Letter to Congressional Leadership

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Charles E. Schumer
Majority Leader
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Schumer,

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) commends President Biden’s push to fund long-neglected public investments like transportation, research and development, clean energy infrastructure, and a highly skilled workforce in the next phase of his “Build Back Better” agenda. We also applaud the president and his team for acknowledging the need for raising revenue to offset most of the costs of his American Jobs  Plan and offering concrete proposals to do so.

The federal budget deficit will top $3 trillion for the second consecutive year in 2021, leaving the federal government owing more money than the economy produces annually for the first time since World War II. Although borrowing whatever sums were necessary to combat the covid recession was justified,  structural deficits will persist and continue growing larger after the economy has recovered. Moreover,  our recovery has thus far been “K-shaped”: those who entered this crisis flush with wealth in stocks and real estate are emerging wealthier than ever before, while lower-income workers and the unemployed are  falling farther behind. Americans deserve a recovery package that is substantially funded by progressive adjustments to our tax code.

We understand that the administration’s ambitious blueprint has controversial features and will trigger robust debate in Congress. Our view is that Congress should consider a wider array of tax changes to offset the costs of whatever it eventually passes. Building off of discussions with moderate lawmakers  who have expressed similar desires, PPI has developed a menu of radically pragmatic options for strengthening the government’s fiscal infrastructure and sustainably financing strategic investments in  America’s future growth.

We respectfully encourage you to consider the following tax reforms, which would largely tax wealth  instead of work and make federal taxes more progressive:

  • Raise the tax on inherited fortunes. Less than 0.1 percent of inheritances are subject to the federal estate tax, which allows heirs to inherit up to $23.4 million tax-free from the estate of a couple. There is simply no good reason that a wealthy heir should pay less in taxes than a middle-class  schoolteacher or an entrepreneur who earns their wealth through hard work. Replacing the estate tax with a progressive inheritance tax (one that taxes inherited income at the recipient’s ordinary tax rate plus a 15 or 20 percent surtax) would raise an enormous amount of revenue while deconcentrating wealth in America. Every dollar raised from taxing the unearned income of the super-wealthy is a  dollar the government does not need to raise by taxing work or productive investment.
  • Reduce Tax Preferences for Capital Gains. Capital gains are currently taxed up to 23.8 percent and while ordinary income is taxed up to 37 percent. Capital accounts for roughly 40 percent of income for households in the top 1 percent of the income distribution, compared to less than 2 percent of income for households in the bottom half, so reducing the disparity in tax treatment is an essential component of a progressive tax system. To ensure this change raises significant revenue, lawmakers should also repeal the “step-up basis” provision that allows recipients of inherited assets to permanently avoid paying taxes on untaxed capital gains that accrued during the original owner’s  lifetime – otherwise, many wealthy Americans will simply choose to hold assets until death to avoid higher capital gains tax rates.
  • Institute a Value-Added Tax (VAT). Many developed countries, including Canada and all of those  in the European Union, fund their generous social safety nets through a consumption tax collected incrementally at each step in a product’s supply chain. Economists prefer these consumption taxes over income taxes because they are harder to evade and reward people for saving and investing in  growing the economy. Pairing a value-added tax with subsidies to hold harmless lower-income  Americans could raise significant revenue in a progressive way without harming economic growth.
  • Put a price on carbon pollution. Congress should use our tax code to harness the power of market mechanisms to limit the damage of climate change. Placing a fee equal to the social cost of carbon on producers puts those social costs on the emitter and ensures that carbon is only emitted when the benefits outweigh the true costs. Carbon-intensive businesses would pay higher taxes for producing more carbon and businesses that invest in reducing their emissions would gain a competitive advantage. A carbon price would especially help frontline communities most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change by reducing emissions, and these benefits could be further enhanced by earmarking some of the revenue raised to be invested in targeted climate mitigation efforts.
  • Transition to mileage-based fees. Revenue raised by federal taxes on motor fuels have failed to keep up with transportation funding needs, both because Congress never indexed the rates to inflation and because improvements in vehicle fuel efficiency are reducing the amount of gasoline that the average driver needs to buy. That shortfall will only grow worse as our country makes the transition to electric  cars and trucks. A mileage-based fee would be neutral as to fuel type while ensuring that what you pay to use the roads is related directly to how much you use them. Although a national vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) fee for all vehicles may not be not practical now, adopting a VMT for commercial trucks and launching pilot programs for passenger vehicles would put our transportation infrastructure on the road to sustainable funding for the future.
  • Raise the corporate income tax rate. Real corporate tax reform would have lowered the corporate income rate and paid for it by broadening the tax base. But while the GOP tax law’s corporate tax changes did curtail some deductions, it did not do nearly enough and gave away hundreds of billions of dollars more in revenue than it raised. The net revenue loss was an unaffordable tax giveaway to the wealthy that should be recouped by raising the tax rate.
  • Cap itemized deductions. Itemized deductions are worth more to taxpayers in higher tax brackets because they would have owed more on each dollar deducted if it had been taxed. Capping itemized deductions at 24 or 32 percent ensure that people in higher tax brackets receive no greater benefit per dollar deducted than people in the tax bracket at which the cap is linked.
  • Increase resources for IRS enforcement. The IRS estimated 10 years ago that taxpayers failed to pay over $400 billion in tax obligations annually. But instead of trying to reclaim that money by spending more on tax law enforcement, Congress has cut the IRS’ budget in inflation-adjusted dollars by nearly 20 percent since then. As a result, the IRS is now 80 percent less likely to audit people earning over $1 million than it was in 2011. Spending more money on tax enforcement will help the  IRS crackdown on tax evasion by the wealthy and reduce federal budget deficits.

Now is the time to pass a big, bold recovery package that funds America’s future. With your leadership,  we can set our country on the path to sustainable and equitable growth.

Sincerely,

Will Marshall

President, Progressive Policy Institute

Ben Ritz,

Director, PPI Center for Funding America’s Future

Five Ways the Americans Jobs Plan Gets Workforce Development Right

The Biden administration released its American Jobs Plan yesterday – a bold package with critical investments in infrastructure and America’s workers. Among its more ambitious aims is $100 billion set aside for workforce development. This includes a long overdue investment to diversify career pathways, through approaches such as apprenticeship programs, a focus on sector partnerships, and a new and robust program for dislocated workers. There is a lot to cheer for in the AJP—here are five ways it gets it right in pairing job creation with next-generation training programs.

  1. Investing in Workforce Development and Worker Protection. For decades, the United States has lagged other high-income countries in workforce development. The AJP calls for a $48 billion investment in workforce development and worker protection, which includes funding for registered apprenticeships and pre-apprenticeship programs. In total, this would create one to two million new registered apprenticeships. PPI has long-called for the U.S. to increase apprenticeships 10-fold and provide workers with career pathways that do not require a four-year degree. We’ve also advocated for two specific ways to modernize apprenticeships: Congress should formalize and incentivize intermediaries (public or private) by subsidizing them to create “outsourced” apprenticeships, and government at all levels should create public service apprenticeship opportunities and programs, including in industries such as information technology, accounting, and health care.
  2. Expanding Career and Technical Education. The plan recognizes the need for investments to expand career and technical education (CTE) and workforce-readiness programs for middle- and high-school students. The 10 million jobs lost by Americans at the pandemic’s onset disproportionally impacted young adults between the ages of 16 and 24, and some estimate that as many as 25 percent of our youth will neither be in school nor working when the pandemic ends. According to the U.S. Department of Education, high school students enrolled in programs with a CTE concentration are more likely to both graduate and earn higher median annual salaries than those who did not participate. These investments will set up students to be better prepared to enter the labor force upon graduation and gain their economic footing as they transition to adulthood.
  3. Addressing Inequities. Women and minorities have been disproportionately impacted by job losses during the pandemic and have historically been excluded from infrastructure jobs. Acknowledging these inequities, the plan calls for “strengthening the pipeline for more women and people of color to access apprenticeship opportunities,” such as through the Women in Apprenticeships in Non-Traditional Occupations program. Another option would be to increase training programs and increase apprenticeship slots in industries dominated by women that face worker shortages, such as early childhood education and care, and pair these jobs with competitive wages.
  4. Supporting Job Training with Smart, Evidence-Based Policies. The AJP acknowledges that we need forward-looking, evidence-based approaches to train the next generation of American workers and help those who might need to reskill or upskill, including laid off workers during the pandemic. The White House calls for a “a $40 billion investment in a new Dislocated Workers Program and sector-based training.” These funds would be allocated to help train workers get trained with skills in high-demand industries, such as clean energy, manufacturing, and caregiving. To ensure the success of such programs, the White House draws on evidence that completion rates are highest when workers are provided with wrap-around services, income supports, counseling, and case management to overcome the barriers to finishing their training.
  5. Empowering Workers and Unions. Lastly, the AJP emphasizes the important role of union jobs as the backbone of the American middle class. The proposed legislation includes important provisions for strengthening the rights of workers to organize and for making sure that employers who benefit from the plan adhere to appropriate labor standards and do not interfere with workers’ exercise of their rights. Enhancing the power of workers in our economy is critical to supporting good jobs and a strong middle class.

The Covid recession has left over 10 million Americans out of a job and millions of workers might not have a job to return to when the pandemic is over. For them, the AJP would create a diverse set of pathways to connect them with quality jobs offering livable wages. We hope that when Congress takes up this package in the coming months, they will pursue equity not just for underrepresented groups in workforce development, but also for those who lack a college degree yet make up a majority of the labor market. For them, access to pathways that do not require a four-year degree will be critical to help them regain their economic footing. Overall, the AJP meets the moment to address historic job losses and infrastructure in need of significant public investment.

New Report from PPI Calls for EU to Support AI Innovation

A new report released today by the Progressive Policy Institute calls on the European Union to support artificial intelligence (AI) industry growth and innovation by enacting targeted reforms to help small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Europe succeed. The report also calls on the EU to consider policies to facilitate the emergence of a highly-skilled technical workforce, and strike a balance between consumer protections and overly burdensome regulations.

Report authors Caleb Watney and Dirk Auer outline the existing regulations that hamper the development of AI systems in the EU, as well as the unique promise AI holds for SMEs. Unlike the United States and China, the EU has largely failed to foster global players in the digital platform industry. Of the 30 largest internet companies in the world, only one is European. Those in the EU’s tech industry are smaller players who often rely on foreign AI platforms – mostly American – to boost AI adoption. The EU’s protectionist tax and trade measures hamstring these platforms, stifle innovation and limit job creation in Europe.

“There’s a real opportunity here for the EU to bootstrap the AI adoption process for their SMEs and become a global player in the tech industry. But it won’t happen without smart investment in public datasets, increased regulatory certainty, and an openness to working with rather than against US firms,” said Caleb Watney, Director of Innovation Policy at PPI.

Artificial intelligence is already being used across a wide range of domains to decrease power costs, improve logistics and sourcing systems, predict cash flows, streamline legal analysis, aid in drug discovery, improve factory safety conditions, and identify logistics efficiencies. This is in addition to opening up entirely new fields like autonomous vehicles, drone delivery systems, and instantaneous language translation. While many of AI’s most eye-catching use cases will likely remain the preserve of large platforms, the technology also holds tremendous promise for SMEs.

Key policy recommendations in the brief include:

Data investment as a public good:

  • Where appropriate, align incentives for the private sector to contribute industry-level SME data to public and private data trusts that could be used by everyone.
  • Invest in making more government datasets open to the public.
  • Fund Focused Research Organizations or similar groups with the explicit goal of creating new scientific and commercial public datasets.

Provide regulatory certainty:

  • Clarify existing regulations and the obligations that SMEs must meet when utilizing a new AI tool.
  • Consider the creation of a new SME regulatory website that provides informational resources to SMEs about the benefits of AI adoption for their business and the potential roadblocks that they need to be aware of.
  • Before promulgating new regulations or regulatory bodies, closely scrutinize the ecosystem to see if the same goal could be better achieved through existing industry specific regulations or fine adjustments to liability laws.

 Encourage an ecosystem of AI platforms:

  • Avoid protectionist tax and trade policies that make it difficult for international AI platform companies to serve EU SMEs.
  • Invest in the creation of open-source AI platforms that could be utilized by SMEs and create a forum for receiving feedback on the types of tools that would be most useful for SMEs.
  • Articulate best practices on the member state level for encouraging AI adoption so that the best ideas can be identified and quickly adopted elsewhere.

Expand the AI talent pool

  • Encourage upskilling of the EU population by offering to cover a portion of the costs of specialized AI training courses.
  • Reevaluate EU immigration pathways to make them more attractive for international technical talent.
  • Facilitate global knowledge spillovers by removing potential obstacles to cross-border M&A.

Media Contact: Aaron White – awhite@ppionline.org

-30-

 

Mexico’s App Economy in 2020

The COVID-19 pandemic undoubtedly disrupted peoples’ way of life, both in terms of health and the economy. For Mexico, more than 2 million cases have been confirmed as of this writing, with economic output declining by 8.5 percent in 2020 – the country’s biggest annual contraction since the 1930s. 

As people have engaged in social distancing and work from home to mitigate the virus, wireless connectivity has never been more critical. Smartphones and apps are increasingly becoming a part of daily life, allowing consumers and businesses to interact and be productive from a distance.

In this paper, we focus on Mexico’s App Economy: those app developers and other workers who create, maintain, and support an ever-expanding range of apps for health, communications, ecommerce, education, transportation, banking, and smart homes. The size of an App Economy workforce in a country is indicative of the rate at which that country is embracing the digital transformation and how well it will be positioned as the global economy recovers from the pandemic.

Read the full report in English here.

Read the full report in Spanish here. 

 

Report Shows Mexico’s App Economy Grew by Double Digits, Despite the Pandemic

A new report released today by the Progressive Policy Institute shows Mexico’s App Economy – app developers and other workers who create, maintain, and support mobile phone applications – grew by 11 percent from 2019 to 2020, and by 7 percent from 2018 to 2019. The report also estimates Mexico has 178,000 App Economy jobs as of 2020. This growth is consistent with App Economy growth across the world during the pandemic.

“As people have engaged in social distancing and work from home to mitigate the virus, wireless connectivity has never been more critical. Smartphones and apps are increasingly becoming a part of daily life, and Mexico’s strong and growing app economy is indicative of the country’s embrace of digital transformation and shows how Mexico will be positioned as the global economy recovers from this pandemic,” said Michael Mandel and Elliott Long, report authors and economists at the Progressive Policy Institute.

This growth is helping cushion the economic and human damage wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico.

Read the full report here.

-30-

Encouraging AI adoption by EU SMEs

For the firms that adopt them, artificial intelligence (AI) systems can offer revolutionary new products, increase productivity, raise wages, and expand consumer convenience. But there are open questions about how well the ecosystem of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) across Europe is prepared to adopt these new technologies. While AI systems offer some hope of narrowing the recent productivity gap between small and large firms, that can only happen if the technologies actually diffuse throughout the economy.

Policymakers have naturally been attracted to this topic as SMEs represent the backbone of the European economy, making up 99% of all businesses. And an AI-enabled productivity boost would be particularly timely as SMEs are recovering from the effects of the ongoing Covid-19 crisis.

At the same time, the EU has articulated a desire to be on the forefront of developing novel AI regulations. The EU is contemplating new regulations on the development and deployment of AI that seek to address dual priorities2: How can the EU simultaneously increase the uptake of AI by European firms while shaping the regulatory environment to protect European consumers from harm?

And while the EU’s ambition is laudable, the Commission’s pronouncements have so far failed to grapple meaningfully with the significant tradeoffs that the regulation of new technologies entails. As is the case with all new technologies, the adoption of AI systems — i.e., the broad suite of technologies that are designed to automate or augment aspects of human decision making — involves a tradeoff between risk-mitigation and rapid adoption. Unless carefully managed, the effort to protect consumers from potential risks places additional burdens on firms, which can chill investment and adoption, especially among SMEs. Policymakers thus need to achieve a balance between these two objectives.

With this in mind, our report outlines various policy considerations that should enable policymakers to achieve this balance between the two goals and embody the principle of Thinking Small First3 — the idea that public policy should consider the potential impacts on SMEs from the ground up. The report discusses the promise for AI systems to increase productivity among EU SMEs, the current barriers to AI uptake, and policy tools that may be useful in managing the risks of AI while maximizing the benefits.

Read the report here.

 

Carolina Postcard: Will Voting Rights Battles Come to NC – Again?

For 150 years, North Carolina has been a battleground over Black citizens’ voting rights. Get ready for another battle.

Governor Roy Cooper issued a warning this month:

“I expect Republican leadership in our North Carolina legislature to follow a lot of other state legislatures in using this ‘big lie’ of voter fraud as an excuse for laws that suppress the vote. Let’s just get real about it: These laws are intended to discourage people from voting.”

Legislators in 43 states have proposed more than 250 bills to suppress voting. Georgia just passed one that The New York Times says will have “an outsize impact on Black voters.”

Reporters in Raleigh have speculated that similar bills will be introduced this year – and rushed through the legislature to Governor Cooper’s desk.

Our state has been here before. Resistance began as soon as the Fifteenth Amendment gave Blacks the right to vote after the Civil War.

Blacks helped elect Governor William W. Holden, a Republican, in 1868. In 1870, the Ku Klux Klan used murder and intimidation to suppress Republican votes. Democrats regained control of the legislature. They impeached Holden and removed him from office.

Despite Jim Crow laws and the Klan, Blacks continued to hold elected office in North Carolina during the 19th Century. The last to serve in Congress was George Henry White (1897-1901).

Congressman George H. White

Then white supremacists took over. In 1898, white mobs murdered Black citizens and overthrew the legally elected government of Wilmington. The Democratic Party and The News & Observer, working together, imposed ruthless voter-suppression laws that disenfranchised Blacks for decades.

In the 1960s, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act despite filibusters by Southern Senators, including North Carolina’s Sam Ervin, a Democrat.

The two parties then reversed roles on race. The Democratic Party, once the party of white supremacy, embraced civil rights. Southern whites embraced the Republican Party, once the party of Lincoln.

The News & Observer became a strong voice for civil rights and racial equality.

Republican Senator Jesse Helms, elected in 1972, took up the Southern-resistance banner. He had won fame fulminating on WRAL-TV against the civil rights movement and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He held his seat for 30 years; he never changed his views on race.

The U.S. Justice Department accused Helms’ 1990 campaign – against a Black opponent, Harvey Gantt – of intimidating Black voters. The campaign sent 125,000 postcards, mostly to Black voters, falsely claiming they were not eligible and could be prosecuted for voter fraud. Helms’ campaign later signed a consent decree to settle the complaint.

A former Democrat, Helms had been involved in one of the most racist campaigns in North Carolina’s history, Willis Smith’s victory over Frank Porter Graham in the 1950 Senate Democratic primary. Smith’s campaign passed out flyers that said: “White People Wake Up.”

Willis Smith campaign flyer, 1950

Despite Helms, North Carolina earned a reputation in the last decades of the 20th Century as a progressive state on racial issues.

Then, in 2010 – the first midterm after the election of Barack Obama, the first Black President – Republicans won majorities in the state House and Senate.

In 2013, they passed an election law that the Brennan Center for Justice called “possibly the most restrictive” in the nation. It required a photo ID, curtailed early voting, ended same-day registration and ended provisional voting.

A federal court said the law “disproportionately affected” Black voters, targeting them “with almost surgical precision.” Lawsuits tied up many of the law’s provisions.

Now – in the wake of the 2020 election and Donald Trump’s false claims of voter fraud – North Carolina may be in for another battle.

PPI’s Mosaic Economic Project Announces Second Cohort of Policy Experts

12 Women Join the Effort to Diversify the Policy Debate

Today, the Mosaic Economic Project, an initiative of the Progressive Policy Institute, announced it’s second cohort of policy experts participating in the ‘Women Changing Policy’ workshop, March 29 – 31, 2021. The women are all experts in the fields of economics, business and technology, who are forging a path forward to bring a diverse perspective to today’s public policy debates.

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.

“We are thrilled to welcome another class of talented, highly skilled, and diverse leaders to Mosaic Economic Project’s second cohort. This event will help this dynamic group of women hone their skills for high-profile engagement in public policy debates, and promote inclusiveness within the economic growth and innovation fields of study,” said Crystal Swann, Mosaic Economic Project team lead.

This diverse and talented group of leaders will hear from experts in public policy and media, including leaders and representatives from the United States Congress, the media, communications consulting firms, and more.

The Mosaic Economic Project Cohort includes:

      • Hilary Abell, co-founder of Project Equity
      • Dr. Lisa Abraham, Associate Economist at the RAND Corporation
      • Joanna Ain, Associate Director of Policy at Prosperity Now
      • Talisha Bekavac, Vice President of Government and External Affairs for the U.S. Black Chambers (USBC)
      • Dr. Carycruz M. Bueno, Postdoctoral Research Associate at the Annenberg Institute and The Policy Lab at Brown University
      • Melissa Gopnik, Senior Vice President at Commonwealth
      • Dr. Tiffany Green, Assistant Professor of Population Health Sciences and Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison
      • Dr. Leshell Hatley, Associate Professor of Computer Science at Coppin State University
      • Gabriella Kusz member of the Board Directors and Public Policy and Regulation Committee of the Global Digital Asset and Cryptocurrency Association
      • Aditi Mohapatra, Managing Director at BSR
      • Dr. Sarah Oh, Senior Fellow at the Technology Policy Institute
      • Jessica Schieder, Federal Tax Policy Fellow at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP)

For more information on how to contact the members of the Mosaic Economic Project please reach out to Crystal Swann at cswann@ppionline.org.

Media Contact: Aaron White – awhite@ppionline.org

###

Biden Infrastructure Plan Should Boost R&D

When President Biden unveils the next phase of his Build Back Better recovery agenda in Pittsburgh on Wednesday, he’s expected to propose a $3 trillion spending plan broken into two major components. The first consists of investments in “traditional” infrastructure, such as transportation, waterways, broadband, and clean energy. The second component will consist of what the administration calls “human infrastructure,” such as investments in early childhood education and community college. President Biden should be commended for his commitment to bolster these two categories of public goods that have been neglected for far too long by federal policymakers. But to raise American standards of living and outcompete our adversaries, Biden should prioritize a third category that is equally (if not more) important in fueling the engines of human progress: research and development (R&D).

Every technology that powers our modern economy, from the cars that we drive to the phones in our pockets, is the culmination of years or even decades of R&D. When it comes time to commercialize new technologies based on such discoveries, the countries that maintained and cultivated their scientific community have a head start on the competition. The United States was once the indisputable global leader in R&D, but our leadership has faltered in recent years. In 2018, China spent more money on R&D than any other country, dethroning the United States for the first time in decades. Meanwhile, other countries including Japan and South Korea are spending substantially more on R&D as a percent of their gross domestic product than the United States is. America must renew its commitment to investment in R&D so we can attract top talent and remain the leader of innovation in the 21st century.

Read the full piece on Forbes.

The Alarming Truth about Biden’s Latest Education Nominee

Supporters of Cindy Marten, President Biden’s nominee for Deputy U.S. Secretary of Education, laud her success in closing achievement gaps during her eight years as superintendent in San Diego. Unfortunately, such claims are false.

Linda Darling-Hammond, who led Biden’s transition team on education, cites Marten’s “enormous work” and “knowledge base on how to improve schools and close opportunity and achievement gaps” for poor and minority students as her lead qualification. When the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee holds its hearing on Marten this Wednesday, it should scrutinize that claim.

Complaints against Marten include inequitable treatment of families with special needs students, disproportionate rates of suspensions and expulsions for Black and Brown SDUSD students, financial mismanagement, mishandling sexual abuse cases, a serial lack of transparency, and retaliation against truth-tellers.

Read the rest on RealClearEducation.

Biden Needs New Deal for Immigration

This piece was also published on Medium.

Congress Should Raise Taxes On Multi-Million Dollar Inheritances

After passing President Biden’s $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, Congress is beginning to move on enacting the rest of his “Build Back Better” recovery agenda. This next bill presents a unique opportunity to finally fund long-neglected public investments in infrastructure and scientific research that lay the foundation for robust economic growth. But at a time of skyrocketing budget deficits and rising inequality, lawmakers should also be pursuing changes to our tax code that equitably and efficiently raise enough revenue to fund these and other national priorities.

Unfortunately, Republicans in Congress seem to believe the opposite: on the same day they voted unanimously against giving aid to help lower- and middle-income Americans weather the pandemic, Senate Republicans introduced a bill to cut taxes exclusively for multi-millionaires who inherit their wealth. The GOP’s tone-deaf pursuit of their tax-cuts-at-any-cost agenda is galling: there is simply no good reason that a wealthy heir should pay less in taxes than a middle-class schoolteacher or an entrepreneur who earns their wealth through hard work. Lawmakers should raise taxes on inheritances, not cut them.

Read the full piece here.

To Build Back Better, Biden Must Invest in Modern Apprenticeship System

Now that the historic American Rescue Plan has been passed in Congress and signed into law, President Biden will turn to his Build Back Better plan to help the more than 10 million unemployed Americans return to the labor force. As part of this effort to lift the job prospects of laid-off workers and young Americans without college degrees, America needs to go big on investing in a modern apprenticeship system built for the needs of our 21st century workforce.

More than ever before, Americans – especially young adults – need pathways to careers that don’t require a traditional four-year college degree. While Millennials are the most educated generation in history, as of 2015, only about a third of Americans ages 25-to-34 were college graduates. That number is even lower for older Americans. Apprenticeships offer an on-ramp to well-paying careers for those who did not go to college. The average starting annual salary for registered apprentices is $60,000.

Even though most Americans don’t go to college, the U.S. has historically underutilized apprenticeships compared to European countries. European apprenticeships span a range of industries, including those on the cutting edge. For example, German biotechnology company BioNTech, which partnered with Pfizer on a COVID-19 vaccine, hires and trains large numbers of apprentices as part of its business model.

Read the full piece here.

PPI Statement on Senate Confirmation of Katherine Tai as USTR

Today, Will Marshall, President of the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) released the following statement on the unanimous bipartisan Senate confirmation of Katherine Tai to be the Biden Administration’s United States Trade Representative:

“Without doubt, Katherine Tai will capably represent America on the world stage, and help us regain our footing with our international trading partners after the previous administration’s ill-conceived detour into blunderbuss tariffs, protectionism and gratuitous ally-bashing.

“Our new Administration faces unprecedented challenges in trade – caused not only by COVID-19, but also by China’s routine flouting of global trade rules. We also have rare and exciting opportunities for growth and innovation in digital trade policy, which – if addressed robustly – will benefit American businesses, workers, and producers for generations to come.

“The Progressive Policy Institute congratulates USTR Tai on her historic confirmation, and commends the Biden Administration for this excellent choice in leadership.”

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.

Media Contact: Aaron White – awhite@ppionline.org

###

How to Bridge the Digital Divide without Widening Partisan Divides

Joe Biden’s pledge to be a president for all Americans — not just those who voted for him — is already being tested by the harsh reality of the hyper-partisan Washington outrage machine. Biden and his team will have to work overtime to find policy issues offering enough common ground to garner 60 votes in the Senate.

Getting every American connected to broadband — an issue that cuts across “Red-Blue” and urban-rural fault lines — would be a good place to start repairing the breach.

Republicans know infrastructure deployment gaps are found primarily in rural, as well as tribal areas. Democrats understand broadband adoption rates are lowest among low-income households and in communities of color. And common sense, pro-consumer open internet protections and privacy safeguards enjoy strong bipartisan support — so long as they’re not weighed down with poison pills and unrelated add-ons.

Taken together, these priorities offer ripe ground for bipartisan compromise and meaningful progress. Universal broadband connectivity is an attainable goal — if the administration can resist pressure to go down the dead-end paths of government micromanagement and instead stay focused on targeted spending, smart reforms, and public-private partnerships.

Read the full piece here.

Carolina Postcard: Tracking North Carolina’s “Blue Shift”

By Gary Pearce

Looking back, it’s clear that North Carolina took a big step in 2008 toward becoming a Democratic state in presidential elections. It’s not clear whether we’ll keep moving in that direction.

Since 2008, Democrats have confidently predicted that demographic trends – more young voters, minority voters and college-educated voters – would make North Carolina more like Virginia, which is increasingly Democratic, and Georgia, which was surprisingly Democratic in 2020.

Before we explore whether that will happen, let’s be clear about the “blue shift” that already has happened.

From 1980 to 2004, North Carolina was reliably Republican in presidential races. Republican candidates carried the state seven straight times, usually by double digits.

Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter here by 2% in 1980, then swamped Walter Mondale by 24% in 1984; George H. W. Bush beat Michael Dukakis by over 16% in 1988. Bill Clinton made North Carolina competitive again in 1992, losing to Bush by less than 1%, partly because Ross Perot was on the ballot and siphoned votes away from Bush. Bob Dole beat Clinton here by 4.7% in 1996.

In 2000, George W. Bush beat Al Gore in North Carolina by 12.8%; Bush beat John Kerry by 12.4% in 2004, even with former North Carolina Senator John Edwards on the Democratic ticket.

But that pattern changed dramatically in 2008.

The breakthrough didn’t come the way experts expected: with a moderate white candidate from the South, another Carter or Clinton. Instead, it was a Black candidate, an unknown first-term Senator from Illinois with an unlikely name and an unexpected appeal.

Republicans scoffed that year at reports Barack Obama’s campaign was targeting North Carolina. No way, they said, could a Black Democrat win such a safe Republican state.

But Obama did win, by just 0.3%, thanks to a surge of minority voters and young voters. He won white working-class voters who had lost faith in Republican economic policies and lost patience with never-ending wars in the Middle East. John McCain’s pick of Sarah Palin for Vice President cost him women and college-educated voters.

North Carolina turned red again on the electoral maps of 2012, 2016 and 2020. But the margins never returned to pre-2008 levels. Mitt Romney beat Obama here in 2012 by just 2%. Trump beat Hillary Clinton by 3.6% in 2016 and Joe Biden by 1.3% in November.

Democrats here have been inspired by Democrats in Georgia, which went for President Biden and elected two Democratic Senators. Efforts have begun to replicate Georgia Democrats’ voter registration and turnout juggernaut.

But North Carolina isn’t Georgia. We’re more rural. While both states have over 10 million people, Georgia’s rural population is about 1.8 million; North Carolina’s is over 3 million. Georgia has more Black voters – 30% of the total electorate, compared to North Carolina’s 20%.

Three questions will decide the future of North Carolina’s “blue shift.”

First, will Covid and its economic impact put an end to the 40-year reign of Ronald Reagan’s philosophy that “government is the problem”? Some polls suggest Americans today want more from government, not less.

Second, which party’s set of issues matter more to voters? Biden and Democrats are focusing on Covid vaccines, economic relief, climate change, and gender and racial equality. Republicans are focused on abortion, immigration, “reopening” the country and “cancel culture.”

Third, which will prevail: Democrats’ efforts to expand voting or Republicans’ efforts to restrict it?

In a state where presidential elections are decided by 1, 2 or 3%, small actions and small shifts in attitudes can produce big shifts in outcomes.