Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Bipartisan majorities support most of the Inflation Reduction Act

Inflation Reduction Act signing ceremony

President Biden, joined by Democratic members of Congress, signs the Inflation Reduction Act into law during a ceremony in the White House on Tuesday.

Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

On Tuesday, President Biden signed into law the Inflation Reduction Act, a massive alteration to climate change, health care and tax policy. Although the bill passed both chambers without any Republican votes, most of its major provisions have bipartisan backing, according to new data from the University of Maryland.

While Biden and congressional Democrats will claim passage of the IRA as the latest in a string of policy victories for their side, others view this as a win for the American people despite a polarized government.

Over the 20 components studied by PPC and Stanford University's Deliberative Democracy Lab, the vast majority have support among the general public and 13 items garnered backing of both Democrats, Republicans and independents.


“Majorities support 19 of 20 major proposals in the legislation,“ said Steven Kull, director of the school’s Program for Public Consultation, which produced the report. “While there has been grave concern about the state of our democracy, the movement of this bill should give Americans hope that our system can and does work, and that Congress is acting to reflect the will of the people.”

PPC broke the proposals down into four categories: energy and environment, workforce development, taxes and health care. While the concepts tested in public surveys are not a 100 percent match to the final legislation, they are similar enough to provide an indication of people’s stance.

The bulk of the proposals fall into the energy and environment category. Of the 14 items, nine of them had bipartisan support:

  • Tax credits for equipment used to produce clean energy.
  • Tax credits for producing clean energy.
  • Tax credits for small-scale clean energy projects.
  • Tax credits for building energy-efficient residences.
  • Tax credits for energy-saving improvements to homes and commercial buildings.
  • Tax credits for energy-efficient improvements to heating and air conditioning systems.
  • Additional tax credits for improving the energy efficiency of commercial buildings.
  • Tax credits for the production of heavy-duty electric vehicles such as buses.
  • Tax credits for farmers to construct biogas (a type of biofuel) facilities.

Both items under the “workforce development” heading received bipartisan backing:

  • Increased funding for cities and states to train people for clean energy jobs.
  • Tax credits for businesses that offer apprenticeships.

Two of the three health care items were supported by Republicans and Democrats.

  • Allowing Medicare to negotiate some drug prices with pharmaceutical companies.
  • Extending increased Affordable Care Act subsidies for low-income earners.

Only one proposal fell under the taxes category – increasing IRS funding for tax enforcement – and that failed to get a majority of Republicans’ support. (Although it did get the backing of 68 percent of independents, in addition to 88 percent of Democrats.)

And just one area failed to get at least 50 percent from any of the three partisan groups: increasing tax incentives for carbon-producing power plants to store their carbon emissions.

Some want to see the IRA as a launching pad for other legislation.

“While the Inflation Reduction Act passed along party lines, members of both parties should use this as a moment to finally make achieving deficit reduction a prioritized and regular part of the policy making process,” said Mike Murphy, director of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget's FixUS program. “From here, Congress should take this moment as an example, prioritizing deficit reduction as the normal, everyday aspect of governing it ought to be.”

Meanwhile, Erik Olsen, co-founder of the Common Ground Committee, is skeptical that the survey indicates Republican respondents want the entire bill to pass, given Congress’ recent track record in passing legislation with bipartisan support.

“I wouldn’t look at this and say Congress can’t find a way to work together,” he said.

The data from the three health care items came from polls conducted by the Deliberative Democracy Lab. The other 17 items were tested by the PPC.

See the complete breakdown of the survey data.

Read More

For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

Praying outdoors

ImagineGolf/Getty Images

For the Sake of Our Humanity: Humane Theology and America’s Crisis of Civility

The American experiment has been sustained not by flawless execution of its founding ideals but by the moral imagination of people who refused to surrender hope. From abolitionists to suffragists to the foot soldiers of the civil-rights movement, generations have insisted that the Republic live up to its creed. Yet today that hope feels imperiled. Coarsened public discourse, the normalization of cruelty in policy, and the corrosion of democratic trust signal more than political dysfunction—they expose a crisis of meaning.

Naming that crisis is not enough. What we need, I argue, is a recovered ethic of humaneness—a civic imagination rooted in empathy, dignity, and shared responsibility. Eric Liu, through Citizens University and his "Civic Saturday" fellows and gatherings, proposes that democracy requires a "civic religion," a shared set of stories and rituals that remind us who we are and what we owe one another. I find deep resonance between that vision and what I call humane theology. That is, a belief and moral framework that insists public life cannot flourish when empathy is starved.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Myth of Colorblind Fairness

U.S. Supreme Court

Photo by mana5280 on Unsplash

The Myth of Colorblind Fairness

Two years after the Supreme Court banned race-conscious college admissions in Students for Fair Admissions, universities are scrambling to maintain diversity through “race-neutral” alternatives they believe will be inherently fair. New economic research reveals that colorblind policies may systematically create inequality in ways more pervasive than even the notorious “old boy” network.

The “old boy” network, as its name suggests, is nothing new—evoking smoky cigar lounges or golf courses where business ties are formed, careers are launched, and those not invited are left behind. Opportunity reproduces itself, passed down like an inheritance if you belong to the “right” group. The old boy network is not the only example of how a social network can discriminate. In fact, my research shows it may not even be the best one. And how social networks discriminate completely changes the debate about diversity.

Keep ReadingShow less
Rethinking Drug Policy: From Punishment to Empowerment
holding hands
Photo by Priscilla Du Preez 🇨🇦 on Unsplash

Rethinking Drug Policy: From Punishment to Empowerment

America’s drug policy is broken. For decades, we’ve focused primarily on the supply side—interdicting smugglers, prosecuting dealers, and escalating penalties while neglecting the demand side. Individuals who use drugs, more often than not, do so out of desperation, trauma, or addiction. This imbalance has cost lives, strained law enforcement, and failed to stem the tide of overdose deaths.

Fentanyl now kills an estimated 80,000 Americans annually. In response, some leaders have proposed extreme measures, including capital punishment for traffickers. But if we apply that logic consistently, what do we say about tobacco? Cigarette smoking and secondhand smoke kill nearly 480,000 Americans

Keep ReadingShow less
From Gerrymandering to Threats Faith in Democracy and Constitutional Erosion

U.S. Constitution

Douglas Sacha/Getty Images

From Gerrymandering to Threats Faith in Democracy and Constitutional Erosion

Many Americans have lost faith in the basic principles and form of the Constitutional Republic, as set forth by the Founders. People are abandoning Democratic ideals to create systems that multiply offenses against Constitutional safeguards, materializing in book banning, speech-restricting, and recent attempts to enact gerrymandering that dilutes the votes of “political opponents.” This represents Democratic erosion and a trend that endangers Constitutional checks and representative governance.

First, the recent gerrymandering, legal precedent, and founding principles should be reexamined, specifically, around the idea that our Founders did not predict this type of partisan map-drawing.

Keep ReadingShow less