BEGIN:VCALENDAR METHOD:PUBLISH CALSCALE:GREGORIAN PRODID:-//EVDB//www.eventful.com//EN VERSION:2.0 X-WR-CALNAME:Social Policy After the Economic Crisis in Washington DC at New America Foundation - Eventful BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTART:20081205T120000 DTSTAMP:20081221T112319Z SUMMARY:Social Policy After the Economic Crisis DESCRIPTION: Related Programs:The Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Progra m\, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget\, Fiscal Policy Program \, Health Policy Program\, Workforce and Family Program On December 5\ , 2008\, the New America Foundation's Next Social Contract Initiative hosted a three panel discussion about the future of social policy afte r the economic downturn. David Gray\, Director of the Workforce and Fa mily Program at New America\, opened the event with preliminary remark s. Karen Kornbluh\, formerly of the New America Foundation\, policy di rector in the office of Senator Barack Obama and the primary author of the 2008 Democratic Party Platform\, delivered the keynote address. S he was followed by a series of experts who discussed how the global me ltdown will affect programs in three crucial policy arenas: Medicare\, Social Security\, and retirement savings\; workforce and family polic y\; and healthcare. The experts contemplated the future of these polic ies in the Obama Administration\, and offered proposals for reform goi ng forward. Karen Kornbluh began her keynote address by discussing her experience writing the party platform. The proposals that wound up in the platform\, she believes\, are similar to many of New America's id eas. The section "Renewing the American Dream\," in particular\, empha sized a renewed social contract in which government and citizens uphol d their respective ends of the bargain. It's time for policies to catc h up to our expectations\, Kornbluh asserted\, and offered three guidi ng principles: social insurance is "social\," the New Deal isn't "new\ ," and the way we're operating right now is cheating the future. Soci al insurance is inherently social\, Kornbluh argued. From the Social S ecurity Act of 1935 onward\, there has always been a family-oriented c omponent to social programs--the survivor's benefit\, aid to dependent children\, etc. Social insurance is not about the individual saving f or himself\, it is about ensuring all families are secure. Although th at philosophy remains relevant today\, specific New Deal programs are not new: the single breadwinner model upon which these programs are ba sed is now completely outdated. Other industrialized nations have upda ted their social insurance systems to fit their changing economies\, K ornbluh noted\, and the U.S. must follow suit by adopting such 21st ce ntury policies as paid leave and the right to work flexibly. The unfor tunate result of our current\, outdated system is that we are cheating the future. America is now a knowledge economy\, and we rely on famil ies to produce the essential human capital for the next generation. Bu t our current social policy subjects too many families to cycles of ec onomic insecurity and long-term stagnation. In terms of making an imm ediate difference\, Kornbluh contended that health insurance should be the primary issue. It was the "strongest and longest" section of the Democratic Party Platform\, and the party is committed to guaranteeing health insurance coverage for every American. However\, the necessary policy reforms go far beyond the healthcare system. "We're in one of those moments\," Kornbluh concluded. When the New America Foundation w as founded\, there was not the same sense of urgency that there is now \, but founding Director Ted Halstead always warned everyone to "be re ady." The time for which we have been readying ourselves has come. Pan el I: EntitlementsLen Nichols\, Director of the Health Policy Program at New America\, opened the first panel discussion by "being a bit of a curmudgeon" and objecting to the term "entitlement\," which he consi ders a 1980s libertarian pejorative. He instead prefers "promises\," w hich better reflects the sacredness of the social contract. Nichols we nt on to discuss Medicare\, which he sees as a healthcare cost-growth problem rather than an entitlement problem. Medicare's cost growth per capita is 2.5 times per capita GDP growth\, meaning that Medicare is consuming an ever-larger share of our output. More troublingly\, one-t hird of healthcare spending (equivalent to about 5% of GDP) does not a dd any clinical value. Medicare and the broader healthcare system are inexorably linked\, Nichols argued\, and Medicare must be the catalyst for systemic reform. There is substantial political impetus for unive rsal coverage\, but reforms must enable citizens to buy smarter and "e xercise stewardship" over our healthcare resources. Maya MacGuineas\, Director of the Fiscal Policy Program at New America and President of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget\, argued that the econo mic crisis is revealing the deep cracks in our existing social insuran ce system. Although the focus right now is on stimulus and economic gr owth\, we must start talking about our institutions and how to update them. The federal budget deficit will reach at least $1 trillion next year\, MacGuineas said\, and policymakers need to review the budget li ne-by-line and think hard about how we are going to pay for it all. Be cause most of our money currently goes towards "mandatory spending pro grams\," these programs cannot be ignored when we rethink the budget. MacGuineas would like to link stimulus and long-term entitlement refor m. The sums of current stimulus proposals are so large as to enable ma jor\, lasting investments in our economy. We should borrow money now\, MacGuineas argued\, but offset costs once the economy is stabilized. Without neglecting the importance of greater individual responsibility \, we must think about vulnerable populations in our country right now --children and those hurt by globalization. Government must become mor e progressive\, and focus its limited resources on those that need the m most. The current economic climate demands major reforms\, MacGuinea s concluded\, and the national discussion about the most appropriate p olicy choices is just beginning. Mark Iwry\, Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution\, discussed the retirement savings and p rivate pension aspects of the entitlements debate. In the wake of the election\, and in light of the financial crisis\, Iwry argued\, retire ment policy must move in three basic directions. First\, we must prop up the defined-benefit pension system\, which is suffering from "long- term secular trends" that run against it. Second\, we must reform (not eliminate or replace) the 401(k) defined-contribution system\, downpl aying its "every-man-for-himself" characteristics and encouraging mode rating reforms such as annuities\, automatic enrollment\, and automati c investment. Finally\, we must pursue universal retirement savings th rough President-elect Obama's proposal for an Automatic IRA. Michael C alabrese\, Vice President of the New America Foundation and an expert on retirement security\, moderated the question and answer session tha t followed. Questions touched upon the costs of Medicare reform\, the long-term sustainability of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation\, the question of raising the retirement age\, and effects of policy ch oices on inter-generational relations. Panel II: WorkforceRay Uhalde\, Director of the Workforce Development Strategies Group at the Nationa l Center on Education and the Economy\, opened the second panel by ass erting that the current system of unemployment insurance is not up to the task. Fewer than 40% of unemployed people receive unemployment ben efits\, but such benefits are a crucial economic stabilizer. Uhalde we nt on to note that only a few states have long-term job training and s kills programs for the unemployed. Policy reforms should tie unemploym ent insurance to long-term occupational training\, he believes. Uhalde also discussed the 400\,000-strong apprenticeship system in the Unite d States--the most demand-driven training system that we have\, and al most totally private-sector funded. The apprenticeship system is small \, but important for the kind of skilled workers that we will need for ongoing infrastructure renewal programs over the next decade. We need to develop the next generation of public workforce programs\, Uhalde concluded\, and link adult education\, technical training\, and workfo rce investment. Katie Corrigan\, Co-Director of Workplace Flexibility 2010\, argued that the question on the table is whether the issue of w orkplace flexibility is still relevant\, given today's the big-picture economic problems. Corrigan believes that now is\, in fact\, the idea l time to think about how to build in workplace flexibility programs u p-front\, rather than trying to retrofit them after the crisis. The re ality of the American workforce is no longer education\, career\, then but rather an undulating line that includes unexpected illnesses\, of f\, and extended leave. The workforce has undergone enormous changes i n recent decades\, but without any comprehensive public policy respons e. We made big gains on flexible scheduling in the 1980s\, Corrigan cl aimed\, but very little has changed since the late 1990s. However\, th e current economic crisis "blows things open" and encourages a lot of new thinking. Now is the time to integrate the various strands of cont emporary workforce policy\, and implement the major reforms that the n ext generation of workers requires.Phil Longman\, Schwartz Senior and Research Director of the Next Social Contract Initiative at the New Am erica Foundation\, opened his talk with a sobering fact: even before t he current economic crisis\, more children experienced their parents' bankruptcy than their parents' divorce. The state of the economy is ti ed to the state of the family. In the past few months\, Longman noted\ , a tremendous new consensus has emerged that we need to spend "a whol e bunch of money\, real fast\," on infrastructure. Longman proposed a single policy lever that would "stimulate the economy\, make driving f aster and more fun\, reduce the cost of highway repairs\, prop up home prices\, save thousands of lives\, and reduce greenhouse gases"--a "s teel wheel interstate" of long-haul freight railroads to complement th e nation's creaking interstate highway system. Wall Street should dire ct the world's capital into smart infrastructure projects rather than "credit cards and sub-prime loans\," and railroads are a remarkably ef ficient investment: trains are 11 times more fuel efficient than truck s\, and far less polluting. David Gray\, Director of the Workforce and Family Program at New America\, moderated the subsequent question and answer session. Questioners asked about the wisest use of federal dis cretionary research funding\, the potential for significant community college investment in the next \, the consequences of the 1996 welfare reform\, the effects of the new GI Bill\, and how to protect the achi evement of anti-discrimination in employment during a period in which layoffs will increase. Panel III: HealthcareJoe Minarik\, Senior Vice President and Director of Research at the Committee for Economic Devel opment\, began the third panel by identifying the aggregate problem wi th America's healthcare system: excess healthcare cost growth over GDP \, and healthcare consuming a growing share of our economic output. Mi narik then noted that corporations have been squeezed by the rising co st of healthcare. This cost squeeze is transferred onto employees--ded uctibles and co-payments are rising\, and employers are increasingly t elling workers that their families will not receive coverage. For the past eight years\, there has been no increase in employer-based covera ge\, despite continuous population growth. For Minarik\, the biggest p roblem is one of choice: 77% of those offered employer-based health in surance are only offered one choice of carrier. Consequently\, health providers have no reason to worry about the cost of the services they offer\, leading to over-treatment. This lack of choice\, Minarik belie ves\, is a key reason for the system's rising costs and disregard for value or quality. Genevieve Kenney\, Principal Research Associate and Health Economist at the Urban Institute\, noted that\, given the numbe r of Americans who rely on their employers for health insurance\, the recession could have huge implications for Medicaid and SCHIP. There i s strong evidence\, she argued\, that the need for these programs grow s during tough economic times\, and they constitute an important compo nent of the economic safety net. Many of the state governments that fu nd these programs are facing budget shortfalls in the coming fiscal ye ar. Therefore\, Kenney believes\, a large infusion of federal funds is needed to prop up state budgets and support these crucial programs du ring the economic downturn. Medicaid is incredibly important to low-in come families and the disabled--the most vulnerable members of our soc iety. To the extent that Medicaid relies on state funding\, therefore\ , policymakers must think seriously about implementing a counter-cycli cal funding system. Elizabeth Carpenter\, Associate Policy Director of the Health Policy Program at New America\, discussed the new politica l realities of healthcare reform\, given the economic crisis. Since th e conclusion of the campaign\, many pundits have speculated that Obama 's domestic priorities--especially healthcare reform--would be relegat ed to the back-burner\, in favor of the more pressing need for stimulu s to spur economic growth. Carpenter sought to demonstrate that the lo ng-term cost of doing nothing would be far greater than the one-time c ost of systemic reform. She noted that the poor health and shorter lif espan of the uninsured costs the U.S. economy as much as $207 billion annually in lost productivity. Moreover\, healthcare costs are growing faster than wages\, which will make healthcare even more unaffordable in the years to come. Perpetuating the status quo comes with a price\ , Carpenter argued--employers are asking their employees to bear an ev er-greater share of the healthcare cost burden\, and the insured pay a "hidden tax" to provide healthcare to the uninsured. Although the eco nomic picture looks bleak\, Carpenter asserted\, we should not believe the cynics. On the contrary\, a broad consensus has emerged among the incoming Administration\, voters\, Congress\, and other coalitions to make healthcare reform a reality in the years to come. Julie Barnes\, Deputy Director of the Health Policy Program at New America\, moderat ed the question and answer session that followed. Questions touched up on the potential for huge tax increases in the years following a major reform\, the prospects for SCHIP reauthorization in 2009\, and the po litical realities of reform today versus in 1993. LOCATION:New America Foundation @ 1630 Connecticut Avenue NW Seventh F loor, Washington, District of Columbia 20009 United States SEQUENCE:1229858599 UID:E0-001-017669460-6 URL:http://eventful.com/E0-001-017669460-6 END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR