Raising the minimum wage creates partisan divide


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

housing minimum wage graphicLast week in his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama called on both Chambers of Congress to either work with him to move the country forward or forcing him to use his presidential powers to enact  policy. 

He rattled off dozens of policy initiatives for Congress to consider this session, including immigration, emergency unemployment, manufacturing, trade, environment, education, closing Guantanamo Bay, closing tax loop holes, job training, family policies, and retirement savings. But the President also called for an increase in the nation’s minimum wage to provide America’s worker’s a living wage.

The president used his speech as a very visible bully pulpit to call on states to not wait for Congressional action to give people a living wage.

Although creating jobs will be one of the top campaign issues that must be addressed by the state’s gubernatorial candidates (Clay Pell was not available for comment by press time), look for the minimum wage issue to pop up for political discussion with the Democratic and Republican views being like two sides of a coin. 

When he announced his bid for governor, Mayor Taveras he told his supporters that increasing the minimum wage is a step in building an economy that supports higher paying jobs, puts people back to work and gives Rhode Island families the opportunity for a better life. There was a time when his mother worked at the minimum wage to support three children so he knows firsthand how much raising it can help a family, he stated. He is also pushing for statewide universal pre-kindergarten.

Tarveras quoted from a recent study by the Economic Policy Institute that indicated that increasing the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour would increase the wages of 65,000 Rhode Island workers and indirectly benefit an additional 26,000 more, totaling nearly 20 percent of the work force.  He cited another study that found that moving to a higher wage would boost the national economy by as much as $22.1 billion, creating as many as 85,000 new jobs.”

“I’m a Democrat who believes in raising the minimum wage and indexing it with regular cost of living adjustments,” noted Treasurer Gina Raimondo, in her announcement to run for Governor at Hope Artiste Village in Pawtucket.

According to Eric Hyers, Gina Raimondo’s Campaign Manager, “Gina strongly believes that we need to increase the minimum wage and she was pleased to see President Obama call for increasing the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour during the State of the Union this week.  No one who works full time should live in poverty.  As the President said, it is time to give America a raise.”

“But let’s not wait for a dysfunctional Congress to act; we can take action right here in Rhode Island,” Hyers said.

“Gina is calling for us to take action on this now and raise the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2015 and then index it to the cost of living so that politicians can’t play games with people’s lives. Two-thirds of minimum wage earners are women so a raise would immediately help women across Rhode Island and their families, adds Hyer, noting that people are really struggling and there is an urgency to help out working families.

Meanwhile, “Clay [Pell] is in favor of increasing the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour and does not see a reason to delay this matter until 2018 or 2015. He would be in favor of the General Assembly passing legislation this year. Too many Rhode Islanders are working in jobs at wages that are simply insufficient and no individual who works a full time job should have to raise their family in poverty. There’s an economic development aspect to this as well, by raising the minimum wage we’re putting more purchasing power out there, which will help spur the economy,” said Bill Fischer, Pell’s spokesperson.

General Contractor Todd Giroux, a Bristol resident who seeks the Democratic nomination for Governor, sees the national conversation of increasing the minimum wage as shifting towards that of providing America’s workers with living wage.  According to Giroux, President Obama’s call for a national minimum wage increase for federal contractors increases the “momentum for main street people to call upon elected leaders to represent their needs in jobs and wage security.”

Beginning May 2014, Giroux proposes the $ 8.00 minimum wage to be called a provisional starting wage for new hires for the first two weeks of employment.  This hourly rate would increase to $ 9.11 after their second week. On January 2015, the provisional starting wage would be $ 8.75 for the first two weeks of employment, increasing to $10 per hour after their second week.  Full-time, part-time and seasonal workers would be eligible for this salary increase.

Giroux believes the only way to effect a livable wage is to lower a person’s tax burden and increase the state’s mandated minimum wage.The Public Utilities Commissions’ thirty percent increase in the cost of utilities, combined with rising fuel, housing expenses and food work against any [political] argument on increasing the minimum wage, Giroux says.

But the Rhode Island’s GOP candidates, Cranston Mayor Allan Fung and businessman Ken Block, are not buying the Democratic candidate’s solution that minimum wage is the way to go.

“Democrats continue to recycle bad ideas. It’s time we consider some new ones so people have the opportunity to succeed and thrive, and not rely on government coercion to dictate wages. Increasing the minimum wage will result in higher unemployment, reduced job opportunities, reduced customer spending, and will reduce net job growth because of the effect on expanding companies,” says Mayor Fung

Mayor Fung states “At a time when we are tied for the highest unemployment in the country, we cannot put more hurdles in front of the companies we have here in Rhode Island; we need to remove them. Further, Obamacare is already hurting workers because employers are transitioning employees to part time work because they cannot afford the healthcare premiums. An increase in the minimum wage would only increase the burden on small business owners who are already working on thin margins.”

“The real issue in Rhode Island is unemployment and getting our workforce prepared with the necessary skill set for the ever changing workforce. It is quite evident that raising the minimum wage would not solve these problems,” adds Fung.

Block agrees with Fung, noting in a recent statement, “As I said the other day when it was announced that Rhode Island has the worst unemployment in the country, raising the minimum wage is a job killer.”

Block adds, “President Obama seems to believe that government can just order the economy to improve. Republicans and independents know that government has a critically important, but limited role in the growth of jobs. Government’s role is to regulate fairly and only where necessary, and to control its spending so people and businesses are not taxed to death. President Obama continues on the wrong track to fix lagging employment, just as the Democratic leaders of our General Assembly continue on the wrong track to fix Rhode Island.”

Mazze weighs in

But Edward M. Mazze, Distinguished University Professor of Business Administration, at the University of Rhode Island, puts in his two cents into the policy debate, too.

On the one hand, “Raising the minimum wage does not create jobs and can reduce the number of hours worked for existing workers and the number of jobs for part-time workers. There could also be an impact on the number of internships offered to high school and college students.  And, just as important, raising the minimum wage will also raise the price of products and services, observes Mazze.

“The minimum wage is not the entry point to middle class, it is the jobs that pay over $20 an hour and have a “career” future, says Mazze, noting that Rhode Island recently increased the minimum wage.

But, Mazze believes that the state’s minimum wage should be adjusted every number of years to keep up with inflation and other economic events.  “The best way to create living wages in Rhode Island is to prepare workers for jobs for the future, have an economic development strategy that creates jobs and attracts businesses, and have affordable housing and a fair sales, property and personal income tax program,” he notes.  

With the Rhode Island General Assembly geared up to pass legislation to make the Ocean State an easier place to do business, lawmakers should not forget their constituents who cannot pay their mortgage, utility bills, or even put food on their tables.  Until the state’s tax and regulatory system primes the economic pump to create more jobs, giving a little bit more money, say $10.10 per hour, will go a long way for tens of thousands of poor or working poor Rhode Islanders who struggle to survive.

How can Rhode Islander’s currently making a weekly paycheck of $320 (minus taxes), receiving a minimum wage, support their families?  This is not the American Dream they were brought up to believe in.

Herb Weiss, LRI’12 is a Pawtucket-based writer who covers, aging, health care, medical and business issues.  He can be reached at hweissri@aol.com.

Whitehouse, Reed vote no on food stamp cuts in farm bill


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

delegationSenators Sheldon Whitehouse and Jack Reed were two of the nine Democrats who voted no on the latest version of the farm bill, which slashes food stamps by $8 billion over the next 10 years.  When the original Senate farm bill (which would have cut nutrition programs by $4 billion) passed, our Senators were the only Democrats voting no.

In the final bill, they picked up no votes from seven other Democrats, including the Senators from our neighboring states–Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Chris Murphy (D-CT), and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).  Because a surprising number of progressives, including Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), voted with leadership on this one, our senators’ principled votes are especially meaningful.

In the house, both of our Congressmen voted no, too.  David Cicilline took to the floor to deliver one of his best speeches yet, deploring the cruelty of cutting anti-hunger programs.

Although we lost this battle, because our delegation put up such a hard fight, they almost certainly kept the cuts from being even worse than they are.  They deserve our gratitude today.

 

Economists agree: Little reason to trust stink tank’s economic modeling


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

mrmoneybags Tom Sgouros and Jason Becker are both well-respected critical thinkers in Rhode Island politics, though they don’t often have opportunity to agree – for example, Sgouros has been critical of the new state education aid funding formula that Becker helped devise.

But it turns out the two have found common ground when it comes to the Center for Freedom and Prosperity. Both agree the science, as it were, associated with the right wing think tank’s plan to eliminate the sales tax is built on rosy predictions and politically-charged assumptions.

Last week Sgouros wrote two posts on the right wing think tank’s specious use of economics in their proposal to shrink state government by reducing the sales tax (here and here). This inspired Becker to take a closer look at the modeling used for its report. After doing so, he tweeted, among many others:

and

Additionally, he tweeted these questions and concerns:

Becker also tweeted this report compiled by an University of Arizona economist (you can check her credentials here) disparaging the same economic modeling tool that the RI right wing think tank used to push its preferred policy here as the Goldwater Institute was using in Arizona.

In it, she wrote, “They should know that models can only be used for modest changes from existing economic conditions and that results from modest changes cannot be used to predict what would happen with large, never before seen, changes in policies.”

Deconstructing ProJo education policy op/ed


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Ed Achorn is the editor of the Providence Journal op/ed page.
Ed Achorn is the editor of the Providence Journal op/ed page.

“…adult benefits, rather than the needs of students, often decide the way public education is administered in Rhode Island,” claims an editorial in today’s Providence Journal describing Education Commission Deborah Gist’s State of Education speech last week.

Those benefits? Well, a little later on the editorial mentions this, “Teachers are finally being evaluated.”

If there are others, the editorial does not mention them. My guess is this is an attempt to heap responsibility onto unionized teachers for the central issue cursing public education in Rhode Island: the achievement gap.

If you think teachers from all over the state are the cause of this massive achievement gap that exists between the affluent suburbs and the struggling cities here in Rhode Island you probably wouldn’t do too well on the critical thinking portion of the NECAP test.

The ProJo owes it to Rhode Island to have a more honest look at education policy in Rhode Island. There are very real issues affecting our children and our economy. Among them listed in the op/ed:

“…huge gaps persist between the performance of poor students and those in the middle-class. Low-income students have a four-year graduation rate of 66 percent, compared with 90 percent for higher-income students.”

Bullseye. And it’s so worth noting that this has absolutely zero to do with employee benefits trumping student need.

“Clearly, the dollars Rhode Island taxpayers are pouring into education are not being spent as effectively as they could be,” opines the op/ed.

I’d agree with this too. Last week, the East Greenwich School Committee approved giving new laptops to every high school student. Meanwhile, in Providence, Pawtucket and Woonsocket students still sometimes need to share outdated text books.

But is this because the adults in Providence, Pawtucket and Woonsocket are more greedy than their East Greenwich counterparts? Or is it because East Greenwich has a better ability to offer a more comprehensive education to its students than does Providence, Pawtucket and Woonsocket?

The op/ed says charter schools are proving “even poor students from the toughest neighborhoods can thrive in the right school environment.” The writer should really compare per pupil spending at charter schools compared to their entirely-publicly funded counterparts are accomplishing this.

In the meantime, one failure of education policy perseveres: our inability to have an honest conversation about solutions to the achievement gap between the affluent suburbs and the struggling cites.  It’s sad that such a conversation is being stifled by the state’s paper of record because of its obvious abhorrence of organized labor.

People’s Pledge faces tough politics


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

“The love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”

-First Epistle to Timothy, Chapter 6, Verse 10; King James Version

peoples pledge copySo proclaims the KJV, and ponder that the famous part, “the love of money is the root of all evil,” is a proverb older than Christianity itself.

“Issues of campaign finance have taken a front seat in this election,” John Marion told RI Future earlier. Marion should know; as executive director of Common Cause RI the task of keeping the three big Democratic primary campaigns of Pell, Raimondo, and Taveras at the table falls to him as they meet to hammer out the details of a People’s Pledge. Raimondo and Taveras also swatted at one another over campaign donations this week.

It is beginning to sound like negotiating a Pledge will be akin to a Herculean labor. The Raimondo campaign hit with a one-two punch of an expansive Pledge, covering all outside expenditures, not simply the Super PAC spending; and also requested that the negotiations be open to the media.

It’s a canny move, given that it’s likely the Raimondo campaign won’t just be facing campaign operations, but also public sector union operations aimed at ending her career. The “typical” Pledge used by during Massachusetts’ Warren-Brown race for Senate certainly seems to harm Raimondo the most, and the blanket outside spending ban will prevent her opponents from mitigating her significant fundraising lead.

As intelligent as that may be in the immediate future, it seems to ignore that limiting the resources campaigns have will probably lead to negative advertising (because it unfortunately works); and then it becomes a race to see who can emerge the least-bloodied in September. Hopefully, instead of these being ironclad demands, the Raimondo team is merely staking out its ideal position, and will allow itself to be bargained down.

Similarly, the call for opening negotiations to the media sounds like a great idea; until you think that few negotiations of consequence have ever been hammered out in the public eye. Negotiations call for discretion and humility, and the court of public opinion rarely rewards those characteristics, especially for politicians.

But a call for transparency about a Pledge aimed at increasing transparency is good politics, and it’s a fine line to walk between voicing legitimate concerns and sounding like you’ve got something to hide.

Make no mistake about it, this is a war of position right now, with each side marshaling what it needs to hammer at each other come the summer and early fall when voters start actually paying attention.

That’s partly why campaign finance has received media attention at all. It is the season of fundraisers and campaign finance reports. With little to report on beyond money, the political scene will be mostly focused on the big political campaigns until the General Assembly starts to take up bills, at which point the media will keep one eye on both.

The problem is that the state is not electing a fundraiser-in-chief, but rather a governor. Ultimately the Pledge is subservient to that goal, providing the voters the ability to select who they think would govern best. Until then, we may find ourselves, like the ancients, pierced through with many sorrows.