The November mid-term elections in the United States will be vital for the future of the Democratic Party, as it not only seeks to retain its control of the Senate, but possibly reclaim the House of Representatives after four years under Republican control.
If it wishes to do so, the Democrats must be clear in what it stands for in social policy, and carry out a programme of major liberal reform that fulfils the promises of hope and change that Barack Obama evoked amongst so many people on his road to the presidency back in 2008.
In social policy, a Democratic Congress should amend the country’s social security system by introducing new social benefits for families and employees.
A universal child benefit scheme could help to tackle poverty, while a universal system of child care (a policy proposal passed by Congress way back in 1971 but vetoed by then-president Richard Nixon, and one which the Democrats pledged to introduce in 1992) would make it easier for parents to meet family and work commitments.
Statutory entitlement to paid holidays along European lines should be enshrined in law, while paid sick leave (which last year covered only 62% of employees) should be made mandatory for the entire workforce, along with paid parental leave for all mothers and fathers.
No longer would the United States be one of the few countries in the world not to provide paid leave to mothers, despite its immense wealth.
A Democratic Congress should also work towards implementing the remainder of Obama’s liberal policy agenda during his last two years in office. This includes the realisation of such bold promises as the exemption of all seniors living on less than $50,000 a year from paying income tax, the indexation and raising of the federal minimum wage to $9.50 an hour, and the requirement of employers to provide 7 days of annual paid sick leave.
In addition, the Democrats could reintroduce blocked initiatives such as the Paycheck Fairness Act (aimed at reducing the pervasive pay gap between men and women), the Buffett Rule (which, supported by investor Warren Buffett, seeks to introduce a minimum tax for millionaires), and a bill to expand education and healthcare programmes for veterans.
According to Obama, at least 500 bills have been blocked by the Republican opposition since 2007, highlighting the difficulties of legislative bipartisanship in contemporary American politics and further demonstrating the need for a liberal majority in Congress.
There exists, therefore, the basis for a strong liberal programme for the Democrats in Congress to unite behind and implement in a wake of a potential victory in the November elections. The implementation of such a programme would not only change America for the better, but also demonstrate the importance of progressive liberalism as a force for innovative change. For progressive liberals in the United States, the return of the long-fabled “Liberal Hour,” a time of great liberal reform, may be just around the corner.
* Vittorio Trevitt has written for Respublica, Democratic Audit, Catch 21, Fabian Society and Compass. He has also done voluntary work for the Labour Party, including campaigning on behalf of local candidates, carrying out research for speeches, and writing articles to raise awareness of important social issues. He believes in British socialists and liberals working together to achieve progressive ends, united by their commitment to equality, freedom, and justice.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Ken Farnes: The forgotten England fast bowler who died in WWII
The Hecklers: a great documentary about the 1966 election
Plaid Cymru take another step into the twilight zone
Tim Rogers
Jana
David Raw
9 Comments
Unfortunately, I thought this was a bad article. It comes across as a big shopping list, funded entirely by the Buffet Tax, which even if it would work, wouldn’t touch the US deficit.
If there was a liberal left hour, it would just be followed by a conservative right hour. People should focus on sustainability, not hours.
I think there is a chance for more moderate government, or even broad economic liberalism, but the old ideologies of left and right are basically obsolete.
I don’t think the US middle class would support a liberal left government. Even liberal broadsheets such as the Washington Post have been critical of Obama’s foreign policy for broadly being too weak.
I think the United States have one of the best politicians in the world in Hillary Clinton, but unfortunately due to America’s two party (left-right) system she might not win the Democrat nomination, even though Americans broadly want her as president. Liberal Democrats should work towards ensuring UK politics doesn’t fall back into this broken model.
Regards
@ ES – “Unfortunately, I thought this was a bad article.”
Unfortunately, i agree.
“Statutory entitlement to paid holidays along European lines should be enshrined in law,”
Why [should] they? Are you american? Is it for you to say how [they] should organise [their] society?
Perhaps you can understand how an american might view this; as a call to make america as uncompetitive as its european neighbour.
“No longer would the United States be one of the few countries in the world not to provide paid leave to mothers, despite its immense wealth.”
Hmmm, perhaps there is a deeper wisdom in that sentence then perhaps the author realises…
Although I would be generally supportive of the social measures mentioned in the article, I think most of us [and our children] would be best served if Congress would pass the new laws included in Obama’s ‘Climate Action Plan’.
As lead author to the National Climate Assessment, Professor Gary Yohe pointed out:
“One of the few places in the US where it looks like climate change is a 50-50 proposition is in the Congressional record. That is problematic.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americas-wakeup-call-climate-change-once-seen-as-issue-for-the-future-has-moved-into-present-9328282.html
I find myself agreeing with the first 3 comments, most of the measures in this “shopping list” sound fair enough in principle but sorting the deficit takes priority. In addition some of the proposals, such as the Minimum Wage, should be for Individual Cities or States rather than at Federal level.
The overall tone of the article seems to be more Social Democratic than Liberal, a bit one-sided perhaps ?
For anyone wondering where I got the information for the article from, these are the sources that I used:
(1.) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1326053/MID-TERM-ELECTIONS-2010-Democrats-lose-House-Republican-tsunami.html
(2.) http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/06/23/that-one-time-america-almost-got-universal-child-care/
(3.) http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29610
(4.) http://www.forbes.com/sites/tanyamohn/2013/08/13/paid-time-off-forget-about-it-a-report-looks-at-how-the-u-s-compares-to-other-countries/
(5.) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/paid-sick-leave-us-workers-_n_3562419.html
(6.) http://fortune.com/2014/05/15/america-comes-in-last-place-on-paid-maternity-leave/
(7.) http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/24/end-income-tax-for-seniors-making-less-than/
(8.) http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-broken/?page=4
(9.) http://change.gov/agenda/family_agenda/
(10.) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26964278
(11.) http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/12/28/1356701/what-could-have-been-the-most-important-bills-blocked-by-republicans-in-2012/
(12.) http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/199480-gop-blocks-veterans-bill
(13.) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2623476/Obama-claims-Republicans-obstructed-500-bills-seven-years.html
(14.) http://www.thursdayreview.com/liberal.html
Hi Vit, I know Obama has suggested some if these, but he would have made sure they were funded by more cuts elsewhere or watered them down. I don’t get the impression that he is a social liberal. The article would have been better if there was more details on how these programs would be funded. 🙂
Vittorio Trevit,
For anyone wondering where I got the information for the article from, these are the sources that I used:
To be honest, you’re better off getting data from academic and government sources, rather than partisan newspapers and blogs. The latter are rather less honest.
I wish the US Democrats all the best in November for the reasons given in the article and given the alternative is so awful. In addition I think the US Democrats should try to do more to reduce inequality which has continued to widen, should stop the drone attacks against countries in which they have not declared war against and have not had permission from the UN, conduct an inquiry into the conduct of the military given their responsibility for conducting torture in Iraq and other places, and including extraordinary rendition, and repeal the so-called patriot act which has impinged on civil liberties. The GOP will do whatever they can to stop them from doing all this but it is important they try all the same.
It would be great if the Democrats won the House, but they’re some way short of that and there is a big incumbency factor. Moreover, mid-term elections tend to go against the President’s party.
I agree with some commenters that the American political system, marvellous though its record of survival and adaptation is, is broken. Money talks unlimited. Decades of mutual gerrymandering to reduce the number of marginal constituencies has helped the two opposing groups to prosper in their bunkers. Forty or fifty years ago a liberal Democratic president could find liberal Republicans to support key measures and a conservative president could find conservative Democrats, but now the whole system works towards deadlock. When rarely one coherent group has a majority in both houses and the presidency, vested interests can spin things out for two years until the problem goes away.
It would be lovely to imagine a new constitutional convention, but the two sides are so far apart, it would need a disaster – and that might in fact drive them further apart.
As for Obama’s foreign policy being weak, he has made some mistakes, but much of the criticism is coming from people who can’t reconcile themselves to the simple truth that the USA is no longer the sole colossus, or even one of two, but moving towards being one of three or four. Even when it was clearly the one real superpower, it couldn’t bend Iraq or Afghanistan to its will.