trumpcare). While we decimate our social safety net and deficits spiral out of control.
Mr. Bernstiein's tired and small proposals (especially subsidies for having children) are not going to fly. And are political suicide for Democrats.
The Democratic Agenda needs to be jobs, jobs, jobs:
- Medicare for All (job mobility, freedom to start a small business)
- Living Wage (dignity of work allows you to pay your bills)
- Rebuilt America (infrastructure = jobs)
On the revenue side:
- Tax capital gains and dividends as ordinary income
- End the step-up basis for inherited stocks
- Why should people who work for a living and earned wages be penalized by our tax code, and people who live off of accumulated wealth be favored?
10
A universal child allowance is a horrible idea. I am not anti-children, but this proposal, while potentially politically popular, would encourage people to have more children when the planet is already way overpopulated, and it is unfair to people who don't have children and who would not receive any subsidy. Far better to tax the rich (e.g. limit their child dependent deductions, mortgage deductions, and make the tax rates more progressive) and spend the money on better public education. We should be moving towards engines of economic growth that improve people's lives (improved services), not just dumb and dangerous population growth.
10
Let's see: universal health care, supported by every D since Truman. 3 people have actually increased Americans' access to health care: LBJ, with Medicare and Medicaid; Obama (and Pelosi, so 4) with the ACA, and Hillary Clinton, with CHIP. All what the Bernie folks would, and do, call "establishment" Democrats.
Raising the minimum wage, supported by all Ds. A raise has been in the platform for almost 8 years now. Whose done something about it? Obama, on federal wages, and states and cities like Washington and Seattle, under "establishment" Democrats.
Regulating the banking industry, supported by every D since FDR. Who got it done? Establishment Democrats like FDR, Dingall, Obama, and Prez Clinton.
Supporting the working class? Every D since whenever; Ds are the ones pushing back against "right to work" anti-union legislation; Ds are the ones that have given us workplace safety standards, the right to organise, health care (see above), and a raft of other policies.
Seems to me these new so-called progressives only think they are inventing the wheel, and getting the Democratic party to change; when instead they're just attempting to claim exclusive ownership of long-held, and acted on, ideals.
I'm not impressed by uninformed appropriation by ineffectual blowhards. I like my progressivism with a dose of accomplishment.
Raising the minimum wage, supported by all Ds. A raise has been in the platform for almost 8 years now. Whose done something about it? Obama, on federal wages, and states and cities like Washington and Seattle, under "establishment" Democrats.
Regulating the banking industry, supported by every D since FDR. Who got it done? Establishment Democrats like FDR, Dingall, Obama, and Prez Clinton.
Supporting the working class? Every D since whenever; Ds are the ones pushing back against "right to work" anti-union legislation; Ds are the ones that have given us workplace safety standards, the right to organise, health care (see above), and a raft of other policies.
Seems to me these new so-called progressives only think they are inventing the wheel, and getting the Democratic party to change; when instead they're just attempting to claim exclusive ownership of long-held, and acted on, ideals.
I'm not impressed by uninformed appropriation by ineffectual blowhards. I like my progressivism with a dose of accomplishment.
4
"I like my progressivism with a dose of accomplishment."
I agree. That is why I am done with the Clintons.
They have ruined the Democratic Party, starting with Bill in 1992. "It's the economy stupid." "We're gonna end welfare as we know it." "The era of big government is over." Repeal of Glass-Steagall. Big Macs and SUVs. Wall Street and the C-Suites. Limousine Liberals.
I didn't agree with Bernie on everything. But at least he could communicate with everyday citizens and get his message across.
We need new energy in the Democratic Party -- people who can actually communicate with the American People and win elections. Winning elections is the first order of business for "accomplishments."
I agree. That is why I am done with the Clintons.
They have ruined the Democratic Party, starting with Bill in 1992. "It's the economy stupid." "We're gonna end welfare as we know it." "The era of big government is over." Repeal of Glass-Steagall. Big Macs and SUVs. Wall Street and the C-Suites. Limousine Liberals.
I didn't agree with Bernie on everything. But at least he could communicate with everyday citizens and get his message across.
We need new energy in the Democratic Party -- people who can actually communicate with the American People and win elections. Winning elections is the first order of business for "accomplishments."
5
SCHIP was sponsored by Senators Edward Kennedy and Orrin Hatch- . No offense but Ms. Clinton was not in a position to sponsor legislation then.
This was is '97 or so, when there was greater bi-partisanship and the parties believed in children.
This was before money became so all- consuming a pastime and before the conflation of politics and celebrity.
The eras since then have eroded greatly the integrity of both parties.
Lesson to the democrats: try not locking up a substantial part of your case the next time around.
Yes, I and many others are annoyed by the predictability of this.
This was is '97 or so, when there was greater bi-partisanship and the parties believed in children.
This was before money became so all- consuming a pastime and before the conflation of politics and celebrity.
The eras since then have eroded greatly the integrity of both parties.
Lesson to the democrats: try not locking up a substantial part of your case the next time around.
Yes, I and many others are annoyed by the predictability of this.
1
$250 per child to buy a vote? This gimmick is too close to the hackneyed stump speeches of our vacuous president. How about real policies that take care of people. Healthcare, living wage, fair taxes, and for the love of God, get Citizen United neutralized! I'd vote for that.
13
Agenda like this should benefit the Fox News viewers and voters. Why wouldn't they support it? Can Democrats regain control of the Congress and the Senate without the Fox News viewers/voters? If not, then policy of this is just a pipe dream.
I can't see giving an incentive to people to have more children than they can afford. Here is a better idea. Give every child who graduates from HS $100k to be placed in a broad equity-based index fund that cannot be touched until they are 65. Give them another gift of say...$100k if they achieve a college degree or equivalent trade-school certification. Allowed to grow tax-free and adjusting for inflation, such an investment could be worth $1m when they reach 65. They would then be assured of a secure retirement. They would have more of an incentive to get an education that will provide for higher wages throughout their working lives. It would lessen the pressure on the social security system. It would give them a stake in the well-being of the country and themselves which should translate into better personal and civic decisions.
7
I believe that all children should be well fed, clothed, housed, and educated. I generally vote for state and local tax increases to fund education. I buy raffle tickets to help support the school across the street. I volunteer for, and donate to, local organizations that help those in need. I answer the fund-raising requests of the school across the country that my nephew attends. However - as someone who has intentionally not had children, I must admit to a certain weariness for the constant need to pay to raise other people's children. Let's provide free birth control to anyone who wants it.
14
Democrats need to realize that being the party of marginalized groups and the party of the white working class are not mutually exclusive: advocacy is not a zero sum game. Rights for one are rights for all. Class, more than race, or sex, or sexual orientation, is at the root of our discontent.
With regard to health care: we must stand for the idea that in a civilized country, health care for all is a fundamental right, not a privilege for those who can afford it, like a house in a fancy neighborhood. This means simple, straightforward universal access for everyone, rich or poor, not a byzantine labyrinth of rules, paperwork, and exclusions. The solution, as Medicare demonstrates, is to remove profit from the equation: if we agree that health care is in fact a fundamental right, then it is wrong for anyone--insurance companies, drug companies, doctors-- to profit obscenely from providing it, or worse, denying it.
Radical? Yes. But it exists already, both in Medicare and also in the non-profit Kaiser model. I agree with the authors: it's time for bold thought followed by sound policy. Let us please not go off half-cocked or we will set our country back even farther than we already have.
With regard to health care: we must stand for the idea that in a civilized country, health care for all is a fundamental right, not a privilege for those who can afford it, like a house in a fancy neighborhood. This means simple, straightforward universal access for everyone, rich or poor, not a byzantine labyrinth of rules, paperwork, and exclusions. The solution, as Medicare demonstrates, is to remove profit from the equation: if we agree that health care is in fact a fundamental right, then it is wrong for anyone--insurance companies, drug companies, doctors-- to profit obscenely from providing it, or worse, denying it.
Radical? Yes. But it exists already, both in Medicare and also in the non-profit Kaiser model. I agree with the authors: it's time for bold thought followed by sound policy. Let us please not go off half-cocked or we will set our country back even farther than we already have.
13
Until we get big money out of politics, no agenda will ever be without it's influence. The government works for big money. Dem and Repub alike. They have been forced to answer to and serve big money not the people. Thank you supreme court.
6
Lol, it's always been that way. It's not thanks to the Supreme Court (although that exacerbated things), it's thanks to the decision to give each state primary its own day in the limelight, which means America has the longest, most expensive primaries in the world, and unfairly elevates the voting opinions of early voting states over later ones. It's due to the Founding Fathers, who were affluent men who thought only affluent men should attain positions of power and feared the common folk they only barely controlled.
Ideally we wouldn't have campeign contributions at all, because those always bias candidates towards those who can afford to pay, whether that's rich individuals, companies and groups in the current system or the affluent middle and upper class in the individual donor system favored by Sanders. Ideally we'd have a system where every candidate is given the same budget allowance when they run, it would both even the playing field and act as a test of a candidate's ability to strategically use limited funds.
Ideally we wouldn't have campeign contributions at all, because those always bias candidates towards those who can afford to pay, whether that's rich individuals, companies and groups in the current system or the affluent middle and upper class in the individual donor system favored by Sanders. Ideally we'd have a system where every candidate is given the same budget allowance when they run, it would both even the playing field and act as a test of a candidate's ability to strategically use limited funds.
What is it with people to whom everything is all or nothing? And where is all the money going to come from to instantaneously put all of these ideas in play anytime soon?
As several commenters have pointed out, just taking care of healthcare, living wages, jobs, and education would turn this society in the right direction all on its own and solve many other problems in addition. I'd also add that we need major reform on voting rights and tax reform to get the mega-wealthy paying their share.
Goodluck getting people like me who sacrificed a career and struggled on one family income to raise their families to get on board with the child allowance.
As several commenters have pointed out, just taking care of healthcare, living wages, jobs, and education would turn this society in the right direction all on its own and solve many other problems in addition. I'd also add that we need major reform on voting rights and tax reform to get the mega-wealthy paying their share.
Goodluck getting people like me who sacrificed a career and struggled on one family income to raise their families to get on board with the child allowance.
9
We need a stronger economy and more jobs for all Americans!
We need better education for our kids!
We need better, more affordable healthcare for all Americans!
We need leaders that have the character to lead without the tremendous character flaws (I'm looking at both Donald and Hillary on this one).
We need better education for our kids!
We need better, more affordable healthcare for all Americans!
We need leaders that have the character to lead without the tremendous character flaws (I'm looking at both Donald and Hillary on this one).
3
I do believe we need to lay the groundwork now and come up with some basic plans and ways to communicate them: $15/hour (or even $12/hour) minimum wage is a good start, as is improving Obamacare (if it still exists then), and funding for education and infrastucture. But the "monthly stipend for all families with children..." This is a terrible idea. That gives the Trumpers all sorts of negative arguments about paying for "welfare kids" that people had even though they could not afford; do not give them that ammunition. And what about those couples, like me, a middle-class Democrat who decided not to have children (for many reasons; including, yes, financial as well as environmental and personal ones)? That makes me feel like the choice I made to be responsible is moot. Just giving people money to support their children shouldn't fly, but creating an environment where people can succeed with hard work (including schoolwork) should be the focus.
8
There is a clear road map for the comeback of the Democratic Party, and it was drawn by FDR during the Great Depression. The idea that Republican politicians fear the most is that the federal government can be a power to improve people's lives. The Democrats proved government can be a power for good with Social Security and Medicare, just to name two programs. If the Democrats are to come back, they must not be afraid to use all the power of the government to take on the entrenched wealthy interests that would turn our country into a feudal fief.
7
Bernie Sanders et al. do not represent the "left wing" of the Democratic Party. They represent the traditional Democratic Party. The party of FDR, Harry Truman, LBJ, Hubert Humphrey and others like them. And the quicker we get back to that core tradition the better for the party and, most importantly, the country.
19
For those who ask why child credit, just fix the education system? Hungry children don't study so well even in a good school. Children who have parents working two jobs have exhausted struggling parents who don't practice reading, spelling, and basic math with them. Children doing well in school can find a job later in life that pays a living wage. Also nobody is getting rich from 250 $ a month per child. Let's look at societal impact and not 'my taxes'.
3
So true. I live and work in the PA state Capitol , and the secretary of education ( a democrat just like me) could walk to every school in this district and see how ridiculously bad things are. He could develop a checklist of actionable items just via a walk through.
I have lived here a long time.
There is no plan to "fix" this, only Lamentations about how poor and dysfunctional the families are.
This is reason #250 why the Democratic Party fails at winning. Too many kids holding a basketball as a pastime , and not enough attention to the work on the ground. The party has failed and while Hilary and the leaders point the finger at one another we will continue to shake our heads, grit our teeth and roll our eyes as they fight over spoils.
I have lived here a long time.
There is no plan to "fix" this, only Lamentations about how poor and dysfunctional the families are.
This is reason #250 why the Democratic Party fails at winning. Too many kids holding a basketball as a pastime , and not enough attention to the work on the ground. The party has failed and while Hilary and the leaders point the finger at one another we will continue to shake our heads, grit our teeth and roll our eyes as they fight over spoils.
3
Let's say the Democratic Party give up all ideas of government give a ways, which the right love to attack, and American voters love to agree with, and instead focus on the rights of workers to unionize. Why not start demanding (maybe even write a law)that all workers who earn an hourly wage, or salary be enrolled in a workplace or skill based union that has the right to bargain for wages, working conditions and fringe benefits? Do that , and workers could take control of their own futures. Employers would be held accountable for poor workplace safety and for low wages, or off the book hours. Labor unions have backed the Democrats for many generations and have taken a beating while doing so. It is time the Democrats backed the unions in a big, important, life changing way.
6
I'm all for unions, and helping workers.
Democrats should return to their pro-union heritage.
But the government compelling people to join unions will never fly. The right would have a field day with that one.
Democrats should return to their pro-union heritage.
But the government compelling people to join unions will never fly. The right would have a field day with that one.
1
The word "progressive" is a gift to the GOP. The Democrats do need to have a plan, but it needs to be middle of the road, focused on jobs, repairing the damage the next year and a half will do to the country, and most important, start making America a country that cares about all Americans, not just the ones in a specific "tribe". When Mike Pence says he's a "Christian, a conservative, and a Republican", Democrats should say, they are concerned about Americans, period.
4
There is no agenda. There is no leadership either. Clinton, with overwhelming help from drumpf, has pretty much finished the democratic party. I get their emails, having found no way to stop it from from stuffing my mailbox, and have yet to find anything more than a sophomoric plea to help end the republican deluge. The demise of the party is alarming.
14
If Jared Bernstein is the architect of new Democratic National policy, the party is doomed. Congress is bought and paid for by corporate interests, and almost nobody in Washington cares about the average American citizen. Other comments have articulated the kind of serious reforms necessary. Mr. Bernstein would do well to read them and gain a better understanding of the kind of frustration across America that led to the election of a dangerous sociopath, rather than the kind of milquetoast technocrat who would would generate a list like this.
Single Payer Health Care must be at the top of the Democratic Party's list.
We've tried Obamacare, and it couldn't stop the premiums from rising. From all analyses, Trumpcare will only lead to further disaster.
There's only one thing left: Single Payer. It works all over the world by keeping prices down and quality up.
We've tried Obamacare, and it couldn't stop the premiums from rising. From all analyses, Trumpcare will only lead to further disaster.
There's only one thing left: Single Payer. It works all over the world by keeping prices down and quality up.
9
Take the trouble to read the 2016 Democratic platform; it's quite good. If all voters had read the two parties' platforms (instead of obsessing about e-mails, etc.) Democrats would have won in a walk.
8
We had the wrong messenger and had no chance to work toward unity. We failed.
3
I so agree. I tend to think that if Clinton had made more of the platform, instead of responding to Trump, she would have done better. (To give her her due, she did speak of policy, but those speeches got drowned out by the Trump-Clinton quarrel.)
3
If the media had chosen to cover her when she spoke about the issues instead of obsessing over the emails and Trump it would have helped too. I agree Clinton's biggest problem was she lost control of her message and then neither she nor her advisers really knew enough to get control of it back.
3
"Is there an Emerging Democratic Agenda?" If you have to ask the question, then there isn't one.
9
Another inside-the-beltway think tank piece of nonsense from the embedded political establishment that was certain Hillary would win. Time to look outside of DC for new ideas. Try looking to California for a highly successful Democratic agenda.
10
What is the highly successful part of the Demo California agenda? Crumbling infrastructure, high taxes, disastrous schools, inadequate public transportation, hordes of illegal Mexicans, over regulation of business driving employers to Nevada, municipal malpractice, and a capable but unfocused governor. If that's your model, get ready for another 4 years of Trump.
3
Probably would have been good to put this together before the election.
7
Where is the evidence of a consensus? In the imagination of socialists perhaps. All of this sounds like subsidies to discourage employment and increase dependence. How about cutting immigration that depresses wages? Americans don't want mindless tax and spend policies. Wake up Jared!
3
Yes, let's go back to trickle down economics. That works great. And I guess the lawn mowers and dishwashers really have depressed salaries- banish then, we want those jobs!
3
On the revenue side, we must fight to tax all capital gains and dividends as ordinary income.
Why should our tax code penalize Americans who work for a living and earn wages, and favor unearned income from trust funds and accumulated wealth? It make no sense, and serves no purpose for the benefit of society.
This policy only exacerbates wealth and income inequality.
We should also eliminate the step-up basis for inherited stock - for the same reason.
---
I posted below my 3 bullet points for the Democratic Agenda - with a common theme of jobs, jobs, jobs:
- Medicare for All (job mobility, freedom to start a business)
- Living Wage (dignity of full-time work should pay the bills)
- Rebuild America (infrastructure - jobs, jobs, jobs)
Why should our tax code penalize Americans who work for a living and earn wages, and favor unearned income from trust funds and accumulated wealth? It make no sense, and serves no purpose for the benefit of society.
This policy only exacerbates wealth and income inequality.
We should also eliminate the step-up basis for inherited stock - for the same reason.
---
I posted below my 3 bullet points for the Democratic Agenda - with a common theme of jobs, jobs, jobs:
- Medicare for All (job mobility, freedom to start a business)
- Living Wage (dignity of full-time work should pay the bills)
- Rebuild America (infrastructure - jobs, jobs, jobs)
9
Bernie had it. My apologies to the HRC supporters. Yes I voted for her.The DNC made a very bad decision. The party lost sight of the way most of us have been getting by.
14
The DNC didn't make that decision. She won the nomination with a surplus of 4 million votes.
Why do the far left and far right hate the ballot box?
Why do the far left and far right hate the ballot box?
Is is this too much, too little, too late?
I look outside my window in central PA and watch the jobless black men stand on corners on which their fathers stood. Those dads are now in jail, while America has found itself hog-tied to an economy that relies upon producing the same marijuana for which more than a few of these folks have been incarcerated.
Surely the same is happening a few hundred miles away in West Virginia, Exocet the dads there are on opioids and pickling their livers. They've been spared the black urban institutional solution and have found it in more respectable places.
I am shocked at the degree to which we have fallen as a society, even as Mr. Obama showed a belief in incremental but measurable growth.
Too little, too late.
It will take extraordinary will to fix this mess, and I don't see anyone with true power willing to make the call and show the courage of conviction required.
Societies such as ours have killed themselves off.
Perhaps that is the better way.
I look outside my window in central PA and watch the jobless black men stand on corners on which their fathers stood. Those dads are now in jail, while America has found itself hog-tied to an economy that relies upon producing the same marijuana for which more than a few of these folks have been incarcerated.
Surely the same is happening a few hundred miles away in West Virginia, Exocet the dads there are on opioids and pickling their livers. They've been spared the black urban institutional solution and have found it in more respectable places.
I am shocked at the degree to which we have fallen as a society, even as Mr. Obama showed a belief in incremental but measurable growth.
Too little, too late.
It will take extraordinary will to fix this mess, and I don't see anyone with true power willing to make the call and show the courage of conviction required.
Societies such as ours have killed themselves off.
Perhaps that is the better way.
5
Democrats: stop being milquetoasts dinking around the edges!
This was the most depressing and uninspiring "agenda" ever.
This was the most depressing and uninspiring "agenda" ever.
6
Thank you Democrats for coming up with ideas.Ideas that would help people
Not hurt them,and cost less then Trump the ,the ignorant wants.
Trump has been shoving his personal opinions based on made up numbers down our throats since he hit the White House.His cabinet is marching in lock step(or is that goose step) with everything he utters including covfefe.
Get him out .Do it. Now.
Not hurt them,and cost less then Trump the ,the ignorant wants.
Trump has been shoving his personal opinions based on made up numbers down our throats since he hit the White House.His cabinet is marching in lock step(or is that goose step) with everything he utters including covfefe.
Get him out .Do it. Now.
I am pretty active politically and I have not heard of a per child subsidy as part of the democratic platform? Where did that information come from? The other things like universal health care are part of democratic ideas but I had never heard of a per child subsidy before today.
3
Wow, the Dems are really drifting away from me. I used to consider myself pretty liberal, but I may have been eclipsed by "super-welfare state" leftists. They will lose me (to what I don't know) if they continue down this road. Yet good ideas abound, read Len Charlap in these comments to see a few that I can get behind. Universal healthcare, real infrastructure reinvestment, stronger and more universal unions, crackdown on speculation on Wall Street, government jobs as a last resort.
9
"Democrats must not make the same mistake. Playing defense is necessary, but it is not sufficient."
Well Republicans got control of the House, the Senate and now the WH. Playing defense seems to be a winning political strategy.
Well Republicans got control of the House, the Senate and now the WH. Playing defense seems to be a winning political strategy.
2
Republicans won by very little and Clinton overwhelmingly got the popular vote. Meaning that with some tweaking this is possible.
New ideas to help the struggling poor and middle class are always welcome, but to say that a democratic consensus is emerging on any of them seems very premature. For example, the idea of $250/month/child income support seems to be a very new idea that needs to be discussed much more before one can speak of consensus forming on this. On closer inspection this idea seems full of problems, political and otherwise, that will make its passage highly unlikely. Raising the minimum wage is one proposal that has been highly discussed, but its time may have passed due to recent rapid strides in technology. Doing this could simply accelerate job losses to automation. Recent studies shows that automation (e.g. via robots) is now so cost-effective that it reduces employment more than it generates. One obvious proposal NOT mentioned (why?) is universal health care. I do believe its time has come.
4
One idea to help the lack of better paying jobs after the long term effects of automation and trade policies where the American worker received very little and business received most of the benefit (Dow Jones 4k to 21k) is to privatize unemployment. Require all companies to hire their share of the unemployed and train the workers. This would require an adjustment time to facilitate the transformation but could substantially increase the consumers income (75% of economy) and thereby increase business profits. Very small companies should be exempted.
It is hard to believe that the "emerging Democratic agenda" does not even include a mention of health care. Health care is my number one concern, and there are millions more like me, who have struggled with the premiums of the Affordable Care Act. For those of us in our fifties and early sixties, the premiums and out of pocket maximums are huge.
If Democrats can finally figure out how to improve the ACA (assuming Trump hasn't completely destroyed it by next year), and explain it in simple terms, they may stand a chance in the 2018 midterms.
If they also push for a gradual reduction in the Medicare age, starting with a reduction to age 60 or 62, they could get some of the working class Trump voters on board. People are desperately looking for some relief on health care costs. Please Democrats, offer moderates something we can vote for.
If Democrats can finally figure out how to improve the ACA (assuming Trump hasn't completely destroyed it by next year), and explain it in simple terms, they may stand a chance in the 2018 midterms.
If they also push for a gradual reduction in the Medicare age, starting with a reduction to age 60 or 62, they could get some of the working class Trump voters on board. People are desperately looking for some relief on health care costs. Please Democrats, offer moderates something we can vote for.
13
I agree Democrats should make healthcare front and center. Go bold!
Medicare for All.
Forget the incremental approach. (Perhaps a final compromise bill would end up lowering the Medicare eligibility age to 55, but that is not the starting point of negotiating or political sausage making.)
Medicare for All.
Forget the incremental approach. (Perhaps a final compromise bill would end up lowering the Medicare eligibility age to 55, but that is not the starting point of negotiating or political sausage making.)
6
The GOP Congressional majority may be a failure by your reckoning, but at last check they are still a majority. Indeed, one could argue that the GOP has effectively seized all of the branches of federal government precisely by not having an agenda other than calculating how best to object publicly to the policies proposed by their opponents.
5
I am all for job creation, but it is not going to come from fossil fuel industries. The Progressives' ideas would actually increase tax revenue over the next 10 years. These jobs need to be cutting edge, true 21st century cutting edge. America has led the world for the past 72 years or so in innovation, but we are on the verge of losing that advantage. Holy Cow, we live in a nation where the wind blows every day at a speed getting than 8 m.p.h., key requirement for wind turbines to work properly. Furthermore, of the top three places that receive the most sunshine on the planet, two are in this country (AZ & NM), yet we are not number one in generation of solar electricity nor in the area of solar technological development.
At some point in the future, we can have our cake and eat it too! But, we must first do the prep work, which the G.O.P. is too lazy to do because it would require them to change their worldview. We need Progressive vision, and I, a more conservative person than a liberal one, believe a little subsidized growth can go a very long way to "feeding everyone" and attacking things like child poverty.
"We the People" need to standup and be heard from now until the cows come home, the Holy Ones and the working ones!
At some point in the future, we can have our cake and eat it too! But, we must first do the prep work, which the G.O.P. is too lazy to do because it would require them to change their worldview. We need Progressive vision, and I, a more conservative person than a liberal one, believe a little subsidized growth can go a very long way to "feeding everyone" and attacking things like child poverty.
"We the People" need to standup and be heard from now until the cows come home, the Holy Ones and the working ones!
1
I like the message, but it is too complex. Simpler is better. That is the lesson the GOP has learned. It does not even have to be fact based.
For me, the message should be something that appeals to everyone. Like, A living wage for every American. Let them buy their own food and healthcare.
No worker should be on subsidies, but businesses should not be either. A business that cannot pay its workers a living wage and pay some taxes are a drag on our economy and should not be in business.
The minimum wage argument just sounds so weak.
For me, the message should be something that appeals to everyone. Like, A living wage for every American. Let them buy their own food and healthcare.
No worker should be on subsidies, but businesses should not be either. A business that cannot pay its workers a living wage and pay some taxes are a drag on our economy and should not be in business.
The minimum wage argument just sounds so weak.
2
Clearly, the clarion cry for jobs and relevance in white working class land STILL hasn't resonated with Democratic leadership. Trump, Bannon, repeat...
4
Single payer health care for all should be the number one priority. Why? Because no other policy matters much to you if you're dead. You don't need tax cuts if you're dead. You don't need a job if you're dead. You don't need education if you're dead. You don't need contraception or abortion if you're dead. You don't care about gay rights or gun rights if you're dead. You don't need defense if you're dead. You don't care about the environment...you get the idea. Being alive is a prerequisite for benefiting from anything else, so let's start with keeping Americans alive.
4
Amen
Excellent piece Jared, thank you!
DNC leaders all ned a copy of this NOW.
DNC leaders all ned a copy of this NOW.
The emerging Democratic Agenda must be based on economics,
not racial or social identities.
It must preserve and strengthen the federal economic safety net. This must include Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid.
It must also include preservation of either Obamacare or an equal or better replacement.
It also must include a federal income tax with a strongly progressive rate structure (and a federal estate tax), but without a zillion special credits.
It also must include strong federal regulation of commerce -- above all banking.
It must also preserve and strengthen federal regulation of consumer protections,
and do away with such travesties as mandatory arbitration of consumer transactions and "click-through" supposed contractual "agreements" of internet transactions.
On the environment, it must focus on strengthening federal regulations that directly affect Americans, such as pollution that directly affects, in the near term, the air and water that Americans use. While not denying climate change or the need for global agreement on carbon emissions, it must not get so wrapped up in long-term, world-wide environmental concerns that public enthusiasm wanes for federal regulation of more direct and immediate environmental concerns.
On racial justice, the Democratic Agenda should turn its focus from broad-brush "programs" to promote statistical equal "demographic" outcomes and must instead focus on case-by-case restitution for individual victims of racial discrimination.
not racial or social identities.
It must preserve and strengthen the federal economic safety net. This must include Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid.
It must also include preservation of either Obamacare or an equal or better replacement.
It also must include a federal income tax with a strongly progressive rate structure (and a federal estate tax), but without a zillion special credits.
It also must include strong federal regulation of commerce -- above all banking.
It must also preserve and strengthen federal regulation of consumer protections,
and do away with such travesties as mandatory arbitration of consumer transactions and "click-through" supposed contractual "agreements" of internet transactions.
On the environment, it must focus on strengthening federal regulations that directly affect Americans, such as pollution that directly affects, in the near term, the air and water that Americans use. While not denying climate change or the need for global agreement on carbon emissions, it must not get so wrapped up in long-term, world-wide environmental concerns that public enthusiasm wanes for federal regulation of more direct and immediate environmental concerns.
On racial justice, the Democratic Agenda should turn its focus from broad-brush "programs" to promote statistical equal "demographic" outcomes and must instead focus on case-by-case restitution for individual victims of racial discrimination.
It's heartening to learn that Democrats might be developing a policy agenda that could unite various factions within the party. However, none of that will make any difference if they can't come up with a strategy to regain political power at the municipal, county, state, and federal levels. I don't hear or see anything about that.
How about a strategy built on outreach to actual people from all income and educational levels from all parts of the country. A strategy that processes the views of those people through a policy lens and builds new policies on issues real folks actually care about.
Regaining political power is the most important challenge faced by the Democrats. Having a better policy agenda will only help if it produces increased political engagement and votes to accomplish it.
How about a strategy built on outreach to actual people from all income and educational levels from all parts of the country. A strategy that processes the views of those people through a policy lens and builds new policies on issues real folks actually care about.
Regaining political power is the most important challenge faced by the Democrats. Having a better policy agenda will only help if it produces increased political engagement and votes to accomplish it.
If these ideas are viewed as the best that Democrats have to offer, then all hope is truly lost. Many other commenters have already hit the nail on the head: universal health care and solid support for public education. Equally important: people really do want steady jobs, not complicated systems of tax breaks and outright handouts. How do you foster the creation of many millions of steady jobs at a decent living wage? Figure that out and you will have an invincible platform
1
The Democrats, for all practical purposes, are the sole opposition to Trump's regime, they, and the electorate. Voters have definitely spoken more loudly than the Democrats.
Congressional Democrats have not been present in the media. If they've been outraged, or have a plan, it hasn't been in the press, on television...or anywhere. Democrats really need to take a page from the Rupublican playbook on using media for maximum results
To give credit where it's due, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Diane Feinstein, Al Franken and Ted Kennedy have actually been on camera or on Facebook.
That's it. Democratic mayors and governors have been more vociferous than their Congressional colleagues in fighting Trump's proposals, and I say bravo to them.
The perceived image is that Democratic electeds are silent and doing nothing because they can do nothing in the Republican-ruled House and Senate.
But they have a voice. Maybe there is no political will or leadership to use it. The world and over half the U.S. stands against Trump--without Democratic reaction. I do not understand this flacid approach to Trump.
If they are still stuck trying to bring Hillary and Bernie supporters together, that is pathetic. The world has moved on. Unify already! The U.S. needs a party that has backbone and fire in its belly to fight Trump.
For this article, the Democrats maintained their silence--not one was quoted. This lack of presence does not inspire confidence, in them or their agenda.
Congressional Democrats have not been present in the media. If they've been outraged, or have a plan, it hasn't been in the press, on television...or anywhere. Democrats really need to take a page from the Rupublican playbook on using media for maximum results
To give credit where it's due, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Diane Feinstein, Al Franken and Ted Kennedy have actually been on camera or on Facebook.
That's it. Democratic mayors and governors have been more vociferous than their Congressional colleagues in fighting Trump's proposals, and I say bravo to them.
The perceived image is that Democratic electeds are silent and doing nothing because they can do nothing in the Republican-ruled House and Senate.
But they have a voice. Maybe there is no political will or leadership to use it. The world and over half the U.S. stands against Trump--without Democratic reaction. I do not understand this flacid approach to Trump.
If they are still stuck trying to bring Hillary and Bernie supporters together, that is pathetic. The world has moved on. Unify already! The U.S. needs a party that has backbone and fire in its belly to fight Trump.
For this article, the Democrats maintained their silence--not one was quoted. This lack of presence does not inspire confidence, in them or their agenda.
This article is music to my eyes. It is definitely not enough to be the opposition party. You need an alternative positive agenda that captures the dreams imagination of all Americans--left, right, and in-between.
Unlike Mr. Bernstein, I do not concede that progressive-minded people have to wait many years to wrest control from Agent Orange and his enablers.
We might, however, if we don't soon get the Democratic party to at least do what Bernstein suggests. The Dems somehow lost sight of their base of support that was being the party of the working people.
Bernie knew that and was true to it. The Dems need to champion fixes for the ills afflicting working Americans. So, good article, Jared. Keep 'em coming.
We might, however, if we don't soon get the Democratic party to at least do what Bernstein suggests. The Dems somehow lost sight of their base of support that was being the party of the working people.
Bernie knew that and was true to it. The Dems need to champion fixes for the ills afflicting working Americans. So, good article, Jared. Keep 'em coming.
Start with the fact that supply side economics was greatest scam ever pulled on the middle class! That is the start of the "Emerging Democratic Agenda".
Dems must get out and provide a good plan now, with numbers that are verifiable. We, the Dems, have been sitting on our laurels for a while now. The sooner they can get their plan and info out, everywhere, the better off we will be in the next election. Clarity and information that is easy for voters to understand is the key. Quit t-rump bashing. We all know that this will just be a waste of time. He will self destruct, along with his velcro.
Progressive policies that were promoted by the Democrats during the last election were the reason that Donald Trump was elected in November. People want to pay less taxes and not more. These liberal programs are too expensive and impossible to sustain. The costs would be prohibitive and some people would be paying more than their fair share. The Democrats would not gain many votes on this progressive idea big rather lose in spades.
Why does the U.S. not have more jobs with higher wages?
Part of the reason is taxes:
First, almost all other nations have a Value Added Tax or VAT. VATs inherently subsidize exports (thus creating jobs) and penalize imports (thus protecting jobs). Lacking a VAT, the U.S. hurts its exporters and those competing with imports.
Second, output is produced by some combination of workers and machines, with the mix depending on the relative cost and effectiveness of both. We like machines, because they make workers more productive, and more productive workers can be paid more. But the cost of machines is generously subsidized by a variety of tax benefits. The cost of workers is seriously increased by costs of Social Security taxes, pension contributions, health care costs, unemployment compensation contributions, etc. Thus the worker/machine mix is tilted towards machines and away from jobs and wage increases.
Part of the reason is taxes:
First, almost all other nations have a Value Added Tax or VAT. VATs inherently subsidize exports (thus creating jobs) and penalize imports (thus protecting jobs). Lacking a VAT, the U.S. hurts its exporters and those competing with imports.
Second, output is produced by some combination of workers and machines, with the mix depending on the relative cost and effectiveness of both. We like machines, because they make workers more productive, and more productive workers can be paid more. But the cost of machines is generously subsidized by a variety of tax benefits. The cost of workers is seriously increased by costs of Social Security taxes, pension contributions, health care costs, unemployment compensation contributions, etc. Thus the worker/machine mix is tilted towards machines and away from jobs and wage increases.
"Hey, Bernie did it" !
I think it's great that there is a new more "let" agenda being developed to counteract the "further right GOP . . . but more importantly, we need to look at the "from the bottom up" method that Bernie employed and gained a huge base from.
He got people and especially young people; "excited" and motivated to stand up for their rights.
We need a groundswell from 'we the people" - we need clear and realistic platforms that can actually be legislated and "paid for" !
Simple things like; Higher Minimum Wages so hard working families can actually feed themselves - One-Payer Medical Insurance for ALL Americans - More Funding for the EPA and FDA so we can have a safer country and world - Higher Taxes for the insanely rich who made their fortunes on the backs of now poor Americans ! - Better Education for ALL - - - "Has anyone looked at where "we" rank worldwide on key subjects like Math - Computer Science - etc. . . . 'not so good" - "Yeah - it's time to believe in smart, knowledgeable people again ! Have "Real Leaders" who talk to the "Real News" and raise the bar for understanding "what is real and what is fake.
"I'm ready, let's get to work" !
I think it's great that there is a new more "let" agenda being developed to counteract the "further right GOP . . . but more importantly, we need to look at the "from the bottom up" method that Bernie employed and gained a huge base from.
He got people and especially young people; "excited" and motivated to stand up for their rights.
We need a groundswell from 'we the people" - we need clear and realistic platforms that can actually be legislated and "paid for" !
Simple things like; Higher Minimum Wages so hard working families can actually feed themselves - One-Payer Medical Insurance for ALL Americans - More Funding for the EPA and FDA so we can have a safer country and world - Higher Taxes for the insanely rich who made their fortunes on the backs of now poor Americans ! - Better Education for ALL - - - "Has anyone looked at where "we" rank worldwide on key subjects like Math - Computer Science - etc. . . . 'not so good" - "Yeah - it's time to believe in smart, knowledgeable people again ! Have "Real Leaders" who talk to the "Real News" and raise the bar for understanding "what is real and what is fake.
"I'm ready, let's get to work" !
1
Neoliberalism is at the heart of today's problems for our low and middle class population. Until this is also addressed with a new meta-strategy, these programs will also be considered incremental. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-pro...
2
That's great, but how could you leave out universal health coverage? That is the one screaming void in the American safety net. The one thing every other civilized country in the world has figured except that bastion of creativity, the United States of America. For God's sake, isn't it time for Medicare for all? Never mind the malevolent Republicans. What is the hold up, for the Democratic Party, to yell and scream about it every day, to make it front and center in their agenda?
My guess is the hold up is shameful moral cowardice in facing the all powerful insurance companies. Like Joe Lieberman, who single-handedly killed lowering the Medicare age to 55, too many elected members of Congress represent those insurance companies instead of their constituents. And we all pay the price.
My guess is the hold up is shameful moral cowardice in facing the all powerful insurance companies. Like Joe Lieberman, who single-handedly killed lowering the Medicare age to 55, too many elected members of Congress represent those insurance companies instead of their constituents. And we all pay the price.
9
These progressive ideas will never get implemented until liberals retake the White House and Congress.
Until then, how about this infrastructure spending idea. I thought that was something liberals and conservatives agreed on. Trump even "promised" it during the campaign. God knows we need it.
Unfortunately, the Trump White House, and the Republican-led Congress are so inept, so out of control, and so preoccupied with other scandals and investigations, they can't even begin to discuss that with the opposition party.
Conservatives need to come up with a infrastructure spending plan. Because if the liberals propose it, the Republican Congress will say it's a bad idea, and Trump will veto it anyway.
Until then, how about this infrastructure spending idea. I thought that was something liberals and conservatives agreed on. Trump even "promised" it during the campaign. God knows we need it.
Unfortunately, the Trump White House, and the Republican-led Congress are so inept, so out of control, and so preoccupied with other scandals and investigations, they can't even begin to discuss that with the opposition party.
Conservatives need to come up with a infrastructure spending plan. Because if the liberals propose it, the Republican Congress will say it's a bad idea, and Trump will veto it anyway.
Trump's infrastructure plan is to privatize everything - with huge corporate welfare subsidies paid for by the taxpayers.
It's one thing to build new toll roads. But do you really want your city water owned and operated by Goldman Sachs?
It's one thing to build new toll roads. But do you really want your city water owned and operated by Goldman Sachs?
10
Well, that was disappointing.
I kept waiting for the full-throated endorsement of universal health care and commitment to public education.
Once the Democrats start talking about tax credits and percentages and statistics, they LOSE.
I kept waiting for the full-throated endorsement of universal health care and commitment to public education.
Once the Democrats start talking about tax credits and percentages and statistics, they LOSE.
4
The problem with the Democratic legislators is that all this progressive legislation that they propose when out of power is suddenly dumped when they come into power. So I am unimpressed with the "efforts" until they do something when they are in. Just think Card Check -- as soon as they took over both houses of Congress, people who had sworn to pass it suddenly discovered reasons that they couldn't support it. Spineless, faithless DINOs. Jared Bernstein is not one of these, but he knows what's going on.
These ideas can start to form a Democratic agenda, but let's not forget about taking on a core part of the GOP strategy that has worked well for them: fear. I am so tired of the fear mongering, whether the message -- explicit or subtle -- is to fear immigrant terrorist or the family down the block who looks or sounds different from me. I believe it is a major reason why so many pull that red lever come voting time.
The Dems need to take this on directly, calling it out for the shameful fear mongering it is. And don't forget to remind people that it is under Democratic national leadership that we have had some of our safest and most prosperous times.
Dems -- be blunt. The soft, wonky approach isn't working. Be blunt, be bold.
The Dems need to take this on directly, calling it out for the shameful fear mongering it is. And don't forget to remind people that it is under Democratic national leadership that we have had some of our safest and most prosperous times.
Dems -- be blunt. The soft, wonky approach isn't working. Be blunt, be bold.
1
This piece is built around the premise that the Democratic party is a party of values, which they are not, unless you consider corporatism and cronyism the type of values which benefit voters. One need look no further than the shenanigans of the Democratic primary in 2016 to see the ferocity at which the corporatists choked-out the populist movement behind a candidate that had far better poling numbers than HRC.
We can't even get the bulk of the Democratic House to endorse single-payer health care. Pathetic.
There IS something emerging - the Millennials and a third party that will most likely send the Democrats down the same historical path as the Whigs.
We can't even get the bulk of the Democratic House to endorse single-payer health care. Pathetic.
There IS something emerging - the Millennials and a third party that will most likely send the Democrats down the same historical path as the Whigs.
4
Who cares about that nasty deficit? What happens to the small businesses like restaurants, roadside motels and convenience stores when the minimum wage goes to $15? What this proposal is a recipe for economic stagnation like in France and Italy. The fact is that if a part of the country is in economic stagnation, people who want to work need to move. That is why West Virginia is declining and Atlanta is thriving. As for doubling taxes on the rich (that is all you readers with incomes >$100,000) it will never happen and shouldn't happen if we want economic growth. Even the child subsidy sounds nice but are we to subsidize girls who drop out of high school meanwhile having five children out of wedlock with five different men? I am sorry, but as inadequate as the Republicans are in solving social problems, this is worse. There Ain't No Such Thing as a Free Lunch!
Bold = let a real person write these op-ed articles and not "senior fellows" at the (fill in the name of the think tank/lobby firm/corporation). It's not about analysis, and reports, and studies, and data, and policy. It's about justice. The boldest of all bold moves. Throwing the wealthy, the powerful, the elites, who break the law, into jail. Stopping inequality by taxing the same wealthy, powerful elites and making no apologies for doing so. Taking money out of politics. Reinstating the checks and balances that monitor and control these monsters. Breaking down the walls these elites have built that separate everyone else from them.
All the policy wonks in the world are not going to get the country out of this mess. We need one thing - justice. Because without justice we have zero chance of fixing anything else.
All the policy wonks in the world are not going to get the country out of this mess. We need one thing - justice. Because without justice we have zero chance of fixing anything else.
2
I asked one of my doctors what he thought about single payer? He replied, ". Do you like your meficare?". " Yes. " "Would you like everyone to have that same coverage available?". " as opposed to none or hi h priced, yes. " "There you have it.". Me: " What about doctors signing on because of income? ". "I can't speak for everone, but $1.00 or $10.00, it's profit.'. Democrats are going to have to work together NOW and regain power. Moderate Republicans are going to have to take their party back and if the extremists want to break and form a third party, let them. It's time to FORCE sanity back and it's only going to be through us, the voters it will happen. Voting for the people, not just t the party is one way. Moderates on both sides.
3
I, for one am tired of being a victim of the Repubs blatant and well publicized agenda that attacks our country and our Democracy at it's core. When will the Dem's stop whining about not being in power and come back with serious agenda items? Items that people and leadership can get behind? Ideas that call out the right for who they are and give the press something to promote with ideas that are worth promoting? Why can't the Dems figure this out? Are we too nice? I don't know but the Repubs own the headlines. They also own the hearts and minds of people who they blatantly harm with their actions. This is so backwards it makes no sense to me. We need vision and leadership everyone can get behind and ideas that are unable to be twisted. I repeat. I am tired of being positioned as the victim of the mean old Repubs.
2
The Democrats need to come out of the shadows and speak loudly about Trump's harmful decisions.
The only one I've heard is Governor Jerry Brown who didn't mince any words.
When are the leaders going to shout about this wreckage? Why are they standing by so timidly instead of demanding media time? Even all the negativity about Trumpism just consolidates his base.
The only one I've heard is Governor Jerry Brown who didn't mince any words.
When are the leaders going to shout about this wreckage? Why are they standing by so timidly instead of demanding media time? Even all the negativity about Trumpism just consolidates his base.
2
Jared Bernstein, I always respect and appreciate your opinions, but if you give every family $250.00/month per child, you are going to have people having LOTS of babies just tp get $250.00 per month for each one! I think if this proposal were even feasible/worthy, you would have to limit the payments to two children. Should someone who has eight or ten children get $250.00/month for each one?! Furthermore, it is not clear to me why people who cannot AFFORD to have a lot of children keep having more children! I would not want to encourage/reward that behavior with subsidies! I have to tell you that in 1995 when I was visiting England, I was speaking with 2 lovely, young, British women, who told me that UK government gives a monthly subsidy to each child, even if the families are wealthy. Everyone gets it, they said. I had never heard of such a thing. I am not sure if this is a good idea...or not. While I am a liberal Democrat, and I DO BELIEVE in a minimum standard of living for every individual, I fear that subsidies like this will just encourage people who don't want to work (or don't want to work THAT MUCH) to use procreation to feather their nests. I believe that health care is a human right, as are shelter and food. We ABSOLUTELY MUST HAVE single payer & MORE JOBS. I think, as someone else said, we must strengthen the educational system in this country, and do something about the obscene cost of college that puts so many of our citizens in debt...sometimes FOREVER!
3
We must never pay people to have babies. It is wrong to pay taxpayer money for each child one has. Today, that is the biggest failing policy we have when it comes to pulling people out of poverty - we pay teenagers for each baby they have; keeping these women out of school and making their careers child birth instead of a real job, backed by a real education.
The progressives must remember that not all of their policies make sense or can (should) be funded. The world is not fair, life isn't fair. It's access to opportunity, which starts with a (good) public education. One is not promised money because one decides to have a baby. The right choice is to get an education, get a job, meet someone you want to partner with, and THEN have a baby (or two, as you can afford).
The progressives must remember that not all of their policies make sense or can (should) be funded. The world is not fair, life isn't fair. It's access to opportunity, which starts with a (good) public education. One is not promised money because one decides to have a baby. The right choice is to get an education, get a job, meet someone you want to partner with, and THEN have a baby (or two, as you can afford).
3
The child credit is a good idea & works but it"s acceptance by Americans has not yet arrived ...better to focus on what we can sell now like universal health care. FYI child credit does not cause people to pump out more children for a few more bucks...it could definitely help off-set child care costs for working families. I doubt most women (some men) think $250 a month warrants multiple rounds of pregnancy, months of sleepless nights & all the other travails of babies/toddlers/teenagers on parents lives. Why do think contraception is so popular.
But, first lets get over the election hump with issues we can get people on board with...later, if Dems/Prog win, we can develop these ideas.
But, first lets get over the election hump with issues we can get people on board with...later, if Dems/Prog win, we can develop these ideas.
"Our" Jared makes a great case for these ideas, but we should be scandalized by the "fight for $15"s completion date of 2024. How much time does it take for an employer to adjust? How's about 2018 for a target?
1
No no no no. The Democratic party's renaissance will only come when they embrace this simple message: their's is the party of labor. Everyone should have a job. Everyone should have health care. Everyone should have enough resources to live in retirement. They represent the working people of America and not the top 1%. It should be their mantra and a contract with American workers.
2
The Democratic agenda is to take partial truths and make innuendos amounting to lies about Trump and what Republicans are trying to do. They have no plans they are willing to run on except to save the ACA which collapsing under its own design. Their programs are socialist and more than 60% think it is the wrong direction.
Common decency is the Progressive agenda.
After 40+ years of pulling the political spectrum radically to the farthest right of extremes, just asking someone if they are ok, is now considered some sort of socialist plot to take over the country.
Having said that, the pendulum is now swinging back towards the center.
After 40+ years of pulling the political spectrum radically to the farthest right of extremes, just asking someone if they are ok, is now considered some sort of socialist plot to take over the country.
Having said that, the pendulum is now swinging back towards the center.
Forget the child care credit. It will kill a ny hope of getting rid of the Trumpistas!
FOCUS ON ONLY 3 ISSUES.
1) A CLEAN AND HEALTHY PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT.
2) SINGLE PAYER (FEDERAL) AND AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE FOR ALL.
3) THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL TO HAVE ACCESS TO AN AFFORDABLE AND GOOD EDUCATION.
FOCUS ON ONLY 3 ISSUES.
1) A CLEAN AND HEALTHY PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT.
2) SINGLE PAYER (FEDERAL) AND AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE FOR ALL.
3) THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL TO HAVE ACCESS TO AN AFFORDABLE AND GOOD EDUCATION.
1
By "consensus" he means the DNC might not sell out to Wall St. quite as much as it has for the last 20 years.
2
Valuable thoughts to take underpaid workers out of their predicament; remember to push those politicians reluctant to raise the minimum wage (hunger diet, really) to live at least a couple of weeks on the starving $7.25, to see prompt action. You didn't mention the need, sometimes, to move beyond one's state to find a job. For this to occur you need politicians with an open mind and able to walk in the shoes of the least among us; but, insofar republican help, it might be easier to imagine pigs flying... than those low-flying worms crawling to relevance.
1
The entire Finance Banking System is at the center of the desperation gripping labor. They even pretended that they were Industrial Service Banks to get us to become their reinsurers.
Until Democrats & Labor face the facts and recognize Goldman Sachs for the Financial Terrorists they are and demand that the Banking System become regulated as a Utility, we will continue to be robbed.
As an inspiration we all need to look at The Bank of North Dakota, and do that. Do that on the State levels & do that nationally.
Until Democrats & Labor face the facts and recognize Goldman Sachs for the Financial Terrorists they are and demand that the Banking System become regulated as a Utility, we will continue to be robbed.
As an inspiration we all need to look at The Bank of North Dakota, and do that. Do that on the State levels & do that nationally.
1
Sorry. As a progressive I find the lack of framing and vision appalling. This sort of checklist without context or vision is what cost HRC the White House.
1
If the Democrats' agenda is nothing more than the enormous income redistribution project envisioned here, they are toast.
I ridicule people who profess to be so much smarter than the rest of America, yet cannot even get their opening headline correct.
America is a DEMOCRATIC nation.And yet we are a Republic.
U.S. Citizens are entitled to vote for their elected representatives.
In EVERY election EXCEPT for POTUS majority rules. If you get the most votes, even it's just one vote - you WIN.
For POTUS we go by a U.S. Constitutional rule. EACH STATE gets a vote for each Senate seat and Congressional District. So whoever wins the most Electoral votes is the winner.
Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama are Democrats. One of these people won the Electoral College vote. The other did not.
So is the author of this article trying to imply that ONLY Democrats can espouse Democratic ideas? Or that ONLY Democrats are Democratic?
And when did that become law? I thought this was a nation of equals,
Democrats, Republicans, Independents - believe it or not, each one of those categories can espouse Democratic ideas.
Obviously not in this author's opinion. He is a Democrat. The rest of us don't count.
America is a DEMOCRATIC nation.And yet we are a Republic.
U.S. Citizens are entitled to vote for their elected representatives.
In EVERY election EXCEPT for POTUS majority rules. If you get the most votes, even it's just one vote - you WIN.
For POTUS we go by a U.S. Constitutional rule. EACH STATE gets a vote for each Senate seat and Congressional District. So whoever wins the most Electoral votes is the winner.
Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama are Democrats. One of these people won the Electoral College vote. The other did not.
So is the author of this article trying to imply that ONLY Democrats can espouse Democratic ideas? Or that ONLY Democrats are Democratic?
And when did that become law? I thought this was a nation of equals,
Democrats, Republicans, Independents - believe it or not, each one of those categories can espouse Democratic ideas.
Obviously not in this author's opinion. He is a Democrat. The rest of us don't count.
Where are new ideas?
Why do all the ideas come from the far left of the party?
Where is the sensible middle of the democratic party?
Do we need a third party if the Democratic party continues to be coopted by the far left of the party?
I don't believe Jared has talked to folks around the country save for folks on the upper west side of manhattan?
Why do all the ideas come from the far left of the party?
Where is the sensible middle of the democratic party?
Do we need a third party if the Democratic party continues to be coopted by the far left of the party?
I don't believe Jared has talked to folks around the country save for folks on the upper west side of manhattan?
Ha, this article is a clear example of what ails Democrats. They only see one side of the formula, enjoying giving things away while neglecting to consider where this money comes from. People speak a good line until they are handed the bill, then liberals quickly turn into conservative cheapskates who are looking for the door. In general, the only "help" that the American elite willingly offer the poor is a good "scolding" for their racist ways. They certainly do not want to raise their own taxes to "help" others, so the hat is passed on to the exhausted middle class. It's an old, neglected story... the rich continue to get richer (regardless of their skin tone.) While the rest of the country struggles to keep their heads above water.
the Dems have lost so much credibility due to their pie in the sky thinking, offering expensive re-distributive policies that will only diminish the middle class. At this point and in this political climate, you can not re-distribute without seriously harming the middle class. Right now, the Republicans are engineering a tax change that will dump a huge burden on the middle class (removing their income and real estate tax deductions) while elite newspapers like this one turn a blind eye to it. If it is not about protecting the rich or the poor, the limousine liberals are just not interested in discussing it.
the Dems have lost so much credibility due to their pie in the sky thinking, offering expensive re-distributive policies that will only diminish the middle class. At this point and in this political climate, you can not re-distribute without seriously harming the middle class. Right now, the Republicans are engineering a tax change that will dump a huge burden on the middle class (removing their income and real estate tax deductions) while elite newspapers like this one turn a blind eye to it. If it is not about protecting the rich or the poor, the limousine liberals are just not interested in discussing it.
very encouraging to see democrats from blue coastal areas still don't have a clue what drives those in the 3000 counties that voted for Trump. by all means keep up the name calling and derision of us deplorables, thus exposing the leftist Democrats have become.
Clintonomics and Obamanomics didn't work for the average person. Time for a new, truly progressive agenda a la Bernie. Bring it on!
The Democrats had better propose a workable, sustainable green economy that exceeds the goals of the Paris accord and creates full employment without destroying the planet (no fair exporting our carbon footprint to developing countries either). Meanwhile, automation and AI will continue to hollow out both skilled and professional labor markets while increasing the wealth divide between owners/entrepreneurs and workers. We desperately need a vision that provides meaningful, fulfilling, well paid employment as robots displace most traditional human tasks. It's all well and good to say that software development and technology will provide those jobs, but it's not reasonable to expect most people to have the wherewithal to do them. Current proposals for a guaranteed income regardless of employment status are non-starters, especially in the context of America's Puritan work ethic.
We need campaign finance reform.
This a popular issue among the rank and file of both the Republicans and the Democrats, although the establishments of both parties will fight against it tooth and nail.
Look at the response Bernie Sanders got last year when he refused money from corporate billionaires and instead appealed to the common people for campaign funds!
Also, don't overlook the fact that a big part of Donald Trump's attraction to Republican voters was that he was not bought and paid for by the usual corporate forces.
This is something both Blue and Red voters are interested in. And it is something that would reinvigorate our fading democracy. A win-win proposition for the American people.
This a popular issue among the rank and file of both the Republicans and the Democrats, although the establishments of both parties will fight against it tooth and nail.
Look at the response Bernie Sanders got last year when he refused money from corporate billionaires and instead appealed to the common people for campaign funds!
Also, don't overlook the fact that a big part of Donald Trump's attraction to Republican voters was that he was not bought and paid for by the usual corporate forces.
This is something both Blue and Red voters are interested in. And it is something that would reinvigorate our fading democracy. A win-win proposition for the American people.
Count me out. How do I know the parents will spend the money on the child? And do you get an unlimited amount by the number of children or is there a cap? Must you be a citizen?
If this is the Democratic party's economic agenda, the Democratic party is in trouble. We need bold, big ideas that reduce income inequality, reduce the influence of special interests on our political system, and bring about real changes that lead to a healthier, more productive society.
1
Income inequality reflects an underlying inequality in knowledge and skills. Our society has a large number of completely hopeless people whom employers cannot use, and a smaller but still quite large set of very smart, well-educated people who know how to advance themselves and make money.
It is very difficult to see how to fix this problem, which has been decades in the making.
It is very difficult to see how to fix this problem, which has been decades in the making.
So by going bold the author means gradually increasing the abysmally low federal minimum wage, a bit of tax reform, and throwing money at children (I know, children are our future, etc.). This all sounds warmed over. If the Democratic party wants to pass something bold, it should go for Medicare for All. That "for all" is important--Americans seem hostile to programs by which people they see as less deserving get something they don't.
2
Trying to set our economic goals, as Jared Bernstein does, based on what Congress 'will or won't do' dooms us. Congress is hopelessly corrupt and dysfunctional, dominated by the wealthy. We are not going to get anything from them remotely near what is humane and fair for our society. We need far deeper changes in government--getting the lobby money out, cutting the stranglehold of the two political parties, huge tax raises on the wealthy, free healthcare and full retirement for all, and so on. Trying to 'convince' members of Congress to even nibble at the edges of those things is an exercise in futility. We have to force them through. And tepid editorials such as these, with watered down proposals which even if they were implemented would still leave millions in the lurch, don't help. Let's start getting real.
2
Some of the positions of the democratic party are pretty contradictory, an increased minimum wage is worthless if employers are allowed to hire illegal laborers without any punishment, or if corporations are allowed to move their operations to low-wage, low-regulation mexico and not pay any kind of border tax on goods destined for the American market.
The reason why these working class voters who delivered the presidency to Trump have left the democratic party is because the party stopped defending their interests. It fought for a healthcare system that left the private insurers in command when it had the opportunity to push through universal healthcare, it supported NAFTA, which made elites in Mexico and the USA better off but American workers worse off, and it has all but abandoned any opposition to illegal immigration, which depresses domestic workers' wages and makes a mockery of our labor and employment laws. People from OH, PA, WI, and MI have reduced their support for the party because the party has stopped being their defender.
There are some good ideas in this article, but the democrats are going to be forever hamstrung in their ability to be a competitive political party if they continue to cater to the interests of their rich donors in CA and NY above everyone else, and those people don't want any kind of shake-up of the status quo.
The reason why these working class voters who delivered the presidency to Trump have left the democratic party is because the party stopped defending their interests. It fought for a healthcare system that left the private insurers in command when it had the opportunity to push through universal healthcare, it supported NAFTA, which made elites in Mexico and the USA better off but American workers worse off, and it has all but abandoned any opposition to illegal immigration, which depresses domestic workers' wages and makes a mockery of our labor and employment laws. People from OH, PA, WI, and MI have reduced their support for the party because the party has stopped being their defender.
There are some good ideas in this article, but the democrats are going to be forever hamstrung in their ability to be a competitive political party if they continue to cater to the interests of their rich donors in CA and NY above everyone else, and those people don't want any kind of shake-up of the status quo.
3
We need to "get" that technological innovation is and accelerating.
We also need to appreciate that, as an ever-more-present consequence, jobs will become obsolete.
When I started in the construction industry, people drew construction drawings with a pencil. (A hundred or so years ago, they used pens.) Today you'd be hard-pressed to find a single construction drawing that wasn't generated using a computer.
Imagine, if you can, the disruption that caused. The hard-earned skills of a generation of people (mostly men), who'd spent years learning how to draft construction drawings (in and out of school) were, in little more than a decade, largely obsolete.
And it wasn't as if, while that was happening, those draftspersons had the leisure time, or the money, to go back to school and take courses in AutoCAD (or anyone of the other CAD programs in use).
Nor, frankly, did many of them even want to. Many had become draftspersons because they loved to draw. And they didn't love "keyboard drafting" (i.e., drawing by typing) at all. In fact, many hated it.
How are we going to deal with the fact -- and it is a fact -- that similar innovation and similar automation are occurring across the board, at an ever-accepelarting rate? I recently learned software is being developed with a view to replacing judges (i.e., court judges) with computers. What will judges do when their judicial skills no longer are needed--Become Walmart greeters? Unlikely.
We also need to appreciate that, as an ever-more-present consequence, jobs will become obsolete.
When I started in the construction industry, people drew construction drawings with a pencil. (A hundred or so years ago, they used pens.) Today you'd be hard-pressed to find a single construction drawing that wasn't generated using a computer.
Imagine, if you can, the disruption that caused. The hard-earned skills of a generation of people (mostly men), who'd spent years learning how to draft construction drawings (in and out of school) were, in little more than a decade, largely obsolete.
And it wasn't as if, while that was happening, those draftspersons had the leisure time, or the money, to go back to school and take courses in AutoCAD (or anyone of the other CAD programs in use).
Nor, frankly, did many of them even want to. Many had become draftspersons because they loved to draw. And they didn't love "keyboard drafting" (i.e., drawing by typing) at all. In fact, many hated it.
How are we going to deal with the fact -- and it is a fact -- that similar innovation and similar automation are occurring across the board, at an ever-accepelarting rate? I recently learned software is being developed with a view to replacing judges (i.e., court judges) with computers. What will judges do when their judicial skills no longer are needed--Become Walmart greeters? Unlikely.
1
This country is at a crossroads: For years, the GOP has been selling the philosophy of pure capitalism, where the free market is the solution to every problem. Ideologues like Paul Ryan want to cut back on "entitlements" like food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, etc. and use the money they save to pay down the debt. No mention of eliminating the tax loopholes that benefit the 1% like Donald Trump and most of his cabinet.
To quote former Congressman Joe Walsh, "why should I have to pay for someone else's healthcare?" Any mention of introducing new programs that actually help the 99% elicit howls from the right, complaining about creeping socialism.
Socialism and capitalism can co-exist, if the people we elect would only try to agree on which serves best to address our needs. A perfect example: healthcare insurance for people with 'pre-existing conditions.' Capitalism needs to charge more than most people can pay, so a social solution where we all 'pay it forward' is necessary to help people get the care that will keep them alive. Every one of us will need that help eventually, so why deny it?
To quote former Congressman Joe Walsh, "why should I have to pay for someone else's healthcare?" Any mention of introducing new programs that actually help the 99% elicit howls from the right, complaining about creeping socialism.
Socialism and capitalism can co-exist, if the people we elect would only try to agree on which serves best to address our needs. A perfect example: healthcare insurance for people with 'pre-existing conditions.' Capitalism needs to charge more than most people can pay, so a social solution where we all 'pay it forward' is necessary to help people get the care that will keep them alive. Every one of us will need that help eventually, so why deny it?
1
It's not just, or all about economic fairness and progressive policies.
If the Democratic Party wants to really get out the vote and inspire young people (the way Bernie Sanders did) they need to get behind real electoral reform.
Our whole electoral system -not just corrupt campaign financing- is constantly damping back reform with its antiquated systems and structures.
Real democratic policy ideas and proposals are heavily handicapped under our current systems and neither party seems to have the guts to change the rules of the game - especially if they just won under those rules.
Publicly funded election campaigns and fair, more up to date voting systems - like Ranked Choice voting - could unleash a wealth of enthusiasm and new "faith in government."
We have a whole generation asking "Is this what democracy looks like?"
and consequently not bothering.
If the Democratic Party wants to really get out the vote and inspire young people (the way Bernie Sanders did) they need to get behind real electoral reform.
Our whole electoral system -not just corrupt campaign financing- is constantly damping back reform with its antiquated systems and structures.
Real democratic policy ideas and proposals are heavily handicapped under our current systems and neither party seems to have the guts to change the rules of the game - especially if they just won under those rules.
Publicly funded election campaigns and fair, more up to date voting systems - like Ranked Choice voting - could unleash a wealth of enthusiasm and new "faith in government."
We have a whole generation asking "Is this what democracy looks like?"
and consequently not bothering.
2
My family lived The American Dream. It did because of massive government support, for my father when he returned from World War II. Government sent him to law school. We (and I) bought first houses with VA loans. So many other got training, education, business loans, housing and on and on not just because they had the spunk to want to “live the American dream” but because they got a tremendous amount of support from – yes – government!
Maybe it’s time for another surge of support, this time not just for soldiers returning home but also for people who have been displaced and left out as globalism and technology redefine work fundamentally, people who need and want skills, jobs, housing, health care: the tools needed to succeed.
Yes, in America you can be anything you want to be, with a little help.
Maybe it’s time for another surge of support, this time not just for soldiers returning home but also for people who have been displaced and left out as globalism and technology redefine work fundamentally, people who need and want skills, jobs, housing, health care: the tools needed to succeed.
Yes, in America you can be anything you want to be, with a little help.
1
Just after WWII, the government spent nearly nothing on Social Security payments and medical care. Now, these items are 72% of the budget, or $3 trillion dollars.
That is why there is no money left.
That is why there is no money left.
1
The problem that the United States (and other first-world countries) face is more basic: With the the advent of globalization and systemic automation, more and more low-skill (and even some high-skill) jobs are moving offshore or being automated away. Never mind the exodus of factory jobs. Think: automated checkout lines, smart ATMs, self-driving taxis, drone deliveries, tele-medicine, AI-assisted diagnoses, remote surgeries, cloud computing, etc. All of these are reducing the need for manual labor, not just in factory work, but also in software, medicine, and elsewhere.
As a result, point solutions like increasing the minimum hourly wage will not cut it. The United States needs a comprehensive strategy for transitioning the workforce from a labor-heavy job marketplace to one where workers partner with robots and intelligent software assistants, or where they supervise offshore workers. This is a major sea change and the majority of US workers is not ready for this.
To implement this strategy, we can START by increasing the minimum wage and providing child and educational subsidies, but we have to also provide subsided retraining for older workers across the job spectrum. A high school degree does not cut it anymore, but neither do many college degrees.
This is the kind of long-term vision that we need from the Democratic Party and, indeed, from all our leaders in Washington.
As a result, point solutions like increasing the minimum hourly wage will not cut it. The United States needs a comprehensive strategy for transitioning the workforce from a labor-heavy job marketplace to one where workers partner with robots and intelligent software assistants, or where they supervise offshore workers. This is a major sea change and the majority of US workers is not ready for this.
To implement this strategy, we can START by increasing the minimum wage and providing child and educational subsidies, but we have to also provide subsided retraining for older workers across the job spectrum. A high school degree does not cut it anymore, but neither do many college degrees.
This is the kind of long-term vision that we need from the Democratic Party and, indeed, from all our leaders in Washington.
Bernstein writes: " Progressives will be playing defense for many years to come. But let’s also make sure we’re ready to roll with a true progressive agenda when our time comes."
Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Jeff Merkley and other like minded progressives have played more than defense these last 2 years. For example, Sanders has made Medicare for all, a carbon tax to combat climate change, tuition free public college education, and a living minimum wage of $15 an hour viable ideas, even as "moderate" Democrats have ignored these ideas or run in the opposite direction. It's time for "moderate" Democrats, like HR Clinton (if she hopes to remain relevant in the Democratic Party), Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, to either embrace these positions with full voice or get the heck out of the way.
Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Jeff Merkley and other like minded progressives have played more than defense these last 2 years. For example, Sanders has made Medicare for all, a carbon tax to combat climate change, tuition free public college education, and a living minimum wage of $15 an hour viable ideas, even as "moderate" Democrats have ignored these ideas or run in the opposite direction. It's time for "moderate" Democrats, like HR Clinton (if she hopes to remain relevant in the Democratic Party), Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, to either embrace these positions with full voice or get the heck out of the way.
7
Hear, hear!
Not clear why it should necessarily cost $190 billion a year. I see no reason why everyone automatically should receive a child allowance. There are ~$74 million children (under 18) and of those 1/20 are at or below the poverty line. If child allowance is reserved for those at or below the poverty line, the most vulnerable section of families, then we need ~$11 billion per year. Even if we extend the allowance to twice the number, because at least that many might be at risk to fall below the poverty level, we need at most ~$22 billion per year. This number is a sneeze relative to a $17.9 trillion national economy, especially given the potential reach to future GDP of such an investment to our children.
1
A lot of these proposals strike me as the same sort of things Democrats have been coming up with for years: handouts for the poor. Do these kinds of programs work, at least in so far as reducing poverty? Sure, but we can do much better.
Because what people want is opportunity--not handouts.
We need to start thinking bigger than targeted programs to the poor and middle class. How about regulations that put upward pressure on wages? How about a guarantee for free college for students who graduate high school with a 3.0 or better? How about a program that reduces interest rates on student loans--or maybe even forgiving a certain percentage for Americans who have them? How about a massive infrastructure project to rebuild our roads, bridges, and power grid?
Finally, how about a single-payer health care system that truly covers everyone while drastically cutting the cost of our medical system?
What Democrats need to run on is opportunity--not handouts.
Because what people want is opportunity--not handouts.
We need to start thinking bigger than targeted programs to the poor and middle class. How about regulations that put upward pressure on wages? How about a guarantee for free college for students who graduate high school with a 3.0 or better? How about a program that reduces interest rates on student loans--or maybe even forgiving a certain percentage for Americans who have them? How about a massive infrastructure project to rebuild our roads, bridges, and power grid?
Finally, how about a single-payer health care system that truly covers everyone while drastically cutting the cost of our medical system?
What Democrats need to run on is opportunity--not handouts.
7
The real domestic economic problem-at-hand is finding a meaningful place for average Americans in and increasingly automated and global world. That is an extremely difficult task, one that may take decades of restructuring in education and policy. And that's assuming we can stop arguing and find the will to do so.
True economic health cannot be achieved by proclamation, by one shot fixes like raising the minimum wage, tax credits, or enacting permanent government make-work programs. This is just the Democratic version of the eternal Republican pledge to lower taxes in hopes of garnering votes. It's not about winning, it's about figuring out what to do.
True economic health cannot be achieved by proclamation, by one shot fixes like raising the minimum wage, tax credits, or enacting permanent government make-work programs. This is just the Democratic version of the eternal Republican pledge to lower taxes in hopes of garnering votes. It's not about winning, it's about figuring out what to do.
5
The Democrats need to adopt a policy I call "Sustainable Economics". The concept is simple -- moderated capitalism. The key difference between "Sustainable Economics" and "Redistribution" is that it does not cast the wealthy as the enemy to be bled dry for having committed the offense of being successful. Instead, it recognizes their legitimacy but also the need for a stable and prosperous society. By emphasizing programs that help those willing to work to get jobs and raise their standard of living without overtaxing the wealthy, we can achieve a Sustainable Economy that benefits all Americans.
1
These are all nice ideas, but the biggest seller by far I think would be a single-payer health system. We are already decades behind other countries in that respect; Obamacare didn't go far enough, couldn't go far enough, and not just because of the Republicans but also because so many moderate Democrats were too afraid to take that bold step. The result was a tepid law that was burdened by overly-complicated rules designed more to preserve some semblance of the status quo rather than make the drastic changes needed. Its time to cut the Gordian knot, gentlemen.
7
$250 payments for kids will fall flat and easily attacked as encouraging people to have children they can't afford.
Better to focus on living wages and/or jobs.
Speaking of walls, how about creating jobs to build walls along our coast for when the oceans rise?
Better to focus on living wages and/or jobs.
Speaking of walls, how about creating jobs to build walls along our coast for when the oceans rise?
3
Bernstein is reliably infatuated with wealth transfers. He should consider that "most other advanced countries" are able to shower benefits like a "universal child allowance" on their citizens because those countries (not just Europe) free ride on American defense guarantees. The ride has been free to such an extent that Germany, Japan and other "advanced countries" have token militaries or worse. Germany's military has minimal capabilities and basically no readiness. (Of course, they are understandably exercised at the idea of contributing essentially a token amount of GDP to defense even though they have agreed to do it.)
Subsidized job programs are fine as long as you are not the one doing the subsidizing. Often "subsidized" means "make work" and why not? The intent is wealth transfer, seldom anything productive.
I do hope that Bernstein is correct on one point: Progressives will be playing defense for many years to come. I would add, "particularly if they pursue these types of policies."
Subsidized job programs are fine as long as you are not the one doing the subsidizing. Often "subsidized" means "make work" and why not? The intent is wealth transfer, seldom anything productive.
I do hope that Bernstein is correct on one point: Progressives will be playing defense for many years to come. I would add, "particularly if they pursue these types of policies."
5
I get what you're saying about defense spending by our allies, but Japan and Germany are limited in their military might by treaty.
Dems can distinguish themselves by becoming a party of values--the right ones and not those of the Trumpian extremists. Granted they provide a proper foil, but that's not enuf. Truth and love are always a great place to start. Advocate for vision based in reality and for policy that works. Don't offer vision or policy that has no chance of realization (ie, love your neighbors who have a decent vision of conservatism). Thus something has to be offered to oppose the tired, insistent left-wing mantras that demagogue issues like trade and health care. If government is to run more of our lives, then it has to prove itself ready to be effective. I still can't believe that I don't hear any Dems arguing for attention paid to government burdens on individuals, families, and groups. If we (and I'm a registered Democrat) are to offer something better than GOP extremism, it has to be better towards the center and not extremism from any other wing.
1
The emerging Democratic agenda formulated here is once again framed around a litany of policies without a core message. What is the overarching theme and idea that they convey? What does the party stand for? What is the essence of a progressive agenda? I've written a "white paper" for discussion that suggests an overarching theme for Democrats - "responsible government". The government component is designed to counter the Republican message that government is the problem, not the solution. The responsible part is designed to suggest that those government policies and programs that efficiently and effectively help Americans move towards a higher quality of life and build a better future are the ones that will be put forward. Thus government programs such as a higher minimum wage, affordable health care, universal child allowance, and many others enhance the quality of life for many Americans and help create a better future. "Responsible government" may not be the best message for you, but for me it's a great starting point for an important discussion. Democrats better quickly find a simple, sustained message that can be used to convey what the party stands for to convince all Americans that Democrats have their best interests at heart and should be elected to office in all parts of the country.
4
It's a start, but I think it is unlikely to be enough to win back control for the Democratic party. Trump tapped into the population that is angry about our financial system and the taking advantage of US workers to improve profits by using cheap, foreign labor. This agenda, while positive, it not nearly enough to create a sustained progressive agenda. I'm expecting Republicans to be in charge at least until 2024. There are still far too many powerful elements in the party that cannot see their own greed and destructive agendas for what they are.
It is amazing to me how unwilling the leaders of the party are to accept their own faults. We've had 2 chances now to make a difference, and they were thrown away completely. Obama had a chance to really remake the global financial system, and he failed to even consider it. In 2016 the Democrats had a chance to crowd out regressive policies by motivating a much larger base through Sanders' candidacy and agenda.
Three strike and your out. Go big or go home.
It is amazing to me how unwilling the leaders of the party are to accept their own faults. We've had 2 chances now to make a difference, and they were thrown away completely. Obama had a chance to really remake the global financial system, and he failed to even consider it. In 2016 the Democrats had a chance to crowd out regressive policies by motivating a much larger base through Sanders' candidacy and agenda.
Three strike and your out. Go big or go home.
6
I own a small forestry services company. Despite a competent tax preparer I pay well over 20% in federal income taxes. A large forestry company (Weyerhauser) with billions in revenue pays 0% federal income tax. The republicans did that, but they had help from the corporate democrats. Short of revolution we cannot change this in the short run. So it is nice to see democrats like Bernstein buying in to rational ideas like child allowance, infrastructure jobs programs and earned income tax credit. Maybe the democrats are ready to help the rest of us.
8
The winning party will have to become the master of words. Wordsmith if you will the health care into a word that is self centered and controlled by the individual. Universal care does not match up with people who have a vocabulary at the local level.
Promise true medical insurance choice via voluntary payroll taxes on a Medicare plan that is farmed out to insurance companies as it is now for seniors. Don't discriminate on age, let anyone elect to have medicare. Or elect to have private insurance, or elect to have a concierge doctor, or elect to not be covered at all.
The next agenda must promise it all, promise coal operators that EPA will lax the regs and promise to get jobs in solar energy at the same time. Let them compete free enterprise style. Promise two faced on all fronts.
Promise to leave Roe V Wade settled, but promise to send support from the government to churches and faith ministries to educate young adults( male and female) on ...what ever level (contraception or virginity) the faith believe.
Promise to support public education that is assessed by standard test and promise to support charter schools with freedom to choose assessment and evaluation.
Promise people that you will work on issues like childhood asthma using words that match the common persons experience not words like climate change. Asthma is a result and it is real. Kids die for real.
Promise everything and then like usual, deliver half of it at best when elected.
Promise true medical insurance choice via voluntary payroll taxes on a Medicare plan that is farmed out to insurance companies as it is now for seniors. Don't discriminate on age, let anyone elect to have medicare. Or elect to have private insurance, or elect to have a concierge doctor, or elect to not be covered at all.
The next agenda must promise it all, promise coal operators that EPA will lax the regs and promise to get jobs in solar energy at the same time. Let them compete free enterprise style. Promise two faced on all fronts.
Promise to leave Roe V Wade settled, but promise to send support from the government to churches and faith ministries to educate young adults( male and female) on ...what ever level (contraception or virginity) the faith believe.
Promise to support public education that is assessed by standard test and promise to support charter schools with freedom to choose assessment and evaluation.
Promise people that you will work on issues like childhood asthma using words that match the common persons experience not words like climate change. Asthma is a result and it is real. Kids die for real.
Promise everything and then like usual, deliver half of it at best when elected.
Universal housing vouchers which limit rent to 30% of income are much more important than any of these measures. Now, only one third of those who qualify get them. We also need eviction and foreclosure insurance, like the FDIC.
Read Desmond Matthews.
Read Desmond Matthews.
2
Well, what if the property tax on the place is more than 30% of your income? In many parts of the country, the landlord is only a tax collector for the town or county.
Sorry, but is this what counts as "bold" these days? If so, Democrats to be out of power.
If they had any sense at all, they'd pick a few simple, effective policies that people can actually rally around.
1. Medicare for all.
2. Get rid of our insanely complicated tax code. Adopt a no-file system with no deductions, creidts or loopholes. Exempt first $50k or so of income for all. Just a progressive series of rates that taxes work and dividend income at the same levels.
3. Massive infrastructure bill to tidy up our airports and roads and give everyone fast internet. Create a modern energy grid capable of accommodating an "all of the above" generation policy, with a focus on green energy and power storage from intermittent sources. Launch infrastructure bank.
4. Create system of trade schools to parallel America's world-beating universities. We don't need free college for all because not everyone wants to go to college. What we need are Ivy League-equivalent trade schools that coordinate with businesses and government to train workers for modern industry and green energy generation.
5. Break up the big oligopolies dominating so many industries. Break up the cable and phone companies. Break up the big tech companies that sell all of our personal data without our knowledge. Break up the big banks. Break up the big airlines. This isn't anti-market. Our market no longer works. Go look at your cable bill for evidence.
If they had any sense at all, they'd pick a few simple, effective policies that people can actually rally around.
1. Medicare for all.
2. Get rid of our insanely complicated tax code. Adopt a no-file system with no deductions, creidts or loopholes. Exempt first $50k or so of income for all. Just a progressive series of rates that taxes work and dividend income at the same levels.
3. Massive infrastructure bill to tidy up our airports and roads and give everyone fast internet. Create a modern energy grid capable of accommodating an "all of the above" generation policy, with a focus on green energy and power storage from intermittent sources. Launch infrastructure bank.
4. Create system of trade schools to parallel America's world-beating universities. We don't need free college for all because not everyone wants to go to college. What we need are Ivy League-equivalent trade schools that coordinate with businesses and government to train workers for modern industry and green energy generation.
5. Break up the big oligopolies dominating so many industries. Break up the cable and phone companies. Break up the big tech companies that sell all of our personal data without our knowledge. Break up the big banks. Break up the big airlines. This isn't anti-market. Our market no longer works. Go look at your cable bill for evidence.
18
Please excuse the typos above... I was excited. I also hit the character limit, but wanted to add that my overall point is that Democrats should always opt for simplicity and clarity instead of technocratic wheezes and increased complexity.
People feel alienated from government even when they benefit from from government programs. Bad actors benefit from the opacity that comes from complexity. We need to get rid of all the garbage so everyone can see what works and who's cheating.
Simplicity is also easier to sell on the campaign trail. Who wants to listen to a speech about some tax credit that will just get lost in the thicket of needs, wants, responsibilities, and supposed benefits we all have to juggle.
People feel alienated from government even when they benefit from from government programs. Bad actors benefit from the opacity that comes from complexity. We need to get rid of all the garbage so everyone can see what works and who's cheating.
Simplicity is also easier to sell on the campaign trail. Who wants to listen to a speech about some tax credit that will just get lost in the thicket of needs, wants, responsibilities, and supposed benefits we all have to juggle.
We could have medicare for all.....but we'd have to tax everyone about 40% of their income, starting from the first dollar, with no deductions or allowances.
1. MEDICARE FOR ALL
- Freedom from medical bankruptcy - due to sudden illness or accident.
- Freedom for workers to change jobs.
- Freedom for workers to start companies or become self-employed (the real "job creators").
- Freedom for small businesses from the high costs, administrative overhead, and burdensome regulations of dealing with private insurers and Obamacare.
2. $15 MINIMUM WAGE
- Freedom from poverty for the working poor.
- Anyone working full time should be able to afford normal living expenses
- End corporate welfare, where Wal-Mart's bottom line is subsidized by taxpayer assistance for their underpaid full-time workers.
3. REBUILD AMERICA
- A matter of national security.
- Highways/Bridges - it is shameful that we had two bridges collapse in the last decade, in the richest country in the world.
- High-speed rail. Acela is profitable. Expand it to other major city pairs (Chicago area, Texas, Florida, Seattle/Portland, Atlanta-Charlotte). Take pressure off airport capacity for trips less than 250 miles.
- National Electric Grid - national security and energy efficiency
- Water security - Flint Michigan, never again.
---
Come on, Democratic Party. This isn't rocket surgery. It's not that hard.
- Freedom from medical bankruptcy - due to sudden illness or accident.
- Freedom for workers to change jobs.
- Freedom for workers to start companies or become self-employed (the real "job creators").
- Freedom for small businesses from the high costs, administrative overhead, and burdensome regulations of dealing with private insurers and Obamacare.
2. $15 MINIMUM WAGE
- Freedom from poverty for the working poor.
- Anyone working full time should be able to afford normal living expenses
- End corporate welfare, where Wal-Mart's bottom line is subsidized by taxpayer assistance for their underpaid full-time workers.
3. REBUILD AMERICA
- A matter of national security.
- Highways/Bridges - it is shameful that we had two bridges collapse in the last decade, in the richest country in the world.
- High-speed rail. Acela is profitable. Expand it to other major city pairs (Chicago area, Texas, Florida, Seattle/Portland, Atlanta-Charlotte). Take pressure off airport capacity for trips less than 250 miles.
- National Electric Grid - national security and energy efficiency
- Water security - Flint Michigan, never again.
---
Come on, Democratic Party. This isn't rocket surgery. It's not that hard.
18
How do we pay for this?
GENERAL REVENUE
- Tax all capital gains and dividends as ordinary income.
- Why should workers earning wages be penalized, and people living off unearned trust funds be favored?
MEDICARE FOR ALL
- Payroll tax increase, which is offset by savings from eliminating the current private insurance premiums.
- Increase the payroll tax cap above the current $117,000 income.
INFRASTRUCTURE
- Form an Infrastructure Bank or Infrastructure Trust Fund.
- Interest rates are at generational lows (but will go up if we wait too long).
MILITARY
- Take care of our veterans first.
- Our military is equipped to fight the Cold War, not our current threats.
- Our success against terrorism is thanks to special forces, intelligence, and drones -- not expensive new ships, planes, and missiles.
- Contain the defense budget, and make a smarter, leaner military to fight the threats of the 21st century.
GENERAL REVENUE
- Tax all capital gains and dividends as ordinary income.
- Why should workers earning wages be penalized, and people living off unearned trust funds be favored?
MEDICARE FOR ALL
- Payroll tax increase, which is offset by savings from eliminating the current private insurance premiums.
- Increase the payroll tax cap above the current $117,000 income.
INFRASTRUCTURE
- Form an Infrastructure Bank or Infrastructure Trust Fund.
- Interest rates are at generational lows (but will go up if we wait too long).
MILITARY
- Take care of our veterans first.
- Our military is equipped to fight the Cold War, not our current threats.
- Our success against terrorism is thanks to special forces, intelligence, and drones -- not expensive new ships, planes, and missiles.
- Contain the defense budget, and make a smarter, leaner military to fight the threats of the 21st century.
5
Would you adjust capital gains for inflation, or would you say that if I bought a stock in 1982 for $100, and sold it today for $200, I have 'made' $100 profit.
The overall theme:
Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!
MEDICARE FOR ALL:
- Job security, job mobility, job creators (makes it easier to start a business or be self-employed)
LIVING WAGE
- The dignity of work.
- A full-time job should allow anyone to pay their bills.
INFRASTRUCTURE
- Creates well-paying jobs, across the nation.
Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!
MEDICARE FOR ALL:
- Job security, job mobility, job creators (makes it easier to start a business or be self-employed)
LIVING WAGE
- The dignity of work.
- A full-time job should allow anyone to pay their bills.
INFRASTRUCTURE
- Creates well-paying jobs, across the nation.
1
Jobs creation is just part of the problem. The other part of it is paying people a living wage, which neither party has moved on. Minimum wage will not allow a person to have a safe roof under which to live and decent food on the table.
Real Progressives should not only be pushing for decent living conditions, but also for early education, great health care, and skills training for those who may not have the ability or the means for a college education. On second thought, this is not a progressive agenda, it is a human one.
The Democrats and the Republican Party had better get their acts together, or there will be a huge cry for an Independent Party and also funding for same. Democrats were in charge when Obama was President and they did very little to change things for the poor or the middle class. It is to bad Bernie Sanders was cheated by the Dems to a fair and impartial Primary.
They are now paying for their sins.
I am hoping the Republicans start paying for theirs.
I see very little evidence so far these problems are going to be solved, as most elected officials are just jockeying for position. They all should have to live on a minimum wage for the rest of their lives.
Real Progressives should not only be pushing for decent living conditions, but also for early education, great health care, and skills training for those who may not have the ability or the means for a college education. On second thought, this is not a progressive agenda, it is a human one.
The Democrats and the Republican Party had better get their acts together, or there will be a huge cry for an Independent Party and also funding for same. Democrats were in charge when Obama was President and they did very little to change things for the poor or the middle class. It is to bad Bernie Sanders was cheated by the Dems to a fair and impartial Primary.
They are now paying for their sins.
I am hoping the Republicans start paying for theirs.
I see very little evidence so far these problems are going to be solved, as most elected officials are just jockeying for position. They all should have to live on a minimum wage for the rest of their lives.
4
Jean Cleary: You said it all. We need a HUMAN agenda. We need common sense. And decency. But I feel that we are talking to the empty air, because the GOP politicians, in particular, are not interested in welfare of us human beings, and from what I see every single day, they are certainly not interested in DECENCY. As for common sense...I could cry. It is all about accumulating MORE power and wealth for themselves and their corporate cronies. So we can talk about what life in these United States SHOULD BE, but who is listening? REALLY listening? (I know Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are.)
where is there reference to access to affordable health care?
8
One policy fits all 50 states is a recipe for regional disaster. The minimum wage should not be the same in Kansas as in New York City. How about $15/hour in the 25 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) with the highest cost of living, and $12 everywhere else?
3
$12 per hour does not send the worker's kids to college which is expensive even the 'cheap' states (mostly Republican states, where the legislature has been chipping away funding from all education even higher education). The present minimum wage is a major transfer of funds from all tax payers to the private companies, often to large private companies and franchise holders, since the society has to supply food stamps, subsidized housing, medicaid etc to the workers' family. You may say that of course he/she could get another job to increase his income, answer is NO: these companies, which rely on cheap labor, change work schedules every week (I know my daughter worked for one), hence the worker cannot even plan to have a second job or go to school to improve his/her job skills to get better employment opportunities.
1
Kansas should be $15.00. NYC, Boston, L.A., San Francisco, etc, SHOULD BE MORE THAN $15.00!
Have you gone grocery shopping ANYWHERE lately, tried to rent an apartment, buy or lease a car, not to mention afford health insurance?????
Have you gone grocery shopping ANYWHERE lately, tried to rent an apartment, buy or lease a car, not to mention afford health insurance?????
A question for Mr. Bernstein: How do you prevent the child allowance from becoming a subsidy for teenage and out of wedlock pregnancy ? As I understand it, single motherhood is a major predictor of poverty and subsidizing it would seem to be exactly the wrong way to go.
11
Oh please give me a break - the federal treasury is a feeding trough for mind boggling waste corporate lobbyists that populate DC and environs secure for their clients regularly and you complain about a paltry "subsidy" to feed a child. The older I get the more of this type of ugly, destructive mindset a person encounters in this country from reading discussions such as this makes me want to go take a shower.
OK, all you "single payer" advocates (which includes me) - convince the 80% of working Americans who now get "free" health insurance through their employer that that would be a better deal. Convince them that their employer will raise their wages by the amount they would save and it would pay for the $4,000/yr or so payroll/tax it would now cost workers. It's not going to happen.
1
You must be a government worker. There hasn't been "free" healthcare provided by private sector employers for a long long time. Employee contributions and deductibles have been increasing every year.
4
One tax season Inworked at a tax preparer's office.
To my astonishment the biggest returns were not from professionals or people in good paying jobs, but those at the low end of the economic who barely worked, had too many children, but received thousands of dollars in refunds in earned income credits.
And this is what the author of this piece, more money tossed at those who choose to have children that they cannot afford and choose a lifestyle of downward mobility?
No wonder the Democratic Party keeps losing ground when it thinks we should make people feel comfortable, instead of uncomfortable, with their poverty.
To my astonishment the biggest returns were not from professionals or people in good paying jobs, but those at the low end of the economic who barely worked, had too many children, but received thousands of dollars in refunds in earned income credits.
And this is what the author of this piece, more money tossed at those who choose to have children that they cannot afford and choose a lifestyle of downward mobility?
No wonder the Democratic Party keeps losing ground when it thinks we should make people feel comfortable, instead of uncomfortable, with their poverty.
1
The trouble with all of these ideas is not that they would be unduly costly in and of themselves. It is that the tax increases necessary to maintain Social Security and Medicare will drain the well, and prevent any of these ideas from being fundable. You can yell "Raise the Cap" all you want -- but just know that when the Cap is raised (which will eventually happen) that will redirect massive amounts of new tax dollars away from any Non-Defense Discretionary spending. Social Security goes negative in 17 years -- and anyone who thinks that is far away isn't very good at financial math.
1
Social Security is NOT maintained by taxes, and it is currently funded well into the future...............
All good thoughts, but I worry that they could further complicate the inefficient patchwork of social programs that now function as Band-Aids for a fundamentally dysfunctional system. What's really needed is a complete rethinking of the social contract, as automation takes more and more jobs and funnels a higher and higher share of the benefits to the rich owners of the machines. Wouldn't it be amazing if, for once, we actually got ahead of an emerging problem and started experimenting with solutions?
4
Go bold? No!
I'm a swing voter and voted for Hillary. And I more often vote Democratic than Republican. But these wild subsidies and guaranteed income plans will certainly push me to the other side. Trump is more interested in padding his pockets and those of his family and friends under the pretense of patriotism but these irresponsible "bold" proposals sound like people who never ventures our of their gated communities. It's a mess out there in the real world. Some people can't get it together to work. More needs to be done for truly basic healthcare and Earned Income support. But not more income for people who think it makes economic sense to increase their income by having a baby. More needs to be done for those who are unlucky or made a mistake to get their lives back on track if they work for it. But not a blanket handout to anyone with his hand out.
I'm a swing voter and voted for Hillary. And I more often vote Democratic than Republican. But these wild subsidies and guaranteed income plans will certainly push me to the other side. Trump is more interested in padding his pockets and those of his family and friends under the pretense of patriotism but these irresponsible "bold" proposals sound like people who never ventures our of their gated communities. It's a mess out there in the real world. Some people can't get it together to work. More needs to be done for truly basic healthcare and Earned Income support. But not more income for people who think it makes economic sense to increase their income by having a baby. More needs to be done for those who are unlucky or made a mistake to get their lives back on track if they work for it. But not a blanket handout to anyone with his hand out.
3
Membership in our local Democratic club has increased ten fold since the election. People are working harder than ever to forge a Democratic platform and are very enthusiastic. Our biggest areas of concern and goals we are working toward are the environment, single-payer healthcare and fair immigration policies.
Democrats cannot achieve any of this unless we have knowledgeable voters. Reading letters to the editor gives me hope that people everywhere in these United States are as concerned as our little but growing group is. However, people need to put goals into action - join a local Democratic club, advertise good speakers that give people intelligent alternatives in your local paper, write letters to the editor to that paper, canvass your neighbors and ensure people vote.
Democrats cannot achieve any of this unless we have knowledgeable voters. Reading letters to the editor gives me hope that people everywhere in these United States are as concerned as our little but growing group is. However, people need to put goals into action - join a local Democratic club, advertise good speakers that give people intelligent alternatives in your local paper, write letters to the editor to that paper, canvass your neighbors and ensure people vote.
3
The Democratic Party must do a better job. Stop cringing in the background and complaining. I am a long time liberal Democrat, and I have no idea what the party currently stands for nor what they want to achieve. If the party does not move into the 21st Century, you might as well write it off........
I read articles by Mr. Bernstein for years in the Huffington Post. I always felt he wrote well and expressed the opinions of the progressive wing of the party well. But this article is just as thin as whitewash on a fence.
Where are the comments on single payer healthcare? This is one of the biggest drains on families finances. Where are the ideas for education? How can any everyday family afford the cost of college that we are told is the requirement for a good job these days? What about equal pay and inequity in earnings? Just making women's pay the equivalent of men would provide a significant boost to a family's earnings. How about ending corporate welfare and force them to distribute the fruits of the company's profits more towards the workers than the executives and shareholders. How long can this country allow the rich to get richer while the rest stagnate or see their lives worsen?
No. The progressives should go with a true progressive program and not some wish-washy, hope it can pass the Republicans program. Stand for what you believe.
Where are the comments on single payer healthcare? This is one of the biggest drains on families finances. Where are the ideas for education? How can any everyday family afford the cost of college that we are told is the requirement for a good job these days? What about equal pay and inequity in earnings? Just making women's pay the equivalent of men would provide a significant boost to a family's earnings. How about ending corporate welfare and force them to distribute the fruits of the company's profits more towards the workers than the executives and shareholders. How long can this country allow the rich to get richer while the rest stagnate or see their lives worsen?
No. The progressives should go with a true progressive program and not some wish-washy, hope it can pass the Republicans program. Stand for what you believe.
5
Lol... $190 billion child care stipend, never going to happen. Neither is the job subsidy program. Raise the minimum wage? Maybe, but probably to only about $9.00.
1
Jobs + Medicare for all will solve many of these problems.
Handing out cash to parents for child care? Might as well admit Dem defeat right now. The Right will have a field day with that.
Handing out cash to parents for child care? Might as well admit Dem defeat right now. The Right will have a field day with that.
2
"Jobs + Medicare for all will solve many of these problems."
That is it. That is the ticket. Those two things are the beginning of the answer to everything! We need MORE JOBS, and we need HEALTHCARE FOR ALL. It is not only a human right to have health care, but it should certainly be a human right to have a job and work. We should strive to give people dignity.
That is it. That is the ticket. Those two things are the beginning of the answer to everything! We need MORE JOBS, and we need HEALTHCARE FOR ALL. It is not only a human right to have health care, but it should certainly be a human right to have a job and work. We should strive to give people dignity.
1
"Field day," is right! Can't the Dems understand that encouraging people to accept handouts and treat procreation as a meal ticket is what got us into this mess? Call names, say whatever you want to make yourselves feel better, but that will not stop the truth from being true...
Having one person pay to take care of another person's child creates the wrong incentives.
4
Just giving money does not say that the child will be taken care of. It takes a lot more than money to "take care" of children.
If this is the future of the Democratic party, then I'm done with it. Heaving trillions of dollars at new entitlements when so many other problems remain makes zero sense. I want my party to do this instead:
1. Fix the environment with green infrastructure and tax reform
2. Fix the health care system with a public option
3. Make education affordable with investment in public universities, training in the trades, and a civil service analog of the GI bill.
1. Fix the environment with green infrastructure and tax reform
2. Fix the health care system with a public option
3. Make education affordable with investment in public universities, training in the trades, and a civil service analog of the GI bill.
10
We don't need to cut any taxes (though we need to tax capital gains like ordinary income). We do need those higher wages, especially for the lower pay rungs. Wages high enough so anyone working can afford their basic needs.
So here's the deal. Cut the corporate tax rate in exchange for a $15 minimum wage increasing to $20 over the next decade. At the same time, taxpayers will save on programs no longer needed for the working poor. As long as those two words - working poor - coexist together in American we are not close to solving the problem.
So here's the deal. Cut the corporate tax rate in exchange for a $15 minimum wage increasing to $20 over the next decade. At the same time, taxpayers will save on programs no longer needed for the working poor. As long as those two words - working poor - coexist together in American we are not close to solving the problem.
3
Jared Bernstein's column is a breath of fresh air and cool water for this reader. Maybe there is some hope for America after all the recent negatives.
3
The Democratic Party currently has no agenda. It seems to consist of a large group of people screeching "TRUMP-RUSSIA-TRUMP-RUSSIA" over and over.
It is economically illiterate to think that one minimum wage fits all areas of this country well. $15 may be appropriate for Boston, Seattle, and San Francisco, but for rural counties in Oklahoma? The median wage is not above $15 in every country in this country. Do you think that might have some unforeseen consequences? Please stop with the policy ideas that fit on a bumper sticker and show some sense. A constructive and helpful minimum wage law for the entire country has to be based on a formula that takes into account median wages and the cost of living. It should specify a minimum wage for each county (say 30-50% of the median wage) which would help the neediest without discouraging job creation. Well meaning one-size-fits-all policies dictated from Washington and their unintended consequences are how the Democratic Party deservedly got into the mess that it's in. Stop repeating your mistakes!!
5
Jobs. Healthcare. Jobs. Higher Minimum wage. Jobs. (Environment, too.) (Lower military spending) Fair taxation of the rich. Jobs. These ideas are all popular and do-able.
The notion of a child allowance should be dropped now. If I, as a life-long progressive, find it repulsive, I can imagine what more centrist folk will think. It's a loser. Drop it now.
The notion of a child allowance should be dropped now. If I, as a life-long progressive, find it repulsive, I can imagine what more centrist folk will think. It's a loser. Drop it now.
133
If you were a low-income family and wanted to have children you might feel differently about child allowance! Now everybody has the same values you do!
Democratic agenda= Communism.
1
You lost me at paying people to breed.
No!
No!
15
Is this the best that "progressive democrats" can do? A whole host of bandaid solutions? Come on ! Try single payer health, jobs program, government infrastructure program, etc. We must rid ourselves of the neo - liberal austerity program we've been running for decades. . It has given us massive inequality, despair and Donald Trump.
5
Shouldn't it be highly, highly progressive by this time? Maybe aggressive progressive? Has a ring to it!
1
My representatives here in NH really need to come out of their neo-liberal cocoons and see what is around them. 80% of this state voted for progressive democratic values in the name of Bernie Sanders. Both reps went with HRC. Democrats - please become Democrats once again. Real down in the dirt FDR democrats need only apply.
7
This is unreal - I hope Democrats run on this agenda. They will never be in power. Growing the economy is the only way to reduce the deficit. Instead Democrats should propose spending $1 trillion to hand out more cash for doing nothing??
You really need to get out to flyover country
You really need to get out to flyover country
7
Same old agenda. Tax and Spend.
It's funny that Dems accuse Republicans of ignoring facts when most progressives ignore these following facts as they are driven by envy and resentment to punish the rich.
The US taxation system is already the most progressive among the rich nations. Further, the US tax system has become progressively more progressive over recent decades. Again, that's not what you normally hear but it is also true.
The data demonstrates that the U.S. individual income tax continues to be very progressive, borne mainly by the highest income earners.
In 2012, 136.1 million taxpayers reported earning $9.04 trillion in adjusted gross income and paid $1.1 trillion in income taxes.
All income groups increased their income and taxes paid over the previous year.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers earned their largest share of income since 2007 at 21.9 percent of total AGI and paid their largest share of the income tax burden since the same year at 38.1 percent of total income taxes.
In 2012, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers (68 million filers) paid 96.7 percent of all income taxes while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 3.3 percent.
The top 1 percent (1.3 million filers) paid a greater share of income taxes (38.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent (122.4 million filers) combined (29.8 percent).
The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a higher effective income tax rate than any other group at 22.8 percent, which is nearly 7 times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent (3.28 percent).
The US taxation system is already the most progressive among the rich nations. Further, the US tax system has become progressively more progressive over recent decades. Again, that's not what you normally hear but it is also true.
The data demonstrates that the U.S. individual income tax continues to be very progressive, borne mainly by the highest income earners.
In 2012, 136.1 million taxpayers reported earning $9.04 trillion in adjusted gross income and paid $1.1 trillion in income taxes.
All income groups increased their income and taxes paid over the previous year.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers earned their largest share of income since 2007 at 21.9 percent of total AGI and paid their largest share of the income tax burden since the same year at 38.1 percent of total income taxes.
In 2012, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers (68 million filers) paid 96.7 percent of all income taxes while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 3.3 percent.
The top 1 percent (1.3 million filers) paid a greater share of income taxes (38.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent (122.4 million filers) combined (29.8 percent).
The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a higher effective income tax rate than any other group at 22.8 percent, which is nearly 7 times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent (3.28 percent).
2
Who knows? A miracle may occur and the Democrat liberal progressives may actually start to pay attention to the Plain Folks of the Middle Class, those people who actually keep the country running on a day to day basis.
Her Hillaryship give short shrift to these "Deplorables" and the overburdened Middle Class was just something to be flow over as Hillary greeted her minion in the major metropolitan voting districts. The poor folks there grateful, they know their betters and they tug on their forelocks in the presences of the Progressive Beautiful People.
Her Hillaryship give short shrift to these "Deplorables" and the overburdened Middle Class was just something to be flow over as Hillary greeted her minion in the major metropolitan voting districts. The poor folks there grateful, they know their betters and they tug on their forelocks in the presences of the Progressive Beautiful People.
2
You mean those "plain folks" in rural and small town America that are taking drugs in record numbers?
You mean those "plain folks" who are out of work coal miners and factory workers sit on their derrières waiting for their jobs to miraculously come back?
You mean those "plain folks" where racism has taken on a new life in blaming immigrants, Muslim or anyone of color?
And I am not even going to get in how those "plain folks" always manage to vote for hucksters whose only interest is to get elected.
Granted, I am sure there are some "plain folks" that "keep things running."
But, far too many of them think their civic duty is just keeping things running, instead of reconizing tbat a good citizen makes an effort to be informed, engaged and open to new ideas.
Which is clearly not the case with far too many "plain folks" who see civic laziness as a virtue and keeping their calendars on 1957, instead of 2017.
You mean those "plain folks" who are out of work coal miners and factory workers sit on their derrières waiting for their jobs to miraculously come back?
You mean those "plain folks" where racism has taken on a new life in blaming immigrants, Muslim or anyone of color?
And I am not even going to get in how those "plain folks" always manage to vote for hucksters whose only interest is to get elected.
Granted, I am sure there are some "plain folks" that "keep things running."
But, far too many of them think their civic duty is just keeping things running, instead of reconizing tbat a good citizen makes an effort to be informed, engaged and open to new ideas.
Which is clearly not the case with far too many "plain folks" who see civic laziness as a virtue and keeping their calendars on 1957, instead of 2017.
If you want more of something you subsidize it and if you want less of something you tax it. There are some "paretns" out there who shouldn't be parents at all. They are terrible at it and WILL NOT produice good citizens for the community do the self-inflicted chaos in their lives. SO now if we just throw money at them and their kids it will all be better? And the taxpayerts don't even get a say, they're just there to write the check?!?!?!? Thank goodness saner heads have prevailed and are just saying NO to these senseless give aways of my hard earned tax money to foks who have NO BUSINESS having kids in the home. In the future, taxpayers MUST have a say about these issues, otherwise the Democrats are just trying to turn the Govt. into a "Beggar by Proxy", ie. collecting and distributing my tax money through force, then giving it to the beggars, who have NO IDEA what they are doing or supposed to be doing.
3
The 80s called. They want their dog-whistle "welfare queen" myth back.
This is another dumb entitled liberal proposal.....attaching big adjectives to small ideas. What is $250 a month, when a child has a health problem?
The Democrats need to address health care and regulation....yes, awful regulation......in the financial and energy areas, where the concerns at the top have been allowed to devastate the economy and the environment, and all of us pay in lives as well as dollars.
Finally, and likely obvious to all, economic development lies in finding the solution to the energy and environmental problems that now face us. Disaster is not facing merely our children and grandchildren....it is imminent. Those countries that truly focus on innovation and management in these areas will lead the world economically as well as benefitting all, hopefully.
It is so sad that in these terrifying times the Democrats still don't find the capacity to step outside the old box where they create new labels for the same old thing and don't recognize the need to alter the corporate order that first benefitted and now damns them.
The Democrats need to address health care and regulation....yes, awful regulation......in the financial and energy areas, where the concerns at the top have been allowed to devastate the economy and the environment, and all of us pay in lives as well as dollars.
Finally, and likely obvious to all, economic development lies in finding the solution to the energy and environmental problems that now face us. Disaster is not facing merely our children and grandchildren....it is imminent. Those countries that truly focus on innovation and management in these areas will lead the world economically as well as benefitting all, hopefully.
It is so sad that in these terrifying times the Democrats still don't find the capacity to step outside the old box where they create new labels for the same old thing and don't recognize the need to alter the corporate order that first benefitted and now damns them.
2
Jobs, jobs, jobs!!!
Child care credits, gender equality, and other progressive causes are not the answer. We Dems need to campaign on JOBS and how to get a good one.
No other message is needed and no other message will take its' place.
Jobs.
40 Hour Jobs
5 Days a Week
Child care credits, gender equality, and other progressive causes are not the answer. We Dems need to campaign on JOBS and how to get a good one.
No other message is needed and no other message will take its' place.
Jobs.
40 Hour Jobs
5 Days a Week
2
Oops, the author left out any mention of identity politics! How will this ever fly with the Dems?
1
This guy must be a Republican plant.
Paying people to have more babies?! That's a recipe for a full scale electoral whipping.
Next.
Paying people to have more babies?! That's a recipe for a full scale electoral whipping.
Next.
5
The Democrats need to remind Americans that the Republicans have never done a thing for the middle class or lower income people. It needs to explain what FDR did and begin a "21st Century New Deal" which will return power to the people and mostly educate people about how over the years, the Republicans have taken everything and given it to the top 1 per cent. They should adopt European style social democracy and make the people understand that "social democracy" is not "communism" or "socialism".
2
No where in these proposals do I see the recognition that a large portion of the human population is not only poor but also not needed for society to function and develop its knowledge base and technical facility. It would be better to give the poor a life time stipend that insures healthcare, food and shelter and to require in return that the poor produce no children. I understand that such a proposal is hard and politically beyond the pale. But given the reality of a society that is moving steadily toward a two tier caste system and increasing inequality, this is the most humane solution -- the unborn suffer no pain. Nothing in the proposals given in this article remove the fixed barrier between the upper tier and lower tier of society. The children of the poor, even if given an allowance will still be left behind. Creating work for the sake of creating work will do nothing to raise people out of a second class position in society. It is good to ameliorate bad conditions but it is better to do so with a plan to prevent such conditions from coming into existence. I think that given a large enough financial incentive, the poor would be willing to forego reproduction.
2
We need to produce a generation of very smart people who can do tomorrow's jobs and lead us forward to a world that's better for everyone.
Poor people's children could be among those desirable workers if we spent MUCH MORE on education (from preschool through college and advanced vocational training), nutrition (why do we subsidize corn syrup and cotton but not broccoli or blueberries?), healthcare (including dental care and mental health care), measures to ensure adequate sanitary housing, better public transportation to help people get to jobs, etc. etc. . . . .
It is not inevitable that the children of the poor will struggle to find work. Even if you believe in I.Q. (and I absolutely don't), note that researchers say it is only 50% heritable--the other 50% is environmental conditions, including good nutrition, good education, good healthcare and a less stressful environment.
Bottom line: Progress requires the participation of everyone. Let's not write off 20% of our population as hopeless! Instead we need to make sure that every human being can fulfill his or her potential and reap the satisfaction of having made a contribution to bettering the world.
Poor people's children could be among those desirable workers if we spent MUCH MORE on education (from preschool through college and advanced vocational training), nutrition (why do we subsidize corn syrup and cotton but not broccoli or blueberries?), healthcare (including dental care and mental health care), measures to ensure adequate sanitary housing, better public transportation to help people get to jobs, etc. etc. . . . .
It is not inevitable that the children of the poor will struggle to find work. Even if you believe in I.Q. (and I absolutely don't), note that researchers say it is only 50% heritable--the other 50% is environmental conditions, including good nutrition, good education, good healthcare and a less stressful environment.
Bottom line: Progress requires the participation of everyone. Let's not write off 20% of our population as hopeless! Instead we need to make sure that every human being can fulfill his or her potential and reap the satisfaction of having made a contribution to bettering the world.
1
"It would be better to give the poor a life time stipend . . . in return that the poor produce no children."
Wow! Have you never heard of eugenics?
This evil (sterilizing the "feeble-minded" citizens) was practiced here as recently as a decades ago. The most successful eugenics practicioner was an obscure figure in history, named . . . Adolph Hitler.
That said, the author's proposed subsidies for having more children is a bad idea (and political suicide for Democrats), as many here have pointed out.
Wow! Have you never heard of eugenics?
This evil (sterilizing the "feeble-minded" citizens) was practiced here as recently as a decades ago. The most successful eugenics practicioner was an obscure figure in history, named . . . Adolph Hitler.
That said, the author's proposed subsidies for having more children is a bad idea (and political suicide for Democrats), as many here have pointed out.
1
Wait, what happened to a single payer health care system? That should be priority #1 for Democrats. It will simplify life for all Americans, remove the risk and fear that you are one major illness away from bankruptcy, and disengage health care from job status, which will make our companies more competitive and unleash entrepreneurial activity, with Americans less fearful of quitting their jobs and corporate health care plans. That's a plan that benefits all Americans and can be sold across the political spectrum, unlike the proposals in this article that are targeted mainly to the poor. I suspect that the insurance companies, rich doctors, and big pharma won't like it, but it's time that we stop being held hostage by these special interests.
4
Couple of pounts:
First, when the country experienced previous extremes of inequality in the late 19th century, unions changed the balance of political power between classes and improved the lives of millions of workers for decades. But the process was violent, with some violence by unionists but more of it directed against them. It could happen again, and it may help to see a massive increase in the minimum wage as a non-violent alternative to improve the welfare of those left out of the growth of national wealth in recent decades.
Second, while job creation in areas that have experienced economic decline may be workable in some places on some scale, we have to recognize the reality that jobs and prosperity exist elsewhere. People need help in making life and family changing decisions to relocate on a larger scale. It may help for Americans to think about why we are here; it is because our forebears left somewhere else to make better lives for themselves. People need the courage, and assistance through targeted programs, to do that again.
First, when the country experienced previous extremes of inequality in the late 19th century, unions changed the balance of political power between classes and improved the lives of millions of workers for decades. But the process was violent, with some violence by unionists but more of it directed against them. It could happen again, and it may help to see a massive increase in the minimum wage as a non-violent alternative to improve the welfare of those left out of the growth of national wealth in recent decades.
Second, while job creation in areas that have experienced economic decline may be workable in some places on some scale, we have to recognize the reality that jobs and prosperity exist elsewhere. People need help in making life and family changing decisions to relocate on a larger scale. It may help for Americans to think about why we are here; it is because our forebears left somewhere else to make better lives for themselves. People need the courage, and assistance through targeted programs, to do that again.
2
Mr, Bernstein is seeing images worthy of the Wizard of Oz.
The liberals in my world, and as confirmed by the continuing emotional screeds seen daily her in comments and all things political, are still having trouble coming to grips with why their anointed leader, Hillary Clinton, lost an election that was hers to lose.
And Candidate Clinton's "Why I Lost" tour is doing nothing to change the or improve the liberals' lack of focus, message, and connection to what the political desires of even their own constituency.
You win elections by votes. And you win votes by having a message that The People can trust and support.
Mr. Bernstein's dream right now is wishful projection onto a screen of ethereal mist.
The liberals in my world, and as confirmed by the continuing emotional screeds seen daily her in comments and all things political, are still having trouble coming to grips with why their anointed leader, Hillary Clinton, lost an election that was hers to lose.
And Candidate Clinton's "Why I Lost" tour is doing nothing to change the or improve the liberals' lack of focus, message, and connection to what the political desires of even their own constituency.
You win elections by votes. And you win votes by having a message that The People can trust and support.
Mr. Bernstein's dream right now is wishful projection onto a screen of ethereal mist.
5
It's really a quite simple plan. The entire scheme has as its premise the idea that every productive person fortunate enough to have some money will gladly agree to allow others to spend that money until there is no more to spend... At which time the productive person will be expected to produce more money to be spent by.... Guess who?
1
Democrats need to position themselves to take advantage when Trump's fanciful ideas -- jobs back from China, infrastructure, anything at all beyond white nationalism and self-enrichment (for Trump & Co) -- collapse.
At this rate, Republicans have nothing to run on in 2018 besides SCOTUS. For the nation's busybodies ("Social Conservatives"), that may be about enough. For the economically downtrodden, it won't be.
Democrats must have a strong enough jobs and uplift message -- one that overcomes the twin elephants in the room -- guns and race (two deeply interconnected issues). I think what has to happen for real change is to unite the working class against their rich exploiters. Note: immigrants and Chinese didn't "take" our jobs; mostly rich and white CEOs *gave* them away.
Working=class whites need to understand that where they are -- lacking a solid economic future -- is where minorities have been all along. A coalition of these groups (Bernieism) is the obvious solution. But beware the GOP using guns and race to drive them apart, as usual.
At this rate, Republicans have nothing to run on in 2018 besides SCOTUS. For the nation's busybodies ("Social Conservatives"), that may be about enough. For the economically downtrodden, it won't be.
Democrats must have a strong enough jobs and uplift message -- one that overcomes the twin elephants in the room -- guns and race (two deeply interconnected issues). I think what has to happen for real change is to unite the working class against their rich exploiters. Note: immigrants and Chinese didn't "take" our jobs; mostly rich and white CEOs *gave* them away.
Working=class whites need to understand that where they are -- lacking a solid economic future -- is where minorities have been all along. A coalition of these groups (Bernieism) is the obvious solution. But beware the GOP using guns and race to drive them apart, as usual.
3
Dems need to focus on one thing only: defeating Republicans and it doesn't matter how. R's adopted a scorched earth strategy years ago and it worked. Fight fire with fire.
1
Reviving the welfare state does not seem like a good platform to run on. It may even be worse than "I'm with her."
2
Swing for the fences. Go Big or Go Home.
1
We live on a crowded planet. We should not be subsidizing families for having more children. We should pay our citizens not to have children. We should welcome refugees, train them, provide them a decent wage, and pay them not to have more children.
6
The Democrats solution is always to throw hard-earned taxpayer money at kids. I don't have kids. I am working until I am 70 (no pension). I pay for schools in my area (which are dismal by the way), I pay a "meal tax" when I eat out to pay for a new school we did not need. I pay a car tax which also funds the local schools. If I have to fund even more stuff for kids - where more than half the kids born today in the US are funded by Medicaid. This is stupid!!!!! We don't need to give people more money to have more kids.
Fix the schools. They are BROKEN. Create a system in which students graduate with real world skills so they can get a decent job - and I am not talking about sending everyone to college. Create a culture with a strong work ethic. This is where the money needs to go.
Fix the schools. They are BROKEN. Create a system in which students graduate with real world skills so they can get a decent job - and I am not talking about sending everyone to college. Create a culture with a strong work ethic. This is where the money needs to go.
8
Are Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, Tom Perez and Cory Booker reading this? Because they need to. These are the types of party stalwarts that stand in the way of legitimate economic progress.
What is this guy smoking? We will still have a colossal war economy, colossal income inequality, and a corrupt democratic party after this "coming together". This is more the Clinton pipe dream that if they could just come up with the right song and dance, and people will follow, "stronger together'. I was there at the convention when they took our seats, brought in the sound machines and hired applauders. That was together.
2
The immediate Democratic priority should be the 2018 midterm elections. We need to elect enough Democrats to Congress to keep Republican legislation from reaching the White House. To achieve this goal, I favor a Democratic agenda that stresses a positive message and offers proposals that will benefit a broad cross section of the population. Examples: clean air and water, single payer health care, investment in human capital including education and job retraining (not a temporary government job program), and investment in modern infrastructure.
Dem. candidates need to speak the truth about paying for their plans. Americans know you can't get something for nothing and many of them are tired of waiting for the illusory trickledown benefits of tax cuts for the wealthy. We need a progressive tax system that spreads the cost fairly.
Democrats will never win over those hardcore voters whose unswerving loyalty to Trump is based on prejudice and ignorance, nor will they sway the fat cat opportunists whose greed has distorted the Republican agenda for their own profit. However, it isn't necessary to persuade them. It's only necessary to appeal to the crumbly edges of the Trump bloc, those frustrated voters who thought that Trump's lies and false promises would help them but who are starting to see that they made a bad bet. Democrats can show them a better way.
Dem. candidates need to speak the truth about paying for their plans. Americans know you can't get something for nothing and many of them are tired of waiting for the illusory trickledown benefits of tax cuts for the wealthy. We need a progressive tax system that spreads the cost fairly.
Democrats will never win over those hardcore voters whose unswerving loyalty to Trump is based on prejudice and ignorance, nor will they sway the fat cat opportunists whose greed has distorted the Republican agenda for their own profit. However, it isn't necessary to persuade them. It's only necessary to appeal to the crumbly edges of the Trump bloc, those frustrated voters who thought that Trump's lies and false promises would help them but who are starting to see that they made a bad bet. Democrats can show them a better way.
69
AND , most importantly, abandon Super Delegates if you want more voter turnout. So many of my fellow Dems decided not to bother to vote because their votes wouldn't matter!
The first thing that needs to happen is campaign finance reform. Without it change is impossible.
2
Democrats have to stop taking money from corporations and the rich or nothing will ever change. Limit contributions to $100 or less and then you can represent the people of the United States, not the moneyed elites. It seems simple but so far has been unattainable by the national democratic party. If we don't want Wall Street running things then stop taking their money. If we ever get in power again we have to do away with private campaign finance. Money is not free speech.
52
Do away with private campaign finance. If we don't, then Dems MUST take money from corporations and the rich. Or they will be defeated every time.
2
C'mon, mat, not so loud..........you will wake up the Democrats. And possibly the Republicans. Then they would have to legislate, something they have apparently forgotten how to do.....
OK then, just keep floundering being republican lite.
No mention of the elephant in the room: defense spending ( >%50 of the discretionary budget), since there's probably no political will for either party to reign that in.
2
As a minimum, let's switch to single payer, universal health care and save 1.5 trillion dollars. Invest that saving in education, both K-12 and higher education, including reasonable college tuition costs. This simple solution alone would 1) help an enormous number of family much more than than getting a tax credit of $6000 instead of $2000; 2) provide much better health care, with people in much better physical health and shape; 3) provide a much better educate populace, capable of thinking and recognizing the immense scam the the GOP leadership is perpetrating to the damage of the average American and vote them out of the system.
These things are done in many European Union countries. And they work very well. And they can work very well here, too, since the size of our economy is much larger.
Imagine, just imagine...
These things are done in many European Union countries. And they work very well. And they can work very well here, too, since the size of our economy is much larger.
Imagine, just imagine...
2
Good ideas, but do they ignore the immense income inequality that is accelerating under the Trump agenda of more "massive" tax cuts at the expense of health care and rapidly impoverishing most of us. We need to reverse the Reagan era income tax policies and return to a more equitable form of a truly progressive income tax reform that would restore a top rate of 50 percent and zero rate for families earning under $35,000/year--all adjusted for inflation. We need a Job Security Act on the model of Social Security that will provide a year's salary and a year's retraining for all workers displaced either by automation or the transfer of their jobs to another country. We need to view a four-year college as an extension of the publicly funded K-12 education system. And, we need to insure educational equality by replacing the real estate tax that favors wealthy communities over poor ones with an education income tax that provides equal per pupil expenditures. In short, we need a pro-worker, pro-labor agenda that includes revising our labor laws to encourage the formation of unions.
2
Keep it simple and short. Repeat every day in every way.
Universal health care.
Minimum wage
Commitment and investment in the rebirth of public education
Tax the 1% and corporations
Federal voting rights and secure ballot counts
Infrastructure/jobs commitment public not private
Some suggestions above. The Democratic party needs to adopt - pick a number 3,5,7 - main policy objectives. Create a short and clear phrase and just push, push, push it Every day in every form. Make it appear on twitter every minute or whatever. The GOP lies cheats and steals. Be prepared to use their tactics against them. They are buying TV stations across America as I write. What are the Dems going to do about that?
The agenda needs to be clear, beneficial for all with as little as possible objections such as 'giving to welfare cheats' etc. No room to not understand.
Bold Direct Simple
Universal health care.
Minimum wage
Commitment and investment in the rebirth of public education
Tax the 1% and corporations
Federal voting rights and secure ballot counts
Infrastructure/jobs commitment public not private
Some suggestions above. The Democratic party needs to adopt - pick a number 3,5,7 - main policy objectives. Create a short and clear phrase and just push, push, push it Every day in every form. Make it appear on twitter every minute or whatever. The GOP lies cheats and steals. Be prepared to use their tactics against them. They are buying TV stations across America as I write. What are the Dems going to do about that?
The agenda needs to be clear, beneficial for all with as little as possible objections such as 'giving to welfare cheats' etc. No room to not understand.
Bold Direct Simple
11
Yes, the Dems need a new agenda, but in fact, it's more of a return to their historic agenda: focusing on lifting up the middle class and working people, which they abandoned when the went along with the "trickle down" policies that were born under Reagan and expanded since. Simply put, what we need to do is return to the form of capitalism that fueled the largest expansion of the middle class in history. We need to roll back the tax code changes that promoted short term profit taking, and punished long term investment; that promoted off-shoring of manufacturing and service provision and the corresponding jobs; that promoted wealth creation without job creation. If we do this, sustainable jobs that pay living wages will return, and there will be no need to artificially create them, which is an unsustainable policy.
Aside from a return to "capitalism with a conscience", we need to implement a Single Payer health insurance system, which will provide access to decent health care for everyone, but also remove the cost of health insurance from businesses, thus increasing their ability to hire more workers.
Short term, launching large public works and infrastructure projects can be a bridge until the above changes take hold, but over the long haul we need to get the system back in balance as when Americans all felt a share in the system and its rewards. If we don't, we risk descending into a war between the Haves and the Have Nots which will serve no one.
Aside from a return to "capitalism with a conscience", we need to implement a Single Payer health insurance system, which will provide access to decent health care for everyone, but also remove the cost of health insurance from businesses, thus increasing their ability to hire more workers.
Short term, launching large public works and infrastructure projects can be a bridge until the above changes take hold, but over the long haul we need to get the system back in balance as when Americans all felt a share in the system and its rewards. If we don't, we risk descending into a war between the Haves and the Have Nots which will serve no one.
1
Here is an axiom that should be considered as a policy for the Democratic party’s agenda, ‘Investment Creates Wealth!’ The party needs to inject the phrase into the consciousness of the American public where its meaning not only applies to the basis of capitalism, but, is broadened to include an approach to public policy. It should be stressed that as individuals invest into stocks to create personal wealth, the taxes paid, an abhorrent concept to many, are also investments in public policies. Examples include; the progressive polices cited by previous contributors.
That being said, for too long the concept of ‘Investment Creates Wealth,’ or some version of it, has been interpreted to become a basis for a political philosophy that is narrowly restricted to economic policies that are oriented to creating personal wealth. If the concept is broadened to include basic progressive public policies one will appreciate that investing for personal gain and investing (being taxed) for public policy goals are not mutually exclusive, they are two sides of the same coin! For the sake of brevity, a healthy and wealthy society created by a practical public policy creates wealth for the individual and vice-versa. This approach is not ideological driven, but one based on the practical understanding of ‘Investment Creates Wealth.’
That being said, for too long the concept of ‘Investment Creates Wealth,’ or some version of it, has been interpreted to become a basis for a political philosophy that is narrowly restricted to economic policies that are oriented to creating personal wealth. If the concept is broadened to include basic progressive public policies one will appreciate that investing for personal gain and investing (being taxed) for public policy goals are not mutually exclusive, they are two sides of the same coin! For the sake of brevity, a healthy and wealthy society created by a practical public policy creates wealth for the individual and vice-versa. This approach is not ideological driven, but one based on the practical understanding of ‘Investment Creates Wealth.’
2
Twenty-one States at $7.25 per hour, eh?
$7.25 times 8 hours times 5 days times 52 weeks gives about
$15,000 a year before the taxes they do pay. And, it should be noted that many wage slaves do not get the 40 hours per week, not do they get health benefits. It's called exploitative capitalism.
$7.25 times 8 hours times 5 days times 52 weeks gives about
$15,000 a year before the taxes they do pay. And, it should be noted that many wage slaves do not get the 40 hours per week, not do they get health benefits. It's called exploitative capitalism.
5
Replacing the patchwork of child assistance programs would go far beyond the initial goal of reducing child poverty. Children who have enough to eat learn better in school and are healthier overall. They grow into more engaged and productive citizens and workers.
As a social worker, I have known children who went to school only to eat. One literally hid on the school grounds the rest of the day, refusing to go to class. The school apparently had no resources for him and neither did my agency.
America is one of the richest countries in the world. We don't need a larger military. We need to support the health and welfare of our children. The money is there. Is the will?
As a social worker, I have known children who went to school only to eat. One literally hid on the school grounds the rest of the day, refusing to go to class. The school apparently had no resources for him and neither did my agency.
America is one of the richest countries in the world. We don't need a larger military. We need to support the health and welfare of our children. The money is there. Is the will?
All worthy and thoughtful ideas to consider. I would like to see a companion piece pertaining to a Democratic alternative to the concept of endless war and an expanding American military empire overseas. I have never seen so much support for NATO from the left as I have seen in recent weeks in response to President Trump’s rebuke of that very costly endeavor. The US currently provides a $200 billion annual subsidy to wealthy European nations (as well as a similar subsidy to our gallant allies in Japan and South Korea). This subsidy allows these countries to invest in their people and infrastructure while providing universal healthcare.
The United States is at a crossroads and we need to focus on domestic priorities above all else. We can’t fix the manifest problems here while being involved in every issue, every skirmish overseas.
The United States is at a crossroads and we need to focus on domestic priorities above all else. We can’t fix the manifest problems here while being involved in every issue, every skirmish overseas.
2
It is time for the USA to catch up to the rest of the developed world. Donald Trump and the McConnell/Ryan Congress must be a wakeup call. We need to take the burden of medical insurance off of our employers if we really want to bring jobs back from overseas. We need to educate our children so they can perform the jobs of tomorrow. We need to amend our Constitution to protect against foreign countries interfering in our elections, big money donors running the Congress and unqualified or unfit candidates running for high elected office.
1
If the democrats truly want to win they have to start on a weekly basis pointing out the gerrymandering. Also, make a deal with trump on something and in return get the electoral college removed. Also, why is that a state like CA has two senators just like say Nebraska? CA has approx 35B people and Nebraska has under 2B?
3
I for one just want Democrats to get ORGANIZED and do SOMETHING. The Republicans have been making up issues to use against Democrats for years, and it has worked. We have a man in office who assaults women, doesn't pay his bills, obviously has something to hide on his taxes, gives away state secrets to Russia, uses his personal phone for government business, and the Democrats sit on their hands. What a timid, ineffective lot. Can they learn nothing from the Republicans? They go in six directions, each with their own agenda. They need to get rid of Pelosi. She is no leader. They need someone with some new ideas. For one thing, quit leading with children and education. Yes, it is a wonderful issue - but children don't vote. It is not working so move on. Democrats need to start communicating with the common man who simply wants a job and to live in a safe neighborhood. After they win the election they can work on schools.
2
So the solution for the Democrat's lack of ideas is to move to the extreme left. This will go down just great with the voters and will guarantee a bright future. I could try to joke that we should start the nationalizations, but this is no joke, it's just the logical conclusion of what the author advises: let's build a huge state sector to provide cushy jobs for people who will faithfully vote for their political patrons.
The final irony is that the Democrats discover their thirst for socialism rather late - just as it went bankrupt in Europe.
The final irony is that the Democrats discover their thirst for socialism rather late - just as it went bankrupt in Europe.
Note the focus on the economic; I am a centrist, perhaps slightly right of center Catholic, who loathes Trump, and would have never voted for him - and had my home state been at all at risk of a Trump victory, I would have even voted for Hillary. However, many of my (large) extended family did so. Many are the picture of the white middle-to-upper-middle class Trump voter, who (whether through ignorance or not) hate the "elites" who are telling them how they must be supportive of left-leaning social causes: the "PC" issues like transgender issues, abortion on demand, and the like. In other words, they are Reagan Democrats. (And now Trump Republicans, sadly). I see few established Democrats (perhaps Kirsten Gillibrand?) who can break the mold of being stridently left on social causes while taking a progressive (even "populist"?) stand against the tyrannical corporatist destruction of America. As terrible as Trump's numbers are now, can a *Democrat* leader create a "big tent" like Reagan did, focusing on the economic -- and even recognize, and give attention to, appropriate social justice causes -- while not turning the Democratic Party into a Mother Jones convention? Many will say they just need to get out the vote more, and that Bernie would have won. I think this is delusional. As many Trump voters as there were, there are many more who sat this election out who would come out against someone more liberal than Hillary.
Maybe. But the progressives also bring us identity politics and the social justice wars, which are absolutely toxic to centrist voters.
2
Has the writer been in a cave asleep?
Democrats' agenda of the past eight years has resulted in massive losses on the state level and now losses at the federal level.
Republicans are not like democrats. They still believe in individualism and consensus not authoritarian allegiance.
Republicans are traditionalists and nationalists. Democrats are socialists and globalists. Consensus takes time as all sides have to give and take. That said republicans are just as obstructionist as democrats.
The D.C. political elites are all out to destroy Trump regardless of party. He's not a politician and speaks bluntly. Politicians are expert at double speak saying nothing absolute. It's an incestual relationship among politicians, the press, and lobbyists. Each senator and congressman is owned by them, not Trump.
Democrats' agenda of the past eight years has resulted in massive losses on the state level and now losses at the federal level.
Republicans are not like democrats. They still believe in individualism and consensus not authoritarian allegiance.
Republicans are traditionalists and nationalists. Democrats are socialists and globalists. Consensus takes time as all sides have to give and take. That said republicans are just as obstructionist as democrats.
The D.C. political elites are all out to destroy Trump regardless of party. He's not a politician and speaks bluntly. Politicians are expert at double speak saying nothing absolute. It's an incestual relationship among politicians, the press, and lobbyists. Each senator and congressman is owned by them, not Trump.
Any party that accepts donations measured in thousands of dollars and claims to be the party of the common people is lying. It's lying to itself and it is lying to voters. Before we get rational policies we need a political donation limit that 90% of Americans can afford. I suggest a day's wages at minimum wage.
2
All good idea's, however to get them to fly, democrats must say something about insuring those who can work do work! Even if it is civic duty, too much money going to those who choose to simply sit it out and live on the doll. Some acknowledgement of this problem might bring some republicans and Independents, like myself, to look more favorably at the reasonable solutions suggested.
Um, I don't think it's the hordes of unemployed welfare cheats who are receiving the bulk of our GDP lately.
By paying people to have babies, aren't we just encouraging irresponsible behavior ? Perhaps adults should decide whether or not they can afford to have children.
If I decide not to have children, why should I pay for someone else to have kids ?
Yes, bad things can happen to otherwise responsible adults; they can get sick, or lose their jobs.But those ought to be temporary issues for the vast majority of people, and we already have unemployment insurance and Medicaid.
Mr. Bernstein wants the spigot to continue to flow unchecked.
Typical Democratic tax and spend.
The real problem is that the total assets of "the rich" cannot cover the cost of all of Mr. Bernstein's wishes.
There is no such thing as a free lunch, and the kitchen is going bankrupt.
If I decide not to have children, why should I pay for someone else to have kids ?
Yes, bad things can happen to otherwise responsible adults; they can get sick, or lose their jobs.But those ought to be temporary issues for the vast majority of people, and we already have unemployment insurance and Medicaid.
Mr. Bernstein wants the spigot to continue to flow unchecked.
Typical Democratic tax and spend.
The real problem is that the total assets of "the rich" cannot cover the cost of all of Mr. Bernstein's wishes.
There is no such thing as a free lunch, and the kitchen is going bankrupt.
4
It is obvious that democrats must "go bold", but Democrats do not have the leadership, ability, drive or sense, to offer a progressive agenda or accomplish a shift away from their current incompetent positions! Remarkably, the Democratic Party has failed to establish itself as the party of the middle class, even after years of Republican legislation to benifiting only the wealthy and big business, at the expense of the middle class!
The Democratic party is a party of hundreds of individual politicians all going off in different directions, unorganized and incoherent! I am tired of hearing Democratic politicians, speaking favorably to the media about their "colleagues on the side of the aisle". Anyone who wants to deprive 20 million Americans of health care, reduce or abolish Medicare, unions and the VA, should not be a colleague!
Democrats failed to remind and educate the American people of the failures of the Republican party, failed "trickle down" economic policies, ending in recessions, and the Great Depression.
Democratic party voters demand a new leadership with a sense of direction, leaders who must then be able to offer ideas, established beliefs, a progressive platform and unification, to counter and denounce Republican right wing propaganda, and champion progressive issues.
We need Democrats with "Backbone" to protect Social Security, Medicare, the VA, unions and the other social programs targeted for elimination by the Republicans! ! We need them now!
The Democratic party is a party of hundreds of individual politicians all going off in different directions, unorganized and incoherent! I am tired of hearing Democratic politicians, speaking favorably to the media about their "colleagues on the side of the aisle". Anyone who wants to deprive 20 million Americans of health care, reduce or abolish Medicare, unions and the VA, should not be a colleague!
Democrats failed to remind and educate the American people of the failures of the Republican party, failed "trickle down" economic policies, ending in recessions, and the Great Depression.
Democratic party voters demand a new leadership with a sense of direction, leaders who must then be able to offer ideas, established beliefs, a progressive platform and unification, to counter and denounce Republican right wing propaganda, and champion progressive issues.
We need Democrats with "Backbone" to protect Social Security, Medicare, the VA, unions and the other social programs targeted for elimination by the Republicans! ! We need them now!
2
Paying people to have kids plus an open border policy. What could possibly go wrong? God forbid the party recognize that most of our ills are economic and inflict just as much pain on poor whites as all of your preferred minority groups. i.e. it's "class privilege" not "white privilege" that's torn up the ladder that so many us, myself included, previously used to climb out of the socio-economic bottom.
You need return to your Blue Collar roots and do the following:
- Fully support Capitalism with the caveat that it only works well when labor has a seat at the table. i.e. We need vastly increased participation in private sector unions
- Require our trading partners to meet the same labor and environmental standards we do or face tariffs to compensate
- Require all companies to participate in e-verify and add stiff penalties plus jail time to employers who hire illegals
- Raise the fees for applying for H1B visas and do not return the fee if the visa is not granted. Use the extra funds for job training programs targeting the industries who can't find the workers they need
- Tuition at public universities needs to be cheep enough that anyone can work their way through college.
- Recognize that success in this great nation requires hard work, and if your not willing to do that work then your problems are your fault not society's
You need return to your Blue Collar roots and do the following:
- Fully support Capitalism with the caveat that it only works well when labor has a seat at the table. i.e. We need vastly increased participation in private sector unions
- Require our trading partners to meet the same labor and environmental standards we do or face tariffs to compensate
- Require all companies to participate in e-verify and add stiff penalties plus jail time to employers who hire illegals
- Raise the fees for applying for H1B visas and do not return the fee if the visa is not granted. Use the extra funds for job training programs targeting the industries who can't find the workers they need
- Tuition at public universities needs to be cheep enough that anyone can work their way through college.
- Recognize that success in this great nation requires hard work, and if your not willing to do that work then your problems are your fault not society's
One of the reasons the GOP cannot do anything legislatively is because they spent the last 8 years frittering away our time being "The Party of No." Additionally, Hillary spent most of her time telling us how bad Donald was, not what she and the Dems would do...a proven loser in campaigning. Dems are smart not to fall into a resistance only posture.
The real issue here in very general terms is solving problems. Those words, in and of themselves--"solve problems" is a winner for Democrats since solving them means identifying them, and... the man behind the curtain, naked, bumbling and tripping over himself, knows of nothing of a real problem that Americans face (like lying cheating leaders, but I digress). He knows only yellow brick roads, flying evil monkeys, and emerald cities. Of course the 'know-little, do-nothing, but profit-opportunistically' Republicans in Congress will go along trying not to stare at the exposed private parts. They will never SOLVE a problem in America--even for those who want to, there are too many that won't admit we have them because the problems so clearly put accountability in their laps. We have a contagious case of corruption that includes denial, lying, profiteering, shirking oaths, perjury, and profiteering, and did I mention profiteering? .. that has become epidemic for having not been CHECKED 8 years ago when the last batch of Republican thieves left the People's House.
1
How about promoting these ideas instead of all this anti Trump, anti Rep rants. The Times, MSNBS, CNN, are promoting all the anti rhetoric, and almost none of these proposals. The anti stuff is overwhelming. The $15 minimum wage marches, demos, got many states to sign on.
This is a public relations issue. Get Dems out there, giving press conferences, putting forth these ideas. The anti stuff is giving no PR for positive stuff. PR works; look at the effect FOX News had, all positive on the Reps, giving us Trump.
Coverage, coverage, coverage. Get with it Dems!
This is a public relations issue. Get Dems out there, giving press conferences, putting forth these ideas. The anti stuff is giving no PR for positive stuff. PR works; look at the effect FOX News had, all positive on the Reps, giving us Trump.
Coverage, coverage, coverage. Get with it Dems!
2
Universal child allowance? Encouraging welfare moms and single parenthood? The Republicans will kill them with that and rightfully so. There has been talk about universal basic income. Even Charles Murray is in favor of that. The difference with Murray's plan is that would pay that only to adults. In other words, any kids you bring into the world are on your nickel. They are YOUR responsibility not everybody else's. Anyway, the Dems economic agenda is all moot unless they stop pushing transgender bathrooms and other such nonsense as their main agenda items. They will keep losing. It hurts me too, because I am a Democrat.
5
Democrats are hopeless tools of the group of people they benefit
Republicans are hopeless tools of the group of people they benefit.
Both are run out of K Street, just different offices.
Time for a truly independent third party.
3
In response to Drs. As someone in that upper bracket, you ahve a responsibility to contribute back to society. If you don't, there will come a point where those of us who have been pushed out of the middle class decide we've had enough and we rebel and destroy what you have. If you want to stay at the top, get rid of some of your greed and pay back some of what you don't need anyhow.
I am begging Democrats/Liberals to please stop obsessing over and psycho-analyzing the stubbornness of Trump voters and how 46% of the electorate could possibly vote Trump, and GOP in general. Guess what? 42-45% of the national electorate are going to vote for the GOP regardless of candidate, and, barring a significant black swan (i.e. '08 Financial Crisis or Iraq War Weariness), will generally look back in hindsight at who they voted for and at best still proclaim "My GOP guy/gal isn't great, but was still a better choise than that Democratic candidate."
It's happening now, as many of my GOP friends say they think Trump is unstable and misguided, yet of course all believe "Hillary would have been worse." Please stop worrying about what these 42-45% think. They're not going to vote Democrat...ever. They've created their own alternate bubble of reality where liberals and "others" are the cause of all of their problems.
Also Democrats/Liberals, please set realistic expectations. I see far too many editorials and comments of Democrats with delusions such as "If we can just get the right message to poor and working people in red states, we can turn them and get 67% of the national vote." That's not happening. Instead, your realistic goal is to get 52-53% of the national vote (and that's in a good election year), and your stretch goal, if Democrats can ever turnout people that don't traditionally vote, is 55-56%.
It's happening now, as many of my GOP friends say they think Trump is unstable and misguided, yet of course all believe "Hillary would have been worse." Please stop worrying about what these 42-45% think. They're not going to vote Democrat...ever. They've created their own alternate bubble of reality where liberals and "others" are the cause of all of their problems.
Also Democrats/Liberals, please set realistic expectations. I see far too many editorials and comments of Democrats with delusions such as "If we can just get the right message to poor and working people in red states, we can turn them and get 67% of the national vote." That's not happening. Instead, your realistic goal is to get 52-53% of the national vote (and that's in a good election year), and your stretch goal, if Democrats can ever turnout people that don't traditionally vote, is 55-56%.
2
It's great to have these programs lined and ready to go. But one deeply important thing Democrats have missed in selling their new ideas is Passion. We get so hung up in policy and numbers that the WHY of an idea gets buried in data. People don't vote for data. They vote for things that they FEEL strongly about.
If any of this is to come about and swing voters to the Democratic side of things, we have to remember to sell the WHY...not the how, and certainly not the data.
Invoke passionate stories. Make people feel something and you'll get their votes. It's a lesson Republicans learned long ago, and Democrats have been far too slow to catch on.
If any of this is to come about and swing voters to the Democratic side of things, we have to remember to sell the WHY...not the how, and certainly not the data.
Invoke passionate stories. Make people feel something and you'll get their votes. It's a lesson Republicans learned long ago, and Democrats have been far too slow to catch on.
35
I honestly think Democrats FEAR showing passion, because they are afraid of the intensely anti-government attitudes of many voters, for who "government action" always means "hand-outs" to the "undeserving". So for years, Democratic politicians have been cowering and trying to sound as anti-government and conservative as they get away with.
But people see through it.
Maybe more of them need to start sounding like Bernie Sanders, but also more of them really need to FEEL that way too.
But people see through it.
Maybe more of them need to start sounding like Bernie Sanders, but also more of them really need to FEEL that way too.
Single payer plan for healthcare provision.
Infrastructure.
K-12 education
Higher education
Tax reform--higher taxes for higher tax brackets
Social Security withholding: no ceiling.
Infrastructure.
K-12 education
Higher education
Tax reform--higher taxes for higher tax brackets
Social Security withholding: no ceiling.
3
Education is, by far, the most important policy that we can expand, and certainly improve upon. Not with some form of "School Choice" concept, which has been divisive, selective and, by following those paths, racist. Rather, it needs to be focused on inclusion and continuously updated on the workplace of the future.
We need to establish an Agenda, combining educators and government, business and labor, and academia, as well as parents and some (older_ students. And perhaps, even some recent high school graduates.
We need to transform our educational system, to prepare the future generations of workers, for the jobs of the future. This concept should be re-affirmed and updated, perhaps every five years, or so. As changes in technology, systems, and best-practices will accelerate at a faster, and faster pace, our educational preparedness must be updated at an equivalent pace.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
We need to establish an Agenda, combining educators and government, business and labor, and academia, as well as parents and some (older_ students. And perhaps, even some recent high school graduates.
We need to transform our educational system, to prepare the future generations of workers, for the jobs of the future. This concept should be re-affirmed and updated, perhaps every five years, or so. As changes in technology, systems, and best-practices will accelerate at a faster, and faster pace, our educational preparedness must be updated at an equivalent pace.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
1
Education is extremely important to me personally. I work at a major university. But education as a federal issue is not going to win national elections. K-12 education is mostly a local issue. Democrats should be all about jobs, jobs, jobs in the national campaigns.
It may work to talk about the out-of-control college cost inflation, and student loan debt. It may work to talk about community colleges and job retraining. But these should be secondary issues on the national level. Talk about jobs, jobs, jobs.
It may work to talk about the out-of-control college cost inflation, and student loan debt. It may work to talk about community colleges and job retraining. But these should be secondary issues on the national level. Talk about jobs, jobs, jobs.
1
Passing out cash won't solve any problems. Our goals should be to reduce income inequality and improve social mobility. The way to do this is by ensuring high quality K-12 education for every single child and guaranteed healthcare for every person.
It is criminal that two children with identical potential should experience a 3X difference in the investment in their educations just because they live on opposite sides of town. Society does not owe adults a promise of equal outcomes, but it certainly does owe children the promise of equal opportunity.
On healthcare, it is unnecessary for so many of us to live under the threat of financial ruin should illness strike. We are the richest country on the planet, and poorer, smaller countries have succeeded. We can too.
The conservative zero-sum philosophy embraced by Trump and the rest of the GOP, if allowed to continue, will lead to more income inequity, more personal risk and more racial and cultural strife.
The Democratic strategy can be expressed in one simple concept: we're all in this together. We invest in each other, in each other's children, and in the infrastructure. We ensure truly equal opportunity for children. We provide for the national defense but we don't go looking for opportunities to kill foreigners. We win on the national stage through the strength of our culture, not by military adventure. I heard this philosophy at the Democratic National Convention and I'd like to see it put into practice.
It is criminal that two children with identical potential should experience a 3X difference in the investment in their educations just because they live on opposite sides of town. Society does not owe adults a promise of equal outcomes, but it certainly does owe children the promise of equal opportunity.
On healthcare, it is unnecessary for so many of us to live under the threat of financial ruin should illness strike. We are the richest country on the planet, and poorer, smaller countries have succeeded. We can too.
The conservative zero-sum philosophy embraced by Trump and the rest of the GOP, if allowed to continue, will lead to more income inequity, more personal risk and more racial and cultural strife.
The Democratic strategy can be expressed in one simple concept: we're all in this together. We invest in each other, in each other's children, and in the infrastructure. We ensure truly equal opportunity for children. We provide for the national defense but we don't go looking for opportunities to kill foreigners. We win on the national stage through the strength of our culture, not by military adventure. I heard this philosophy at the Democratic National Convention and I'd like to see it put into practice.
I kind of can't believe I'm saying this, as a serious progressive, but if the opiate epidemic is as bad as everyone says it is, a $250/month handout would likely not be spent on kids in way too many families. A lot of people who are addicted and using would not say "OK, good. Now with this money I can get my fix AND still have $250 left over in my budget to send my kid to science camp or buy healthy lunches." The intention, the will and the love might be there, but addiction is a powerful force. Maybe we'd just have to write that off, knowing that in a majority of families, the money would be used well. I don't know.
1
These proposals are good, but we need more in healthcare, infrastructure, jobs. And we must be ready to fight for Congress in 2018.
It is necessary but not sufficient to discuss progressive policy issues in order to appeal to disaffected middle class voters in the U.S. In order for it to be necessary and sufficient, the means of communicating these positions must be radically improved upon.
1
While I agree with your opening premise I do not agree with your solution. At least not right now. Until we fix the tax system to be bring more parity to wage earners vs shareholders/investor growth and have an affordable college and health system in place, fooling around with small fixes will only bring on more resistance. The underlying systems need retooling before any specific fixes will have any chance of sticking.
1
It appears that the Democrat's shiny new proposed policies come from the pre-1980s party. We have a new version of the Aid to Families with Dependent Children, the so-popular and successful welfare program, and CETA, the make work Carter era jobs program. Exciting!
I like the idea of a child credit. But it shouldn't be in addition to the returns Middle and upper middle class parents already get. In other words, I don't need more. And it should be paid for with an elimination of child tax benefits for those making more than $300,000 a year. Let the figure go up for those who really need it.
.
As far as the minimum wage. I am certainly in agreement that $7.25 an hour is much too low. But what we really need is a localized minimum wage that's indexed to local fair market rents for housing. $15 is perhaps too much for a minimum wage in Memphis. By my math, they could get by with a $12.50 minimum wage. But in California's Bay Area $15 is far too low. They'd need to double that to allow minimum wage workers to afford housing in San Fransisco!
.
As far as the minimum wage. I am certainly in agreement that $7.25 an hour is much too low. But what we really need is a localized minimum wage that's indexed to local fair market rents for housing. $15 is perhaps too much for a minimum wage in Memphis. By my math, they could get by with a $12.50 minimum wage. But in California's Bay Area $15 is far too low. They'd need to double that to allow minimum wage workers to afford housing in San Fransisco!
1
Centrism, wealth, and corporatism go hand-in-hand. There is absolutely zero chance the party will get more progressive as long as we serve corporate agendas as a quid pro quo for campaign fundraising. So let's not kid ourselves that all progressive campaign sloganeering will actually turn into real progressive policies. Heaven forbid all those companies who have armies of accountants figuring out how to get away with paying zero taxes to the federal government are actually forced to pay what they should, instead of building their companies on the backs of the middle class. Let's call this what it is: unpatriotic. Any business incorporated in the U.S. has a duty to its country, just as every citizen does. Heck, we should make that a condition of Citizens United. You want your business to have the same speech rights as an individual? Fine. Pony up the cash like the rest of us do.
As was so brilliantly summarized in a recent Op-Ed, the democratic party is getting too rich for its own good. And that may very well be the death knell for the Democratic Party. I have never been more discouraged about this country's political future as I am today.
As was so brilliantly summarized in a recent Op-Ed, the democratic party is getting too rich for its own good. And that may very well be the death knell for the Democratic Party. I have never been more discouraged about this country's political future as I am today.
1
From your mouth to the ear of God. I suppose in recent, more of less bountiful times, the party had the luxury to focus almost exclusively on social justice, paying little more than lip service to economic justice. But issues of employment, healthcare, wages and income distribution are the the bones and sinews of the party. We MUST shoulder that burden once more. There really hasn't been a left in this country for many decades. We needn't ignore social justice issues, but economics must once again be the soul of the party. All the rest is commentary
These are good proposals and sound public policy as they target scarce resources where they will have the most effect and consolidate or replace existing ineffective programs.
But they are still incremental proposals targeting the poor. They will get nowhere politically unless they accompany truly bold proposals that reach deep into the middle class. Democrats don't need to go looking for bold proposals with middle class appeal. Sanders already announced them: universal healthcare and free tuition at public colleges and universities.
Democrats need only resolve themselves to educate the American public to the obvious: that modest tax increases to pay for socialized benefits can bring huge overall and individual out-of-pocket savings. Traditionally, this is a hard sell and scares politicians into marginal and empty promises. But in this, the Internet Age, it needn't be so.
Websites and apps that allow voters to input basic family and income information can show them directly, viscerally how much they stand to gain under any set of proposals or, at the upper reaches, how little they stand to lose to gain solid security for their own, their children's and their grandchildren's health and education future. The web that can be used to blast "fake news" is not intrinsically a broadcast medium: it can be used to bring real life truths home to individuals as no other past media. Democrats need to go bold and go particular. The tools are there. They just need to be used.
But they are still incremental proposals targeting the poor. They will get nowhere politically unless they accompany truly bold proposals that reach deep into the middle class. Democrats don't need to go looking for bold proposals with middle class appeal. Sanders already announced them: universal healthcare and free tuition at public colleges and universities.
Democrats need only resolve themselves to educate the American public to the obvious: that modest tax increases to pay for socialized benefits can bring huge overall and individual out-of-pocket savings. Traditionally, this is a hard sell and scares politicians into marginal and empty promises. But in this, the Internet Age, it needn't be so.
Websites and apps that allow voters to input basic family and income information can show them directly, viscerally how much they stand to gain under any set of proposals or, at the upper reaches, how little they stand to lose to gain solid security for their own, their children's and their grandchildren's health and education future. The web that can be used to blast "fake news" is not intrinsically a broadcast medium: it can be used to bring real life truths home to individuals as no other past media. Democrats need to go bold and go particular. The tools are there. They just need to be used.
2
It would be wonderful indeed if a bold progressive movement coalesced, and we need to move quickly so that we're prepared for the 2020 elections.
It surprises me that there are so many comments against a government child allowance plan. Most European countries offer government supported child allowance payments; some give an annual allowance, and many give monthly payments.
For those who don't want to "pay people to have children" the UK for example, stipulates conditions: "Child benefit Paid immediately if the child is under 16, or 16 to 19 and in education or training, and the claimant has an individual income of less than £50,000. Amount is £20.30 a week for the eldest or only child, £13.40 per additional child". Many put these payments into a college fund for their children.
And it's a mistake to think that "unskilled labor" is no longer needed in our high tech world--American roads all the way across the country desperately need major repairs. There are many, many infrastructure jobs that need doing--but don't get done because of Republican cutbacks in state budgets.
Our current minimum wage is a disgrace. Many single parents who try to support their families on hourly wages need to have two jobs just to put food on the table. I just don't understand the thinking of people who want to give breaks to the very wealthy, while pushing middle class and fragmented families under the bus.
It surprises me that there are so many comments against a government child allowance plan. Most European countries offer government supported child allowance payments; some give an annual allowance, and many give monthly payments.
For those who don't want to "pay people to have children" the UK for example, stipulates conditions: "Child benefit Paid immediately if the child is under 16, or 16 to 19 and in education or training, and the claimant has an individual income of less than £50,000. Amount is £20.30 a week for the eldest or only child, £13.40 per additional child". Many put these payments into a college fund for their children.
And it's a mistake to think that "unskilled labor" is no longer needed in our high tech world--American roads all the way across the country desperately need major repairs. There are many, many infrastructure jobs that need doing--but don't get done because of Republican cutbacks in state budgets.
Our current minimum wage is a disgrace. Many single parents who try to support their families on hourly wages need to have two jobs just to put food on the table. I just don't understand the thinking of people who want to give breaks to the very wealthy, while pushing middle class and fragmented families under the bus.
1
Aargh. The same mistakes over and over.
We need, for starters:
1. Universal health care
2. Living wage
3. Infrastructure, especially low-carbon technologies
That's what counts.
We need, for starters:
1. Universal health care
2. Living wage
3. Infrastructure, especially low-carbon technologies
That's what counts.
1
Good ideas, generally, yet the author gives short shrift to the $15 minimum wage, seemingly reluctant to say boldly, what must be said, which is this -
The minimum wage must, immediately, be raised, by whatever means necessary, including Presidential decree / executive order, so that no state or corporation can opt out, and it must further be adjusted annually by a percentage that truly reflects real inflation, as opposed to the government stripped out number, which seeks to enforce a designed false inflation number so wages are not seen as remaining stagnant.
Governments engineer "management perception" tactics, which are nationally and internationally deployed, in an effort to obfuscate what is really occuring, which, as we all know, is the wholesale transference of wealth from the poor and the middle-class, into the secure coffers of the elites, never to be utilized for anything other than further efforts to enhance and preserve the transference.
One other critical element necessary for economic survival of the poor and the middle-class is nationalized across the board health care, which insofar as the elites, our masters, are concerned, is anathema, never to be permitted under any circumstances.
With Democrats or Republicans in power, regardless the media mouthpiece spin, nothing will be allowed to change for the better, and in fact we will continue to accelerate on the road to economic slavery and penury, for the masses.
The minimum wage must, immediately, be raised, by whatever means necessary, including Presidential decree / executive order, so that no state or corporation can opt out, and it must further be adjusted annually by a percentage that truly reflects real inflation, as opposed to the government stripped out number, which seeks to enforce a designed false inflation number so wages are not seen as remaining stagnant.
Governments engineer "management perception" tactics, which are nationally and internationally deployed, in an effort to obfuscate what is really occuring, which, as we all know, is the wholesale transference of wealth from the poor and the middle-class, into the secure coffers of the elites, never to be utilized for anything other than further efforts to enhance and preserve the transference.
One other critical element necessary for economic survival of the poor and the middle-class is nationalized across the board health care, which insofar as the elites, our masters, are concerned, is anathema, never to be permitted under any circumstances.
With Democrats or Republicans in power, regardless the media mouthpiece spin, nothing will be allowed to change for the better, and in fact we will continue to accelerate on the road to economic slavery and penury, for the masses.
2
Dems should focus on health care (including reproductive care), early childhood education, and retraining for 21st century jobs. Forget these fringe issues and no identity politics. Who would not benefit from health care, education, and a good job?
1
If that's bold, I give up on the Democratic party.
Senator Sanders handed Democrats the priorities they should focus on:
single-payer healthcare
affordable public education
reigning in the influence of money on politics
Senator Sanders handed Democrats the priorities they should focus on:
single-payer healthcare
affordable public education
reigning in the influence of money on politics
7
I gave up on them nearly 6 decades ago, and frankly I can't get over how we couldn't see that Bernie Sanders was our last opportunity.
We will all live to regret this colossal error.
We will all live to regret this colossal error.
2
The democrats can use the Trump era to be on the right side of every single issue. First, as a general rule, markets work better than government. The more we overlay complicated patchwork solutions on an open competitive market, the more problems we create. Subsidizing work in some communities, as you suggest, requires the government to decide which communities are worth subsiding. Do you think that is going to produce anything other than corruption and political fighting? The tax code is a mess because of 10,000 "nice ideas" that have been added to it. All that has produced is an unfair tax system that is gamed by those who have the resources to do so.
With that basic premise we should then identify the markets where basic economics tells us free market competition won't work well. Health
insurance, health care, education, environmental protection are all clear examples.
Social justice, is also very important, but should be done in a way that doesn't create a giant patchwork of programs. We should also accept that any aid to the poor will never be perfect and will come at some cost of waste. Pretending otherwise is dishonest and weakens the long-run political strength of the program.
Also, honesty matters a lot. Just be totally honest with people. I voted for HRC, but I wouldn't say she is an honest person. Trump is worse.
Finally, I have no clue how to address the racist history that remains in this country. But that matters a lot. Standing for decency matters.
With that basic premise we should then identify the markets where basic economics tells us free market competition won't work well. Health
insurance, health care, education, environmental protection are all clear examples.
Social justice, is also very important, but should be done in a way that doesn't create a giant patchwork of programs. We should also accept that any aid to the poor will never be perfect and will come at some cost of waste. Pretending otherwise is dishonest and weakens the long-run political strength of the program.
Also, honesty matters a lot. Just be totally honest with people. I voted for HRC, but I wouldn't say she is an honest person. Trump is worse.
Finally, I have no clue how to address the racist history that remains in this country. But that matters a lot. Standing for decency matters.
2
What democrats want is tantamount to socialism. It might work, but is everyone on board to pay more than 50% in income taxes, and over 20% in sales tax? Many people want it to be like Scandinavian countries, but that would be the price to pay. That with a gigantic (yes even bigger than now) bureaucracy.
It's always great to get paid for nothing, like this ridiculous idea of money without effort.
Continue to preach dear dems for such measures, and you will continue to lose.
Realistically, giving more money to parents who neglect their children won't help. What is needed is bigger credits for low income full time workers. Certainly not credits to employers to create employment. But bigger breaks for legal low and middle class workers.
It's always great to get paid for nothing, like this ridiculous idea of money without effort.
Continue to preach dear dems for such measures, and you will continue to lose.
Realistically, giving more money to parents who neglect their children won't help. What is needed is bigger credits for low income full time workers. Certainly not credits to employers to create employment. But bigger breaks for legal low and middle class workers.
1
Another major area: fund the arts and fund them generously. There are thousands of talented Americans with fantastic skills in music, theater, dance, film, literature, and the visual arts. We are wasting huge numbers of talented people in bad jobs, when they could be playing in orchestras and bands, acting in theaters, dancing on stages, making films and television, writing books, and creating art.
We took a major wrong turn when we started attacking arts and culture. Now we've moved on to attacking science, education, and social services.
There are far too many over-qualified, highly skilled people working at regimented, underpaid jobs that hold little interest for them or offer them any hope for the future. Even worse, we have drug addiction and unemployment eating the souls of people who might actually have something to contribute to society if only there were a place for them in society! But we are busy shuttering our theaters, publishers, orchestras, research labs, and schools, cutting film incentives, slashing budgets for anything that doesn't make the Koch brothers and their ilk more money. Not everyone is cut out to be a banker or an accountant.
Here's a novel idea: How about putting money into the professions that people actually want to be in, instead of throwing money at corporations that create terrible jobs that no creative, thinking person would ever want to do? Let's design a society that can accommodate all of our many talents, one we all want to live in.
We took a major wrong turn when we started attacking arts and culture. Now we've moved on to attacking science, education, and social services.
There are far too many over-qualified, highly skilled people working at regimented, underpaid jobs that hold little interest for them or offer them any hope for the future. Even worse, we have drug addiction and unemployment eating the souls of people who might actually have something to contribute to society if only there were a place for them in society! But we are busy shuttering our theaters, publishers, orchestras, research labs, and schools, cutting film incentives, slashing budgets for anything that doesn't make the Koch brothers and their ilk more money. Not everyone is cut out to be a banker or an accountant.
Here's a novel idea: How about putting money into the professions that people actually want to be in, instead of throwing money at corporations that create terrible jobs that no creative, thinking person would ever want to do? Let's design a society that can accommodate all of our many talents, one we all want to live in.
2
More than just another set of economic ideas, Democrats must start defending the progress they have already made. When they passed Obamacare they allowed the Tea Party to take over the narrative. Consequently, too many people did not realize the value of the program until they became in danger of losing it.
The same with international trade agreements and global cooperation. Rather than mimicing Trump on NAFTA and PTT, Clinton and other Democrats should have defended the jobs those agreements have created rather than those lost. Democrats abandoned the field allowing the narrative that all trade deals are job-killers to take hold. It will take years for West Virginians to figure out that coal mining jobs are not coming back. By that time Republicans will have totally eliminated taxes for anyone earning over $1 million a year.
The same with international trade agreements and global cooperation. Rather than mimicing Trump on NAFTA and PTT, Clinton and other Democrats should have defended the jobs those agreements have created rather than those lost. Democrats abandoned the field allowing the narrative that all trade deals are job-killers to take hold. It will take years for West Virginians to figure out that coal mining jobs are not coming back. By that time Republicans will have totally eliminated taxes for anyone earning over $1 million a year.
1
What "robust, highly progressive agenda"? Please tell.
But what I read in the papers or see of substance on TV is Dem elites castigating Trump. Big deal. We all do that, all the time.
A few days ago, I did hear Bernie's commencement speech for a Brooklyn graduation. It's the same words, from the same guy that still strike me as absolutely what we need. But I also got the same feeling of this one voice, alone, in the thicket of this purgatory of American politics.
A commentator here thought the New Deal could never return. If the ideals and goals of the New Deal, which I would encapsulate as concern for the basic needs of jobs sufficient to provide food and shelter, will never return, then we are indeed doomed to the growing inequality of today. Where is it written so?
Taking a lesson from 19th and 20th century England, which first experienced the miseries of the socio/economic upheavals of the industrial revolution, that country rose to the occasion with effective public health and social welfare policies. And in the US, we controlled the excesses of the robber barons with effective regulation of their harmful industries.
So I remain hopeful the nightmare of Trump is but an aberration that will only serve to galvanize us to remember and exercise the humanity and conscience of peoples when they are truly great.
But what I read in the papers or see of substance on TV is Dem elites castigating Trump. Big deal. We all do that, all the time.
A few days ago, I did hear Bernie's commencement speech for a Brooklyn graduation. It's the same words, from the same guy that still strike me as absolutely what we need. But I also got the same feeling of this one voice, alone, in the thicket of this purgatory of American politics.
A commentator here thought the New Deal could never return. If the ideals and goals of the New Deal, which I would encapsulate as concern for the basic needs of jobs sufficient to provide food and shelter, will never return, then we are indeed doomed to the growing inequality of today. Where is it written so?
Taking a lesson from 19th and 20th century England, which first experienced the miseries of the socio/economic upheavals of the industrial revolution, that country rose to the occasion with effective public health and social welfare policies. And in the US, we controlled the excesses of the robber barons with effective regulation of their harmful industries.
So I remain hopeful the nightmare of Trump is but an aberration that will only serve to galvanize us to remember and exercise the humanity and conscience of peoples when they are truly great.
3
The Democratic Party needs to move away from market-distorting policies like the minimum wage, towards socially-beneficial and economically sound policies like a Universal Basic Income.
I would also love to see discussion of reducing the work week to 36 hours a week, instead of 40.
1
If these are the big ideas the Democratic centrists (aka Clintonites) are advertising ahead of the midterms, then the Party is doomed. Slowly raising the minimim wage to a level still below its inflation-adjusted value as compared to the '30s isn't revolutionary. It seems downright reactionary when you remember that several countries have launched pilot programs for universal income. (Or that our very own Nixon considered such a program way back when.)
Apparently, the best Sanders could do is cause the Democratic Establishment to raise the dollar amount for their old, unsatisfying ideas. We need a new, Progressive Party. I used to think splitting the Democrats in two was lunacy, but now I think it's necessary. The centrists can keep their shoddy policy and constant election losses.
Apparently, the best Sanders could do is cause the Democratic Establishment to raise the dollar amount for their old, unsatisfying ideas. We need a new, Progressive Party. I used to think splitting the Democrats in two was lunacy, but now I think it's necessary. The centrists can keep their shoddy policy and constant election losses.
2
"We need a new, Progressive Party. I used to think splitting the Democrats in two was lunacy, but now I think it's necessary."
Al, I hope you are wrong, but I fear you may be right. On this point, I too am moving away from the "lunacy" camp and toward the "necessity" camp. The centrists simply aren't helping to bridge the growing economic divide in this country. On the contrary, at least some of their policies have caused this divide to grow and worsen.
Al, I hope you are wrong, but I fear you may be right. On this point, I too am moving away from the "lunacy" camp and toward the "necessity" camp. The centrists simply aren't helping to bridge the growing economic divide in this country. On the contrary, at least some of their policies have caused this divide to grow and worsen.
2
Centrists are your best hope if you want to win. You should have learned that by now.
Obama tried to transform the country to a far left ideology and it was rejected by the centrist voters. Democrats lost almost 1,000 state seats in Obama's two terms. Last year Trump took advantage of that sentiment. Those voters knew Hillary would just be more Obama.
If democrats want to win the electoral college they will have to move back toward the center. The electoral college is not going away any time soon.
You can attempt to force the working class and/or small city, rural citizen but they won't change as fast as Obama and lib/progs think.
Obama tried to transform the country to a far left ideology and it was rejected by the centrist voters. Democrats lost almost 1,000 state seats in Obama's two terms. Last year Trump took advantage of that sentiment. Those voters knew Hillary would just be more Obama.
If democrats want to win the electoral college they will have to move back toward the center. The electoral college is not going away any time soon.
You can attempt to force the working class and/or small city, rural citizen but they won't change as fast as Obama and lib/progs think.
Get rid of gerrymandering, voter suppression and the electorial college and we will win on any platform. Dems are already in the majority.
3
This sounds to me like an emerging progressive wishlist rather than an emerging Democratic agenda.
The trend since the 1990's has been to moderate the progressive agenda. One could argue that Democrats now need to take aggressive progressive stances, but the reality is that establishment Democrats are beholden to monied interests and are unlikely to move too far to the left.
A realistic Democratic agenda would maintain some of the moderation of the current era but move left on issues where Americans are trending left, such as healthcare, infrastructure, and support for low-income workers.
The trend since the 1990's has been to moderate the progressive agenda. One could argue that Democrats now need to take aggressive progressive stances, but the reality is that establishment Democrats are beholden to monied interests and are unlikely to move too far to the left.
A realistic Democratic agenda would maintain some of the moderation of the current era but move left on issues where Americans are trending left, such as healthcare, infrastructure, and support for low-income workers.
1
Appalled!
A $250 credit for Barron Trump and all the other rich kids? Tax dollars are precious. You can't just pass out money. If 20% of America's children are in poverty address that. Maybe an increase in the minimum wage would help. Maybe revisiting welfare reform would help. Maybe better nutrition programs and more money spent on education focused at low-income communities would help. But, I know for sure that handing out $250/month per child with my tax dollar to people who are already better off than me isn't the solution.
A $250 credit for Barron Trump and all the other rich kids? Tax dollars are precious. You can't just pass out money. If 20% of America's children are in poverty address that. Maybe an increase in the minimum wage would help. Maybe revisiting welfare reform would help. Maybe better nutrition programs and more money spent on education focused at low-income communities would help. But, I know for sure that handing out $250/month per child with my tax dollar to people who are already better off than me isn't the solution.
4
I think that Dems should focus on two things that got out of control on their watch: the cost of college and the cost of healthcare. These two are two big barriers for inter-class mobility in US - and they simply ballooned on Obama's watch.
To put it in perspective: over 18 years, the child support program will pay out 54k - but that may be not enough to send that child to college. Similarly, the 4k increase in tax credit will still be less than the annual deductible for Obamacare for people who actually have to buy it.
To put it in perspective: over 18 years, the child support program will pay out 54k - but that may be not enough to send that child to college. Similarly, the 4k increase in tax credit will still be less than the annual deductible for Obamacare for people who actually have to buy it.
4
Wait, what? My brother, who owns four houses, would get a $500 a month check, while I, who live in a 550 sf unit without running water would get to help pay to for this?
And my under-30 co-worker, who already has 5 children, would get a boost of $1250 / month?
I would stay home rather than vote for someone who pushes for this.
And my under-30 co-worker, who already has 5 children, would get a boost of $1250 / month?
I would stay home rather than vote for someone who pushes for this.
8
The people who have been slowly moving toward the GOP have grown resentful. Most of these people are white rural, southern, and Midwestern Americans with a strong dose of people dying in Appalachia who will never find a coal job. The cost of real change will require a change in hearts and minds of the forgotten people who do the dirty work that is not done on both coasts. This will require a major restructuring of the tax system in the US, a single payer health care system, mandatory pensions from greedy corporations, and yes much more regulation of the employer, with more power vested in employee. Pensions are important and are a mental benefit if one sees that someday they can stop working with dignity. In addition to fair housing, healthcare, and a pension, families and job-retraining will require a significant investment in adult and childhood education. When all is taken together, along with raising minimum wage, what is really required, is an awakening among the vast majority of Americans, not akin to a second revolution. This extends to the federal government as well. Congressional term limits, and overturning of Citizens' United superPACs must be enacted. What is really needed is beyond Bold or Leftist but another revolution. A government that is truly of the people, not of the special interests.
There also needs to be a return to family and community life, with less time at work, or on an electronic device. More social interaction and support among neighbors.
There also needs to be a return to family and community life, with less time at work, or on an electronic device. More social interaction and support among neighbors.
2
After the trophy wives, mansions and cars and art collections. the signature of great wealth is a stable full of obedient politicians. We need a tax structure that prohibits any individual or family from acquiring enough money to buy a politician. Tax the rich back into the working upper middle class.
3
The Democrats are generally deluded in their belief that the current level of taxes on the middle-class is politically sustainable. In Hilary Clinton's speech announcing her candidacy she said that the middle class pays too much taxes. She never mentioned a middle class tax cut again. Presumably, due to pressure from Sanders who pushed her to the left, which severely hurt her chances. Most Democrat politicians are not aware that, by far the best thing government could do for most middle-class households would be to lower their taxes. Thus, in many cases middle-class households will grasp at any chance they think could lower their tax burden and support candidates who promise them a tax cut, no matter how odious the candidates might be otherwise.
It is the compounding effect of shift away from taxes on capital income such as dividends, capital gains and inheritances each year as the rich get proverbially richer which is the prime generator of inequality.
Today the top 3% of households pay about 50% of Federal taxes and the rest of the 97% pay the other 50%. In 1969 the top 3% of households paid 75% of Federal taxes and the rest of the 97% paid only the other 25%. It is possible that the Republicans will have the top 3% of households pay only about 25% of Federal taxes and the rest of the 97% pay the other 75%. Repealing the estate tax will give billions to a fraction of the top 1%, to be made up by the rest of the taxpayers..."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4067359
It is the compounding effect of shift away from taxes on capital income such as dividends, capital gains and inheritances each year as the rich get proverbially richer which is the prime generator of inequality.
Today the top 3% of households pay about 50% of Federal taxes and the rest of the 97% pay the other 50%. In 1969 the top 3% of households paid 75% of Federal taxes and the rest of the 97% paid only the other 25%. It is possible that the Republicans will have the top 3% of households pay only about 25% of Federal taxes and the rest of the 97% pay the other 75%. Repealing the estate tax will give billions to a fraction of the top 1%, to be made up by the rest of the taxpayers..."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4067359
1
Jared Bernstein was part of the Obama administration's ineffective economic team. Ineffective because their response to the Great Recession proved pitifully inadequate. Obama came into office promising bold, innovative action. What the nation got instead was timid, incremental change that made little difference to the lives of most Americans. Harvard professor Daniel Rogoff has observed that it takes on average seven years for a country's economy to recover from a recession caused by a financial crisis. That's about how long it took our country, showing that Obama's policies made little if any difference. Bernstein and the other incrementalists, having been discredited by the failure of their approach, should now keep silent and let others drive the party's agenda. They had their chance. They blew it.
4
It seems to me that allowing so many years to pass before a new minimum wage goes into effect, and is enforceable, the end result is the same as not raising the minimum wage in the first place. When 2024 finally rolls around the cost of living increase will negate the hoped for benefit.
Why don't they tie the minimum wage to COLA, and thereby give a real boost to the minimum wage working families?
Why don't they tie the minimum wage to COLA, and thereby give a real boost to the minimum wage working families?
Perhaps Bernstein is a bit too optimistic about the likelihood of our nation moving that far to the left. I have voted D in the last few presidential elections but if the new D party is truly heading in the Bernie Sanders direction then count me out. I suspect millions of other Americans are like me in that regard. Once anybody invokes Denmark in an economic comparison to the USA, I usually take that as a sign that they are living in a utopian dreamworld. There are more people in my COUNTY (Los Angeles County) than there are in that nation. Presumably a lot of these alleged legislative proposals are really just designed to mobilize younger and more marginalized voters in the 2018 midterms, but certainly there is no universe in which they actually become law in the next 10-20 years.
5
Two parties for 350M people?
One healthcare solution for 350M people?
No to both.
One healthcare solution for 350M people?
No to both.
Democrats have no vision. What is the overall goal? What is the aspiration, the shining light on the hill? I'm excited about the bold vision of Elon Musk. What should I be excited under Democratic leadership? Don't we need a common target in to determine the methods to get there? We spend a great deal of time complaining about where we are but little about where we're going. The Republican party foster greed and selfishness and manipulates voters with fear and loathing. Is America about power and riches for the few? Dems remind me of the saying "protect me from the well intended uninformed". Why are you losing elections? You ignored the needs and fears of those you used to represent and spent your time squabbling among yourselves. You drove away those with legitimate concerns and those who understand the need for fiscal responsibility. Can we decide who we want to be, e.g., a bountiful green planet populated by people as concerned about the happiness of their neighbor as themselves? I believe there are more people of good will than haters, the greedy, or manipulators. Lets stop focusing on our differences and find areas in which we agree. Christians fight with Christians and Muslims with Muslims over nuances of their beliefs while ignoring, or altering, the teachings of Jesus and Mohammed. We can't agree on what it is to be an American. Maybe if we spent some time defining our societal goals we could come together to determine how best to get there.
While Mr. Bernstein's observations and recommendations are very positive, and will likely have traction with Democratic voters, the most important thing that the Democrats should be doing is pushing harder for voter registration. That is the way to win the midterm and presidential election. This "emerging agenda" can only become a reality if the likeminded voters are mobilized.
1
Make union organizing easier and you'll have a market solution for raising wages and improving working conditions.
3
Not sure which Democrats Bernstein is talking to. As a Democrat who's been reasonably active in NY politics, Mr Bernstein ideas are not the ones we're talking about.
7
These proposals are a New New Deal. In this deal, since most of the gains from productivity improvements (automation, IT, etc.) have gone to capital instead of labor--that is, owners got increased profits but workers did not get higher pay--the Deal makes some of that back for labor. By providing the security of universal health care, and by shoring up wages at the bottom of the scale for those who have been left behind by the very same economic changes that have enriched those at the top.
But good luck selling it. GOPers will say no, of course. But you must find a way to sell this to Trump supporters without letting Trump take credit. Example: Lots of them don't trust the gubmint to do health care right, but can't wait to get on Medicare. So start by expanding Medicare; lower the age of eligibility to 62, to coincide with Social Security eligibility. It's a small step, but it is the thin edge of the wedge.
But good luck selling it. GOPers will say no, of course. But you must find a way to sell this to Trump supporters without letting Trump take credit. Example: Lots of them don't trust the gubmint to do health care right, but can't wait to get on Medicare. So start by expanding Medicare; lower the age of eligibility to 62, to coincide with Social Security eligibility. It's a small step, but it is the thin edge of the wedge.
2
Universal healthcare has a real chance now that Republicans' proposals have succeeded in alienating people. Fewer people seem to see it as "socialist ". But I agree with others that Democratic Party must have a unifying vision. And if Hillary really wants to contribute to the party's success she needs to "exit stage left ". Right or wrong she is synonymous with everything the Democrats need to leave behind.
1
Go ahead and institute a high minimum wage. You can then deal with the massive unemployment.
Republican voters believe in capitalism and will resist socialism.
I don't see a problem with reforming the income tax laws for capital investment but big corporations will resist it. It will put a dent in their ability to attract capital.
I understand libprogs want America to become a socialist society. That won't happen without an authoritarian government. Libprogs will accept that but conservatives never will. The only way is by force. The courts are now attempting to play that authoritarian role by forcing people to adopt a PC philosophy.
Republican voters believe in capitalism and will resist socialism.
I don't see a problem with reforming the income tax laws for capital investment but big corporations will resist it. It will put a dent in their ability to attract capital.
I understand libprogs want America to become a socialist society. That won't happen without an authoritarian government. Libprogs will accept that but conservatives never will. The only way is by force. The courts are now attempting to play that authoritarian role by forcing people to adopt a PC philosophy.
the states that have instituted higher minimum wages have seen an uptick in employment, NOT massive unemployment.
there is small displacement, but oftentimes that occurs in companies that weren't viable to begin with or didn't have a good business model or base. the vast majority of stories have been successes. Seattle is a good example.
we doubled the minimum wage in the past virtually overnight and it benefited workers. you can have small price increases to offset the costs. this has been analyzed to death and shown to work. in the case of mega corporations, it's a drop in the bucket--a penny or 25-cent raise per item. for smaller businesses, it might pose a challenge, but as a small biz owner, my feeling is, if you can't pay someone $15 or 20 bux an hour, you have no business--and no business being in business.
there is small displacement, but oftentimes that occurs in companies that weren't viable to begin with or didn't have a good business model or base. the vast majority of stories have been successes. Seattle is a good example.
we doubled the minimum wage in the past virtually overnight and it benefited workers. you can have small price increases to offset the costs. this has been analyzed to death and shown to work. in the case of mega corporations, it's a drop in the bucket--a penny or 25-cent raise per item. for smaller businesses, it might pose a challenge, but as a small biz owner, my feeling is, if you can't pay someone $15 or 20 bux an hour, you have no business--and no business being in business.
1
If these small narrowly focused ideas are the agenda, then the Democratic Party is dead. Major tax reform, both federal and state, to achieve a truly progressive and fair system. Deal with the coming loss of tens of millions of jobs; e.g. most truck drivers. Deal with the fact that the lack of growth has stymied both those new to the job market and those near or in retirement. We are angry because the Democratic Party has not been on our side.
Anything short of an economic "New Deal" will merely continue the decline of the working and middle class, and also the decline of the Democratic Party.
Anything short of an economic "New Deal" will merely continue the decline of the working and middle class, and also the decline of the Democratic Party.
3
What 'emerging' Democratic Agenda
Mr. and Mrs. William Jefferson converted their public 'service' policies of mass black incarceration, mass black welfare deformation, mass corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrat oligarch welfare and military-industrial complex war mongering into their multimillionaire massive pot of gold.
Now it is the turn of Mr. and Mrs. Barack Hussein Obama to do likewise.
But thanks to the votes of 58% of white Americans including 63% of white men and 54% of white women along with Vladimir Putin, Benjamin Netanyahu, James Comey and Julian Assange the votes of 46% of Americans were converted into the Electoral College majority right of the House of Donald Trump to occupy the Oval Office of our White House for the next four years.
What fresh new creative original independent wise talented experienced Democrat is waiting in the wings to replace Donald Trump if he lasts until 2020 or Pence or Ryan if he does not?
Mr. and Mrs. William Jefferson converted their public 'service' policies of mass black incarceration, mass black welfare deformation, mass corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrat oligarch welfare and military-industrial complex war mongering into their multimillionaire massive pot of gold.
Now it is the turn of Mr. and Mrs. Barack Hussein Obama to do likewise.
But thanks to the votes of 58% of white Americans including 63% of white men and 54% of white women along with Vladimir Putin, Benjamin Netanyahu, James Comey and Julian Assange the votes of 46% of Americans were converted into the Electoral College majority right of the House of Donald Trump to occupy the Oval Office of our White House for the next four years.
What fresh new creative original independent wise talented experienced Democrat is waiting in the wings to replace Donald Trump if he lasts until 2020 or Pence or Ryan if he does not?
2
The Dem Party does not have a "new creative original independent wise talented experienced Democrat".
A paltry group of geriatrics is what is ready to lead the fight.
A paltry group of geriatrics is what is ready to lead the fight.
Same tired old list. "Robust" indeed.
4
Jared,
Will you and a few other liberal economists (there is a Nobel-columnist here in NYT) get together and a write a piece in NYT supporting single-payer? And prove yourself to be truly progressive?
Will you and a few other liberal economists (there is a Nobel-columnist here in NYT) get together and a write a piece in NYT supporting single-payer? And prove yourself to be truly progressive?
With due respect to the author, the fundamental problem, sine qua non of a successful appeal to working class folks abandoned by the Democratic Party and who voted for Trump in November is to take a less indulgent stance on problems posed by illegal immigration, including the ability of "mujeres embarrasadas" to slip across the border, give birth in a US hospital and have us pick up the tab for life. I don't blame them: "Chacun voit son interet dans cette vie!" But this indulgence costs us hundreds of millions,and added to number of "indocumentados"inserting themselves into our labour markets and driving down wages,many American workers wonder if they have any rights at all. Nation that does not defend its borders is no longer sovereign.Aware that such a position on immigration violates one of the Left's sacred tenets, but the issue of defense of American workers is inextricably linked to immigration.Thus, author is engaged in what is known in French as "dancer autour du pot, " or avoiding core issue.Times newspaper has conscientiously recorded marginalization of white workers in that small town in Iowa where newly arrived workers are now it appears in the majority in the meat packing plant, and white employees now feel, to borrow a phrase from Hoschild, " "foreigners in their own land!"What is the solution but "fortress America, but that is unrealistic since so long as entrepreneurs see offshoring or importation of foreign labor as a means of increasing the bottom line.
3
Let's include in that group the booming business of Chinese who come here as tourists to give birth.
..."entrepreneurs see offshoring or importation of foreign labor as a means of increasing the bottom line..."
You call the above ..."one of the Left's sacred tenets"? As long as I can remember, the Republican party has looked the other way while illegal immigrants helped the bottom lines of their supporters.
You call the above ..."one of the Left's sacred tenets"? As long as I can remember, the Republican party has looked the other way while illegal immigrants helped the bottom lines of their supporters.
Watching This Week on Sunday, Katrina, on the panel, said that the Dems should not just focus on Russia, but start energizing folks with an agenda they can all get behind. I do agree in part with that, because without a real economic agenda that benefits us all (minus the very rich) it will just be like a spinning wheel going nowhere. I do, however, feel this Russian thing is not just like Bengazi, there is much more to this story than the Trump administration wants us to know.
My question is this: What happens, IF, they actually prove that Trump was complicit with the Russians in tilting the election in his direction? Does that make his presidency illegitimate? If it is illegitimate, does that mean Hillary becomes president or is a special election held?
NYT: Can you touch on that topic so folks know what could happen in such a case?
My question is this: What happens, IF, they actually prove that Trump was complicit with the Russians in tilting the election in his direction? Does that make his presidency illegitimate? If it is illegitimate, does that mean Hillary becomes president or is a special election held?
NYT: Can you touch on that topic so folks know what could happen in such a case?
1
Paying people to have children is a truly bad idea.
12
Out with the old, in with the new. Democrats need to get a grip.
Another handout designed to encourage more children to be born, genius!
12
Right on, so to speak!
Progressives have not been playing defense, because there is no one for them to play defense against.
The Right Wing budget "genius" Paul Ryan's budget plans are posted all over the so-called Left-Leaning Liberal Media, while the Progressive Caucus budget proposals can only be found on the obituary pages of the NY Times, or any other "Liberal" MSM outlet, and forget about televised corporate owned "Liberal" news outlets, you will never see or hear anything about the Progressive Caucus, let alone their Progressive budget proposals.
After the Obama win, the GOP did an autopsy on their Party; seems to me the Democrats need more than an autopsy, because they already know the cause of their death, incompetence and alienating voters, who actually vote.
The Democratic "Jackass" symbol should be replaced with the Phoenix, except in the Democratic version the Phoenix may as well be a cooked goose.
Need proof, with an Idiot-in-Chief in charge, they still cannot win a special election, going 0 for 2, soon to 0-3, which brings to mind the song "High Hopes," for the Democrats chances of actually retaking the House in 2018, and worse with 25 Democratic Senate seats up for reelection in 2018 mid-term there is an excellent chance the GOP Neanderthal Party will gain a 60 seat majority.
And now for the Good News.
The Right Wing budget "genius" Paul Ryan's budget plans are posted all over the so-called Left-Leaning Liberal Media, while the Progressive Caucus budget proposals can only be found on the obituary pages of the NY Times, or any other "Liberal" MSM outlet, and forget about televised corporate owned "Liberal" news outlets, you will never see or hear anything about the Progressive Caucus, let alone their Progressive budget proposals.
After the Obama win, the GOP did an autopsy on their Party; seems to me the Democrats need more than an autopsy, because they already know the cause of their death, incompetence and alienating voters, who actually vote.
The Democratic "Jackass" symbol should be replaced with the Phoenix, except in the Democratic version the Phoenix may as well be a cooked goose.
Need proof, with an Idiot-in-Chief in charge, they still cannot win a special election, going 0 for 2, soon to 0-3, which brings to mind the song "High Hopes," for the Democrats chances of actually retaking the House in 2018, and worse with 25 Democratic Senate seats up for reelection in 2018 mid-term there is an excellent chance the GOP Neanderthal Party will gain a 60 seat majority.
And now for the Good News.
Nobody should have children unless they are planned for, supported by their parents, loved and educated. Social safety nets must not be designed to increase the haul of "fish."' Get real..... fix education, provide universal family planning and healthcare, create incentives to work, pay a decent wage, involve employees in the success of their enterprise with bonus and equity ownership options and then get the hell out of the way! The success will be astonishing.
6
We can disagree on the child care credit, but I will say that the Democratic party would be making a huge mistake if their sole issue is to be anti-Trump. Granted he has motivated the left like no one else on the left could but to just run on "we are against Trump" is not going to win them elections.
1
The Agenda, in one sentence: MEDICARE for ALL-2018- A Healthy America. One thing at a time, people. And THIS is the most important.
3
Although most people receive their healthcare through employers, only 9% of companies pay 100% of that healthcare. On average, people who have family plans - pay on average, 32% out of their paycheck. That's up almost 100% from 2001. All people (republicans, democrats, trump and Hillary supporters) have been clamoring for is LOWER premiums... How about negotiating with drug companies and implement Medicare for all... Not one politician that has spoken about this. No matter their party or politics, people aren't expecting the private market to solve their insurance problems... They just want LOWER premiums,so they can feed their families,. Yet I don't hear either party or the "private market insurance market" saying they can do this. And BTW can the democratic party STOP referring only to the poor on medicaid and the ACA. Why aren't they referring to them as the working class. Because most are working! Many of us are 1099's or small business owners who are happy to stay this way, if there is a way to keep ourselves and our families safe and our money protected from the current mercenary, broken healthcare system in America... The teeny, tiny little nibbling around the edges platform, that is suggested here (I was a Hilary supporter by the way), is why I am now entirely disgusted with the spineless, atrophied democratic party. Go big, or go home. Let's get a third party in here for god's sake and hope that real change can be made to continue to make America great.
2
Why are we spending money on people who won't vote for us? Nearly all of this money will go to far out rural America. Progressives can call it "compassion" but time and again those rural voters spit on your handouts and vote in their thugs to cripple our agenda. They want austerity, give them austerity. Get the thugs out first.
1
I don't believe any of this. The Dems are also the party of the corporations. See H. Clinton, speeches.
3
I'm all in favor of these things, for the simple reason that they actually work.
What I'm not in favor of is lefties pretending that they themselves shouldn't need to pony up; just go tax the wealthy.
Which I'm also in favor of. But folks, how in the world can you expect to push a credible alternative, when you share with the Right the notion that somewhere, somehow how, there's a whole passel of lazies who just need to get some marching orders? And the notion that you better not come askin' ME for anything?
The Right says it's poor people. If we just say it's rich people, well, we agree: we're just squabbling about who to hand the check to.
What I'm not in favor of is lefties pretending that they themselves shouldn't need to pony up; just go tax the wealthy.
Which I'm also in favor of. But folks, how in the world can you expect to push a credible alternative, when you share with the Right the notion that somewhere, somehow how, there's a whole passel of lazies who just need to get some marching orders? And the notion that you better not come askin' ME for anything?
The Right says it's poor people. If we just say it's rich people, well, we agree: we're just squabbling about who to hand the check to.
1
You're right Robert. Bill Clinton pushed for, and got, a tax hike on the middle class early in his presidency. It may have been the only liberal thing he actually got accomplished, and it is widely credited with setting the stage for the economic boom, not to mention the balanced budgets, later in his presidency.
Perhaps no factor better predicts poverty than out-of-wedlock childbearing. And the absence of a father is a terrible tragedy for children. Alas, present policy makes qualification for numerous programs contingent upon cranking out a kid the parent(s) cannot afford.
Kindergeld is an interesting idea, but it arose back in the day when society needed lots of soldiers. Now, that’s not the case. What we need is more responsible child bearing; offering an additional bribe for stupid behavior is an awful idea. Put simply, if you’re so poor that Medicaid will be attending to your childbirth costs, making a baby should be the last thing on your to-do list.
We don’t need to subsidize job creation or higher, governmentally-mandated wages; just send illegals home, end unskilled legal immigration, eliminate corporate taxes, and scale back draconian regulation. Labor shortages will solve the problem of low pay.
In short, every single one of these proposals is a rotten idea. Freedom solves essentially all of our economic problems.
Kindergeld is an interesting idea, but it arose back in the day when society needed lots of soldiers. Now, that’s not the case. What we need is more responsible child bearing; offering an additional bribe for stupid behavior is an awful idea. Put simply, if you’re so poor that Medicaid will be attending to your childbirth costs, making a baby should be the last thing on your to-do list.
We don’t need to subsidize job creation or higher, governmentally-mandated wages; just send illegals home, end unskilled legal immigration, eliminate corporate taxes, and scale back draconian regulation. Labor shortages will solve the problem of low pay.
In short, every single one of these proposals is a rotten idea. Freedom solves essentially all of our economic problems.
5
I recall a study that compared the outcomes of impoverished girls who gave birth as teens with their sisters who didn't, and found no difference in their adult incomes. It isn't unwed childbearing that causes poverty, it is poverty that causes unwed childbearing, because impoverished women lack good access to birth control and also lack the ability to defend themselves from sexual predation.
Wage rates, meanwhile, are as much a matter of social norms as they are of markets, making minimum wages an invaluable tool. As for immigration? People only compete for jobs with others of the same skill set, which means that unskilled immigrants - most of whom, in contrast to those born in America, speak little or no English - compete with each other rather than with us.
Taxes? Whatever Republicans may say, there is no correlation between tax rates and growth. Regulations? Some are dumb, but many more do us indispensable good.
I am exceedingly weary of Republicans' tendency to always blame the victims of our society's entrenched inequities for the things that are inflicted on them, while always letting the beneficiaries off the hook.
Wage rates, meanwhile, are as much a matter of social norms as they are of markets, making minimum wages an invaluable tool. As for immigration? People only compete for jobs with others of the same skill set, which means that unskilled immigrants - most of whom, in contrast to those born in America, speak little or no English - compete with each other rather than with us.
Taxes? Whatever Republicans may say, there is no correlation between tax rates and growth. Regulations? Some are dumb, but many more do us indispensable good.
I am exceedingly weary of Republicans' tendency to always blame the victims of our society's entrenched inequities for the things that are inflicted on them, while always letting the beneficiaries off the hook.
The words "health care" are nowhere to be found in this tepid brew
Great! Just what we Democrats need: a universal health care for kids so women can be encouraged to make more welfare dependent children out of wedlock from a bunch of different men.
No wonder Republicans despise Democratic thinking.
The problem in America is that con men like Donald Trump and the Republican Party want to pay the average working class in America squat. The Democrats like Obama then want to tell you with what little money you do have to throw it away on their entitlements programs.
Incidentally, that free college education that Bernie proposes, who pays for that?
We need Democratic leaders who aren't afraid to tell their membership that nothing in life is free. That's how Donald Trump got elected on a empty promise campaign of wishful thinking. And his dim witted supporters like the coal miners still refuse to look at how he's fooling them.
No wonder Republicans despise Democratic thinking.
The problem in America is that con men like Donald Trump and the Republican Party want to pay the average working class in America squat. The Democrats like Obama then want to tell you with what little money you do have to throw it away on their entitlements programs.
Incidentally, that free college education that Bernie proposes, who pays for that?
We need Democratic leaders who aren't afraid to tell their membership that nothing in life is free. That's how Donald Trump got elected on a empty promise campaign of wishful thinking. And his dim witted supporters like the coal miners still refuse to look at how he's fooling them.
11
Mr. Bernstein, if you think these "bold ideas" will lead to tremendous popular support for Democrats, you are "bigly" mistaken. Wake up please and get it through your head that the old way is O. U. T. out, and that it will be necessary to go to war with Big Pharma, Big Hospitals, Big Education, Big Telecommunications, etc. to win an enthusiastic majority of Americans and truly make us great again, in truth rather than slogans.
3
Democrats bear the freight of trying to be the sane people in the room, because the GOP has gone totally-off-the-rails cray-cray. Many of the tensions in the Democratic party stem from the fact that there are an increasing number of refugees who have joined the party who might be described as "Rockefeller Republicans" in any saner era.
HRC is a Rockefeller Republican really. The Bernie supporters see this as an epithet, and many are still yuuugely bitter both because HRC beat Bernie in the primary and because then HRC lost, and they presume Bernie would have won.
I don't know whether he would have or not, but what I want to point out to other Democrats is that imagine Bernie as president right now, with today's composition of Congress ... or if you prefer imagine HRC. With either there would be no Gorsuch, no attempted muslim ban, no withdrawal from the Paris accords or Pruitt in the EPA. But the country would be utterly ungovernable and potentially closer to constitutional crisis than we are now (and we are close).
Democrats: arguing over grand themes of Democratic agendas and creating new reasons for division is insanity. We need to face the nation's horrible problem: about half the electorate has truly gone crazy and is supporting a reality-show President with no agenda beyond know-nothing white-power revanchism, and groping-is-good uncontrolled id.
Democrats need to win seats in the House and the Senate, with any candidates and any agenda that is sane.
HRC is a Rockefeller Republican really. The Bernie supporters see this as an epithet, and many are still yuuugely bitter both because HRC beat Bernie in the primary and because then HRC lost, and they presume Bernie would have won.
I don't know whether he would have or not, but what I want to point out to other Democrats is that imagine Bernie as president right now, with today's composition of Congress ... or if you prefer imagine HRC. With either there would be no Gorsuch, no attempted muslim ban, no withdrawal from the Paris accords or Pruitt in the EPA. But the country would be utterly ungovernable and potentially closer to constitutional crisis than we are now (and we are close).
Democrats: arguing over grand themes of Democratic agendas and creating new reasons for division is insanity. We need to face the nation's horrible problem: about half the electorate has truly gone crazy and is supporting a reality-show President with no agenda beyond know-nothing white-power revanchism, and groping-is-good uncontrolled id.
Democrats need to win seats in the House and the Senate, with any candidates and any agenda that is sane.
3
It is abject idiocy to compare the US to Germany and Denmark. The US has four times the population of Germany and 60 times the population of Denmark. In addition the demographics of the US are in no way similar to either Denmark nor Germany.
3
Right, shrink the federal government and let the states take on state-sized problems.
1
Do yourselves a favor Dems, start at the local level this time. Make it work in the States, then you too can run against Washington and win.
2
There appears to be a significant difference between the approach of the Democrats and Republicans:
While the Dems float an idea and then let it languish and srivel off the vine,
the Republicans keep pounding away at it and repeating the same party lines no matter their accuracy in order to keep their agenda alive.
Do Democrats think their plans are only worth part-time support.
Dems need to learn how to sustain the fight.
While the Dems float an idea and then let it languish and srivel off the vine,
the Republicans keep pounding away at it and repeating the same party lines no matter their accuracy in order to keep their agenda alive.
Do Democrats think their plans are only worth part-time support.
Dems need to learn how to sustain the fight.
Americans are much too complacent about economic inequality. That the recommendations of this article count as "bold" is evidence of this.
We need a much more progressive federal income tax, with the increased revenues sent directly to poorer Americans, rather than funneled indirectly through inefficient government programs. Take from the rich and give to the poor and middle class.
In addition, we need a cap on total wealth, as Franklin and Jefferson recommended at our nation's birth. There is no justification and great disvalue in allowing individuals to engross hundreds of millions of dollars. Among other things, it perverts our politics.
We need a much more progressive federal income tax, with the increased revenues sent directly to poorer Americans, rather than funneled indirectly through inefficient government programs. Take from the rich and give to the poor and middle class.
In addition, we need a cap on total wealth, as Franklin and Jefferson recommended at our nation's birth. There is no justification and great disvalue in allowing individuals to engross hundreds of millions of dollars. Among other things, it perverts our politics.
so lazy or incompetent people can lay their hands on money that other people earned by going to work ?
Child allowances is one of the dumbest ideas I've seen. Talk about unintended consequences. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that it would create an incentive for poor families to have more children for the simple goal of getting paid more in allowance money. If you don't think that'd happen just look at the history of welfare. Government programs that simply throws money at poverty problems has been shown to have negative consequences that outweigh the benefits.
9
How about a comprehensive plan to start making things in the US again rather than relying on countries that we're alternately threatening and then awarding huge trade advantages?
Producing company after company with the primary purpose of selling advertising & confidential data to other companies is rather paper tigerish.
Producing company after company with the primary purpose of selling advertising & confidential data to other companies is rather paper tigerish.
1
A number of the best comments are pointing out that the vast majority of countries around the world - "less" developed as well as more developed - have programs far more progressive than what is being proposed here, and nobody - even the most right wing in those countries - would dream of rejecting them.
liberals/Democrats/progressives are terrible at messaging.
Since virtually every one of the program suggested, either by Mr. Bernstein or the majority of commenters, involves the assumption that the government can be of service to all of us, this is the #1 message the Democrats need to present.
Every day, from now forward, there needs to be as many people as possible putting forward the message, educating people.
I suggest a great way to start would be to educate people about how much the government does now that is being taken for granted.
They tried it - and did it terribly - with an ad last year (I don't recall the details - something about a woman named Julia?).
You need to make it relevant to every man, woman and child in the US. When you wake up in the morning, how much of the edible food, clean water to drink (from municipal water systems), septic system, clean air, roads, safe cars, etc etc etc is the government responsible for?
You know how you can be sure this has been successful?
When someone says, "There's an infrastructure all businesses use, and THEY DIDN'T BUILD THAT," - everyone in the country will say, "yes, Amen.'
www.remember-to-breathe.org
liberals/Democrats/progressives are terrible at messaging.
Since virtually every one of the program suggested, either by Mr. Bernstein or the majority of commenters, involves the assumption that the government can be of service to all of us, this is the #1 message the Democrats need to present.
Every day, from now forward, there needs to be as many people as possible putting forward the message, educating people.
I suggest a great way to start would be to educate people about how much the government does now that is being taken for granted.
They tried it - and did it terribly - with an ad last year (I don't recall the details - something about a woman named Julia?).
You need to make it relevant to every man, woman and child in the US. When you wake up in the morning, how much of the edible food, clean water to drink (from municipal water systems), septic system, clean air, roads, safe cars, etc etc etc is the government responsible for?
You know how you can be sure this has been successful?
When someone says, "There's an infrastructure all businesses use, and THEY DIDN'T BUILD THAT," - everyone in the country will say, "yes, Amen.'
www.remember-to-breathe.org
Okay, fine, let's keep fiddling around the edges when bold leadership is required. Really - we need to go after corporate welfare with a giant earth mover. That's the size of the tool needed at this point! Tax the Rich. Tell them we'll build them a statue to honor their 'generosity.' Speaking of statues, take down the statue of Robert Taft in front of the Capitol building, and rededicate it to the memories of all the Americans who have died over the decades as a result of having no health insurance. (Taft can be moved to the front of the Heritage Foundation or something.)
This is great stuff for an American who once wrote speeches for Democratic candidates for office but who was driven out by the party's clamorous cultural radicals. Keep it up!
Democrats need to go BOLD. Be bold and brash, you don't fight fire with a garden hose. Really give folks a true, obtainable agenda, were the congress were democratic. Show them the WAY you would get your bold ideas constructed! Folks are a bit tired of hearing IDEAS and goals without HOW to implement them. Give the GOP a run for their money in the districts where people are losing their healthcare, and tell them you would do universal healthcare, but HOW that would possibly work, IF they elected a democratic or independent congressman.
Start treating people with intelligence but get the right talking points going. Keep it simple but with some real substance.
Start treating people with intelligence but get the right talking points going. Keep it simple but with some real substance.
I find Mr. Bernstein's comments unusually precient. However, the solutions he presents here are too vague even for a Trump-ete tour. What are needed are specific programs the states administer, undeer federal oversight regarding spending (so general funds don't swallow the juice). Jared names the issues: child poverty, child pre-school education, nutrition, minimum wage and health care (medicaidd for families with children). It is clear, given America's racial bent that Christian charity cannot be counted upon to colve these problems. Splendid churches and art collections are what churches go for these days. Give the states the monies from our taxes and direct their spending with legal oversight on how these admininstered. No increase in defeicit, simply targerted spending. I'd rather see our undrclasses get my tax money than myself or the upper-upper classes.
The United States with regard to economic policy has always been a conservative country. It only becomes more progressive in times of crisis. Now while I won't waste anyone's time dismantling the insanity of much that is written here, what I will say, if we have any hope of overthrowing the completely unacceptable current governing majority, run as fast as you can from this loony-tune prescription. If the Democratic Party embraces a "child allowance" or a "permanent subsidized jobs program" you can pack up the tent and shut it down right now; and then kiss goodbye any hope of ever having a governing majority anywhere in this country ever again. At a time when I couldn't be more depressed by the Republicans and their agenda in Washington, I read this and realize: we really are doomed.
1
Until and unless the DNC and the democratic party reverts back to a more FDR (and anti-corporatist-interests TR) like agenda, the democrats will and should lose. Should we revert back to the Clintonian Kissinger-for-FP agenda? Or her DOMA agenda? Or Clinton's (and Obama's) short-sighted pro-globalization agenda? Or her prison-industrial-complex agenda? Or her conservative-lite agenda? They are ALL failed policies, and they are the good reasons why we have a buffoon for president. Until the democrats realize this and call this out, they will not, and should not win.
I quit donating to the Democratic Party some time ago. I now resign as a member. To paraphrase Will Rogers, "I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat. "
2
There is an emerging Democratic agenda. But it starts with Single Payer, full stop.
2
I am a progrssive and I think the $250 per child is a bad idea. If payment is tied to an income level cap those just over the limit to receive payment will understandably object. It will be viewed as another "Democrat entitlement." Democrats need to stick with the basics. Ensure affordable healthcare for all. Provide food (actual food) to those who do not have consistent means get enough food and work to reduce homelessness. It is not just people with children who lack insurance, food and shelter.
The payment for children reminds me of Lyndon Johnson's original program that was accused of incentiving women to "breed to feed." I do not know if any of the Republican claims were true but it went a long way to create the saga of the "Welfare Queen."
The payment for children reminds me of Lyndon Johnson's original program that was accused of incentiving women to "breed to feed." I do not know if any of the Republican claims were true but it went a long way to create the saga of the "Welfare Queen."
4
This is the kind of candy store give away that gets Dems laughed out of power over and over. The country needs the political parties to occupy the middle, not the crazy fringes.
55
Yeah, giving money to poor children is just crazy. They should know their place and continue to have horrible education, nutrition, and life prospects. Entitled poor children are the real problem here.
Candy store giveaways are how the Dems create and sustain their base.
"But let’s also make sure we’re ready to roll with a true progressive agenda when our time comes". ---- If it is that progressive, there will be no debate. I suspect, that advancement will come from a private company, and not politicians.
1
is it just me, or does a tax credit for having children fly in the face of concern for the environment? After all, when you strip away all of the rhetoric about clean energy and climate change denial, the bare fact is that the burgeoning human population is the reason for environmental degradation. If we were able to stop putting CO2 into the atmosphere tomorrow, what about shortages of clean water and food?
This, unfortunately, reflects the current thinking of what used to be called the Democratic party, probably changing it's name when it abandoned real support for the working class in this country. Child subsidies, earned income tax credits, instead of real legislation to crack down on corporations and wall street to make them pay their fair share and abstain from robbing the working class.
This, unfortunately, reflects the current thinking of what used to be called the Democratic party, probably changing it's name when it abandoned real support for the working class in this country. Child subsidies, earned income tax credits, instead of real legislation to crack down on corporations and wall street to make them pay their fair share and abstain from robbing the working class.
11
Yes, we need to make sure that corporations--and people in general--PAY for what they GET. This means that corporations should pay for the limited liability insurance they enjoy now at taxpayer expense. It means that individuals that inherit great wealth pay a significant amount of that as tax, because wealth inheritance is immoral (you should earn wealth, not just be given it for free). And it means that people that burn fossil fuels pay for the cost of carbon that they currently dump for free (via a revenue neutral/zero-net carbon tax, preferably).
But all of the above doesn't not preclude our OBLIGATION to make sure that poor children get food, shelter, and education equal to any child. It is immoral (and hugely inefficient, if you don't care about immorality) to have a market system where rich children get a huge starting advantage.
But all of the above doesn't not preclude our OBLIGATION to make sure that poor children get food, shelter, and education equal to any child. It is immoral (and hugely inefficient, if you don't care about immorality) to have a market system where rich children get a huge starting advantage.
How does a universal child allowance help the woman I know who voted for Obama twice and then Trump? She retired from an airline, and had her pension stripped in bankruptcy court. She had too much dignity ever to seek disability, and now she is disabled, living in one room of her sister's house with her stuff in storage in the yard. The Dems never stood up for her when the unions were busted and pensions of regular people evaporated. They don't stand up for those whose student and credit card debt is usury. A pox on universal child care, allowing both genders to work until they drop in the harness and the kids get raised by underpaid under qualified daycare attendants. A pox on these "democratic" ideas.
11
The farther the Democratic party moves to the left the less likely the Republicans will lose the White House and Congressional majority.
If Democrats want to regain power they need to stay centrist and deliver a quality, consistent message. Centrist Democrats will never win the conservative right vote nor will they win the far-left Democrats. But the middle, left middle and right middle are where the majority of voters exist. Appealing to them wins elections. Reject the far right and far left. Appeal to the majority.
There is considerable appeal to fixing our infrastructure. Obama proposed this and it got lost in the "just say no" Congress. Raising the minimum wage appeals because those low wage workers are no longer the poor and temporary worker. The economic crisis drove these jobs to the middle class.
Child allowance? There is no way that will fly with the majority of voters. It feeds into people's wide ranging prejudices and fears. I understand the goal is to cut child poverty but that message will quickly get lost in any conservative debate.
If Democrats want to regain power they need to stay centrist and deliver a quality, consistent message. Centrist Democrats will never win the conservative right vote nor will they win the far-left Democrats. But the middle, left middle and right middle are where the majority of voters exist. Appealing to them wins elections. Reject the far right and far left. Appeal to the majority.
There is considerable appeal to fixing our infrastructure. Obama proposed this and it got lost in the "just say no" Congress. Raising the minimum wage appeals because those low wage workers are no longer the poor and temporary worker. The economic crisis drove these jobs to the middle class.
Child allowance? There is no way that will fly with the majority of voters. It feeds into people's wide ranging prejudices and fears. I understand the goal is to cut child poverty but that message will quickly get lost in any conservative debate.
1
Our American community must assure that its children grow up healthy, mentally and physically, so that they have the opportunity to enjoy whole lives. I am not confident, however, that throwing $250 a month at children will accomplish its purpose. The solution is much more complex. And at the same time, the nation and the world must be cautious in not providing incentives for having larger families.
4
I believe those who ask for respect for the rank-and-file voters who voted Republican are correct, and here’s why: Calling people out for following their beliefs only stirs up fear, defensiveness, and anger. This is not where we want to go, because it always ends up in a street fight, solving nothing. While pointing out the untruths that are being bandied about everywhere is a good thing, the only way Democrats are going to be able to turn things around is to show OURSELVES as the conservative, peaceful, fearless party, a party with integrity, a party that DOES NOT LIE. Present an agenda that SOLVES problems, makes people feel safer just to associate themselves with it. I honestly think the Republicans now have the upper hand because they have somehow made the rank and file person feel safer with them, and they believe that Republicans are going to make their lives better. We have to build a platform that shows people how we’re going to make their lives better, and that means a solid plan, a plan in which Democrats can put aside the differences within their own party and come to a consensus. Yes, there will be many who prefer the street fight to levelheadedness, but the next four years will show many that the agenda that has put greed at the top will NOT help the rank-and-file voter. Let’s show them why!
1
Alice, you have the prescription for bringing the liberal and democrat out of of his irrelevance to our governance,
le
But I would add one more element to your otherwise excellent piece.
You need to develop workable solutions that can actually make it through the legislative process.
It was the inability to work within the legislative processes that has left the Obama agenda in tatters. Governance by "phone and a pen" can rarely bring lasting or meaningful change.
le
But I would add one more element to your otherwise excellent piece.
You need to develop workable solutions that can actually make it through the legislative process.
It was the inability to work within the legislative processes that has left the Obama agenda in tatters. Governance by "phone and a pen" can rarely bring lasting or meaningful change.
1
I wish I were intelligent enough to come up with solutions. I feel certain that a body of Democrats more politically savvy than I could put this together, as well as rev up the voters to back them!
I hope that Democrats have more of an agenda than to just oppose anything Trump wants to do. But they might have to listen to the concerns of the forgotten part of the populace living in flyover country. Hillary you remember, described these people as uneducated hicks. But as smart Republicans knew, the votes of those hicks counted as much as those from people living in the sophisticated and enlightened east and west coast areas.
2
"as smart Republicans knew, the votes of those hicks counted as much as those from people living in the sophisticated and enlightened east and west coast areas."
Actually Rich, the votes of those "hicks," at least in battleground states such as PA, OH, MI, WI and IA count even more. Everyone knows that NY and CA are not going red anytime soon. The Republicans don't need either state to win, as long as they can get enough "hicks" in battleground states to vote for them.
Actually Rich, the votes of those "hicks," at least in battleground states such as PA, OH, MI, WI and IA count even more. Everyone knows that NY and CA are not going red anytime soon. The Republicans don't need either state to win, as long as they can get enough "hicks" in battleground states to vote for them.
Dems need to figure out an overarching philosophy on immigration, one that is simple, easily understood, and not just a negative reaction to the degrees of hostility coming from the right. The right wing likes to say dems support an open door policy, which is clearly untrue...right?
But if your official position is that immigration makes us stronger ("melting pot!"), and immigration is a net plus to GDP and keeps cost low with no effect on the availability of blue collar jobs (the "they do things we don't want to do" argument), where exactly are the limits?
This is crucial. Trump won over voters with a simple, tangible, racist, immigration policy. Dems seem weirdly messy on this - perhaps there is a lack of consensus here? "We believe legal immigration makes us stronger and represents a fundamental american value. We believe in efficient and humane enforcement of immigration law, and providing a path to citizenship for those who have shown that they are willing to join in the making of a better, stronger USA." Am I missing something?
But if your official position is that immigration makes us stronger ("melting pot!"), and immigration is a net plus to GDP and keeps cost low with no effect on the availability of blue collar jobs (the "they do things we don't want to do" argument), where exactly are the limits?
This is crucial. Trump won over voters with a simple, tangible, racist, immigration policy. Dems seem weirdly messy on this - perhaps there is a lack of consensus here? "We believe legal immigration makes us stronger and represents a fundamental american value. We believe in efficient and humane enforcement of immigration law, and providing a path to citizenship for those who have shown that they are willing to join in the making of a better, stronger USA." Am I missing something?
3
I would suggest to you, Mr. Dolgenos, that the opposition to some, if not most, of the proposals on immigration is far broader than just the "JDP".
"Open borders" is not a political concept that sees support in sufficient numbers to pass through the legislature.
I doubt that we will see such a policy in our lifetimes.
"Open borders" is not a political concept that sees support in sufficient numbers to pass through the legislature.
I doubt that we will see such a policy in our lifetimes.
Eh, nothing about single-payer healthcare.
5
There is no real progressive agenda until that agenda more fully engages the voting public, or more precisely, the (mostly) working and middle class who could be induced to vote for it. But...getting into the weeds of EITC and infrastructure investment and how best to invest $1 trillion and the nuances of tax codes and the pros and cons of direct federal spending for the majority of Americans, as opposed to federal CUTS that boost the take-home of the tiny elite minority, and what that means to federal revenue--most of that is a proven turn-off.
You see who and what many people voted for, right? Why? For one huge factor, he made it sound SIMPLE. Double-talk sound bites and cut-to-the-chase cynicism prevailed over complicated facts. Give 'em more of what they want to hear and less of what they don't know they need. Bogus claims of "We're going to bring jobs back" were set in stark opposition to more viable formulas for jobs retraining. HRC's proposals required thought, analysis, debate, and $$$. Trump's menu basically offered the meat-chicken-or-fish versions of a cheap three-course meal. Period. Much of the voting public wants a tag line, a pithy summary, the Cliff Notes version of the Cliff Notes. Make Me Listen or Sit Down.
This piece is sincere and accurate--but if the Democats fail to succinctly summarize any new progressive philosophy, it will be a dull and boring appeal to many voters, who will either again vote against their own interests, or stay home.
You see who and what many people voted for, right? Why? For one huge factor, he made it sound SIMPLE. Double-talk sound bites and cut-to-the-chase cynicism prevailed over complicated facts. Give 'em more of what they want to hear and less of what they don't know they need. Bogus claims of "We're going to bring jobs back" were set in stark opposition to more viable formulas for jobs retraining. HRC's proposals required thought, analysis, debate, and $$$. Trump's menu basically offered the meat-chicken-or-fish versions of a cheap three-course meal. Period. Much of the voting public wants a tag line, a pithy summary, the Cliff Notes version of the Cliff Notes. Make Me Listen or Sit Down.
This piece is sincere and accurate--but if the Democats fail to succinctly summarize any new progressive philosophy, it will be a dull and boring appeal to many voters, who will either again vote against their own interests, or stay home.
1
A "Democratic agenda" and not a word about climate.
1
Nor race, nor bathrooms.
Add a single payer health care system and I think you've got the major bases covered.
2
The things that galls me is that there is almost no recognition in the neo-liberal wing of the DNC that it is exactly the policies laid forth in this article (cloaked as "progressive--" as progressive as the moon is made of green cheese) that got us here. Not despite that, and certainly has nothing to do with what the Clinton camp calls the problems were. I am embarrassed to be a registered democrat. HRC should recall that she couldn't win against this unqualified an opponent. And it had little to do with what she and her coterie says the problems were. Just go away from the party for the good of the country.
3
The U.S. has two parties for the one per cent and none for the bottom 40 per cent.
The immiseration of the bottom 40 per cent will only increase until the Democrats are transformed into social democrats, with Bernie ideas in the mainstream. The U.S. is the only major democracy without a left-wing party which is why the U.S. has by far the worst child poverty. This article makes the fundamental liberal mistake of segregating child poverty from family poverty.
The Clintons were the worst enemies of poor children, throwing millions into extreme poverty when they abolished FDR's family support program and then took a million black fathers from their children with the failed policy of mass incarceration.
Mr Bernstein speaks of cutting extreme poverty (less than $3/day) in half. Extreme poverty is child abuse, and three million cases of child abuse through extreme poverty wold be a damnation for America.
The Dems are so killed by identity politics that Hillary thought the import of the last election was whether she would smash a glass ceiling. Social democrats would be concentrated on abolishing all child poverty.
Social democratic countries have education and training security, leisure security, income security among which is universal but scaled child benefit, housing and health care security, etc.
Even Bernie's platform was conservative by social democratic standards. Justice for America's poor will not arrive without a new party of the left.
The immiseration of the bottom 40 per cent will only increase until the Democrats are transformed into social democrats, with Bernie ideas in the mainstream. The U.S. is the only major democracy without a left-wing party which is why the U.S. has by far the worst child poverty. This article makes the fundamental liberal mistake of segregating child poverty from family poverty.
The Clintons were the worst enemies of poor children, throwing millions into extreme poverty when they abolished FDR's family support program and then took a million black fathers from their children with the failed policy of mass incarceration.
Mr Bernstein speaks of cutting extreme poverty (less than $3/day) in half. Extreme poverty is child abuse, and three million cases of child abuse through extreme poverty wold be a damnation for America.
The Dems are so killed by identity politics that Hillary thought the import of the last election was whether she would smash a glass ceiling. Social democrats would be concentrated on abolishing all child poverty.
Social democratic countries have education and training security, leisure security, income security among which is universal but scaled child benefit, housing and health care security, etc.
Even Bernie's platform was conservative by social democratic standards. Justice for America's poor will not arrive without a new party of the left.
3
Add single-party payer health care and you've got something.
1
Single payer health care that allowed workers to start new businesses or move to other employment would grow the economy so that there would be a larger tax base to pay for child credits.
3
"Progressives will be playing defense for many years to come. But let’s also make sure we’re ready to roll with a true progressive agenda when our time comes."
Truer words were ne'er spoken. Democrats can begin playing offense by electing younger and more progressive leadership. It would be wonderfully refreshing to see some younger people take the party helm.
There is definitely talent there, but the party elders need to graciously step aside. Now would be great. Yesterday would have been better.
Truer words were ne'er spoken. Democrats can begin playing offense by electing younger and more progressive leadership. It would be wonderfully refreshing to see some younger people take the party helm.
There is definitely talent there, but the party elders need to graciously step aside. Now would be great. Yesterday would have been better.
3
Focus on jobs, jobs, jobs. Jobs that pay a good wage. If this means government jobs, so be it. I'd rather my tax dollars go to put people to work. And healthcare reform--this time let's take it all the way.
93
People who question this should look at the projects that not only created jobs and fed poor people and their families, but also created infrastructure that remains now and enriches people's lives. I think of the highways that go along the ridge of the Smoky Mountains and adjacent mountains, which allow people to enjoy the natural beauty of this area. But there are many parks, theatres, and other such projects that are more than worth the sums spent on them.
1
Kudo's to Bernstein for at least acknowledging that Democrats are moving sharply left (contrary to many pundits who deny this). But let's be clear - "What’s important is that such ideas, once the domain of the party’s left wing, now face a diminished resistance from centrists." There are very few Dem centrists remaining. Over 1/3 of all Dem House Reps come from just three very liberal states - CA, NY and MA. Where are the the "blue dog" Democrats ?
And let's be clear about something else. "International data show that child poverty in America remains at 20 percent — twice the rate in Germany and seven times the rate in Denmark ... Those countries, and most other advanced economies, provide regular payments to families with children based on the recognition that investing in children is an essential public good." Bernstein is correct - but he misses the point that such "public goods" are funded by everyone in these countries (including the poor). In Denmark, for example, they have a 25% VAT (sales tax) paid by everyone ... and their income tax rate varies only from 35% (for the poor) to 45% (for the rich).
By contrast, liberals in the US have adopted a Marxist position ("From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"). In this view, the difficulties of the poor aren't solved by issues of education (17% still drop out of high school) or marriage (40% of the poor are single parent families) but rather by taxing the rich.
And let's be clear about something else. "International data show that child poverty in America remains at 20 percent — twice the rate in Germany and seven times the rate in Denmark ... Those countries, and most other advanced economies, provide regular payments to families with children based on the recognition that investing in children is an essential public good." Bernstein is correct - but he misses the point that such "public goods" are funded by everyone in these countries (including the poor). In Denmark, for example, they have a 25% VAT (sales tax) paid by everyone ... and their income tax rate varies only from 35% (for the poor) to 45% (for the rich).
By contrast, liberals in the US have adopted a Marxist position ("From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"). In this view, the difficulties of the poor aren't solved by issues of education (17% still drop out of high school) or marriage (40% of the poor are single parent families) but rather by taxing the rich.
2
Democrats need to avoid their historical tendency to create excessively complicated, admin heavy solutions to every problem. There should only be two supplemental income programs, one for those temporarily out of work and another for those permanently unemployed due to physical or mental illness. Whenever you pay extra money to poorer families on a per child basis, it becomes open season for the far right to start slinging "welfare baby" accusations at your elected representatives. Yes it's wrong, but it is also politically effective. Instead, run on all children having medical coverage, a decent meal and equal education. Throw in comprehensive child care for all working parents. Put all our money into these core programs and support them relentlessly. Stop diluting funds and political support across dozens of less effective and efficient political "pet projects". As for family income, the real solutions are an inflation adjusted minimum wage and free career retraining. Unions should also be supported in some new form that better meets the needs of the modern world. Union reform will require much thought and debate, the old model has become unsustainable. Establish a half dozen core ideas that you support relentlessly. Resist complexity and embrace radical reform of your old ideas. This is the surest path back to a truly Democratic future.
2
I am in favor of raising the minimum wage, but I do have concerns about a carte blanche child allowance. When Frances Perkins, FDR's Labor Sec'y, suggested Social Security payment for single mothers, she was warned that some would have children to increase their payments. She thought no one would ever do something like that, but we know they did. There needs to be some requirement, maybe an income threshold and serious community service hours (possibly as child care givers while other mothers work) to get such payments. First, because history has shown that there are those who will have children to increase their payments; and second, because as we have seen in the 70s, there will be a backlash from those who are angered by seeing people getting something for nothing. Child poverty is a problem, but a child allowance is simplistic and not the answer.
2
$250 a month for each child? I can just hear the conservatives: "The liberals want to pay welfare moms $3k a year to have more babies!" The Democrats should run on a platform of national health care. I am surrounded by Trump voters out here and what they want most is affordable health care.
189
Child allowance doesn't necessarily mean the more babies the better. Only babies that are wanted and can be taken care of properly.
Agree totally!
Security for ALL Americans in childhood, employment years, and old age with universal healthcare insurance for all should be the goal.
To achieve it we must enable every child and adult to reach his or her full potential through barrier free education and training. If the GI Bill was such a success, how about making it available to everyone? No one should suffer from the weight of college loans.
The most proven anti-poverty program is a stable well paying job. Raising the Federal minimum wage to provide a living wage would be a good start. Enforcing laws against age and racial discrimination would also help.
No accident or medical illness should cause financial bankruptcy. It never happens in Canada and they live three years longer than Americans.
For the sake of all, corporate "persons" and all fortunate 1%ers must pay their share of taxes. Tax reforms would help.
Campaign finance reform to make all contributions immediately public and transparent would clear the smoke away from why our politicians say and vote the way they do and improve the quality of our political discourse.
Recognition by all Americans that we share our time, air, water, land and resources with each other and have obligations beyond family and faith to each other and to future generations of Americans.
To achieve it we must enable every child and adult to reach his or her full potential through barrier free education and training. If the GI Bill was such a success, how about making it available to everyone? No one should suffer from the weight of college loans.
The most proven anti-poverty program is a stable well paying job. Raising the Federal minimum wage to provide a living wage would be a good start. Enforcing laws against age and racial discrimination would also help.
No accident or medical illness should cause financial bankruptcy. It never happens in Canada and they live three years longer than Americans.
For the sake of all, corporate "persons" and all fortunate 1%ers must pay their share of taxes. Tax reforms would help.
Campaign finance reform to make all contributions immediately public and transparent would clear the smoke away from why our politicians say and vote the way they do and improve the quality of our political discourse.
Recognition by all Americans that we share our time, air, water, land and resources with each other and have obligations beyond family and faith to each other and to future generations of Americans.
4
I fear the left will go back, just as the right reaches back, to solutions of the past. What worked in the past, is no assurance it will work now. The G.O.P. agenda is all-too-telling in that concept.
What frustrates me the most about both parties is that neither of them recognize that until you put into place, strong access to mental health services, paired with adult education, the ideas of 'make-for-work' jobs, or child care allowances are simply surface and very 'easy' solutions, that will not solve anything for these families in the long-run. When I speak with small business owners they are frustrated beyond words at the lack of qualified candidates. This lack is both in skills and in basic work habits. Whether this comes from a place of education or mental health stability, it disqualifies these people from getting hired.
We can ease financial burdens on those struggling. We can create jobs, but if the unemployed are not trained and/or receive the requisite mental health support, these jobs will not last. They too will be unfilled. We have to get below the surface of all of these old-time surface remedies of the past and create the solutions for today.
While I know, ideologically, the conservative in this country may never understand the concepts needed. I hope, however, the Democrats can reach deeper and finally 'get it'.
What frustrates me the most about both parties is that neither of them recognize that until you put into place, strong access to mental health services, paired with adult education, the ideas of 'make-for-work' jobs, or child care allowances are simply surface and very 'easy' solutions, that will not solve anything for these families in the long-run. When I speak with small business owners they are frustrated beyond words at the lack of qualified candidates. This lack is both in skills and in basic work habits. Whether this comes from a place of education or mental health stability, it disqualifies these people from getting hired.
We can ease financial burdens on those struggling. We can create jobs, but if the unemployed are not trained and/or receive the requisite mental health support, these jobs will not last. They too will be unfilled. We have to get below the surface of all of these old-time surface remedies of the past and create the solutions for today.
While I know, ideologically, the conservative in this country may never understand the concepts needed. I hope, however, the Democrats can reach deeper and finally 'get it'.
1
Float all boats with federally funded childcare and single payer health insurance! Sadly, there is no collective will to eliminate poverty. Add to the dream an excellent public school education, regardless of zip code. But then we'd be living in Scandinavia where quality of life is understood to be worth paying for.
2
Trump's first move was to redistribute wealth: $3 million to an Indiana company to keep 700 jobs for 3 years. Basically, the government is paying the salary of these employees for the length of the agreement, though they never point out this last part. A lesson for Democrats in terms of messaging.
4
What about immigration? No mention here of that sticky wicket and the Republicans will certainly make it an issue again.
Aside from that I'd say
1. Medicare for all
2. Universal child care as part of public education through college (no "child credits"
3. Infrastructure - public works a la WPA
4. A truly progressive tax rate with many more brackets and investments taxed the same as earned income
5. Take the cap off FICA
Aside from that I'd say
1. Medicare for all
2. Universal child care as part of public education through college (no "child credits"
3. Infrastructure - public works a la WPA
4. A truly progressive tax rate with many more brackets and investments taxed the same as earned income
5. Take the cap off FICA
3
Healthcare, lifelong education/training (including critical thinking skills) childcare and investment in alternative energy industry that will provide the basis of future job growth and global and economic wellbeing....all effectively communicated to all Americans...by a leader who can put the united back in the US...
1
In addition to public job creation or government subsidized private jobs, Democrats may wish to consider strategically located job incubator programs that could help the long-term unemployed start their own businesses. These incubators could be located in Rust-Belt areas that have been impervious to improving employment by traditional means. I believe The NY Times has featured substantive reporting on this topic.
i expect that the more Democrats can do to improve job prospects they will find themselves to be more successful with the electorate.
i expect that the more Democrats can do to improve job prospects they will find themselves to be more successful with the electorate.
3
Proposals also need a long term strategy:
Address climiate change, if this issue isn't addressed the public health impacts, economic cost and the likely resulting conflicts far exceeds anything else we can imagine.
Then focus on some of the more specifics.
1) A more progressive income tax rate
2) Remove the cap on social security (FICA) taxes
3) Everyone need to participate in the health insurance market (no private insurance, ie 40% of workers are in private/self-funded plans - this creates an imbalance of healthy/unhealthy
4) Increase spending in research - NIH, NASA, etc (these have provide the cutting edge technoligies and spur innovation
5) Shift to a border tax
6) enforce sale taxes on cross state purchases
7) remove gerrymandering of congressional districts (districts should not be drawn based on party lines in addition to race.
8) remove party affiliation for elections, look at California's approach, the top two in the primary face off in the general - the last Senate had 2 democratic members - this leads to less extreme candidates
9) strength Unioin and unionization should be part of trade agreement.
10) strength trade with our partners.
Address climiate change, if this issue isn't addressed the public health impacts, economic cost and the likely resulting conflicts far exceeds anything else we can imagine.
Then focus on some of the more specifics.
1) A more progressive income tax rate
2) Remove the cap on social security (FICA) taxes
3) Everyone need to participate in the health insurance market (no private insurance, ie 40% of workers are in private/self-funded plans - this creates an imbalance of healthy/unhealthy
4) Increase spending in research - NIH, NASA, etc (these have provide the cutting edge technoligies and spur innovation
5) Shift to a border tax
6) enforce sale taxes on cross state purchases
7) remove gerrymandering of congressional districts (districts should not be drawn based on party lines in addition to race.
8) remove party affiliation for elections, look at California's approach, the top two in the primary face off in the general - the last Senate had 2 democratic members - this leads to less extreme candidates
9) strength Unioin and unionization should be part of trade agreement.
10) strength trade with our partners.
4
How about meaningful education to bring workers knowledge base up to equal the jobs that are out there today - jobs that require specialized education but not a college degree. Education is the KEY!
3
How about meaningful education on how to not become a parent until finishing high school and getting married?
How about teaching personal responsibility?
No this is not a village......and you cannot rely on your somebody else.
How about teaching personal responsibility?
No this is not a village......and you cannot rely on your somebody else.
2
Minimum wage increase is the best path out of poverty. Even though I consider myself a liberal I think we must avoid the problem that occurred during the "War on Poverty". I remember young women opting to have multiple children at an early age just to get out their impoverished single parent home and set up their own single parent impoverished home. Then a significant percentage of those women pushed those kids out on to the street because they wanted them for the income only and didn't want the responsibilities of parenting. This was one of the reasons why there was a huge increase in street crime and a major spike in gang membership in the seventies and eighties. Working for a livable minimum wage is much superior to sitting home and having more babies.
6
This is basically the European welfare state, which voters have rejected. California analyzed going to single payer health care system and their own analysis shows it would cost the entire state budget and more. Where do we think all this money will come from? If folks in NYC want to pay 65% of their income in taxes they have made that choice, the others of us have voted with our feet and gone elsewhere. Any coincidence that 4 of the 5 fasting growing cities are in the Southeast? That homes on the Hamptons are showcased in the Times and WSJ because their "owners are moving to Florida"/no state income tax). I think there is a vast majority of American's who want our current system with the problems fixed, not the European model which has unemployment rates double or more of ours. It is not economically sustainable, especially if we are going to maintain our leadership role in the world.
5
Many reject the "European welfare state" because they have no idea of how(well) it works and even less of an idea of the extent that they are screwed over by our capitalism -- on this issue in the form of the pharma companies, big insurance, etc. which have given us the 37th "best" health care in the world at the number cost in the world. Guess getting exploited and neglected by the private sector equates with "freedom" and "individualism" for them. Don't ask me why!
1
Ask anyone liberal progressive to say the word "Union." You will get a whole lot of pausing and thinking.
It is the only concept that will restore a reasonable balance in the economy of the us.
And the fact that it is never discussed or brought up in democratic conversations is a fundamental definition of neoliberalism.
Yes. The unions went to far. They were a factor in the decline of the american economy in the '70's.
It is nervous making, but it is the only counterbalance to the accumulation of individual money and power that rules our lives today.
It is the only concept that will restore a reasonable balance in the economy of the us.
And the fact that it is never discussed or brought up in democratic conversations is a fundamental definition of neoliberalism.
Yes. The unions went to far. They were a factor in the decline of the american economy in the '70's.
It is nervous making, but it is the only counterbalance to the accumulation of individual money and power that rules our lives today.
9
All this twisting us inside and outside in the tax code just to get to a point where wages keep up with real inflation and real wages provide for a family of four like it did in 50's, 60's and most of 70's.
Policies of changing of how we conclude the inflation rate, unemployment, Social Security were changed to hurt the amounts given to these programs. Policies that allowed our jobs to be shipped overseas and business that did that got subsidies by us tax payers. Loopholes in our tax codes for business taxes to be held overseas and not taxed here in US. Our tax code was so perverted to favor the all ready wealthy to get riches beyond belief which gave them to much power in our current system of government of and by the rich.
Policies of changing of how we conclude the inflation rate, unemployment, Social Security were changed to hurt the amounts given to these programs. Policies that allowed our jobs to be shipped overseas and business that did that got subsidies by us tax payers. Loopholes in our tax codes for business taxes to be held overseas and not taxed here in US. Our tax code was so perverted to favor the all ready wealthy to get riches beyond belief which gave them to much power in our current system of government of and by the rich.
5
These are worthy aims, but lack a theory tp consolidate them. There is one which explains reality. It's called MMT, Modern Monetary Theory. Contrary to mainstream models, all of which fail but are part of Neo-liberal policy. It works.
The Federal government cannot go broke in $us as it created the dollar back in 1776. so it can buy anything that is "for sale"
For sale includes full pensions, free education, and free healthcare. None of these require "taxpayer dollars" as the fed doesn't spend such dollars. Etc Etc.
So all these things in the article can be bought, and the cost doesn't much matter.
The Federal government cannot go broke in $us as it created the dollar back in 1776. so it can buy anything that is "for sale"
For sale includes full pensions, free education, and free healthcare. None of these require "taxpayer dollars" as the fed doesn't spend such dollars. Etc Etc.
So all these things in the article can be bought, and the cost doesn't much matter.
1
Hyperinflation? Weimar Germany? Mugabe's Zimbabwe? No thanks. I'll take my chances with sparing quantitative easing and organic growth.
I don't think incentives for having more children are appropriate. The population of the globe has more than doubled in my lifetime and even though some places have open spaces, the best we can do for the planet is to encourage a slower population growth rate.
How about an allowance for those who have resisted adding to the burgeoning population? Think about the loss of fresh water; the global warming rate; the habitat loss.
How about an allowance for those who have resisted adding to the burgeoning population? Think about the loss of fresh water; the global warming rate; the habitat loss.
12
Paragraph 1 suggests a well-intentioned but unrealistic POV. People don't slow reproduction until they first become economically secure.
Paragraph 2 is typical of the self-centered bubble POV that so effectively prevents the American left from having significant influence in politics. I trust it is offered in jest.
Paragraph 2 is typical of the self-centered bubble POV that so effectively prevents the American left from having significant influence in politics. I trust it is offered in jest.
2
Progressive, liberal, taxes, government, social justice, political correctness, climate change, Obamacare, Obama, Clinton, Bernie, Democrats - ETC - these are "fightin words" today. Utter these in casual conversation and you are inviting a contentious discussion in any random group of people gathered for no particular purpose. A similar reaction can ensue when you mention the name, Donald Trump. If you say you are a "moderate" you get a kind of dazed reaction, like this has become a foreign concept. We need to bring back the term "moderate" to the conversation and define it, re-define, and explain to ourselves, looking in mirrors, why moderation is what we need now. We see the results of extremism that has been formulating ever since wages for the middle class began to stagnate. Getting rich, getting elected again and again, getting your's - these "values" have creeped into to our political value system and now dominate. What do regular citizens want? It is not represented by either of the party extremes. Those who voted for Bernie or voted for Trump had at the emotional base of their vote a change for the better, a better life for all, not a better life for a few at the cost of the many. Let's recognize that, start over, shake hands, and get some leaders in government who want the same.
5
To be honest I have more hope of seeing a single payer system instituted under someone like Trump than with any Democrat.
5
Wow, this is great. A list of a few newer ideas that comes with a strong measure of defeatism:
"Progressives will be playing defense for many years to come."
Why's dat?
The problem is that "progressives" (can't use that dirty word "liberals" any more) have been playing defense for about...40 years or so. So, that's the offered stance for the future? Push the REJECT button.
If the ultimate goal of progressives is to move the nation much closer to European style government support programs for everyone, then, yes, call yourself progressives and hide the intention. That is never going to work in America, at least not under the current set of economic/social conditions and not for at least 100 to 200 years (after that, anything goes, who knows?)
I say this, Dems, come up with a set of ideas that you can aggressively support. Take down the idea that "big government" is a force for evil in a nation of more than 340 million. Give up on a lot of little side projects that alienate half of America. Analyze and criticize the Republican, far right propaganda apparatus and find a better way to communicate directly with your supports and potential supporters equal to the right wing machine.
Forget about playing defense, a defeatist idea and in no way a winning strategy. Grab the ball and run.
"Progressives will be playing defense for many years to come."
Why's dat?
The problem is that "progressives" (can't use that dirty word "liberals" any more) have been playing defense for about...40 years or so. So, that's the offered stance for the future? Push the REJECT button.
If the ultimate goal of progressives is to move the nation much closer to European style government support programs for everyone, then, yes, call yourself progressives and hide the intention. That is never going to work in America, at least not under the current set of economic/social conditions and not for at least 100 to 200 years (after that, anything goes, who knows?)
I say this, Dems, come up with a set of ideas that you can aggressively support. Take down the idea that "big government" is a force for evil in a nation of more than 340 million. Give up on a lot of little side projects that alienate half of America. Analyze and criticize the Republican, far right propaganda apparatus and find a better way to communicate directly with your supports and potential supporters equal to the right wing machine.
Forget about playing defense, a defeatist idea and in no way a winning strategy. Grab the ball and run.
4
I understand that the share of profits going to employers (as opposed to employees) has increased. Doesn't an increased EITC subsidize this development, . . . and thereby encourage it? Make employers pay up by increasing the minimum wage.
3
Dems need confident, un-apologetic, rhetorically-gifted messengers (like Bernie Sanders, but with more range) who will do what conservatives have done for years, only the Dems will have facts on their side: corner the market on withering depictions of the opposition. It's high time for Democrats to win this messaging battle.
5
Please stop subsidizing the creation of children, whether by the rich or the poor. What children really need is a recognition that they are baseline the equal responsibility of both genetic parents in all respects. This is a relatively easy thing to accomplish for children now that paternity is as readily established as maternity.
These dysfunctional "child payment' programs subsidize men, in particular, having children with zero responsibility for them. They subsidize women, in particular, having children out of a often-childlike need for relationship rather than because the woman is able to take adult responsibility for the child.
Paid parental leave is similarly bad in its incentives to parents that hurt children, particularly on the "Progressive" model where the poor receive more than higher income taxpayers in the paid leave programs.
Children's welfare is compromised when their parents receive money for making them. It should be the other way around. Parents (and both parents equally, as a baseline) are primarily responsible for all needs of their children.
These dysfunctional "child payment' programs subsidize men, in particular, having children with zero responsibility for them. They subsidize women, in particular, having children out of a often-childlike need for relationship rather than because the woman is able to take adult responsibility for the child.
Paid parental leave is similarly bad in its incentives to parents that hurt children, particularly on the "Progressive" model where the poor receive more than higher income taxpayers in the paid leave programs.
Children's welfare is compromised when their parents receive money for making them. It should be the other way around. Parents (and both parents equally, as a baseline) are primarily responsible for all needs of their children.
10
This perhaps may be an "old argument" but it still holds true: Where is an individual's incentive to take personal responsibility to improve their life when the government provides myriad subsidies?
3
It is an irrelevant argument in a system in which an increasing number of people never have a chance. "Doomed from the womb," as we say in medicine. Those who support that system tend to be among the 25% or so who still benefit from it, or those finding emotional sustenance in its mythology. Some of the latter will change their minds after the axe falls. Many of the former will still cruise along until an even bigger axe falls. Or, we can abandon the mythology.
2
Lived for ten years in Germany. There is no lack of personal responsibility there, but there are also subsidized jobs, healthcare, arts and culture. There are unions, free college tuition, and Kindergeld (money paid to every family that has kids, regardless of income). Germans are hard-working, disciplined, educated, compassionate, and aware. Which is why they have all of these subsidies for everyone.
One reason why this works: no baseline incomes for many of these subsidies. Everyone gets Kindergeld, regardless of whether they are rich or poor. Everyone's kid gets a free education, regardless of income. If you qualify to get into university or technical school, you get a free education, regardless of income. If you don't qualify, there are apprenticeship programs and other types of training available.
We make the mistake of not subsidizing the middle and upper classes as well. If we were to treat everyone the same, offer the same reliable services to everyone, you would see far less screeching from the middle and upper classes. If we all received universal healthcare and higher education, if our tax money was spent on public transportation and high-speed rail, efficient and better infrastructure, etc. instead of bombs, bombs, and more bombs, we would see a much happier and more industrious population. People who are well-cared for and well-educated make much better workers, inventors, and entrepreneurs than people who are underpaid, overworked, and have no safety net.
One reason why this works: no baseline incomes for many of these subsidies. Everyone gets Kindergeld, regardless of whether they are rich or poor. Everyone's kid gets a free education, regardless of income. If you qualify to get into university or technical school, you get a free education, regardless of income. If you don't qualify, there are apprenticeship programs and other types of training available.
We make the mistake of not subsidizing the middle and upper classes as well. If we were to treat everyone the same, offer the same reliable services to everyone, you would see far less screeching from the middle and upper classes. If we all received universal healthcare and higher education, if our tax money was spent on public transportation and high-speed rail, efficient and better infrastructure, etc. instead of bombs, bombs, and more bombs, we would see a much happier and more industrious population. People who are well-cared for and well-educated make much better workers, inventors, and entrepreneurs than people who are underpaid, overworked, and have no safety net.
4
The glaring omission in this piece is Medicare for All, single payer healthcare. It's time.
10
Jared could also have mentioned single payer health care as a plank in the next Democratic platform.
5
So, the Republican Party is painted as the extreme right wing party that is solely accountable to the rich and its policies can be disparaged as evil. Yet, no one, certainly no one likely to comment on this article, believes that the Democratic Party is lurching drastically to the left with questionable polices different from before. The Democratic Party is now becoming the party of free stuff for all, notwithstanding its effect on the budget, or the American taxpayer.
Maybe the reason for the extraordinary partisan divide now occurring in America is that the two parties are diverging rapidly away from one another, like two galaxies in the universe. We are deviating from the path we have been on as a nation since the end of the Civil War: economic stability and full employment for all; moderate growth in the Federal government to accomplish consensus national goals; strong military & defense of our allies; prudent spending of taxpayer monies; and social programs to enhance individual freedom.
This national consensus is dying rapidly in a sea of acrimony and disparagement of the motives of those who disagree with us. It is time to take stock of our respective positions and seek some political compromises with each other before it is too late.
Maybe the reason for the extraordinary partisan divide now occurring in America is that the two parties are diverging rapidly away from one another, like two galaxies in the universe. We are deviating from the path we have been on as a nation since the end of the Civil War: economic stability and full employment for all; moderate growth in the Federal government to accomplish consensus national goals; strong military & defense of our allies; prudent spending of taxpayer monies; and social programs to enhance individual freedom.
This national consensus is dying rapidly in a sea of acrimony and disparagement of the motives of those who disagree with us. It is time to take stock of our respective positions and seek some political compromises with each other before it is too late.
8
A monthly stipend of a minimum $250.00 per child? Sounds like ADC. Haven't we already tried that with not too many positive results?
4
Correction: make that AFDC.
Policy is good. But the Democrats' policy remains limited by what donors can stomach. Successful policy needs to be rooted in both consistent principles and evidence. The Democrats adhere to neither, instead seeking the most generous possibilities that their corporate benefactors can bear but no more. That's how we get janky knock-offs of decent policy ideas, e.g., the ACA, rather than ones that will remain popular long-term.
A monthly child allowance is great, so long as it goes to ALL children and not just all children up to x% of the federal poverty level. Invest in kids or don't; if they are worth it, then it must be universal to protect it from the same fate as the ACA.
A monthly child allowance is great, so long as it goes to ALL children and not just all children up to x% of the federal poverty level. Invest in kids or don't; if they are worth it, then it must be universal to protect it from the same fate as the ACA.
3
"what’s really needed is a permanent, scaled-up version of a subsidized jobs program"
A poor description: "subsidized jobs program". What's really needed is to get on with the important jobs so far understaffed and undervalued and underpaid: environmental protection, infrastructure development, affordable housing, rehabilitation, child & elder care, education, .... millions of people-oriented jobs that don't fit into the profit-above-all-else bottom-line driven private sector business model.
The corporate Congress of "less taxation, less regulation, less benefits, less government" isn't headed this way. The Dems could look into the future with government by & for the people, not big business and high finance.
A poor description: "subsidized jobs program". What's really needed is to get on with the important jobs so far understaffed and undervalued and underpaid: environmental protection, infrastructure development, affordable housing, rehabilitation, child & elder care, education, .... millions of people-oriented jobs that don't fit into the profit-above-all-else bottom-line driven private sector business model.
The corporate Congress of "less taxation, less regulation, less benefits, less government" isn't headed this way. The Dems could look into the future with government by & for the people, not big business and high finance.
4
So "centrist Democrats" are finally awakening to Sanders' message? About time they grasp that identity politics means nothing, when the well-being of all "identities" are at risk from the alt-right and hard right that dominate Republican discourse ... and at risk from the Democrats' failure to see what's before their eyes.
How many people live in places where there may never be any growing or at least sustained opportunities to earn a decent livelihood for a family? What policies would improve their and their children's lives?
5
There is no societal benefit in people having more than two children. All proposal such as the child allowance must be seen as having ROI or not. An allowance for 1-2 children-- great-- we need future people. An allowance for ANY child thereafter-- ridiculous. There are exceptions of course (wealthy mormans for example) but most people with children beyond two are simply not good parents-- otherwise they would see that > than two is not realistic. A too-large family makes that family take up more than their fair share of limited resources. Most of the people with an overflowing shoe of kids are-- simply put-- not good emotional or genetic role models.
10
Dems should consider how Trump, the worst presidential candidate of all time, could have possibly won the election. It was because he stumbled upon the most important issues to many Americans. I call them the big six: 1) good jobs, 2) growth economy, 3) reduced taxes and regulation, 4) illegal immigration, 5) destroy global terrorism, and 6) better trade and international deals (NATO, Paris, etc). If the Dems focused on these issues versus more government handouts, more regulations, more wealth transfers, social justice, identity politics, etc, they would have a chance in upcoming elections.
2
If you take out #3 and substitute universal healthcare and education for all and fair $15/hr wages for the entry level worker, and ending citizens united, I would be with you except, forever, NEVER Trump.
2
@mr. Reason in az
If democrats did these things, they would be republicans & they would have no reason to exist. Nobody would ever have a reason to vote for them.
I would like to see Dems focus on job creation & health insurance/healthcare reform.
If democrats did these things, they would be republicans & they would have no reason to exist. Nobody would ever have a reason to vote for them.
I would like to see Dems focus on job creation & health insurance/healthcare reform.
1
Trump won because he exploited the hate, resentment, fear, and ignorance in a small, but strategically located voting block.
I would suggest quickly adding single payer to your list and not waiting until late 2018 to begin promoting the agenda. The Democrats should be shouting it from the rooftops everywhere, NOW! Running candidates who can articulate this program, succinctly and repeatedly, in every race in 2018 - even where they have no chance - will at least "prime the pump" (to coin a phrase) for 2020.
4
Although the proposals outlined are admirable and most likely effective, they will fail to generate support among disaffected voters, particularly Trump supporters. Trump may be a lying con man, but his message is aspirational: America can provide good jobs that will bring back comfortable living standards and jope for our children's futrure. The Democrats cannot gainmvotes by promising a better minimum wage and government support programs. As effective as these ideas may be, they are also self limiting. They assist with survival, whereas Trump sees a better America. Tomsucceed at the polls Democrats must also offer a future which is better than mere survival.
3
It's good to want to do something that helps the poor, especially poor children, but given how much each of us spends on things like updating our cell phones or buying cars or the countless other items that our consumers culture produces, why can't individual make use of local charities and donate $250 a month to feed poor children? Donate $100 a month or $50 a month to show you really care about this issue. When the federal government is responsible for "good act" two things happen; we distance ourselves from the virtue of giving and the government introduces a high level of inefficiency that reduces the benefit to the recipients. Democrats need to promote tax breaks for charitable giving not new programs.
4
Oh, more piecemeal programs, all well-intended, of course, and some even quite useful. So why am I yawning and having visions of Michael "it's not about ideology, but competence" Dukakis? The current majority might currently be a legislative failure (don't think about Gorsuch!) but that harsh hard-right ideology has been a winner.
And that is what the Democrats so obviously lack: a coherent compelling ideology. Or, for those allergic to the term ideology, a coherent compelling Policy. Programs are instituted to implement policy; programs and policy are not the same thing. Hope, Change, Fairness, Togetherness are nice slogans but are not Policy.
Fortunately, the Democratic Party already has a concise, compelling statement at hand, although it has forgotten it as climbed on the economic meritocracy, dare I say neoliberal, bandwagon. It is FDR's 1944 presentation of an Economic Bill of Rights as the policy prescription Democrats must fight for. It's probably the most left-wing statement ever made by a major party leader in America, and it's one that can unite the party and actually lead it to victory and long-term gains in passing programs that actually improve the lives of every citizen.
FDR's mug should be on every missive from the DNC and the local precinct chair. Newt Gingrich and Wall Street know FDR as The Enemy they've been trying to slay for 60 odd years. Dems should be rallying around his vision.
And that is what the Democrats so obviously lack: a coherent compelling ideology. Or, for those allergic to the term ideology, a coherent compelling Policy. Programs are instituted to implement policy; programs and policy are not the same thing. Hope, Change, Fairness, Togetherness are nice slogans but are not Policy.
Fortunately, the Democratic Party already has a concise, compelling statement at hand, although it has forgotten it as climbed on the economic meritocracy, dare I say neoliberal, bandwagon. It is FDR's 1944 presentation of an Economic Bill of Rights as the policy prescription Democrats must fight for. It's probably the most left-wing statement ever made by a major party leader in America, and it's one that can unite the party and actually lead it to victory and long-term gains in passing programs that actually improve the lives of every citizen.
FDR's mug should be on every missive from the DNC and the local precinct chair. Newt Gingrich and Wall Street know FDR as The Enemy they've been trying to slay for 60 odd years. Dems should be rallying around his vision.
5
I would agree that more and better jobs are the most reliable way to increase the incomes of the working people of our country. This ideal does not take into consideration that the biggest companies have for years been outsourcing and/or using robotics to reduce their employment of Americans, who, until Reagan began beating up unions, had good employment; jobs, pay, benefits, pensions. All these went down the drain with the move to globalize production. Now, we seem to be in a stuck place - too many people, not enough good jobs, innovation and education not keeping pace with people's needs. This mimics the problems of the Great Depression, when Roosevelt's programs saved the day. Job creation to clean up the messes left by extinct production facilities, including streams, rivers and water systems, and then infrastructure. If the payment is by government, fine - people need work and the government exists to help people as well as protect them. If people have no money, they have none to spend on consumer goods, which is the current engine of our economy.
Many jobs are notable for their anonymity, but collectively, they are necessary to our lives; i.e., health care aides and technicians, garbage collectors, daycare providers, fast food servers. They deserve decent pay for their necessary work, and an increase in the minimum wage is necessary.
Many jobs are notable for their anonymity, but collectively, they are necessary to our lives; i.e., health care aides and technicians, garbage collectors, daycare providers, fast food servers. They deserve decent pay for their necessary work, and an increase in the minimum wage is necessary.
The suggested programs may all do good for many, but they are still just bells and whistles. To go bold, Democrats should establish a sensible tax policy which treated all income the same, eliminated all tax deduction and credits, and established tax brackets based on the value of money. The result would be an enormous redistribution of wealth to reduce (not eliminate) income inequality; and it would be systemic, not piecemeal, thus reducing the need for many patchwork programs. Programs like the ones mentioned would be even more effective because they could be more carefully targeted to remaining areas of disadvantage.
1
The thing is, "we're not Trump" should actually work. Almost all of Trump's key proposals are unpopular and he's already under a cloud of scandal. I just don't think we're a democracy anymore, and the Republicans have found a way to govern as the majority with the support of less than half the country.
1
To win future elections, particularly congressional ones, the Democratic Party must stick to issues of concern to most people. It should reduce its attention to identity politics and social issues. Most independent, non-political, and centrist voters I know look down on Democrats for this exact reason. These are the people we need most.
9
The $250 a month child allowance is a terrible idea if it is a direct cash payout. It subsidizes over population and won't incentivize anyone to do better. If this allowance went into childcare programs, education, and nutrition it might help. Which is what we already have. Which is what the administration wants to cut. Fix these programs so they work.
This payout idea doesn't seem to be well thought out. If you have parents who need jobs train them to help kids. A government run day care centered staffed by parents trained in that specialty would be a much better goal for a community. A cafeteria that serves healthy food in impoverished areas that could be run by locals would get more out of the funding. Pay people to clean up the neighborhood. A job corps that involves locals and broke college students would link communities.
We need to think outside the box not just throw money into it. We need the social welfare version of the Silicon Valley thinkers to tool over these problems.
This payout idea doesn't seem to be well thought out. If you have parents who need jobs train them to help kids. A government run day care centered staffed by parents trained in that specialty would be a much better goal for a community. A cafeteria that serves healthy food in impoverished areas that could be run by locals would get more out of the funding. Pay people to clean up the neighborhood. A job corps that involves locals and broke college students would link communities.
We need to think outside the box not just throw money into it. We need the social welfare version of the Silicon Valley thinkers to tool over these problems.
6
The American dream is founded on equal opportunity. I think the progressive Democrats need a strategic theme - both a policy foundation and a message melody. That theme is Equal Economic Opportunity.
Every policy from health care to tax reform to education can be run through that prism: Inheritance taxes, since the dead don't complain and don't vote, should be structured to enhance equal opportunity, not to create a 21st century aristocracy; education is critical to a sustainable middle class; income is income and equitably taxable; for people to have equal economic opportunity they must not be bankrupted by unaffordable health care. Wealth can be celebrated and emulated in a system where hard work and persistence are fairly rewarded. The idea is not to take from the rich and give to the undeserving - which is the fear the Republicans prey on - but to give the hardworking a fighting chance to succeed in a clean and safe country.
Every policy from health care to tax reform to education can be run through that prism: Inheritance taxes, since the dead don't complain and don't vote, should be structured to enhance equal opportunity, not to create a 21st century aristocracy; education is critical to a sustainable middle class; income is income and equitably taxable; for people to have equal economic opportunity they must not be bankrupted by unaffordable health care. Wealth can be celebrated and emulated in a system where hard work and persistence are fairly rewarded. The idea is not to take from the rich and give to the undeserving - which is the fear the Republicans prey on - but to give the hardworking a fighting chance to succeed in a clean and safe country.
1
Dr. Bernstein just can't change his stripes. He's an incrementalist, half stepping, establishment "Dem". This is proven by his previous support for a back door cut in Social Security benefits through using a chained CPI to calculate cost of living adjustments.
With allies like Dr. Bernstein, the working class and real Democrats don't need enemies. Please just step aside and take your half baked, half stepping, incrementalist, watered down, thin as gruel, protect the establishment at all costs programs with you. We're moving forward more boldly than you and your wealthy benefactors care to imagine. Either follow or get out of the way because we're going to roll right over you.
With allies like Dr. Bernstein, the working class and real Democrats don't need enemies. Please just step aside and take your half baked, half stepping, incrementalist, watered down, thin as gruel, protect the establishment at all costs programs with you. We're moving forward more boldly than you and your wealthy benefactors care to imagine. Either follow or get out of the way because we're going to roll right over you.
5
You have to assemble an enduring majority coalition. The trick is to maintain a balance between incrementalism, so as to not scare the majority, and bold new ideas, so as to value you and move forward. This requires, more than anything else, salesmanship. This country is about selling stuff, like it or not; that's been so since the Dutch arrived. FDR was very good at this; so was Reagan. Successful union leaders and community organizers are, too. Wonks, nerds, effete intellectuals, and self-righteous identity types don't do so well. Neither do arrogant firebrands, my friend. They all overestimate the number of people like themselves and thereby lose in the country that we have.
It all depends on what the definition of "Democratic" is. If it is helping average people get ahead, as it used to be, then we don't need the labels of leftist, centrist, liberal, progressive and whatever else.
5
This approach may appeal to the liberal base but it won't bring back the working class that is increasingly holding their nose and defecting to the Republican party. Turning this country around is a long haul project and a tough task. Spending money is not a pausible solution without a plan to increase the size of the pie to be shared . There are issues related to working class values that have never been addressed. Many liberals seem to ignore unresolved value conflicts and assume the working class routinely votes against their own self interests, a notion that is both naive and insulting.
4
Please explain in which way shape or form they have voted for their interests.
1
If this is actually the emerging Democratic Agenda, they are gone. Perhaps deliver on what Trump actually got elected promising affordable healthcare for all; increased minimum wage; rebuilt social and physical infrastructure is the smartest course to follow? Trump may be a buffoon but his promises to working America had an element of sense that Trump long ago forgot.
137
Amen! I hate the direction of our current administration but proposing something equally dumb in the opposite direction is no solution.
Did the article not mention infrastructure and increased minimum wage?
trump was against raising minimum wage and thought it was too high as it is, at least that is what he said while campaigning.
We should not waste money on those who can never succeed, spend it on those who, with a modicum of assistance, can turn the corner and improve their standard of living; it is called spending ones money wisely!
1
If this is the Dem platform, you will go down in flames! Most of the liberals in this comment section don't even agree with the child allowance. The GOP would make mincemeat out of you! When the world is overwhelmed by over-population, you want to encourage people to have more children? And with Dem open door immigration you think any social programs are sustainable?
Health care must be at the top of the list. Affordable and accessible health care is a "kitchen table" issue affecting EVERY American, red, blue or purple. Every American voter is looking at the GOP House bill in fear, even GOP voters, whether they are ready to admit it or not. The time is now for single-payer, Medicare for all. Even GOP voters ordinarily opposed to "socialism" don't want family members losing everything and having to come live with them. The GOP is offering their demise with their health care proposals. For god's sake, seize the opportunity and hammer it home!
I could make other suggestions, but this one is so pertinent, I don't want to water it down. The only other thing I can say is, get out of your beltway bubble. That was the problem with the last election. Go see the real United States......red, blue, city, country, all of it. Read the letters to the editor, the comment sections in newspapers large and small. If the Dem establishment is so clueless as this article, they need to be gone. They will blow 2018 at a time when we can't afford them to lose.
Health care must be at the top of the list. Affordable and accessible health care is a "kitchen table" issue affecting EVERY American, red, blue or purple. Every American voter is looking at the GOP House bill in fear, even GOP voters, whether they are ready to admit it or not. The time is now for single-payer, Medicare for all. Even GOP voters ordinarily opposed to "socialism" don't want family members losing everything and having to come live with them. The GOP is offering their demise with their health care proposals. For god's sake, seize the opportunity and hammer it home!
I could make other suggestions, but this one is so pertinent, I don't want to water it down. The only other thing I can say is, get out of your beltway bubble. That was the problem with the last election. Go see the real United States......red, blue, city, country, all of it. Read the letters to the editor, the comment sections in newspapers large and small. If the Dem establishment is so clueless as this article, they need to be gone. They will blow 2018 at a time when we can't afford them to lose.
284
A single issue is not a platform. No disagreement on single payer but a platform advances the agenda on multiple fronts. $250 a month is not likely to result in overpopulation but will put money where its needed now and where it is needed most, the welfare of our children. If it doesn't get traction at least it focuses the debate on issues faced by people living, as you say, in the real United States. Ditto for infrastructure spending, living wages and college tuition financial reform. Hammer 'em all.
3
Your argument is excellent. I hope "progressive liberal" democrats pay attention to it.
The child allowance is not a pass or entreaty to bear more children. At least, it doesn't have to be. The child allowance, with moving children off the poverty line, can be handled in such a way that it does not just turn over cash to parents. But a child could get free dental care, or after school tutoring, or lunch at school, or eye exams. Passing off cash is never a good idea, but easing economic burden is.
Stick to the issues of education, health care, and economic justice (economic justice does not include incentives to bring children into the world that cannot be afforded).
Oh, and in the mean time, look for an effective leader - one that is fresh.
Oh, and in the mean time, look for an effective leader - one that is fresh.
2
The balance is always between fiscal responsibility and government intervention. Right now there appears to be no middle ground, and until there is there will always be partisan infighting among bothe parties.
The solution could be establishing an Independent Party as a party with equal standing as Democrats and Republicans.
But whenever the government becomes too big, the economy suffers great harm.
The solution could be establishing an Independent Party as a party with equal standing as Democrats and Republicans.
But whenever the government becomes too big, the economy suffers great harm.
1
Unbelievable! No mention of health care?! Are you kidding me? Everybody knows that the problem is out-of-control costs due to privatization and the epic greed of the pharmaceutical companies. Health care must be regulated in the public interest and that would be most quickly and efficiently accomplished by Medicare-for-all, the so-called "single payer" option.
198
Unfortunately, many Dems are "supported" by Health Care lobbyists, and seem to reject all the most effective efforts at reducing costs of health care. (i.e., Single Payer)
2
It would be wonderful if enough Americans agreed to any of these generous plans to invest a trillion or so tax dollars to insure the health and welfare of disadvantaged citizens, and to feed and educate their children.
Big pause here.
The author may be convinced that Democrats are coming to recognize the wisdom of Bernie Sanders's proposals. But I'm not. In an interview with the NY Daily News, Bernie proved he really had no idea how his daring projects (break up the banks!) would be implemented, nor who had the authority to carry out these reforms.
But that's a minor problem.
The major problem? Lots of Americans don't want to be more European ... and Democrats must communicate with these voters.
The key ... figure out how to address patriotic masculinity (shared by men and women).
Want to be more French? No! Way too girly. Wanna be more Swedish? No! Girly. Want to live in a nation that provides childcare, food, and education to most of its children? Girly. (Paul Ryan declared that free school lunches would harm the "souls" of the hungry kids who received public charity. Why aren't these kids pulling themselves up by their bootstraps?) Want to submit to the New World Order dictated by Europe? Yucky girly.
Gun rights? Manly. Physical independence from government? Manly. A country largely freed of its government? Manly.
This is a vast, messy country, often held together by loud patriotic messages and fight songs. Democrats must learn to deal with that.
Big pause here.
The author may be convinced that Democrats are coming to recognize the wisdom of Bernie Sanders's proposals. But I'm not. In an interview with the NY Daily News, Bernie proved he really had no idea how his daring projects (break up the banks!) would be implemented, nor who had the authority to carry out these reforms.
But that's a minor problem.
The major problem? Lots of Americans don't want to be more European ... and Democrats must communicate with these voters.
The key ... figure out how to address patriotic masculinity (shared by men and women).
Want to be more French? No! Way too girly. Wanna be more Swedish? No! Girly. Want to live in a nation that provides childcare, food, and education to most of its children? Girly. (Paul Ryan declared that free school lunches would harm the "souls" of the hungry kids who received public charity. Why aren't these kids pulling themselves up by their bootstraps?) Want to submit to the New World Order dictated by Europe? Yucky girly.
Gun rights? Manly. Physical independence from government? Manly. A country largely freed of its government? Manly.
This is a vast, messy country, often held together by loud patriotic messages and fight songs. Democrats must learn to deal with that.
3
This is clearly not the thinking of the majority voter, however.
Bold is single payer healthcare. Bold is a national policy of training and education to meet the challenge of a global economy. Bold is an educational system that supports both college and vocational training. Bold is universal service either in a civilian or military capacity. Bold is public/private partnerships as policy to foster and grow both technologies and business enterprises that enable all of our citizens to participate in the 21st century economy. Bold is a fair income tax structure for all Americans not just for those at the top. And, fundamentally, bold is relearning that Americans can conquer any challenge if we shape an environment that encourages their ideas, labor and innovation and provides the dignity that follows.
8
As a TAX paying, retired, senior citizen, Democrat, I say nope to any allowances to ANYONE; ain't gonna happen.
After working, struggling for 45 years to the point of near life fatigue before I could retire, that took 5 years to recover from, I am not about to pay taxes so that some one who has more kids than they can afford will be able to enter the middle class.
What an idea to hand Trump four more years to suck the life blood out of democracy.
As a Democrat, I believe work at a fair wage of $15/hour entry level, should be squarely at the forefront of our platform as well as universal healthcare for every citizen, but we must emphasize WORK and EDUCATION as the primary methods of reducing poverty.
And yes, I believe the allowances, aka known as subsidies to big businesses is also wrong.
After working, struggling for 45 years to the point of near life fatigue before I could retire, that took 5 years to recover from, I am not about to pay taxes so that some one who has more kids than they can afford will be able to enter the middle class.
What an idea to hand Trump four more years to suck the life blood out of democracy.
As a Democrat, I believe work at a fair wage of $15/hour entry level, should be squarely at the forefront of our platform as well as universal healthcare for every citizen, but we must emphasize WORK and EDUCATION as the primary methods of reducing poverty.
And yes, I believe the allowances, aka known as subsidies to big businesses is also wrong.
248
People will spend that money to stimulate economic growth, leading to job creation. Children become productive adults, whose work helps finance your retirement and mine. I don't want to see future generations suffer the way ours did. Let's learn from our experiences.
@JRS...Cudos, sir. I am also old and worry for the youth upcoming and for the 50 year-olds that have little chance for medical security. They say nothing is free. But the businesses of this country are receiving virtually free labor. Because there are no unions. In 1981 Reagan killed the Unions. It's been a free ride for CEO's ever since. The division of wealth can be cured with a higher wage and a return to President Eisenhower's tax brackets. But how is it possible to get these ideas through a Republican Congress. We can yell all we want, but we won't get it. Not until "Citizens United" is over-turned. Only one thing to do: get out the Democratic vote. PERIOD!!!!!!BUT,BUT there's 80,000 democratic voters in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan....Oh, my they hurt so bad that they listen to just about anyone...
1
Amen. It is merely continuing the mistakes of the past to cherry pick new handouts for voters that you want, and to cherry pick new taxes to get revenge over those you hate. That is not a bold progressive agenda. VAT and single health system are bold, and necessary. Environmental policy, rightly led from the top down, is bold. Ending subsidies to big food and big oil, are bold. Ending predatory lending AND unrealistic demand for consumer debt--that's bold. If Democrats are going to ride to wave of anti-GOP feeling but replicate small-minded tactics, the failure to win elections will continue.
I continue to ask myself why the Democratic Party allowed itself to lose so many congressional seats both nationally and at the state level. Looking further back, I feel that the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), which got Bill Clinton elected, veered away from the party's traditional pro-labor stance, taking the party along the disastrous Republican-Light detour.
But with the damage done, now is an excellent time for citizens--Democrats or Independents--truly inform ourselves as to what we want a future government to be.
But with the damage done, now is an excellent time for citizens--Democrats or Independents--truly inform ourselves as to what we want a future government to be.
4
Just get us out of war and go to a single payer healthcare system. Those two moves will provide everything that we need. Boom! Done!
176
Since when is the Dem Party the party of accountants? How about some good old bathroom and identity politics so I can believe this is the Dem party we are talking about.
Done, after you (somehow) remove about 320 Republican senators and Congressman from Washington.
How do we do it?
How do we do it?
Here's the frustrating, indeed maddening, thing about Mr. Bernstein's column: the Democrats had the opportunity to implement most if not all of what he proposes in 2009-10, when they had majorities in both houses of Congress, and squandered the opportunity. Think about it: when will the Democrats have 60 Senate seats again? When will the Democrats have 257 House seats again? They had both of these in 2009-10 and willfully passed on a bold agenda for national economic revitalization because the centrists within the party, as embodied by President Obama and by both Clintons, have destroyed what for decades was the animating spirit of the party, as embodied by the FDR and LBJ presidencies, to lift up the less fortunate.
Those who still believe in this animating spirit must reclaim the party's soul. The centrists should either get with the program or join the Republican Party. I don't care how this sounds; I've reached my breaking point with the Democratic Party leadership and am boiling mad at what the Democratic Party, over time, has done to itself and by extension to the country as a whole.
Those who still believe in this animating spirit must reclaim the party's soul. The centrists should either get with the program or join the Republican Party. I don't care how this sounds; I've reached my breaking point with the Democratic Party leadership and am boiling mad at what the Democratic Party, over time, has done to itself and by extension to the country as a whole.
5
These are well-meaning but terrible ideas. They are essentially a return to the welfare state. An agenda as discredited as the more heartless, tax cuts for the rich. The focus needs to be on job creation and community investment. We need to encourage businesses and educated, successful people to invest in distressed communities. We need to focus on programs that bring the country together and create a roadmap for the future.
Get your head out of the 60s and 70s. We need NEW ideas!!!!!
Get your head out of the 60s and 70s. We need NEW ideas!!!!!
3
The Democratic platform should be to restore dignity, honesty, and governance to the government. Once we get those things back, and re-staff the EPA, FEMA, and other agencies and departments, we can get back to work.
3
Since rich folks prefer not to be taxed and the Wall Street wing is well represented in the Clintonian democrat...Who will provide the money for a universal stipend? Nice spin. Lets face it democrats main concern is demographic and same sex bathrooms. Not really a compelling economic message off Wall street.
4
Where's the middle class? (or what's left of it). The only class that can give the economy legs for everyone, but is pressed six feet under and counting.
9
Is there an emerging democratic agenda? I propose that what "emerged" when Trump was sworn into office became the Democratic agenda: To rid this country of the hate-filled policies of an alt-right influenced GOP agenda. Did the GOP have an agenda during Obama's presidency other than to obstruct and fight tooth-and-nail against his health care law? I submit that along with the question of colluding with Russia to win the election, Trump has clearly shown the world what drives him and his policies: Twitter.
49
The GOP agenda is essentially that for the rich and powerful to crush the poor and weak is a virtue.
Ralph: Twitter AND MONEY.
I am very concerned by the author's universal child allowance. For a couple reasons.
First, it discriminates against couples who, for a variety of reasons, don't care to have children.
Second, it incentivizes having children in a country and on a planet which are already severely over-crowded.
A bold idea would be to provide economic incentives to not have children.
Let's take that $250 a month and apply it to seniors and general healthcare.
First, it discriminates against couples who, for a variety of reasons, don't care to have children.
Second, it incentivizes having children in a country and on a planet which are already severely over-crowded.
A bold idea would be to provide economic incentives to not have children.
Let's take that $250 a month and apply it to seniors and general healthcare.
13
While I applaud working on the Democrat agenda, please dump the theory that all progress comes from Progressives.
I would've voted for Bernie had he been the candidate, but he did too little, too late to help Democrats last year.
As an old, white, woman, he's a continuation of old white guy politics. Enough! Listen to the talented youngsters in their fifties and below.
I would've voted for Bernie had he been the candidate, but he did too little, too late to help Democrats last year.
As an old, white, woman, he's a continuation of old white guy politics. Enough! Listen to the talented youngsters in their fifties and below.
3
Democrats need to get behind single payer Medicare for All! They need to educate Amercians who are stuck in the "socialize medicine" mindset that the Republican Party and special interests have been feeding the masses for years.
8
Single payer was considered in depth by Democrats before they passed Obamacare. It was discarded because it did not promote the desires of special interest Democrats who make large campaign contributions. Nothing there has changed. If Democrats now promote a new medical plan they prove Republicans right that the Democrat's Obamacare law is a disaster.
1
If you didn't learn in '16 that putting candidates with strong ties to big biz is disasterous, this comment is posted as a reminder. Biden = Trump 2020 Victory.
2
Whatever the Democrats decide on, they must find the words to sell it. The gop have mastered the art of propaganda and their sales pitch doesn't include wonkish analysis like this.
5
What about education? What about a better school system and lifetime learning for job improvement, using computer-aided-learning?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is education not mentioned? Obama's education policies, with all the funding and all the technology was a failure. This, no doubt, contributed to Hillary Clinton's election loss. Our brilliant President Obama was clueless on how to fix our failing schools and on how to cope with rising college debt.
I suggest that the Democrats get their act together for education, above all else, to stimulate job creation and retention, to keep hope alive. We have the technology, the "teach-nology" if you will, but we are not developing it, so that all Americans benefit, with more knowledge and wisdom for all.
I say, "reading and writing and rithmetic", taught to the tune of computers.
========================================================
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is education not mentioned? Obama's education policies, with all the funding and all the technology was a failure. This, no doubt, contributed to Hillary Clinton's election loss. Our brilliant President Obama was clueless on how to fix our failing schools and on how to cope with rising college debt.
I suggest that the Democrats get their act together for education, above all else, to stimulate job creation and retention, to keep hope alive. We have the technology, the "teach-nology" if you will, but we are not developing it, so that all Americans benefit, with more knowledge and wisdom for all.
I say, "reading and writing and rithmetic", taught to the tune of computers.
========================================================
64
Schools are failing because families are failing.
Nobody wants to mention the radical shift of the last 50 years -- dog eat dog economics requiring mass use of day care.
When babies receive institutional care at the Nth degree (say, Romanian Orphanages) we know it is bad for them. At a more moderate degree of use, it is still not good. The brain of a human grows exponentially in early life. It is very different being one on one with your mother, carried and held and breastfed, talked to and sung to, loved-- rather than sitting in a car seat with a propped bottle 7/8 of the time. Babies require an adult-rich download that does not happen in day care.
Failing schools go back to kids coming in who had had all the wrong experiences to set them up to learn.
Nobody wants to mention the radical shift of the last 50 years -- dog eat dog economics requiring mass use of day care.
When babies receive institutional care at the Nth degree (say, Romanian Orphanages) we know it is bad for them. At a more moderate degree of use, it is still not good. The brain of a human grows exponentially in early life. It is very different being one on one with your mother, carried and held and breastfed, talked to and sung to, loved-- rather than sitting in a car seat with a propped bottle 7/8 of the time. Babies require an adult-rich download that does not happen in day care.
Failing schools go back to kids coming in who had had all the wrong experiences to set them up to learn.
1
To be honest, you really aren't saying anything concrete here. Are you talking computers in every classroom? Or more money for teachers? Or some new way to measure progress in schools?
Everyone wants education to be improved, but I don't see what your plan is.
Everyone wants education to be improved, but I don't see what your plan is.
1
@DRS: But we already DO pay for schools. We pay property taxes specifically for schools; and as though that weren't enough, a portion of our Federal and State taxes also go to fund schools. And I'm not done: many people specifically pay more than they should for homes in order to be zoned to the right schools; and others spend exorbitant amounts of money to send their children to private school.
.
We aren't asking for "free" schools. We're asking for our money's worth. It's what we already paid for.
.
We aren't asking for "free" schools. We're asking for our money's worth. It's what we already paid for.
1
Why is the black hand at the bottom? And why is it that it is almost ever thus in the white media? It really helps explain white pandering to the racism of the odious Charles Murray and his ilk
1
Where is an effective communication plan from the Dem's? The press is not doing the country any favors with the daily focus being everything but the Dem's plans or any of these progressive ideas that would help the people. This is why we always come from behind and are on our heels. The right's propaganda machine is well developed and designed to push away any reality. We need to turn this around.
4
Child subsidies could be very useful; however they must be tailored
(if possible) to not encourage larger families for poor people. That would not
be overall helpful for them.
(if possible) to not encourage larger families for poor people. That would not
be overall helpful for them.
4
I agree that there should be an across the board, child subsidy. Today's parents are over whelmed by the task and cost of parenting and get little to no support from society. If the daily grind does not do parents in, than the cost of college certainly will. Sadly, after so much irrational gushing over Barack Obama there is no one to take the baton from him and lead. Policies do not fight for themselves, it takes compelling, courageous leadership.
3
Change the leadership of the Democratic Party! They have, by going right with Wall Street as their bankrollers, bankrupted the middle class!
5
Here are some things that I would like to see the Democrats address:
1. Yesterday's NYT ran an article about telemarketers latest ploy: direct to voicemail robocalls that they claim are not covered by existing regulations, because if your phone doesn't ring, it's not really a telephone call. The Republican National Committee supports this: according to the RNC, freedom of speech means that telemarketers have the right to fill your voice mailbox with unwanted solicitations for everything from Viagra to Orlando vacation scams. This issue alone could give the Democrats control of the House and Senate.
2. Granny sent you an email? Better not click on that attachment. Maybe it's just a photo of her cat -- or maybe it's the latest ransomware virus, and you are one click away from being locked out of your PC until you pay $300 to an anonymous group of criminals. There has to be a better way to deal with this besides relying upon everyone and their grandmother being on a high state of alert every time they open their email accounts.
3. Universal high speed internet access. There's an infrastructure project for you.
4. Net neutrality. Individuals and small businesses should not see their internet connection speeds drop because internet providers are giving preferential treatment to large companies.
1. Yesterday's NYT ran an article about telemarketers latest ploy: direct to voicemail robocalls that they claim are not covered by existing regulations, because if your phone doesn't ring, it's not really a telephone call. The Republican National Committee supports this: according to the RNC, freedom of speech means that telemarketers have the right to fill your voice mailbox with unwanted solicitations for everything from Viagra to Orlando vacation scams. This issue alone could give the Democrats control of the House and Senate.
2. Granny sent you an email? Better not click on that attachment. Maybe it's just a photo of her cat -- or maybe it's the latest ransomware virus, and you are one click away from being locked out of your PC until you pay $300 to an anonymous group of criminals. There has to be a better way to deal with this besides relying upon everyone and their grandmother being on a high state of alert every time they open their email accounts.
3. Universal high speed internet access. There's an infrastructure project for you.
4. Net neutrality. Individuals and small businesses should not see their internet connection speeds drop because internet providers are giving preferential treatment to large companies.
4
Having children is a choice. Any payments per child should end at 1 or 2 (1, if the larger population issue is considered). Such a policy would not be limiting people's choices and would not reward having children to increase family income, as past welfare systems did with poor results.
3
Red states: Take notice. The GOP wants to eliminate many government related jobs, which means you lose jobs in many states in America, not just Washington. Also, they want to make abortion even more difficult and they want to eliminate women's healthcare, contraception etc. So now they want you to have more children! BUT they don't want any social programs to help feed, educate or care for those children. And without adequate healthcare, the women having them may actually have less healthy children on top of it all.
See the irony? Wake up and realize that the only reason Obama couldn't give you a better version of Obamacare was the GOP wouldn't allow the public option and the whole thing became too complicated for complete success. How funny that the Dems don't remind folks of that!
NYT: Help people remember why things are the way they are and hold those accountable who got us here but reporting and reminding everyone as to why. Thanks.
See the irony? Wake up and realize that the only reason Obama couldn't give you a better version of Obamacare was the GOP wouldn't allow the public option and the whole thing became too complicated for complete success. How funny that the Dems don't remind folks of that!
NYT: Help people remember why things are the way they are and hold those accountable who got us here but reporting and reminding everyone as to why. Thanks.
4
Conservative Democratic Party leaders serve Wall Street the same way all Republican Party leaders do. Our advantage is that not every Democrat is corrupt; many like Rep. Joe Kennedy III are progressive and uncorrupted. The Democratic Party knows exactly what to do to win -- adopt Sen. Sanders' progressive Democratic Party agenda, force out the old corporate Democrats who balk and support the new generation of leadership.
Of course, those old corporate Democrats will go about as quietly as old corrupted Republicans. They will want to take the whole country down with them to pad their pockets with a few more Wall Street dollars in their twilight years.
Of course, those old corporate Democrats will go about as quietly as old corrupted Republicans. They will want to take the whole country down with them to pad their pockets with a few more Wall Street dollars in their twilight years.
3
You won't be playing defense if you actually go bold with your messaging, given the majority of the American people support progressive policies.
Part of the reason progressives have done so poorly in elections is their presentation of ideas- this apologetic, half a loaf approach. "Gee, do you think it might be okay if we raise the minimum wage a little bit? I mean, if you think it's okay, totally okay if you don't, you know." Then they get trampled by the GOP.
The policies of the Republican party are indefensible and evil, but give them credit, they are unabashed about it. Unapologetic. They know how to sell their poison.
We have to stop framing economics through the lens of tax cuts. That's what the GOP wants and you will never beat them at their own game. What we need to talk about are WAGES - and how the average American hasn't had a decent raise in decades.
Talk about finally creating a universal, single-payer healthcare program. Most Americans want that. Talk about the need to re-build the crumbling embarrassment of our infrastructure, which will make us competitive, healthy, and will create jobs. Talk about alleviating the student loan burden that is crushing the younger generation. Talk about closing the tax loopholes and the offshoring of billions that corporations and the 1% exploit.
You want to get voters excited? Stop dancing around the edges like policy wonks and be bold. Be more like Bernie Sanders. There, I said it.
Part of the reason progressives have done so poorly in elections is their presentation of ideas- this apologetic, half a loaf approach. "Gee, do you think it might be okay if we raise the minimum wage a little bit? I mean, if you think it's okay, totally okay if you don't, you know." Then they get trampled by the GOP.
The policies of the Republican party are indefensible and evil, but give them credit, they are unabashed about it. Unapologetic. They know how to sell their poison.
We have to stop framing economics through the lens of tax cuts. That's what the GOP wants and you will never beat them at their own game. What we need to talk about are WAGES - and how the average American hasn't had a decent raise in decades.
Talk about finally creating a universal, single-payer healthcare program. Most Americans want that. Talk about the need to re-build the crumbling embarrassment of our infrastructure, which will make us competitive, healthy, and will create jobs. Talk about alleviating the student loan burden that is crushing the younger generation. Talk about closing the tax loopholes and the offshoring of billions that corporations and the 1% exploit.
You want to get voters excited? Stop dancing around the edges like policy wonks and be bold. Be more like Bernie Sanders. There, I said it.
11
The 'emerging' Democratic agenda is the eternal Democratic agenda, re-branded for a gullible new generation: from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. The Democrats have been pushing this Marxist creed for 90 years, since 1932, with limited success (as you do, in fact, always run out of other peoples' money). The American spirit never was, nor will it ever get, comfortable with the ballot-box thievery underlying the 'agenda' (i.e. 'voting in your own self-interest' is code for 'poorer people outnumber richer people so poorer people should appropriate the wealth of richer people through the political process')
3
Ballot-box thievery is much better than the out and out thievery of 'free market' Capitalists! The Republican Party has also kept to its 'eternal agenda' of "Let the buyer beware," which you are selling so successfully to what is truly 'a gullible new generation.' ALL people deserve to lead healthy and useful lives, and the refusal of richer people to pay their fair share to insure that, asserting their right to take an ever increasing share of wealth at the expense of our society WILL be the downfall of WHATEVER 'the American spirit ' is.
In order to build an agenda, you must first accept defeat. And in accepting defeat you must listen to the people, not your radical base
It will be a very long time before the Liberals will come to terms with that concept.
It will be a very long time before the Liberals will come to terms with that concept.
8
Why, Hawk? The Republicans have been listening to their radical base and now control the Presidency, the House and the Senate.
1
Hopefully, first of all, you will come to terms with the concept that Republicans lost the popular vote massively, and only won the electoral vote by suppressing Democratic votes by JUST enough in a few places. If the Republicans can't win elections by honest means, and keep winning them without winning the popular vote, they are doomed. Accept THAT.
1
The base of the Democratic Party is made up of real people. And for the most part they are certainly not "radical" -- except maybe when viewed from the Trump and Tea Party right. Jared Bernstein offers many excellent ideas here, and I for one am ready to get on board with this kind of agenda.
Unfortunately, the emphasis on legislation rather than deregulation has blinded the Democratic party elite to the true genius of the right. They continue to steer the values conversation and prey on fear. Fear compels people to do counterproductive things and begets evil.
This is a joke. For Dems to win, they must go bold. Child-care allowances are nuthin. The Dems need to call for universal guaranteed childcare for every American - either while they're at work or looking for work. The Dems need to call for universal single-payer healthcare, guaranteed shelter, clothing, food, education, and a secure retirement. Then, they'd win!
5
If Hillary Clinton keeps the focus on her: her needs, her bitterness, her loss at the hands of everyone but her, the Democrats will have a hard time selling anything to the American people. She needs to step back.
4
So does Bernie.
Where have you been lately? Don't you know this is the land of make America great again for the wealthy, business, foreign investment, war machine, and all friends of the crackpot we call president?
1
about time.
I don't have any children. Why do I have to subsidize other peoples kids. If you can't provide for a child, don't have one and create a burden for everyone else. People will see children as a paycheck in this system. It's just a hand out.
3
Because those kids will subsidize you. They will man the emergency rooms and change your diapers and bring you Meals on Wheels when you get old, fight to keep Medicare intact for you old geezers and build roads and bridges for you younger folks to get to work. They will spend a lifetime paying taxes to support cranks like you who despise poor people who have kids, and make sure the nursing homes stay open when you get old and there's no one at home to take care of you. You think you've stashed enough money to take care of yourself all by yourself? You better hope you live in a fully-stocked bunker with no need for utilities or fresh food and don't live too long.
I'd rather not have Hillary Clinton involved in any Democratic Party "unification.". Progressive ideology has nothing to do with the Clinton foolishness. We don't want the big money and the corporations that support her policies. Most of us are Berniecrats, and support most of the policies of Elizabeth Warren. Hillary can retire, now. We have no further need of her and her cronies.
3
The reality of our Republic is it's built on compromise. Hillary Clinton has something that both Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren lack, the ability to compromise and actually do something.
The same ideologies who support Warren and Sanders will never compromise or be effective as President. They are also the reason Donald Trump is President today.
The same ideologies who support Warren and Sanders will never compromise or be effective as President. They are also the reason Donald Trump is President today.
2
Hl--I can't argue with that point of view, but I would argue that Bernie is just as good a compromiser, without being beholden to big donors. He serves his actual constituents. That would be US.
2
If you truly want to help poor children, give them free early quality day care, free after school day care with tutoring services, free summer camp. Money to families with children is not the way to go. There is no way of knowing if that money would actually be used for the children. Much of it might go for drugs, alcohol or siphoned off by boyfriends.
1
Build a durable coalition of those who understand America as a multi-cultural democracy. Stop the hand-wringing that haters aren't going to vote for us.
3
We need a new centrist political party, taking ideas from left and right (well, not too far right). For a name, I would reach back into the Monty Python skit and call it the Sensible Party (both Republicans and Democrats - for different reasons - are now in the Silly Party). New faces, young faces, must come forward to propose and implement programs based on the new alignment of ideas. This is happening in France, and it can happen here. Only then will our political discourse drive government that improves the lives of all our citizens.
Some of these ideas are interesting and I really agree that we somehow have to help the low and middle income people in this country with real benefits. But we need to ask ourselves a fundamental question that make comparisons to Germany and Denmark irrelevant.
We have a shortage of skilled labor that can pass a drug test. No other country in the world is in this situation. We also have a disability program run completely amok. It is essentially a minimum income plan with strong incentives in place that exacerbate drug abuse, broken families, child abuse and fraud.
If you don't deal with THAT - you can forget all the rest of this plan.
We have a shortage of skilled labor that can pass a drug test. No other country in the world is in this situation. We also have a disability program run completely amok. It is essentially a minimum income plan with strong incentives in place that exacerbate drug abuse, broken families, child abuse and fraud.
If you don't deal with THAT - you can forget all the rest of this plan.
Bringing together the Hillary and Bernie wings? Relying on increasing support from "establishment donors? In what way is that bold? The Democrats need to reach bamboozled working class and middle class trump voters, not other Democrats.
Minimum wage, yes. But more importantly, true universal health care, affordable day care, quality public education in every locality, serious direct infrastructure spending that creates jobs. All of these things would appeal to many trump voters, in many left-behind places.
And by the way, the Democratic party needs to wean itself from "establishment donors". Obama and Bernie, and,yes, trump--showed what small donors can do.
Minimum wage, yes. But more importantly, true universal health care, affordable day care, quality public education in every locality, serious direct infrastructure spending that creates jobs. All of these things would appeal to many trump voters, in many left-behind places.
And by the way, the Democratic party needs to wean itself from "establishment donors". Obama and Bernie, and,yes, trump--showed what small donors can do.
1
"Progressives will be playing defense for many years to come. But let’s also make sure we’re ready to roll with a true progressive agenda when our time comes."
The time HAS COME to be playing offense with a true, progressive agenda. Dems need to stand for something, and the Progressive agenda is what the Democratic Party has historically been about. It's good the Centrists are moving left. They represent the status quo with a few tweaks, not the more dynamic change the American people want, and that elected Donald Trump.
The time HAS COME to be playing offense with a true, progressive agenda. Dems need to stand for something, and the Progressive agenda is what the Democratic Party has historically been about. It's good the Centrists are moving left. They represent the status quo with a few tweaks, not the more dynamic change the American people want, and that elected Donald Trump.
3
A defect in federal subsidies is that it does not take into account differences in the cost of living.
1
Unspoken here is the issue of health care, which, if implemented properly (see examples from European countries, Canada, and others around the world) would do more for the average American financially than most of the proposals set forth here.
15
"Progressives will be playing defense for many years to come."
There's the problem and it's a problem caused by Democrats. Having been run roughshod over by the Right for the past 45 years, the party of my parents and grandparents - that of the poor, working and middle classes - has become the part of (pick the characters on any TV show based upon lawyers...mind would be "The Good Wife/Fight").
Democrats were nowhere to be found in states like Kentucky, explaining how a vote for Trump was one against their own interests....in this case, Medicare expansion. 60% of those in that state's Clay County - Kentucky's poorest - benefited from the expansion; 87% cast their votes for Trump.
Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin? States that should've gone in the Clinton column didn't because the candidate was nowhere to be found.
"Infrastructure build-outs can help, but what's really needed is a permanent, scaled-up version of a subsidized jobs program that worked well in the last recession."
Know where those build-outs belong? INFRASTRUCTURE!!! Bridges are collapsing or in danger of doing so. Our rail system is pretty 19th century. The interstate highway system is in serious disrepair.
Need I go on Infrastructure - new and where necessary, improved - would provide jobs well into the future. Money better spent than giving $250/mo per child.
There's the problem and it's a problem caused by Democrats. Having been run roughshod over by the Right for the past 45 years, the party of my parents and grandparents - that of the poor, working and middle classes - has become the part of (pick the characters on any TV show based upon lawyers...mind would be "The Good Wife/Fight").
Democrats were nowhere to be found in states like Kentucky, explaining how a vote for Trump was one against their own interests....in this case, Medicare expansion. 60% of those in that state's Clay County - Kentucky's poorest - benefited from the expansion; 87% cast their votes for Trump.
Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin? States that should've gone in the Clinton column didn't because the candidate was nowhere to be found.
"Infrastructure build-outs can help, but what's really needed is a permanent, scaled-up version of a subsidized jobs program that worked well in the last recession."
Know where those build-outs belong? INFRASTRUCTURE!!! Bridges are collapsing or in danger of doing so. Our rail system is pretty 19th century. The interstate highway system is in serious disrepair.
Need I go on Infrastructure - new and where necessary, improved - would provide jobs well into the future. Money better spent than giving $250/mo per child.
8
A child subsidy program on a sliding scale is only just especially as Republicans demand that children be born. But if we can not approve Medicare or Medicaid for all at least we could approve lowering the eligibility age to 55 allowing people to buy in also on a sliding scale according to income. Republicans rail against such ideas, but it is what their base really want if they were honest with themselves. What good is it to them to have bombs of destruction if they can not feed their families or go to the doctor. Democrats need to find reasonable programs that work and reach beyond the present rancor.
5
We need an economic agenda that has very clear objectives.
Firstly reduce dramatically the income inequality gap this in turn will drive consumer demand which accounts for 65 percent of GDP.
Secondly drive to energy independence through conservation and focus on renewables and less destructive energy sources.
For example in rust belt set up enterprise zones manufacturing renewable energy components. Convert our National Truck fleet to natural gas .
This will not only create jobs but reduce our dependency on Saudi Arabia a disaster in the making.
Tax reform eliminate benefits for rich, increase benefits for the poor . Corporate tax reduction to 20 percent , all companies must pay revenue neutral.
Infrastructure investment paid for by 3 percent infrastructure tax on all imports.
Minimum wage increase.
Enhance Obama care by reducing drug prices, setting up single payer based on Medicare, self funding using current subsidies. Put together a team of experts to ensure we evolve to universal health care efficiently, effectively.
Simple, deals with our issues and is self funding
Firstly reduce dramatically the income inequality gap this in turn will drive consumer demand which accounts for 65 percent of GDP.
Secondly drive to energy independence through conservation and focus on renewables and less destructive energy sources.
For example in rust belt set up enterprise zones manufacturing renewable energy components. Convert our National Truck fleet to natural gas .
This will not only create jobs but reduce our dependency on Saudi Arabia a disaster in the making.
Tax reform eliminate benefits for rich, increase benefits for the poor . Corporate tax reduction to 20 percent , all companies must pay revenue neutral.
Infrastructure investment paid for by 3 percent infrastructure tax on all imports.
Minimum wage increase.
Enhance Obama care by reducing drug prices, setting up single payer based on Medicare, self funding using current subsidies. Put together a team of experts to ensure we evolve to universal health care efficiently, effectively.
Simple, deals with our issues and is self funding
1
More welfare, and more subsidies for employers that can't or won't pay their employees a living wage: this is not a progressive democratic proposal, it's a formula to shore up an unsustainable economic system which is based on global labor arbitrage. In other words, a short term fix, perhaps, for what is essentially a discredited supply side economic model.
4
I've always thought of myself as a progressive. That said I'm not a fan of socialism and direct, permanent cash credits. What I'm for is great public institutions which are currently being destroyed. We need great public schools, we need great universal public health, we need a public army, we need community policing, public prisons that rehabilitate and reduce recidivism. We need a none political Justice system that strives to both protect and rehabilitate and errors on the side of empathy and compassion for both sides.
I'm not afraid of private companies if we have a good public structure along with consistent, well thought out regulations that reduces liability while allowing for the genius of a large idea pool.
70% of our military is private, private prisons are going up all over the country, our police are being militarized and many will be privatized, our schools crumbling and public health costs are going up and coverage is going down.
I went to great public schools, lived in a country that had a draft army and spent money on science, public broadcasting, the arts...Our Justice system was the envy of the world. We still had poverty, depression, crime but we at least were looking forward to a better days ahead.
We are turning inward, privatizing our best institutions, looking backwards. We need to keep investing in the future by strengthening and investing in our people but lets not forget the great public institutions.
I'm not afraid of private companies if we have a good public structure along with consistent, well thought out regulations that reduces liability while allowing for the genius of a large idea pool.
70% of our military is private, private prisons are going up all over the country, our police are being militarized and many will be privatized, our schools crumbling and public health costs are going up and coverage is going down.
I went to great public schools, lived in a country that had a draft army and spent money on science, public broadcasting, the arts...Our Justice system was the envy of the world. We still had poverty, depression, crime but we at least were looking forward to a better days ahead.
We are turning inward, privatizing our best institutions, looking backwards. We need to keep investing in the future by strengthening and investing in our people but lets not forget the great public institutions.
10
It's critical to limit opportunities for abuse. Critics of "government handouts" get plenty of ammunition when cash for kids options get floated and implemented. Head start programs and investments in education, especially in smaller class sizes and better teach support systems, offer tangible benefits and fewer opportunities for abuse.
There is no evidence to support the contention that smaller class size leads to better outcomes. Sounds good, no evidence.
Head start programs are historically ineffective. Giving people enough money to afford the things they need is not. Also -- consider yourself. Would you rather have your own income, that you can spend wisely, or a set of narrow "services" that you must use or have no other options?
I'm for investment in services also, but giving financial assistance is being done effectively all over the world.
I'm for investment in services also, but giving financial assistance is being done effectively all over the world.
1
Except for increasing the minimum wage, these are just terrible proposals. If they become the Democratic policy agenda, they will doom the party to continued wandering in the electoral desert.
Raising the minimum wage is long overdue. Adjusted for inflation, the level is far below the wages paid decades ago. As technology shifts eliminate much labor from both blue and white collar jobs, lower skilled service jobs will become an increasingly larger segment of the labor market. Those jobs must provide living wages if we are to have a civil society. Better yet, combine raising of the minimum wage with national healthcare and we'll have a much improved economy due to increased consumer spending.
Pouring more money into child care and job training hasn't worked, won't work and does not address the core issues necessary to eliminate child poverty and good jobs. The solution here lies in education and families that value education. Simply providing more money to single parent families will not change the equation.
On the other hand, investing in infrastructure will create millions of good jobs which can directly impact child poverty and useful job skills. The market will ensure this outcome.
Political agendas that combine infrastructure investment, raising the minimum wage for those who cannot make the skills transition, and providing universal health care will do more for our country than creating more bureaucracy and federal spending.
It might even win elections.
Raising the minimum wage is long overdue. Adjusted for inflation, the level is far below the wages paid decades ago. As technology shifts eliminate much labor from both blue and white collar jobs, lower skilled service jobs will become an increasingly larger segment of the labor market. Those jobs must provide living wages if we are to have a civil society. Better yet, combine raising of the minimum wage with national healthcare and we'll have a much improved economy due to increased consumer spending.
Pouring more money into child care and job training hasn't worked, won't work and does not address the core issues necessary to eliminate child poverty and good jobs. The solution here lies in education and families that value education. Simply providing more money to single parent families will not change the equation.
On the other hand, investing in infrastructure will create millions of good jobs which can directly impact child poverty and useful job skills. The market will ensure this outcome.
Political agendas that combine infrastructure investment, raising the minimum wage for those who cannot make the skills transition, and providing universal health care will do more for our country than creating more bureaucracy and federal spending.
It might even win elections.
7
If the minimum wage had been indexed to inflation, today it would be $4.25.
I'm 58 years old. I've been working for over 30 years with a some lovely stretches of long term unemployment woven in. I've seen friends lose jobs. I've seen family members lose jobs. I've seen friends go bankrupt from medical bills that they had to pay because insurance wouldn't cover them. I've gone without needed medical care and continue to. Without exception every one of my friends and family members are hard working Americans who want to pay their bills, improve life for themselves and their children, keep working until they can retire.
Yet the last 30 years or more have shown us how little value we have for either party. Almost none of the policies enacted by any administration have helped the working classes of America. By working classes I mean anyone of us who has to depend upon a paycheck to cover the rent, mortgage, groceries, etc. In short, we need jobs to have lives. But there has been a shift from businesses paying workers decent wages, training them and retaining them to firing first and hiring as little as possible by using temps.
We have become a country where our citizens, unless they are part of the economic 1%, are ignored except to be fleeced and penalized. Most of us kept our end of the bargain with America. We've worked, paid our taxes, and been self reliant. Yet time and again, America kicks us to the curb and both parties contribute to this.
Yet the last 30 years or more have shown us how little value we have for either party. Almost none of the policies enacted by any administration have helped the working classes of America. By working classes I mean anyone of us who has to depend upon a paycheck to cover the rent, mortgage, groceries, etc. In short, we need jobs to have lives. But there has been a shift from businesses paying workers decent wages, training them and retaining them to firing first and hiring as little as possible by using temps.
We have become a country where our citizens, unless they are part of the economic 1%, are ignored except to be fleeced and penalized. Most of us kept our end of the bargain with America. We've worked, paid our taxes, and been self reliant. Yet time and again, America kicks us to the curb and both parties contribute to this.
19
Hen3ry: Thank you for educating us, for making your voice heard in such a cogent yet dramatic way. Can you get yurself to the nearest Democratic Party headquarters to make your presence felt?
I'm a life-long, socially liberal Democrat. And i say "Nope" to the simple wealth redistribution described in this article. it is long-term unsustainable and represents a moral hazard with no quid pro quo from the beneficiaries. I expect more creativity from "progressives" (I consider myself a true progressive) that isn't just Robin Hood. Let's see some expectations (e.g., willingness to move to get a good job) in return for sharing the wealth.
22
Shoring up poor kids is the best way our money can be spent. It will also radically reduce health care and other expenses as these kids grow. The link between trauma in childhood and poor adult health is very clear. The better and safer we can make young lives, the stronger our country will get.
3
As a left of center social issue guy, the child subsidy is attractive. As a right of center fiscally responsible guy, what??? The child subsidy payment seems ripe for abuse and expensive. I'm all for helping people, but unless this handout had very strong enforcement that the money goes into the right hands (or mouths) I'd be extremely reluctant to support such an entitlement.
13
If we adopt a sane healthcare system which reduces our healthcare spending by 50% that's a savings of $1.5 trillion, making that $190 billion for child subsidy change dropped on the sidewalk. Reduce healthcare spending by 50%?!! That's not possible! If other countries with better health than us can do it, then we can.
170
Why do you jump to the assumption there will be abuse? There is absolutely no evidence this would occur, despite Republican fears of Reagan's fictional "welfare queens." Conservatives are all about personal responsibility, but they want to choose who is responsible and who is not.
3
Like the campaign, the NYT ignores Senator Sanders once again. The DNC's 2016 Party Platform is the agenda and has already emerged. The question now is will the Democrats stand with Wall Street or Main Street. It is obvious where the NYT stands as they continue to ignore the most popular politician in the US.
10
Democrats support Dodd-Frank, Republicans don't.
Newell: Exactly what do you want the NYT to do for Bernie Sanders?
Not any more he's not.
Developing and honing the message is all well and good but who is being groomed to deliver the message? If the Dems plan to take back governance of our country then shouldn't the potential Presidential candidates start making themselves known? The sooner the Dems rally behind an effective leader the better.
8
Why not attack the jobs problem directly" In 1797 good old Tom Paine proposed a job guarantee program. The federal gov would become the employer of last resort. It would guarantee a decent job or paid training for such a job to everyone able to work.
There are plenty of things that need to be done--fixing roads & bridges, education, research etc. BTW there are plenty of support jobs in education and research that do not require a degree. As with unemployment benefits today, you could require each worker to show that he had applied for a comparable private sector job periodically.
How would we pay for it?
A) It would to a certain extent pay for itself.
1. When people are working, producing, & spending, they pay more taxes than when they are out of work. The money they spend provides jobs for others who also spend & pay taxes.
2. We could reduce much of what we currently spend on welfare.
3. It would raise private sector wages and thus taxes.
B) We could raise income tax rates on the Rich as we did during the Great Prosperity of 1946 - 1973. This would not only raise revenue, it would reduce inequality and financial speculation, both of which are bad for the economy.
C) We could sell Treasury bonds both to the public locking in low interest and to the FED which returns the interest.Since we would be producing more, there would be little inflation.
See http://www.levyinstitute.org/topics/job-guarantee
There are plenty of things that need to be done--fixing roads & bridges, education, research etc. BTW there are plenty of support jobs in education and research that do not require a degree. As with unemployment benefits today, you could require each worker to show that he had applied for a comparable private sector job periodically.
How would we pay for it?
A) It would to a certain extent pay for itself.
1. When people are working, producing, & spending, they pay more taxes than when they are out of work. The money they spend provides jobs for others who also spend & pay taxes.
2. We could reduce much of what we currently spend on welfare.
3. It would raise private sector wages and thus taxes.
B) We could raise income tax rates on the Rich as we did during the Great Prosperity of 1946 - 1973. This would not only raise revenue, it would reduce inequality and financial speculation, both of which are bad for the economy.
C) We could sell Treasury bonds both to the public locking in low interest and to the FED which returns the interest.Since we would be producing more, there would be little inflation.
See http://www.levyinstitute.org/topics/job-guarantee
8
A wide subsidy will do more harm than good, what is needed is free tertiary education for those that cannot afford it and a retraining program for people to build the skills needed for 21st century jobs.
4
One reason for child poverty is irresponsible parents. How does a blanket $250 child allowance repair that rather than subsidize it?
11
When the last Third Way, Democratic Leadership Council, Clintonite is driven out of the Democratic leadership give me a call. Until then please feel free to wander in the Wilderness.
Voters in 2008 gave Democrats a Supermajority in the House and Senate plus the White House and we got Obamacare instead of single payer, not one Bankster prosecuted, Wall Street made whole at taxpayer expense, more War in Iraq and Afghanistan and very little to show for the effort people put into getting a Democrats elected. That lesson was not lost on millions.
I find it interesting that Clinton partisan never shut up whining about the General Election but had no problem with a rigged Primary and Caucus season. Apparently rigging the nominating process for Hillary was OK, as long as she got ahead. Election reform needs to start within the Democratic Primary and Caucus system. Had everyone who wanted to vote got to vote, Hillary would never have been nominated.
The Democrats like to pose as the party of the people, but all kinds of strings were pulled to turn the last cycle into a coronation. That is not democracy.
Voters in 2008 gave Democrats a Supermajority in the House and Senate plus the White House and we got Obamacare instead of single payer, not one Bankster prosecuted, Wall Street made whole at taxpayer expense, more War in Iraq and Afghanistan and very little to show for the effort people put into getting a Democrats elected. That lesson was not lost on millions.
I find it interesting that Clinton partisan never shut up whining about the General Election but had no problem with a rigged Primary and Caucus season. Apparently rigging the nominating process for Hillary was OK, as long as she got ahead. Election reform needs to start within the Democratic Primary and Caucus system. Had everyone who wanted to vote got to vote, Hillary would never have been nominated.
The Democrats like to pose as the party of the people, but all kinds of strings were pulled to turn the last cycle into a coronation. That is not democracy.
23
Reading your book on weaving hair shirts and locust recipes would be a good field guide to wilderness adventurers.
1
I agree. Also, who needs or wants 'establishment donor' acquiescence? Sanders showed that you can finance a campaign without them. If the Democratic Party wants to be democratic it will renounce fat cat contributions. Regarding the earned income tax credit, this was a Republican idea originally offered up as an alternative to raising the minimum wage so that Republicans could show they weren't heartless while shifting the cost to the taxpayer instead of having employers pay a decent wage.
37
If anybody wants a good start, they should try getting rid of professional fund raisers who do as much as anybody to ruin political campaigns.
1
We must push to end our focus on spending money on needless wars. Until we have a true peace-time economy where we spend our resources and use our collective power on creating a society that develops people and not destroys people, we will not have a truly progressive agenda. We have only had a war economy since 1940. Isn't it time we say no to such policies and practices?
8
After four months of Trump, I found myself turning more Democratic. However, each of these ideas are rooted in the "Robin Hood" philosophy of "Rob from the Rich and Give to the Poor" rather than the simple philosophy imbedded in our psyche: "giving a hand up rather than a hand out." As for me, I'd rather give a hand up to an immigrant family that wants to come to this country in order to work and make a contribution, instead of offering yet more handouts to those who have --perhaps thru no fault of their own--grown accustomed to taking as much as they can without giving anything back. In short, these ideas, if pursued, could ensure a second term of Trump. Heaven Forbid!
5
The difference between a "hand up" and a "hand out" is simple: people I like get a "hand up" and people I don't get a "hand out." How convenient!
3
Single Payer Health Care (no copays, no deductibles, include medical, dental, and mental health)
Free college education
Free child care
Student loan forgiveness
Free contraception
Living Wage and wage equality for women
Serious wall street reform
Serious financial sector (banking) reform
Promote fair trade, not free trade
Increased infrastructure spending
Decreased military spending
End war on drugs - legalize marijuana
No private prisons
No mandatory sentencing guidelines
Decrease the prison population
Continue to champion civil rights ("Identity politics" is about basic civil rights)
Champion the importance of the arts
And that is just off the top of my head.
But where, oh where, are the bevy of young, articulate, Democratic leaders who are articulating any or all of this?
Free college education
Free child care
Student loan forgiveness
Free contraception
Living Wage and wage equality for women
Serious wall street reform
Serious financial sector (banking) reform
Promote fair trade, not free trade
Increased infrastructure spending
Decreased military spending
End war on drugs - legalize marijuana
No private prisons
No mandatory sentencing guidelines
Decrease the prison population
Continue to champion civil rights ("Identity politics" is about basic civil rights)
Champion the importance of the arts
And that is just off the top of my head.
But where, oh where, are the bevy of young, articulate, Democratic leaders who are articulating any or all of this?
35
Free....Free....Free.... There is no such thing as "Free" This is not a new Democratic agenda ; just a ew-srtatement of the same old take from those who earned it and give to those who didn't platform they have offered for so long that their constituency has come to believe they are somehow not onlt entitled to that they are already taking for "free', but unbelievably are entitled to even more.
1
They presented it to big democratic fund raisers ; and where laughed out of the room.
1
Free this, free that. Do you hear yourself? Nothing is free - it's paid for by someone. As someone in the top, already extortionist, income bracket, I say NO WAY. Pay for it yourself.
33
So discouraging! Bernstein is essentially telling us that it's going to be at least 8 years of Trump and the Republican Orcs because the Democrats have even worse ideas.
The winning populist platform for the Democrats must be a single payer healthcare policy which encourages departure from fee-for-service, an infrastructure program financed by healthcare savings, legislation which removes big and unaccountable money from politics and limits the reach of lobbyists, and a foreign policy which recognizes that broad trade alliances are the strongest deterrent to military conflict, social unrest, and repressive governments/cultures.
Wage equity, environmental healing, and acceptance of cultural differences, if well curated, flow easily from these policies. Do well, by doing good.
The winning populist platform for the Democrats must be a single payer healthcare policy which encourages departure from fee-for-service, an infrastructure program financed by healthcare savings, legislation which removes big and unaccountable money from politics and limits the reach of lobbyists, and a foreign policy which recognizes that broad trade alliances are the strongest deterrent to military conflict, social unrest, and repressive governments/cultures.
Wage equity, environmental healing, and acceptance of cultural differences, if well curated, flow easily from these policies. Do well, by doing good.
20
Glad to see gun control, noticeably, didn't make this list. It cost Democrats tens of millions of single issue or social issue middle states voters. Keep pushing the urban interpretation of limited 2nd Amendment freedoms and we will lose, again.
4
The policies are good but much more is needed.
1. Universal single payer Healthcare
2. End citizens United
3. At the state level independent redistricting commissions
4. Paid maternity leave and expanded EITC
5. Subsidized college tuition
6. Massive infrastructure investment
7. Automatic voter registration and secure voting process
8. Full support for unions and an end to "right to work" laws
9. An increase in the payroll tax beyond the $125K cutoff
10. Taxing dividends and capital gains as ordinary income
And so much more. Dems, go big or go home!
1. Universal single payer Healthcare
2. End citizens United
3. At the state level independent redistricting commissions
4. Paid maternity leave and expanded EITC
5. Subsidized college tuition
6. Massive infrastructure investment
7. Automatic voter registration and secure voting process
8. Full support for unions and an end to "right to work" laws
9. An increase in the payroll tax beyond the $125K cutoff
10. Taxing dividends and capital gains as ordinary income
And so much more. Dems, go big or go home!
37
Michael,
Yes to your list and two more: real educational reform at the k-12 level and more affordable housing. In places like California where there are good jobs, high housing costs and poor early education in many areas makes it harder for families with low-incomes to survive and thrive.
Yes to your list and two more: real educational reform at the k-12 level and more affordable housing. In places like California where there are good jobs, high housing costs and poor early education in many areas makes it harder for families with low-incomes to survive and thrive.
9
This why Dem leaders are so old: it takes nearly a lifetime to read the list of to what their constituents feel entitled.
I am an older Progressive, and my comments may seem like heresy, but the problem I see with a child stipend, it would incentivize having children.
Decreasing poverty should be the incentive of a so-considered "Christian" nation, but let's face it, we are a Capitalist nation, where the marketplace is the Holy Grail.
If we were a nation built on Abraham tradition, tactics implemented by Catholic social service agencies,"liberal" Protestant groups, and in Jewish and Muslim communities on care for the poor and homeless should be government policy.
It is interesting that businesses survived fifty years ago when the minimum wage was $1.60 ($11.90 in 2016 dollars). The economy was booming and there was no complaining by most employers about the wage. The reason was that 7% to 10% ROI was a good thing, not 15% to 20%.
That means working for current minimum wage of $7.25 earns $14,500 for 40 hours a week for 50 weeks (taking into account various holidays and perhaps personal time). At $11.90 an hour, that same scenario would earn the worker $23,800, a 64% difference in income!!
The incentive should be for female children (teens) having babies not to do so, and be paid instead a minimum stipend to earn a degree or a certificate. By postponing childbearing and rearing into the mid-20s is a big difference than a teenager trying to do so, which actually means the grandparent in the late 30s or 40s becomes the actual parent.
Decreasing poverty should be the incentive of a so-considered "Christian" nation, but let's face it, we are a Capitalist nation, where the marketplace is the Holy Grail.
If we were a nation built on Abraham tradition, tactics implemented by Catholic social service agencies,"liberal" Protestant groups, and in Jewish and Muslim communities on care for the poor and homeless should be government policy.
It is interesting that businesses survived fifty years ago when the minimum wage was $1.60 ($11.90 in 2016 dollars). The economy was booming and there was no complaining by most employers about the wage. The reason was that 7% to 10% ROI was a good thing, not 15% to 20%.
That means working for current minimum wage of $7.25 earns $14,500 for 40 hours a week for 50 weeks (taking into account various holidays and perhaps personal time). At $11.90 an hour, that same scenario would earn the worker $23,800, a 64% difference in income!!
The incentive should be for female children (teens) having babies not to do so, and be paid instead a minimum stipend to earn a degree or a certificate. By postponing childbearing and rearing into the mid-20s is a big difference than a teenager trying to do so, which actually means the grandparent in the late 30s or 40s becomes the actual parent.
9
Universal health care would do more for the poor as well as the middle class than 250.00 a month. The lights are on at the DNC, but apparently there's still no one home.
23
Paying people's new guaranteed check independent of the efforts and success in the marketplace is the new nonstarter. Why must Dems always revisit ideas that seek to level a playing field that look backwards for justification. A reasonable progressive income tax in which return on investments shares the same final 1040 line or a transaction tax will provide enough tax revenue for a few reasonable items of a shared strength in numbers. Paying people to have more children just doesn't ring my bell.
7
Agendas don't emerge; they are proposed and accepted.
Why don't the Democrats in Congress offer sensible alternatives to GOP proposals, instead of try to kindle public outrage? Why doesn't the Democratic Party spend its money on formulating and publicizing policy instead of funding an internet campaign to instigate protest against the continuing GOP attempts to sabotage our nation?
How about proposing the $250 per child per month subsidy, at a cost of $190 billion per year, as an alternative to supporting or initiating one of the costly military weapons for which we have no worthy enemies?
How about a real universal health care program instead of a patchwork of scams and subsidies to encourage people to buy health care insurance? People in countries that provide residents with affordable health care don't have or need insurance; they get their health care directly from the providers.
How about a value added tax, a fair and inescapable tax on commerce, as an alternative to the fictitious corporate income tax? How about an individual income tax plan that will begin to correct our broken economy, which fails to provide a livable income for half the working population while heaping ever more wealth onto the hoarded capital of the ultrarich?
The time is right and the opportunity wide open to make America great in the 21st Century. Can we step up to it?
Why don't the Democrats in Congress offer sensible alternatives to GOP proposals, instead of try to kindle public outrage? Why doesn't the Democratic Party spend its money on formulating and publicizing policy instead of funding an internet campaign to instigate protest against the continuing GOP attempts to sabotage our nation?
How about proposing the $250 per child per month subsidy, at a cost of $190 billion per year, as an alternative to supporting or initiating one of the costly military weapons for which we have no worthy enemies?
How about a real universal health care program instead of a patchwork of scams and subsidies to encourage people to buy health care insurance? People in countries that provide residents with affordable health care don't have or need insurance; they get their health care directly from the providers.
How about a value added tax, a fair and inescapable tax on commerce, as an alternative to the fictitious corporate income tax? How about an individual income tax plan that will begin to correct our broken economy, which fails to provide a livable income for half the working population while heaping ever more wealth onto the hoarded capital of the ultrarich?
The time is right and the opportunity wide open to make America great in the 21st Century. Can we step up to it?
3
I'm pretty surprised by all the people who say, I'm a progressive, but this will never work. Most especially people who are concerned that giving people more money will incentivize them in ways "we" don't like. This is a paternalistic and prejudiced perspective. Believe it or not, poor people also want healthy food, stable housing, decent schools and access to healthcare for their children. Sure, we can offer these as services, but it's also radical to simply trust them to make these decisions for themselves. Many studies shows that cash transfer programs (either conditional or not) result in poor people spending their money exactly the way middle income people spend it. On the resources their families need -- not more kids, junk food, concert tickets, or whatever other fear these commenters have -- plus there is less money wasted on oversight. Many studies show that helping reduce the toxic stress and instability of severe poverty is the most effective way to protect these children and families -- and results in better health, educational, and socioemotional outcomes for children. This is achieved best by giving people more money, and helping them earn it themselves. (PS. I have a phd in education, with a focus on poverty)
10
What would really work for the Democrats is asking people what they want and then listening.
Trump got elected in part because people were so often told that the future was set and they better get used to it, because it didn't matter whether they liked it or not.
If you want to win in 2018, tell people they have a say in the future.
Trump got elected in part because people were so often told that the future was set and they better get used to it, because it didn't matter whether they liked it or not.
If you want to win in 2018, tell people they have a say in the future.
13
These ideas are okay for the poor. Direct job creation, in particular, has merit but what about single-payer healthcare and free college education? These ideas are key for the middle class, which has been squeezed tremendously by the present / recent economic conditions.
24
Universal voter registration and suffrage.
Universal health care insurance.
Universal public education, including sex and contraception education.
Universal free contraception.
Universal living wages.
The rest of the problems will take care of themselves very quickly and wipe right-wing tyranny, authoritarianism and cultured religious ignorance off the world map.
Universal health care insurance.
Universal public education, including sex and contraception education.
Universal free contraception.
Universal living wages.
The rest of the problems will take care of themselves very quickly and wipe right-wing tyranny, authoritarianism and cultured religious ignorance off the world map.
317
Two more things: an earned tax credit for caring for aged relatives, in lieu of placing them in assiste living facilities, to offset the costs incured by the (children) caregivers.
This could have important effects on health care costs and would provide for better care, if monitored by visiting nurse programs.
And then, extend the visiting nurse program to cover all pregnant girls whose economic straits are moest, to provide instruction and oversight about healthy babies and well cared for infants.
With your agenda, this will make a really powerful Democratic platform. Let's do it.
This could have important effects on health care costs and would provide for better care, if monitored by visiting nurse programs.
And then, extend the visiting nurse program to cover all pregnant girls whose economic straits are moest, to provide instruction and oversight about healthy babies and well cared for infants.
With your agenda, this will make a really powerful Democratic platform. Let's do it.
1
Money corruption in our government - Repeat over and over again - also needs to be remedied fast and hard. Most of the problems will take care of themselves when this is addressed. With a dash of term limits.
2
Perfect! Equality for all...well, at least until some aspire to be more "equal" than others....Orwell would have loved to have experienced your utopia...
1
Pretty obscure and technocratic agenda for re-energizing and re-claiming our party from the republican-lite, DLC, Clinton legacy. Here's my list. $1 trillion in actual spending on infrastructure projects including high speed rail. Federal Voting Rights Bill with same day registration, 6 weeks early voting period and internet voting. $15 per hour minimum wage now (not 8 years from now). Public financing of elections. Increase social security benefits by eliminating limit on income taxed. Medicare for all health care. Equal pay for equal work. Universal pre-K public education. Affordable child and senior care. Net neutrality restored. Strong internet privacy law that gives consumers complete control over their information. Equal time media provisions reinstated. Media ownership concentration rules revived. Breaking up too big to fail banks and otherwise expanding anti-trust laws. Passing law requiring shareholder approval of executive compensation. Criminal and civil access to justice reform. Making every school a "charter" school. Stop privatization of government functions, e.g., prisons, federal security, schools, courts. A real EPA. I could go on......
43
I am a democrat. I'm loyal to the party. I agree with nearly all the end products of these proposals. But, we will never, ever win by simply proposing these ideas. We must show, rather than tell, how we're going to get from here to there, from A to Z, specifically. Prepare a budget, do the work of planning it would take to actually implement. Do the work. Grand ideas are a dime a dozen. He who knows how to implement wins. We never seem to have any idea how to implement, hence we're beaten by the narrative that says, tax and spend.
11
What in the world are you talking about? Except for Eisenhower, the only Party that has shown in the past hundred years that it can and will implement policies of benefit to the majority of Americans is the Democratic Party. If details and specific plans were required to win elections here, we would not have Donald Trump in the White House. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Civil Rights, Voting Rights, Health Care, all Democratic programs, all under attack all the time from Republicans. Plans and implementation are NOT our problem. The problem we have is winning elections, the nuts and bolts of persuasion, voter identification and turnout.
1
As a progressive, I say, uh, NO! How about fixing healthcare and making real food more affordable.
9
Sorry DNC, this doesn't resonate. This will be perceived as simply another government handout. I think we can all agree that poverty is an issue however the DNC would do well to address the structural, legal, trade, and corporate frameworks that have lowered wages for millions of lower AND middle class workers. If the DNC wants to 'go bold' then let's really do it with serious tax reform, enforced limits on lobbying, and reversal of Citizens United to start with. Instead of starting with giving more money away, let's take money out of the system where it doesn't belong like in politics, health care cost bloat, and cozy tax laws for private equity traders and offshore corporate tax havens.
23
$250 a month is not a lot of money to raise a child. Nevertheless, such a subsidy might encourage poor people to have more children. This is not a good idea.
One of the reasons (not the only one) people are poor is that they have too many children. Such subsidies should be limited to two (or perhaps three) children, regardless of how many a family has, or might have. Solutions should not contribute to the problem they're trying to correct.
One of the reasons (not the only one) people are poor is that they have too many children. Such subsidies should be limited to two (or perhaps three) children, regardless of how many a family has, or might have. Solutions should not contribute to the problem they're trying to correct.
19
Along with universal health care, universal public service, either in the military or in some civilian program, such as the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). (The CCC was a fantastic program.) Universal public service would have many benefits, most importantly bringing us back together as one nation.
31
The real problem for Democrats is messaging. Put a bill out there, appear in mass on all the news/talk shows, hold rallies around the country and dare the Republicans to go against a progressive agenda that is popular with the majority of the country. Most of all, don't cower at the first attack from the bullies on the other side. Stand up to the Republicans. What do you have to lose? The House? Senate? Supreme court? Presidency? Your silence and cowardice has already lost you everything.
31
There is nothing new Jared Bernstein’s wish list. Be bold and be honest. Child care credits, minimum wages and subsidized private sector wages don’t improve the economy – particularly if they violate sound market principles. Asking the right questions can reveal the problem:
• Should we mandate higher minimum wages than businesses can afford (restaurant and farm workers) or subsidize low wages with tax dollars and even more tax dollars for those with lots of children?
• Why should some businesses be effectively taxed with higher minimum wages and others get a subsidy for paying low wages?
• Why should we encourage parents to work for child care credits when the children might be better off with stay-at-home moms, particularly in the pre-school ages?
A better approach would give transitional jobs to all in the non-profit sector at a little below private sector rates. The jobs could be full or part time, entry level to professional – whatever the charity needed to expand services. Much of the funding could come from limiting the $40 billion charitable deduction to charities that agreed to provide transitional jobs.
A complementary tax reform would also tax wealth and income inversely. Taxpayers could choose a higher wealth tax for a lower income tax or vice versa (with no job killing payroll taxes). Now imagine health, education, child care and retirement support programs that are based only on family wealth – the more you have the less you need from government.
• Should we mandate higher minimum wages than businesses can afford (restaurant and farm workers) or subsidize low wages with tax dollars and even more tax dollars for those with lots of children?
• Why should some businesses be effectively taxed with higher minimum wages and others get a subsidy for paying low wages?
• Why should we encourage parents to work for child care credits when the children might be better off with stay-at-home moms, particularly in the pre-school ages?
A better approach would give transitional jobs to all in the non-profit sector at a little below private sector rates. The jobs could be full or part time, entry level to professional – whatever the charity needed to expand services. Much of the funding could come from limiting the $40 billion charitable deduction to charities that agreed to provide transitional jobs.
A complementary tax reform would also tax wealth and income inversely. Taxpayers could choose a higher wealth tax for a lower income tax or vice versa (with no job killing payroll taxes). Now imagine health, education, child care and retirement support programs that are based only on family wealth – the more you have the less you need from government.
4
Half of these proposals are inefficient and costly, democrats are still in the wilderness regarding appropriate progressive policies.
6
What's next on the agenda, birth benefits, guaranteed income, housing, guaranteed breakfast, lunch and dinner vouchers, transportation coupons, guaranteed phone and internet access, guaranteed summer camp, guaranteed burial benefits. Where does this end?
12
"Though Democrats have written bills for most of these ideas,,," So, who knows about them? They certainly won't be discussed on Fox News, the news outlet where the people that Democrats want to help listen to. Democrats, yes I'm one of them, are terrible at advertising their ideas. Many good ideas are raised in Congress, dumped by the anti-American Republicans and no one ever hears of them. Get it out on TV, radio, and all social media, otherwise there will never be support for these ideas.
14
Great idea for Red States. No candidiate can outspend McConnell and Paul. So establish a uniform platform. Then buy advertising in off years, so when a brave candidate steps forward, the people can at least recognize what the Democratic party stands for. Also, spend time and money on market research and focus groups. What works in California will not work in Kentucky.
4
The DNC still doesn't seem to have a crisp path forward for 2018. Its plan for a 2017 "Summer of Resistance" doesn't tell voters what Democrats stand for - just what they are against. Party candidates need to be ready to tell people what Democrats hold dear. These used to be called "values." Further, Democrats need to be the "adults in the room" - not just yell louder than the opposition.
Democrats need to actually listen to prospective voters that didn't support them in the last election cycle; and make a plan that responds to their concerns, while staying consistent with Democratic values. That means leaving the echo chamber and engaging others who may think differently. It also means a potentially less progressive agenda than described by the author.
To be blunt, the DNC needs to focus its work on just four things:
1. Crisply define the national party's values and flow them down to the state and local party organizations so they can be widely and consistently communicated;
2. Methodically talk to voters (and non- voters) across the country to get a clear picture of their needs, frustrations, and the extent to which our party values could realistically address them;
3. Using that feedback, develop actionable steps to be accomplished by the party at the national, state, and local levels, consistent with the party's values; and
4. Get a credible, electable roster of 2018 local, state, and national candidates in place as soon as possible.
The clock is ticking.
Democrats need to actually listen to prospective voters that didn't support them in the last election cycle; and make a plan that responds to their concerns, while staying consistent with Democratic values. That means leaving the echo chamber and engaging others who may think differently. It also means a potentially less progressive agenda than described by the author.
To be blunt, the DNC needs to focus its work on just four things:
1. Crisply define the national party's values and flow them down to the state and local party organizations so they can be widely and consistently communicated;
2. Methodically talk to voters (and non- voters) across the country to get a clear picture of their needs, frustrations, and the extent to which our party values could realistically address them;
3. Using that feedback, develop actionable steps to be accomplished by the party at the national, state, and local levels, consistent with the party's values; and
4. Get a credible, electable roster of 2018 local, state, and national candidates in place as soon as possible.
The clock is ticking.
29
I totally agree, I have been a Democratic voter since 1960 and I have no idea what this party stands for!
They must remind and educate the American people of the failures of the Republican party, the last two Republican Administrations, practicing failed "trickle down" economic policies, both ended in recessions, and of course the Great Depression happened during the presidency of a Conservative/Republican president!
Remarkably, the Democratic Party has even failed to establish itself as the party of the middle class, even after years of Republican politicians supporting legislation to benifit only the wealthy and big business, at the expense of the middle class!
They must remind and educate the American people of the failures of the Republican party, the last two Republican Administrations, practicing failed "trickle down" economic policies, both ended in recessions, and of course the Great Depression happened during the presidency of a Conservative/Republican president!
Remarkably, the Democratic Party has even failed to establish itself as the party of the middle class, even after years of Republican politicians supporting legislation to benifit only the wealthy and big business, at the expense of the middle class!
1
I agree with comments expressing concerns that an increased child tax credit risks incentivizing women who lack the means to support their own children to have more of them. Increased availabilty of pre-school and daycare could benefit the children while giving the parent more opportunity to either work or obtain job skills.
7
You do realize that your selfish, horrible irresponsible parents are the reason you can sit at your desk and tap out a message about how it's disgusting that other human beings, especially poor people, would even think of having children. Unless you're royalty, even if your parents had a few bucks, that doesn't mean their parents or grandparents did. But, yeah, blame people who have children.
While it should not be hard, the Democrats have rarely been effective at developing an articulate, intelligent platform that they actually adhere to and promote consistently. Their lack of capability to frame a platform that appeals to the masses, particularly rural and economically disadvantaged, is one of the reasons we are in the current situation. Unfortunately, there appears to be a little evidence that that is changing. Why? That's the question.
3
A big part of the answer is money. A lot of big donors want to protect their interests above all.
3
In Massachusetts, we developed a strong and progressive platform on Saturday that addresses many of the things in this article and more.
3
Most people want universal health care, tuition-free education, an end to subsidized outsourcing, etc. Measly child tax credits is some new version of midnight basketball or school uniforms.
54
'Measly child tax credits is some new version of midnight basketball or school uniforms.' ... and it's one of the reasons we will see another Trump term come to fruition, and quite possibly a splintering of the Democratic Party. It may even be fair to call it a 'redistribution' of the goals, values and agenda of the Democratic Party.
1
If Democrats don't follow Bernie Sanders' example and eschew corporate and PAC donations, and vow to remove all money from politics their support will continue to erode and populists will splinter away into a 3rd Party. Maybe we need to break the Democratic party in two in order to save both the middle class and our democracy. With fascist idealogues like McConnell, Ryan, Sessions and Trump ruining the nation and threatening the lives, hopes and dreams of millions, Democrats, progressives, minorities, women, the disenfranchised should be coming together every bit as much as we did after Pearl Harbor to fight this class war. Instead many Dems, (Manchin, Booker) ones, are still sniffing for corporate money, trying to be the errand boys of the rich. Yet more and more of their constituents are forced into poverty, despair, homelessness and ill health. Today they tweet and post and grumble and protest, awaiting a new populist hero to lead them. Is there another young JFK or MLK or Lincoln out there who will turn the tide for us? If the middle class and poor don't see relief soon, when children are hungry, when people die of neglect or starvation or pollution, a nation with 300 million guns is going to rip apart into violence that rivals the Civil War. We have less than TWO YEARS to bind together in righteous indignation to throw these cretins out of office. Get it together.
17
Why leave out the most important current idea, universal healthcare? A glaring omission here.
Yes, go bold, Democrats - or you'll never win.
Yes, go bold, Democrats - or you'll never win.
119
Massachusetts has it in their platform that was approved on Saturday (along with tuition-free education K through university).
5
Please post the Massachusetts platform or a link to it.
Yes, I agree with this. It's not in a vacuum though. HRC was for a lot if not all of this.
4
As a lifelong Democrat I can agree with most of your ideas. But the idea of a child allowance is not good. The money would most likely go to drugs, alcohol or other wastes of money instead of benefitting the child in many instances. I think we should help poor families, but they have to help themselves also.
18
Pay people to have more children ? - when the biosphere is being destroyed by a tidal wave of humanity and youth un and underemployment is widespread in both developed and third world countries? Mr. Bernstein must be getting a stipend from one or more global corporations, or his ideology doesn't permit him to see reality.
27
The author writes: "In fact, under the surface tension, a robust, highly progressive agenda has been coming together in recent months, one with the potential to unite both the Hillary and Bernie wings of the party, to go beyond both Clintonomics and Obamanomics." Sounds good, but WHERE is the evidence this is true? Sounds like a fairy tale.
The Democrats have made it clear they are working for the corporations, not the people, and have no interest in adopting progressive policies. Obama's pushing of Tom Perez as DNC chair at the last minute when it looked as if a progressive might be chosen, is an example, as is the fact that they have opposed progressive candidates in down ticket races and have done nothing to correct their own internal corruption. Even with a nod to Bernie progressives on the minimum wage, the DNC platform still supports fracking, and drilling on Federal lands. No mention is made here of the bloated military budget (which, BTW did not start with Trump) and the endless wars, which are draining our economic resources to the tune of .64 on the tax dollar. All fantasy, no facts here, another NYT feel good article.
The Democrats have made it clear they are working for the corporations, not the people, and have no interest in adopting progressive policies. Obama's pushing of Tom Perez as DNC chair at the last minute when it looked as if a progressive might be chosen, is an example, as is the fact that they have opposed progressive candidates in down ticket races and have done nothing to correct their own internal corruption. Even with a nod to Bernie progressives on the minimum wage, the DNC platform still supports fracking, and drilling on Federal lands. No mention is made here of the bloated military budget (which, BTW did not start with Trump) and the endless wars, which are draining our economic resources to the tune of .64 on the tax dollar. All fantasy, no facts here, another NYT feel good article.
19
This is all good but where is there anything like a carbon tax or a carbon fee and dividend proposal to deal with climate change?
4
Because that's not the burning concern of the flippable segment of voters, that's why.
The best tax policy to help the middle and lower classes would be to eliminate the tax subsidies for investment income, especially capital gains. They do next to nothing to encourage investment. Instead, they penalize hard work. Thus, capital gains should be taxed at the same rates as salaries and wages, and investment income would be subject to Medicare and Social Security taxes.
9
That "subsidy" you imagine is compensation for taking risk, and does everything to encourage investment.
2
Providing tax breaks to fuel investment will work if two preconditions are satisfied:
1. The beneficiary of the tax break feels sufficiently secure to take a risk with the money rather than spend it improving his lifestyle.
2. There is a sufficient investment opportunity available to attract the beneficiary to spend the money there instead of on his family.
The reason trickle-down economics doesn't work is that the public's ROI on tax cuts is not secured or protected in any way. If we want to create jobs, then offer tax cuts in return for creating jobs, and rescind them if it doesn't happen.
1. The beneficiary of the tax break feels sufficiently secure to take a risk with the money rather than spend it improving his lifestyle.
2. There is a sufficient investment opportunity available to attract the beneficiary to spend the money there instead of on his family.
The reason trickle-down economics doesn't work is that the public's ROI on tax cuts is not secured or protected in any way. If we want to create jobs, then offer tax cuts in return for creating jobs, and rescind them if it doesn't happen.
1
I have a problem with tailoring aid to family size. The basis necessities - rent/mortgage, electricity, heat, water, phone, transportation - are not necessarily cheaper for the 1 or 2 person household, than a 4 person household.
Aid for those items should be determined by setting a basic standard of living.
Beyond that, aid such as food and healthcare should reflect family size.
Aid for those items should be determined by setting a basic standard of living.
Beyond that, aid such as food and healthcare should reflect family size.
4
That should be "basic necessities".
Please excuse the typo.
Please excuse the typo.
The per child credit is a very good idea. It would help stabilize families. It would reduce abortion. Children raised in a more supportive enviroment would become better and more educated citizens of the future (and likely pay more in taxes to help support society). It is not hard to predict that in such an enviroment, the cost of such a program would result in lots of direct and indirect savings, such as reduced social serivce costs across an arrray of services now provided. It would raise education scores. lessen stress and create a more wholesome enviroment for many families. Conservatives should like many of these benefits. What is the alternative as we face a future of increasing technology that lowers wages for many while stripping away what used ot be the bread and butter jobs of families. The cost of the status quo is, and will be, extraordinarily high.
3