SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
January, 10 2021, 11:00pm EDT
Contact:
Karen Conner, 202-281-4159, conner@cepr.net
CEPR Publishes Guide to Federal Budget Activism
WASHINGTON
The Biden administration will need to activate every tool in the shed to deal with the urgent needs of a country suffering from a pandemic, a recession, and staggering inequities at every level. To optimize the use of public spending and taxation, the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) releases today the first of three guides for fiscal activism, How Joe Biden's Budget Can Build Back Better, Part I: Send Money Now!, by CEPR senior research fellow Max B. Sawicky.
"First and foremost, we need a plan to limit and beat back the spread of the virus until adequate vaccine distribution has been accomplished," said Sawicky, an expert on the federal budget and state and local finance. For economic recovery, "We suggest a stimulus of $3.5 trillion, phased in over three years."
Part I: Send Money Now! focuses on cash assistance to families and to state and local governments. It is written for advocates, decision-makers, and the interested public. Along with the two installments to follow, the guide lays out guideposts mutually recognized by the diverse interests that are clamoring for action by the incoming administration.
The guide prioritizes keeping the aid flowing on automatic pilot with direct payments to individuals and households, including continued expansion of unemployment benefits, paid sick leave, and cash payments to individuals and families with children, until it can be shown to be no longer needed.
A second priority is providing sufficient, immediate aid to state and local governments of $500 billion annually through 2022. In the US, these governments carry most of the responsibility for providing public services and host the bulk of public fixed capital, chiefly roads, bridges, school buildings, and transit infrastructure. Furthermore, policy makers should consider a revival of permanent federal fiscal assistance to state and local governments, formerly known as revenue sharing.
Although the ambitious fiscal policies outlined here will face political difficulties, this approach can inform current debates and the run-up to mid-term elections in 2022. The paper offers a model for "turning crisis into opportunity," by relating the current crises to the long-term benefits of the permanent institution of a guaranteed income and a new program of revenue sharing for state and local governments. In other words, rather than being reduced to the application of band-aids, even large ones, to current problems, Sawicky argues for the consideration of solutions that apply immediately but would also be permanent and provide automatic, timely responses to similar problems in the future.
The second part in this series will discuss longer-term priorities in the field of public investment in the framework of a Green New Deal and President Biden's commitment to investment in the "care economy." The third part will discuss the roles that defense spending cuts and tax reform should play going forward.
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380LATEST NEWS
Critics Warn Trump Plan for 'Zombie' Coal Plants Will Make Energy Dirtier and Costlier
"The Trump administration is once again putting its thumb on the scale to help old, dirty power sources at the expense of air quality, public health, and higher energy bills," said one opponent.
Jul 08, 2025
Green groups warned Tuesday that the Trump administration's plan to invoke a bogus "energy emergency" in order to keep old, polluting coal-fired plants running will make electricity generation dirtier and more expensive while failing to produce enough power to keep up with surging demand.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Energy published a resource adequacy analysis that includes plans for boosting fossil-fueled electricity generation, including at coal-fired plants. The report cites President Donald Trump's executive orders declaring a national energy emergency and strengthening the reliability and security of the nation's electric grid, and highlights the DOE's plan to classify aging fossil fuel plants as critical to system reliability. The administration is also likely to continue invoking Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act and the Defense Production Act in order to extend the lifespans of older fossil fuel plants.
Although the analysis acknowledges that "old tools won't solve new problems," its methodology supports keeping expensive and polluting coal plants in operation. Dirty coal plants that continue to operate despite economic inefficiencies are sometimes called "zombie" plants.
"More clean energy will make the U.S. grid stronger, more reliable, and more resilient."
Not only does the report fail to state that the burning of fossil fuels is the leading driver of the climate emergency, it does not even mention the word "climate" once in its 73 pages. This tracks with the Trump administration's long-standing proscription of the term "climate change."
"The methodology released today is another attempt to push the false narrative that our country's energy future depends upon decades-old coal and gas plants, rather than clean renewables," said Sierra Club senior attorney Greg Wannier. "The only energy crisis faced by the American public is the catastrophic increase in costs that the Trump administration is forcing on the country's ratepayers."
Wannier noted that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and states "are already well equipped to meet any projected resource needs through the existing regulatory process, which ensures that electricity demand is reliably met at the least public cost."
"Any effort by DOE to override this process to forcibly keep coal plants online past their planned retirements would be an extraordinary and unlawful overreach of its regulatory authority," Wannier added. "It would be particularly harmful and costly to the communities living near these power plants who face the possibility of continued exposure to toxic levels of air and water pollution."
Ted Kelly, director and lead counsel for U.S. clean energy at the Environmental Defense Fund, said Tuesday:
The Trump administration is once again putting its thumb on the scale to help old, dirty power sources at the expense of air quality, public health, and higher energy bills for American families and businesses. This time it has issued a methodology that uses dodgy accounting to ignore all the clean energy we have at our disposal—including solar, wind, and battery technologies that are helping meet our nation's energy needs and support the reliability of our electric grid—in order to make a bogus case that these old, dirty power plants are needed. The administration's deeply flawed approach can't hide the fact that clean energy resources are helping keep lights on and lower electricity bills across the country, while keeping old, dirty power plants on life support will mean higher power bills for families and more toxic, cancer-causing pollution in the air we breathe.
The Trump administration has already used the nonexistent energy emergency in a push to fast-track fossil fuel permitting, keep fossil-fueled plants operating, and to wage lawfare against Democrat-controlled states trying to hold Big Oil financially accountable for its role in causing the climate emergency. In 2017, the first Trump administration also moved to bail out financially floundering coal and nuclear plants.
"No matter how they try to gussy it up, bailing out coal or other fossil fuels when low-cost solar and wind power is growing so quickly makes even less sense today than it did in 2017 when the previous Trump administration tried it before," Kit Kennedy, managing director for power at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), said in response to the DOE plan.
"It's ironic that the Energy Department is warning about reliability just days after Republicans in Congress repealed the clean energy tax credits," Kennedy added, referring to a provision in the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed by Trump on Friday.
NRDC cites analysts' predictions that the legislation will reduce additions of the electricity needed to meet rapidly growing demand and raise wholesale electricity prices as much as 25% by 2030 and up to 74% by 2035.
"More clean energy will make the U.S. grid stronger, more reliable, and more resilient—all while saving consumers money on their electricity bills," Kennedy said. "Bailing out old, dirty coal, gas, and oil plants would mean higher costs and a less reliable grid."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ad Campaign Targets Vulnerable Republican Who Broke Promise Not to Cut Medicaid
Northeastern Pennsylvania Congressman Rob Bresnahan is one of many Republicans in swing states who are taking heat after ripping away Medicaid coverage from their constituents.
Jul 08, 2025
A new ad campaign is targeting a vulnerable first-term Republican congressman in a Northeastern Pennsylvania swing district after he broke his promise not to vote for Medicaid cuts.
Rep. Rob Bresnahan Jr. (R-Pa.) joined the rest of his party last week to vote for the Republican budget megabill, which cut over $1 trillion from the safety net program over the next decade.
As editorial board of The Times-Tribune in Scranton wrote, Bresnahan's vote went against his "repeated promises" to protect safety net programs, including a pledge he made in February that "if a bill is put in front of me that guts the benefits my neighbors rely on, I will not vote for it."
Bresnahan did ultimately vote for the bill, which may now result in nearly a half-million of his "neighbors" in the state of Pennsylvania losing coverage, according to a study published last week by the Joint Congressional Economic Committee. More than 200,000 people in Bresnahan's district—over a quarter—are Medicaid recipients.
In a new ad released Monday by the progressive group Unrig Our Economy, one of those neighbors comes back to haunt him.
"I sat in a meeting with Congressman Bresnahan," says a Scranton woman named Krysten. "We discussed some issues that I deal with myself."
The ad notes that Krysten had an ankle injury that required "six surgeries," "rehabilitation," an "ankle brace," and "medication."
"I had explained how important Medicaid is with him sitting straight across from me," Krysten says. "He stated to me that he would not make cuts to Medicaid."
"Afterwards, when the votes were done," she continues, "when I found out how he voted, I was very upset to hear that Congressman Bresnahan voted for the largest cut to Medicaid in history to give tax breaks to billionaires. This doesn't make sense at all."
Bresnahan won his seat by just 1.6 points in 2024, knocking out Democratic incumbent Rep. Matt Cartwright. The Cook Political Report lists Bresnahan as one of the most vulnerable Republican incumbents in the country in the 2026 midterms.
"Congressman Bresnahan looked his own constituents in the eyes and promised to protect Medicaid, then turned around and voted to gut it so billionaires could get another tax break," said Kobie Christian, a spokesperson for Unrig Our Economy. "People like Krysten deserve healthcare and honesty, not cruel cuts and empty promises. Congressman Bresnahan should start fighting for his constituents, not the ultrarich."
Other Democratic-aligned groups are joining in the full-court press, hoping Bresnahan's betrayal of Medicaid recipients would be enough to sink his reelection chances.
In a post on X Tuesday, the House Majority PAC, which seeks to win the House majority back for Democrats, called out Bresnahan for selling his stock in the Centene Corporation, the largest Medicaid provider in the U.S., on May 15, just one week before the first version of the Republican bill passed the House. The value of the stock would tank throughout the month of June as cuts to Medicaid became increasingly inevitable.
"This congressman literally dumped stock in a Medicaid provider company right before this bill came to the floor," said Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.). "Don't be fooled—these guys know exactly what they're doing."
Bresnahan is one of many Republicans who may be in danger after voting to strip Medicaid from their constituents.
According to Newsweek, 64 GOP lawmakers represent districts where the Medicaid enrollment rate is higher than the national average. In addition to Bresnahan, four others—Nick Begich (R-Alaska), Juan Ciscomani (R-Ariz.), Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), and Jeff Hurd (R-Colo.) won their districts by five points or less and are particularly vulnerable.
The GOP bill is historically unpopular, with polls from Quinnipiac University, The Washington Post, Pew Research, and Fox News all showing roughly 2-to-1 opposition. Meanwhile, just 10% of Americans say they support cuts to Medicaid spending compared to nearly half who say the government should spend more money on the program, according to Quinnipiac.
According to reporting from Politico Sunday, Republicans are now in panic mode about how this vote could affect their chances.
"What we know from past elections is that messing with people's healthcare coverage is very problematic for politicians," said Republican pollster Whit Ayres. "It has, in the past, yielded some very, very negative views about the people who supported it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ripping GOP Megabill's Attack on Medicaid, Pro-Labor Dan Osborn Runs for Senate in Nebraska
"We're seeing tax cuts for the billionaires at the expense of workers, people that are struggling to get by," Osborn said.
Jul 08, 2025
Mechanic and former labor union leader Dan Osborn, who last year ran for the United States Senate as an independent in deep-red Nebraska and came within 63,000 votes of defeating incumbent Republican Sen. Deb Fischer, is getting back into the ring.
Osborn announced on Tuesday that he will be running for Senate again next year against Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), whom he lampooned in his opening campaign video as "Wall Street Pete."
🚨MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT🚨
Ok. You've all convinced me. I'm in.
I'm running for Senate against billionaire Pete Ricketts In Nebraska.
This race represents the foundational battle taking place in America right now:
The Billionaire Class vs. The Working Class
Who's with me? pic.twitter.com/QQmcq4H3bl
— Dan Osborn (@osbornforne) July 8, 2025
In an interview with New York Times opinion columnist Michelle Goldberg, Osborn said that he believes he can make the recently passed GOP budget bill a key issue in a state that has not elected a non-Republican to serve in the Senate since Democrat Ben Nelson defeated Ricketts back in 2006.
"They were sold a bill of goods that if you work hard in this country, your government is going to be there, to have a level playing field for you to get ahead," Osborn explained to Goldberg. "But now we're seeing tax cuts for the billionaires at the expense of workers, people that are struggling to get by."
In fact, The New York Times reports that Osborn is resurrecting many of the class-based economic themes that he deployed in a race that he lost by just six-and-a-half points despite being in a state that President Donald Trump won by more than 20 points.
"If you're truly a party for the working class, your candidates are going to be mostly working-class," he told the Times. "I like to call it paycheck populism, because I get a paycheck once a week. I know how much money comes in. I know much money goes out. And I know how much harder it is to live now versus eight years ago."
In his interview with the paper, Osborn once again made sure to bring up the just-passed GOP budget bill.
"We can talk about the Big Beautiful Bill and the fact that it is going to continue funneling money toward the top by taking from social services, and healthcare from hard-working people," he said. "I doubt there's a bunch of billionaires that are in line for Medicaid."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular