(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
Democrats’ response to President Donald Trump’s crafty promise to deliver five large into every American’s hot little hands has been to paint it as shady, a bribe, even illegal. But they are confusing the politician with the policy. Just because Trump is the one to propose this generous stimulus check doesn’t make it a bad idea. Rather than dismissing the idea or coloring it with doubt, Democrats need to hop on board: Draw up a bipartisan plan to send that $5,000, no matter who wins.
There is only one reason for the Democrats to not join forces with Trump on this issue, and that’s they risk catching some of Trump’s ick. Trump is so superbly toxic that he has managed to sour people on free money. According to polling from Strength in Numbers:
53% of adults said they supported [the checks] while 35% opposed them, a net of +18. … When we described the checks as he actually offered them [on the condition that Republicans retain control of Congress] voters were opposed, at 35% support and 54% oppose, net −18.
These checks are no more bribery than any campaign promise or beneficial government proposal: “In order to enact X law and fund it for Y amount, I need my party to win both chambers” is as anodyne appeal as any politician could make. When Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) says Trump “now wants to buy your vote with $5,000 in taxpayer-funded blood money,” one wonders if Newsom would describe spending on Medicare or national parks the same way. (Sure you can visit Yosemite, if you don’t mind benefiting from taxpayer-funded blood money!)
Democrats’ accusatory barbs stem from the assumption that Americans already conceive of Trump as corrupt and dishonest, and his bald bid for votes is another chance to drive that point home. But Democrats do not actually need to make that case. Initial polling on the idea shows that most Americans see right through the president’s motives and intentions. From Strength in Numbers:
62% say Trump made the promise mainly to win votes in November, and only 13% think he genuinely intends to send the money. Moreover, 71% of adults say it is inappropriate for a president to promise government payments that depend on his party winning an election, including 53% of Republicans. Only about a quarter think the checks would actually go out even if Republicans win.
Why co-sign a measure so freighted with misgivings? Because Democrats can take control of the narrative.
They can campaign on a small number, even and then push Trump to follow through no matter who wins. After all, Trump has accidentally backed into supporting a radically progressive cause: a form of universal basic income delivering an influx of cash with no means-testing or judgment attached. Maybe some Americans would see this money as a chance to take a vacation, but even a fraction of what Trump is pretending to offer would be life-changing for many, including the 40% of us that have less than $1,000 in emergency funds.
So shift course immediately. Say you’ve thought about it, and you’re in. Propose that talks begin on how to make it happen. Get yourself on Fox News and tell them how much you like the idea. Trump has tried to hand-wave questions about issuing the payments now, and warned with Democratic victories in the fall, “all of that money will be thrown out. If the Democrats get in, they won’t be able to pay it.” What’s he talking about? I don’t know! Hakeem Jeffries, tell him you want to address his concerns.
Aim to create a situation where there is nothing standing in the way of those checks except the President himself.
——
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.
New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!
Comments
↓ Scroll down for comments ↓