I have a pair of cousins twice removed whose father died, and their mom gets Social Security checks to help support them. Messed up part is the cousins live with my aunt (their great grandmother) because their mom and grandma are both too messed up to care for them, but if my aunt tried to get the SS money their mom would try to get the kids back (and neglect them) so she wouldn’t lose the check.
Or work to implement ranked choice voting. The more localities use it, the more comfortable people get with it (the primary anti-ranked choice argument is it’s “too confusing for voters”), the more chance it has to be adopted by more states beyond the current Maine and Alaska beachhead.
The Republican demands were to NOT do things, which can be moved towards by filibuster and delay. The Democrat demands are to DO things, and filibuster and delay would just get the Republicans what they want, while being able to blame the Democrats for all the negative effects that are surprising to their constituents. They need to find better messages and ways to get those messages out, absolutely, but it’s not a mirror image to the Republican situation four years ago.
It’s not coming from a centrist in this case: the article is written by someone who argues Bernie is insufficiently left.
Is the movement now to ban vacation homes?
Also note that California, with the worst housing crisis, has one of the lowest vacancy rates, while Maine, Alaska, and Hawaii have among the highest rates. There’s not a housing shortage on average, there’s a housing shortage in the places people want to live - which largely means the places where they can get jobs.