

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.
"I’m running because Mainers deserve a fighter who won’t cave to Donald Trump. Jared Golden said Trump is ‘OK’ and that we’ll be ‘just fine’ but Mainers are being hurt by his policies."
Maine Auditor Matt Dunlap on Monday launched a Democratic primary campaign against US Rep. Jared Golden, citing the incumbent congressman's frequent siding with President Donald Trump and Republicans and promising a "People's Agenda" that centers working-class needs.
"I’m running because Mainers deserve a fighter who won’t cave to Donald Trump," Dunlap, who is also a former Maine secretary of state, said in a statement announcing his candidacy. "Jared Golden said Trump is ‘OK’ and that we’ll be ‘just fine’ but Mainers are being hurt by his policies."
"Golden has repeatedly sided with Trump, even when it means that healthcare costs will skyrocket for thousands of Mainers," Dunlap added. "When I’m in Congress, I’ll stand up for Maine, and I’ll fight for affordable healthcare, a lower cost of living, and higher wages for hardworking people.”
Dunlap's platform—which includes Medicare for All and universal childcare—stands in stark contrast with Golden's record as the sole House Democrat to vote against unemployment benefits, child tax credits, and affordable healthcare in the American Rescue Plan pandemic relief package signed by former President Joe Biden in 2021.
Golden was also the only House Democrat who voted for Republicans' government funding bill last month, blaming "hardball politics driven by the demands far-left groups" for the ongoing government shutdown.
Taking aim at both Golden and former Gov. Paul LePage, the likely Republican nominee, Dunlap said in his first campaign ad that "we can do better than bad and worse."
The ad also highlights Dunlap's purported accessibility, a sore spot among voters who accuse Golden of dodging his constituents by refusing to hold town hall meetings.
Dunlap faces a steep uphill battle in a district that Trump won by 9.6% in 2024.
“If Matt Dunlap thinks this district will choose him over Paul LePage, he’s got another thing coming,” Golden said in response to Monday's announcement.
LePage campaign spokesperson Brent Littlefield welcomed Dunlap's entry into the race, saying the progressive candidate "sees what we see, Jared Golden is hiding."
"From Aroostook to Oxford and every county in between, Maine people say they never see Jared Golden in their towns or communities," he added.
Dunlap already has a history of clashing with Trump. During his first term, the president appointed the then-secretary of state to a bipartisan panel tasked with investigating alleged voter fraud. Dunlap sued the commission to obtain files he said were being withheld from him. A judge ruled in his favor; Trump subsequently shut down the commission.
Health insurance premiums are expected to rise significantly for approximately 22 million Americans after Republicans ended a tax credit for those enrolled in programs under the Affordable Care Act.
Democratic leaders said Thursday that they plan to hold up negotiations on a potential government shutdown unless Republicans agree to forfeit a policy change that is expected to dramatically raise health insurance premiums for millions of Americans.
Health insurance premiums are expected to rise significantly for approximately 22 million Americans enrolled in Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace plans after Republicans refused to extend enhanced tax credits when passing Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" in July.
In remarks on Capitol Hill Thursday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he and Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) were in total agreement not to negotiate unless Republicans agree to extend the tax credits.
“On this issue, we’re totally united. The Republicans have to come to meet with us in a true bipartisan negotiation to satisfy the American people’s needs on healthcare, or they won't get our votes, plain and simple,” Schumer warned at a press conference.
"We will not support a partisan spending agreement that continues to rip away healthcare from the American people. Period. Full stop,” Jeffries said.
The enhanced tax credits, which were created in 2021 under the American Rescue Plan Act and later extended through the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, are credited with reducing the insurance premiums of millions of people who purchase health insurance through government exchanges.
The tax credits have reduced insurance premiums by 44% on average—over $700 per enrollee—and have contributed to the number of people purchasing insurance on the exchanges more than doubling to over 24 million in 2025.
According to a report released Wednesday by KFF:
Nine in 10 enrollees (92%) receive some amount of premium tax credit. If these enhanced tax credits expire at the end of 2025, out-of-pocket premiums would rise by over 75% on average for the vast majority of individuals and families buying coverage through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplaces.
The increases come as insurance companies, citing "slumping share prices," per the Financial Times, are planning the largest hike to premiums in 15 years, including an 18% increase for those buying from ACA exchanges.
These increases will come on top of those already expected as a result of a Trump administration rule passed in June, which increased the maximum percentages of income and raw dollar amounts that insurance plans could charge patients out-of-pocket for care.
According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, these changes "will make coverage less affordable for millions of people." The CBPP estimates that "a family of four making $85,000 will have to pay an additional $197 in premiums for coverage in 2026" while a "family of two or more people on the same plan could face an additional $900 in medical bills if a family member is seriously ill or injured in 2026, and an individual enrolled in self-only coverage could face an additional $450 in medical bills."
In all, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in May that as a result of these mounting costs, over 5 million people will no longer be able to afford their health insurance plans.
"The death star of American healthcare, the insurance companies are preparing to blow up the lives of millions of middle-class families," warned journalist David Sirota in a podcast for The Lever.
Republicans in Congress are facing mounting pressure to extend the tax credits and stave off the premium hikes. Last week, 11 Republicans in Congress signed onto a bill that would extend the credits through 2026, allowing them to avoid the issue until after the midterm elections.
A survey conducted in July by two of Trump's most trusted pollsters, Tony Fabrizio and Bob Ward, found that for Republicans in the most competitive districts, "a 3-point deficit becomes a 15-point deficit" against the generic Democrat if they allow the healthcare premium tax credit to expire.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has stayed coy about whether he and the Republican caucus plan to support extending the credits.
"I'm not going to forecast that right now," Johnson told reporters earlier this week, while also saying, "There's a lot of opposition to it as well."
Democrats, meanwhile, have proposed a competing bill to make the subsidies permanent and are hoping to use this month's budget showdown to force Republicans to make concessions on the issue.
As David Dayen wrote Monday for the American Prospect, it sets up a challenging strategic and moral dilemma for Democrats:
On the one hand, Democrats fighting for healthcare benefits speaks to an issue where they have the highest level of support from the public. They would credibly be able to tell voters that they fought for lower costs during an affordability crisis and won, and that more of that will happen if they are given power in the midterms.
On the other hand, Republicans willingly drove the healthcare system toward the point of oblivion, and some may question why Democrats would offer a lifeline to bail them out. In this reading, relieving Republicans of the consequences of their health care plans would be harmful to Democratic midterm chances; Trump would take credit for keeping health care costs low.
What's clear, Dayen said, is that "unless action is taken, it will be an enormous example of Trump's failure to rein in the runaway cost of living."
Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, urged Democrats to stand firm as the fight over a potential government shutdown heats up.
"If Republicans refuse to negotiate and move away from their cost-increasing agenda, then it is Republicans who will be forcing a government-wide shutdown," Gilbert said. "There should be no deal without assurances that the budget will be honored and not impounded, and one that returns care to the American people.”
"The central fiscal priority in the megabill is to reward the wealthiest Americans with even more tax cuts, but to try to disguise that as a boon for working families," one policy expert told Common Dreams.
The Republican budget law that passed earlier this month—which hands out lavish tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans—will result in increased taxes on the poorest 40% of the country's poorest as early as 2026.
Many of low-income Americans will already see net losses to their income due to the law's drastic cuts to Medicaid and food stamps. However, most of those cuts will not begin to hit for multiple years.
But the lawmakers also allowed an enhancement of tax credits that helped millions of Americans pay for health insurance to expire and those effects will be felt much sooner, according to a study published Tuesday by the nonpartisan Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)
That enhancement—passed in 2021 as part of the American Rescue Plan and extended until 2025 by the Inflation Reduction Act—provided nearly 20 million low- and moderate-income Americans who purchased health insurance on state and federal exchanges with tax relief that significantly shrunk their insurance premiums.
According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, recipients saved over $700 on average on their insurance premiums as a result of the tax breaks.
Largely as a result of this policy change, the ITEP study projects that the poorest 20% of Americans will end up paying $140 more on average than they paid before the law passed as soon as next year. The next poorest 20% will end up paying $100 more.

An estimated 4.2 million are also expected to lose health insurance as a result of the change, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), adding to the 10 million it estimates will lose insurance due to Medicaid cuts.
This does not even take into account the effects of President Donald Trump's regressive tariffs, which will also hit the poorest Americans hardest by increasing the cost of goods.
"The central fiscal priority in the megabill is to reward the wealthiest Americans with even more tax cuts, but to try to disguise that as a boon for working families," Jon Whiten, the deputy director of ITEP told Common Dreams.
A previous ITEP estimate found that for everyone except the top 20% of Americans, the cost of the tariffs will either largely offset or surpass the amount they'll save due to the tax breaks in the law.

Meanwhile, the law is estimated to give the richest 1% of Americans $117 billion in tax cuts next year. That amount far exceeds the tax savings of the bottom 60% of Americans put together, who will cumulatively save just $77 billion.
The report found that even foreign investors who own shares in U.S. companies will benefit more in 2026 than many of the poorest Americans due to the law's extension of corporate tax breaks: They will receive $32 billion in tax cuts in 2026 compared to just $1.5 billion for the bottom 20% of Americans.
"This bill is already very unpopular, and most Americans see it for what it is: a big boost for the richest folks and not much for anyone else," said Whiten.
According to polling last week by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, 6 in 10 Americans believe the law will do more to hurt than help lower-income people.
Whiten added, "People are likely to continue to sour on it as they learn more about it and see how it impacts their family finances."
Millions of Americans could lose coverage if the GOP allows the Affordable Care Act's enhanced premium tax credits to expire.
As Congress negotiates the extension of Affordable Care Act tax credits, a nonpartisan government analysis warned this week that letting the ACA subsidies expire next year would cause millions of Americans to lose health coverage in the years ahead.
The American Rescue Plan Act "reduced the maximum amount eligible enrollees must contribute toward premiums for health insurance purchased through the marketplaces established by the Affordable Care Act, and it extended eligibility to people whose income is above 400% of the federal poverty level," wrote Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Phillip Swagel.
His Thursday letter came in response to an inquiry from U.S. Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) along with Reps. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) and Lauren Underwood (D-Ill.) about "the effects on health insurance coverage and premiums that will result from not extending—either for one year or permanently—the expanded premium tax credit structure."
"Without an extension through 2026, CBO estimates, the number of people without insurance will rise by 2.2 million in that year," Swagel said. "Without a permanent extension, CBO estimates, the number of uninsured people will rise by 2.2 million in 2026, by 3.7 million in 2027, and by 3.8 million, on average, in each year over the 2026-2034 period."
"Without an extension through 2026, CBO estimates, gross benchmark premiums will increase by 4.3%, on average, for that year," the director continued. "Without a permanent extension, CBO estimates, gross benchmark premiums will increase by 4.3% in 2026, by 7.7% in 2027, and by 7.9%, on average, over the 2026-2034 period."
"If Congress fails to act, healthcare will become out of reach for millions of Americans, leaving middle-class families to struggle and choose between seeing a doctor or keeping a roof over their heads or groceries in the fridge."
The analysis comes as the world braces for GOP control of Congress and the White House, with President-elect Donald Trump set to be sworn in next month. Since President Barack Obama signed the ACA—also known as Obamacare—in 2010, elected Republicans including Trump have repeatedly tried to gut or fully repeal the law.
In response to the CBO report, Wyden said, "This is a stark preview of healthcare under Donald Trump: higher insurance premiums for families who buy health coverage on their own, and more uninsured Americans who can't afford health insurance at all."
"Republicans have an opportunity to end their ideological crusade against the Affordable Care Act and work in a bipartisan manner to make healthcare more affordable for working families, but instead they seem poised to hand another big tax break to corporations and the wealthy," warned Wyden, the outgoing Senate Finance Committee chair.
In September, Shaheen and Underwood introduced a bill to make the ACA's enhanced premium tax credits permanent. Shaheen said Thursday that the "new data from CBO confirms what we feared: if Congress fails to extend these tax credits, healthcare costs will skyrocket for millions of families and 3.8 million Americans will lose coverage entirely."
"At a time when Americans are already facing higher prices, we should do everything we can to lower costs when and where we can," she added. "It's time we pass my Health Care Affordability Act to permanently extend the tax credits so many families rely on."
Advocacy groups echoed demands for Congress to at least extend the subsidies following the CBO's findings.
"If Congress fails to act, healthcare will become out of reach for millions of Americans, leaving middle-class families to struggle and choose between seeing a doctor or keeping a roof over their heads or groceries in the fridge," said Protect Our Care executive director Brad Woodhouse in a statement.
"Instead of helping hardworking families, Republicans have opposed measures to lower healthcare costs and have instead focused on delivering tax breaks to big corporations and the wealthiest Americans," he continued. "Health coverage gives people peace of mind knowing they won't go bankrupt over an injury or illness. Democrats stand ready to extend the tax credits to ensure everyone has access to affordable healthcare. It's time for Republicans to get on board."
While the CBO found with the expiration of the credits, "on average, those with health insurance will see their unsubsidized gross monthly premiums increase by as much as 8% each year," Anthony Wright, executive director of Families USA, pointed out that "for people who now receive premium assistance, the increases will be far steeper."
"Taking into account the cuts in premium assistance, nonpartisan organizations, such as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, report that people will experience estimated premium increases ranging from 41% to 218%, with a median increase of 91%—a near doubling of their monthly costs," he explained.
"For nearly 20 million Americans, these enhanced tax credits have been the difference between getting access to the healthcare and coverage they need or going without it," Wright stressed. "At a time when so many families are struggling to pay for the basics, these tax credits have been a literal lifeline for millions of people to get healthcare they can afford."
"Voters just made it clear in the 2024 election that they want action to lower costs—and so it would be cruel to have the result be inaction that allows these tax credits to expire, and monthly healthcare costs to jump," he added. "For many millions of working Americans, premiums will double. For some, the spike will be not just hundreds but thousands of dollars of additional costs, leading many millions to lose coverage altogether. Congress must protect the health and financial security of our nation's families right now by extending these critical tax credits."
Citing several unnamed sources, The Washington Post reported Friday afternoon that Democrats on Capitol Hill privately proposed a deal to extend the ACA subsidies by a year, which "accompanied a broader package of healthcare proposals submitted to Republicans on Thursday night ahead of year-end spending negotiations."
"It is not yet clear whether Republican leaders, who control the House, will agree to any of the proposals," the Post noted. "Spokespeople for Republicans on the House Ways and Means and the Senate Finance committees declined to comment."
Despite efforts to salvage the ACA subsidies due to the pain and economic suffering that would follow if they are not extended, progressives across the board continue to argue that Obamacare—which sends billions of federal dollars to the private insurance industry—is a far inferior solution compared with Medicare for All, which would cover everyone in the United States at a lower overall cost than the current system.
"Childcare is a public good and needs robust federal investment to maintain progress that was made with relief funds and to avoid further crisis," reads an analysis.
With the last of the federal childcare funding included in coronavirus pandemic relief set to expire at the end of September, two civil society groups on Thursday released an analysis of the "significant benefits" the funding included for families and early childhood educators across the U.S.—showing that the federal government could, and "must," gain control of the nationwide childcare crisis with robust investments.
Published by the National Women's Law Center (NWLC) and the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), Cliff Notes: Key Takeaways From Pandemic-Era Child Care Relief and the Child Care Funding Cliff analyzes the childcare benefits included in the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021, which provided $24 billion in childcare stabilization grants and $15 billion in supplemental money for the existing Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG)—the latter of which is set to expire September 30.
The funding helped stabilize 220,000 childcare programs across the country, according to the report, assisting centers to pay staff members, rent, and continue providing services to families. A 2022 survey of childcare programs by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) showed that the funding also allowed 75% of respondents to pay employees sufficiently, with 53% providing bonuses and 38% increasing baseline wages in a notoriously low-paying industry.
When the childcare stabilization grants expired last September, Thursday's study found, it was felt across the country by families and childcare workers alike. Twenty-nine percent of families faced higher tuition due to rising operating costs for providers, and as employees told NAEYC in another survey in February 2024, staff shortages led to increased burnout among early childhood educators.
"Childcare is a public good and needs robust federal investment to maintain progress that was made with relief funds and to
avoid further crisis," reads a fact sheet accompanying the report by NWLC and CLASP.
The $15 billion in supplemental CCDBG funding set to expire at the end of the month allowed states to make "substantial improvements to their childcare assistance policies," which in turn eliminated waiting lists for childcare assistance, expanded eligibility for assistance, lowered or waived copayments for families, and increased payment rates to providers.
Now, said the groups, "the United States can and must make long-term investments in women, children, and families."
Melissa Boteach, vice president of childcare and income security at NWLC, said Congress must pass "$16 billion in emergency relief, alongside long-term investments, so that families and early educators can have the robust, fully funded childcare system that they need and deserve."
The report emphasizes that the U.S. government "has the resources to fulfill this vision," using as an example tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans that were included in former Republican President Donald Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
"The soon-to-expire $15 billion ARPA supplemental CCDBG discretionary funding was a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of revenue lost from decades of tax cuts for the wealthy and large corporations," reads the report. "We can't afford to put off investing in early learning and childcare any longer, and we have an imminent opportunity to raise public dollars to support investments in childcare. In 2025, some provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are scheduled to expire. If we allow the tax cuts for the wealthiest to expire and make additional progressive changes to the tax code, we could raise trillions of dollars in tax revenue that could support investments in women, children, and families."
Increasing the law's federal corporate tax rate from 21% to 28% would raise $1.35 trillion over 10 years, "which could fully fund President [Joe] Biden's childcare proposal twice over and still have money left over," reads the report.
The report makes clear, said Boteach, "that public investment in childcare works, and that our current childcare crisis is a policy choice."
The report was released as U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) prepared to introduce a bill that would cap childcare costs for families earning under $250,000 per year at $10 per day, modeled on a Canadian initiative. The proposal includes a grant program that would allocate $780 billion over 10 years to fund childcare providers.
"As a father of young kids, I understand how difficult this is for families," Khanna told Time magazine. "Particularly for those who are away from grandparents or uncles or aunts and are working or middle class. But I also think that it is fundamental to giving people a fair shot at the American dream—that the biggest investment we can make is in young children to have a big economic return."
Unless the federal government makes a "significant and sustained" investment in childcare, said Stephanie Schmidt, director of childcare and early education at CLASP, "the challenges and inequities plaguing the childcare sector will worsen and states will backslide on the progress they achieved using the relief funds to make care more affordable and easier to find."
Expanding the credit is a proven solution for lifting millions of children above the poverty line and helping to ensure that all children have the resources they need to thrive.
During the 2025 tax debate, policymakers have the opportunity to remake the tax code so that it is fairer, works for low- and moderate-income people and families, and advances racial equity.
A key priority should be expanding the Child Tax Credit to benefit the roughly 19 million children shut out from receiving the full credit simply because their families have low incomes. Lawmakers should, at a minimum, reinstate the successful 2021 American Rescue Plan expansion of the Child Tax Credit, including making the full credit available to children in families with low incomes and increasing the maximum amount of the credit to $3,600 for children aged five and younger and $3,000 for children aged 6 to 17, among other changes.
When the expanded credit expired, the number of children experiencing poverty rose substantially, demonstrating that child poverty is created—and can be alleviated —through policy choices.
There has been intensive congressional interest in the Child Tax Credit this year, including the House-passed bipartisan Wyden-Smith expansion, and proposals from congressional Child Tax Credit champions that build on the Rescue Plan.
Under current law, three major design flaws in the Child Tax Credit deny its full benefit to millions of children in low-income families:
The credit is also unavailable to 17-year-olds, who typically are still in high school.
An estimated 1 in 4 children—or roughly 19 million children—got less than the full $2,000-per-child credit or no credit in 2022 because their families’ incomes were too low. (See chart for examples of families at different income levels.) This includes nearly half of Black children, 4 in 10 Native American children, more than 1 in 3 Latino children, and about 1 in 3 children living in rural areas. Their families are overrepresented in low-paying work due to past and present hiring discrimination, inequities in educational and housing opportunities, and other sources of inequality. About 1 in 6 white children, more than 1 in 7 Asian children, and all children in Puerto Rico are also left out of the full credit.
When Congress temporarily expanded the Child Tax Credit in 2021, child poverty plummeted; the credit expansion reduced the number of children living below the poverty line by more than a third. While all racial and ethnic groups saw large reductions in poverty, the percentage point reduction in child poverty was largest for Black, Latino, and Native American children. In passing the American Rescue Plan, Congress extended the Child Tax Credit to all children living in families with low or no income for the first time, and increased the $2,000-per-child credit to $3,600 per child aged 5 and younger, and $3,000 per child aged 6 to 17 (making 17-year-olds eligible for the first time), among other changes.
When the expanded credit expired, the number of children experiencing poverty rose substantially, demonstrating that child poverty is created—and can be alleviated —through policy choices. A 2019 National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine report on reducing child poverty found that “income poverty itself causes negative child outcomes.” A large number of studies have found evidence that additional income can improve children’s outcomes in the short and long term.
If the Rescue Plan version of the Child Tax Credit were in place for 2024, roughly 2.6 million fewer children would live in families with incomes below the poverty line. (See Table 1 at this link for estimates by state.) This includes 959,000 Latino children, 755,000 white children, 654,000 Black children, 79,000 Native American children, and 71,000 Asian children.
Congress should, at a minimum, reinstate the Rescue Plan expansion of the Child Tax Credit.
We’ve seen strong interest in the Child Tax Credit over the last year. Bipartisan tax legislation, which was negotiated by House Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.) and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), included a modest, but still important, expansion and passed the House with a large majority in January 2024. That proposal would have increased the Child Tax Credit for an estimated 16 million children in the first year, and lifted some 500,000 children above the poverty line when fully in effect.
Separately, two congressional proposals, Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Michael Bennet’s (D-Colo.) Working Families Tax Relief Act and Rep. Rosa DeLauro’s (D-Conn.) American Family Act, build on the success of the Rescue Plan’s expanded Child Tax Credit. They make the full credit available to children in families with low incomes, propose larger maximum credit amounts than the Rescue Plan (by adjusting the Rescue Plan maximum credit amounts for inflation), and make additional changes to the credit. Though details differ, both proposals would lift more children above the poverty line over time than reinstating the 2021 Rescue Plan credit due to their larger maximum credit values and other changes. For example, according to a Columbia University analysis, had the American Family Act been in place for 2023 the credit expansion would have lifted an additional 3.6 million children out of poverty compared to current law.
Policymakers in both parties should make expanding the Child Tax Credit a priority in the 2025 tax debate. At minimum they should reinstate the Rescue Plan changes, which would provide an income boost to more than 60 million children in total, including the 19 million children in families with the lowest incomes. (See Table 2 at this link for estimates by state.) Expanding the Child Tax Credit is a proven solution for lifting millions of children above the poverty line and helping to ensure that all children have the resources they need to thrive.
"In contrast, low-wage voters will be asking, What are Democrats providing as an alternative?" said the head of the group that published the report.
Most U.S. workers who rely on tips to supplement their often meager incomes would see no benefits from a tax exemption proposed by former President Donald Trump that the authors of a report published Tuesday called a "hollow promise."
The report—published by One Fair Wage and the Food Labor Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley—details how the proposal by Trump, the Republican nominee for president, and Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) related No Tax on Tips Act would deliver little relief to tipped workers.
According to One Fair Wage, "66% of tipped restaurant workers would not benefit from tax exemptions on tips because they or their households do not earn enough to pay income taxes."
"Trump tried to make tips the property of owners the last time he was in office, so he's clearly NOT a genuine advocate for working people."
While the proposal may seem beneficial to tipped workers, the group said it "falls too short of having a real impact and fails to address the fundamental issue facing working-class Americans: the need for a stable, living wage."
According to One Fair Wage, the report's key findings include:
While Trump has picked Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) as his running mate in an apparent bid to win over working-class workers, President Joe Biden on Sunday left the race and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris to become the Democratic presidential nominee.
"Regardless of who's on the ticket, it's clear that candidates who want to win this cycle should address the needs of working people," One Fair Wage president Saru Jayaraman said in a statement. "Let's remember that for his part, Trump tried to make tips the property of owners the last time he was in office, so he's clearly NOT a genuine advocate for working people."
"In contrast, low-wage voters will be asking, What are Democrats providing as an alternative?" Jayaraman added. "In order to reach this critical voting bloc, their response should be loud and clear: It is time to raise the minimum wage and end the subminimum wage for tipped workers."
In a recent interview, Jayaraman told Common Dreams that "the restaurant industry has used tips for 150 years in place of what people need, which is a stable base living wage with tips on top."
"It is helpful, for sure, to not have your taxes tipped, but that is a red herring," she added. "That should be on top of what workers really need."
Last week, the Center for American Progress (CAP) published an analysis that found Cruz's bill is "deeply flawed": In addition to excluding 95% of low- and moderate-wage workers who are not working tipped jobs, "it contains few, if any, guardrails to prevent high-income professionals such as hedge fund managers from shifting their compensation to a tax-free tipping model."
"The No Tax on Tips Act potentially kicks the door wide open for tax abuse by the wealthy and fails to deliver any meaningful tax cuts for low- and moderate-wage workers," said CAP senior director for economic policy Brendan Duke. "Just 5% of all workers making less than $25 per hour receive tips. And even among those that do receive tips, the tax cuts would be minimal at best."
Duke asserted that restoring the American Rescue Plan's earned income tax credit and child tax credit expansions would broadly benefit "both tipped workers such as waiters and nontipped workers such as home health aides."
"At a time when a majority of American voters believe tax on big corporations should be increased, there is no reason we should be providing corporations a tax cut while only giving families pennies," said the lawmaker.
Some economic justice groups this week are pushing for the passage of a $78 billion bipartisan tax package that includes an expansion of the child tax credit—but one lawmaker who has made the credit one of her signature issues for years said Monday that the legislation does not go far enough to support families in need, especially considering the corporate tax breaks it includes.
As U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said the bill is expected to come to the House floor this week under "suspension of the rules," an expedited maneuver requiring the approval of two-thirds of members for passage, U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) said the bill "fails on equity" and leaves out too many struggling American families.
DeLauro released a fact sheet showing how the bill, negotiated by Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), "falls far short of comparing to the gains made under the American Rescue Plan (ARP)," which in 2021 helped slash childhood poverty by about 30% with its inclusion of an enhanced child tax credit (CTC).
With Republicans insisting on work and minimum income requirements for the version of the CTC included in the tax package—to "safeguard" against undocumented immigrants and "ineligible persons" benefiting from the bill, according to the House Ways and Means Committee—"families with little-to-no income are left behind from the full child tax credit, while allowing a single parent making $200,000 or a married couple making $400,000 to receive the full $2,000 credit," notes DeLauro's fact sheet.
The ARP included all but the highest earners in the enhanced CTC, which increased the maximum credit amount to $3,000-$3,600 per child depending on the child's age and issued half of the credit on a monthly basis, enabling families to use the money for everyday necessities.
Falling short of the credit amount included in the ARP, the Wyden-Smith plan would afford families a maximum of $2,100 per child and would not provide payments to families on a monthly basis.
The tax deal is estimated to lift "up to 400,000 kids" out of poverty, said DeLauro, while "93% of kids in the lowest quintile (the poorest 1/5th of children in the country) will continue to be left behind—meaning they will not receive the full credit."
Last week DeLauro called on her fellow Democrats to "fight to ensure our families aren't sold out for profits" and told The Connecticut Mirror the bill has "serious room for improvement."
While falling short on providing economic support for families paying for groceries, childcare, healthcare, and other essentials, the Wyden-Smith deal "locks in $600 billion in tax cuts for businesses," according to Smith.
The GOP aims to make those cuts permanent, making the three-year cost "four times higher than the child tax credit," DeLauro noted.
"This is not parity," said the congresswoman, adding that a research and development tax credit for corporations will be made retroactive "under the guise of incentivizing R&D."
"It is virtually impossible to incentivize action for anything retroactively," said DeLauro. "While the CTC phases-in, corporations will get their tax cuts on the first dollar. Families will not be getting any additional child tax credit retroactively to 2022, like the corporations are."
The tax deal "delivers huge tax cuts for giant corporations while denying middle-class families the economic security they had under the expanded, monthly child tax credit," said DeLauro. "It also leaves the poorest families behind because of a policy choice. At a time when a majority of American voters believe tax on big corporations should be increased, there is no reason we should be providing corporations a tax cut while only giving families pennies."
The Pew Research Center found last year that 61% of Americans feel corporations don't pay their fair share. Nearly two-thirds said tax rates on large corporations should be raised; 39% said by "a lot," while 26% said by "a little" and just 14% said they should be lowered.
Some of DeLauro's colleagues have suggested any expansion of the CTC should be passed, with Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) telling The Mirror he was "less than ecstatic" that the credit is not completely expanded but that he would "rather see this provision enacted than none at all."
Another Connecticut Democrat, Sen. Chris Murphy, said he would consult "the mother of the child tax credit"—DeLauro.
"I'm going to continue to work to improve this legislation before it's considered on the House floor because I believe that families and children need a strong child tax credit," DeLauro told the outlet. "I'm opposed to this bill in its current form. Corporations get everything they asked for and children got pennies."
"Effective federal public policies over the previous few years were spectacularly successful in stemming U.S. hunger, but as many of those policies have been reversed, hunger has again soared," said one expert.
Highlighting the end of a yearslong trend of declining hunger in the United States due largely to federal policies like the expanded Child Tax Credit and universal school meals, a report published Wednesday details how the expiration of these programs has fueled a resurgence in food insecurity.
Hunger Free America's (HFA) 2023 National Hunger Survey Report found that "the number of Americans without enough food over a seven-day period was an average of 40% higher in September and October of 2023 than in September and October of 2021."
"Over that time period, the number of people without enough food increased from 19.7 million to 27.8 million nationwide," HFA noted, attributing the rise in hunger to the expiration of the expanded Child Tax Credit and universal school meals.
"Many federal benefit increases have either gone away entirely, or are being ramped down, even as prices for food, rent, healthcare, and fuel continue to soar," the advocacy group added.
Among the report's other findings:
"This report should be a jarring wake-up call for our federal, state, and local leaders," HFA CEO Joel Berg said in a statement.
The new HFA report follows federal data released in November showing the U.S. child poverty rate more than doubled in 2022 compared to the previous year, thanks in large part to the expiration of the expanded Child Tax Credit. Under the policy—part of the American Rescue Plan signed into law by President Joe Biden in March 2021—eligible families received up to $300 per child each month.
However, the program expired at the end of 2021 as congressional Republicans and right-wing Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia opposed its extension. Manchin infamously argued that parents would use the money to buy drugs instead of food for their children.
Meanwhile, congressional Republicans last year blocked the extension of a pandemic-era policy under which public schools offered free breakfast and lunch to tens of millions of children.
"Effective federal public policies over the previous few years were spectacularly successful in stemming U.S. hunger, but as many of those policies have been reversed, hunger has again soared," Berg said on Wednesday. "At exactly the moment when so many Americans are in desperate need of relief, many of the federally funded benefits increases, such as the Child Tax Credit and universal school meals, have expired, due mostly to opposition from conservatives in Congress."
"Just as no one should be surprised if drought increases when water is taken away, no one should be shocked that when the government takes away food, as well as money to buy food, hunger rises," Berg added. "Our political leaders must act to raise wages and provide a strong safety net, so we can finally end U.S. hunger and ensure that all Americans have access to adequate, healthy food."
"Letting 9 million children in this country live in poverty is a policy choice," said analysts who called on lawmakers to prioritize children from the lowest-income households.
Experts on anti-poverty policies on Tuesday urged lawmakers weighing tax legislation to consider evidence that became strikingly clear in 2021: Guaranteeing that families have money on a monthly basis to provide for their children, via the expanded child tax credit, helped ensure that far fewer kids struggled with insufficient food and other essentials.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) noted that policymakers have reportedly begun negotiating a possible year-end tax bill and have already heard from dozens of pro-business groups from across the country that have called for a tax code that "supports innovation" and enables businesses to "finance growth."
To return to what analysts have called "a historic reduction in poverty" that was observed just two years ago, CBPP called on negotiators in Congress to include "a well-designed expansion of the child tax credit (CTC) in any tax legislation considered," with the children from the lowest-income households prioritized.
"Letting 9 million children in this country live in poverty is a policy choice, as recent census data underscores," wrote Chuck Marr, Kris Cox, and Sarah Calame at CBPP. "Policymakers have an opportunity to make a different—and better—choice in the coming weeks. They should prioritize reducing child poverty—and improving the life prospects of millions of children."
As Common Dreams reported in September, the opposition of Republican senators and right-wing Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) led to the end of the expanded CTC, which helped push child poverty to a record low of 5.2% in 2021 as eligible families received up to $300 per child, per month. As a result, in 2022, the U.S. Census Bureau recorded the largest single-year increase in poverty among children in the U.S., which rose to 12.4%.
"If Congress had continued the American Rescue Plan's child tax credit expansion in 2022, about 3 million fewer children would have been in poverty, preventing more than half of the increase in the number of children in poverty last year, we estimate," wrote Marr, Cox, and Calame.
The decision to take thousands of dollars per year away from families struggling with the rising cost of living and stagnant wages was driven largely by Manchin's false claim that parents who were given money to help with the cost of childcare and groceries each month would spend the cash on drugs, but CBPP expressed hope that some Republicans facing tough reelection campaigns next year have signaled an interest in supporting the provision, which was backed by Republican, Independent, and Democratic voters in an Economic Security Project poll last year.
Civil society groups including the Maine People's Alliance (MPA) and Americans for Tax Fairness this week began calling on lawmakers to "put children first, not corporate profits" as they negotiate a tax bill.
"Right now, Congress is hearing from big business, not American families like yours," MPA told its supporters in a call to action. "We are the people who know how critical cash is to making a household work. We are the people our members of Congress need to hear from."
CBPP emphasized that "the details of any child tax credit expansion are important" and called for a particular focus on the children who have been left out of the credit in the past despite their families' struggles with the cost of housing, food, childcare, and other essentials.
The economists wrote that any tax bill must prioritize ensuring that 19 million children whose parents' incomes are too low to receive the full CTC must be "the focus of any child tax credit expansion."
Explaining that the current structure of the CTC is "upside down," they wrote that children in families with less than $2,500 in earnings are not eligible for any credit, while families with incomes below about $16,000 get less than $2,000 in total and middle- and high-income households receive the maximum of $2,000 per child.
For example, a childcare provider who has two children of their own and is a single parent might earn $15,000 per year and receive $1,875, while a married couple who employs the provider might earn $400,000 per year and receive $4,000 in CTC.
"The children who would benefit the most—children whose families face challenges affording rent, utilities, food, clothing, and transportation—often get the least," wrote the economists. "As a result, more children live in poverty than would if children in families with low incomes received the same child tax credit as children in families with higher incomes."
This inequity disproportionately affects Black, Indigenous, and Latino children whose parents are "overrepresented in low-paid work," noted CBPP.
The record low child poverty rate in 2021 was achieved by making the full CTC available to low-income families, raising the maximum credit from $2,000 per child to $3,600 for children aged 5 and younger and $3,000 for older children, and providing the credit on a monthly basis rather than a lump sum after taxes were filed.
Marr, Cox, and Calame explained that simply raising the maximum amount for the CTC would do little to help the families who need it most, and a proposal led by Rep. John James (R-Mich.) would still leave many low-income families with partial or no credit.
By contrast, the economists proposed making the current $2,000 CTC—often called the "fully refundable" credit—to the lowest-income households, which could lift an estimated 1.5 million children out of poverty and boost the income of the single parent in CBPP's example by $2,125—a significant difference for a regular household income of $15,000.
"As policymakers evaluate approaches to expanding the child tax credit" in end-of-year tax legislation, said Marr, Cox, and Calame, "they should seek to maximize the number of children with low incomes lifted out of poverty."