Republicans' populism can sound very progressive
A version of this story appeared in CNN's What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.
Pay attention to an important shift in tone in Washington as Republicans evolve with President Donald Trump's brand of populism. Some of the president's goals dovetail with things Democrats have been talking about for a long time.
► Give babies seed money. In Republicans' tax legislation, there's a proposal for what they're calling 'MAGA' savings accounts — $1,000 given by the government to each American newborn in a tax-deferred account. The idea of giving American babies money to be grown during their childhoods and then used for college or a home purchase has been percolating for years, with bipartisan support. New Jersey Democratic Sen. Cory Booker proposed 'baby bonds' when he was running for president as a way to address inequality. GOP Sen. Todd Young of Indiana has also pushed the idea, and some states are experimenting with it.
► Tax the rich. Trump said he'd be open to raising taxes on the wealthy as lawmakers on Capitol Hill search for ways to offset his tax cuts.
He later backtracked, but the idea of a tax-hiking GOP president gave whiplash to old-school Republicans familiar with the not-too-distant era of the no-new-tax pledge.
► Drive down drug costs. Trump promised to cap prescription drug prices in an executive order. The plan will face obstacles in court, but it is the cousin of Democrats' success under President Joe Biden passing a law to drive down drug prices by allowing Medicare, for the first time, to negotiate the price it pays for some medications.
► Give parents more money. Republicans in the House envision bumping the child tax credit by $500 to $2,500. It's less generous than moves by Democrats when they were in charge that temporarily gave child tax credits even to parents who don't pay income taxes. When those ended, the child poverty rate rose. But the GOP proposal does acknowledge the expense of raising children. However, the GOP plan would shrink the number of children eligible by requiring parents have a Social Security number. Immigrants, even those who pay taxes and have children who are citizens, would be excluded.
The Trump administration has also toyed with the idea of 'baby bonuses' — $5,000 checks to entice parents to procreate. That's less than the universal child care supports envisioned by some Democrats, but it's not a trivial sum.
► Invest in manufacturing. Trump's tariffs — which he's said will either lead to better trade deals or raise revenue for the government — are also taxes, but they are meant to force a new era of American manufacturing.
Building a manufacturing base was also a goal of the Biden administration, but the White House and Congress back then agreed to spend money to seed semiconductor and renewable energy industries rather than hike taxes on imports.
► Change how the Pentagon buys things. In April, Trump signed an executive order seeking to reform Pentagon acquisition — or how it buys things. The Pentagon spends a lot of money, and the system is notoriously bloated. Trump's order is not exactly meant to cut defense spending — his budget envisions $1 trillion going to the Pentagon in one year — but it is an acknowledgment that American defense spending needs reform, something many progressives would agree with.
None of these points of agreement should lead anyone to think we are on the cusp of a new era of bipartisanship. Plainly, we aren't.
Republicans today, like Democrats during the Biden administration, are pursuing Trump's goals in a bill designed to sidestep the filibuster in the Senate.
Current proposals would slash food security benefits along with Medicaid spending and largely end efforts to address climate change, all while adding trillions to the national debt in the name of tax cuts.
The only option for lawmakers is likely to be an up-or-down vote on such a large measure, which means Republicans are having trouble finding enough support in their own party, let alone any help from Democrats.
But clearly there are bridges to be built across the American political divide.
During his first term, Trump followed up his tax cuts bill with a bipartisan achievement, the First Step Act, which cut extremely long prison sentences, among other things. It's hard to imagine Trump revisiting that issue given his rhetoric about imposing the death penalty on drug dealers, his endorsement of prisons like CECOT in El Salvador and the fact that he has considered suspending habeas corpus in the US.
What Trump ultimately wants is to get wins, however, and passing laws creates more lasting change than his executive orders.
I asked the Bipartisan Policy Center, a group that tries to bring Democrats and Republicans together, about which issues might have room for accord.
'It rarely gets much attention, but bipartisan cooperation is happening on Capitol Hill because it is the only way to actually get anything done that lasts longer than the next change in majority,' said Margaret Spellings, BPC's CEO, who was education secretary in the George W. Bush administration.
BPC pointed to bipartisan legislation on 'permitting reform,' which is Washington speak for making it easier to start building energy and infrastructure products — not the sexiest issue, but one that could make the government work more efficiently. There are also ongoing efforts for legislation to get more Americans involved in retirement savings programs and to reauthorize expiring substance abuse treatment programs.
Meanwhile, a shift in tone can offer a brief rest from the normal sniping in Washington.
Pushing Trump's proposal to match US drug prices with Europe's, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. argued that issue was the 'fulcrum' of Sen. Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign.
The next day at a hearing on Capitol Hill, Sanders asked Kennedy whether he'd work on legislation — which has more power than an executive order — to further drive down drug costs.
'Absolutely,' Kennedy said, although Republicans are currently trying to craft a 'big, beautiful' tax cut bill for Trump that does not include any effort to expand drug cost measures.
Appearing on CNN's 'Inside Politics' Monday, Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri panned the House version of the tax bill because it would cut Medicaid benefits. Medicaid is the federal program that helps low-income Americans obtain health insurance.
'I continue to stand by my line in the sand, which is no Medicaid benefit cuts,' he said.
'We're the party of the working class,' Hawley said, referencing how the parties have realigned in recent years. 'We need to act like it.'
He also said he's fine with raising taxes on those making more than $1 million per year.
Being okay with something is different than fully supporting it, however.
After suggesting he could support a tax on the wealthy, Trump said he wouldn't because he didn't want Democrats to use the issue against him.
'The problem with even a 'TINY' tax increase for the RICH, which I and all others would graciously accept in order to help the lower and middle income workers, is that the Radical Left Democrat Lunatics would go around screaming, 'Read my lips,' the fabled Quote by George Bush the Elder that is said to have cost him the Election. NO, Ross Perot cost him the Election!' Trump wrote on social media.
Trump could stop worrying so much about what Democrats say since he won't face any more elections. The Constitution forbids him from seeking a third term.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
11 minutes ago
- Forbes
More Colleges Freeze Hiring And Suspend Salary Increases
Colleges and universities continue to look for ways to cut spending because of the Trump Administration's policies towards higher education. One June 2nd, Johns Hopkins University announced a set of policies to prepare for a possible decline in revenue. They join a list of schools including Brown University, Duke University, Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Washington, and the University of California system, that have temporarily paused hiring and vow to hold off on capital spending. Hopkins has already seen $850 million in grant cuts resulting from the culling of USAID and other program terminations, plus the school has a large number of international students (many who pay full tuition) who may be dissuaded from studying in the U.S. due to the Administration's more restrictive visa policies. Like a number of elite universities, Johns Hopkins relies heavily on tuition from international students attending its undergraduate and graduate programs. In the 2024-2025 academic year, over ten thousand foreign students were enrolled at Johns Hopkins according to the Institute of International Education. In addition to the hiring freeze, University President Ron Daniels also announced a pause in annual pay increases for employees earning $80,000 or more, a slowing of capital projects by 10% to 20%, and spending cuts for travel, events, food, and supplies. The salary freezes will likely squeeze faculty, who have seen real wages decline. From 2013 to 2023, average pay for faculty (when adjusted for inflation) has decreased by 1.5%, while administrative pay has risen by 4% for the same time frame. In addition, administrative staff positions at most universities and colleges has grown faster than faculty. There is no doubt the universities and colleges need to take steps to address the impact of the Trump Administration's policies. Although painful, the policies issued by Johns Hopkins and other schools are necessary in the near-term. But a different approach is needed long-term. One that doesn't rely on higher student tuition or faculty salaries that fall further behind inflation. These policies should include: The Trump Administration's policies towards colleges and their students may eventually be rolled back or reversed at some point, but in the meantime, higher education needs to rethink their budgets and what should be prioritized.
CNN
12 minutes ago
- CNN
How Kilmar Abrego Garcia's case became a political flashpoint
Kilmar Abrego Garcia's case started quietly, boiling down to a clerical error that moved him up on a list to land on a deportation flight destined to El Salvador in March. And then a court filing from the Trump Justice Department acknowledging the mistake brought it to the national forefront – culminating in a fraught legal battle and heated political debate. On Friday, the Trump administration announced that Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national who had resided in Maryland until he was mistakenly deported to his home country, landed in the United States, and was facing criminal charges. It was an extraordinary development in a case that's come to define the president's hardline immigration policies and a striking about-face from the Trump administration, which had maintained he would not return to the US. At the start of the legal battle, nearly three months ago, both sides agreed that Abrego Garcia's deportation to El Salvador – and subsequent imprisonment in the country's notorious mega-prison – was a mistake. In 2019, an immigration judge granted Abrego Garcia withholding of removal, meaning he couldn't be removed to El Salvador over fear of persecution. A senior Immigration and Customs Enforcement official called his removal an 'administrative error' in a March court declaration, appearing to mark the first time the administration had conceded an error over the controversial flights to El Salvador that resulted in the detention of hundreds of migrants in the CECOT prison. But then, Trump administration officials publicly abandoned that position and called Abrego Garcia 'a terrorist,' because they allege he is a member of MS-13, which the US has designated as a terrorist organization. His attorneys and family maintain that he was not a member of MS-13 and have argued that he is still entitled to due process. Here's how Abrego Garcia's case played out over the last few months. Abrego Garcia, who came to the United States illegally in 2012, first had an encounter with immigration authorities in 2019 after an arrest. At the time, the government similarly argued that Abrego Garcia was a gang member while he made the case that he feared a possible return to El Salvador. The immigration judge presiding over the case sided with Abrego Garcia and ruled that he may not be deported back to El Salvador. Years later, on March 12, 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement pulled over Abrego Garcia and arrested him, which came as the Trump administration continued its aggressive crackdown on immigration. Abrego Garcia was then mistakenly put on a deportation flight three days later and sent to CECOT. It took the Trump administration weeks to concede that it mistakenly deported the Maryland father to El Salvador 'because of an administrative error.' But while doing acknowledging the mistake, the administration said in court filings on March 31 that it could not return him because he was in Salvadoran custody. Later that week, Judge Paula Xinis of the US District Court in Maryland ordered the Trump administration to return Abrego Garcia to the US, kicking off a monthslong legal battle in which the Trump administration has argued that courts cannot intervene in the foreign policy decision-making of the United States. In her April 4 order, Xinis gave a deadline of April 7 to bring back Abrego Garcia but the Supreme Court paused the deadline. Days later, the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration must 'facilitate' Abrego Garcia's return but stopped short of requiring the government to return him. In recent weeks, Xinis has accused the Trump administration of repeated stonewalling and intentional noncompliance with its obligation to produce information related to how it has been facilitating Abrego Garcia's return. President Donald Trump, in an interview with ABC News in April, acknowledged that he could secure Abrego Garcia's return, contradicting previous remarks made by him and his his top aides who said the US did not have the ability to return Abrego Garcia because he was in the custody of a foreign government. When asked by ABC's Terry Moran why he can't just pick up the phone and secure Abrego Garcia's return, Trump said: 'And if he were the gentleman that you say he is, I would do that. But he is not.' The president went on to accuse Abrego Garcia of being a MS-13 member, pointing to his tattoos, which experts say are not by themselves proof he's a gang member. And just days later, the White House and El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele made clear during an Oval Office meeting that Abrego Garcia would not be returned to the US. Democratic lawmakers have been critical of how the Trump administration handled the Abrego Garcia case and continued to call for him to be brought back. One Democratic senator, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, flew down to El Salvador to meet with his constituent. After initially not being allowed to meet him, Van Hollen had a sit down with Abrego Garcia on April 17 and in a press conference a day later, the senator said Abrego Garcia told him he was traumatized. 'He said he was not afraid of the other prisoners in his immediate cell but that he was traumatized by being at CECOT and fearful of many of the prisoners in other cell blocks who called out to him and taunted him in various ways,' Van Hollen said. Van Hollen added that Abrego Garcia was moved a week earlier from the maximum-security prison to another detention center where 'conditions are better.' The Trump administration slammed the senator's visit, claiming Democrats and the media painted an overly rosy picture of Abrego Garcia. Meanwhile, the administration continued to portray him as a violent and dangerous criminal, releasing previously unshared documents stemming from two interactions Abrego Garcia had with law enforcement and the courts system: a 2019 arrest that didn't lead to charges or a conviction, but did result in his detention by immigration officials, and a 2021 protective order his wife filed against him alleging domestic violence, which she later decided against pursuing further after she said the couple had resolved their issues. Sources told CNN in late April that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had been in touch with Bukele about the detention of Abrego Garcia. A US official told CNN the Trump administration was working closely with El Salvador and asked for Abrego Garcia's return but insisted that Bukele had made clear that he was not returning him to the US. In early May, Tennessee state law enforcement released a video of a November 2022 traffic stop involving Abrego Garcia – an incident that US officials argue supports their claims that Abrego Garcia was a member of MS-13 and involved in human trafficking. The video showed Abrego Garcia being stopped for speeding. When asked about other passengers in the car, Abrego Garcia tells the trooper he and the others are workers returning from a construction project in St. Louis, Missouri. When the trooper asked for his documents, Abrego Garcia explains in the video that his driver's license was expired and that he is waiting for immigration documents to renew it. He tells the officer the vehicle, which had a Texas license plate, belonged to his boss. The trooper then searches the car with a police canine. They do not appear to find anything suspicious, according to the video. Abrego Garcia was not detained during the stop and no charges were filed. Nearly three months after he was deported, Abrego Garcia on Friday returned to the US to face federal criminal charges. Abrego Garcia has been indicted on two criminal counts in the Middle District of Tennessee: conspiracy to unlawfully transport illegal aliens for financial gain and unlawful transportation of illegal aliens for financial gain. Trump administration officials pointed to the charges as justifying their effort to remove Abrego Garcia from the United States. Meanwhile, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, an attorney for Abrego Garcia, accused the Trump administration of 'playing games' with the legal system and said his client should appear in immigration court, not criminal court. 'The government disappeared Kilmar to a foreign prison in violation of a court order. Now, after months of delay and secrecy, they're bringing him back, not to correct their error but to prosecute him. This shows that they were playing games with the court all along,' Sandoval-Moshenberg said in a statement to CNN. 'Due process means the chance to defend yourself before you're punished, not after. This is an abuse of power, not justice.' Abrego Garcia will be in custody for at least a week, followed by an arraignment and detention hearing, the Associated Press reported.
CNN
13 minutes ago
- CNN
How Kilmar Abrego Garcia's case became a political flashpoint
Kilmar Abrego Garcia's case started quietly, boiling down to a clerical error that moved him up on a list to land on a deportation flight destined to El Salvador in March. And then a court filing from the Trump Justice Department acknowledging the mistake brought it to the national forefront – culminating in a fraught legal battle and heated political debate. On Friday, the Trump administration announced that Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national who had resided in Maryland until he was mistakenly deported to his home country, landed in the United States, and was facing criminal charges. It was an extraordinary development in a case that's come to define the president's hardline immigration policies and a striking about-face from the Trump administration, which had maintained he would not return to the US. At the start of the legal battle, nearly three months ago, both sides agreed that Abrego Garcia's deportation to El Salvador – and subsequent imprisonment in the country's notorious mega-prison – was a mistake. In 2019, an immigration judge granted Abrego Garcia withholding of removal, meaning he couldn't be removed to El Salvador over fear of persecution. A senior Immigration and Customs Enforcement official called his removal an 'administrative error' in a March court declaration, appearing to mark the first time the administration had conceded an error over the controversial flights to El Salvador that resulted in the detention of hundreds of migrants in the CECOT prison. But then, Trump administration officials publicly abandoned that position and called Abrego Garcia 'a terrorist,' because they allege he is a member of MS-13, which the US has designated as a terrorist organization. His attorneys and family maintain that he was not a member of MS-13 and have argued that he is still entitled to due process. Here's how Abrego Garcia's case played out over the last few months. Abrego Garcia, who came to the United States illegally in 2012, first had an encounter with immigration authorities in 2019 after an arrest. At the time, the government similarly argued that Abrego Garcia was a gang member while he made the case that he feared a possible return to El Salvador. The immigration judge presiding over the case sided with Abrego Garcia and ruled that he may not be deported back to El Salvador. Years later, on March 12, 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement pulled over Abrego Garcia and arrested him, which came as the Trump administration continued its aggressive crackdown on immigration. Abrego Garcia was then mistakenly put on a deportation flight three days later and sent to CECOT. It took the Trump administration weeks to concede that it mistakenly deported the Maryland father to El Salvador 'because of an administrative error.' But while doing acknowledging the mistake, the administration said in court filings on March 31 that it could not return him because he was in Salvadoran custody. Later that week, Judge Paula Xinis of the US District Court in Maryland ordered the Trump administration to return Abrego Garcia to the US, kicking off a monthslong legal battle in which the Trump administration has argued that courts cannot intervene in the foreign policy decision-making of the United States. In her April 4 order, Xinis gave a deadline of April 7 to bring back Abrego Garcia but the Supreme Court paused the deadline. Days later, the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration must 'facilitate' Abrego Garcia's return but stopped short of requiring the government to return him. In recent weeks, Xinis has accused the Trump administration of repeated stonewalling and intentional noncompliance with its obligation to produce information related to how it has been facilitating Abrego Garcia's return. President Donald Trump, in an interview with ABC News in April, acknowledged that he could secure Abrego Garcia's return, contradicting previous remarks made by him and his his top aides who said the US did not have the ability to return Abrego Garcia because he was in the custody of a foreign government. When asked by ABC's Terry Moran why he can't just pick up the phone and secure Abrego Garcia's return, Trump said: 'And if he were the gentleman that you say he is, I would do that. But he is not.' The president went on to accuse Abrego Garcia of being a MS-13 member, pointing to his tattoos, which experts say are not by themselves proof he's a gang member. And just days later, the White House and El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele made clear during an Oval Office meeting that Abrego Garcia would not be returned to the US. Democratic lawmakers have been critical of how the Trump administration handled the Abrego Garcia case and continued to call for him to be brought back. One Democratic senator, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, flew down to El Salvador to meet with his constituent. After initially not being allowed to meet him, Van Hollen had a sit down with Abrego Garcia on April 17 and in a press conference a day later, the senator said Abrego Garcia told him he was traumatized. 'He said he was not afraid of the other prisoners in his immediate cell but that he was traumatized by being at CECOT and fearful of many of the prisoners in other cell blocks who called out to him and taunted him in various ways,' Van Hollen said. Van Hollen added that Abrego Garcia was moved a week earlier from the maximum-security prison to another detention center where 'conditions are better.' The Trump administration slammed the senator's visit, claiming Democrats and the media painted an overly rosy picture of Abrego Garcia. Meanwhile, the administration continued to portray him as a violent and dangerous criminal, releasing previously unshared documents stemming from two interactions Abrego Garcia had with law enforcement and the courts system: a 2019 arrest that didn't lead to charges or a conviction, but did result in his detention by immigration officials, and a 2021 protective order his wife filed against him alleging domestic violence, which she later decided against pursuing further after she said the couple had resolved their issues. Sources told CNN in late April that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had been in touch with Bukele about the detention of Abrego Garcia. A US official told CNN the Trump administration was working closely with El Salvador and asked for Abrego Garcia's return but insisted that Bukele had made clear that he was not returning him to the US. In early May, Tennessee state law enforcement released a video of a November 2022 traffic stop involving Abrego Garcia – an incident that US officials argue supports their claims that Abrego Garcia was a member of MS-13 and involved in human trafficking. The video showed Abrego Garcia being stopped for speeding. When asked about other passengers in the car, Abrego Garcia tells the trooper he and the others are workers returning from a construction project in St. Louis, Missouri. When the trooper asked for his documents, Abrego Garcia explains in the video that his driver's license was expired and that he is waiting for immigration documents to renew it. He tells the officer the vehicle, which had a Texas license plate, belonged to his boss. The trooper then searches the car with a police canine. They do not appear to find anything suspicious, according to the video. Abrego Garcia was not detained during the stop and no charges were filed. Nearly three months after he was deported, Abrego Garcia on Friday returned to the US to face federal criminal charges. Abrego Garcia has been indicted on two criminal counts in the Middle District of Tennessee: conspiracy to unlawfully transport illegal aliens for financial gain and unlawful transportation of illegal aliens for financial gain. Trump administration officials pointed to the charges as justifying their effort to remove Abrego Garcia from the United States. Meanwhile, Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, an attorney for Abrego Garcia, accused the Trump administration of 'playing games' with the legal system and said his client should appear in immigration court, not criminal court. 'The government disappeared Kilmar to a foreign prison in violation of a court order. Now, after months of delay and secrecy, they're bringing him back, not to correct their error but to prosecute him. This shows that they were playing games with the court all along,' Sandoval-Moshenberg said in a statement to CNN. 'Due process means the chance to defend yourself before you're punished, not after. This is an abuse of power, not justice.' Abrego Garcia will be in custody for at least a week, followed by an arraignment and detention hearing, the Associated Press reported.
