Debate: The Future of Family Policy

How conservatives should think about welfare.

By
10

A new bill is making its way through Congress, aiming to expand the existing Child Tax Credit (CTC) policy. As part of a Dispatch debate series, associate editor Luis Parrales moderates a debate between Kevin Corinth of the American Enterprise Institute and Patrick T. Brown of the Ethics and Public Policy Center on the merits of the proposal. What are the tradeoffs of a work requirement? Should the policy be viewed as a form of welfare or tax relief? How do such policies balance the value of parenthood and employment?

Show Notes:
— Kevin Corinth: Let’s Not Turn the Child Tax Credit Into Welfare
— Patrick T. Brown: A Child Tax Credit Compromise for the Real World

What is The Skiff? This is the combined podcast feed of all of the members-only bonus content that The Dispatch produces. Here you’ll find every Dispatch Live episode, the Dispatch Book Club, AMAs with Jonah (and others), the account of Sarah and Steve’s nail-biting wager in High Steaks, and many, many more exclusive, uncut and ad-free surprises: all available in one superfeed to make sure you don’t miss a single episode.

CLICK HERE to get your personal feed.

This content is available exclusively to Dispatch members
Try a membership for full access to every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism.
Start Your Free Trial
Already a paid member? Sign In
By
Comments (10)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Toog

    The federal deficit was around $2 trillion in 2023 or ~6% of GDP, and will rise to ~8% of GDP by 2033 and ~14% by 2053, even at the very low CBO baseline assumption for interest rates. The national debt is already around $200,000 per household, and is skyrocketing. No remotely mainstream conservatives have any plan to address this entirely through spending cuts.

    So providing further net tax relief to the middle class is insane, even if it is bundled with budgetary offsets. Those offsets need to be severed off and flowed directly to the deficit. Plus orders of magnitude more. This is like the moment in Apollo 13 when they are arguing about a bunch of side issues and the guy desperately butts in to say "we have to turn everything off!"

    Now, if somebody has a plan to do the needed huge increases in middle class taxes, along with very painful spending cuts, and within that you want to increase the burden on people with fewer kids at home even more, in order to redistribute that to people with more kids at home, that's possible. But most people have at least some kids at some point in life. You just can't make all of them better off, as much as Congressional Republicans want to peddle the lie that you can.

    Collapse
  2. Bigdonmck

    I got a sad kick out of the argument that a few thousand parents adjusting their finances under the "look back provision" to enhance their share of this welfare benefit "doesn't bother me".
    Well, it bothers me.

    Collapse
  3. Philebus

    If a basic guaranteed income would clean up some of these programs and tax policies, I'd say: "let's have a good hard look". In addition, if more of these programs could be pushed out to the individual states, again you have my ear. We may find better solutions at the state level, rather than a one-size-fits-all federal approach.

    Anyway, just some suggestions for future debates. I'll shut up now.

    Collapse
  4. Jabobward

    Where was the debate? Who was arguing that the CTC should be allowed to expire?

    Collapse
  5. Jabobward

    Who is forcing you to have more children! Why are my taxes paying for you to reproduce? Stop growing the federal government!

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Dave T

      There's a demographic crisis looming -- haven't you been paying attention? It behooves nations to make their futures sustainable.

      Collapse
    2. Bigdonmck

      Agreed! If you cannot afford children, do not have them.

      Collapse
      1. Philebus

        What do you mean by afford? My wife and I put two through private colleges, and it was a ballbuster, but we made it stick - in the grand scheme it wasn't affordable - we went through the bills every month and adjusted as we could - it was never an issue between us. Hopes and dreams are good reason to sacrifice, but for some it's not a matter of priorities - they need some help. We didn't, and we didn't ask, but it's an allowance that I'm willing to concede.

        Collapse
        1. Bigdonmck

          Great post and I tip my hat to you and your spouse for paying your own freight. Kudos.
          My definition of afford is to pay your own way. Just like you did. Two private school tuitions. that's an accomplishment.
          I have no problem dipping into the government welfare for short stretches when things go bad. But to raise a family on the government dole at the taxpayer's expense is something I'm not comfortable with.
          Just my opinion. I respect opposite views. Have a good one.

          Collapse
          1. Philebus

            Understand completely. When the Clinton administration came out with tax deferred savings accounts to cover college tuition that people could put aside. We were both kinda in the mood of where you when we needed you. It's alright. It all worked out fine regardless, but we could've used some help.

            Collapse