SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.) conducts a news conference outside the Capitol to reintroduce the Universal Child Care and Early Learning Act on Tuesday, April 27, 2021. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Democratic Rep. Mondaire Jones on Sunday criticized efforts to include means-testing requirements on programs in his party's reconciliation package as an approach that is not cost-effective and that could exclude those most in need.
The vocal opposition to means-testing from Jones and other progressive Democrats came amid a push by conservative Democrats including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to pare back the climate and safety net package by imposing income limits on proposals like Medicare expansion.
\u201cLimiting the social safety net programs proposed in the #BuildBackBetterAct according to income level \u201csounds good in theory\u201d says @RepMondaire, \u201cbut in practice... we know that it\u2019s overly burdensome for the neediest Americans\u201d. #Velshi\u201d— Ali Velshi (@Ali Velshi) 1634488777
"When you force people to prove that they qualify for a social program," Jones (D-N.Y.) told MSNBC's Ali Velshi, "you have to create processes and an entire administration to then verify eligibility."
"We know that that is overly burdensome for the neediest Americans, people who... can't obtain the documentation they need," he said.
A further problem, Jones continued, is that people "may be intimidated by the countless pages that they have to complete in many instances--in many instances complex pages."
"We know that universal programs are popular," he said. "There's a reason why Social Security and Medicare have withstood the test of time despite the best efforts by Republicans to roll those programs back."
Jones echoed some of the arguments against means-testing he made in a Washington Post joint op-ed last week with Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.).
"For [President Joe] Biden's agenda to meet its potential, we must heed the lessons of the past," Jones and Porter wrote. "That means making our investments universal."
"We can't, as some have insisted, weaken the proposals by 'means-testing' them: restricting benefits only to those who meet arbitrary income requirements and who have the ability to prove they do."
In that joint op-ed, as well as in his interview with Velshi, Jones pointed to 2011 research from the Center for Economic and Policy Research that found "meanstesting is not an effective route for reducing the cost of Social Security" and could in fact raise the costs of the program.
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Democratic Rep. Mondaire Jones on Sunday criticized efforts to include means-testing requirements on programs in his party's reconciliation package as an approach that is not cost-effective and that could exclude those most in need.
The vocal opposition to means-testing from Jones and other progressive Democrats came amid a push by conservative Democrats including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to pare back the climate and safety net package by imposing income limits on proposals like Medicare expansion.
\u201cLimiting the social safety net programs proposed in the #BuildBackBetterAct according to income level \u201csounds good in theory\u201d says @RepMondaire, \u201cbut in practice... we know that it\u2019s overly burdensome for the neediest Americans\u201d. #Velshi\u201d— Ali Velshi (@Ali Velshi) 1634488777
"When you force people to prove that they qualify for a social program," Jones (D-N.Y.) told MSNBC's Ali Velshi, "you have to create processes and an entire administration to then verify eligibility."
"We know that that is overly burdensome for the neediest Americans, people who... can't obtain the documentation they need," he said.
A further problem, Jones continued, is that people "may be intimidated by the countless pages that they have to complete in many instances--in many instances complex pages."
"We know that universal programs are popular," he said. "There's a reason why Social Security and Medicare have withstood the test of time despite the best efforts by Republicans to roll those programs back."
Jones echoed some of the arguments against means-testing he made in a Washington Post joint op-ed last week with Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.).
"For [President Joe] Biden's agenda to meet its potential, we must heed the lessons of the past," Jones and Porter wrote. "That means making our investments universal."
"We can't, as some have insisted, weaken the proposals by 'means-testing' them: restricting benefits only to those who meet arbitrary income requirements and who have the ability to prove they do."
In that joint op-ed, as well as in his interview with Velshi, Jones pointed to 2011 research from the Center for Economic and Policy Research that found "meanstesting is not an effective route for reducing the cost of Social Security" and could in fact raise the costs of the program.
Democratic Rep. Mondaire Jones on Sunday criticized efforts to include means-testing requirements on programs in his party's reconciliation package as an approach that is not cost-effective and that could exclude those most in need.
The vocal opposition to means-testing from Jones and other progressive Democrats came amid a push by conservative Democrats including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to pare back the climate and safety net package by imposing income limits on proposals like Medicare expansion.
\u201cLimiting the social safety net programs proposed in the #BuildBackBetterAct according to income level \u201csounds good in theory\u201d says @RepMondaire, \u201cbut in practice... we know that it\u2019s overly burdensome for the neediest Americans\u201d. #Velshi\u201d— Ali Velshi (@Ali Velshi) 1634488777
"When you force people to prove that they qualify for a social program," Jones (D-N.Y.) told MSNBC's Ali Velshi, "you have to create processes and an entire administration to then verify eligibility."
"We know that that is overly burdensome for the neediest Americans, people who... can't obtain the documentation they need," he said.
A further problem, Jones continued, is that people "may be intimidated by the countless pages that they have to complete in many instances--in many instances complex pages."
"We know that universal programs are popular," he said. "There's a reason why Social Security and Medicare have withstood the test of time despite the best efforts by Republicans to roll those programs back."
Jones echoed some of the arguments against means-testing he made in a Washington Post joint op-ed last week with Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.).
"For [President Joe] Biden's agenda to meet its potential, we must heed the lessons of the past," Jones and Porter wrote. "That means making our investments universal."
"We can't, as some have insisted, weaken the proposals by 'means-testing' them: restricting benefits only to those who meet arbitrary income requirements and who have the ability to prove they do."
In that joint op-ed, as well as in his interview with Velshi, Jones pointed to 2011 research from the Center for Economic and Policy Research that found "meanstesting is not an effective route for reducing the cost of Social Security" and could in fact raise the costs of the program.