It's Almost Show-Time- An Intro to Hillarynomics

In 2008, I told people that I felt Hillary Clinton was a solid progressive. Some of those who opposed her campaign scoffed at that and said she everything from a "moderate" to "Republican-lite." Anyone who read through the domestic policies of Hillary and President Obama would have actually come to my conclusion, but most didn't. Bygones are bygones though, and President Obama is finishing two successful terms in office and leaving in two years. Secretary Clinton is likely to run for President. So, let's try this again.

On Friday, the Center for American Progress released a white paper on economic solutions for America and the United Kingdom (who happens to have an election coming up in May). Her policy director for her last run, Neera Tanden is the President over there, and Larry Summers (of the last two Democratic Administrations) was one of the writers. Ed Balls, Labour's Chancellor of the Exchequer if they win, was also involved. In other words, this paper matters. Anything from CAP matters, particularly with John Podesta having founded the organization, and now moving into a role as "liaison" from the Clinton-campaign in waiting to the White House. It was titled the "Report on the Commission on Inclusive Prosperity." Matthew Yglesias of Vox sums it up:

In some ways, it defies stereotypes of the Clintons as standard-bearers for neoliberal centrism by endorsing fiscal stimulus and a strong pro-labor union agenda while downplaying the strong education-reform streak of the Obama administration. But it's also notable for the Obama-era liberal ambitions it pushes aside. In the main recommendations for the United States, there's no cap-and-trade or carbon tax in here, no public option for health care, and no effort to break up or shrink the largest banks. Nor is there an ambitious agenda to tackle poverty.

Instead, you get a multi-pronged push to boost middle-class incomes. After an extended period in which Democratic Party politics has been dominated by health care for the poor, environmental regulation, and internecine fights about Wall Street, Hillarynomics looks like back-to-basics middle-class populism. It should in many ways further infuriate Clinton's left-wing intellectual critics — and then further infuriate them by turning out to be an agenda that makes the party's voting base perfectly happy.

So that might seem complicated in that it says on the one hand that we need serious fiscal stimulus and a stronger labor movement, but it's not in line with some of this White House's agenda. So, is this a progressive plan. In short, yes. Yglesias makes it more clear with some more details:

The list of proposed solutions for the US is long, ranging from more infrastructure spending (with new measures to improve project management on federal infrastructure deals), more preschool, closing corporate tax and inheritance tax loopholes, curbing the deductibility of executive pay, a tax cut for middle class workers, more FHA subsidies for riskier loans, and a reiteration of the merits of comprehensive immigration reform.

But the report is especially striking for its endorsement of labor market regulations not normally associated with the Summers wing of Democratic thinking. As David Leonhardt put it, "one theme is that the countries where the middle class has fared better are countries where workers have more power." The document endorses a variety of regulatory changes that would make union organizing easier, and calls for the creation of German-style works councils outside the context of traditional union organizing. It also endorses more favorable tax treatment for worker-owned firms, and proposing "estate tax relief" for corporate founders who convert their companies to worker-owned enterprises when they retire or die.

On the non-wage front, inclusive growth calls for paid (gender-neutral) parental leave, expanded Family and Medical Leave Act eligibility, and universal paid sick days and paid vacation days — all loosely under the banner of increasing women's labor force participation. Clinton has, in the past, field-tested feminist frames as a means of selling big government.

The chief criticism of this plan will be that it is less inclined to focus on poverty, and more inclined to focus on middle-class stagnation. One could pretty plainly argue that the focus is correct, and middle-class, consuming-class, stagnation is killing our economy. One could also say that after an era where Democrats did focus on these issues, the next Democratic President must simply defend the gains we received in this era. Either way, it's worth noting that CAP's agenda is very, very heavy on pro-worker reforms. It's not a "business friendly" plan, even if it is a clear deviation from Elizabeth Warren-economics.

It must be noted here that this is not a white-paper from the Clinton campaign, which doesn't even exist yet. It's not a statement by the candidate (or her husband), and it's not legislation that could be passed as is, either. It's just a clue. A clue that came on the weekend before the State of the Union, the point in 2015 at which it now becomes viable for Clinton to begin a campaign, when she chooses. At some point in the next two months or so, we will probably get word that Hillary Clinton is becoming a candidate for 2016. This paper just gives us something to chew on and process while waiting.