[music] I'm Alexander Heffner, your host on The Open Mind.

I'm delighted to welcome our guest today, Natalie Foster, who's president of the Economic Security Project and author of The Guarantee Inside the Fight for America's Next Economy.

Welcome, Natalie.

Thanks for having me.

Natalie, tell our viewers about your work at Economic Security Project, what you've accomplished to date and what your vision is for increasing the access to a safety net and greater economic security for a greater number of Americans.

Yeah.

Our focus at Economic Security Project is to ensure that everyone, regardless of race, religion, or zip code in this country, has what they need to thrive and to build economic power for everyone.

We have focused our fights on putting money into people's pockets and tackling who's taking money out of people's pockets.

Namely, corporate concentration and broken markets.

You know, there's a reason why things are so expensive and to help families who are struggling.

Things like a guaranteed income put money into people's pockets to help parents have the stability they need to build lives of dignity and agency, which, frankly, everyone deserves in this country.

And there's a policy roadmap to get us there.

We just need the political will to make it happen.

In your mind is a major target here, the monopoly to price gouging pipeline.

That the advent of these new monopolies in 2025 that have grown over the last decade, that antitrust policy to tackle monopolies is important to alleviate the cost burden on American families.

Absolutely.

And we have seen a sea change in how we approach these broken markets over the last few years.

The government understands that it is our job to make sure markets are competitive and fair, right?

That little guys can compete alongside the big guys.

And frankly, it costs families hundreds of dollars a year when there's only 1 or 2 players inside the market.

And one of the problems right now is that there is almost an illusion of choice.

So when you go into the grocery store and you look at all the different cereal, you think, oh, there's hundreds of companies creating hundreds of types of cereal.

And they are competing against one another.

And I have a choice.

The truth is, it is a very small number of players who own all the brands and are giving us the illusion of choice while raising prices.

And that is the kind of thing that I think is really important to shift.

If we are serious about building, economic security for everyone in this country.

And what are the industries that your project is most interested in tackling?

Doing a kind of monopoly audit and then fixing the system.

You alluded to the grocery store and cereal.

But we know the monopolization has happened across real estate, technology, and of course, food.

But, if you were to try to analyze this holistically from, you know, housing and rent payments to cereals, how do you do it?

I actually think you just laid it out.

It's everything from cereal, to housing, to airlines, to automakers, to technology.

The list goes on and on, to our phones.

And so it is because for decades now, we've believed that the market would solve its own problems if left to its own devices.

And instead, we've seen that it gets more and more consolidated as time goes on, making markets anti-competitive and costing people, costing families more money.

And so things like, the lawsuit, asking Apple to stop its anti-monopoly practices, or a recent one at the end of 2024 was ensuring that companies have to make it easier to unsubscribe.

It's broadly part of an anti-monopoly agenda that says government has a role in ensuring markets work for people.

And, that is something that I hope continues on for years to come.

So in addition to awakening, what we would say has been the dormant antitrust enforcement in this country for decades.

If you want to expound on what that looks like, from the FTC to the FCC, in terms of mobilizing an antitrust enforcement policy, but also what is required when it comes to forward looking legislation?

To the extent that antitrust can't solve this problem, are there legislative solutions that you're focused on?

Yeah.

I think there is legislation that Congress can pass.

There is work that the agencies can do.

And then there's work locally.

We're actually seeing in statehouses across the country a renewed vigor to make markets competitive and fair.

In California, there is a rethink of all our antitrust statutes on the book that was passed by Assembly member Buffy Wicks and a number of outside organizations and grassroots groups are engaged in that fight.

Another thing I'd point to is these right to repair bills.

So right now, a lot of companies, including your iPhones, make it incredibly hard for you to repair your gadget, which means you end up throwing it out and buying another one.

It's bad for the planet.

It's bad for our pocketbook.

And frankly, it's bad for the American ethos of being able to fix and tinker and keep our products up to date.

And so a number of states have passed, laws that say, no, you should have a right to repair.

Farmers should have a right to repair their farm equipment, when it breaks down, which literally many farm equipment companies have made it very hard to do.

We consumers who use iPhones should have the right to fix our iPhone.

And we've seen Apple make a big shift on that because state after state after state has passed these kinds of bills.

It sounds like there is bipartisan consensus on the consumer protection angle.

I know one of your focus points here at the Economic Security Project.

And, of course, the subject of your book, is universal basic income, an idea that emanated from a Republican as much as a Democrat, and was not considered a liberal policy or conservative policy, at least at its inception.

But when we do talk about legislative solutions, how much are you still focused on UBI experiments?

And if you are, which have been successful and which are you looking at as models for the future?

Yeah.

Well, here's the thing.

I believe that everyone in America deserves an economics floor, right?

Deserves the stability that allows for lives of dignity and agency and freedom.

If you have no sense of when you'll get the hours needed to make the money to pay your rent, right?

Or if you have to literally go bankrupt in order to pay for cancer treatments.

If there's no floor, then people have a very hard time truly being able to make choices, decide who they spend time with, and provide for their families.

And so I believe that everyone deserves a floor regardless of race, religion or income in this country, and that in the pandemic we began to pass policies at the national level that started to create this floor and show that these things can happen in the United States of America.

One of them is, as you say, guaranteed income.

And we have seen this idea go from two pilots in Stockton, California, and in Jackson, Mississippi, to hundreds of pilots around the country, small cities, big cities, counties, states are demonstrating what it would look like if we created a cash floor a guaranteed income.

If you get a promotion at your job, you still get the check, right?

If you make more money, you still get the check.

If you lose your job, you still get the check.

Families can count on it.

It's stable and it creates resilience.

In this era of chaos.

And I think that's one of the reasons that this idea is growing and it's so popular.

And frankly, we see at the federal level in the expanded child tax credit.

Right?

It sounds sort of just like any other part of the tax code.

But it's actually a significant, shift and looks like a guaranteed income for families with kids.

When Congress passed the expanded child tax credit, every parent in America received checks into their bank account with no strings attached.

And so that is exactly the type of policy we need for a 21st century.

With all of the shifts that we will see.

And when you assess efficacy of the universal basic income programs.

Guaranteed livelihood, whatever you want to call it.

What do you think constitutes the most successful program?

If there are mayors or policy advisers listening to this in cities or townships across the country, and they want to understand what has worked most effectively.

Yeah.

Well, I think there are a number of things to point to.

There are dozens and dozens of research studies that have come out now around these different demonstrations.

We're seeing overall that people are significantly less stressed, that cortisol levels are down, right?

That people are able to sleep better at night because they know there's a regular check coming in each month.

We know that doctor visits go up as people do preventative doctor visits, but emergency room visits go down, right?

We know that birth rates and birth weights go up when people feel the stability of an income floor.

So that's one of the things, that we're looking at.

But another thing that I see that doesn't really show up on the ledger of how people spend the money.

People spend the money in ways we imagine.

They pay down bills.

They paid down debt.

They make sure the rent can happen in some month when the hours weren't quite enough.

And that's how people spend the money.

But what doesn't show up on the ledger is the time that people get back and the sense of agency.

I think of Adriana, who is a mom in Chicago.

She has two kids.

They love to play soccer, and every fall, it would be stressful for Adriana to pay for the cleats, the shin guards, the whole kit, the fees, the uniforms that go into playing soccer.

Last fall, she was part of the Chicago Area Guaranteed Income program.

So she had $500 coming in a month on top of her wages, and she went straight to the sports store and bought the full soccer kit for her kids.

Setting them up for success.

And feeling like the parent that she wanted to be who could provide for her kids.

That agency that came with economic security.

And that's really what I want for every parent in this country.

Would you say that the programs generally have targeted, people who are already employed?

But they may be in 1 or 3 jobs, and it's not paying for food, medical expenses, rent, it's not sufficient.

Or is it targeting unhoused?

Or some combination of the two?

Communities across this country are tackling that question differently.

But here is what we know that people up and down the income ladder feel incredibly insecure in their finances.

And that can happen to a good middle class job that all of a sudden, goes away with tech layoffs or goes away with, the increase in AI and automation, that are shifting the American job landscape literally under our feet as you and I talk.

And so many families that were once considered solidly middle class have found themselves in a place of insecurity and vulnerability.

And that's the kind of thing that we know guaranteed income can impact.

We know that it also helps keep people in their homes.

So there are folks who are from the housing communities that are looking at how can we, shore up housing security, so that we have less people who become unhoused at the end of the day?

And we also know, that one job in America isn't enough, right?

That there's a big fight to raise wages in this country.

And over the last few years, we've actually seen wages go up because of the tight labor markets.

And that, I think is really important.

But it is still true that the biggest job in America is the service industry, which is some of the most vulnerable work and pays the least.

And it is true that one job in this country at minimum wage does not pay the bills.

And that is why people have one, two and three jobs, as you say.

And so, yes, I want a world where somebody doesn't have to DoorDash on a Saturday morning, but can instead spend time with their kids, or with their family or with their church, in order to build the civic life as opposed to working every second of the day just to make ends meet.

What I hear you saying, Natalie, is that the constituency of recipients of this support will range from those who are unhoused to those working three jobs, barely making their rent payments or mortgage.

It really just depends on the municipality, the city, the state.

Yeah.

Those are all sort of pilots that are designed to show what this could look like if we as a nation said this is the future of our social contract.

And I think the future of our social contract needs to be a floor that provides housing, and healthcare, and family care, and the guarantee of good work, of income, of college, of debt free college, and guarantees an inheritance known as a baby bond.

These are all ideas that would create economic security that I explore, in the book and show how they've moved, into the mainstream.

I think that is where we ultimately need to be, and that is for everyone, right?

That is something that we all deserve to have in the richest nation on earth.

In looking at the most effective ways to communicate that guarantee, the gold standard, even though the program is not as secure as we would hope.

Social Security.

And when you think of how many generations have paid into it for it to be viable in perpetuity, it's not, the trust will go bust eventually.

How much of the way that you think about the guarantee, you know, in the book, in future policymaking, based on the success of Social Security and the idea that it is that floor that you want to achieve, not just for the elderly, but for all Americans.

Yeah.

You know, first I'd say we have a choice on whether or not Social Security will be around for generations to come.

We absolutely have that choice.

And I hope we elect people who want to make sure Social Security continues to be a guarantee, as I age and as my children age.

And that that is something you can count on in the United States.

And, of course, there was a time when that wasn't true, when it was inconceivable that you would just give people money when they're old and in the twilight of their years?

And it was organized for it was fought, it was piloted, it was tried, and then it was passed.

And it has grown over time to become what we understand today, just the norms of how social policy works, a guarantee.

And so, yes, I believe here we are at the beginning of, you know, AI and its impact on the workforce, of automation, of climate chaos that is wreaking havoc, that is incredibly unpredictable.

And it is more important than ever to build guarantees in to our social policy.

And here's the thing.

We have guarantees in America.

We have guarantees for businesses.

If you are a business here, you know that you can count on the court system, the patent system.

You know that you can count on a solid monetary system, right?

We even have liability for shareholders to ensure that they're not personally held responsible for any misdoing.

In the corporate world, there are so many guarantees, for businesses and those wealthiest among us, that I'm arguing we should extend them to everyone, and that this is an evolution of American capitalism that needs to happen if our democracy and if capitalism is going to continue.

There was a movement during the 2016 campaign.

And again in 2020 for, Medicare for all.

I haven't heard the nomenclature Social Security for all, but I feel like maybe it's out there.

Whispers.

I honestly feel as though the idea of universal basic income or an economic guarantee.

In the pursuit of securing Social Security for generations.

I feel like that may be the next discourse we're having in the political realm.

The idea of extending the benefit of Social Security to a younger cohort.

And, you know, the basic promise of that, being extended perhaps to all Americans.

What do you think about that way of framing it?

Yeah.

I think you're really on to something.

I think Social Security for all is a great way of thinking about an income floor that sits alongside your wages and any other earnings that you have, and creates a level of stability.

The other thing I'd point to is this concept of a baby bond.

And this is the idea that there's income and income is important.

And there's a significant income gap in America.

There is a racial income gap in America.

There's an income gap between men and women.

But the real gap here is at the level of wealth and wealth being what you owe, what you own, minus what you owe.

And that the racial wealth gap is one of the great immoral stains of our time.

Right?

That the average white family has ten times the wealth that the average black family has in this country.

And so, wealth is incredibly important to think about as we think about economic security.

And one of the big ideas that has moved into the mainstream is to create an account, a trust at birth for every child that when they turn 18, they would have a nest egg, a sort of seed capital, to start their adulthood, just like an inheritance, like a child of a wealthy family may have that we can do this for everyone.

And this idea is gaining traction.

It was a white paper written by Sandy Darity and Darrick Hamilton probably 12, 15 years ago.

But then Cory Booker, Senator Booker ran for president, in 2020 on this idea, creating a national version of how we would, pass baby bonds in this country.

And then states have picked up the baton and are moving it forward.

So the state of Connecticut was the first to pass baby bonds.

So baby Nolan was the first baby born in the state that has a trust held in his name.

And when he turns 18, he'll have a seed.

He'll have seed capital to start his life to buy a home, to pursue a degree.

The things that you need to start your life, and this is the kind of idea that I think sits alongside, the income quite well and reflects what I think Social Security, has provided for generations.

How do you deal, Natalie with the conundrum, the elephant in the room, if you will, which is means testing and the moral question, as well as the fiscal question of, does baby Nolan or whoever that baby might be, merit a bond if they are already inheriting a significant amount of wealth if they are part of the, group that you described that has historically been privileged, and that is, white Americans as opposed to people of color.

As you support policies to make families more economically secure and prosperous, how do you analyze this question of if and when means testing is at all appropriate?

Yeah.

You know, ultimately, the more... First, Id say, ultimately, this is a political choice that we can make.

The first question is, are we going to create an economic floor for a 21st century?

And then the next question is how, and the how starts to become really interesting and really, really important, right?

The policy details matter.

Let's take the child tax credit that was the centerpiece of Joe Biden's American Rescue Plan in 2021.

So right after the pandemic, the health crisis was in full swing.

And we had an economic crisis, just really gaining steam.

So the American Rescue Plan was designed to do just that, right?

Create stability.

And so the expanded child tax credit came monthly to every parent in this country was debited directly into their account.

And it was every parent who made $400,000 or less, which ended up being about 92% of Americans.

So it means tested.

But it was means tested pretty high up the income ladder.

So these are all choices that we can make.

And that is a debate I welcome, the “how”, not the “if”, -we should do it.

-Right.

Well you're speaking some common sense, Natalie.

And, I mean, I urge legislators, policymakers, laypeople who are watching this to read Natalie's book, The Guarantee.

Read the work of the Economic Security Project.

As we close here, let me just ask you about the historical precedent.

I mentioned from the outset that this was a bipartisan and nonpartisan proposition.

Does that bear out in your research as well?

That, this is not something that is really partizan or politicized when it comes to the historical idea of having a guarantee of wealth or life, liberty and happiness, or being able to pursue your lives successfully in America.

Yeah.

You know, I think that is a really important question.

And we are seeing support from very different perspectives on both sides of the aisle for creating more economic security in America.

I think it is much further along, left of center, where you've had a number of people running for office, under the Democratic Party who are taking these ideas and moving them forward.

And it's my strong hope that we see the same revival in the Republican Party.

We certainly have, you know, Republicans who are interested in antitrust law.

And, and economic security for families.

So it's my strong hope to see more support there.

Here's the thing that we know, right?

That the economy is not like the weather.

The economy is a series of choices that we make.

It's like a house that we build and we construct and we make decisions every step of the way, and we get the outcomes that we designed for.

So if we design for homelessness, right?

If we design for, pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality, around something like housing, then we will have the unhoused on the streets.

And if we design for precarity, then that's what we'll get.

And so I think it's incredibly important to note, we can design a very different economy.

And it will usher in a revival of creativity, ingenuity, small business creation we've seen go up, after we've made investments in families over the last several years after the pandemic.

These are the kinds of things that absolutely should be bipartisan.

Natalie Foster, president to the Economic Security Project.

Dare I say that the seeds of the Affordable Care Act were planted in the Republican Romney administration in Massachusetts, and some of the seeds of UBI or the guarantee were studied by Nixon aides, in a Republican presidential administration.

Before we go, I want to acknowledge Economic Security Project for their support of our programing on economic fairness.

Natalie, thank you for your insight.

And thank you for your really constructive work at the Economic Security Project.

It's my pleasure to be here.

Thanks for having us.

[music] Please visit the Open Mind website at thirteen.org/openmind Download the podcast on Apple and Spotify and check us out on X, Instagram and Facebook.

Continuing production of The Open Mind has been made possible by grants from Vital Projects Fund, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Ploughshares Fund, Angelson Family Foundation, Robert and Kate Niehaus Foundation, Grateful American Foundation, and Draper Foundation.