Report

Democracy Corp/CAF Survey on the House Republican Budget

Terrance Heath — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:45:01 -0400

Paul Ryan To Seniors: "Drop Dead"

A new Democracy Corps/Campaign for America's Future survey on House Republican budget proposal shows Americans are skeptical of Republicans in Congress and the Tea Party movement, and cautious about the deficit reduction plan.

Our data shows that proposals to dismantle Medicare in the 2012 House Republican budget could sink the political futures of those who for it. When the budget is described, using the language of its chief author, support collapses to 36 percent. The proposed cuts to Medicare raise concerns for nearly two-thirds of respondents.

Here are the key findings from the survey:

Just 38 percent of voters say they approve of House Republicans. After the tumultuous debate over the 2011 budget and the threatened government shutdown, a shocking 55 percent disapprove.
Less than half of the public supports the House Republican budget — described simply as a “budget for the next 10 years that they say will cut 6.2 trillion dollars from the federal budget.”
When the budget is described using Ryan's own language, support drops to 36 percent. A large majority of 56 percent oppose it, 42 percent strongly. Among seniors, support drops to just 32 percent, with 57 percent opposed. Independent support drops to 43 percent.
Cuts to Medicare raise concerns for nearly two-thirds of respondents; raising serious doubts for 66 percent, and very serious doubts for 40 percent.

America: A Center-Left Nation

Isaiah J. Poole — Tue, 18 May 2010 12:54:32 -0400

Barack Obama promised change during his White House campaign last year and ran on a distinctly liberal platform of comprehensive health care reform, investing in new energy and good jobs, ending the Bush‐era tax cuts for the very wealthy, and ending the war in Iraq. Obama won more votes than any other candidate in American history, and his victory capped off several years’ worth of sweeping Democratic electoral wins.

Yet almost within hours of Obama’s victory, portions of the political press corps insisted America remained firmly planted on the “center‐right” of the political spectrum.

From the press’ perspective, the broad Democratic wins last November did not signify a sea change in American politics, which was how the media treated big Republican wins in 1980 and 1994. Instead, the Democratic wins last year unfolded in spite of voters’ natural conservative leanings.

It made sense for partisan conservatives, eager to downplay their losses, to push the center‐right claim in the wake of November’s stinging defeats. (Karl Rove, appearing on Fox News the day after Obama’s win: “Barack Obama understands this is a center‐right country.”) It’s misleading, though, for the news media to echo that spin, since it’s not factually sound. Still, months into Obama’s first term, the center‐right claim enjoyed widespread media acceptance.

The center‐right trend is a familiar one. For years, the Beltway press has consistently announced, in spite of widespread issue‐based polling data that proved otherwise, that America leans center‐right, while implying that Democrats are electorally successful only if they’re able to camouflage whatever liberal impulses they might have. ʺThese Democrats that were elected last night are conservative Democrats,ʺ said CBS’ Bob Schieffer the day after they scored big wins in the 2006 midterm elections.

It wasn’t true, though. A Media Matters survey of the 30 newly elected House Democrats who took Republican seats in 2006 found that they advocated liberal positions, such as raising the minimum wage, changing course in Iraq, funding embryonic stem cell research, and opposing any effort to privatize Social Security.

The strong job approval ratings that Obama has posted during his first months in office, during a period when he unveiled an often proactive and progressive agenda, undercut the claim that the country is center‐ right. In fact, conservative commentators, particularly those on Fox News, have portrayed Obama as so liberal that his activist agenda bordered on socialist or even Marxist. Yet according to Gallup polling, Obama’s approval ratings for this first 100 days in office were higher than those of any president since Ronald Reagan and higher than seven of the last eight presidents at the 100‐day mark. It doesn’t seem likely that an entrenched center‐right nation would reward such a liberal president with historically high job‐ approval ratings. However, a centrist or center‐left nation would.

And all indications today are that America is becoming just that. Polling data regarding a wide range of issues, including the role of big business, health care reform, gay marriage, stimulus spending, international trade, and Social Security, indicate that Americans are increasingly receptive to and comfortable with a progressive agenda.

Eating Dangerously

Terrance Heath — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 21:31:26 -0400

Globalization and the Safety of the American Consumer

Tomatoes are just the beginning. As the U.S. imports more of its food from overseas, it is reducing its ability to ensure the safety and quality of these foreign foods. Conflicting government agency oversight, inefficient food inspections, and lax food safety standards in exporting countries has compromised the safety of American food imports.

Our report, “Eating Dangerously: The Failure of the American Food Import Safety System,” documents the government’s ineffectiveness in regulating increasing numbers of food imports. Agricultural imports have increased by 78 percent since 1973 while the number of inspections decreased 78 percent over the same period of time. Foreign food producers are not held to American food safety standards. A complex government bureaucracy, inadequate inspections, and motley safety standards place consumers at risk. Our report concludes that the American food safety system is in desperate need of reform; the government must be held responsible for ensuring the safety of imported foods.

Download the report (PDF)

Ensuring Food Safety

Our report calls for several areas where leadership is needed:

The FDA needs adequate funding and a more efficient food safety inspection system to solve problems related to overlapping agency oversight of food imports, lax food inspections, and inconsistent foreign food safety standards.
Corporations should be held responsible for the food products they sell, regardless of where they are made.
When the FDA issues a recall, it should be mandatory, not voluntary.
With increasing globalization, additional attention to safety and quality control issues is needed before signing the next generation of NAFTA-style trade agreements. Future trade agreements must ensure the food safety that American demand and expect.

High Imports, Low Regulation

These two charts show the government’s increasing failure to protect against potentially harmful food imports. The number of food inspections to guard against potentially tainted products has not kept up with dramatic growth of imports. FDA food inspections have been flat for nearly 20 years while imports have nearly tripled over the same time period (Figure 1). In addition, government inspections per dollar of imports dropped by 73 percent between 1991 and 2006 (Figure 2).

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

The Stress Test

Terrance Heath — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:38:49 -0400

The headlines scream bad news about the economy: Prices are high and rising; wages are not keeping up. Homes foreclose at a record pace. Gas prices are at record highs. While economists and politicians debate whether or not we’re technically in a recession, most Americans feel we’ve been in a recession for years. People know in their guts that something is wrong.

To show how the economy affects working families, The Campaign for America’s Future has designed an economic stress test. Assessing the condition of jobs, housing, health care, and household costs on a state-by-state basis over time, the CAF stress test illustrates the troubles families face and shows the way to solutions.

"The Stress Test" shows trouble across the board. It shows flat wages and rising costs. It shows more people without health insurance and the neglect of such established public responsibilities as state support for college education. It demonstrates overall economic mismanagement and it quantifies the general level of stress in this historically optimistic country.

Read the full report (PDF) | State stress test statistics

What "The Stress Test" Measures

Jobs

Unemployment rates and changes in unemployment rates (March 2000-March 2008)
Changes in the number of goods-producing and service-providing jobs (March 2000-March 2008)
Changes in available construction jobs (March 2000-2008)
Changes in available manufacturing jobs (March 2000-2008)
Changes in average weekly wage (Q3 2001-Q3 2007)

Costs and quality of life

People without health insurance, per 1,000 residents; rate and change over time; overall and employer-based (2000-2006)
Population spending 25 percent of pre-tax income on health care; rate and change (2000-2008)
Public college tuition as a percentage of income; rate and change over time (2000-2001 – 2006-2007)
Bankruptcy, per capita; rate and change over time (2006-2007)
Foreclosures, per capita (2007)
Average price of gas, change over time(January 2000-February 2008)

The Solutions

To relieve this economic stress, this report shows, we need a new economic strategy. We need to stop using tax dollars to bail out Wall Street bankers and start using public money to benefit the struggling middle class. This means the creation of new, good jobs here at home and a strategy for retaining knowledge and technology in America. We need to expand public investment in infrastructure as well as human capital in order to ensure the safety and well-being of all Americans. This includes investment in roads, bridges, education and health care. These reforms are the foundation for a new economy in which all Americans benefit.

The elements of the new direction include:

New Energy for America
We should launch a concerted drive for energy independence, and put people to work building a green economy.

A National Strategy in the Global Economy
We need a clear strategy for our nation in the global economy. The first step out of the hole we are in is to stop digging. No more NAFTAs, no more trade accords written by and for multinational corporations and banks.

Invest in People and Basics that Work
We need to ensure our children have access to the best education in the world: universal pre-kindergarten, smaller classes in earlier grades, challenging after-school programs, and affordable college or advanced training. Invest in repairing roads and bridges, sewage systems and school buildings, ensuring that the jobs created are good jobs.

Health Care for All
We need to revive the American Dream and help working families with the basics. We should start with health care reform, providing for all a guaranteed choice of health care, just as members of Congress have. Provide every business and individual with the option of either keeping their current private plan, if they like it, or the ability to buy into a high-quality public plan.

Sharing Prosperity
We need to correct the imbalance between the top floor and the shop floor to ensure that profits and productivity are widely shared. Raise the floor – increase the minimum wage, guarantee workers paid sick days and family leave. Empower workers to organize, pass the Employee Free Choice Act, turn the National Labor Relations Board back into a watchdog for workers. Pass comprehensive immigration reform, gain control of our borders and enforce fair labor standards so employers can’t exploit undocumented workers.

Americans have a right to know how we can build a sustainable economy. Presidential candidates need to address the issues that are relevant to working Americans, refocusing national attention from the wants of Wall Street to the needs of Main Street. We can begin to relieve Americans’ economic stress by challenging candidates and elected officials to support and promote real solutions to real economic problems.

Stress Test State Reports

See the level of economic stress in your state.

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky

Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota

Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

The Decline of Conservatism

OurFuture.org Staff — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:39:11 -0400

Progressives Rising

Robert Borosage — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:52:36 -0400

The 2008 election has the potential to be not simply one of change, as conventional wisdom suggests, but of sea-change, one that marks the end of the conservative era that has dominated our politics over the past three decades and the beginning of a new era of progressive reform. This report details the signs of the emergence of that era, and cautions that progressives will not only have to continue to drive the debate in the election season, but will also have to define, expand and claim the mandate after the election.

Block & Blame

Ian Mishalove — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 13:37:53 -0500

On Tuesday, December 18, 2007, conservatives in the U.S. Senate set a modern-day record for obstruction. They forced the 62nd cloture vote to move beyond a filibuster. The previous record was 61 cloture votes, reached during the 107th Congress in 2002. The conservatives of 2007 surpassed that mark, in only the first session of the 110th.

Read the full report »

The Progressive Majority

tjackson — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:08:04 -0500

For anyone interested in where the American public really stands on the big issues that distinguish progressives from conservatives – including the issues at the forefront of today’s political debates – “The Progressive Majority: Why a Conservative America Is a Myth” offers hard facts and analysis based on decades of data from some of the nation’s most respected and nonpartisan public opinion researchers. This is the evidence that political leaders have a mandate to pursue bold, progressive policies.

This report by the Campaign for America’s Future and Media Matters for America shows that in study after study, solid majorities of Americans take progressive stands on a full spectrum of issues, from bread-and-butter economics to the so-called “values” issues where conservatives claim preeminence.

Read the Full Report

(Adobe PDF)

Blog Commentary

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS

On Health Care: 69 percent of Americans think it is the responsibility of the federal government to make sure all Americans have access to health coverage; 76 percent find access to health care more important than maintaining the Bush tax cuts; three in five would be willing to have their own taxes increased to achieve universal coverage.

On Energy Policy: 52 percent of Americans believe "the best way for the U.S. to reduce its reliance on foreign oil" is to "have the government invest in alternative energy sources"; 64 percent are willing to pay a higher energy tax to pay for renewable energy research; 68 percent of the public thinks U.S. energy policy is better solved by conservation than production.

On the Economy: 77 percent of Americans believe Congress should increase the minimum wage; 66 percent believe "upper-income people" pay too little in taxes; 53 percent feel the Bush administration's tax cuts have failed because they have increased the deficit and caused cuts in government programs.

On Government's Role: 69 percent of Americans believe the government "should care for those who can't care for themselves." Twice as many people (43 percent to 20 percent) want "government to provide many more services even if it means an increase in spending" as want government to provide fewer services "in order to reduce spending."

On Immigration: 62 percent of Americans believe undocumented immigrants should be given a chance to "keep their jobs and eventually apply for legal status." 49 percent believe the best way to reduce illegal immigration from Mexico is to penalize employers, not more border control.