Those of us who grew up in public school systems were taught two indelible but contradictory lessons. One, from civics classes, was that laws are created (and government run) according to the necessities of compromise. (The reason politics is called the art of the possible.) The other, drilled into us by history instructors, reminded us of the evils of compromising with fanatics. (The endless Sudetenland analogies we sat through.)
But these two lessons never held equivalent weight because while we could see compromise all around us, history was for other countries. The Atlantic’s James Fallows, happily, has pointed out the error of that thinking in a couple of recent online pieces about the pending government shutdown. His thesis, basically, is that the media have it all wrong in their reporting on the shutdown (which could come tomorrow, October 1) and the even more troubling likelihood of a debt default (see how much your 401(k) is worth in two weeks).
» Read more about: Tea Party Over Country: Why the Shutdown Is Coming »
With the release of the documentary Inequality for All, the core progressive story about what is wrong with the economy is now on the silver screen. For those of us who have been working to articulate what we call a progressive economic narrative, it is a major milestone.
The right spent decades projecting their view that prosperity is created through limited government and free markets, concepts that still dominate most Americans’ thinking, even as the American dream is becoming a nightmare for more and more families. The new movie provides a powerful way to popularize a very different story.
Inequality for All is based around a big lecture course that Robert Reich gives at the University of California Berkeley. Reich and the film’s director, Jacob Kornbluth, mix facts, infographics, documentary footage and profiles of families whose lives have been scarred by the new economy with the personal story of Reich’s lifelong work to push for a just economy,
At the 1992 Republican National Convention, then Vice Presidential nominee Dan Quayle summed up his thoughts on taxing those with greatest wealth at higher rates with the line, “Why should the best people be punished?” This rare candor spotlights the beliefs still central in today’s economic policymaking.
Last week, House member Kevin Cramer (R-ND) invoked scripture to justify taking food from the mouths of babes, saying “If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.” His colleague, Rep. Steve Southerland (R-FL) similarly declared, “work is a blessing.” Clearly, the economy is intended as far more than an aggregation of what we produce, purchase, consume and invest. We’re meant to see it as an instrument to impose a particular morality: to reward the good and punish the naughty.
Republicans would go further and have us believe the economy is an angry and vengeful God.
» Read more about: Holy Hypocrites: Why Conservatives Punish the Poor »
Domestic workers in California — and groups and people who support better employment conditions for them nationwide — are hailing a new bill of labor rights signed into law Thursday in Sacramento.
The signing of AB 241 ensures that domestic workers in private homes are paid overtime for the hours they work.
The law goes into effect on January 1, a year before similar but federal regulations announced this month begin, California state Assemblymember Tom Ammiano said in a statement. He is the main author of the bill.
“This is a big step for respecting and recognizing domestic work as real work, and the fight doesn’t stop here,” Marcela Escamilla, a San Francisco domestic worker, said in a statement released by Mujeres Unidas y Activas.
“The fire for this movement will now burn brighter for domestic workers across the country fighting for the same recognition.”
Mujeres Unidas y Activas,
» Read more about: State’s Domestic Workers Celebrate O.T. Law »
As anyone thinking about enrolling in a college or university knows, tuition is not cheap. The National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators (NASFAA) notes that since the early 1980s, tuition has risen by approximately seven percent a year, causing two-thirds of students to borrow to complete their degrees. Although grants and outright scholarships exist, part of the problem, NASFAA’s website explains, is that “in 1975 the states picked up 60 percent of the tab while families shouldered 33 percent” and the federal government picked up the balance. Thirty-eight years later, the states pay approximately 34 percent and the feds pay 16 percent, leaving students and their families to shell out – often through loans – the remaining half.
And it’s getting worse. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, since the start of the recession in 2008, “cuts to higher education have been severe and almost universal.”
» Read more about: Tuition Woes Hurting Women Students More »
In a new report, University of Southern California professor and warehousing and logistics expert Juan D. de Lara reveals that the local warehousing industry is relying on low-paid, temporary workers at serious risk to the ongoing economic health of the region.
De Lara takes a closer look at labor and census statistics to unpack actual warehouse worker wages.
“It should be clear that most blue collar warehouse workers earn far less than the average logistics annual wage of $45,000,” De Lara writes in Work: Path to the Middle Class or Road to Economic Insecurity?, released by USC’s Program for Environmental and Regional Equality. “Any conversation about the future of the logistics industry as a key driver in the Inland Empire’s regional economy should begin with an honest assessment of blue-collar vs. white collar wages.”
While the average logistics wage is often taken at face value,
» Read more about: USC Report: Low Wages Damaging Inland Empire Economy »
In a move to slash the retirement benefits of public employees in California, a group of mostly conservative policy advocates has been working behind the scenes on a possible 2014 ballot initiative. A copy of the still-secret draft initiative, which could dramatically impact the lives of hundreds of thousands of Californians and send a signal nationwide, has been obtained by Frying Pan News. (See the document’s text following this article or click here.)
If enacted, the proposed law would allow the state and local governments to cut back retirement benefits for current employees for the years of work they perform after the changes go into effect. Previous efforts to curb retirement benefits for public employees have largely focused on newly hired workers, but the initiative would shrink pensions for workers who are currently on the job.
“This initiative defines that a government employee’s ‘vested rights’ only applies to pension and retiree healthcare benefits earned for service already rendered,
» Read more about: Exclusive: Pension-Cutting Ballot Initiative Revealed »
It is 3 p.m., June 27, 2013 and I find myself walking on the sidewalk along Pacific Coast Highway in Newport Beach. Just like any other day in Southern California, the skies are blue, the sun is bright gold and the owners of new BMWs, Mercedes Benzes and Maseratis speed down the highway without a care in the world. Unlike any other day, I find myself among a delegation of community members, clergy, reporters and union representatives in support of Joe Dickson and his co-workers.
We march towards the elegant Newport Beach Balboa Bay Country Club to speak with Alireza Mahdavi before he gives a speech to a group of investors and financiers at a convention. We certainly did not pay $900 to have some alone time with the CEO of American Logistics International; I don’t think any of us have that kind of money to spend on a chicken dinner alone.
» Read more about: Alireza Mahdavi: Come Out, Come Out Wherever You Are! »
On ABC’s This Week, Newt Gingrich and I debated whether House Republicans should be able to repeal a law — in this case, the Affordable Care Act — by de-funding it. Here’s the essence:
GINGRICH: Under our constitutional system, going all the way back to Magna Carta in 1215, the people’s house is allowed to say to the king we ain’t giving you money.
REICH: Sorry, under our constitutional system you’re not allowed to risk the entire system of government to get your way.
Had we had more time I would have explained to the former Speaker something he surely already knows: The Affordable Care Act was duly enacted by a majority of both houses of Congress, signed into law by the President, and even upheld by the Supreme Court.
The Constitution of the United States does not allow a majority of the House of Representatives to repeal the law of the land by de-funding it (and threatening to close the entire government,
» Read more about: GOP’s Defunding Mania: Instant Constitutional Crisis »
Negotiating a fair contract is a complex process that involves hard work and commitment from both labor and management. When both sides bargain in good faith and share a goal of securing a deal, a deal eventually gets done. I’ve personally been involved in many tough negotiations that ended with a fair deal that both parties could live with. It takes patience and willingness from both sides to compromise.
In the BART [Bay Area Rapid Transit] negotiations, unfortunately, that hasn’t been the case. BART management paid Thomas Hock, an out-of-state lawyer with a history of driving disputes to a strike, nearly $400,000 to lead negotiations. Hock and his company have been responsible for seven strikes, 47 unfair labor practice charges and nine discrimination lawsuits. Not exactly a history of committing to compromise in order to secure a deal.
True to form, Hock hasn’t been serious about negotiating a resolution at BART that would spare the Bay Area a strike.