Katie Malone is an editorial intern at The American Prospect.
By Katie Malone | Apr 26, 2019
When Obama took office in 2009, senior administration officials equivocated over how to jump-start recovery amid the Great Recession. “Because monetary policy had been the key anti-recessionary tool for the previous 20 years, we had little knowledge of exactly how well fiscal stimulus would work and which type of stimulus would be the most effective,” said former Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers Christina Romer. Speaking at the Economic Policy Institute last week, Romer argued that since the Fed has limited power when a recession hits, creating adequate fiscal policy is essential.
The long-lasting consequences of the Great Recession, combined with a generation of underinvestment, has left U.S. communities vulnerable to another economic downturn. A recession could hit in the next 18 months, according to experts speaking at EPI’s Next Recession event, and the fiscal policy necessary to combat it needs to be put in place now. Public-investment legislation, including the right automatic stabilizers and creating government jobs, could mitigate the potential blowback of a fiscal plunge.
In recent years, tax cuts on the wealthy and loopholes for corporations have kept large sums of money in the hands of the wealthy. President Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 only excacerbated the divide, hurting vulnerable communities that have not had the chance to fully recover from the previous recession. An Economic Bill of Rights, insists Kirwan Institute Executive Director Darrick Hamilton, would ensure an inclusive economy that benefits all. Protecting economic stability for every American would uplift underserved communities and reduce the consequences of a financial panic, even for those still recovering.
Greater public investment could invigorate the economy from its roots. During Romer’s year and a half in the Obama White House, she learned the importance of “jobs not checks.” She cited New Deal–era programs like the Civilian Conservation Corps that put Americans back to work.
“When you create a public-sector job, that has spillovers. An employed worker goes out and buys things and that puts other people to work,” Romer said. These programs boosted morale and improved public spaces to benefit the community as a whole.
That said, it’s difficult to ensure the prioritization of workers as economic disaster unfolds. Automatic stabilizers that protect jobs at the local, state, and federal levels are essential to keep the basis of the economy intact in the worst of times. They would guarantee that even if another bubble bursts, roads will be paved, children will be taught, and criminals will face justice.
“Public jobs are the cornerstone of what is needed to emerge from a recession stronger,” said Amy Hanauer, executive director of Policy Matters Ohio. Investing in workers who keep the economy thriving is a surefire way to pull through a recession and enrich our economic future.
Before the next recession hits, Democrats need to outline a persuasive narrative to spur large-scale investment. Romer admits that the administration should have done more to make the case in favor of fiscal stimulus to the American public. But since then, the American public has seemingly grown skeptical of much-needed interventions. As Romer told EPI, “Even actions like extending unemployment insurance during a long downturn are now highly controversial.”
Part of the reason for misguided public attitudes, experts lament, is the failure of Democrats to shape the debate. Margarida Jorge, a grassroots organizing expert and executive director of Health Care for America Now, commented on how easy it is for Republicans to monopolize the conversation about the economy when Democrats remain silent about the issue. “When you have nothing to say and your opposition has a lot to say,” Jorge said, “people tend to believe your opposition.”
Crafting the right narrative about defending workers, reining in Wall Street, and strengthening the social safety net is the first step to drafting adequate policy.
By Katie Malone | Apr 11, 2019
Despite recent progress toward criminal justice reform, the United States continues to pursue policies that encourage mass incarceration and fail to rehabilitate offenders, according to a Human Rights Watch report presented to the United Nations Human Rights Committee earlier this year.
The international watchdog organization also detailed a spectrum of overreach and misconduct in the criminal justice system, including adult sentences for juvenile offenders and disproportionate sentencing based on race.
The U.S. juvenile detention system often tries young people as adults and metes out sentences that outweigh the crimes. The number of youth in prison has dropped by 50 percent since its peak in 2000, but over 5,000 juveniles remain incarcerated in adult jails and prisons nationwide.
Human Rights Watch raised specific concerns about disproportionate sentencing and racial profiling. While African Americans and whites use drugs at similar rates, African Americans are imprisoned on drug charges at six times the rate of white users.
Surprisingly, the Trump administration has taken some steps toward effective criminal justice reforms; President Trump signed the First Step Act into law in December. New Jersey Democratic Senator Cory Booker said in statement that the bill would help “correct the ills of the failed War on Drugs.” The law includes provisions that increase good-time credits, move offenders closer to their homes, and expand skill-building programs.
But Human Rights Watch and other criminal justice advocacy groups vehemently opposed the measure, and last spring the group urged the House Judiciary Committee to vote no. Jasmine Tyler, Human Rights Watch’s U.S. advocacy director, explained that most of the text is “extremely problematic,” with the exception of few measures like retroactivity for equalizing powder cocaine and crack cocaine sentences.
Attorney General William Barr could also pose a threat to reform, the group says. Barr has a history of supporting initiatives, from harsher sentencing for crack cocaine to co-signing a report in favor of increasing incarceration in the 1990s, that are at odds with the First Step Act as well as broader criminal justice reform efforts.
Tyler also criticized the use of a “risk assessment based on a likely racist system” to place people into re-entry programs that “likely don’t exist.” According to Tyler, the law does not address the limited services and abysmal halfway-house conditions that many people returning to their communities face. As Human Rights Watch said in a letter to the committee, passing “back-end reform” without including “front-end reform” won’t meaningfully improve the federal system.
By Katie Malone | Feb 04, 2019
The Pew Research Center released a survey in January highlighting the left-leaning values of Generation Z. While most of Gen Z has yet to reach voting age, its members are now 13-to-21 years old, those who identify as Republican hold more progressive values than Republican millennials, Generation Xers, Baby Boomers, or the Silent Generation. If these trends hold, they could presage a broader disillusionment with a GOP in thrall with its right wing. A Democratic Party that actively embraces its progressive youth would be well-situated to make inroads with this group.
Generation Z and millennials share common perspectives, and both generations are more progressive than their elders. Both generations hold negative views of President Donald Trump's job performance, believe that government should be more involved in problem solving, and think that racial and ethnic diversity is good for society.
Overall, Generation Z has little enthusiasm for Trump’s tenure in office. Only 30 percent of them approve of his job performance, compared to 29 percent of millennials, 38 percent of Gen Xers, 43 percent of boomers, and 54 percent of the Silent Generation. Although Trump remains very popular among older Republicans, a smaller majority of Gen Zers support him.
Younger generations have more positive views of the role of government: 53 percent of Generation Z respondents believe that ordinary citizens can do a lot to influence the government in Washington. Gen Z Republicans share this optimism: They are much more likely than older generations to believe that government should work to solve problems. Most older Republicans responded that the government does too much; problem-solving, they feel, should be left to businesses and individuals.
Gen Z is even closing the partisan gap on divisive issues like race, immigration, gender, and climate. Generation Z Republicans are notably more aware of social inequities compared to previous generations: 43 percent of Gen Z Republicans surveyed believe that African Americans are treated less fairly than whites compared to 30 percent of millennials. Roughly 20 percent of Gen Xers, boomers and silent Republicans believe that blacks are treated unfairly.
Of the Gen Z Republicans surveyed, 41 percent believe that application forms should include gender options besides just male or female while only 27 percent of millennial, 17 percent of Generation X, and 16 percent of both boomers and silent generation Republicans do.
And on climate, only 18 percent of young Republicans attribute the Earth’s warming to natural patterns rather than human influences; while 30 percent of millennials, 36 percent of Gen Xers, 42 percent of boomers, and 41 percent of silent generation Republicans do.
It’s hard to know whether this leftward tilt will persist as Generation Z Republicans reach voting age, but it’s a trend that bears watching. If the GOP continues to stoke fears about immigration and racial and ethnic diversity; downplay the importance of gender; and sow doubt about climate change, the Democratic Party’s progressive values may be much more appealing.