For many years, one of the basic phrases of electoral politics was “it’s the economy, stupid.” The test, devised by former Bill Clinton strategist James Carville, warned party leaders that economic concerns will always trump other issues on voters’ minds.
But lately, Carville’s behavioral advice feels like it’s been forgotten.
In the administration of President Joe Biden, social and cultural concerns rose on the priority list of Democrats. Policies such as the $15 minimum wage and addresses rise in price in grocery stores was not front and center in Vice President Kamala Harris’ short presidential campaign (or at least, not as front and center as other issues).
Under President Donald Trump, who won in part on a promise to lower prices on consumer goods, prices have nevertheless gone into reverse, driven by his strategy of punitive tariffs and a war with Iran that has disrupted the energy market.
Because of this, concerns about the economy — and especially the cost of living — have never been more important to voters. That fact has led candidates of both parties in the 2026 midterms (as well as potential candidates in the 2028 presidential election) to focus on a new dimension of “importance.”
The A word may be the hottest thing in politics right now. It’s in policy papers and TV commercials, and on the campaign trail after being announced by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose successful 2025 campaign focused on the issue. At its core, the idea isn’t that different from Carville’s: A candidate must show loyalty to “kitchen table” issues before anything else, especially this time.
That being said, affordability means many things to many people (including Trump, who has called it “deception“). I wanted to spend this week America, Really break down the buzzword and get a sense of the policy positions that inform this new goal.
So I spoke with Representative Greg Casar (D-TX), who is the chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, about the recently released “New Affordability Agenda”. It is a 10 point policy proposal explain in more concrete terms what progressive democrats mean when they say affordability.
I think the timing of the proposal is very interesting, with the Democrats out of power in both houses of Congress and Trump still in the White House. Why are progressives bringing this up now? And how many of these proposals do they believe can get bipartisan support?
Read on for a snippet of our conversation, lightly edited for length and clarity. There is much more in the full show, therefore listen America, Really wherever you find your podcasts or watch them Vox’s YouTube channel.
Why abandon this agenda now? Democrats are clearly not in the majority of parliament. Why this time?
The new affordability agenda is the Progressive Caucus’ 10-point plan to lower costs for everyday people, especially by taking on the big companies and the super-rich who rip you off and make their money gouge you. And the reason for making this agenda clear now is because we want the candidates to campaign on this agenda in their primaries.
We want people to win their elections by going out and connecting with their constituents about cutting costs. Here’s the big part: If we get a majority, I want us to pass these kinds of policies to lower your utility bill by $500 next year, to cover your child care costs or lower the cost of your prescription drugs, and then dare Donald Trump to try to block it.
If they pass it, great. If they prevent it, then the voters will know who is to blame. But right now, the thought I’m hearing from many voters is, well, they know who Trump is. They may be outraged by his lies and the way he is, but they want to know what the Democrats stand for, especially when it comes to everyday economics.
Congress isn’t necessarily credited with passing big bills in the past few years. How achievable are these things?
Voters are very angry and very angry right now with the way their costs are going up and up. And so I’m hearing from elected officials all over, but especially my Democratic colleagues, that we have to do something about this. And so I think this is an important opportunity to finally defeat Big Pharma and start producing tons of our own drugs as a country and bring down the price of so many drugs that people depend on for their health care.
Now is the time to finally take on these super PACs that are trying to buy politicians and elections and policies. And so I smell blood in the water this time, when the voters are angry, to create a new agreement in the Democratic Party.
You seem to be saying some of this agenda should be seen as a signal to your fellow Democrats in 2026 and 2028, saying, “This is what affordability means to us.”
As a progressive in a progressive district, I could put forth an economic agenda that would vote very well in Austin, Texas, but probably have more problems in, say, some rural areas of the country. We strategically chose not to do that and instead set that agenda polls very well and two in three Trump voters, seven in 10 independents.
We did it because we want this agenda to be passed. This is an agenda of no excuses. It plays well in every district and helps voters with something we hear every day, which is how expensive living is going in this country.
By the way, is that why I don’t see things like climate change or even Medicare for All listed among these boards?
As an ongoing meeting, we have items called our main agenda. That includes Medicare for All and the Green New Deal. We continue to fight for those major bills and bring more parts of the party together about those ideas.
But these are not our flags. This new slate is our warships and our flags. These are the kinds of issues where we’ve gotten, in some cases, 80 percent of the voters, not just now, but consistently. And so let’s move those things, because we can have an agreement on it while still pushing the big ideas.
It feels a little, though, that the Democrats are talking about the weather less. Is that true?
What we need to make sure we do in the climate movement is connect it to people’s everyday lives. When Republicans tried to make it seem like addressing the climate problem was about buying more expensive products or was some kind of elite luxury, we got a big blow.
And so I think it’s really important, if we care about having an achievable climate agenda, that we need to talk about how electrification is going to make things cheaper.
Let’s start this over by taking on the insane price of your electric bill, get people to believe in you, and then show people how a climate agenda can make your life more affordable instead of more expensive.
I also wanted to ask about banning tracking prices. I know you introduced a bill on that policy, and your bill would prohibit the use of survey-based pricing and wage setting. It would also prevent the use of AI to set wages.
This all makes sense to me, but it feels like a larger question of regulation of technology and AI that we’ve heard from members of Congress who have called for a total moratorium on data centers.
Why isn’t something like that on this list, and instead it features tracking prices?
We need AI principles in time. But let’s start and, in my opinion, take the AI hall on something that is understandable to everyone.
Let’s talk about price tracking for a second because it pisses people off. One day we had someone on Twitter at JetBlue, “I’m trying to go to a funeral. Someone just passed away, and in the last day, the price of this flight has gone up like $250.” And a customer service representative answered from JetBlue saying, “Clear your savings. Clear your cookies.”
And this is what people know is going on. You get your personal data, they run it through AI, and they figure out how to price you. That’s the kind of thing that should unite Democrats, but also tons of independent voters and Republicans to say, “Yeah, these guys are using AI to power us.”
Part of the premise of this session is that we want to analyze words like affordability and even sustainability. We talked about the former, but I think the latter is important as well as the one that can be misinterpreted.
What does being a progressive mean to you in 2026, and how can you differentiate it from just being a democrat?
To me, being a progressive means at least two things. One, to be willing to connect a lot of people with a lot of people, all the people who are facing the authorities that are making your life worse, whether that is oppressing you on the issue of civil rights or costing you as we talked about. It is about bringing the everyday person, who may not have (financially) but should have political power, together to take them on.
Second, I think being progressive is a promising business. I think that the world can be better, that we don’t need to settle for crumbs or settle for the status quo.
