Biden has an opportunity to ensure an FDR-like legacy, and he might blow it

By Catherine Rampell,

Over the past month, many pundits lavished praise on President Biden and his supposedly transformative domestic policy agenda. The White House has basked in comparisons to Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal and Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society; some argued Biden might leave a more lasting imprint on the role of government than Barack Obama
, in whose shadow Biden lived for years.

But in truth, Biden risks falling short of such history-defining legacies. That’s because he’s getting cold feet about making the most consequential part of his own agenda thus far permanent.

The trigger for all those comparisons between Biden and previous “paradigm”-shifting Democratic presidents was the $1.9 trillion fiscal relief bill signed last month. Most of that legislation was advertised as a temporary, targeted response to the immediate crisis, rather than any sort of lasting transformation of the welfare state. With one prominent exception: its revamping of the child tax credit.

As child poverty experts and Democratic lawmakers such as Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro (Conn.) and Sen. Michael F. Bennet (Colo.) have been urging for years, the bill converted the existing annual child tax credit into a more frequently issued “child allowance” (amounting to $250 or $300 per month, depending on a child’s age). Perhaps more significantly, it made this benefit “fully refundable.” That means even children whose parents make too little to pay any taxes at all would get infusions of cash. Previously, ultra-poor families had been excluded from eligibility for the child tax credit, even though they arguably had the greatest need for financial help.

Just as Roosevelt created Social Security for seniors, Biden had now effectively created it for kids, with a guaranteed income even for the poorest of the poor. Biden and other progressives celebrated the achievement, frequently touting one remarkable topline takeaway: the legislation would cut U.S. child poverty — currently among the highest in the developed world — in half.

But there was a catch. The bill created this new, celebrated government program for only one year; additional legislation would be required to keep the benefit in place beyond then.

Fortunately, tons of Democrats (and at least one prominent Republican) have expressed support for making a monthly child allowance permanent. Among those on record for permanency are Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.); House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.); Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), who oversee congressional tax-writing committees; and most other Democratic lawmakers.

The White House has said the president also wants the policy to be permanent. Why, after all, allow such a monumental achievement to disappear?

And yet, Biden is expected to ask Congress for only a temporary extension, as part of his forthcoming $1 trillion “American Families Plan.” Under this proposal, child allowances would expire in 2025 — unless lawmakers choose to extend the policy again.

It’s extremely risky for Biden to cross his fingers and hope that whoever controls government in 2025 will choose to protect this critical program, and thus Biden’s legacy. Especially since the 2024 Senate election map looks perilous for his party, with several Democratic incumbents in red or purple states up for reelection. Democrats must make their priorities permanent while they know they have power.

As the assault weapons ban showed, there’s no guarantee that a progressive priority, even a popular one, will be extended once it is slated to sunset. And it is a heavier lift for Congress to renew an expiring policy than to simply leave a permanent one in place. Conversely, Obamacare has managed to survive, despite many GOP attempts at repeal and years of controversy, in part because its default was to remain law.

My own reporting suggests Biden settled on a four-year extension of the child allowance for fiscal reasons. The overall cost of his American Families Plan is expected to be enormous, and he wants to pay for everything, so he’s limiting how much each element costs. That includes letting child benefits sunset.

But the fiscal dynamics of a child allowance are unusual; some research suggests that the costs of monthly checks will be at least partially offset by other government savings, because the children who benefit will grow up to make higher earnings and pay more taxes, and also need fewer services, as adults.

Moreover, even if the policy does get renewed in 2025, structuring it as a series of temporary extensions is likely to be more expensive in the long run than just making it permanent upfront. Why? Because history suggests Republicans will extract all sorts of other expensive concessions (estate, corporate, capital gains tax cuts) as part of negotiations.

Biden has an opportunity to be fiscally responsible; to permanently lift millions of kids out of poverty, promoting racial equity in the process; and to cement his legacy as the kind of transformational president he aspires to be. He should not waste it.

Sign up to receive Catherine Rampell’s columns by email as soon as they’re published

Read more: Helaine Olen: Joe Biden is right. We need human infrastructure spending, too. E.J. Dionne Jr.: What’s more important than slashing child poverty? Katrina vanden Heuvel: Biden is facing a Roosevelt moment James Hohmann: Biden is planning for a Great Society 2.0