Middle Class 2003: How Congress Voted

America’s middle class is definitely not better off, according to a useful new study.

Who’s better off under a Republican White House and Congress? Not the middle class. So finds a very useful new report out today from the Drum Major Institute for Public Policy, a non-partisan think tank. The report, titled “Middle Class 2003: How Congress Voted,” takes a look at several major pieces of legislation considered by the 108th Congress that, for better or worse, “would significantly impact America’s middle class,” and assigns lawmakers a grade based on their support of the middle class position. It is intended, says Drum, to “serve as a yardstick by which Americans can measure how effectively Congress is acting in their interests.”

(Click here for the executive summary, and here for the full report in PDF format.)

The study defines middle class as Americans with incomes between approximately 200 percent of the federal poverty threshold and those of the top 5 percent of earners — roughly $25,000 to $100,000 a year.

Says the introduction:

We chose bills that, if passed, would not only have an impact on the financial stability of millions of middle-class families struggling to with the burdens of unemployment, underemployment, homeownership, childcare, healthcare, and debt, but on the aspirations of low-income Americans who want to work their way into the middle class.”

Legislation under consideration runs the gamut from bills that Drum views as supportive of the middle class (like The Pharmaceutical Market Access Act, which would lower the cost of prescription drugs by allowing Americans to purchase them from foreign vendors, and which passed only in the House; and the American Dream Downpayment Act, signed into law, which directed $200 million in federal aid to thousands of American families trying to buy a home), to those it considers harmful (like the Death Tax Repeal Act, which passed in the House and would eliminate the tax on the inherited estates of the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans, thereby draining state budgets; and the Jobs and Growth Tax Act, which gave the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans forthy percent of the total tax cut — at the expense of the middle class.)

Among the findings:

The Senate, overall, earned a B grade, but the average obscures disparities: while 96 percent of Democratic senators got an A, a quarter of Republicans got an F “for their failure to support the middle class.”

The House, says the report, “did a poor job of voiting with the middle class,” rating a C overall. Here, too, there were big disparities: 36 percent of House members received an failing grade, while 21 percent got an A. The former group was almost entirely Republican, the latter entirely Democratic.

In weighing their votes this year, Americans would do well to consult the Drum report, which assigns each member of Congress a grade on each piece of legislation. As the report says, “In politics, there is no greater force than incumbency. During the the 2002 midterm election, nearly all incumbents seeking an additional term in office secured it, due in large part to to the lack of comprensive information available to American voters.”

Thanks to this report, American voters now have the information they need to decide whether to keep their representatives — or throw them out.

One More Thing

And it's a big one. Mother Jones is launching a new Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on the corruption that is both the cause and result of the crisis in our democracy.

The more we thought about how Mother Jones can have the most impact right now, the more we realized that so many stories come down to corruption: People with wealth and power putting their interests first—and often getting away with it.

Our goal is to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We're aiming to create a reporting position dedicated to uncovering corruption, build a team, and let them investigate for a year—publishing our stories in a concerted window: a special issue of our magazine, video and podcast series, and a dedicated online portal so they don't get lost in the daily deluge of headlines and breaking news.

We want to go all in, and we've got seed funding to get started—but we're looking to raise $500,000 in donations this spring so we can go even bigger. You can read about why we think this project is what the moment demands and what we hope to accomplish—and if you like how it sounds, please help us go big with a tax-deductible donation today.

We Recommend


Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.


Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.