Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.) conducts a news conference outside the Capitol to reintroduce the Universal Child Care and Early Learning Act on Tuesday, April 27, 2021. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Oct 17, 2021
Democratic Rep. Mondaire Jones on Sunday criticized efforts to include means-testing requirements on programs in his party's reconciliation package as an approach that is not cost-effective and that could exclude those most in need.
The vocal opposition to means-testing from Jones and other progressive Democrats came amid a push by conservative Democrats including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to pare back the climate and safety net package by imposing income limits on proposals like Medicare expansion.
\u201cLimiting the social safety net programs proposed in the #BuildBackBetterAct according to income level \u201csounds good in theory\u201d says @RepMondaire, \u201cbut in practice... we know that it\u2019s overly burdensome for the neediest Americans\u201d. #Velshi\u201d— Ali Velshi (@Ali Velshi) 1634488777
"When you force people to prove that they qualify for a social program," Jones (D-N.Y.) told MSNBC's Ali Velshi, "you have to create processes and an entire administration to then verify eligibility."
"We know that that is overly burdensome for the neediest Americans, people who... can't obtain the documentation they need," he said.
A further problem, Jones continued, is that people "may be intimidated by the countless pages that they have to complete in many instances--in many instances complex pages."
"We know that universal programs are popular," he said. "There's a reason why Social Security and Medicare have withstood the test of time despite the best efforts by Republicans to roll those programs back."
Jones echoed some of the arguments against means-testing he made in a Washington Post joint op-ed last week with Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.).
"For [President Joe] Biden's agenda to meet its potential, we must heed the lessons of the past," Jones and Porter wrote. "That means making our investments universal."
"We can't, as some have insisted, weaken the proposals by 'means-testing' them: restricting benefits only to those who meet arbitrary income requirements and who have the ability to prove they do."
In that joint op-ed, as well as in his interview with Velshi, Jones pointed to 2011 research from the Center for Economic and Policy Research that found "meanstesting is not an effective route for reducing the cost of Social Security" and could in fact raise the costs of the program.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Democratic Rep. Mondaire Jones on Sunday criticized efforts to include means-testing requirements on programs in his party's reconciliation package as an approach that is not cost-effective and that could exclude those most in need.
The vocal opposition to means-testing from Jones and other progressive Democrats came amid a push by conservative Democrats including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to pare back the climate and safety net package by imposing income limits on proposals like Medicare expansion.
\u201cLimiting the social safety net programs proposed in the #BuildBackBetterAct according to income level \u201csounds good in theory\u201d says @RepMondaire, \u201cbut in practice... we know that it\u2019s overly burdensome for the neediest Americans\u201d. #Velshi\u201d— Ali Velshi (@Ali Velshi) 1634488777
"When you force people to prove that they qualify for a social program," Jones (D-N.Y.) told MSNBC's Ali Velshi, "you have to create processes and an entire administration to then verify eligibility."
"We know that that is overly burdensome for the neediest Americans, people who... can't obtain the documentation they need," he said.
A further problem, Jones continued, is that people "may be intimidated by the countless pages that they have to complete in many instances--in many instances complex pages."
"We know that universal programs are popular," he said. "There's a reason why Social Security and Medicare have withstood the test of time despite the best efforts by Republicans to roll those programs back."
Jones echoed some of the arguments against means-testing he made in a Washington Post joint op-ed last week with Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.).
"For [President Joe] Biden's agenda to meet its potential, we must heed the lessons of the past," Jones and Porter wrote. "That means making our investments universal."
"We can't, as some have insisted, weaken the proposals by 'means-testing' them: restricting benefits only to those who meet arbitrary income requirements and who have the ability to prove they do."
In that joint op-ed, as well as in his interview with Velshi, Jones pointed to 2011 research from the Center for Economic and Policy Research that found "meanstesting is not an effective route for reducing the cost of Social Security" and could in fact raise the costs of the program.
From Your Site Articles
Democratic Rep. Mondaire Jones on Sunday criticized efforts to include means-testing requirements on programs in his party's reconciliation package as an approach that is not cost-effective and that could exclude those most in need.
The vocal opposition to means-testing from Jones and other progressive Democrats came amid a push by conservative Democrats including Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia to pare back the climate and safety net package by imposing income limits on proposals like Medicare expansion.
\u201cLimiting the social safety net programs proposed in the #BuildBackBetterAct according to income level \u201csounds good in theory\u201d says @RepMondaire, \u201cbut in practice... we know that it\u2019s overly burdensome for the neediest Americans\u201d. #Velshi\u201d— Ali Velshi (@Ali Velshi) 1634488777
"When you force people to prove that they qualify for a social program," Jones (D-N.Y.) told MSNBC's Ali Velshi, "you have to create processes and an entire administration to then verify eligibility."
"We know that that is overly burdensome for the neediest Americans, people who... can't obtain the documentation they need," he said.
A further problem, Jones continued, is that people "may be intimidated by the countless pages that they have to complete in many instances--in many instances complex pages."
"We know that universal programs are popular," he said. "There's a reason why Social Security and Medicare have withstood the test of time despite the best efforts by Republicans to roll those programs back."
Jones echoed some of the arguments against means-testing he made in a Washington Post joint op-ed last week with Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.).
"For [President Joe] Biden's agenda to meet its potential, we must heed the lessons of the past," Jones and Porter wrote. "That means making our investments universal."
"We can't, as some have insisted, weaken the proposals by 'means-testing' them: restricting benefits only to those who meet arbitrary income requirements and who have the ability to prove they do."
In that joint op-ed, as well as in his interview with Velshi, Jones pointed to 2011 research from the Center for Economic and Policy Research that found "meanstesting is not an effective route for reducing the cost of Social Security" and could in fact raise the costs of the program.
From Your Site Articles
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.