{"id":985,"date":"2021-03-22T12:00:00","date_gmt":"2021-03-22T16:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/americancompass.beckandstone.com\/?p=985"},"modified":"2023-10-03T04:47:27","modified_gmt":"2023-10-03T08:47:27","slug":"family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/","title":{"rendered":"Family Financial Security: Sen. Romney on the Right\u2019s Fight to Support Our Most Important Institution"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><em>Senator Mitt Romney joins us for a conversation about what draws him to family benefits, why he thinks conservatives should embrace the Family Security Act\u2019s approach, and how he sees this debate fitting into the broader one about the right-of-center\u2019s future.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<div id=\"buzzsprout-player-8189327\"><\/div>\n<script src=\"https:\/\/www.buzzsprout.com\/1080440\/8189327-family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-right-s-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution.js?container_id=buzzsprout-player-8189327&amp;player=small\" type=\"text\/javascript\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Excerpted Comments by Senator Romney (edited for clarity):<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p><em><strong>On the importance of a monthly benefit:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p>One of the reasons we moved to the monthly payment was because right now, with the child tax credit, you get a refund or a substantial check when you file your taxes. So it might be $6,000 that comes when you file your taxes. Well, how\u2019s that money going to get spent? Probably not on monthly food and clothes for the kids. It\u2019s going to be spent on some major purchase, more than likely, if people act like I do when something comes in an unexpected way.&nbsp;And so&nbsp;<strong>moving to a monthly check means that we\u2019re going to do a better job in supporting our kids<\/strong>, giving them a chance, perhaps to even go to a private or parochial school setting, a Catholic school, perhaps, but giving them the food and clothing support that they need.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p><em><strong>On the importance of encouraging work:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p>I very much favor a policy of encouraging work. I don\u2019t like the idea of people having a lifetime of government support and never getting into the workforce. You really do want to have people working and you want to encourage people to work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>[In our plan], we don\u2019t eliminate the earned income tax credit. That is still there and so there\u2019s a substantial incentive, which exists in our program and in the current law, to encourage people to work. That remains and so I want to encourage people to work. \u2026&nbsp;I\u2019m comfortable with the idea of saying, let\u2019s say this person has worked in the past. That might be sufficient as an on-off switch for these benefits. But if someone said, \u201cNo, you\u2019ve got to work at least, let\u2019s say, $5,000 worth per year,\u201d I\u2019m okay with that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I think I\u2019d prefer a setting where we don\u2019t connect work and childbearing in the same policy. So my own preference is to recognize that&nbsp;<strong>one thing I want to encourage here is family formation and childbearing. I also want to encourage and continue to encourage work. But I don\u2019t know that I want to put those two things together.<\/strong>&nbsp;So, I want to make sure that we have incentives for people to go to work and to be participants in the work system. At the same time, I want to encourage people to have children and I want to support people who do have children, to make sure that the child is given the kind of care and treatment that we as a society want them to have.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p><em><strong>On considering other proposals:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p>I would note that&nbsp;<strong>my plan is not a \u201ctake it or leave it exactly as it is\u201d plan<\/strong>. I recognize that other people have good ideas\u2014certainly Senator Lee and Senator Rubio do, I know you as well, Oren, you have some ideas in this regard.&nbsp;<strong>I\u2019m open to those and think that if we make progress on this front, it\u2019s going to be on a collaborative basis.<\/strong>&nbsp;And we\u2019re going to have to have Democrats, not just a bunch of Republicans work on this or conservatives, but we\u2019re going to have to have some Democrats look at it and it\u2019ll change in some ways. But I think recognizing that our current programs are really not working in the way we\u2019d hoped and that moving to monthly support and hopefully not raising taxes to pay for this, but instead finding pay force within the elimination of current programs, that that\u2019s an approach that has some merit.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p><em><strong>On the importance of Republicans having forward-looking policy ideas:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p>I think Senator Lee and Senator Rubio, I\u2019m delighted that they have put out a plan as well. It just says, \u201cOkay, this is an important topic. Republicans, we have a point of view here.\u201d<strong>&nbsp;I\u2019m afraid on too many things going on in Washington right now, Republicans are seen as not having a point of view other than \u201cno.\u201d<\/strong>&nbsp;And there are a lot of things that Democrats are doing where the right answer is no. But there are some topics where we have a better idea. And&nbsp;<strong>I think it\u2019s important for us to lead with those ideas, and this is one area I think we can do that.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p><em><strong>On the emergence of China as a serious geopolitical threat:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p><strong>The thing that\u2019s probably been most dramatic that\u2019s changed in my perspective over the last almost 10 years is seeing China today as a power that is intent on dominating the world and replacing the liberal democratic order in the world<\/strong>, and the rules of the road for the economy, and for our military, and for the freedom of navigation, and the freedom of the skies and space. They intend on basically taking over the world. \u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The world dominated by China is not like the world dominated by Great Britain or the United States.&nbsp;If you want evidence of that, look at what\u2019s happening to the Uyghurs. I mean, there is genocide being undertaken against a population of a million people. And look what\u2019s happened to the people of Hong Kong, promised self-rule given the heavy hand of the Chinese Communist Party. And I\u2019m sure the Tibetans would have a lot to say as well about life under Chinese rule.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>That is probably the single most dramatic change on the world stage that I think requires us to concentrate even more fully on making sure that everything we\u2019re doing strengthens us, it keeps our economy strong, allows us to lead, and allows us to have the moral and economic strength to bring together the other nations of the world to keep China from trying to change the kind of world that we think would be best for freedom and for the people of the world.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Full Transcript<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:<\/strong>&nbsp;Good afternoon and welcome to this American Compass event. My name is Oren Cass. I\u2019m the executive director at American Compass, and we are thrilled to have Senator Mitt Romney joining us this afternoon to talk about family policy. As some of you may know, I had the privilege to work for then Governor Romney on his 2012 presidential campaign and have certainly been an avid follower of his work since then. And as we\u2019ve all seen, he, I think started a very important debate, particularly among conservatives in the past month with his introduction of the Family Security Act, which was a proposal to create a universal child allowance, supporting families with children. American Compass has been doing a lot of work in this space as well. We hope you\u2019ll check that out at americancompass.org and our own proposal for what we call the Family Income\u2026 Excuse me, the Family Income Compliment. And with that, I don\u2019t think Senator Romney needs any more introduction. So I will bring him in. Thank you so much, Senator Romney.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:<\/strong>&nbsp;Thank you so much. There, we got that to work, Oren. Good to see you. Appreciate the chance to be with you and your team and look forward to our conversation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:&nbsp;<\/strong>Yes. And I think we want to start off with just a few slides to run through what exactly the proposal is that you\u2019ve been working on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:&nbsp;<\/strong>Yeah. And just a moment. Let me just note, if you will, the impetus for what we put together. And I note, that this was my team that worked on this and brought the idea to me and I signed on. So it\u2019s not like I had this brilliant insight and then told them, \u201cHey, I want you to come up with something.\u201d They went the other way around. But the observation that I\u2019ve had, and that I think many of us in the conservative world have had, is that we\u2019ve seen the birth rate in this country go down, down, down. And people are not getting married and not having kids. And the preservation of a civilization, and a nation of a society is related of course to maintaining its population.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As a matter of fact, if you go back to 2008, and if we had had the same birth rate over the last 12 years that we had in 2008, we would now have 5.8 million more Americans having been born. So the declining birth rate has cost us some 5.8 million young people, who 18 years from now, or 20 years from now, would be contributing to our economy. So it\u2019s a real concern. And so we said, what is it that\u2019s wrong with our family support systems in this country that\u2019s not helping families encouraging them to get married and to have children. So that\u2019s what led to our proposal. So with that, let\u2019s turn to the first slide. And let me just describe what we do.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Family-Security-Act_American-Compass-slides_final_Page_1-1024x576.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-3855\"\/><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p>There we go. All right. Under our plan, parents receive a benefit, a monthly benefit, and they should begin receiving it four months prior to the time the child is due. This is to help pregnant women who are concerned about the financial circumstances of bringing a child into the world. And so we want to have the payments start within four months of the due date. And the maximum payment is $1,250 per family, per month. So for children, six years of age and younger, it\u2019s $350 a month. For kids six years and older, it\u2019s $250 a month. The payments are administered by the Social Security Administration. And so all of our kids are going to need to have a social security number.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>And I note that the phase out in terms of income for this program is at pretty high income levels. So for a single filer, it phases out at $200,000. And for a joint filer, a couple, in other words, it phases out at $400,000. So this is a monthly payment that\u2019s going to support children and having children, not just to the poor, but to middle-income families and almost some higher income families at 400,000 per month. So it\u2019s designed to be a very substantial incentive for marriage, family formation, as well as for having kids. Let\u2019s go to the next slide.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Family-Security-Act_American-Compass-slides_final_Page_2-1024x576.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-3856\"\/><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p>Just to describe the current programs. Right now, look on the left-hand side. I\u2019ll note that our objective is to consolidate duplicate family programs, to remove the marriage penalties that exist in our current systems, and to treat stay-at-home and working parents the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>We don\u2019t want to create a requirement that, let\u2019s say a couple, a man and a wife that, let\u2019s say the wife wants to go to work. The husband wants to stay home and raise the children. We don\u2019t want to penalize that individual for making that choice. Under the current plan, we spend roughly $188 billion. You see on the left-hand side of this slide, that\u2019s a child tax credit, which costs us 117 billion a year. And the earned income tax credit of 71 billion a year, for a total of 188. The proposal that I\u2019m making is that we change the child tax credit instead to this monthly child benefit that costs the $229 billion. And then the earned income tax credit goes down. It\u2019s still there of course, to provide an incentive for work. We love work. We want people to work. But the child portion of the earned income tax credit is eliminated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So our cost is 254 billion instead of 188 billion. So that means we\u2019re going to have to find $66 billion if we want to have this as a revenue-neutral proposal. And there\u2019s no hard and fast insistence on these pay for spending offsets. But those that we identified are to eliminate the head of household status tax filing credit. That is something, by the way, we\u2019re the only country that has that. It is a marriage penalty that doesn\u2019t exist in other nations and probably shouldn\u2019t in ours. We eliminate the child to develop a care credit, eliminate TANIF. And I\u2019d note TANIF works in some states, not in others. Those who love TANIF will argue with me on that. And maybe we\u2019ll find another place to find an offset. And then finally, the SNAP categorical eligibility changes of 3.1 billion. And then eliminate the SALT deduction, as you know, SALT is highly associated with higher income folks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So this is something that takes away that benefit to high-income folks. And therefore, we came up with the 66 billion. Let\u2019s go to the next slide.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Family-Security-Act_American-Compass-slides_final_Page_3-1024x576.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-3857\"\/><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n<p>And this was going to be the hardest for me to describe. On the left is the size of the benefit that is available to the sample that we\u2019ve chosen. Which is looking at a couple with two young people, two children\u2026 And excuse me. Two young children, one older child. So two young children getting $350 a month, one older child getting $250 a month. And it\u2019s a couple, a husband and wife. And on the bottom, you see family income, and it ranges from zero here to about 100,000. So looking at the different plans, my plan is the dark line in the center. The plan that\u2019s been described by Senators Lee and Rubio is the, I think it\u2019s kind of a greenish line towards the bottom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>And then the orange line is the line that\u2019s proposed by President Biden. What you\u2019ll notice that my plan has a relatively flat level of support going all the way across the income levels. In terms of differences relative to the other plans, you\u2019ll note that on the Biden plan, he has a substantially higher amount at very low incomes, under 25,000. And then brings it down pretty quickly and substantially. On the Lee and Rubio plan, you\u2019ll notice that until you get to about 75,000 of income, that plan has substantially less support for children at the lower income levels. And perhaps the biggest difference is at the very, very low end, which is a zero to about $12,000, the Lee and Rubio plan is very, very low indeed. And the plan that I proposed has more support for very, very low income families. So that\u2019s the outline. And with that, I\u2019ll turn it back to you, Oren, for any questions you might have.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:&nbsp;<\/strong>Terrific senator, thank you for providing the overview. I think as anyone listening gets the sense, there\u2019s obviously a huge number of variables that go into this sort of proposal and so I\u2019d love to sort of talk through the thinking and the rationale that that goes into a few of them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I think the one that\u2019s probably been the focus of the most attention and debate is exactly what you highlighted on the contrast between your proposal and the one from Senators Lee and Rubio at the sort of very low-income end of the threshold and at the sort of $0 amount.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>That is, if you have a household that\u2019s not earning any income of its own, certainly the traditional view on the right of center has been, we want to provide a safety net to those folks but we don\u2019t think we want to sort of send them large amounts of cash. And so I\u2019d love to sort of dig in there first on your thoughts on why we want to move to a model that says, even if you\u2019re a household that isn\u2019t working at all, we have up to a thousand dollars a month may be coming from the government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:<\/strong>&nbsp;Well, let me describe two scenarios. One is one where there\u2019s no work at all in the household. And the other is, let\u2019s say a family earning minimum wage; so they\u2019re at $17,000 a year, and what\u2019s the difference to do those two scenarios.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For those that are earning nothing at all, would presumably be a single parent and if it\u2019s a single parent with two or three children, the question is whether we as a society, want to encourage the mom to leave the home, or if it\u2019s a dad, the dad to leave the home and to work, or whether we might instead look back at their work experience prior to having children. I\u2019m not entirely averse to saying, \u201cAll right, you have to show some history of work or be able to get some job.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>But I do think that if you have someone, for instance earning $5,000 or $10,000 in their household to say, \u201cWe\u2019re not going to give you much money to take care of your children.\u201d One, I don\u2019t know that that\u2019s good for the kids. I think we have a societal interest, one in encouraging people to have children and number two, having a certain amount of support per child.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>One of the reasons we moved to the monthly payment was because right now, with the child tax credit, you get a refund or a substantial check when you file your taxes. So it might be $6,000 that comes when you file your taxes. Well, how\u2019s that money going to get spent? Probably not on monthly food and clothes for the kids. It\u2019s going to be spent on some major purchase, more than likely, if people act like I do when something comes in an unexpected way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>And so moving to a monthly check means that we\u2019re going to do a better job in supporting our kids, giving them a chance, perhaps to even go to a private or parochial school setting, a Catholic school, perhaps, but giving food and clothing support that they would need. So if there\u2019s an on-off switch for whether someone has any work, I understand that. But I do think that even at low incomes, you don\u2019t want to say to people, \u201cHey, we\u2019re not going to support children any more than you\u2019ve paid in taxes.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So for instance, if you look at something like Medicare. People pay into Medicare all their lives, but we don\u2019t limit how much you receive in Medicare based on how much you\u2019ve paid during your lifetime. Likewise, with Social Security. Social security disability, or old age, we don\u2019t limit how much you get from these programs by how much you\u2019ve put in. But we do insist that you\u2019ve worked obviously and have contributed to the programs in the first place other than for the disabled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So I think the philosophy is, let\u2019s support families and encourage family formation and childbearing and not if you will, have lower support for families of low income than we do for families that are earning, let\u2019s say $25,000, $50,000, or $75,000.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:&nbsp;<\/strong>Yeah. That\u2019s a terrific point I think about the family that\u2019s earning 15 or $20,000 a year. You can imagine the single parent with a part-time minimum wage job, let\u2019s say, but I think you, you raised the interesting hypothetical. So let\u2019s say you have a single parent, maybe with young kids. Should public policy prefer work over no work? I think you emphasize if you have a two-parent household and one parent might want to stay home, we certainly don\u2019t want to discourage that, where you only have one parent in the household, of course, now you face a much sharper trade-off between time with the family and time in the workforce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So I\u2019m curious if from your perspective, is it better for policy to truly be agnostic on that question, or would you see it as important to say, \u201cWe don\u2019t necessarily want her working three shifts, or we don\u2019t want him working three shifts but we do see the value in at least some time in the workforce, even if that means some time away from kids.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:&nbsp;<\/strong>Well, first of all, I very much favor a policy of encouraging work. I don\u2019t like the idea of people having a lifetime of government support and never getting into the workforce and not participating in the workforce. So you really do want to have people working and you want to encourage people to work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>One thing I noticed that we don\u2019t eliminate the earned income tax credit. That is still there and so there\u2019s a substantial incentive, which exists in our program and in the current law, to encourage people to work. That remains and so I want to encourage people to work and I don\u2019t know that I\u2019m going to make the societal decision of if there\u2019s a mom, single mom with two kids, do I want her to be working when they\u2019re little? When they\u2019re one and two years old? Do I want her working when they\u2019re five? I mean, I can make those judgments, but I\u2019m not sure I want to apply those necessarily to society at large.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So, I\u2019m comfortable with the idea of saying, let\u2019s say this person has worked in the past. Okay, that might be sufficient as an on-off switch for these benefits. But if someone said, \u201cNo, you\u2019ve got to work at least let\u2019s say $5,000 worth per year.\u201d I\u2019m okay with that. I think I\u2019d prefer a setting where we don\u2019t connect work and childbearing in the same policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So my own preference is to recognize that one thing I want to encourage here is family formation and childbearing. I also want to encourage and continue to encourage work. But I don\u2019t know that I want to put those two things together. So, I want to make sure that we have incentives for people to go to work and to be participants in the work system. At the same time, I want to encourage people to have children and I want to support people who do have children, to make sure that the child is given the kind of care and treatment that we as a society want them to have.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:&nbsp;<\/strong>Yeah and that\u2019s\u2026 I think that\u2019s a really important point that at the end of the day, you\u2019re talking about the welfare of the children, who of course are not the ones who decide whether to work or not and so that\u2019s certainly a factor as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:&nbsp;<\/strong>I\u2019d also note, just my team has pointed this out to me and I haven\u2019t seen all the data on this, but they say there are a number of other countries which have moved to it, a setting much like what I\u2019ve described, and there was some question about whether this would lead people to become less inclined to work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The result in other countries has been just the opposite. That for whatever reason is, as they went to a monthly or regular payment schedule and did not have a work requirement that nonetheless, more people ended up going back to work and it may well have just been the greater confidence they had that they could care for their children, that allowed them to take on part-time work or other jobs, but people went back to work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So clearly, if we\u2019re talking about the few cases where it\u2019s a zero income person, we can look and see what the experience is before we rush to a final judgment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:<\/strong>&nbsp;Yeah. It\u2019s an interesting point and I think distinguishes between the sort of the practical case and the principled case and of course it makes no sense to consider the principle without the practical implications. I think conversely, there\u2019s an important consideration of kind of what are the principles that motivate the policy design and so I\u2019d love to talk a little bit about what this kind of thinking means for conservatism and for the right of center and the GOP going forward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>One point that you made in comparing your proposal to the Rubio\/Lee one was to emphasize that you don\u2019t want to gear how much support a family should receive toward how much they might have paid in taxes. That\u2019s not what we do with Medicare. It\u2019s not what will you do with Social Security and it\u2019s a somewhat arbitrary linkage. I think the traditional view among Republicans would be, well, we believe in making the tax code as fair as possible and using it to do things like support families, but that\u2019s a very different matter from what would look more like redistribution, that is we simply tax some people and send the money to others. And they would say, well, this goes over that line. Once you disconnect this from the tax code, this truly is just collecting money from some people and sending it to others. One answer is that\u2019s fine, and we should do it, but I\u2019m very curious how you, whether you see that division as an important one and how it would factor into this kind of policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:&nbsp;<\/strong>Well, I\u2019m just looking at a circumstance and saying, all right, let\u2019s say we\u2019ve got a young couple. And I think in most cases we\u2019re talking about across the country, these are couples, young couples that have one or two children, and you have a spouse, or perhaps both of them that are working at very low-income levels, they\u2019re early in their career and they probably have, maybe they have some student debt as well, but in many cases, they\u2019ve not graduated from college or gone to college. So let\u2019s say they\u2019re earning $25,000 a year or $15,000 a year combined.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>And the question is, what do we want to do as a society with regards to encouraging them to have children and supporting the children that they have? And I think it is in our society\u2019s interest not to say to them, I\u2019m sorry, you haven\u2019t done enough money to get the $350 a month. You\u2019re only going to get $122 a month because you haven\u2019t earned enough money. Or do we say, as a society, we value your children. We value the support that you\u2019re going to be able to give the child in terms of food and clothing and so forth, education. And so we as a society are going to provide the kind of support that you would need, the same support for your children, that someone who\u2019s earned 30,000 or $40,000 a year would get. And so I fall on that side.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I think there are a number of things that are very conservative in approach. One is we\u2019re making payments to the young women that are pregnant within four months of their due date. As I indicated that among those that have abortions, some 70% say the reason or one of the key reasons that they had an abortion was because they were concerned about their financial capability in caring for the child. So providing a monthly stipend to someone who is pregnant is very much a pro-life consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Likewise, I believe that encouraging family formation and childbearing, particularly in a society that would have had 5.8 million more people if we\u2019d have had the same birth rate as we had in 2008, over the last 12 years, that\u2019s a very conservative orientation, which is to maintain our civilization and our society. So, we can question whether people should get more than they paid in taxes. But again, I note that with regards to our retirement programs and our disability programs, that\u2019s not a requirement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:<\/strong>&nbsp;Very interesting. And it points to the, I think as you alluded to sort of be the economic challenges, it sort of points to in my mind anyway, how this fits into the sort of broader debate that is increasingly going on on the right of center, about what role public policy needs to play, especially economic policy, in addressing some of these challenges that the country has. And so putting this proposal in that context, I think it is implicit in the case that you\u2019ve made, but it is harder now for a family to support kids than it might\u2019ve been in the past, if that is part of the reason for the childbearing decline. How would you describe your assessment of what has happened in the economy and what makes this policy may be needed more now than it would have been in the past?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:&nbsp;<\/strong>I do believe, based upon not just experience but what I\u2019m reading, that there\u2019s a lot more employment uncertainty on the part of young people where they\u2019re coming out of high school or coming out of college as to their permanence in their job and their reluctance to marry is one of the elements of that. Likewise, the decision to delay having children is likewise associated with that. That\u2019s just the new reality. I mean, when I was growing up, people went to work in a company and the great majority of people did, I did, and planned on staying for a long time. That\u2019s just not the case today. And obviously, the COVID crisis has exacerbated the concerns people have about income or workforce insecurity. And so I think that suggests, as well as the simple data which is the decline in birth rates, that what we\u2019re doing, we\u2019re spending $500 billion a year supporting families, but it ain\u2019t working, we\u2019re not getting it to people at the time and in the manner they need it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>And I would note that my plan is not a take it or leave it exactly as it is plan. I mean, I recognize that other people have good ideas, certainly Senator Lee and Senator Rubio do, I know you as well, Oren, you have some ideas in this regard, I\u2019m open to those and think that if we make progress in this front, it\u2019s going to be on a collaborative basis. And we\u2019re going to have to have Democrats, not just a bunch of Republicans work on this or conservatives, but we\u2019re going to have to have some Democrats look at it and it\u2019ll change in some ways. But I think recognizing that our current programs are really not working in the way we\u2019d hoped and that moving to monthly support and hopefully not raising taxes to pay for this, but instead finding pay force within the elimination of current programs, that that\u2019s an approach that has some merit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>And what we\u2019re seeing instead from the president is saying, \u201cHey, I\u2019m going to take the current child tax credit, and I\u2019m going to make it even bigger.\u201d It\u2019s like, well, great, that means that even bigger check for people to get at the end, perhaps. And of course, it\u2019s a pretty steep curve based upon people\u2019s income. I think there\u2019s a way to say, hey, let\u2019s reconsider how we design the program from the very start and see if we can come up with something that\u2019s really the most effective. And part of what we did was look at what\u2019s being done in some other countries and saying, hey, that seems to be having a positive effect there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>So getting back to your question, I think the realities of the kind of employment insecurity people feel today are part of a reason why we need to rethink how we provide the support for kids.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:<\/strong>&nbsp;The contrast to the Biden plan, of course, is interesting because that only is here for one year. So we are almost sure, in probably starting this week, but certainly in the months to come to see a tremendous amount of debate of, okay, well, what comes next? Do we make this permanent? Do we go to something that looks more like the Romney proposal or the Rubio Lee proposal? I\u2019m curious, as you\u2019ve talked with colleagues on both sides of the aisle, what your read is on how that debate might evolve or beyond, obviously just to your plan where you would want it to see it evolve. Where do you think there\u2019s the most common ground, and where do you see there kind of being the most conflict to resolve at this point?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:&nbsp;<\/strong>Well, I think the Democrats are going to have a difficult time deciding what of all the things that they promised that they\u2019re going to give people for free they\u2019re actually going to do, and how are they going to pay for it? And no question, they intend to raise taxes through the reconciliation process. But they have so many things, whether it\u2019s college tuition, reduction in college loans, whether it\u2019s a green new deal, investments in K through 12, and of course these child support efforts. I mean, this is a multi-hundred billion dollar effort that the president has proposed, so how are we going to pay for it in a non-emergency year? And I don\u2019t know that they have confronted yet the cost of all the things that they want to do. And so I agree with you. I know there\u2019s going to be enormous pressure on the part of the Democrats to say, you\u2019ve got to continue this program that the president put in place during COVID. And by the way, that\u2019s not just going to apply to kids. There\u2019s going to be enormous\u2026 People going to say, \u201cHey, I got a $600 check, and then I got a $1,400 check. Where\u2019s my check this year? I want another check.\u201d We\u2019re creating an expectation in our country that that is going to be hard to meet. And that\u2019s why I\u2019m encouraged that I\u2019ve had a number of senators\u2026 Frankly, the Democrats have paid more attention to my proposal so far than have Republican senators, but I\u2019ve had a number of Democrat senators come by and say, \u201cI think you\u2019ve got an interesting proposal. I\u2019d like to take a close look at it. I think we need to make progress on this front.\u201d There are some folks by the way, who said, \u201cHey, look, I like TANF. I like the connection TANF gives to individuals, to young couples, and so forth to make sure they\u2019re getting in the workforce, they\u2019re getting an education, just checking up on them.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>TANF works in some states. There are some other states where the money is kind of used as a budget filler, where there are gaps and it\u2019s not used as effectively as another. So I\u2019m open to saying, \u201cOkay, let\u2019s keep certain elements of TANF that may be working. But, the recognition that we need to adjust our programs I think is pretty substantial. And I think interestingly enough, the president having put a bunch of money in this new child tax credit in his $1.9 trillion COVID Relief Bill is going to focus more attention on, \u201cOkay, what are we going to do next year?\u201d And I\u2019m not afraid of that because I got a proposal there, but I think it\u2019s going to be a very challenging environment to find common ground between Republicans and Democrats. But I think that\u2019s got to happen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I think Senator Lee and Senator Rubio, I\u2019m delighted that they have put out a plan as well. It just says, \u201cOkay, this is an important topic. Republicans, we have a point of view here.\u201d I\u2019m afraid on too many things going on in Washington right now, Republicans are seen as not having a point of view other than no. And there are a lot of things that Democrats are doing, but the right answer is no. But there are some topics where we have a better idea. And I think it\u2019s important for us to lead with those ideas, and this is one area I think we can do that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:<\/strong>&nbsp;It\u2019s discouraging and encouraging at once I guess. I think we have time for one more question, and I\u2019m excited to ask you one that I get asked all the time, and now I get to turn around and pass it on, which is looking back to 2012, as opposed to today, obviously there\u2019s a whole different issue set that is under debate. There\u2019s a different set of concerns. Both parties are in different places. I\u2019m concerned as you think about your own work during\u2026 Or curious as you think about your own work during this time, are there any particular landmarks, things you learned along the way, things that changed out there in the world that have really changed how you think about things, or where you focus compared to where you had in the past?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:<\/strong>&nbsp;It\u2019s embarrassing to say, I wasn\u2019t entirely right on all issues back in 2012, even though I had a brilliant policy director.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:<\/strong>&nbsp;You did alright. We have our shirts that say, \u201cDon\u2019t blame us. We worked for Romney,\u201d so nothing to worry about there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:<\/strong>&nbsp;I guess the thing that\u2019s probably been most dramatic that\u2019s changed in my perspective over the last almost 10 years is seeing China today as a power that is intent on dominating the world and replacing the liberal democratic order in the world, and the rules of the road for the economy, and for our military, and for the freedom of navigation, and the freedom of the skies and space. They intend on basically taking over the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>We could see them emerging in 2012, but they weren\u2019t as great a focus as I think they need to be today. And so, as we look at at the policies domestically that we put in place, I think we recognized that there\u2019s a high degree of concern that we remain a strong and vibrant economy, not just for the wellbeing of our citizens, that\u2019s a huge priority, but also to make sure that we can sustain the military, sustained the education system, the technology and innovation systems, that allow us to push back on China and to encourage China through our strength, and through the strength of our allies, with who we link arms, to get them to finally play by the rules. Because the world dominated by China is not like the world dominated by Great Britain or the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If you want evidence of that, look at what\u2019s happening to the Uyghurs. I mean, there is genocide being undertaken against a population of a million people. And look what\u2019s happened to the people of Hong Kong, promised self-rule given the heavy hand of the Chinese communist party. And I\u2019m sure the Tibetans would have a lot to say as well about life under Chinese rule.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>That is probably the single most dramatic change on the world stage that I think requires us to concentrate even more fully on making sure that everything we\u2019re doing strengthens us, it keeps our economy strong, allows us to lead, and allows us to have the moral and economic strength to bring together the other nations of the world to keep China from trying to change the kind of world that we think would be best for freedom and for the people of the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Oren Cass:&nbsp;<\/strong>Well, we will have to leave it there. Senator Romney, thank you so much for all the work you and your team do on thinking about these policy issues, for doing it in an open-minded way that I think really moves the discussion forward, and for joining us today. I really appreciate it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Sen. Mitt Romney:&nbsp;<\/strong>Thanks so much, Oren. Good to be with you.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Senator Mitt Romney joins us for a conversation about what draws him to family benefits, why he thinks conservatives should embrace the Family Security Act\u2019s approach, how he sees this debate fitting into the broader one about the right-of-center\u2019s future.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":43,"featured_media":986,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_tec_requires_first_save":true,"_price":"","_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_header":"","_tribe_default_ticket_provider":"","_tribe_ticket_capacity":"0","_ticket_start_date":"","_ticket_end_date":"","_tribe_ticket_show_description":"","_tribe_ticket_show_not_going":false,"_tribe_ticket_use_global_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_global_stock_level":"","_global_stock_mode":"","_global_stock_cap":"","_tribe_rsvp_for_event":"","_tribe_ticket_going_count":"","_tribe_ticket_not_going_count":"","_tribe_tickets_list":"[]","_tribe_ticket_has_attendee_info_fields":false,"_EventAllDay":false,"_EventTimezone":"","_EventStartDate":"","_EventEndDate":"","_EventStartDateUTC":"","_EventEndDateUTC":"","_EventShowMap":false,"_EventShowMapLink":false,"_EventURL":"","_EventCost":"","_EventCostDescription":"","_EventCurrencySymbol":"","_EventCurrencyCode":"","_EventCurrencyPosition":"","_EventDateTimeSeparator":"","_EventTimeRangeSeparator":"","_EventOrganizerID":[],"_EventVenueID":[],"_OrganizerEmail":"","_OrganizerPhone":"","_OrganizerWebsite":"","_VenueAddress":"","_VenueCity":"","_VenueCountry":"","_VenueProvince":"","_VenueState":"","_VenueZip":"","_VenuePhone":"","_VenueURL":"","_VenueStateProvince":"","_VenueLat":"","_VenueLng":"","_VenueShowMap":false,"_VenueShowMapLink":false,"_tribe_blocks_recurrence_rules":"","_tribe_blocks_recurrence_description":"","_tribe_blocks_recurrence_exclusions":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[6,269],"tags":[30,29],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v22.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Family Financial Security: Sen. Romney on the Right\u2019s Fight to Support Our Most Important Institution - American Compass<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Family Financial Security: Sen. Romney on the Right\u2019s Fight to Support Our Most Important Institution - American Compass\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Senator Mitt Romney joins us for a conversation about what draws him to family benefits, why he thinks conservatives should embrace the Family Security Act\u2019s approach, how he sees this debate fitting into the broader one about the right-of-center\u2019s future.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Compass\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AmerCompass\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-03-22T16:00:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-10-03T08:47:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Romney-Event-Graphic_Simple_Final-scaled.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2560\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1440\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"American Compass\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@amercompass\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@AmerCompass\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"American Compass\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"26 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"American Compass\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#\/schema\/person\/97d2beede6cfa107064737269f29e2f6\"},\"headline\":\"Family Financial Security: Sen. Romney on the Right\u2019s Fight to Support Our Most Important Institution\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-03-22T16:00:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-10-03T08:47:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/\"},\"wordCount\":6840,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Family\",\"Understanding America\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Multimedia\",\"Podcasts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/\",\"name\":\"Family Financial Security: Sen. Romney on the Right\u2019s Fight to Support Our Most Important Institution - American Compass\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-03-22T16:00:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-10-03T08:47:27+00:00\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/\",\"name\":\"American Compass\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#organization\",\"name\":\"American Compass\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/logo.svg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/logo.svg\",\"caption\":\"American Compass\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AmerCompass\/\",\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/AmerCompass\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#\/schema\/person\/97d2beede6cfa107064737269f29e2f6\",\"name\":\"American Compass\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/amercompass\",\"americancomp\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Family Financial Security: Sen. Romney on the Right\u2019s Fight to Support Our Most Important Institution - American Compass","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Family Financial Security: Sen. Romney on the Right\u2019s Fight to Support Our Most Important Institution - American Compass","og_description":"Senator Mitt Romney joins us for a conversation about what draws him to family benefits, why he thinks conservatives should embrace the Family Security Act\u2019s approach, how he sees this debate fitting into the broader one about the right-of-center\u2019s future.","og_url":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/","og_site_name":"American Compass","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AmerCompass\/","article_published_time":"2021-03-22T16:00:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-10-03T08:47:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2560,"height":1440,"url":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Romney-Event-Graphic_Simple_Final-scaled.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"American Compass","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@amercompass","twitter_site":"@AmerCompass","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"American Compass","Est. reading time":"26 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/"},"author":{"name":"American Compass","@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#\/schema\/person\/97d2beede6cfa107064737269f29e2f6"},"headline":"Family Financial Security: Sen. Romney on the Right\u2019s Fight to Support Our Most Important Institution","datePublished":"2021-03-22T16:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2023-10-03T08:47:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/"},"wordCount":6840,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#organization"},"keywords":["Family","Understanding America"],"articleSection":["Multimedia","Podcasts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/","url":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/","name":"Family Financial Security: Sen. Romney on the Right\u2019s Fight to Support Our Most Important Institution - American Compass","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-03-22T16:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2023-10-03T08:47:27+00:00","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/americancompass.org\/family-financial-security-sen-romney-on-the-rights-fight-to-support-our-most-important-institution\/"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#website","url":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/","name":"American Compass","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#organization","name":"American Compass","url":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/logo.svg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/logo.svg","caption":"American Compass"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AmerCompass\/","https:\/\/twitter.com\/AmerCompass"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/#\/schema\/person\/97d2beede6cfa107064737269f29e2f6","name":"American Compass","sameAs":["https:\/\/twitter.com\/amercompass","americancomp"]}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Romney-Event-Graphic_Simple_Final-scaled.jpeg","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/985"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/43"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=985"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/985\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14543,"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/985\/revisions\/14543"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/986"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=985"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=985"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americancompass.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=985"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}