The Bernie Sanders campaign, which I’ve critically supported, has now over-reached in a way that makes apparent what was wrong with it all along. And it has reached a moment of truth that will determine whether it will be a long-lasting force that changes our politics for the better or a momentary explosion of energy that leaves behind far less than it should—or even damages our country. Continue reading
So Will Bunch, the Philadelphia Inquirer columnist has burned his Democratic Party registration card because, among other reason “the Democratic Party leadership is far too beholden to Wall Street and other corporate interests to do the real hard work of helping America’s middle class back on its feet.” Leaving aside just how dubious that and his other claims are, how we should look at Bunch’s act? Maybe it’s because my deepest political aspirations are so radical—and so far from anything anyone who is running for or holding office actually says or acts on—but the notion that being a “registered Democrat” is a reflection of my principles or an expression of my ideals or a matter of conscience strikes me as completely and utterly bizarre. And thus so does quitting the party. I’m a Democrat not because the party reflects my ultimate ideals, aspirations, or principles but because in addition to… Continue reading
Originally appeared on the Third and State blog, on May 11, 2016. Something new and unusual happened in Harrisburg today. Senators Art Haywood, Vincent Hughes and Jay Costa put forward an idea that actually could help resolve the pressing fiscal cliff we face this year, and at the same time could make our tax system more progressive. Despite partisan differences, three goals are more or less shared by everyone in Harrisburg. While their top priority may differ, for the most part, legislators all say they want: 1. to close the $1.8 billion structural deficit; 2. to spend more on education; 3. and to put no additional tax burden on low- and middle-income taxpayers. Yet no one has presented a plan to accomplish this feat. In an election year, legislators will say that they are not willing to raise the income tax or sales tax – which could generate the necessary… Continue reading
Here is how the “Hillary is a Republican” game is played and why it so absurd. (h/t Nick Alpers whose post got me started and from which I borrowed much of Step One.) Step one: Ignore all the ways that Hillary Clinton breaks with proposals that almost all Republicans support but that are anathema to Democrats: repealing Dodd-Frank; repealing the ACA; block granting Medicaid; turning Medicare into a voucher program; cutting food stamps by 60% and instituting a work requirement to get them; overturning Roe, banning abortion and opposing women’s rights across the board; destroying unions and all workers’ rights; freezing or even eliminating the federal minimum wage; privatizing social security; denying the reality of global warming and opposing cap and trade, a carbon tax, and President Obama’s clean energy plan, instituting Voter ID; reversing pretty much all civil rights legislation; overturning Obergefell and eliminating all protection for the the… Continue reading
Originally published as Those feeling brunt of soda tax will also feel benefits, Philadelphia Daily News, April 19, 2016 THE SUGARY-DRINK tax proposed by Mayor Kenney, also known as the “soda tax,” is controversial because it takes a greater share of the income from poor families than rich ones. And since we at the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center are fundamentally committed to economic justice, we are always inclined to be suspicious of taxes that do that. So it may come as a surprise that we have concluded, overall, that the sugary-drink tax proposed by the mayor is a good idea. Though the costs fall more heavily on those with low incomes, for two reasons, more of the benefit of the tax will go to low-income Philadelphians, as well. The first benefit of the tax flows from how the new revenue will be spent – on pre-K education, community schools, and… Continue reading
The tax on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) proposed by Mayor Kenney, also known as the “soda tax,” is controversial mainly because, like other sales taxes, it takes a greater share of the income of poor families than rich ones. However, while the costs of the soda tax fall more heavily on those with low incomes, more of the benefit of the tax will go to low-income Philadelphians. This report examines those benefits. Click here to read full-screen or print. Continue reading
A diverse coalition of groups from across the state, including education advocates, community service organizations, faith-based groups, environmental groups and labor organizations launched the “Pennsylvania’s Choice” campaign today to bring attention to the devastating consequences of budget cuts across the commonwealth and to advocate for a Pennsylvania budget that best serves the people. If Pennsylvania continues to enact unbalanced state budgets, the commonwealth will run a deficit that grows every year. Without new tax revenues, Pennsylvania will not be able to maintain the needed funding for education, human services, the environment, or community and economic development. “Pennsylvania’s Choice” partners will be organizing in areas across the state, bringing together community members to make clear to elected officials that, if the state cannot secure new revenues, these communities will face devastating cutbacks to programs in these and other areas that are critical to Pennsylvanians every single day. Utilizing earned media events,… Continue reading
Originally published at Third and State, April 4, 2016 It appears that some elements in the Republican Party of Pennsylvania have one and only one goal – to not raise taxes. It doesn’t matter if spending in our classrooms, and especially in the classrooms in our lowest income communities, have not recovered from the Corbett cuts of 2011-12; they won’t raise taxes. It doesn’t matter if waiting lists for mental health and intellectual disability services grow; they won’t raise taxes. It doesn’t matter if tuition keeps rising for our colleges and universities. It doesn’t matter if the budget is “balanced” with smoke and mirrors; they won’t raise taxes. It doesn’t matter if the ratings agencies can see through the smoke and mirrors and plan to downgrade our credit again; they won’t raise taxes. And now that all the special funds have been raided, all the bills have been put off… Continue reading
Originally published at Third and State March 31 So what difference does a budget actually make? Why should we care that we wound up with the Republican budget for this year (HB 1801), rather than the bi-partisan budget agreed to in December 2015 (SB 1073), let alone the budget Governor Wolf proposed in March 2015? The difference for the education of our kids is found in this first figure above. The $846 million cut from classrooms in 2011-2012 has never fully been restored. And because more funding was cut and less funding restored in the districts that have a higher poverty than a lower poverty rate, state spending per student in those districts remains substantially behind what it was in 2010-11. We call the difference between what was spent per student in 2010-11 and what is spent today the “funding gap.” The bi-partisan budget – the one agreed to by Governor… Continue reading
Governor Wolf decided yesterday to allow the latest Republican budget to become law. We were hoping he would veto it. But we understand why, given the intransigence of the extremists in the PA General Assembly, he decided to bring this round to a close, keep schools open this year, and continue the fight for fair and equitable funding for education and human services to enact next year’s budget. We will join him in that and subsequent rounds. But as this one closes, we should be honest about what we lost and congratulate those who won. So, if you believe that natural gas drillers should not pay another cent to the government, even if that means we never restore the Corbett cuts to education funding and human services, congratulations — you won yesterday. If you don’t care that schools in rich districts in Pennsylvania spend 33% more per child than schools… Continue reading