ReportWire

Tag: low income persons

  • More remote workers are willing to move in order to find affordable housing | CNN Business

    More remote workers are willing to move in order to find affordable housing | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Washington, DC
    CNN
     — 

    Housing is less affordable than it has been in about four decades. But buying or renting a home might be even less affordable now if it weren’t for the continuing impact of remote and hybrid workers that resulted from the pandemic, according to a recent study by Fannie Mae.

    The study, which was an analysis of Fannie Mae’s monthly National Housing Survey, with questions asked among more than 3,000 mortgage holders, owners, and renters between January and March this year, looked at how remote and hybrid work has changed over the past few years and its impact on housing.

    More people are willing to move to less expensive areas further away from offices in city centers than a few years ago, according to the report. Continuing remote and hybrid work, at levels remarkably unchanged from two years ago, is enabling people to move toward housing affordability, the study found.

    The report also revealed that “affordability” is the most important factor in finding a place to live, both for renters and homeowners.

    At the beginning of the year, 22% of remote and hybrid workers said they would be willing to relocate to a different region or increase their commute. Only 14% such workers were willing to do so in the third quarter of 2021, which is used as a comparison throughout the study and was when many workplaces attempted a “return to work” until the Omicron variant of Covid-19 pushed many employers’ plans back that winter.

    Workers who are able to break their ties to living in an area because of its proximity to work are able to spread out, reducing the competition for a historically low number of homes for sale that could push prices even higher.

    The research showed that among remote workers, all age and income groups have grown more willing to relocate or live farther away from their workplace since 2021. But younger workers — those between 18 and 34 — are significantly more willing than those older than them to live or commute a further distance from their work, with the share willing to do so jumping from 18% in 2021, to 30% in 2023.

    “We believe this greater willingness to live farther from the … workplace may be an indication that some workers are feeling more secure about their remote work situation … or their ability to find another job if their current employer were to change its policies,” wrote the researchers, in a summary.

    This is good news for remote workers during a time of crushingly low levels of home affordability.

    Remote and hybrid work may be here to stay. Or, it’s here long enough for people to buy or rent a new home because of it, the researchers found.

    Despite the demands by leaders of some prominent companies that workers need to head into the office or head out the door, the share of fully remote and hybrid workers has remained surprisingly constant in the post-pandemic era, according to the study.

    In the first part of the year, 35% of respondents worked fully remote or worked a hybrid mix of some time at a workplace and some time at home. That was only slightly down from 36% in 2021.

    While the share of workers going to a work site or office every day was unchanged at 49% in both 2021 and in 2023, the share of people working fully remote ticked up to 14% this year from 13% in 2021.

    Homeowners continue to be slightly more likely to work from home than renters. And those with more education and higher incomes are also more likely to have a work-from-home situation, which is consistent with 2021, the study found.

    Only 30% of lower-income people, earning 80% of the area median income, could work remotely or hybrid in 2021, and that dropped to 27% by this year. Meanwhile 42% of upper-income people, those making 120% of the area median income, were able to work from home in 2021 and that number did not change in 2023.

    Lower-income people — who are in most need of access to lower-cost housing, found further away from a city’s core — are also those least likely to work remotely, according to the survey.

    With housing affordability taking a hit over the past few years as rents rose, home prices stayed elevated and mortgage rates soared to a 22-year high, it is not surprising that “affordability” was the top factor for people when picking a new home, at 36%. This was a big jump from 2014, the last time the question was asked, when the top consideration was “neighborhood” at 49%.

    Homeowners and renters both showed growth in prioritizing “affordability,” but the increase was greatest among renters, shooting up from 21% in 2014 to 46% in 2023.

    “The change in preference for renters is truly remarkable, since not only did it more than double, but it represented a complete reversal of the relative importance of neighborhood cited by consumers as the top consideration in 2014,” wrote the researchers.

    In addition, despite the talk about moving for more space, “home size” as a factor for picking a next home was unchanged and still outweighed by “affordability.”

    “The striking shift toward affordability as the top consideration among overall survey respondents for their next move substantiates the need of households to find ways to manage around the significant rise in mortgage rates, home prices, and rents of the past few years,” the researchers wrote.

    And this is impacting where people look for a home and what they prioritize when they are searching.

    “Home affordability may also be a reason why we saw an increase in remote workers’ willingness to relocate or live farther away from their workplace, particularly given that, historically, a shorter commute to denser job markets was considered a premium amenity,” the researchers wrote.

    The suburbs are increasingly where people want to be, the report found, which is part of an ongoing trend since 2010. And that share has grown between 2021 and 2023.

    The researchers say the change to the housing market brought about by remote workers holds broader implications for the link between housing and the labor market.

    The growing share of remote-working renters and homeowners willing to live farther from their work location gives employers access to a wider labor market, which could be useful if a downturn in economic activity led to greater rates of job loss.

    “Having access to a larger labor market may also reduce the adverse effect on local home prices when a major employer or industry contracts,” the researchers wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California is about to give Hollywood studios a lucrative tax deal during the writers’ strike | CNN Business

    California is about to give Hollywood studios a lucrative tax deal during the writers’ strike | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The state of California is about to give movie and TV studios a new lucrative tax perk.

    A bill awaiting California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature would the state’s tax incentive program for film and TV productions for five years but with a key update: Studios with more tax credits than they can use will be able to exchange those credits for cash. The bill, part of the state’s overall budget plan, was passed by California legislators on Tuesday, and Newsom is expected to sign it on Friday.

    The bill also mandates any production that receives the tax credit to comply with new on-set firearm safety protocols following the 2021 deadly shooting on the set of Alec Baldwin’s film “Rust,” and it implements requirements aiming to meet diversity hiring targets.

    The new, refundable tax credits come as competition for film and TV production from other states and countries is on the rise. States like New York and Georgia are gaining share of the TV and film market, thanks to their own tax incentive programs, according to a 2021 report from FilmLA — a nonprofit organization that helps creators with production planning and film permitting.

    The bill should be a boon for studios like Netflix. The streaming giant had not previously been able to take full advantage of the tax credit program since it uses a separate research and development incentive from California to significantly reduce its tax liability. In a 2020 SEC filing, Netflix said it had $250 million in California R&D tax credits — far more than it could use.

    Disney and Comcast’s Universal Studios were the only two studios that benefited under California’s existing tax incentive program, due to their relatively larger tax bills from theme parks, according to Democratic assemblywoman Wendy Carrillo, one of the bill’s sponsors. The new bill could benefit other studios that don’t have theme parks in the state, including Warner Bros, which is owned by CNN parent company Warner Bros. Discovery.

    The bill’s safety measures require productions to employ an adviser to oversee production safety and complete detailed risk assessments. Studios must also establish training requirements and standards that focus on the safe handling of firearms. Many of these safety protocols were voluntary before the bill.

    Dave Cortese, the Democratic state senator who introduced the safety protocols in the bill, said research for the legislation began soon after actor Baldwin fired a live round of ammunition from what he said he believed to be an unloaded prop gun during a film’s rehearsal. Cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was killed.

    “Conversations about this legislation started the week after the tragic loss of a cinematographer. Those negotiations have produced the nation’s first and best safety practices for California workers in the state’s vital motion picture industry,” Cortese said.

    In addition to refundable tax credits and stricter safety standards, the bill establishes specific diversity requirements. Studios must submit data about the diversity of their workforce to qualify for the full credit. The bill also adds a new member to the state’s film commission with diversity, equity, and inclusion expertise.

    The tax perk for Hollywood comes amid ongoing tension between the industry’s workforce and the studios’ bosses. The Writers Guild of America, has been on strike since early May, halting the production of many shows. The association’s more than 11,000 members are fighting over substantial issues like pay, the number of writers staffed on any given project, and whether artificial intelligence can be used in writing material.

    Actors may soon stage a work stoppage, as well. Members of the actors’ union, SAG-AFTRA, have voted to authorize a strike against the major studios if they cannot agree to the terms of a new contract. Similar to the WGA, the actors’ union has voiced similar concerns about pay and the use of AI.

    Democratic lawmakers in California celebrated the bill. Carrillo said the plan was a “grand compromise,” and it would help protect jobs in the state.

    “These are hundreds of thousands of jobs, most of which impact Los Angeles County and the city of Los Angeles. They’re good union jobs, they’re production jobs, they’re creative jobs,” she said.

    However, the bill has attracted some criticism. Chris Hoene, the executive director of the California Budget & Policy Center, a nonprofit think tank that provides analysis on state budget issues intending to improve outcomes for low-income communities and people of color in the state, called it “bad policy.”

    “Refundable tax credits were designed to help low-income households… so to take that refundability structure and apply it to a business tax credit, you would think there are some film companies that struggle to make ends meet and don’t make enough money to owe any taxes, but that’s not how it works,” he said.

    Hoene called the new policy a “giveaway that doesn’t have any positive outcomes.”

    The refundable credits are designed to help more than just the big studios, Carrillo said. Film and TV productions help support surrounding businesses in the area, including “small restaurants and catering services,” Carrillo said.

    “It’s very important that California has a competitive advantage and ultimately keeps these jobs and productions in our state while other states continue to announce more incentives,” she added.

    Still, Hoene argued that there were more effective ways to create well-paying jobs in California.

    “If we wanted to take scarce state resources to help workers, we could do that in ways that could provide them with assistance directly, rather than giving it to large corporations who are already minimizing their tax bills in other ways,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Pretending to live a civilian life’: How pro-Ukrainian residents of occupied Melitopol feel daily fear | CNN

    ‘Pretending to live a civilian life’: How pro-Ukrainian residents of occupied Melitopol feel daily fear | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Kyiv
    CNN
     — 

    Editor’s note: The southern Ukrainian city of Melitopol has long been known for its sweet delights. The name “Melitopol” means “the Honey City” in Ukrainian and the city’s official logo features a cherry, a nod to the deep red fruit the region is famous for.

    But life in Melitopol is anything but sweet. The city was captured by Russian troops shortly after Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February last year. Pro-Ukrainian partisans have remained active in the city, orchestrating several attacks against the pro-Russian administration installed in the place of its elected leaders. The Zaporizhzhia region in which the city lies is partially occupied by Russia and was illegally annexed last September.

    Below is the account of a Melitopol resident in her early 30s who has refused to flee the city and is living under Russian occupation. CNN is not naming her because of concerns for her safety. Her testimony was translated from Ukrainian and edited for brevity. 

    There is terror in Melitopol. But it’s quiet, you don’t see it in the streets.

    For partisans, the situation here is terrible. For those of us who rejected Russian passports and are now known as “the unreliable,” the situation is terrible. But if you go to the market, you wouldn’t think that anything is going on.

    The Russians are trying to force everyone here to get Russian passports. It’s easier to manipulate people when they have Russian citizenship. Not getting the passports makes our life very difficult. They are refusing to give us access to hospitals and so on. We are a family of farmers and we are losing our land because we don’t have any Russian documents.

    I’m afraid I will eventually have to get it. But we are delaying this moment. One relative went to the office and the queues were huge because everyone was intimidated into getting a passport. The process has sped up. Previously, you had to wait a month or two, but now they can print a passport in a week.

    Everyone was given cash welfare payments until February, but starting in March, only people with Russian passports get them. That’s why many pensioners started getting passports now because there was no need for it before. Disabled people, people on low incomes, and those who wanted to use free healthcare took the passports immediately after the Russians started offering them, because they didn’t want to lose the benefits.

    All in all, a large percentage of the population already has Russian passports. If you don’t, you’re a black sheep, and you can be subject to a frisking.

    Here in Melitopol, searches are usually conducted after shelling and after guerrilla attacks on pro-Russian collaborators. My grandmother’s house was searched because a Russian soldier deserted when he was in the village. They searched the houses in the village, trying to find him.

    The people who remained in Melitopol can be divided into several categories. There are those who are basically satisfied with the current pro-Russian government. There are those who don’t care and who would support whoever gives them more money in cash payments.  

    Those who stayed mostly support the pro-Russian government. They are convinced that it is here to stay.  

    Obviously, there are also Ukrainian patriots, those of us waiting for Ukraine to win this war. We whisper to each other in the market. You can tell that someone is supporting Ukraine at the market when you ask for high quality produce. Vendors start cursing Russia because they now have to choose between selling bad products and worse products.

    There are still a lot of partisans, God bless them, but we are in the minority. Most of the Ukrainian patriots have left, especially those who actively participated in rallies, because there was a direct threat to their lives.

    Our neighbor turned us in for supporting Ukraine, but we are not being touched, at least not yet. My neighbor works for the new government and she knows that we actively opposed Russia during the first phase of the war.

    I think we will be issued some kind of document that they give to “the unreliable” which says we have refused the passports. This means nothing except showing that we refused to take Russian passports. It’s a temporary certificate of non-citizens, but you either take this piece of paper or you have to leave Melitopol. So, we are going to take it.

    Until April, it was possible to move freely throughout the occupied zone without documents. Now you need a Russian passport or the non-citizen document, but they keep issuing warnings and saying that you need to get a Russian passport by June or you will not be allowed to leave.

    People here are encouraged to send their children to summer camps in Crimea, like they were last year. Some parents on our street voluntarily sent their children to Crimea for a month and the children came back. But our neighbors, who have since left for Germany, did not want to send their son to a Russian school or to a camp, and it was okay. Their son stayed at home all year, studying online at a Ukrainian school. Children are not taken away by force here. You have to understand that parents send them there voluntarily.

    In this file photo, Russian passports are being issued to residents in the occupied city of Melitopol.

    It’s true that the occupiers are worried about the counteroffensive. The mood in the city has changed dramatically over the past month, from “Melitopol is forever with Russia” to thinking where and how they will build defense lines.

    Of course, this is just what the ordinary soldiers in the city are saying, but there is no longer that victorious mood. I feel that something is going to happen here soon. Ukrainian hryvnias are being bought up in the market, and farmers are refusing to sell their products, because they are waiting to give it to Ukraine. And all the neighbors who are in favor of Russia have stopped communicating with us, because they are no longer sure that Russia will stay here forever and are afraid to talk.

    There are more or less no problems with getting food. There is no variety, but there are no shortages either. The standards and packaging have completely changed since the invasion started. Butter that is made at the same factory tastes so bad now that we don’t know what to do to mask the taste.

    Everything that is imported from Russia contains palm oil. That’s not an exaggeration, the ingredient list of a candy lists palm oil three times. It’s in everything. Sausages, cheese, candy, cookies, butter.

    But the biggest problem is with medicines and household goods, as well as baby food. Russia doesn’t have good quality medicines and there is no choice. You go to a pharmacy and they give you one option, take it or leave it. People inquire about medicines for 10 minutes and in the end, they only have iodine. A woman in front of me was trying to buy Nestlé baby food, but the price was out of this world. She ended up buying some Russian-made equivalent.

    My mother and grandmother have diabetes. The Russian medicines have the same active ingredient but they affect them in completely different ways. They have different dosages and excipients and my mother and grandmother started feeling much worse when they began taking them. We received some Ukrainian medicines from Ukraine through Crimea, enough for a month and a half.

    The cynicism of doctors and pharmacists here is overwhelming. No one says anything directly. We call the war a “situation” here. So, they just answer: “Well, this is the situation, if you need it, go to Ukraine or Europe.” When I told the doctor that I needed specific medication, I was told to go to the city of Zaporizhzhia to buy it. And just so you understand, to go to Zaporizhzhia, you have to go via Moscow. That’s the only way.

    A Russian flag flies in the occupied city of Melitopol on October 13, 2022.

    In Russia, they don’t have the same standards and regulations for products. Nothing like that. Russian soaps, shampoos, and toothpastes are of terrible quality. Belarusian ones are a little better, and the best option for us here is Turkish shampoo. There are a lot of Chinese and Turkish products on the market. Russian and Chinese products are of the worst quality, while Belarusian and Turkish products are more or less okay, but more expensive.

    The problem is that only the military here have a lot of money, and often they buy everything decent. The rumours that Russians themselves do not want to buy Russian products are true. Until September, Ukrainian products were smuggled to Melitopol and the Russian military bought everything themselves. Soldiers stood in line in front of me and asked for Ukrainian socks and soap. Now there are no Ukrainian goods anymore.

    Everyone is pretending to live a civilian life. There’s no talk of evacuation. People are used to the explosions and to the fact that from time to time there are burnt-out cars of pro-Russian collaborators on the main street. People are used to the fact that Russian troops and authorities can come to your house and kick you out.

    People have gotten used to everything over the year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How charging drivers to go downtown would transform American cities | CNN Business

    How charging drivers to go downtown would transform American cities | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden’s administration is set to allow New York City to move forward with a landmark program that will toll vehicles entering Lower Manhattan, after a public review period ends Monday.

    The toll is formally known as the Central Business District Tolling Program — but it’s commonly called “congestion pricing.”

    In practice it works like any other toll, but because it specifically charges people to drive in the traffic-choked area below 60th street in Manhattan, it would be the first program of its kind in the United States.

    Proposals range from charging vehicles $9 to $23 during peak hours, and it’s set to go into effect next spring.

    The plan had been delayed for years, but it cleared a milestone last month when the Federal Highway Administration signed off on the release of an environmental assessment. The public has until Monday to review the report, and the federal government is widely expected to approve it shortly after.

    From there, the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) can finalize toll rates, as well as discounts and exemptions for certain drivers.

    New York City is still clawing out of from the devastating impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. Congestion pricing advocates say it’s a crucial piece of the city’s recovery and a way to re-imagine the city for the future.

    “This program is critical to New York City’s long-term success,” New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said last month.

    The plan would also mark the culmination of more than a half-century of efforts to implement congestion pricing in New York City. Despite support from several New York City mayors and state governors, car and truck owners in outer boroughs and the suburbs helped defeat proposals.

    In 2007 Mayor Michael Bloomberg called congestion “the elephant in the room” when proposing a toll program, which state lawmakers killed. A decade later, Gov. Andrew Cuomo — who had long resisted congestion pricing — said it was “an idea whose time has come” and declared a subway state of emergency after increased delays and a derailment that injured dozens. Two years later, the state gave the MTA approval to design a congestion pricing program.

    Ultimately, it was the need to improve New York City’s public transit that became the rallying cry for congestion pricing.

    Each day 700,000 cars, taxis and trucks pour into Lower Manhattan, one of the busiest areas in the world with some of the worst gridlock in the United States.

    Car travel at just 7.1 mph on average in the congestion price zone, and it’s a downward trend. Public bus speeds have also declined 28% since 2010. New Yorkers lose 117 hours on average each year sitting in traffic, costing them nearly $2,000 in lost productivity and other costs, according to one estimate.

    The toll is designed to reduce the number of vehicles entering the congestion zone by at least 10% every day and slash the number of miles cars travel within the zone by 5%.

    Congestion comes with physical and societal costs, too: more accidents, carbon emissions and pollution happen as belching, honking cars take up space that could be optimized for pedestrians and outdoor dining.

    Proponents also note it will improve public transit, an essential part of New York life. About 75% of trips downtown are via public transit.

    But public-transit ridership is 35% to 45% lower compared to pre-pandemic levels. The MTA says congestion fees will generate a critical source of revenue to fund $15 billion in future investments to modernize the city’s 100-year-old public transit system.

    The improvements, like new subway cars and electric signals, are crucial to draw new riders and improve speed and accessibility — especially for low-income and minority residents, who are least likely to own cars, say plan advocates.

    New York City is “dependent on public transit,” said Kate Slevin, the executive vice president of the Regional Plan Association, an urban planning and policy group. “We’re relying on that revenue to pay for needed upgrades and investments that ensure reliable, good transit service.”

    Improving public transportation is also key to New York City’s post-pandemic economic recovery: If commutes to work are too unreliable, people are less likely to visit the office and shop at stores around their workplaces. Congestion charge advocates hope the program will create more space for amenities like wider sidewalks, bike lanes, plazas, benches, trees and public bathrooms.

    “100 years ago we decided the automobile was the way to go, so we narrowed sidewalks and built highways,” said Sam Schwartz, former New York City traffic commissioner and founder of an eponymous consulting firm. “But the future of New York City is that the pedestrian should be king and queen. Everything should be subservient to the pedestrian.”

    While no other US city has yet implemented congestion pricing, Stockholm, London and Singapore have had it for years.

    These cities have reported benefits like decreased carbon dioxide pollution, higher average speeds, and congestion reduction.

    Just one year after London added its charge in 2003, traffic congestion dropped by 30% and average speeds increased by the same percentage. In Stockholm, one study found the rate of children’s acute asthma visits to the doctor fell by about 50% compared to rates before the program launched in 2007.

    Some groups are fiercely opposed to congestion charges in New York City, however. Taxi and ride-share drivers, largely a low-income and immigrant workforce, fear it will hurt drivers already struggling to make ends meet. The MTA said congestion pricing could reduce demand for taxis by up to 17% in the zone.

    Commuters and legislators from New York City’s outer boroughs and New Jersey say the program hurts drivers who have no viable way to reach downtown Manhattan other than by car, and that this would disproportionately impact low-income drivers. (But out of a region of 28 million people, just an estimated 16,100 low-income people commute to work via car in Lower Manhattan, according to the MTA.)

    Other critics say it could divert more traffic and pollution from diesel trucks in Manhattan into lower-income areas like the Bronx, which has the highest rates of asthma hospitalization in the city.

    The MTA and other agencies have plans to mitigate many of these adverse effects, however.

    Taxis and for-hire vehicles will be tolled only once a day. Drivers who make less than $50,000 a year or are enrolled in certain government aid programs will get 25% discounts after their first 10 trips every month. Trucks and other vehicles will get 50% discounts during overnight hours.

    Additionally, the MTA pledged $10 million to install air filtration units in schools near highways, $20 million for a program to fight asthma, and other investments to improve air quality and the enviornment in areas where more traffic could be diverted.

    The stakes of New York City’s program are high, and leaders in other cities are watching the results closely.

    If successful, congestion pricing could be a model for other US cities, which are trying to recover from the pandemic and face similar challenges of climate change and aging public infrastructure.

    “It’s good to see New York City’s program is moving forward,” said the Los Angeles Times Editorial Board last month. “Los Angeles should watch, learn and go next.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The demographic makeup of the country’s voters continues to shift. That creates headwinds for Republicans | CNN Politics

    The demographic makeup of the country’s voters continues to shift. That creates headwinds for Republicans | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Demographic change continued to chip away at the cornerstone of the Republican electoral coalition in 2022, a new analysis of Census data has found.

    White voters without a four-year college degree, the indispensable core of the modern GOP coalition, declined in 2022 as a share of both actual and eligible voters, according to a study of Census results by Michael McDonald, a University of Florida political scientist who specializes in electoral turnout.

    McDonald’s finding, provided exclusively to CNN, shows that the 2022 election continued the long-term trend dating back at least to the 1970s of a sustained fall in the share of the votes cast by working-class White voters who once constituted the brawny backbone of the Democratic coalition, but have since become the absolute foundation of Republican campaign fortunes.

    As non-college Whites have receded in the electorate over that long arc, non-White adults and, to a somewhat lesser extent, Whites with at least a four-year college degree, have steadily increased their influence. “This is a trend that is baked into the demographic change of the country, so [it] is likely going to accelerate over the next ten years,” says McDonald, author of the recent book “From Pandemic to Insurrection: Voting in the 2020 Presidential Election.”

    From election to election, the impact of the changing composition of the voter pool is modest. The slow but steady decline of non-college Whites, now the GOP’s best group, did not stop Donald Trump from winning the presidency in 2016 – nor does it preclude him from winning it again in 2024. And, compared to their national numbers, these non-college voters remain a larger share of the electorate in many of the key states that will likely decide the 2024 presidential race (particularly Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) and control of the Senate (including seats Democrats are defending in Montana, Ohio and West Virginia.)

    But even across those states, these voters are shrinking as a share of the electorate. And McDonald’s analysis of the 2022 results shows that the non-college White share of the total vote is highly likely to decline again in 2024, while the combined share of non-Whites and Whites with a college degree, groups much more favorable to Democrats, is virtually certain to increase. The political effect of this decline is analogous to turning up the resistance on a treadmill: as their best group shrinks, Republicans must run a little faster just to stay in place.

    Especially ominous for Republicans is that the share of the vote cast by these blue-collar Whites declined slightly in 2022 even though turnout among those voters was relatively strong, while minority turnout fell sharply, according to McDonald’s analysis. The reason for those seemingly incongruous trends is that even solid turnout among the non-college Whites could not offset the fact that they are continuing to shrink in the total pool of eligible voters, as American society grows better-educated and more racially diverse.

    Given that minority turnout fell off, the fact that the non-college White share of the total 2022 vote still slightly declined “has to be a huge cause for concern for Republicans at this point,” says Tom Bonier, chief executive of TargetSmart, a Democratic political targeting firm. If more of the growing pool of eligible minority voters turn out in 2024, he says, “it is not unreasonable to expect” that the non-college White voters so critical to GOP fortunes could experience an even “steeper decline” in their share of the total votes cast next year.

    That prospect remains a central concern for the dwindling band of anti-Trump Republicans who fear that the former president has dangerously narrowed the GOP’s appeal by identifying it so unreservedly with the cultural priorities and grievances of working-class White voters, many of them older and living outside of the nation’s largest and most economically productive metropolitan areas.

    McDonald’s “data support what is self-evident: that Trumpism peaked in 2016, and that it leads to a dead end,” says former US Rep. Carlos Curbelo, a Florida Republican. “We saw this in 2018 when Republicans lost the House; we saw it in 2020 when they lost the presidency and the Senate, and we saw it in last year when Republicans were supposed to have big gains in both chambers and [did not]. All of these failures can be attributed to Trumpism. These data just confirm what is visible to the naked eye.”

    Cornell Belcher, a Democratic pollster, says these slow but steady long-term changes in the electorate leave him convinced that the ceiling for Trump’s potential support in 2024 is no more than 46% of the vote. But Democrats, he believes, still face the risk that the clear majority in the electorate opposed to Trumpism will not turn out in sufficient numbers or splinter to third-party options if they do. Both dangers, he argues, are most pronounced for the diverse younger generations that have never found President Joe Biden very inspiring and have not received sufficient messaging and organizing attention from Democrats.

    The political impact of those younger voters, he warns, could be blunted by the proliferation of red state laws making it more difficult to vote and Democrats focusing too much “on chasing this mythical [White] swing voter that doesn’t look like that Millennial or Gen Z voter we are relying on.”

    Overall voter turnout in 2022 was high compared to almost all previous midterms, but below the peak reached in 2018, when a greater share of eligible voters turned out than in any midterm election since 1914, according to McDonald’s calculations.

    Turnout last year fell most sharply among minorities: while 43% of all eligible non-White voters showed up in 2018, that slipped to just 35% last year, McDonald calculates. Turnout among eligible college-educated White voters also dropped from an astronomical 74% in 2018 to just over 69% last year. White voters without a four-year college degree actually came closest to matching their elevated 2018 performance, slipping only slightly from just over 45% then to about 43% last year.

    But turnout is only one of the two factors that shape how large a share of actual voters each group comprises, which is the number that really matters in determining election outcomes. The other factor is how large a share of the pool of potential eligible voters each group represents. Turnout, in effect, is the numerator and the share of eligible voters the denominator that combined produce the share of the total vote each group casts during every election.

    As McDonald found, the long-term trends in the eligible voter pool – the denominator in our equation – continued unabated in 2022. Whites without a college degree fell to just over 41% of eligible potential voters. That was down 3.2 percentage points from their share of the eligible voter population in 2018 – which was itself down exactly 3.2 percentage points from their share in 2014. In turn, from 2014 to 2022, college-educated White voters slightly increased their share of the eligible voter pool and minorities significantly increased from 30.5% then to nearly 35% now.

    Netting together both the turnout results and these shifts in the eligible voter pool, McDonald found that working-class White voters in 2022 declined as a share overall, whether compared either to the last few midterm elections or the most recent presidential contests.

    In 2022, Whites without a college degree cast 38.3% of all votes, he found. That was down from 39.3% in 2018 and more than 43% in 2014, according to his calculations. That finding also represented a continued decline from just over 42% of the vote when Trump won the 2016 presidential election and 39.9% in 2020 – the first time non-college Whites had fallen below 40% of the total presidential electorate in Census figures.

    Whites with at least a four-year college degree were the big gainers in 2022: McDonald found they cast nearly 36% of all votes last year, compared to a little over-one-third in both 2018 and 2014 and a little less than that in the 2020 presidential year. Burdened by lower turnout, the non-White share of the total vote slipped to just over one-fourth, down slightly from 2018, but still higher than in the 2014 midterms. The minority share of the total vote was considerably larger in 2020, reaching nearly three-in-ten in Census figures.

    All of this extends very consistent long-term trends. Census data analyzed by the non-partisan States of Change project show that non-college Whites have fallen from around two-thirds of the total vote under Ronald Reagan, to about three-fifths under Bill Clinton, to less than half under Barack Obama, to the current level of just under two-fifths. Over those same decades, college-educated Whites have grown from about two-in-ten to three-in-ten voters, while minorities have increased from a little over one-in-ten then to nearly three-in-ten now.

    Other respected data sources differ on the share of the total vote comprised by these three big groups: the Pew Validated Voter study and the estimates by Catalist, a Democratic targeting firm, both put the share of the vote cast in 2020 by non-college Whites slightly higher, in the range of 42-44%.

    But both also show the same core pattern as the Census results do, with the share of the total vote cast by those non-college Whites declining by about two percentage points every four years. The Edison Research exit polls conducted for a consortium of media organizations, including CNN, changed its methodology in a way that makes long-term comparisons impossible. But, similarly to McDonald, the exits found the non-college White share of the total vote declining to 39% in 2022 from 41% in 2018, with minorities also slightly falling over that period, and college-educated Whites growing.

    The trend lines that McDonald documented for last year suggest it’s a reasonable prediction that non-college Whites will again decline as a share of total voters by two points over the period from 2020 to 2024. That would push their share of the national 2024 vote down to below 38%, with more minority voters likely filling most of that gap and the college-educated Whites growing more modestly to offset the rest.

    McDonald says the basic dynamic reconfiguring the voting pool is that many Baby Boomers and their elders are aging out of the electorate. That’s both because more of them are dying or they are reaching an advanced age where turnout tends to decline, either for infirmity or other obstacles. Those older generations are preponderantly White (about three-fourths of seniors are White), and fewer have college degrees, which were not as essential to economic success in those years, McDonald points out. Meanwhile, a larger share of young adults today hold four-year degrees, and the youngest generations aging into the electorate every two years are far more racially diverse. According to calculations by William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Metro think tank, young people of color now comprise almost exactly half of all Americans who turn 18 and age into the electorate each year.

    “We are right now at the teetering edge of the influence of the baby boomers,” says McDonald. “They are just starting to enter those twilight years in their turnout rates, while other [more diverse] groups are maturing. So we are right at that cusp – that critical point of where things are going to start changing.”

    The impact of these changes on the outcomes of elections, as McDonald says, is very incremental, “like the proverbial frog in the boiling water.” One way to understand that dynamic is to assume that Whites without a college degree on the one hand, and minorities and college-educated Whites on the other, all split their vote at roughly the same proportions as they have in recent elections. If the former group declines as a share of the electorate by two points from 2020-2024 and the latter groups increase by an equal amount, that change alone would enlarge Biden’s margin of victory in the two-party vote from 4.6 percentage points to 5.8, Bonier calculates. Republicans would need to increase their vote share with some or all of those groups just to get back to the deficit Trump faced in 2020 – much less to overcome it.

    Ruy Teixeira, a long-time Democratic electoral analyst who has become a staunch critic of his party, argues exactly that kind of shift in voting preferences could offset the change in the electorate’s composition – and create a real threat for Biden. Even though Biden is aggressively highlighting his efforts to create blue-collar jobs through “manufacturing and infrastructure projects that are starting to get off the ground,” Teixiera recently wrote, a “sharp swing against the incumbent administration by White working-class voters seems like a very real possibility.”

    Teixeira, now a nonresident senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, also maintains Democrats face the risk Republicans can extend the unexpected gains Trump registered in 2020 with non-White voters without a college degree, especially Hispanics.

    Curbelo, the former congressman, shares Teixeira’s belief that Democratic liberalism on some social issues like crime is creating an opening for Republicans to gain ground among culturally conservative Hispanics. “If they are not careful, they can jeopardize their potential gains from Republicans doubling down on Trumpism by alienating themselves from minority voters who may identify with some of the [Democrats’] economic policies but who do not necessarily identify with the party’s victimhood narrative about minorities,” Curbelo says.

    Still, Curbelo warns that Republicans are unlikely to achieve the gains possible with minority voters so long as they are stamped so decisively by Trump’s polarizing image. And polling has consistently found that while many non-college Hispanic voters hold more moderate views on social issues than college-educated White liberals, those minority voters are not nearly as conservative as core GOP groups, like blue-collar Whites or evangelical Christians.

    As Teixeira has forcefully argued in recent years, such demographic change doesn’t ensure doom for Republicans or success for Democrats. Among other things, that change is unevenly distributed around the country, and the small state bias of both the Electoral College and the two-senators-per-state rule magnifies the influence of sparsely populated interior states where these shifts have been felt much more lightly.

    Yet, even so, the long-term change in the electorate’s composition, along with the Democrats’ growing strength among white-collar suburban voters, largely explains why the party has won the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential elections – something no party has done since the formation of the modern party system in 1828.

    And even though Whites without a college degree exceed their share of the national vote in the key Rust Belt battlegrounds of Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, their share of the vote is shrinking along the same trajectory of about 2-3 points every four years in those states too, according to analysis by Frey. Meanwhile, in the Sun Belt battlegrounds of Georgia, Arizona and Nevada, more rapid growth in the minority population means that blue-collar Whites will likely comprise a smaller portion of the eligible voter pool than they do nationally.

    Trump, with the exception of his beachhead among blue-collar minorities, has now largely locked the GOP into a position of needing to squeeze bigger margins out of shrinking groups, particularly non-college Whites. It’s entirely possible that Trump or another Republican nominee can meet that test well enough to win back the White House in 2024, especially given the persistent public disenchantment with Biden’s performance. But McDonald’s 2022 data shows why relying on a coalition tilted so heavily toward those non-college Whites becomes just a little tougher for the GOP in each presidential race.

    While Trump or another Republican certainly can win in 2024, Bonier says, “he has reshaped the party in such a way that they have a very narrow path to victory.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What Walmart’s pullback from Chicago says about Corporate America’s limits | CNN Business

    What Walmart’s pullback from Chicago says about Corporate America’s limits | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    A line of Chicago mayors heavily courted Walmart over the last two decades, brushing aside community protests. And Walmart welcomed the opportunity to show cities it could be a strong corporate partner.

    But now, Walmart is pulling back from Chicago.

    The largest retailer in the country announced plans this week to close four of its eight stores in the city, citing growing financial losses. Three are in predominantly Black and low-income neighborhoods, and their closures with little warning mean residents — including elderly citizens and people without reliable transportation — will have to travel further to buy groceries and pick up their medications.

    “These stores lose tens of millions of dollars a year, and their annual losses nearly doubled in just the last five years,” Walmart said. Despite years of different strategies, the company said, it did not see a route to profitability for these stores. Walmart, which made $20.6 billion in 2022, did not specify why losses were growing in Chicago.

    City leaders “used a lot of political capital and their trust were questioned, Now it’s kind of like, ‘I told you so,’” said Chicago Alderman-Elect Ronnie Mosley, who will represent a Chicago ward where one of the Walmarts is set to close. His predecessor, who is retiring, was a major proponent of drawing Walmart to Chicago.

    Mayors and key political leaders had pushed to draw Walmart, despite protests from small businesses, labor groups and community activists. Critics pointed to studies that suggested a Walmart presence could push out mom-and-pop stores and drive down wages, as it had in smaller towns.

    But, at the time, officials argued opening Walmarts would provide jobs, economic development and convenient places to shop for affordable groceries and pharmacy services in some of the city’s low-income communities.

    Meanwhile Walmart, which rose mainly in rural and suburban areas, also fought hard to enter Chicago. Walmart saw it as a twofold opportunity: broaden its customer base while proving to skeptical officials in other cities that it was a strong corporate partner.

    The closures are another example of the shortcomings of local governments and even national political leaders betting on leading chains to provide key public services and fill gaps.

    If government couldn’t provide for a populace in desperate need of jobs and fresh foods, the thinking went, for-profit corporations would.

    But in Chicago, that’s not what happened. A 2012 study of Walmart’s impact in Chicago found businesses closer to Walmart were significantly more likely to close than similar businesses farther away — and the number of jobs lost by nearby retail competitors essentially offset the number of jobs created at the new Walmart stores.

    This is a particular issue in predominantly minority, low-income areas that experience economic neglect, and other chains have recently shuttered stores in these areas as well.

    Walmart gave less than a week's notice it would close four stores in Chicago.

    Whole Foods closed in Chicago earlier this year, along with CVS, Aldi and Save A Lot. In 2019, Target closed two stores, angering residents. Chains like Dollar General and Family Dollar are expanding in low-income areas, but they don’t sell fresh groceries.

    Unlike local government, which is theoretically accountable to voters, companies answer only to their shareholders and don’t have an obligation to stay in communities if they aren’t making a profit.

    Whether it’s handing over responsibility for providing public bathrooms to Starbucks and McDonald’s or vaccines and basic health services to CVS and Walgreens, the public is left vulnerable when these companies’ business priorities change or they close locations.

    “We have asked business to solve problems that we don’t want government to solve anymore,” said Bryant Simon, a professor of history at Temple University who studies the role of Corporate America and government. “We’re happy to have them do it and then shocked when they act like a business again.”

    A similar strategy to rely on national chains to help remedy so-called “food deserts” was a focus on the national level during the Obama administration. It too fell short.

    Walmart, Walgreens

    (WBA)    , SuperValu and other store executives joined Michelle Obama at the White House in 2011 to announce a pledge to open a combined 1,500 stores in communities that have limited access to nutritious food by 2016.

    But that effort stalled. The Associated Press found in 2015 that leading chains built just 250 new supermarkets in these areas.

    “The assumption there is a single player in the nation that will work in every market is proving to not be true,” said Liz Abunaw, who founded Forty Acres Fresh Market, a startup grocer, in response to the lack of fresh food options on Chicago’s West Side. “Even in Chicago, the solutions differ by neighborhood.”

    Placing a big chain in the middle of a struggling neighborhood is not an effective strategy alone, she said, and more holistic solutions are needed, including improving housing, jobs and public transportation: “It’s not one thing. All of those things go together.”

    There also can be unintended consequences to chains opening in neighborhoods. Companies sometimes open, small retailers close – and then the chain closes, leaving a bigger void in some cases than when it first came in.

    “The idea that Walmart did the city a great favor by moving in is highly debatable,” said David Merriman, a professor of public policy, management and analytics at the University of Illinois Chicago and co-author of the study of Walmart’s presence in Chicago.

    Instead of relying on large companies to strengthen local economies, some experts say, another solution could be designing policies that better support smaller, family-owned supermarkets, co-operatives, and farmers’ markets such as Yellow Banana and ChiFresh Kitchen in Chicago.

    “Their loss is one of the main reasons that communities lack grocery stores and other basic retail in the first place,” Abunaw said.

    Despite stiff resistance from unions, grassroots groups and some local leaders in Chicago, Walmart has been embraced by the city’s last three mayors as an economic development model.

    In 2006, Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley issued a rare veto to override a City Council bill that required big-box stores such as Walmart to pay workers a $10 minimum wage. In 2013, Mayor Rahm Emanuel cut the ribbon on a new Walmart in an underserved neighborhood, saying it was “another example of a company seeing an alignment of what is good for their bottom line with what is good for our neighborhoods.”

    In 2020, Mayor Lori Lightfoot held a press conference with Walmart CEO Doug McMillon to announce the company would expand its investment in the city following local and national protests over George Floyd’s murder by police.

    But the company struggled in Chicago. Its mammoth superstores, which are designed for people to drive to and make big shopping trips, have been less suited for city residents who tend to make smaller but more frequent trips to supermarkets.

    Walmart tried opening smaller stores, known as neighborhood markets, that serve mostly groceries — but these lower profit margins than other merchandise like electronics or clothing. Walmart is closing neighborhood markets around the country, and three of the four stores closing in Chicago fall into that category.

    In Chicago, Walmart is closing in both low-income and high-income areas, a sign that it’s struggling across the city. But it’s the stores in low-income areas that will feel the loss most.

    “We are in an area where CVS and Walgreens have closed,” Alderman-Elect Mosley said. “Walmart has become the de-facto” store and the closure is “traumatizing.”

    “Walmart is leaving and they may be doing what’s best for them,” he said. “Now I have to figure out with our community what’s best for us.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Florida Senate passes 6-week abortion ban | CNN Politics

    Florida Senate passes 6-week abortion ban | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Florida’s state Senate on Monday passed a bill that would ban most abortions in the state after the gestational age of six weeks, or about four weeks of pregnancy.

    The bill’s advance, which still needs to pass the state’s GOP-led House, comes one year after Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a 15-week ban into law. The new legislation likely further burnishes the conservative credentials of DeSantis, a potential 2024 presidential candidate, and it was met with outrage by state Democrats, two of whom were arrested during a protest near the state Capitol Monday night.

    The current bill would impose restrictions on telehealth abortions and medication. It would include exemptions for women facing life-threatening harm while pregnant and victims of rape, incest and human trafficking.

    The bill targets both physicians who perform abortions and those who “actively participate in” them, and should the bill become law, any person who violates it could be charged with a third-degree felony.

    The “Heartbeat Protection Act” passed the Florida Senate in a 26-13 vote.

    A protest over the bill near the state Capitol resulted in the arrests of 11 people who were charged with trespassing after a warning, Tallahassee police said. Florida Democrats said state party Chairwoman Nikki Fried and Florida Senate Minority Leader Lauren Book were among them.

    “As the Democratic leader in the Florida Senate, it’s my job to a lead this incredible group of 11 Democrats, other than myself, to fight against these extreme policies,” Book told CNN on Wednesday. ‘Women will die as a consequence of this piece of policy.”

    Other abortion rights advocates say the Florida bill unfairly seeks to ban abortions before many even know they are pregnant.

    “This bill will unfairly and disproportionately impact people who live in rural communities, people with low incomes, people with disabilities, and people of color,” Kara Gross, the legislative director and senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, said in a statement.

    “Hundreds of thousands of pregnant people will be forced to travel out of state to seek the care they need. Many people will not even know they are pregnant by six weeks, and for those who do, it is unlikely they will be able to schedule the legally required two in-person doctor’s appointments before six weeks of pregnancy,” Gross said.

    The White House has also criticized the pending bill.

    “The President and Vice President believe women should be able to make health care decisions with their doctors and families – free from political interference. They are committed to protecting access to reproductive care, and continue to call on Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade in federal law,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement when the bill was first introduced.

    State Sen. Clay Yarborough, one of the bill’s Republican sponsors, said “unborn children deserve the strongest protections possible under our laws.”

    The legislation underscores the ongoing efforts across the country to restrict access to abortion in a post-Roe world. Other Republican-led states have also pursued six-week abortion bans that have been met with legal challenges.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • China’s capital offers $6 monthly handout to offset inflation. The public says it’s not nearly enough | CNN Business

    China’s capital offers $6 monthly handout to offset inflation. The public says it’s not nearly enough | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    Beijing will give out a $6 monthly cash subsidy to low-income residents to cushion the impact of rising food prices, a move that has unexpectedly angered many online who say the amount is far too low.

    The announcement from the city government comes as food inflation accelerated in China after policymakers scrapped their zero-Covid strategy in December and eased monetary policy further to fuel economic recovery.

    Last week, protests by retirees broke out in the cities of Wuhan and Dalian over cuts to their medical care benefits, highlighting the growing risk of unrest over livelihood issues as China’s economy struggles to regain its footing after being drained by pandemic policies.

    The demonstrations were the latest outburst of public discontent since mass protests against Covid curbs gripped the country late last year. The recent protests underscored the financial pressure on local governments, after three years of the zero-Covid policy strained their coffers and a property market slump severely eroded their income.

    According to the Beijing Municipal Commission of Development and Reform, the city’s economic regulator, more than 300,000 people on low incomes will each receive a cash payment of 40 yuan (about $6) per month. The first payment will be given out later this month and it’s unclear for how long they will continue.

    “In January, food prices in Beijing rose by 6.6%, meeting the conditions for starting the price-linked subsidy program,” the state-run Beijing Daily newspaper quoted an official from the commission as saying in a Friday report.

    “[We will] try to do a good job in ensuring the basic livelihood of the needy people … and continuously enhance the people’s sense of gain, happiness and security.”

    China launched a low-income subsidy program in 2011 to offer cash handouts to the needy when the consumer price index or food prices hit certain thresholds. Each city or region sets its own standard as living costs vary across the country.

    The news of Beijing’s latest handout was not well received by the public, who took to social media to complain about the high cost of living in the city.

    “40 yuan? Are you serious? [When] the low-income people take the subway to collect the money and then they return, they lose 8 yuan,” said one comment on Weibo.

    “Is it like an insult? [The amount] just subsidizes a bowl of noodles,” another Weibo user said.

    Some people criticized the country’s weak social welfare system, while others blasted the government’s move to write off billions of debt to other countries.

    “Can’t we question the move? Do you think the current welfare system in our country is good? Can it meet the needs of people?” one said.

    China’s consumer inflation accelerated in January, as the CPI rose 2.1% from a year earlier. Although the headline figure remains relatively low compared to other countries, food prices jumped 6.2%, with pork and fruit prices rising the most.

    In Beijing, food prices outpaced the national level. Vegetable prices soared 24% last month.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House GOP keeps up attacks on IRS with bill to abolish the agency | CNN Politics

    House GOP keeps up attacks on IRS with bill to abolish the agency | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The Republican-controlled House has made the Internal Revenue Service a political target after Democrats bolstered the agency with new funding last year.

    Within the first week of the new Congress, a dozen GOP lawmakers introduced a bill that would abolish the IRS altogether and replace the entire federal tax code with a national sales tax.

    Separately, the House voted to rescind nearly $80 billion in funding for the agency that Democrats approved last year – with many top Republicans repeating the misleading claim that the money will be used to hire 87,000 auditors.

    “Instead of adding 87,000 new agents to weaponize the IRS against small business owners and middle America, this bill will eliminate the need for the department entirely by simplifying the tax code with provisions that work for the American people and encourage growth and innovation,” said Rep. Earl “Buddy” Carter, a Republican from Georgia who introduced the Fair Tax Act earlier this month.

    It’s highly unlikely that either bill will become law, given that Democrats still control the Senate. But the measures highlight how America’s two major political parties have very different strategies when it comes to addressing the embattled tax collection agency – which has seen its budget shrink by more than 15% over the past decade and has struggled to not only process returns on time but also answer taxpayers’ questions. Just 13% of phone calls were answered last year.

    Democrats have taken a different approach, making funding the IRS a priority. The Inflation Reduction Act, which passed along party lines last year, approved $80 billion for the IRS over 10 years. By using the money to crack down on tax cheats, it’s estimated that the agency could boost federal revenue by more than $124 billion over that time period.

    The Republicans’ Fair Tax Act is not a new idea. A version was first introduced in Congress in 1999. It’s never had enough support to become law, but it puts forth an appealing message to those Americans who love to hate the federal tax agency.

    It would get rid of the complicated federal tax system, doing away with the annual task of filing tax returns. Instead, the bill would replace federal taxes on individual and corporate income with a national 23% sales tax in 2025, allowing for adjustments to the rate in later years. Americans would pay Uncle Sam whenever they bought a new good or service for personal consumption.

    The bill calls for abolishing the IRS and directing states to collect the new federal tax.

    While every consumer would pay the same tax at the cash register, the bill provides for a monthly tax rebate payment, based on the poverty rate and family size. It’s meant to help offset the tax levy on low-income Americans who tend to spend a higher share of their paycheck on goods and services.

    A national sales tax appears very simple: one rate all Americans pay on new goods and services they buy.

    But some policy experts say the Fair Tax Act is more complicated than it looks.

    “Moving away from taxing income and toward taxing consumption is a step in the right direction for a pro-growth and simpler tax code,” said Garrett Watson, a senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, an independent tax policy nonprofit.

    But there could still be complications. First, the tax rate would likely have to be higher than 23% in order for the federal government to pull in the same amount of tax revenue that it does now. One estimate found that a tax rate of about 30% would more likely be able to generate the same amount of revenue – or 44%, if measured the way state sales taxes are typically presented.

    Second, a nationwide sales tax could leave low- and middle-income people worse off. The current tax system is progressive, meaning it takes a larger percentage of income from high-earners than low-income groups. Even with the monthly tax rebate, a national sales tax would still be less progressive.

    A 2011 independent analysis of a similar national sales tax found that, on average, most income groups would pay more tax than they did under the federal tax system at the time – except the top 5% of earners who would see a tax cut.

    Additionally, it’s hard to imagine that lawmakers would pass a bill that does not exclude some things from the sales tax, like health care costs, for example.

    “The basic income tax is simple too,” said Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.

    It’s the deductions, credits and exclusions – like for retirement savings and charitable giving – that make it complicated.

    Plus, Americans would likely have to file some paperwork to some tax collection entity in order to receive the rebate, Gleckman said. The administration cost may be less than it is now, but it wouldn’t be zero.

    Tax filing season opens Monday and National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins expects IRS services for taxpayers to improve this year – in part due to the funding increase provided by Congress.

    Since the Inflation Reduction Act was passed in August, the IRS has hired 5,000 new customer service agents. The agency has also worked to improve its technology so that taxpayers can ask questions via an automated service online, said Treasury Deputy Secretary Wally Adeyemo on a call with reporters last week.

    The IRS started the year with about 400,000 unprocessed paper individual returns and about 1 million unprocessed business returns. But it’s in much better shape than the prior year, when it had a backlog of 4.7 million unprocessed individual returns and 3.2 million unprocessed business returns, according to the taxpayer advocate’s annual report to Congress.

    Taxpayer service, like answering the phones and processing returns in a timely manner, has suffered as the IRS’ budget has shrunk.

    The Covid-19 pandemic brought even more challenges for the IRS. It was tasked with administering several rounds of stimulus payments to millions of Americans with a lot of its staff working from home. This caused long delays for many taxpayers who filed a paper return. The IRS is starting to implement a scanning system so that returns filed by paper can quickly be made digital. Previously, paper returns had to be entered manually into the agency’s computer system.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • This prominent pastor says Christian nationalism is ‘a form of heresy’ | CNN

    This prominent pastor says Christian nationalism is ‘a form of heresy’ | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Left vs. right. Woke vs. the unwoke. Red State Jesus vs. Blue State Jesus.

    There are some leaders who see faith and politics strictly as an either/or competition: You win by turning out your side and crushing the opposition.

    But the Rev. William J. Barber II, who has been called “the closest person we have to MLK” in contemporary America, has refined a third mode of activism called “fusion politics.” It creates political coalitions that often transcend the conservative vs. progressive binary.

    Barber, a MacArthur “genius grant” recipient, says a coalition of the “rejected stones” of America—the poor, immigrants, working-class whites, religious minorities, people of color and members of the LGBTQ community can transform the country because they share a common enemy.

    “The same forces demonizing immigrants are also attacking low-wage workers,” the North Carolina pastor said in an interview several years ago. “The same politicians denying living wages are also suppressing the vote; the same people who want less of us to vote are also denying the evidence of the climate crisis and refusing to act now; the same people who are willing to destroy the Earth are willing to deny tens of millions of Americans access to health care.”

    Barber’s fusion politics has helped transform the 59-year-old pastor into one of the country’s most prominent activist and speakers. As co-chair of the Poor People’s Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival, he has helped lead one of the nation’s most sustained and visible anti-poverty efforts.

    He electrified the crowd at the 2016 Democratic National Convention with a speech that one commentator called a “drop the mic” moment. And at a time when both political parties have been accused of ignoring the working class, Barber routinely organizes and marches with groups such as fast-food workers and union members.

    “There is a sleeping giant in America,” Barber told CNN. “Poor and low-wealth folks now make up 30% of the electorate in every state and over 40% of the electorate in every state where the margin of victory for the presidency was less than 3%. If you could just get that many poor and low-wealth people to vote, they could fundamentally shift every election in the country.”

    Starting this month, Barber will take his fusion politics to the Ivy League. Yale Divinity School has announced he’ll be the founding director of its new Center for Public Theology and Public Policy. In that role, Barber says he hopes to train a new generation of leaders who will be comfortable “creating a just society both in the academy and in the streets.”

    Though he’s stepping down as pastor of the North Carolina church where he has served for 30 years, Barber says he is not retiring from activism. He remains president of Repairers of the Breach, a nonprofit that promotes moral fusion politics.

    Barber recently spoke to CNN about his faith and activism and why he opposes White Christian nationalism, a movement that insists the US was founded as a Christian nation and seeks to erase the separation of church and state.

    Barber’s answers were edited for brevity and clarity.

    You’ve talked about poverty as a moral issue and said the US cannot tolerate record levels of inequality. But some extreme levels of poverty have always existed in this country. Why is it so urgent to face those problems now, and why should someone who isn’t poor care?

    Doctor King used to say America has a high blood pressure of creeds, but an anemia of deeds. In every generation we’ve had to have a moment to focus on the urgency of the right now. We will never be able to fix our democracy until we fully face these issues. We will constantly ebb and flow out of recessions because inequality hurts us all.

    Joseph Stiglitz (the Nobel Prize-winning economist) talks about this in his book “The Price of Inequality,” and says that it costs us more as a nation for these inequalities to exist than it would for us to fix them.

    Look at how much it costs us to not have a living (minimum) wage. There was a group of Nobel Peace Prize-winning economists two years ago that debunked the notion that paying people a living wage (the federal minimum wage in the US is $7.25 an hour) would hurt business. They said it’s not true.

    Homeless veterans are housed in 30 tents on a sidewalk along busy San Vicente Boulevard outside the Veteran's Administration campus in Los Angeles on April 22, 2021.

    Well, President Roosevelt said that in the 1930s. He said that any corporation that didn’t pay people a living wage didn’t deserve to be an American corporation.

    I don’t think that American society as a democracy can stand much more. We’re moving toward 50% of all Americans being poor and low wealth. It’s unnecessary.

    We say in our founding documents that every politician swears to promote the general welfare of all people. You’re not promoting the general welfare of all people when you can get elected and go to Congress and get free health care but then sit in Congress and block the people who elected you from having the same thing.

    We say equal protection under the law is fundamental. Well, there’s nothing equal about corporations getting all kinds of tax breaks and all kinds of ways to make more and more money, while the average worker makes 300% less than the CEOs.

    WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 06: Supporters of U.S. President Donald Trump pray outside the U.S. Capitol January 06, 2021 in Washington, DC. Congress will hold a joint session today to ratify President-elect Joe Biden's 306-232 Electoral College win over President Donald Trump. A group of Republican senators have said they will reject the Electoral College votes of several states unless Congress appoints a commission to audit the election results. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

    Marjorie Taylor Greene calls herself a ‘nationalist.’ This is what that means

    Some people cite the scripture where Jesus says, “The poor you always have with you” to argue that poverty is inevitable, and that trying to end it is a hopeless cause.

    Every time they say that, they are misquoting Jesus. Because that’s not what Jesus meant or said. He was saying, yeah, the poor are going to be with you always, because he was quoting from Deuteronomy [15:11]. The rest of that scripture says the poor will always be with you because of your greed — I’m paraphrasing it, but that’s the meaning of it. The poor will always be with you is a critique of our unwillingness to address poverty.

    To have this level of inequality existing is a violation of our deepest moral, constitutional and religious values. It’s morally inconsistent, morally indefensible, and economically insane. Why would you not want to lift 55 to 60 million people out of poverty if you could by paying them a basic living wage? Why would you not want that amount of resources coming to people and then coming back into the economy?

    Thousands of people march through through downtown Raleigh, North Carolina, in what organizers describe as a

    I want to ask you about Christian nationalism. What’s wrong with saying God loves America and that the country should be built on Christian values?

    God doesn’t say it. That’s what’s wrong with it. The scriptures says God loves all people and that if a nation is going to embrace Christian values, then we got to know what those values are. And those values certainly aren’t anti-gay, against people who may have had an abortion, pro-tax cut, pro one party and pro-gun. There’s nowhere in the scriptures where you see Jesus lifting that up.

    Jesus said the Gospel is about good news to the poor, healing to the brokenhearted, welcoming all people, caring for the least of these: the immigrant, the hungry, the sick, the imprisoned. Christian nationalism attempts to sanctify oppression and not liberation. It attempts to sanctify lies and not truth. At best, it’s a form of theological malpractice. At worst, it’s a form of heresy.

    When you have some people calling themselves Christian nationalists, you never hear them say, “Jesus said this.” They say, “I’m a Christian, and I say it.” But that’s not good enough. If it doesn’t line up with the founder, then it’s flawed.

    Are you an evangelical?

    I’m very much an evangelical. I tell folks that I’m a conservative, liberal, evangelical Christian. And what that means is I believe in Jesus, not to the exclusion of other faith traditions because my founder said that “I have others who are not of this fold.” I believe that love, truth, mercy, grace and justice are fundamental to a life of faith. And for me to be evangelical means to start where Jesus started.

    The word “evangel” is good news. When Jesus used that phase it was in his first sermon, which was a public policy sermon. He said it in the face of Caesar, where Caesar had hurt and exploited the poor. He said it right in the ghetto of Nazareth, where people said, “nothing good could come out of Nazareth.” He said, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me to preach good news” — evangel —”to the poor.” That’s what evangelicalism is to Jesus. That’s the kind of evangelicalism that I embrace.

    You’ve had health challenges over the years. How do you keep going year after year and keep yourself from being burned out?

    I read the Bible one time, specifically looking to see if I could find any person in scripture that God used in a major way that did not have some physical challenge. And I couldn’t find it. That helped me get over any pity party.

    You know, Moses couldn’t talk. Ezekiel had strange post-traumatic syndrome types of emotional issues. Jeremiah was crying all the time from his struggles with depression. Paul had a physical thorn in the flesh. Jesus was acquainted with sorrow.

    Police keep watch as The Rev. William Barber and other activists demonstrate during a rally in support of voting rights legislation in front of the US Supreme Court in Washington on June 23, 2021.

    Then then I looked down through history, and I couldn’t find anybody. Harriet Tubman had epileptic-type fits. Martin Luther King was stabbed before he did the March on Washington and had a breathing disorder after that.

    During covid, I thought deeply about death and mortality. I have some immune deficiencies and challenges. I’ve battled this ankylosing spondylitis for now 40-plus years. At any time, it could shut my body down.

    During covid, as I kept meeting people, I sat down one day and I said, Lord, why am I still here? I’m not better than these people. I know I’ve been around covid. My doctor said to me if I caught covid I probably would not fare well.

    As I was musing one day, it dawned on me. That’s the wrong question. The question is never, why are you still alive? Why are you still breathing? The question is what are you going to do with the breath you have?

    Because at any given moment, the scripture says we’re a step from death. And so I’ve decided that whatever breath I have, it is too precious to waste on hate, on oppression and on being mean to people. It’s only to be used for the cause of justice.

    John Blake is the author of “More Than I Imagined: What a Black Man Discovered About the White Mother He Never Knew.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opinion: A really bad night for some high-profile Trump-backed candidates | CNN

    Opinion: A really bad night for some high-profile Trump-backed candidates | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    CNN Opinion contributors share their thoughts on the outcome of the 2022 midterm elections. The views expressed in this commentary are their own.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis sent a clear message to every Republican voter Tuesday night: My way is the path to a national majority, and former President Donald Trump’s way is the path to future disappointments and continued suffering.

    Four years ago, DeSantis won his first gubernatorial race by less than a percentage point. His nearly 20-point win against Democratic candidate Charlie Crist on Tuesday sent the message that DeSantis, not Trump, can win over the independent voters who decide elections.

    DeSantis’ decisive victory offers a future where the Republican Party might actually win the popular vote in a presidential contest – something that hasn’t been done since George W. Bush in 2004.

    Meanwhile, many of the candidates Trump endorsed in 2022 struggled, and it was clear from CNN exit polls that the former President – with his 37% favorability rating – would be a serious underdog in the 2024 general election should he win the Republican presidential nomination for a third time.

    My friend Patrick Ruffini of Echelon Insights tweeted a key observation: DeSantis commanded huge support among Latinos in 2022 compared to Trump in 2020.

    In 2020, Biden won the heavily Latino Miami-Dade County by seven points. DeSantis flipped the county on Tuesday and ran away with an 11-point win.

    In 2020, Biden won Osceola County by nearly 14 points. This time, DeSantis secured the county by nearly seven points, marking a whopping 21-point swing.

    DeSantis combined his strength among Latinos with his support among working class Whites, suburban white-collar voters and rural Floridians. That’s a coalition that could win nationally, unlike Trump’s limited appeal among several traditional Republican voting segments.

    Last year, it was Republican gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin of Virginia who scored an earthquake in a Biden state by keeping Trump at arm’s length and focusing on the issues. Tonight, it was DeSantis who ran as his own man (Trump rallied for Marco Rubio but not DeSantis at the end of the campaign) and showed what you can do when you combine the political instincts required to be a successful Republican these days with actual governing competence.

    DeSantis made a convincing case that he, rather than Trump, gives Republicans the best chance to defeat Biden (or some other Democrat) in 2024. With Trump plotting a reelection campaign announcement soon, DeSantis has a lot to think about and a solid springboard from which to launch a challenge to the former President.

    Scott Jennings, a CNN contributor and Republican campaign adviser, is a former special assistant to President George W. Bush and a former campaign adviser to Sen. Mitch McConnell. He is a partner at RunSwitch Public Relations in Louisville, Kentucky. Follow him on Twitter @ScottJenningsKY.

    Roxanne Jones

    Let it go. If election night confirmed anything for me it is this: We can all – voters, doomscrollers, pundits and election deniers included – stop believing every election revolves around former President Donald Trump. Instead, when asked in exit polls across the country, younger people, women and other voters in key demographics said their top concerns were inflation, abortion rights, crime and other quality of life issues.

    What a relief. It finally feels like a majority of voters want to re-center American politics away from the toxic, conspiracy theory-driven rhetoric we’ve experienced over the past several years.

    Yes, Republicans are still projected to take control of the House of Representatives, with a narrow (and narrowing) majority – but will that make much difference? Despite the advantage Democrats had in the chamber the past two years, President Joe Biden has still had to battle and compromise to get parts of his agenda passed. How the balance of power will settle in the Senate is unclear, with a few races in key states still undecided as of this afternoon. It will likely hinge, again, on Georgia, and a forthcoming runoff election between the incumbent, Democrat Raphael Warnock, and his GOP challenger, former football star Herschel Walker.

    No matter what party you claim, there were positive signs coming out of the midterms. My hometown, Philadelphia, and its surrounding suburbs, came up big in another election – rejecting the Trump-backed New Jersey transplant, Dr. Mehmet Oz, and helping to send Democratic candidate John Fetterman to the US Senate. Pennsylvania voters also rejected an election denier, Doug Mastriano, in the race for state governor, and made history by electing Democrat Summer Lee as the state’s first Black woman to serve in Congress.

    Maryland voters, meanwhile, elected Democrat Wes Moore as their state’s first Black governor. And in New England, Maura Healey became Massachusetts’ first female governor. She’s also the first out lesbian to win a state governorship anywhere in the US.

    Democracy, freedom and equality also won out on ballot issues.

    In unfinished business, voters tackled slavery, permanently abolishing “involuntary servitude” in four states – Vermont, Oregon, Alabama and Tennessee. (Louisiana held on to the slavery clause under its constitution, however.)

    Despite efforts to limit voting rights across the nation, voters in Alabama approved a measure requiring that any change to state election law goes into effect at least six months before a general election. And, in Kentucky, voters narrowly beat back an amendment that would have removed constitutional protections for abortion rights – one of several instances in which voters refused to accept restrictive reproductive rights measures.

    Still, the highlight of my midterms night was watching 25-year-old Maxwell Frost win a US congressional race in Florida – holding a Democratic seat in a state whose 2022 results skewed red, no less. More and more, we are seeing young people energized, voting and stepping up with fresh ideas to lead this democracy. I’m here for it.

    Roxanne Jones, a founding editor of ESPN The Magazine and former vice president at ESPN, has been a producer, reporter and editor at the New York Daily News and The Philadelphia Inquirer. Jones is co-author of “Say it Loud: An Illustrated History of the Black Athlete.” She talks politics, sports and culture weekly on Philadelphia’s 900AM WURD.

    Michael D'Antonio

    Voters made Tuesday a bad night for former President Donald Trump. Despite his efforts, many of his favorites not only lost but denied the GOP the usual out-party wave of wins that come in midterm elections. This leaves a diminished Trump with the challenge of deciding what to do next.

    In the short term, the man who so often returns to his well-worn playbook resumed his years-long effort to ruin Americans’ confidence in any election his team loses. “Protest, protest, protest,” he told his followers, even before all the polls closed. In a sign of his declining power, no mass protests ensued.

    Nevertheless, false claims of election fraud will likely be a major theme if he follows through on his loudly voiced hints that he plans to run for the White House again in 2024.

    To run or not to run is now the main question. It’s not an easy choice. Trump could end up like other one-term presidents he has mocked, George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter, who retreated from politics and devoted themselves to new interests. However, he has other options. He could revive his television career – Fox News? – or return to his businesses. Or, he could develop a new role as leader of an organization that can exploit his prodigious fundraising ability, and give him a platform for grabbing attention, while leaving him plenty of time for golf.

    Running could forestall the various legal problems he faces, but he has lawyers who might accomplish the same goal. Fox News is unlikely to pay enough, and his businesses are now being watched by a court-appointed overseer. This leaves him with a combination of easy work – fundraising and pontificating – combined with his favorite pastimes: fame, money and fun. What’s not to like?

    Michael D’Antonio is the author of the book “Never Enough: Donald Trump and the Pursuit of Success” and co-author, with Peter Eisner, of the book “High Crimes: The Corruption, Impunity, and Impeachment of Donald Trump.”

    Jill Filipovic

    Democrat Kathy Hochul won the New York State gubernatorial race, and thank goodness. Her opponent, Lee Zeldin, is not your typical moderate Republican who usually stands a chance in a blue state. Instead, he’s an abortion opponent who wanted voters to simply trust he wouldn’t mess with New York’s abortion laws.

    Zeldin was endorsed by the National Rifle Association when he was in Congress. He is a Trump acolyte who voted against certifying the 2020 election in Congress, after texting with former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and reportedly planning to contest the outcome of the 2020 election before the results were even in.

    New Yorkers sent a definitive message: Our values matter, even in moments of profound uncertainty.

    Plus, Hochul made history as the first woman elected to the governor’s office in New York.

    This race was, in its final days, predicted to be closer than it actually was. Part of that was simply the usual electoral math: The minority party typically has an advantage in the midterms, and Republicans are a minority in Washington, DC, with a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic majority in Congress. And polling in New York state didn’t look as good for Hochul as it should have in a solidly blue state: Voters who talked to pollsters emphasized crime fears and the economy; abortion rights were galvanizing, but didn’t seem as definitive in an election for a governor vastly unlikely to have an abortion criminalization bill delivered to her desk.

    The polls were imperfect. It turns out that New Yorkers are, in fact, New Yorkers: Not cowed by overblown claims of crime (while I think crime is indeed a problem Democrats should address, New York City remains one of the safest places in the country); determined to defend the racial, ethnic and sexual diversity that makes our state great; and committed to standing up against the tyranny of an anti-democratic party that would force women into pregnancy and childbirth.

    However, Democrats shouldn’t take this win for granted. The issues voters raised – inflation, crime – are real concerns. And the reasons many voters turned out – abortion rights, democratic norms – remain under threat.

    Hochul’s job now is to address voter concerns, while standing up for New York values: Openness, decency, freedom for all. Because that’s what New Yorkers did today: The majority of us didn’t cast our ballots from a place of fear and reaction, but from the last dregs of hope and optimism. We voted for what we want. And we now want our governor to deliver.

    Jill Filipovic is a journalist based in New York and author of the book “OK Boomer, Let’s Talk: How My Generation Got Left Behind.” Follow her on Twitter.

    Douglas Heye

    North Carolina’s Senate race received less attention than contests in some other states – possibly a result of the campaign having lesser-known candidates than states like Georgia, Pennsylvania and Ohio.

    In the waning weeks of the race, multiple polls had the candidates – Democratic former state Supreme Court chief justice Cheri Beasley and Republican US House Rep. Ted Budd – separated by a percentage point or less.

    Perhaps more than in any other Senate campaign, the issue of crime loomed large in North Carolina, with Budd claiming in his speeches that it had become much more dangerous to walk the streets in the state. That talking point, along with his focus on inflation, appeared to help propel him to victory in Tuesday’s vote.

    Beasley, by contrast, focused much of her attention on abortion, making it a central plank of her campaign that she would stand up not just for women’s reproductive rights, but workplace protections and equal pay.

    The two candidates were vying for the seat being vacated by retiring Republican Sen. Richard Burr. Despite being seen as a red state – albeit that is less solidly Republican than neighboring southern states – North Carolina has elected Democrats as five of the last six governors and two of the last six senators.

    Former President Barack Obama won the state in 2008 but lost it in 2012 by one of the closest margins in the nation. And while Donald Trump won the state in 2016 and 2020, he never received 50% of the vote.

    Douglas Heye is the ex-deputy chief of staff to former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, a GOP strategist and a CNN political commentator. Follow him on Twitter @dougheye.

    Sophia A. Nelson

    Many of us suspected that Democratic Florida Congresswoman and former House impeachment manager Val Demings would have an uphill battle unseating incumbent Sen. Marco Rubio, and weren’t entirely surprised when she lost the race. With 98% of the vote counted, Rubio won easily, garnering 57.8% of the vote to Demings’ 41.1%.

    As it turns out, Tuesday was a tough night all around for Black women running statewide. Beyond Demings’ loss, Judge Cheri Beasley narrowly lost her Senate bid in North Carolina.

    And in the big heartbreak of the night, Stacey Abrams lost the Georgia governor’s race to Gov. Brian Kemp – a repeat of her defeat to him four years ago, when the two tangled for what at the time was an open seat.

    Abrams shook up the 2018 race by expanding the electoral map, enlisting more women and people of color who turned out in record numbers – but she fell short of punching her ticket to Georgia’s governor’s mansion. And on Tuesday she lost to Kemp by a much wider margin than in 2018.

    Had Abrams succeeded, she would have been the first Black woman to become the governor of a US state. After her second straight electoral loss, America is still waiting for that breakthrough.

    Meanwhile, an ever bigger winner of the night was Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis, who handily defeated Democrat Charlie Crist.

    DeSantis’ big night solidifies what some feel is a compelling claim to front-runner status for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, on what turned out to be a strong election night for Republicans in the state.

    It’s hard for a Democrat to win statewide in the deep South. And as Demings, Beasley and Abrams have shown, it’s particularly tough for a Black woman to win statewide in the region: In fact, it’s never been done.

    All three women were well-qualified and well-funded stars in their party. But, when we look at the final vote tallies, it tells a familiar story. Take Demings, for example, a former law enforcement officer – she was Orlando’s police chief – and yet, she did not get the big law enforcement endorsements. Rubio did, although he never wore the blue.

    That was a big red flag for me, and it showed how much gender and race still play in the minds of male voters and power brokers of my generation and older. For Black women, a double burden of both race and gender at play. It is the nagging story of our lives.

    As for Abrams, I think Kemp was helped by backing away from Trump and modulating his campaign message to appeal to suburban women and independents.

    Abrams, meanwhile, just didn’t have the same support and enthusiasm this time around for her candidacy. And that is unfortunate, but for her to lose by such a big margin says much more.

    At the end of the day however, these three women have nothing to regret. They ran great campaigns, and they created great future platforms for themselves. And they each put one more crack in the glass ceiling facing candidates for the US Senate and governors’ mansions.

    Sophia A. Nelson is a journalist and author of the new book “Be the One You Need: 21 Life Lessons I Learned Taking Care of Everyone but Me.”

    David Thornburgh

    Reflections on the morning after Election Day can be a little fuzzy: Chalk it up to a late night, incomplete data and a still-forming narrative. Still, as a longtime Pennsylvania election-watcher, I see three clear takeaways:

    1) Pennsylvanians don’t take to extreme anti-establishment candidates. The GOP candidate for governor, Doug Mastriano, broke the mold of just about any statewide candidate in the last few decades.

    The state that delivered wins to center-right and center-left candidates like my father Gov, Dick Thornburgh, Sen. Bob Casey and Gov, Tom Ridge gave establishment Democrat Josh Shapiro a wipeout double-digit victory.

    2) “You’re not from here and I am” and “Stick it to the man” proved to be sufficiently powerful messages for alt-Democrat John Fetterman to win his Senate race, albeit by a much smaller margin.

    Amplified by more than $300 million in campaign spending (making PA’s the most expensive Senate race in the country), those two simple themes spoke to the quirky, stubborn authenticity that is a longstanding strand of Pennsylvania’s political DNA.

    3) In the home of Independence Hall, independent voters made a significant difference. Pretty much every poll since the beginning of both marquee races showed the two party candidates with locked in lopsided mirror-image margins among members of their own party.

    Over 90% of Democrats said they’d vote for Shapiro or Fetterman and close to 90% of Republicans said the same of Mastriano or Oz. The 20 to 30% of PA voters who consider themselves independent voters may have been more decisive than most tea-leaves readers gave them credit for.

    Most polls showed Shapiro and Fetterman with whopping leads among independent voters. They may not have been the same independent voters: Shapiro’s indy supporters could be former GOP voters disaffected by Trump, and Fetterman’s indy squad could be young voters mobilized by the abortion rights issue (about half of young voters are independents nationally).

    The growing significance of this independent vote in close elections may increase pressure on both parties to repeal closed primaries so that indy voters can vote in those elections. Both parties will want to have more time and opportunity to court them in the future.

    With Florida ripening to a deeper and deeper Red, Pennsylvania may loom larger and larger as the most contested, consequential swing state in the country: well-worth watching as we move inexorably to 2024.

    David Thornburgh is a longtime Pennsylvania civic leader. The former CEO of the Committee of Seventy, he now chairs the group’s Ballot PA initiative to repeal closed primaries. He is the second son of former GOP Governor and US Attorney General Dick Thornburgh.

    Isabelle Schindler

    The line of students registering to vote on Election Day stretched across the University of Michigan campus, with students waiting for over four hours. There was a palpable sense of excitement and urgency around the election on campus. For many young people, especially young women, there was one motivating issue that drove their participation: abortion rights.

    One of the most important and contentious issues on the ballot in Michigan was Proposal 3 (commonly known as Prop 3), which codifies the right to abortion and other reproductive freedoms, such as birth control, into the Michigan state constitution. Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, many Michiganders have feared the return of a 1931 law that bans abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, and contains felony criminal penalties for abortion providers.

    Though the courts have prevented that old law from taking effect, voters were eager to enshrine reproductive rights in the state constitution, and overwhelmingly voted in favor of Prop 3 with over 55% of voters approving the proposal. This is a major feat given the coordinated campaign against the proposal. Both pro-life groups and the Catholic Church strongly opposed it, and many ads claimed it was “too confusing and too extreme.”

    The issue of abortion was a major focal point of the gubernatorial campaign between Gov, Gretchen Whitmer and her Republican challenger, Tudor Dixon. Pro-Whitmer groups consistently highlighted Dixon’s support of a near-total abortion ban and her past comments that having a rapist’s baby could help a victim heal. Whitmer’s resounding win in the purple state of Michigan is certainly due, in part, to backlash against Dixon’s extreme positions on the issue.

    After the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, so many young voters felt helpless and despondent about the future of abortion rights. However, instead of throwing in the towel, Michigan voters showed up and displayed their support for Whitmer and Prop 3, showing that Michiganders support bodily autonomy and the right to choose.

    Isabelle Schindler is a senior at the University of Michigan’s Ford School of Public Policy. She is a field director for College Democrats on her campus and has worked as a UMICH Votes Fellow to promote voting.

    Paul Sracic

    From the beginning, the US Senate race in Ohio wasn’t expected to be close. In the end, it wasn’t – with author and political newcomer J.D. Vance defeating Rep. Tim Ryan by over six percentage points.

    Republicans also swept every statewide office in Ohio, including the elections for justices on the Ohio Supreme Court who, for the first time, had their political party listed next to their names on the ballot. This will give the Republicans a dependable majority on state’s highest court, which is significant since there is an ongoing unresolved legal battle over the drawing of state and federal legislative districts.

    It is now safe to say that Ohio, for so long the quintessential swing state, is a Republican state. What happened is simple to explain: White, working-class voters have become a solid part of the Republican coalition in the Buckeye State. In 2016, then-Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump convinced these voters that the Democratic Party had abandoned them to progressive and internationalist interests with values they did not share. This shift was symbolized by the movement of voters in the former manufacturing hub of Northeast Ohio, once the most Democratic part of the state, to the GOP.

    The question going into 2022 was whether the Republicans could keep these voters if Trump was not on the ballot. The Democrats recruited Rep. Tim Ryan to run for the Senate because he was from Northeast Ohio, having grown up just north of Youngstown. They hoped that he could win those working-class voters back, and Ryan designed his campaign around working-class economic interests, distancing himself from Washington, DC, Democrats and even opposing President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program. Once the votes were counted, however, Ryan performed only slightly better than Biden had in Northeast Ohio. In fact, he even lost Trumbull County, the place where he grew up and whose voters he represented in Washington for two decades.

    Ohio Democrats will face another test in two years, when the Democratic Senate seat held by Sherrod Brown will be on the ballot. Brown won in 2018, but given last night’s result, the Republicans will have no problem recruiting a quality candidate to run for a seat that, right now, at least leans Republican.

    Paul Sracic is a professor of politics and international relations at Youngstown State University and the coauthor of “Ohio Politics and Government” (Congressional Quarterly Press, 2015). Follow him on Twitter at @pasracic.

    Joyce M. Davis

    Pennsylvanians clearly rejected the worst of right-wing extremism on Nov. 8, sending a strong message to former President Donald Trump that his endorsement doesn’t guarantee victory in the Keystone State.

    Trump proved to be a two-time loser in the commonwealth this election cycle, despite stirring up his base with screaming rallies for Republican candidates Dr. Mehmet Oz, Doug Mastriano and Rep. Scott Perry.

    And a lot of people are breathing a long, hard sign of relief.

    Mastriano, who CNN projects will lose the race for the state’s governor to Democrat Josh Shapiro, scared many Pennsylvanians with his brash, take-no-prisoners Trump swagger. He inflamed racial tensions, embraced Christian nationalism, and once said women who violated his proposed abortion ban should be charged with murder. On top of all that, he’s an unapologetic election denier.

    Dr. Oz, meanwhile, couldn’t shake his carpetbagger baggage, and Oprah’s rejection – on November 4, she endorsed his rival and now-victorious candidate in the Senate race, John Fetterman – seems to have carried more weight than Trump’s rallies, at least in the feedback I’ve received from readers and community members.

    All of this should compel some serious soul-searching among Republican leadership in Pennsylvania. What could have they been thinking to place all their marbles on someone so outside of the mainstream as Mastriano? Did they think Pennsylvanians wouldn’t check Oz’s address? Will they rethink their hardline stance on abortion?

    In a widely-watched House race, Harrisburg City Councilwoman Shamaine Daniels made a valiant Democratic effort to unseat GOP Rep. Scott Perry, after the party’s preferred candidate pulled out of the race. But her lack of name recognition and inexperience on the state or national stage impacted her ability to establish a base of her own. So the five-term incumbent, who played a role in efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, will return to Washington – though perhaps with a clipped wing.

    Many Pennsylvanians may be staunch conservatives, but we proved we’re not extremists – and we won’t embrace Trump or his candidates if they threaten the very foundations of democracy.

    Joyce M. Davis is outreach and opinion editor for PennLive and The Patriot-News. She is a veteran journalist and author who has lived and worked around the globe, including for National Public Radio, Knight Ridder Newspapers in Washington, DC, and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in Prague.

    Edward Lindsey

    In the last two years, President Joe Biden, Sen. Jon Ossoff and Sen. Raphael Warnock, all Democrats, won in the Peach State. There has been a raging debate in Georgia political circles since then as to whether these races signal a long-term left turn toward the Democratic Party, caused by shifting demographics, or whether they were merely a negative reaction to former President Donald Trump. Tuesday’s results point strongly to the latter.

    Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, who had rebuffed Trump’s demand to overturn the 2020 presidential result, cruised to a convincing reelection on Tuesday with a pro-growth message by defeating the Democrats’ rising star Stacey Abrams by some 300,000 votes. His coattails also propelled other Republican state candidates to victory – including the Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger who had also defied the former President – and helped to keep the Georgia General Assembly firmly in GOP hands.

    However, before sliding Georgia from a purple political state back into the solid red state column, we still have one more contest to look forward to: a runoff for the US Senate, echoing what happened in Georgia’s last set of Senate races.

    Georgia requires candidates to win over 50% of the vote and the presence of a Libertarian on the ticket has thrown the heated race between Warnock, the incumbent senator and senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, and Georgia football great Herschel Walker into an overtime runoff campaign to be decided on December 6.

    Both Walker and Warnock survived November 8 to fight another day despite different strong headwinds facing each of them. For Warnock, it has been Biden’s low favorability rating – hovering around 40% nationwide, and only 38% in Georgia, according to Marist. For Walker, it has been the steady drumbeat of personal allegations rolled out over the past few months, some admitted to and others staunchly denied.

    Warnock has faced his challenge by emphasizing his willingness to work across the aisle on some issues and occasionally disagreeing with the President on others. Walker, who is backed by Trump, has pulled from the deep well of admiration many Georgians feel for the former college football star.

    Both of these strategies were strong enough to get them into a runoff, but which strategy will work in that arena? The answer could be crucial to determining which party controls the US Senate, depending on the result of other races that have yet to be called. Stay tuned while Georgians enjoy having the two candidates for Thanksgiving dinner and into the holiday season.

    Edward Lindsey is a former Republican member of the Georgia House of Representatives and its majority whip. He is a lawyer in Atlanta focusing on public policy and political law.

    Brianna N. Mack

    In his bid to win a seat in the US Senate, Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan tried to appeal to working class voters who felt abandoned by establishment Democrats. Those blue collar voters – many of them formerly members of his party – overwhelmingly supported Trump in 2016 and again in 2020.

    Unfortunately for Ryan, his strategy failed. He lost to J.D. Vance by a decisive margin, according to election projections.

    It was, perhaps, a predictable ending for a candidate who threw away the traditional approach of rallying your base and instead courted the almost non-existent, moderate Trump voter. And it’s a shame. Had Ryan won, Ohio would have had two Democratic senators. The last time that happened was almost 30 years ago, when Howard Metzenbaum and John Glenn represented our state.

    But in wooing Republicans and right-leaning moderates, Ryan abandoned many of Ohio’s left-leaning Democrats who brought him to the dance.

    That approach was perhaps most evident in his ads. In a campaign spot in which he is shown tossing a football at various computer screens showing messages he disapproves of, he hurls the ball at one emblazoned with the words “Defund the Police” and dismisses what he disdainfully calls “the culture wars.”

    Another ad showed Ryan, gun in hand, hitting his mark at target practice, as the words “Not too bad for a Democrat” appear on the screen. To imply you’re pro-gun rights when majority of Americans support gun control legislation – and when your party explicitly embraces a pro-gun control stance is bewildering. Ryan’s ads on the economy began to parrot the anti-China rhetoric taken up by Republicans. And when President Joe Biden announced his student debt plan in an effort to invigorate the Democratic bringing economic relief to millions of millennial voters, Ryan opposed the move.

    As a Black woman living in a metropolitan area, I would have liked to see him reach out to communities of color, perhaps by making an appearance with African American members of Ohio’s congressional delegation Rep. Joyce Beatty or Rep. Shontel Brown. But I would have settled for one ad addressing the economic or social concerns of people who don’t live in the Rust Belt.

    Ryan might have won if he’d gotten the kind of robust backing from his own party that Vance got from his – and if he’d courted his Democratic base.

    Brianna N. Mack is an assistant professor of politics and government at Ohio Wesleyan University whose coursework is centered on American political behavior. Her research interests are the political behavior of racial and ethnic minorities. She tweets at @Mack_Musings.

    James Wigderson

    Wisconsin remains as split as ever with Democratic Gov. Tony Evers surviving a challenge from businessman Tim Michels and Republican Sen. Ron Johnson barely holding off a challenge from Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes.

    In late February, Johnson, who Democrats hoped might be a beatable incumbent, was viewed favorably by only 33% of Wisconsin’s voters, according to the Marquette University Law School poll. He was viewed unfavorably by 45% of the electorate with 21% saying they didn’t know what to think of him or hadn’t heard enough about him. He finished the election cycle still seen unfavorably by 46% with 43% of the voters holding a favorable view of him.

    However, Democrats decided to run possibly the worst candidate if they wanted to win against Johnson. At one point in August, the relatively unknown Barnes actually led Johnson by 7%. But familiarity with Barnes didn’t help him. Crime was the third most concerning issue for Wisconsin voters this election cycle, according to the Marquette University Law School poll, and Johnson’s campaign successfully attacked Barnes for statements in support of decreasing or redirecting police funding and for reducing the prison population. In the end, Johnson came out victorious.

    So, with Republicans winning in the Senate, what saved Evers in the gubernatorial race? Perhaps it was women voters.

    The overturning of Roe v. Wade meant Wisconsin’s abortion ban from 1849 went back into effect. Michels supported the no-exceptions law but then flip-flopped and said he could support exceptions for rape and incest. Johnson, for his part, successfully deflected the issue by saying he wanted Wisconsin’s abortion law to go to referendum.

    Another issue that may have soured women voters on Michels was the allegation of a culture of sexual harassment within his company. Evers’ campaign unsurprisingly jumped at the opportunity to argue that “the culture comes from the top.” (In response to the allegations against his company, Michel said: “These unproven allegations do not reflect the training and culture at Michels Corporation. Harassment in the workplace should not be condoned, nor tolerated, nor was it under Michels Corporation leadership.”) Michels’ divisive primary fight against former Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch also didn’t help his appeal to women voters, especially in Kleefisch’s home county of Waukesha, formerly a key to a Republican victory in Wisconsin.

    If Republicans are going to win in 2024, they need to figure out how to attract the support of suburban women.

    James Wigderson is the former editor of RightWisconsin.com, a conservative-leaning news website, and the author of a twice-weekly newsletter, “Life, Under Construction.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Amazon debuts new shopping portal for customers on government assistance | CNN Business

    Amazon debuts new shopping portal for customers on government assistance | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    Amazon on Monday launched a new shopping portal called Amazon Access that is designed for shoppers receiving government assistance.

    The shopfront features SNAP EBT on Amazon, information about the Amazon Layaway program that all shoppers can use to pay for their orders over time and spotlights discounts and coupons for any customer on essential grocery items.

    Amazon already offers some services for low-income customers, such as discounted Amazon Prime membership. It also accepts Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP benefits for groceries purchased through Amazon Grocery, Amazon Fresh and Whole Foods. The company said the new portal is meant to be a centralized hub that puts these individual benefits all in one place.

    “Given the tough economic climate with many facing rising costs on essential needs, we want our customers to know about all the accessible offerings available on Amazon, no matter their circumstances,” said Nancy Dalton, head of community partnerships for Amazon Access.

    Amazon

    (AMZN)     also announced it has renamed its discounted Prime membership to Prime Access. Eligible customers can sign up for the service on Amazon

    (AMZN)     Access.

    Neil Saunders, retail analyst and managing director at GlobalData Retail, said the new portal could be useful for lower-income shoppers.

    “It is something positive Amazon can point to, which shows it is helping hard-pressed consumers during a more difficult economic period,” said Saunders, adding that Amazon “should be able to generate some incremental sales out of consolidating the benefits into a new shopfront.”

    At the same time, he didn’t think Amazon Access would help boost Prime membership numbers significantly.

    “Amazon sees this as a way of growing Prime at a time when it is near to saturation in the US, as there are still many lower income consumers who do not have access to the program,” said Saunders. Former Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos said in an April 2021 letter to shareholders that the company has more than 200 million Prime members worldwide.

    Earlier this year, Amazon said the price of its annual Prime subscriptions would increase from $119 to $139 per year in the United States and its monthly subscription would also increase from $12.99 to $14.99.

    The company said it was increasing the cost because of “expanded Prime membership benefits,” such as added Prime Video content and expanded free same-day shipping, as well to compensate for the rising costs of labor and transportation in its distribution network.

    –CNN’s Clare Duffy contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link