On the latest segment of Talk Policy, Director of Social Policy Veronica Goodman sits down with Dr. Chandra Childers, Study Director at the Institute for Women’s Policy Research. Their discussion focuses on the concept of apprenticeships, it’s benefits for workers, and the historical context on the racial and gender makeup of these job training programs.
Also, check out “Here to Stay: Black, Latina, and Afro-Latina Women in Construction Trades Apprenticeships and Employment,” a paper focusing on how the COVID crisis has put a spotlight on skilled construction trades, and the opportunities it has presented for Black, Latina, and Afro Latina women here.
Learn more about the Progressive Policy Institute here.
While there are promising signs for the overall trajectory of the economic recovery, the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics points to some slowing and the overall picture shows the recovery remains uneven for many workers. Amidst ongoing negotiations in Congress concerning their reconciliation package and news about worker concerns and labor shortages, the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) has released a new report detailing evidence-based approaches to achieving a more equitable recovery. These policy changes and priorities will ensure all Americans in — and out of — the workforce are empowered to succeed.
“As we recover from the pandemic, Congress, policymakers, and business leaders must prioritize policies that ensure an inclusive economic recovery,” said Veronica Goodman, Director of Social Policy at PPI. “To prevent further economic scarring and to better help those currently out of work quickly pivot to new opportunities, we will need to wield every tool to ensure that the recovery brings all workers along.”
The paper proposes a comprehensive slate of policies for addressing historic and worsening inequities in the workforce, including:
Better preparing and supporting students in their transition to work by expanding access to career and technical education, apprenticeships, and training programs.
Equipping adult learners and workers with tools like wraparound services, flexibility in curriculums, building social capital, and training in digital skills, to complete degree and training programs and find jobs in the post-pandemic recovery.
Providing greater transparency about the credit transfer process for all students, including those with nonlinear paths to degree completion.
Prioritizing skills-based hiring and addressing degree discrimination, changing hiring technologies that leave qualified workers out, and aligning workforce development programs with in-demand jobs and opportunities.
Increasing apprenticeship and job training programs across industries, including in early education and child care, that lead to jobs with good wages and benefits for more workers.
Building on the proven success of Great Recession-era subsidized employment programs, so that disadvantaged workers can transition more quickly and seamlessly to the labor force.
Increasing the minimum wage, implementing a Living Wage Credit, and making the pandemic EITC expansion permanent.
Support working parents by investing in supports like child care, universal pre-kindergarten, paid family leave and increasing wages for early education teachers — helping many women and workers of color, while helping parents stay in the labor force.
Strengthening worker protections and rights to ensure a competitive labor market, including modernizing Unemployment Insurance (UI) to be an “automatic stabilizer” that kicks in when certain economic conditions are met.
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.
The Biden administration’s efforts to control the spread of the virus and bolster the economy are working. In fact, job growth has been historically high since President Biden took office, as the economy has recovered 4.5 million jobs. Economists expect that as the delta variant surge wanes, vaccination rates increase, and schools and daycares can reliably stay open, labor markets will further tighten.
However, as the August 2021 jobs report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows, our nascent labor market recovery is still vulnerable to setbacks from surges of the virus. The roaring pace of new jobs early in the summer is not a guarantee that all workers will find employment after historic job losses.
What’s more, new research shows that time and a booming labor market do not a guarantee a fully inclusive recovery. For a multitude of reasons, the non-college educated, workers of color, women, and less experienced workers suffered disproportionate job losses early in the pandemic, and they have historically been last in line for job gains. Policymakers will need to wield every tool to ensure that as the recovery progresses, that we work toward an inclusive and equitable labor market that brings all workers along.
The reconciliation package working its way through Congress with elements of the American Families and Jobs Plans would certainly help working families and individuals affected by the pandemic. In addition, our pandemic strategy should also include new investments in training workers with sought after skills in the marketplace and new steps to empower workers after decades of wage stagnation and growing economic inequality. We cannot be satisfied with a partial recovery that leaves whole communities behind. This paper offers policymakers at all levels of government evidence-based approaches for creating a more inclusive labor market after the pandemic.
Recommendations:
Our education system needs to better prepare traditional and non-traditional students to transition to work and provide better supports. Policymakers should expand access to career and technical education, early college high schools, and flexible models tailored to students and workers that face unique challenges and barriers.
Adult learners and workers need more wraparound services, flexible curriculums, social capital and networking, and training in digital skills to complete degree and training programs and find jobs in the post-pandemic recovery.
Many students will not have a linear path to degree completion. States should require more colleges and universities to be transparent about what coursework will transfer, and then ensure that students get these credits transferred between institutions.
Business leaders and policymakers can work together to ensure our workforce development programs are aligned with in-demand jobs and opportunities in their communities and give employers more skin in the game. Additionally, current systems for hiring and recruitment are leaving out a wide swath of workers due to degree discrimination. Companies should reform their hiring process to switch to skills-based hiring that will help them find the talent to fill openings.
Some industries, such as health care and education, are having difficulty finding workers. Our workforce programs should increase apprenticeship and job training programs, such as in early education and child care, to build a pipeline of high-quality jobs with good wages. A focus on equity and inclusiveness will help women and workers of color succeed in these industries.
Policymakers should build on the proven success of subsidized employment programs used during the Great Recession to help disadvantaged workers transition more quickly and seamlessly to the labor force.
Wages for millions of workers are far too low. Congress should work to increase the minimum wage, implement a Living Wage Credit, and make the pandemic expansion of the EITC permanent going forward.
The child care industry has been in crisis during the pandemic and is facing a severe labor shortage. Yet this critical support is necessary for working families and parents. We should support working parents by investing in child care and increasing wages for early education teachers to attract and retain workers. This will not only help many women and workers of color, but will help parents stay in the labor force. Other programs like paid family leave and universal pre-kindergarten will also boost labor market participation and family economic security.
Lastly, beyond wages, policymakers should strengthen protections and rights for workers to ensure a competitive labor market after the pandemic. To support workers during future economic downturns, Congress should modernize Unemployment Insurance (UI) to be an “automatic stabilizer” that kicks in when certain economic conditions are met that signal a recession.
THE CURRENT LABOR MARKET RECOVERY
The latest data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for this past August shows a labor market recovery slowing under the strain of the coronavirus delta variant wave. As case rates increase across the states, and especially in counties with lower vaccination rates, businesses and individuals have had to grapple with mask mandates, canceled events, delayed returns to in-office work, school and daycare quarantines, and other disruptions that have cumulatively led to decreased economic activity.
While the unemployment rate is down significantly from 14.8% in April 2020, the labor market recovery remains uneven, and the experience of past recessions shows that some workers will need extra support to land good jobs. The unemployment rate for Black workers ticked up to 8.8% in August 2021 compared to 4.5% for white workers. The percentage of long-term unemployed workers (LTU) — those out of work for 27 weeks or more and actively looking — is very high at 37.4%. That figure is trending downward as the labor market tightens, but data from previous recessions suggests that workers with a high school degree or less will struggle to find jobs. And women, hampered by child care and school closures and quarantines, made up only 28,000 new jobs or 11.9% in August 2021, compared with gains of 207,000 for men.
There are also signs of a realignment in our workforce. Employee preferences on how and where to work are changing, while companies are shifting their hiring, technologies, and supply chains to reflect the new pandemic economy. As recent analysis from The Washington Post points out, there is a “massive reallocation” of labor that is leading to a surge in job openings, quit rates, retirements, and redistribution of employment opportunities. Certain sectors, such as education and health care, are having a hard time filling job openings. Opportunities might also shift regionally due to the rise of telework and these differences will have profound policy implications for workers of different races, ethnicities, and backgrounds.
Employers report that workers seem to be pickier about the types of jobs they are willing to accept. One reason may be that they are sitting on increased personal savings, which reflect both government payments during the pandemic and reduced opportunities for consumption in a locked down economy. Some labor analysts have suggested that unreliable access to child care and health concerns may still be holding back some workers. In addition, nearly five million workers seem to have dropped out of the labor market during the pandemic recession. The good news for workers is that wages have been on the rise in certain industries desperate to fill openings and that trend is expected to continue.
However, for a percentage of unemployed workers, their career trajectories might be hampered in the same way as some did during the Great Recession and they will not reap the benefits of a tight labor market. Additionally, analysts predict that not all jobs will come back and that some industries might be permanently changed by the pandemic. The difficulties for those who struggled to find jobs after the last recession serve as a lesson for how to help unemployed workers recover faster during this downturn. As the economy improves during the pandemic, policymakers have several options for building an inclusive recovery. To prevent further economic scarring and to help job seekers quickly pivot to new employment, we need to draw upon the active labor market strategies and workforce development policies that have worked in the past and other promising ideas.
The shape of inflation over the past year isn’t what you might expect. The table below pulls out the change in price for selected goods and services from July 2020 to July 2021, based on BEA personal consumption expenditure (PCE) data (we explain below why we use BEA rather than BLS data).
The overall price level for personal consumption expenditures rose by 4.2% over the past year. (that’s the bold line in the middle of the table). Well-reported contributors to inflation include car rentals (+74%) and purchases of used vehicles (+37%), both spectacularly large pandemic-related increases that no one expects to continue. Other price increases are clearly related to the disruptions of supply chains: Furniture (9%), televisions (10%), and major appliances (12%).
But then there are some price increases that are not so obviously related to the pandemic, and maybe sticky. The price of financial services is up 5%, driven in part by pension funds (12%) and financial service charges, fees, and commissions (+9%). The latter category includes portfolio management and investment advice services, where prices have risen 17% over the past year. That’s disturbing given the importance of the financial system.
Meanwhile some goods and services showed much slower than average price increases. For example, the price of beer only rose by 2.1% from July 2020 to July 2021, about half the overall inflation rate, and lower than the 2.6% increase in the price of food purchased for off-premises consumption.
The price of rental tenant-occupied nonfarm housing rose only 1.9%. That’s the lowest rental inflation rate in decades, with the exception of 2008-09 financial crisis and its aftermath.
Finally, there is the price of telecom and broadband services, which only rose 0.5% over the past year. To calculate this figure, we built a price index that combined wireless and wired telephone, cable and satellite television, internet access, and video and audio streaming, taking into account shifts in spending patterns as consumers adapt to new technological choices.
Change in personal consumption expenditure prices (July 2020-July 2021)
Spectator sports
-4.6%
Prescription drugs
-2.5%
Personal care products
-0.5%
Insurance
-0.2%
Recreational books
0.1%
Household cleaning products
0.3%
Telecom and broadband*
0.5%
Legal services
0.6%
Education services
0.8%
Rental of tenant-occupied nonfarm housing
1.9%
Beer
2.1%
Nursing homes
2.3%
Imputed rental of owner-occupied nonfarm housing
2.4%
Pets and related products
2.4%
Newspapers and periodicals
2.5%
Educational books
2.6%
Food purchased for off-premises consumption
2.6%
Hospitals
2.9%
Physician services
3.4%
Accounting and other business services
3.7%
Veterinary and other services for pets
4.1%
Personal consumption expenditures
4.2%
Hairdressing salons and personal grooming establishments
4.8%
Financial services
5.0%
Social assistance
5.0%
Meats and poultry
5.4%
Repair of household appliances
6.1%
Fresh milk
6.2%
Museums and libraries
6.2%
Meals at limited service eating places
6.6%
Electricity and gas
7.0%
Nonpostal delivery services
7.7%
Furniture
8.8%
Financial service charges, fees, and commissions
9.2%
Televisions
9.9%
Pension funds
12.2%
Major household appliances
12.3%
Moving, storage, and freight services
13.3%
Portfolio management and investment advice services
16.6%
Air transportation
19.7%
Net purchases of used motor vehicles
36.5%
Motor vehicle rental
73.5%
*Includes wireless and wired telephone; cable and satellite television; internet access; video and audio streaming
Data: BEA
Note: The BLS publishes the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for various goods and services, while the BEA publishes a set of price indices connected with Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE) data. Both are useful, but the Federal Reserve tends to give somewhat more weight to the PCE inflation rate because it accounts better for changes in spending patterns. Similarly, using the PCE gives us an opportunity to construct a price index for the telecom and broadband sector that has a chance of capturing some of the rapid changes in the sector.
The Mosaic Economic Project, an initiative of the Progressive Policy Institute, welcomed a new cohort of policy experts for its third ‘Women Changing Policy’ workshop, hosted September 13 – 15, 2021. The cohort included a diverse slate of credentialed experts across sectors in economics and technology, including leaders at the Association of American Railroads and Prosperity Now, as well as professors in Marketing, Economics, and Public Policy at Occidental College and the University of Southern California.
The project’s goal is to locate, elevate, and advocate for the inclusion and engagement of experts with diverse experiences and an interest in meaningful policy conversations, with a focus on Congress and the media.
The group of industry and academic leaders heard from experts in the fields of media, strategic communications, and government, including staff of senior congressional leadership and Politico.
This Mosaic Economic Project Cohort included:
Christina Biedny, Ph.D. Student and Research Assistant at Oklahoma State University
Dr. Luisa Blanco, Professor of Public Policy and Economics at Pepperdine University
Dr. Carycruz Bueno, Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics at Wesleyan University
Rayshoun Chambers, CEO of The Blockchain Chamber of Commerce
Luisa Fernandez-Willey, Assistant Vice President in the Policy and Economics Department at the Association of American Railroads
Myrto Karaflos, Senior Policy Associate at Prosperity Now
Dr. Mary Lopez, Professor in the Department of Economics at Occidental College
Dr. Kalinda Ukanwa, Assistant Professor of Marketing at the Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California
For more information on how to contact the members of the Mosaic Economic Project, please reach out to Jasmine Stoughton at jstoughton@ppionline.org.
Today is National Hunger Day — a day to remember that there are millions of low-income households across America that will not have enough to eat and may be forced to skip meals. Here are five facts on hunger and poverty to show the scale of the problem.
In 2020, over 38 million Americans were food insecure, including more than 12 million children. Households with single parents or children under the age of six have a higher prevalence of food insecurity.
Children were the most likely group to face hunger but even young adults, such as college students, are also vulnerable to food insecurity.
Black and Hispanic families have higher rates of food insecurity, as compared to other households.
Rural communities fare worse on hunger than urban ones, especially in households with young children.
Despite high unemployment and a public health crisis, the USDA reported that the overall rate of 10.5% of food insecure households in 2019 was unchanged in 2020. The historic federal aid provided to struggling families during the pandemic worked at curbing what many expected to be an unprecedented modern-day hunger crisis.
This National Hunger Day, let’s work to ensure a country where we eradicate hunger once and for all. The pandemic has shown that when you provide more food assistance and direct aid for families, hunger goes down. Policymakers have the tools at their disposal to reduce or eliminate hunger in our country.
As Democrats shape the reconciliation package, Congressional leaders must work to earn voter trust on jobs, debt and support for private enterprise
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) recently commissioned a national survey by Expedition Strategies of public attitudes in battleground 44 House districts and eight states likely to have competitive Senate races next year. This second report focuses on how these pivotal voters compare the two parties on jobs and the economy, tax and fiscal policy, and innovation, entrepreneurship and competition.
“Our findings provide crucial context for today’s debate – both between the parties and between the pragmatic and left wings of the Democratic Party – over the size, cost and financing of President Biden’s ambitious Build Back Better plans,” said PPI President Will Marshall.
“The good news is that battleground voters trust Biden and the Democrats more to improve the economy and deliver tax fairness,” he added. “But there are warning signs here on job creation, deficits and paying for public investment that Democrats should heed as they shape their big reconciliation package.”
The full memo on this exclusive polling can be found here. Here are some of the key takeaways:
Battleground voters trust President Biden (53%- 47%) and Congressional Democrats (52%-48%) more than Republicans to “improve the economy.”
They overwhelmingly believe that Republicans stand more for the wealthy (74%) and favor special interests (63%), while Democrats are seen as representing the poor (72%).
Although they want Biden to succeed, voters divide evenly on which party “knows how to create good jobs” and lean toward the GOP as the party that “knows how to strengthen the economy (52-48).
Republicans appear to have a structural advantage on helping companies be more innovative, working to create private sector jobs, strengthening the economy, and helping U.S. firms win the competition with China for economic and technological leadership.
Two-thirds of battleground voters say they are concerned that Democrats are too anti-business. This includes 73% of Independents and even 42% of Democrats.
Possibly as a result, voters are more likely to credit the GOP as the party striving to create private sector jobs (54-46).
Voters lean strongly toward the Democratic position on tax fairness, saying their top goal for tax policy is “making sure the wealthy and companies pay more in taxes.”
Voters also side with Democrats in supporting additional IRS funding to crack down on tax cheats and evaders.
Battleground voters favor more public investment to improve the economy over cutting taxes and regulations by a solid margin, 58-42. Republican supply side nostrums aren’t getting traction.
On the economy, voters say jobs, growth and rewarding work are more important goals than addressing inequality and fairness. Only 10% said “promoting fairness” should be the most important goal.
Battleground district and state voters rank deficits and debt as their second highest economic concern. By 88-12, they say the national debt is a “serious problem.” Independents, undecideds, and Hispanic voters strongly express this view.
By 80-20, voters say they are worried about the mounting debt burden on the young and working families. They also express strong concerns about inflation (74-26).
Voters are slightly more inclined to blame Democrats than Republicans for running up public debt (32-28). Similarly, they trust Republicans more than Democrats (32-28) to get the debt under control, but a plurality (40%) say they trust neither party.
These voters favor (53-47) taxing gains from capital and labor at the same level. However, they oppose capital gains hikes when they are presented as a way to finance public investment in infrastructure and child tax credits (54% opposed).
Last week, PPI released the first report on the poll, which focused on voter attitudes towards President Biden’s infrastructure plan and the social investment package Democrats hope to pass using the reconciliation process.
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.
Recently, the Progressive Policy Institute hosted an event with U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper (D-CO) and a panel of energy experts, focused on expanding power line capacity to enable renewable energy deployment. PPI’s Strategic Climate Advisor Paul Bledsoe moderated the conversation and raised questions about how the US can improve its electric infrastructure to reach President Biden’s clean energy goals. As a member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Senator Hickenlooper spoke of his own efforts to improve transmission siting opportunities and clean energy initiatives.
Learn more about the Progressive Policy Institute here.
Today, the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) announced the hire of three new fellows, focused on communications and political affairs. The fall 2021 fellows include:
Ryan Radulovacki, Communications Fellow
Ryan Radulovacki is the Communications Fellow for PPI. Before joining PPI, Ryan worked in press offices in the U.S. Senate and at the local level on various city council campaigns in New York City. He is a graduate of New York University and based in Washington, D.C.
Maggie Landers, Digital Fellow
Maggie is the Digital Fellow for PPI. She graduated from Marquette University in May of 2021 with a B.A. in Political Science and Philosophy and a minor in Interdisciplinary Culture, Health and Illness. As an aspiring policy analyst, Maggie eventually hopes to attain a master’s degree in public policy. Despite currently living in Chicago, she is a proud Massachusetts native and Boston Red Sox fan.
Phil McLaughlin, Center for New Liberalism Fellow
Phil McLaughlin is PPI’s Center for New Liberalism Fellow, housed within the New Democrat Coalition on Capitol Hill. He is a policy analyst and researcher, with particular interest in public safety, criminal justice, public budgeting, and bond markets. He previously worked for the Massachusetts State Auditor General, and as a research analyst for the Massachusetts House of Representatives.
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.
As Congress prepares to boost public spending on domestic research and development (R&D), policymakers must simultaneously address mounting concerns regarding our scientific institutions, argues a new report from the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI)’s Innovation Frontier Project. The report, authored by M. Anthony Mills and titled “Fix Science, Don’t Just Fund It,” highlights inequities in the distribution of federal R&D funding, stifling bureaucratization across disciplines, and the “replication crisis” of integrity in the scientific enterprise.
“Thanks to revitalized support and interest from Congress, science agencies may soon benefit from a transformative increase in federal funding, signifying a critical first step in supporting American science and innovation. But, as M. Anthony Mills identifies in this must-read report, further action must be taken to address the interrelated issues plaguing the scientific enterprise if we’re going to advance innovation for generations to come,” said Jack Karsten, Managing Director of the Innovation Frontier Project at PPI.
Mills argues that most current proposals for supporting R&D involve substantial increases in federal spending — without institutional guardrails to address issues like highly concentrated distribution, a constraining bureaucratic apparatus, and the prevalence of scientific findings that cannot be independently confirmed.
Mills’ report suggests several proposals for helping policymakers better understand the problems concerning American R&D, including:
The OMB should establish the Research Policy Board (RPB), as it was instructed to do in the 2016 Cures Act. The board is by statute set to expire at the end of this month.
In addition to reauthorizing the RPB, Congress should consider expanding its scope and purview to include a multi-stakeholder assessment of best practices for R&D funding generally.
Congress should direct science agencies to establish a “second look” program for federal science grants to experiment with alternative funding mechanisms.
Congress should direct federal agencies to set aside a fixed percentage of new R&D funding for institutions of higher education for a block grant program.
Congress should direct the NIH to grow and expand the scope of its Director’s Pioneer Award, Specifically, the program should be expanded to include researchers from basic scientific fields in the natural sciences.
These new or expanded funding programs should be pursued in tandem, using a portfolio approach in order to gather evidence of effectiveness. To accomplish this, Congress should establish appropriate feedback mechanisms in coordination with relevant scientific agencies.
Read the report and the expanded policy recommendations here:
Based in Washington, D.C., and housed in the Progressive Policy Institute, the Innovation Frontier Project explores the role of public policy in science, technology and innovation. The project is managed by Jack Karsten. Learn more by visiting innovationfrontier.org.
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.
By Dr. Michael Mandel, Chief Economic Strategist; and Dr. Robert Popovian, Senior Fellow at PPI
As Congress is considering the shape of the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill, one of the biggest flash points is drug pricing reform. Drug price reform is very popular, but when you look closely at the data, as we did in our February 2021 report, the evidence for out-of-control drug price increases becomes much less compelling. Spending on drugs, net of rebates and discounts, is basically flat as a share of GDP over the past decade. At the same time, the pharma industry has boosted spending on R&D much faster than the federal government. In 2020, the U.S. pharma industry spent $106 billion on R&D, almost triple the $37 billion in health R&D coming from the federal government (Figure 1).
Equally important, pharma manufacturers’ revenue, net of discounts and rebates, increased by only 11%, or $36 billion, between 2016 and 2020, according to a report from the IQVIA Institute. Taking the industry as a whole, all of that revenue gain went into increased R&D spending.
That’s not to say that some people aren’t hurting. In 2018, only 1 percent of Americans paid more than $2,000 in out-of- pocket drug expenses, not including Part D premiums, according to our analysis. That’s a small percentage, but a significant number of people in the aggregate.
Moreover, data analyzed by PPI and others suggest that the major issue irritating most American families is the insane number of copays that people have to pay as they get older. On average, the typical American between the ages of 50 and 60 fill almost thirty prescriptions per year, while the typical American over 65 and over fill almost 50 prescriptions per year. Most drugs are covered by insurance, but even when each copay is small, these numbers add up quickly and are a growing drag on household budgets. In an October 2019 report, we call this the prescription escalator, since the number of prescriptions — and copays — rises sharply with age.
The problem is that the centerpiece of the drug pricing reform proposal–broad Medicare drug price negotiation–will almost definitely hurt R&D and new drug development without actually addressing most of the co-pays that Americans pay. A recent CBO study estimates that drug price reform (similar to what has been proposed) would lead to 59 fewer new drugs over the next three decades. Moreover, key lines of drug development may never even be funded, leading to missed opportunities for saving lives and reducing medical costs in the future. That’s unfortunate, coming after a year when the industry outperformed the rest of the world by developing “gold standard” vaccines in record time.
Given the current levels of R&D spending, excessively squeezing the revenues received by pharma companies will inevitably translate into fewer new drugs. That implies Democratic Representatives Scott Peters (D-Calif.), Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.) and Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.), who voted against the drug pricing proposal in the House Energy and Commerce Committee markup process, have solid grounds for worrying that such legislation will undercut investment in innovative drugs.
The drug pricing proposal being considered does contain some good features, including reforming Medicare Part D to cap catastrophic spending. But from a political perspective, it should also deal with the prescription escalator problem that is a key driver of the negative feelings towards drug prices. That means capping out-of-pocket drug expenses, not just for Medicare Part D but for all medical insurance. We examined this in our February 2021 report, “Memo to President Biden: A Reality-Based Approach to Drug Pricing.” In that paper, we support a cap on out-of-pocket costs for drugs, including copays, similar to legislation proposed in 2018. We also support a shift to point-of sales rebates, which should benefit consumers and align their incentives with actual net prices. Getting more transparency into the system is essential.
Finally, we need a better payment scheme for new drugs, especially potential cures for major diseases that are socially beneficial and cost-saving over the long run, but expensive to develop. The most straightforward solution is a shift to outcome-based pricing, which will get new drugs to market faster while having the pharma companies absorb more of the risk.
Today, the Progressive Policy Institute hosted an event with U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper (D-CO) and a panel of energy experts, focused on expanding power line capacity to enable renewable energy deployment.
“Senator Hickenlooper has forged a compelling record as a leader on clean energy and the fight against climate change, from his service as Governor of Colorado to the U.S. Senate. PPI was grateful to have facilitated this engaging roundtable with the senator and our panel of distinguished experts, centering the goals of maintaining the integrity of the electrical grid, expanding capacity while lowering consumer costs, and aggressively confronting climate change with innovative, forward-thinking solutions. Prioritizing these efforts will deliver benefits from public health, to climate, to cost reduction — while protecting our environment and driving job creation,” said Paul Bledsoe, PPI Strategic Advisor and moderator for the event.
Watch the event livestream here:
Senator Hickenlooper serves on the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
“There are lots of benefits from this. It’s going to provide revenue and jobs in rural communities — in other words, this is going to really tie together the country,” said Senator Hickenlooper during the event. “…By investing in transmission and the grid, we’re going to get a level of resiliency that, based on what we’ve seen this year, is sorely lacking in the existing system.”
This event’s panelists included Donnie Colston, Director of Utilities for IBEW; Bob Kump, President of Avangrid; Sue Tierney, energy analyst and author of the National Academy Sciences Report; Macky McCleary, energy consultant and former Rhode Island Utility regulator; and Bill Parsons, Chief Operating Officer for the American Council on Renewable Energy.
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.
Today’s U.S. Census Bureau Supplemental Poverty Measure release for 2020 underscores that despite COVID-19 and high unemployment, government support kept millions from falling into poverty over the past year. The poverty rate that takes into account government aid fell to 9.1% from the SPM rate of 11.8% in 2019. According to the authors, this is the lowest rate since estimates were initially published for 2009.
The stimulus checks moved an estimated 11.7 million individuals out of poverty and Unemployment Insurance prevented 5.1 million from falling into poverty. Notably, poverty decreased across all ages, races and ethnicities, and educational attainment levels.
On this week’s Radically Pragmatic Podcast, Dr. Michael Mandel, Chief Economic Strategist at the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), sits down with Representative Bill Foster (IL-11), to discuss artificial intelligence (AI) and the future of work.
Dr. Mandel and Representative Foster discuss the diffusion of technological innovations for individual consumers and small businesses, the role of government in privacy, and the work Congress is doing to advance pro-growth policies that will help spur innovation. In particular, they underscored the urgent need to help small businesses adopt AI and meet the numerous challenges they face.
Learn more about the Progressive Policy Institute here.
On this week’s Radically Pragmatic Podcast, Dr. Michael Mandel, Chief Economic Strategist at the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), sits down with Representative Bill Foster (IL-11), to discuss artificial intelligence (AI) and the future of work.
“Twenty years ago, when the web was the big new thing, everybody was going to have to learn HTML. And so a whole generation of kids were taught how to program in HTML. And now, of course, we have billions of people who program in HTML without knowing it, they just maintain their Facebook page. And so I think what’s going to happen is that we’re going to have very advanced tools where there will be millions of people using AI but they won’t have any idea what’s underneath the hood and that’s okay,” said Rep. Foster on the podcast.
Representative Foster is a member of the New Democrat Coalition. He represents Illinois’ 11th Congressional District, and is the only PhD physicist in Congress. Rep. Foster serves on the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, the House Select Committee on Coronavirus, and House Financial Services Committee, where he chairs the Committee’s task force on AI.
In the podcast, Dr. Mandel and Representative Foster discuss the diffusion of technological innovations for individual consumers and small businesses, the role of government in privacy, and the work Congress is doing to advance pro-growth policies that will help spur innovation. In particular, they underscored the urgent need to help small businesses adopt AI and meet the numerous challenges they face. Pre-COVID, nearly six in every ten small businesses closed doors within the first five years of operation. Artificial intelligence can help small businesses thrive by:
Saving time on tasks like payroll;
Analyzing data and forecasting future cash flows;
Easing the compliance process for local, state, and federal rules and regulations.
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.
Today, the Progressive Policy Institute’s Reinventing America’s Schools project released a new report titled, “Black Minds Matter: What Should Our Leaders Do About Failing Schools?” The report is authored by David Osborne, Director Emeritus of the Reinventing America’s Schools project. To sum up its argument:
“The task for state policymakers is simple: They must give districts a tool they can use, in the form of legislation to allow innovation zones, and incentives to use that tool. If they ignore this opportunity, they will sentence millions of poor children to inadequate educations that, for most, will result in lifetimes of poverty. That is the true civil rights issue of our time,” said David Osborne in the report.
Millions of children — many of them Black or Brown — languish in low-performing schools, where they are less likely to develop the skills or habits necessary to get into college or the military. Since 1989, 29 states have passed legislation allowing state takeovers of failing school districts, but most have not been very successful.
The report urges state leaders to create “innovation zones,” in which schools have the flexibility they need to improve and are held accountable for student learning. Osborne suggests appointing a zone oversight board that can replace schools and/or administrators if they fail or help them replicate their education models if they succeed. He outlines different innovation school models and provides actionable recommendations for zones and local leaders to support learning for all students.
The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.
The Reinventing America’s Schools project inspires a 21st century model of public education geared to the knowledge economy. One model, charter schools, are showing the way by providing autonomy for schools, accountability for results, and parental choice among schools tailored to the diverse learning styles of children. The project is co-led by Curtis Valentine and Tressa Pankovits.
