The presidential debate accomplished more for Harris than it did for Trump

• Adam N. Michel at Cato Institute argues that tax policy's prominence in the presidential campaign is due to the impending expiration of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and the candidates' proposals for new special-interest tax breaks that complicate and increase the tax code's complexity.
• The report asserts that while there is bipartisan support for extending most of the expiring tax cuts, proposed targeted benefits for tips, families, homeowners, domestic production, and seniors will further complicate the tax system and pose significant fiscal challenges.

• Urban Institute experts write that the Biden administration's rent stabilization proposal aims to cap annual rent increases at 5% for units owned by large landlords, conditioned on maintaining existing tax breaks, aiming to stabilize housing and protect tenants from eviction or displacement.
• The experts argue that while the proposal could make more units affordable for low-income residents, it may also reduce the overall supply of rental units as landlords might convert properties or avoid entering the market, potentially driving up rents for uncontrolled units.

• Experts at Brookings argue that Kamala Harris has regained lost ground for the Democrats, erasing the "enthusiasm gap" and leading in both national and key swing state polls against Donald Trump.
• They examine the reliability of poll averages, highlighting historical underestimation of Trump’s support and the necessity for Harris to maintain significant momentum to secure victory.

• William H. Frey at Brookings argues that Vice President Kamala Harris's nomination as the Democratic presidential candidate has invigorated the race, with a particular impact on female voters who have historically supported Democratic candidates.

​

• The analysis reviews that women's votes were crucial in recent elections, highlighting how post-Roe v. Wade changes and Harris’s advocacy on women's issues could lead to a significant voting surge, potentially favoring her in the 2024 election.

• Comfort Oshagbemi and David Wessel at Brookings examine why the U.S. spends substantially more on transportation infrastructure compared to other countries, highlighting limited state DOT capacity and over-reliance on consultants as key cost-drivers.
• The authors argue that limited competition and insufficient bidder outreach in the market for government construction contracts contribute to higher infrastructure costs in the U.S., and increasing bidder outreach and improving project planning can significantly reduce these costs.