Democrats Plot Ways To Burden Entire GOP With Minimum Wage Debate

Democrats are starting an effort to tie the entire Republican Party to the controversial statements made by a few of its candidates supporting the elimination or restructuring of minimum wage laws.

Strategists have begun urging members to press both incumbents and their general election challengers to formally state where they stand in the debate. The template is the campaign that Democrats ran in 2006 forcing GOP lawmakers and candidates to explain where they stood on privatizing social security.

"We ought to be telling everyone in the House who is a Democrat to say, 'I challenge you, I want my opponent to commit to not lowering the minimum wage,'" said one top-ranked strategist who consults on several races.

In addition, there has been some talk about finding a legislative vehicle that would symbolically reaffirm the party's commitment to not letting the minimum wage dip below its current level of $7.25. Nothing could be formally considered, however, until after the November elections.

The effort is being charted out for obvious reasons. The minimum wage debate is, empirically, a slam-dunk for the Democratic Party. Back in 2006, several states ran ballot initiatives to raise the minimum wage and in basically every contest the margins weren't close. In Nevada, voters favored raising the wage by a 69 percent to 31 percent margin. In Missouri those numbers were 76 percent to 24 percent. In Ohio, it was 56 to 44 percent. In Arizona it was 66 percent to 34 percent. In Montana it was 73 percent to 27 percent. Only in Colorado was it moderately close, with 53 percent favoring a hike and 47 percent opposing this.

Reading the obvious indicators, union officials have already begun to push the minimum wage debate as a wedge issue in the 2010 races. The AFL-CIO has put out mailers in three gubernatorial races, accusing Illinois Republican Bill Brady, Minnesota Republican Tom Emmer, and Oregon Republican Chris Dudley of all having voted or worked against raising the minimum wage.

AFLMinWage

On the heels of statements from Senate candidates Joe Miller (R-AK) and John Raese (R-W.V.) casting federal minimum wage laws as unconstitutional, AFL-CIO header Richard Trumka argued on Tuesday that the proposal should be considered part of the larger GOP platform.

"You can only look at the facts," Trumka said, in a small briefing with political reporters. "In West Virginia the Republican Party has given massive amounts of money to [John] Raese. One of Raese's main platforms is that they ought to do away with the minimum wage... I mean, if they are sponsoring that candidate you have to assume they are sponsoring that statement. They believe in that statement. The same with Rand [Paul], I mean every one of them, Sharron Angle, Miller up in Alaska. All of those candidates are saying do away with the minimum wage do away with regulations and they are getting massive amounts of money from the Republican Party. So you have to say the Republican Party agrees with them. So if they get elected is that their platform? Are they going to do away with the minimum wage? Ask them."

Comments

[Filby]

11:16 PM on 10/11/2010

The minimum wage knocks out the bottom rungs of the ladder for those least advantaged in life. These are often inner city black youth. Not everyone needs to pay rent or a mortgage. Sometimes a job is just needed to demonstrate skills and responsibility, and move up to something better the next summer. What is wrong with $5 an hour when you have no skills? Some of the most prestigious jobs are summer internships which pay far less per hour, or nothing at all.

[Ed Stadick]

12:09 AM on 10/20/2010

Filby, you raise some excellent points, however what you are saying is not only true for people without 'skills'. In Illinois where min wage is $8.25/hour higher then 44 other states, it is next to impossible for college grads to get jobs at McDonalds or Wal-Mart.

[Brian Bisek]

05:31 PM on 10/07/2010

This is not surprising. Democrats will very much want to push this issue because they have convinced the public that support for a higher minimum wage is the only ethically tolerable position. They tend to ignore the numbers associated with the policy, such as the resulting loss of jobs-- which is often greater overall than the gains made by the higher wages. This results in a net loss of overall wealth in the society. I challenge you readers to think about all outcomes of the minimum wage. I ask that before you reply to this, please
read this paper by the Cato Institute http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa106.html
and read my comment thread from yesterday http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Brian_Bisek/democrats-plot-ways-to-bu_n_751281_62822781.html
Thanks.

[audadvnc]

03:39 PM on 10/06/2010

"Democrats are plotting ways..." to eventually making a statement, probably to be released sometime in January - after they've all been sent home to Podunksville, after losing their House seats.

What a pitiful display of campaign strategy.

[axt113]

04:54 PM on 10/06/2010

I remember reading a book title about how the Dems swiftboated America, and how I remember thinking that the Dems couldn't swiftboat a 2 year old.

Outside of Obama's team, Clinton's team and a couple others, the Dems have very little skill at running campaigns or controlling the media narrative, which is why they constantly lose even when the GOP is completely bankrupt of ideas or plans.

I mean the GOP plans are the same as the plans they've laways had, and its never worked, heck even when they had full control of government they didn't even enact a quarter of it, but rather than harping on it, the Dems are giving them a free pass to the house

[mrb419]

02:19 PM on 10/06/2010

All this does is make employers pay "under-the-table" at a lesser rate......Its a win win for all!

[catzoned]

10:27 AM on 10/07/2010

That is called tax evasion.

[rebel9999]

01:56 PM on 10/06/2010

Dems are trying so hard to make this election about something other than the economy. Anything but the economy.

Guess what voters care about: 1 thing, the economy. At least the voters who work and want to work.

[axt113]

05:01 PM on 10/06/2010

Minimum wage is a part of the economy

[CTDFalconer]

01:46 PM on 10/06/2010

There are plenty of places where it's basically impossible to live on minimum wage, mostly cities, of course. In LA, that would be a stretch to cover rent on a room in someone else's house, (much less an apartment) public transportation, and minimal food. Health insurance is out of the question. The bottom line is if you are willing to give a company 40 hours per week of your time, you should be able to live on the money you earn, regardless of skill or experience. It is demeaning and disrespectful of human labor to do otherwise.

[Ed Stadick]

12:24 PM on 10/07/2010

There are college graduates who would love to work anywhere including McDonalds or Wal-Mart who can't get in despite months and years of diligent attempts. This is particularly true in Illinois where min wage is $8.25/hour (higher then 44 other states).

It may be basically impossible to run an entire household on one person's minimum wage job. Which is why many people don't run an entire household on one person's job. Many people live in families, have roommates, etc.

It is also true that for the most part when people start at a job at something close to minimum wage they can before long move into jobs at higher rates.

The problem is that there people who would really really like to work (even for $8.00/hour) who can't find jobs. If a person wants to work for $8.00/hour and a company is willing to pay them that, what give Washington or Springfield the right to step in and say that is not allowed.

[Kris Bui]

01:40 PM on 10/06/2010

I am sick of games/congress....

[foxinretreat]

01:12 PM on 10/06/2010

Lawrence O'Donnell was brilliant last night when he nailed Michael Steele on this issue. All Steele could do was laugh, he couldn't or wouldn't answer Lawrence's questions.

[Demidan]

01:02 PM on 10/06/2010

Truth is a club to beat the Repuglicans with; they have no defense against it except obvious lies.

[audadvnc]

03:40 PM on 10/06/2010

- which the Democrats supply in copious amounts, the useless PTB tools they are.

[Demidan]

08:04 PM on 10/06/2010

Another pathetic fail from the right.

[bart4u]

01:02 PM on 10/06/2010

Just a case of the rich leading the rich.

[drwtsn]

02:15 PM on 10/06/2010

Make that "the rich leading the ignorant."

[Demidan]

12:58 PM on 10/06/2010

Good idea, keep sticking the GoP with questions that show their bias and ignorance.

[rebel9999]

01:57 PM on 10/06/2010

The only problem is that these issues take a back seat to the economy, not matter how hard the Dems try to bring them to the front.

[axt113]

05:01 PM on 10/06/2010

Minimum wage is about the economy, at least the part that voters care about

[livesimply]

12:29 PM on 10/06/2010

I like where they're going with this. The dems have played nice too long. It's time to beat them at their own game except that theirs' are lies and ours' are at least based on truth.

[guveqzero]

11:36 AM on 10/06/2010

The minimum wage debate has not been managed well. It should be phrased that no one in the company should be paid less than 100x less than the CEO's total compensation package.

[babyboomerorig]

12:11 PM on 10/06/2010

LOL.....used to be just the opposite....CEOs wouldn't make more than 40X the top hourly employee.

[Brian Bisek]

11:22 AM on 10/06/2010

Yes, the minimum wage is politically secure. People overwhelmingly support it. But that doesn't mean it's good. The minimum wage is an example of a PRICE FLOOR. Its effect is increased unemployment, especially for low-skilled workers and teenagers. The jobs they could have may not be worth $7.25/hour to their employer, so instead they can't get work. What would be better, a job that pays less than minimum wage, or having no job-- which pays nothing? The minimum wage is just an arbitrary amount decided by politicians and labor unions. If they really "cared" about workers, why wouldn't it be $7.26 per hour? or $8? or $20? Most union workers already earn more than minimum wage but they always support it because it eliminates their competition with lower labor costs, thus giving them a bigger share of their market.

[expat50]

11:40 AM on 10/06/2010

Another false argument. This is always about teenagers in these discussions when in reality it is about all wages. Min wage laws balance the playing field for low skill and younger workers who do not have the workplace experience to know they are getting scr3wed by the employer. You free marketeers believe that being taken advantage of is somehow the sacred duty of the working poor who should accept what ever is offered. And you hope that this will drive all wages down, reduce your costs and increase your profits. Because that's what it all about, your profit. Ties in perfectly to the Rethug motto "Screw you, I got mine"

[Brian Bisek]

12:14 PM on 10/06/2010

"Rethug"? very clever. I'm not even a Republican. Anyways, this is about teenagers AND their wages. AND people who don't have skills to warrant a job that would pay min. wage, AND companies that have increased costs as a result, costs which are passed on to consumers via increased prices. AND the silly arbitrariness about the government deciding what a "fair" wage is, AND the fact that a minimum wage is anti-competitive. The irony is that the min. wage actually hurts people at the bottom, who suffer higher unemployment as a result. To see it only from a management point of view is shortsighted. Accepting a low wage is not necessarily "being taken advantage of", unless you have a skills that are worth more than your compensation. If someone feels they are underpaid, they should go somewhere else that could offer them more. If nobody would offer them more, that shows the limit of their current skills. The great thing is that people are able to learn new skills or change employment if necessary.

[Oldchef]

12:02 PM on 10/06/2010

Sir, can you feed your family, pay your mortgage/rent and car payment, child care, etc. on $290/wk? i don't know where you live, but if you can support a family on that, God bless you.

[Brian Bisek]

12:40 PM on 10/06/2010

The minimum wage affects about 5% of workers http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2009.htm
Most of these people are young, inexperienced and probably don't have a mortgage, or even a very high rent. I actually do know places where I'm from (midwest) where you could survive on that. Actually, thousands of people already do. It's also important to remember that while people might aspire to gain certain luxuries like the ones you listed, they aren't Natural Rights that are guaranteed to us by God or government. They have to be earned.

[Hillbilly49]

10:31 AM on 10/06/2010

Right wing republicans fear the truth more than anything on earth.

Just keep telling the truth about their hideous ideology and policies. 

[serialcoma]

12:23 PM on 10/06/2010

fanned.