CLICK TO SHARE
Rep. Jamaal Bowman Backs Added Security at Capitol: ‘Threat of White Nationalists is Real’
Alot has happened since I last wrote about Mitt Romney’s plan to create a child allowance — worth $350 a month for kids under six and $250 a month for older kids up to age 17 — while ending some other welfare spending and special-interest tax breaks to pay for it.
The Democrats have gotten close to enacting their own child allowance, which would be in effect for only a year to start but would not be paid for at all. And a debate has exploded within the Right as to whether a child allowance is a pro-family reform to support parents — or rather would restore the welfare system we had before 1996, when an “underclass” of single mothers got by on welfare without working, or at least working on the books.
Each side got a boost this week. Scott Winship of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) released his long-awaited report detailing the evidence that payments such as these could push single parents out of the work force or increase single parenthood. And a new “universal basic income” demonstration project released some preliminary results, finding that no-strings-attached money actually increased work among people who got it.
I’m not going to resolve this debate here, but I would like to briefly review these two documents — and suggest a way forward for right-wingers who are at least open to supporting a child allowance.
If you don't see any comments yet, congrats! You get first comment. Be nice and have fun.
CLICK TO SHARE