opposition works.
The Union presented itself unanimously and resolutely when it came to citizens' income and in this way wrested sensible corrections from the traffic light government in the last few meters of the draft law.
The tactic that CDU leader Friedrich Merz apparently chose in close consultation with the Union Prime Minister seems to have worked.
The Union had made a wise decision not to question the planned increase in benefit rates at the beginning of the year - knowing full well that the constitutional requirements for the subsistence level were strict and that the high inflation rate had to be compensated for quickly.
Instead, she has focused on strengthening the principle without which the welfare state cannot exist: the duty of state aid recipients to do their best to get out of their misery.
The “promote and challenge” once chosen by the SPD Chancellor Gerhard Schröder in a coalition with the Greens as the catchy motto of the Hartz reforms was simply neglected in the traffic light draft.
In fact, there should be no sanctions for a lack of cooperation in the first six months, and the SPD, Greens and FDP had planned to spare existing reserves too much.
This was also met with incomprehension among the population.
In Germany, citizens are very willing to show solidarity with the weak.
However, pollsters like Renate Köcher from Allensbach point out that the majority want state aid to be linked to the willingness and effort of the recipient.
The basic security is financed from taxes, so it also burdens people who earn little themselves.
The compromise that is now emerging takes better account of the sense of justice than the previous draft.
Whether the new citizen's allowance also fulfills its goal of helping the long-term unemployed to live on their own is another matter.
Many of the benefit recipients, almost half of whom are now foreigners, are low-skilled, have insufficient language skills and other placement hurdles.
The traffic light has taken up the cause of prioritizing qualification over placement in the hope that permanent integration into adequate work will succeed in this way.
At the same time, with higher additional earnings limits, it is a real incentive to try to find work.
Both changes are worth trying.
If there is no success, i.e. if there are “hammock effects” despite the many vacancies, this reform will not last long.