Sen. Sanders’s proposal is a purely social democratic approach, totally unradical, and really a no-brainer that crosses a lot of lines in lifting people who rarely get a lift and work in some of the least appealing jobs. It is certainly no panacea, and as the author notes and we all know, it has no chance of passing the Senate for at least two years. But the proposal at least moves in the right direction against the destructive level of inequality that plagues us in this economy that is called robust even as the signs of its fragility (or rot, if you prefer) can be seen all around us. Showing Americans what Democrats would do if they had the political clout is one way to get more voters choose to give them that clout. By 2021, this ought to be conventional wisdom among elected Democrats. It’s already so among the rank and file.
Marc Daalder at In These Times writes—Why Every Democrat In Congress Should Support Bernie Sanders’ $15 Minimum Wage Bill:
On Friday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) announced that when the new Congress convenes in January, he will reintroduce his bill to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. The current version of the legislation would gradually increase the minimum wage, until it reaches $15 an hour in 2024. While the bill almost certainly won’t make it past the Republican-controlled Senate, it signals the sort of difference progressives can make if they seize power in 2020.
Although right-wing critics of raising the federal minimum wage often point to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) figure quoted above—1.8 million—as evidence that only around 4 percent of workers will be helped by a wage hike, this is misleading. The BLS statistic doesn’t take into account the people in states with a minimum wage above the federal standard. These residents of 29 states and Washington, D.C., represent more than half the country’s population and are left out of the 1.8 million figure.
Moreover, a vast number of people work for less than $15 an hour, even if they earn above minimum wage. According to Census Bureau data, 40.2 million hourly workers earned at or below $14.63 an hour in 2017. In 2016, according to the Pew Research Center, 20.6 million people earned less than $10.10 an hour but above minimum wage in their state. All of these workers would benefit from the wage bump Sanders’ bill would provide.
The bill would greatly benefit black and brown communities, as minimum wage workers are disproportionately people of color. These workers also tend to be paid less, on average. The median wage for black hourly workers is $12.90 and the median for Latino workers is $13.16, while the median for white workers is $14.89. [...]
This legislation could help anchor a progressive agenda platform for the new class of left-leaning Democrats in Congress. Raising the minimum wage is a consistently popular idea: In 2016, Pew found 58 percent of people supported a $15 wage, while Quinnipiac found 54 percent support in 2017.
It’s also a policy that voters are familiar with. Seeing Democrats get on board with a minimum wage bump would show that they stand on the side of working people, drawing a clear line in the sand with Trump and members of the GOP who would rather get rid of the federal minimum wage altogether. [...]
TOP COMMENTS • HIGH IMPACT STORIES
TWEET OF THE DAY
BLAST FROM THE PAST
On this date at Daily Kos in 2013—No, food stamps don’t cause obesity:
A recent story in the Washington Post provided a look at the cheap food options affordable on a food stamp budget, and the health problems and obesity that diet causes. All well and good, but reporter Eli Saslow's big question was "Has the massive growth of a government feeding program solved a problem, or created one?" The chain of thought that got him to that question:
Hidalgo County has one of the highest poverty rates in the nation ... which has led almost 40 percent of residents to enroll in the food-stamp program . . . which means a widespread reliance on cheap, processed foods ... which results in rates of diabetes and obesity that double the national average ... which fuels the country’s highest per-capita spending on health care.
This is some messed-up logic. Seriously messed up. Let's do a thought experiment and take food stamps away from poor people who are currently using them to buy cheap, processed foods. Is there a scenario in which those people buy more expensive, healthier food, having lost the benefits that are currently providing much of their food budgets?
The reason people are relying on cheap, processed foods is not that people's food budgets are coming from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program—heaven knows it's not like it's a program requirement that benefits be spent on junk food—it's that they are poor. Maybe they live in food deserts. Maybe they don't have the kitchen facilities to keep or cook fresh foods—one woman portrayed in the story doesn't have a fridge. But whatever you can say about the diets of food stamp recipients, poverty, not food stamps, is the starting point.
Monday through Friday you can catch the Kagro in the Morning Show 9 AM ET by dropping in here, or you can download the Stitcher app (found in the app stores or at Stitcher.com), and find a live stream there, by searching for "Netroots Radio.” |