Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) speaks during a House Financial Services Committee hearing on Tuesday, October 22, 2019.
Mondaire Jones, Katie Porter Urge Fellow Democrats to Reject Means Testing Folly
"Means testing is a choice to deprive millions of our neighbors of what they need simply to cope with a budget artificially limited by regressive tax policy."
Democratic Reps. Mondaire Jones and Katie Porter are again pushing back against any effort to implement means testing to water down potentially historic social investments proposed in their party's Build Back Better plan.
Making the proposed investments in the social safety net--including child care and Medicare expansion--universal is both "good policy and good politics," they wrote in a Washington Post op-ed published Thursday.
Jones (D-N.Y.) and Porter (D-Calif.) made their case a day after they joined other leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in which they similarly pushed for universal programs in the reconciliation package over "complicated methods of means-testing that the wealthy and powerful will use to divide us."
The op-ed also followed reporting indicating that President Joe Biden and some Democrats, including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, are open to or are directly pushing for means-testing--income caps--on certain programs to lower the plan's overall costs.
However, wrote Jones and Porter, the argument that means-testing aligns with "fiscal responsibility" just doesn't hold water.
"Means-tested programs cost more to administer, because complex systems, processes, and entire offices must be created to determine who qualifies," in contrast to "universal programs [that] allow us to maximize our investment in the American people," they wrote.
In addition, while means-testing proponents point to a need to exclude wealthier households from receiving benefits, Jones and Porter wrote that the practice "often excludes the most vulnerable poor, who aren't always able to jump through the required hoops to prove their eligibility."
Universal programs, the two lawmakers argue, "build solidarity that helps them stand the test of time--when we all have a stake in the success of a public program, it can withstand changing political winds."
The op-ed noted as an example former President Donald Trump's campaign pledge not to cut the widely popular universal programs Medicare and Social Security, as well as the cutting of means-tested programs such as SNAP and TANF by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
Simply put, Jones and Porter wrote, "means testing is a choice to deprive millions of our neighbors of what they need simply to cope with a budget artificially limited by regressive tax policy."
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
Democratic Reps. Mondaire Jones and Katie Porter are again pushing back against any effort to implement means testing to water down potentially historic social investments proposed in their party's Build Back Better plan.
Making the proposed investments in the social safety net--including child care and Medicare expansion--universal is both "good policy and good politics," they wrote in a Washington Post op-ed published Thursday.
Jones (D-N.Y.) and Porter (D-Calif.) made their case a day after they joined other leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in which they similarly pushed for universal programs in the reconciliation package over "complicated methods of means-testing that the wealthy and powerful will use to divide us."
The op-ed also followed reporting indicating that President Joe Biden and some Democrats, including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, are open to or are directly pushing for means-testing--income caps--on certain programs to lower the plan's overall costs.
However, wrote Jones and Porter, the argument that means-testing aligns with "fiscal responsibility" just doesn't hold water.
"Means-tested programs cost more to administer, because complex systems, processes, and entire offices must be created to determine who qualifies," in contrast to "universal programs [that] allow us to maximize our investment in the American people," they wrote.
In addition, while means-testing proponents point to a need to exclude wealthier households from receiving benefits, Jones and Porter wrote that the practice "often excludes the most vulnerable poor, who aren't always able to jump through the required hoops to prove their eligibility."
Universal programs, the two lawmakers argue, "build solidarity that helps them stand the test of time--when we all have a stake in the success of a public program, it can withstand changing political winds."
The op-ed noted as an example former President Donald Trump's campaign pledge not to cut the widely popular universal programs Medicare and Social Security, as well as the cutting of means-tested programs such as SNAP and TANF by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
Simply put, Jones and Porter wrote, "means testing is a choice to deprive millions of our neighbors of what they need simply to cope with a budget artificially limited by regressive tax policy."
Democratic Reps. Mondaire Jones and Katie Porter are again pushing back against any effort to implement means testing to water down potentially historic social investments proposed in their party's Build Back Better plan.
Making the proposed investments in the social safety net--including child care and Medicare expansion--universal is both "good policy and good politics," they wrote in a Washington Post op-ed published Thursday.
Jones (D-N.Y.) and Porter (D-Calif.) made their case a day after they joined other leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in which they similarly pushed for universal programs in the reconciliation package over "complicated methods of means-testing that the wealthy and powerful will use to divide us."
The op-ed also followed reporting indicating that President Joe Biden and some Democrats, including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, are open to or are directly pushing for means-testing--income caps--on certain programs to lower the plan's overall costs.
However, wrote Jones and Porter, the argument that means-testing aligns with "fiscal responsibility" just doesn't hold water.
"Means-tested programs cost more to administer, because complex systems, processes, and entire offices must be created to determine who qualifies," in contrast to "universal programs [that] allow us to maximize our investment in the American people," they wrote.
In addition, while means-testing proponents point to a need to exclude wealthier households from receiving benefits, Jones and Porter wrote that the practice "often excludes the most vulnerable poor, who aren't always able to jump through the required hoops to prove their eligibility."
Universal programs, the two lawmakers argue, "build solidarity that helps them stand the test of time--when we all have a stake in the success of a public program, it can withstand changing political winds."
The op-ed noted as an example former President Donald Trump's campaign pledge not to cut the widely popular universal programs Medicare and Social Security, as well as the cutting of means-tested programs such as SNAP and TANF by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
Simply put, Jones and Porter wrote, "means testing is a choice to deprive millions of our neighbors of what they need simply to cope with a budget artificially limited by regressive tax policy."