Democrats are running left on economics. Here are their 5 most brazen proposals
Congressional Democrats have responded to unified GOP control of Congress by moving to the populist Left. Here are the most ambitious proposals that Democrats have advanced and that are likely to play a role in the midterm elections and, further down the road, the 2020 Democratic presidential primary.
1. The jobs guarantee
The proposal is that state and local governments would provide public works jobs at $15 an hour for anyone who wanted one. The goal would be to eliminate involuntary unemployment and give low-wage workers an advantage bargaining with employers.
Critics say the sweeping plan would cost hundreds of billions a year and risk moving millions of workers into inefficient government work.
Sanders has not produced an estimate of the cost of the plan or said how it would be financed.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who is thought to harbor presidential ambitions, also hinted at support for a jobs guarantee this spring. New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker has said that he will introduce legislation to set up a jobs guarantee demonstration project.
2. Big tax credits for work
Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., introduced a plan in the fall to massively increase tax credits for low-income workers.
The plan is not the Universal Basic Income that some in Silicon Valley, which Khanna represents, have called for. But it would subsidize work by doubling the Earned Income Tax Credit that boosts low-income families’ pay and extend it for childless workers.
The EITC credit is refundable, meaning that if it exceeds tax liability, the government effectively sends filers a check.
The bigger tax credits would subsidize not just poor families, but also many middle-class families, toward the goal of reducing inequality between middle-earners and the top 1 percent.
Over 10 years, the expanded credit would cost the federal government $1.4 trillion in revenue, according to the Tax Policy Center.
3. Expanding Social Security
Last election, liberal Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren pushed Democratic candidates to counter GOP calls to reform Social Security by pledging to expand it. Eventually, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton signed onto that pledge, a big turnaround from the Obama era.
Last year, Sanders joined with Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., in authoring a bill to boost benefits for poor retirees and pay for it by raising payroll taxes on high earners.
The point is less about the specifics and more about signaling that Democrats are not looking to cut Social Security as a response to the rising federal debt and the looming exhaustion of Social Security's trust funds. Liberals argue that defending Social Security polls very well.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats, is planning to propose a plan to guarantee a job for anyone who wants one, provided by the government.
4. Banking in post offices
Last month, Gillibrand put forward a bill to have post offices provide some basic banking services, allowing the government to compete directly with private banks.
Postal banking would be meant to wipe out payday lenders. The idea is that the U.S. Postal Service already has branches in all the poorest ZIP codes and could conveniently offer small-dollar loans at those locations.
5. Tuition-free college or debt-free college
Liberals are looking to ramp up subsidies for college.
Last year, Sanders proposed having the federal government pay tuition and fees at public colleges across the country for families earning up to $125,000 and making community college free for all.
That policy is estimated to cost about $600 billion over 10 years.
This spring, Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz proposed a different goal: debt-free higher education.
Under his Debt-Free College Act, the federal government would offer matching grants to states that commit to guaranteeing need-based aid so that all students at public universities are able to afford the cost without taking on debt.
Schatz's estimate is that the grants would cost the federal government $80 billion to $95 billion a year, more than current Department of Education spending. States would have to spend more.
Of note, Schatz has said that the plan should not necessarily be paid for by raising taxes or cutting spending elsewhere, saying that the goal of paying for programs puts Democrats at a disadvantage to Republicans, who favor tax cuts.
https:// www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/economy/democrats-are-running-left-on-economics-here-are-their-5-most-brazen-proposals
Gotta hand it to the gimmecrats, they'll come up with any kind of spending gimmick for votes.