Marshall for The Hill: Can Democrats Break America’s Political Stalemate?

By Will Marshall, PPI President

It was inspiring to watch a scrappy U.S. men’s soccer team battle mighty England to a 0-0 draw in the World Cup’s first round. But let’s face it: Americans have little use for moral victories — we want to score and win.

It’s time we applied that principle to our national politics. Since 2000, the competition between Democrats and Republicans for governing power has been stuck in a virtual tie. Tenuous control of the White House and Congress keeps oscillating back and forth because U.S. voters are reluctant to entrust either party with a big or lasting majority.

When neither party can win a popular mandate for change, it’s hard for our country to make sustained progress in any direction. American democracy seems trapped in a political doom loop of intensifying polarization, identity-fueled tribalism and parity between two minority parties.

As the parties migrate toward their respective ideological poles, they vacate the pragmatic center and get smaller. Amplified by social media, dogmatic and extremist voices drown out temperate ones and drive out independents, who now constitute roughly a third of the electorate.

Read the full piece in The Hill.

Lame-Duck Priorities Outlined by PPI’s Center for Funding America’s Future, Fiscal Discipline and Reining in Inflation Key

PPI’s Center for Funding America’s Future today called on Congressional Leaders to prioritize the fight against inflation above all else as both Chambers race to complete the legislative priorities of the 117th Congress.

In their memo to leadership, Ben Ritz and Nick Buffie argue that Congress should not cut taxes or increase spending over the next year or in future years without concurrently offsetting the costs over the same time period. Doing so would double down on a borrowing binge that has worsened inflation and raised costs for hardworking Americans.

PPI’s Center for Funding America’s Future’s outlines key priorities for lawmakers to address in a fiscally responsible way that supports our economy and helps the Federal Reserve bring down inflation:

  • Providing adequate appropriations for normal government operations and new public investments
  • Supporting the fight for democracy in Ukraine
  • Restoring some expansion of the child tax credit
  • Restoring immediate expensing for R&D investments
  • Improving retirement security without costly budget gimmicks, and
  • Passing energy permitting reform to boost energy supply and combat climate change

 

Read and download the memo here:

###

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.

Follow PPI on Twitter: @ppi

Find an expert at PPI.

UK Labour Adviser Claire Ainsley to Direct New PPI Project

Ainsley most recently served as Executive Director of Policy for the Labour Party’s Leader of the Official Opposition, Keir Starmer

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) announced it is expanding its international operation to the United Kingdom, bringing on Claire Ainsley as Director of the PPI Project on Center-Left Renewal. This new U.K.-U.S. initiative aims to catalyze and create renewal of the center-left, as social democrats have seen a revival in their fortunes around the world.

The PPI Project on Center-Left Renewal will look at the political forces driving the changes and how center-left parties can build sustainable majorities in volatile times. Most recently, Ainsley was Executive Director of Policy for the Labour Party’s Leader of the Official Opposition, Keir Starmer MP.

“There is a real opportunity to galvanise a center-left agenda that can win in parliaments and for people. I am really excited to be working with PPI on this new U.S.-U.K. collaboration and look forward to working in partnership across the nations for our common cause,” said Claire Ainsley.

“We’re delighted to join forces with Claire Ainsley, whose insights into working class alienation in Great Britain also are highly relevant to America’s Democrats and center-left parties across Europe,” said Will Marshall, President and Founder of the Progressive Policy Institute. “Our collaboration aims at giving these voters a more compelling center-left alternative to right-wing populism.”

“Claire Ainsley is a wonderful addition to the PPI team. As our friends in the Labour Party are on the verge of returning to lead the U.K. after a disastrous few years of Tory failures, there is much to learn and compare in the U.K. and U.S. The center-left leadership of ideas and policy that benefit the working class is what PPI is cemented in and Claire brings a needed expert voice to our work in the U.S. and U.K.,” said Lindsay Mark Lewis, Executive Director of the Progressive Policy Institute.

The Project on Center-Left Renewal will officially launch in January of 2023. This is the second international project for PPI, with PPI Brussels established in 2018.

Prior to joining the Progressive Policy Institute as Director of the PPI Project on Center-Left Renewal, Claire Ainsley was the Executive Director of Policy to Keir Starmer, Leader of the Opposition and U.K. Labour Party. Claire also served as the Executive Director of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, where she led JRF’s work on the social and political attitudes of people with low incomes. She is the author of “The New Working Class: How to Win Hearts, Minds and Votes,” which was published in May 2018.

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.

Follow PPI on Twitter: @ppi

Find an expert at PPI.

###

Media Contact: Aaron White; awhite@ppionline.org

Marshall for The Hill: U.S. Democracy Just Dodged a Bullet

By Will Marshall, President of PPI
for The Hill 

Even as Republicans take narrow control of the House of Representatives, Democrats are still aglow over their political gravity-defying performance in the midterm elections. More gratifying than the partisan scorecard, however, is the big civic takeaway: Anti-democratic extremism mattered to America’s voters.

They can’t abide it and they voted against candidates who embraced it. This despite the punditocracy’s herd-like certitude that Americans can’t see beyond their kitchen table and would mainly vote their pocketbooks.

Many did – inflation was the top issued cited by voters, and those who gave it priority voted overwhelmingly for Republicans. But many didn’t, turning what would normally be big off-year election gains by the out party into a rebuke of Trumpism.

Consequently, U.S. democracy dodged a bullet this month, giving Americans something else to be grateful for this Thanksgiving.

Read the full piece in The Hill. 

Marshall: Pelosi Has Served Her Country with Consummate Skill, Integrity and Patriotism

Progressive Policy Institute President Will Marshall released the following statement in reaction to Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s announcement that she would step back from leadership in the 118th Congress:

“The Progressive Policy Institute is glad to join in today’s outpouring of tributes to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

“She was the first woman to be elected to the nation’s third highest constitutional office. Over the course of two decades as Speaker, she has served her country with consummate skill, integrity and patriotism.

“At the same time, she has also been a highly effective party leader: smart, disciplined, fair, open-minded and, when the occasion demanded it, tough as nails. In good times and bad, she helped to keep her often fractious party united and focused on doing the people’s business.

“It’s not easy to combine these roles, but for Nancy Pelosi public service and Democratic politics are family traditions. She was born Nancy D’Alesandro in Baltimore, where both her father and brother served as Mayor.

“We won’t forget, and we don’t think the American people will forget, the courageous way Speaker Pelosi defended our democracy when it came under attack by a deranged and lawless president on Jan. 6, 2021.”

PPI Hosts Midterm Analysis Event to Discuss the Key Lessons and Major Takeaways Moving into a Divided Congress

Event featured Rep. Cheri Bustos and leading policy and political experts

Today, the Progressive Policy Institute hosted a panel discussion diving deep into the 2022 midterms, analyzing the political and policy implications of a divided Congress and the messages that moved voters to the polls and delivered a surprisingly strong midterm election for the Democrats. The event featured an all-star lineup of thought leaders and policymakers, including: Congresswoman Cheri Bustos (D-IL)PPI President Will MarshallRuy Teixeira, Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and co-editor of The Liberal Patriot Substack; and Elaine Kamarck, Director of the Center for Effective Public Management at the Brookings Institution.

“The most gratifying part of this outcome for me is that extremism and democracy did matter, contrary to the punidtocracy’s very categorical certitude that nobody in America could look beyond their kitchen table to these esoteric issues, like the state of our democracy. That proved not to be the case,” said Will Marshall, President and Founder of the Progressive Policy Institute during the event. “Certainly abortion — the extreme anti-abortion tribe on the right, was a huge issue. We saw anti-abortion crusaders go down, we saw election deniers and conspiracy theorists go down in flames. It was the cherry on the pie that Donald Trump got the blame for the Republican losses, and he got a presidential rival in Gov. Ron DeSantis. So this split decision turns out to be the best midterm result I’ve seen since 1998.”

The event included thought-provoking discussions on what led voters to the polls — including access to abortion, inflation, crime and protecting our democracy, how the midterm elections will determine the future platform and leadership of the Democratic party, and the challenges the White House will face with a likely divided Congress.

See photos and clips from the event on PPI’s Twitter:

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.

Follow PPI on Twitter: @ppi

Find an expert at PPI.

###

Media Contact: Aaron White; awhite@ppionline.org

Marshall for the New York Daily News: Build on this, Democrats: How the party can capitalize on Republicans’ midterm fizzle

By Will Marshall
President and Founder of PPI
For New York Daily News

Last week’s delightfully abnormal midterm elections left Democrats elated and Republicans wondering how they failed to parlay President Biden’s dismal approval ratings and public consternation over soaring prices into big political gains.

The answer has three overlapping parts: a deeply unpopular stance on abortion, a bad habit of indulging anti-democratic extremism, and a raft of terrible candidates — all of which Republicans inflicted upon themselves. But for Democrats and Biden, dissecting the results and capitalizing on them are two very different matters. To hear voters’ 2022 message and win over many more in 2024, the party must decisively reoccupy the center, with pragmatic solutions that speak to voters’ everyday concerns.

As it happens, most voters (31%) did say inflation was the issue that mattered most to them. But contrary to the media’s claims that abortion was no longer a salient issue, it came in a close second (27%), followed by crime, guns and immigration. Those who chose abortion overwhelmingly backed Democratic candidates.

Read the full piece in the New York Daily News.

Five Trends in American News Consumption

By Malena Dailey (Progressive Policy Institute) and Rosie Beacon (Tony Blaire Institute)

The relationship between the media and democracy has historically been symbiotic: Changes in how society consumes media tends to alter the ways in which citizens engage with democracy. The ascendancy of populist politicians highlights the real-world impact of these trends, with social media providing a new medium for consumption of information as well as means for political figures to engage with the public.

In a moment defined by rising political tensions and differing perceptions of truth — exacerbated by conflicting spins on current events by partisan news organizations and misrepresentation of the truth online — understanding media consumption provides a path to understanding trends in American politics. Media provides information and ultimately influences people’s voting intentions, especially in a news environment that is already very politically charged. In order to understand the full picture of the trajectory of American politics, we must understand how Americans engage with news.

As we leave another election period, it is worth reflecting on what the evidence actually says about where and how most Americans get their news and what this says about modern digital led democracies.

1. Digital devices are the main way people access news, but social media is not the most popular way of accessing it — news brands are still important

Before social media, the day’s news agenda was largely decided by a small editorial elite at major news outlets. Whereas now, the prevalence of social media as a news source demonstrates that editorial narratives are decided as much by social media algorithms as they are the traditional purveyors of news. But irrespective of whether people get their news from news websites, search or social media, the role of news brands is still significant for readers.

The role of traditional news providers as producers of news has not diminished as much as their role as editors and curators of the agenda. The substance of newspapers is still important in what people consume, but the kind of news people see is no longer solely decided by newspapers.

Though digital devices are by far the most common way Americans access their news, where they get that news on their devices is divided among a number of different pathways. News websites, apps, and search engines are the digital pathways most Americans get news from at least sometimes. 63% at least sometimes get news from news websites or apps, 60% from search and 50% from social media, according to an analysis done by Pew Research. In the U.S., nearly a third of Americans regularly get news on Facebook (31%), and this outpaces all other social media sites.

Most individuals using social media are not doing so with the purpose of consuming news, though less than half of users on Facebook, and roughly a third of those on Instagram, YouTube and TikTok regularly get news from the site. This is closer to half for Twitter. Consuming such news via social media can be thought of in two main concepts. First, “incidental exposure,” where people are shown news articles when they are using social media platforms for other reasons. And second, “automated serendipity,” where algorithms surface news from outlets people would not normally use.

2. Individual journalists are now more significant than in a pre-internet age, and these journalists are generally partisan 

Explicitly opinionated and partisan journalists carry an enormous amount of influence in the U.S. media landscape, especially in comparison to other countries. In the U.S., the most mentioned journalists by people are all partisan journalists (74% are political), in contrast to the U.K. where they are generally independent or impartial (38% are political). News brands still galvanize more attention (37%) online, but 21% — a fifth — pay most attention to journalists.

In a pre-internet era, journalists’ careers were tied to the outlets they worked for, but the rise of social media has allowed many individual journalists — and other varieties of “political influencers” — to build their own profiles independent of particular news brands.

This highlights the contrast with countries that have strong national media brands with strict impartiality rules — such as the BBC in the U.K. or ARD News in Germany. Whereas in the U.S., news is much more of a commercial venture, with business models that are somewhat reliant on controversy and strong journalistic personalities. The U.S. is also unable to enforce impartiality due to the Constitution. This is similarly compounded by social media platforms, whose business models and algorithms reward engagement thus giving a stronger platform to contention.

This also demonstrates the importance of cable TV in engaging Americans with news personalities. They may follow up these interests through digital channels, but cable personalities remain memorable to audiences and likely create the interest in the first instance. When asked to name journalists they regularly pay attention to, 74% were from broadcast TV or radio, 17% from online/other and only 9% from print, according to Reuters.

3. The media is politicized, but not completely polarized

While it is true that the U.S. has a higher level of news polarization than the U.K., Germany, or Norway, Reuters also found that it has barely increased since 2016 despite the turbulent political landscape. It has not increased substantially, if at all, in the last six years.

Political polarization is often characterized as one of the major problems democracies face in an increasingly digital landscape. Indeed, the Economist Intelligence Unit’s annual Democracy Index identified political polarization as the biggest threat to U.S. democracy — differences of opinion in the U.S. have evolved into political sectarianism and institutional gridlock. It would therefore be logical to assume this is also reflected in news consumption patterns, given the ascendancy of partisan news media in the U.S. in particular.

But across all four countries, news audience polarization has changed by 3 percentage points or less since 2016, indicating only minimal shifts in audience behavior. What’s more, Reuters calculated a “theoretical maximum” of news polarization. This found that even in the U.S., news polarization is far from the theoretical limit (34%). This should not foster any complacency however, Germany is at 10% of the theoretical limit.

The main difference in the U.S. is that there is no large outlet that appeals to the average political leaning of the population, whereas Germany, Norway. and the U.K. all have public service media, such as the BBC, to anchor their news landscape. Most of the major news brands appeal more to left of center-leaning audiences (New York Times, CNN), with Fox News being one of few outlets on the right.

4. While news polarization is not growing, it has exacerbated pre-existing differences of opinion on particular policy areas — such as climate change

Of all the markets Reuters studied across the world, the U.S. expressed the lowest interest in climate change news. Polarization is considered, at least in part, to drive this relative disinterest. There is a 41 percentage point gap between those on the left interested in climate change news and those on the right. This is quite the contrast to countries with high levels of interest, where there is significantly less left-right polarization.

In the U.S., 55% of those with a left political leaning are interested in climate change news, versus only 14% of those with a right political leaning. Whereas within countries with the highest levels of interest, there is less left-right polarization, such as Greece (a 16 percentage point gap) and Portugal (10 percentage point gap).

This is one issue that could be particularly impacted by a political shift in the House of Representatives. Though climate policy garners widespread support across congressional districts, legislation meant to address it remains quite partisan — meaning a shift to a Republican majority would jeopardize the ability for Congress to enact pro-climate policy.

Interest is highest in several Latin American, Southern European and Asia Pacific markets. Just over half of respondents in Greece (53%), Portugal (53%), Chile (52%) and the Philippines (52%) say they are interested in news about climate change and the environment. Interest is lower in Northern and Western European markets such as Norway (33%) and France (36%), whereas the U.S. has 30% interest. Compounded by the economic climate, it is therefore not surprising that climate has not been a prevalent issue in regards to voting intention in this election.

5. There are generational disparities in what is perceived as a trusted source of information

For the average American adult, trust in major news sources has declined since 2016, but trust in news obtained on social media has remained roughly the same. According to a Pew Research study, in 2022, 71% of U.S. adults said they trust local news organizations, 61% trust national news, and 33% trust news from social media sites. However, for Americans under 30, this gap closes considerably, with 56% trusting national news sources and 50% trusting social media.

This is intuitive when looking at the medium of choice for news consumption across age groups. When surveyed, 44% of American young adults (ages 18-29) say that they get news from television, compared to 74% of adults aged 50-64. And, while digital sources are a popular medium across age groups, there are additional differences in what generations mean when they refer to digital platforms. When looking at all age groups, a higher percentage of American adults over 30 get news from websites or apps of news organizations than on social media or other digital platforms such as search engines or podcasts. For the 18-29 year old demographic, the most common digital media for news consumption is social media, with 76% of respondents saying they use social media for news.

To some degree, this is reflective of what different generations expect from informative content. A 2019 Reuters study found that in contrast to the mentality of traditional media which seeks to inform based on what you “should know,” younger audiences see news as what is useful, interesting, or fun to know. Social media allows for this while also curating news to the type of content which is relevant to the lives and experiences of young people, cutting out the perceived need to seek out news elsewhere when it can be integrated into the experience of interacting with friends and online communities.

Research note: We obtained much of the data and analysis included in this article from Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2022 and Pew Research Center

Malena Dailey is a Technology Policy Analyst at the Progressive Policy Institute. Rosie Beacon is a Policy Analyst at the Tony Blaire Institute, and is based in London. 

Marshall for The Hill: What Does a Midterm Split Decision Mean for Democrats?

By Will Marshall, President of PPI
for The Hill 

The votes are still being counted, but Democrats could yet win a split decision in the 2022 midterm elections. So much for the Red Tsunami giddily forecast by conservative commentators in the run-up to Tuesday’s vote.

There’s little doubt the Republicans will take over the House of Representatives, albeit by a much narrower margin than they expected. But control of the Senate will be decided in exactly the same place and manner as it was in the 2020 elections — a high-stakes run-off election in Georgia.

On Dec. 6, Sen. Ralph Warnock, the Democratic incumbent, will face off again against his Republican challenger, Hershel Walker. It’s a strange reprise that tells us several interesting things about U.S. politics.

Read the full piece in The Hill. 

Lewis for Medium: I drink my beer from a can, don’t take away my choices

By: Lindsay Mark Lewis, PPI’s Executive Director

Over the last several weeks, there has been increased focus and attention on the competition and antitrust debate in Washington. There has been a debate about the connection between these policies and efforts to address historically high inflation. With real consequential decisions looming for consumers, it’s perplexing why the administration chooses to focus on industries that provide consumers with more choices of quality products at competitive prices, such as the beer industry.

Yet, the Biden administration has voiced its concern. In a February report, the U.S. Treasury claims that the beer industry is facing increasing consolidation, lessening consumer choice, and ultimately asks that regulators evaluate whether mergers in the beer industry are providing fewer options for American customers.

Read the full piece in Medium. 

Bledsoe and Sykes for the Hill: GOP killed permitting reform — giving Democrats a new campaign issue

By Paul Bledsoe, PPI’s Strategic Advisor, and Elan Sykes, PPI’s Energy Policy Analyst

Over the last two years, Congress has passed a series of landmark bills that together fund more than $500 billion in clean energy investment, by far the largest ever enacted. More importantly, generous tax incentives can spur many trillions in direct private sector investments, creating a powerhouse U.S. advanced energy sector. Yet, right now, a broken U.S. energy permitting system short circuits thousands of major projects, imposing tremendously high costs in time and money to build clean infrastructure projects, if they get built at all.

Congress had an opportunity to fix this roadblock through a permitting reform bill, but despite claiming to support reform, Senate Republicans effectively killed the measure in a nakedly political effort to deny Democrats a popular policy win. Democrats should turn the tables on the GOP, making the economic and climate costs of this hypocritical action a major campaign issue in the upcoming midterm elections.

Ironically, in the name of environmental protection, a perverse process has developed over decades whereby often unnecessary and duplicative government reviews and nuisance lawsuits have pushed average time for permitting to 4.3 years for electricity transmission, 3.5 years for pipelines and 2.7 years for renewable energy generation projects. In the mid-Atlantic and near-Ohio valley alone, more than 2,500 projects are awaiting approval, 95 percent of which involve renewable energy. In fact, a new Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) report finds that without extensive permitting and regulatory reforms, large projected economic benefits and emissions reductions from recent laws would be substantially limited, and fail to meet policy goals.

Read the full piece in The Hill

Marshall in The Hill: How to Beat National Populism

By Will Marshall, President of PPI

LIVERPOOL, England — Brexit is done, and Donald Trump, given the boot by U.S. voters, is angrily pacing the political sidelines. But the upsurge of rightwing populism that produced them both continues to roil transatlantic politics.

Last Sunday, the far-right Brothers of Italy party, which has a fascist lineage, finished first in national elections. Its leader, Giorgia Meloni, will become Italy’s first female prime minister. She’s a socially conservative Christian who opposes immigration, abortion and LGBTQ rights. Although she’s toned down her Euroskepticism, Meloni also is an “Italy First” nationalist likely to align with illiberal regimes in Poland and Hungary.

A virulent strain of national populism also is advancing in Europe’s social democratic heartland. The Sweden Democrats (SD), formerly a fringe party with neo-Nazi roots, finished a strong second in national elections earlier this month and will join a right-leaning government.

Read the full piece in The Hill. 

Marshall for The Hill: The puzzle Democrats must solve

By Will Marshall

Democrats’ midterm election prospects are brightening as voters’ attention shifts from high prices to abortion and the Republicans’ subservience to former President Trump and rightwing extremism.

By striking down the constitutional right to abortion, the Supreme Court has galvanized suburban women. According to liberal analyst Ruy Teixeira, Democrats now have a 27-point lead among white, college-educated women in party matchups. The ruling has thrown Republican candidates on the defensive and is spurring higher Democratic registration and turnout.

Damning testimony by former Trump White House officials in the Jan. 6 hearings, plus Trump’s inexplicable refusal to hand over top secret documents he illegally took home after leaving the White House, also seems to be moving independent voters back toward the Democrats.

House, but they now call the Senate a tossup or favor Democrats slightly to hold it. Given the usual midterm trends, a split verdict in November would be a major victory for President Biden and his party.

But one key group – white working-class voters – hasn’t budged. Democrats trail by a whopping 25 points among these voters, whose unwavering support for Trump sustains his chokehold on the GOP.

Read the full piece in The Hill.

Marshall for The Hill: Ban the culture war from classrooms

By Will Marshall

As America’s children start getting back to school this month, our country needs a grown-up conversation about public education’s future. The odds of having one this fall are slim.

It’s more likely that the midterm election campaign will intensify today’s noxious trend toward politicizing public schools. That’s reprehensible, because our children, who suffered severe learning losses and emotional stress during the pandemic, deserve better than to be treated as hostages in the nation’s vitriolic culture wars.

Republicans, who seem to be at war with all of America’s public institutions, are the worst offenders. But Democrats aren’t blameless, and even as they fend off the right’s demagogic attacks on public schools, they need to come to grips with the valid reasons why parental frustration is boiling over.

Read the full piece in The Hill.

Marshall for The Hill: Where’s the progressive plan to fix government?

By Will Marshall, President and Founder of PPI

 

More than 100 election deniers have won Republican primaries across the country this year. It’s a woeful reminder that former President Trump’s seditious assault on U.S. democracy didn’t end with his followers’ failed coup attempt on Jan. 6, 2021.

This ominous trend makes the midterm elections much more than a referendum on President Biden’s job performance. But Republican extremism isn’t the only threat to our democracy.

A more subtle but corrosive danger is nosediving public confidence in the federal government’s ability to function effectively. According to the Pew Research Center, only 19 percent of Americans say they trust Washington to do the right thing “most of the time.” That’s near the historic low point in public confidence since Pew started measuring it in 1958.

At the same time, solid majorities of Americans believe government should play a “major role” in tackling national problems. Their qualms about government are practical, not ideological; centering more on its performance than its size.

Read the full piece in The Hill.

PPI Statement on Reconciliation and Innovation Legislation

Ben Ritz, Director of the Center for Funding America’s Future project at the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) released the following statement:

“Earlier this week, PPI encouraged Congressional Democrats to give high priority to passing the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) and a reconciliation bill that includes significant deficit reduction and clean energy provisions. Unfortunately, media accounts suggest that both initiatives are shrinking.

“We shared Sen. Manchin’s concerns about the original reconciliation bill’s overreaching and likely impact on inflation. But walking away from a bill with roughly half a trillion dollars of deficit reduction and significant investments in increasing energy supply would squander the best chance Congress has to help the Federal Reserve rein in rising prices. We hope he and Sen. Schumer will not give up on negotiating a compromise on these components of a reconciliation bill.

“Pro-growth Democrats who want to see the United States outcompete China also should be concerned about reports of a plan to vote next week on a bill that only includes funding for semiconductor subsidies. Losing government R&D funds and other key provisions in the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) would be an enormous setback for America’s innovation and scientific prowess.

“We understand that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s blindly partisan decision to withhold Republican support from a conferenced innovation bill complicates its path to passage. But retreating to a CHIPS-only approach would unnecessarily doom many higher priority pro-innovation policies. Instead, we urge Speaker Pelosi to put the full Senate-passed USICA on the floor for a vote in the House to circumvent McConnell’s obstructionism.

“Democrats must not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.”

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.

Follow the Progressive Policy Institute.

Find an expert at PPI.

###

Media Contact: Aaron White – awhite@ppionline.org