As a parent of three, point number 2 on Douthat’s opinion piece resonates with me:
Second (in the voice of a social conservative), the law doesn’t do enough for family and fertility. No problem shadows the world right now like demographic collapse, and while the United States is better off than many countries, the birthrate has fallen well below replacement levels here as well. Family policy can’t reverse these trends, but public support for parents can make an important difference. Yet the law’s extension of the child tax credit leaves it below the inflation-adjusted level established in Trump’s first term.
One of the odd parts of political haggling is the loud voices, particularly those related to tax deductions for high earners in high tax states. (Yes, the SALT deductions). It’s a small group of high earners in a small number of states. Yet, they’ve managed to be squeaky enough to expand the deduction from $10k to $40k. Well done for their lobbying!
From Claude:
Expanding SALT deductions would primarily benefit upper-middle-class and wealthy taxpayers earning $100,000+ annually, particularly those in high-tax states like California, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, who own expensive homes and face high state and local tax burdens. The benefits become increasingly concentrated among the highest earners, with the top 1% receiving disproportionate benefits from any expansion.
Back to the child tax credit itself. At $2,200, it represents an expansion but is far below the original law (for inflation adjusted dollars). So it seems that our congress cares more about a handful of high income earners than they do for a large (and important) swath of the country: parents.