Republicans have smeared Democratic vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz as an “extremist,” “communist” and “left-wing radical.” They warn of the “dangerously liberal” agenda that he’s implemented as governor of Minnesota and that he might soon inflict upon the entire country.
You know what? The country should be so lucky.
In general, Walz’s state agenda has been politically smart, fiscally sound and family-friendly – not to mention long overdue pretty much everywhere else in America. In fact, Democrats should seriously consider rebranding themselves as the “MAMA” ticket: “Make America Minnesota Already.”
By now, for example, you might have seen the heartwarming footage of children hug-bombing Walz as he signed a law providing universal free school lunches and breakfasts. The scene was unquestionably great PR for a party accused of being “anti-family” and beholden to “childless cat ladies.” It provided an especially compelling contrast with a similar photo op staged by Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R), who was surrounded by frowning kids as she signed a law expanding child labor. One of these two gubernatorial figures looked “radical,” and it sure wasn’t Walz.
But that specific law Walz was signing – a key plank of the MAMA agenda – happens to be quite good policy, too. Making nutritious meals available to kids, without stigmatizing the poorest among them, is a valuable public investment. A recent meta-analysis of past studies on universal school meals found positive associations with children’s diet quality, food security and academic performance.
Other policies that he’s pushed also look like good stewardship of public funds – in addition to being, you know, compassionate.
For instance, Minnesota is developing a program to ensure that kids on Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program are continuously insured from birth to age 6, rather than periodically kicking them out of the program if their family’s income fluctuates slightly.
This is no small mercy. The paperwork required for reapplication is burdensome. It often results in eligible kids losing access to needed medical coverage because of administrative errors, even when their family’s income doesn’t change. Similar programs have been associated with improvements in kids’ health.
Minnesota’s version looks like a pretty good bargain for taxpayers, too. Research suggests that historical Medicaid expansions for kids offer high returns on investment. These policies often “pay for themselves,” says MIT economics professor Nathaniel Hendren, because of “improved later-life health of those children (which reduces future Medicaid spending) and increased later-life earnings (which increases tax revenue).”
One of Hendren’s specialties is developing a standardized system for evaluating which government programs provide the biggest bang for taxpayers’ bucks (and which are hopeless money pits). Based on his work with Ben Sprung-Keyser at the University of Pennsylvania, many of Minnesota’s other supposedly “radical” policies appear fiscally smart.
For example, under Walz, the state made college free to students with household incomes below $80,000. Policies that expand college enrollment tend to have a high return on investment; that’s because college enrollment leads to higher wages, which then pay back some or all of the upfront investment because of increased tax revenue.
Republicans have also ragged on Walz’s law ordering state utilities to switch to 100% carbon-free power by 2040. Though this exact climate policy hasn’t been modeled before, researchers have found that other kinds of subsidies for renewable energy offer a terrific return on investment.
Other policies Walz has implemented in Minnesota, such as paid family and medical leave, lack detailed, long-term fiscal assessments but are nonetheless associated with improved health outcomes. They also happen to poll phenomenally well.
A recent survey conducted by Morning Consult found that 82 percent of registered voters support paid family and medical leave. Among the supporters: 76 percent of Republicans. I supposed that means three-quarters of Republican voters must be “communists” like Walz, too.
To be sure, there are parts of Walz’s state agenda that are more divisive, such as his staunch support for gender-affirming medical care and his restoration of voting rights to people with felony convictions (though even tough-on-crime Republicans might be amenable on the latter, given their presidential nominee). I support both of these measures but hold no illusions about how easy they’d be to roll out nationwide.
But many of his other reforms have historically received bipartisan support, such as expanding the child tax credit and investing in affordable housing. And once again, they’re further evidence that one major party cares about children and families; and the other does not.
If states are the laboratories of democracy, Walz has proved himself an outstanding laboratorian. Americans could do worse than enduring a more widespread expansion of his “radical” experiments.
***
Reach Catherine Rampell at crampell@washpost.com.
