A New Story: Politics for the 21st Century

The Washington Post is a fantastic newspaper but they have a real issue in how they write about direct cash payments specifically and Universal Basic Income in general.  Their latest editorial got a bit right, but so much wrong.  Here is my comment: I absolutely agree that state and local aid is critical; and its lack is likely the reason that the 2008 recession lingered so long.  That needs to be next.  And I agree that that the "targeting" to under 150k a year is also foolish - but I agree because these payments should be universal, and recurring. But to oppose $2,000 stimulus checks is to show that the editorial board of the Washington Post is woefully uneducated about the large and growing body of evidence in support of direct cash payments, still believes that it is possible for the government to quickly and effectively "target aid", still believes that UI benefits do not have a negative drag on unemployment, and finally, and cruelly, that a certain...

Here are my thoughts, and response the this piece in WaPo today. Yes, in terms of what can be done without the do-nothing/obstructionist Republicans in the Senate.  But at the same time, pick a battle in the Congress that you can win to make 2022 a more realistic chance to GAIN seats.  This is the battle for direct cash payments to combat the pandemic and its economic fallout.  82% of voters approve of more rounds of stimulus checks.  Sending three months at $1,000 /month would be the same as the $900 billion proposed.  Do not combine it with anything else.  Make them vote on sending help to people who need it, or not. As much as I am in favor of helping states deal with their budgetary issues, make that a separate fight. Make it universal and therefore fair.  Sell it as essential for small business and families.  Do not take the bait of talking about how to afford it.  Means-test the tax next year, not the benefit this year. Thi...

Here is my reply to this article about the lessons of the 202 election   "I was just discussing this with my 18 year old son. The GOP has better "glue" to generally hold it together. While all Anti (Roe, government, taxes) it serves the purpose of a unifying message, albeit a destructive and angry one.  The Democratic party is a coalition of many interest groups who value their own silo more then winning (at times), and who can get lost in their own ideology. At times the Dems can be dogmatic. At the core, there is little "glue" that holds this coalition together. It is diverse. It is broad. It is also divided.  However, I don't think it is divided on "eventual" priorities; as labor rights, civil rights, social justice, climate change, voting rights seem to be favored by the vast majority of Biden voters. What is divided is the messaging AND a first priority.  A casual glance at the campaigns of the GOP since the time of Nixon ...