Working America’s Job Tracker is your go-to site for finding out what companies in your area have exported jobs overseas, violated health and safety codes, or engaged in discriminatory or other illegal practices. And today, we’ve added some new data to make it even more comprehensive and more useful. We want to empower you to help expose corporate misbehavior.
If you’re concerned that companies in your area are violating minimum wage, overtime pay, and child labor laws, you can find that out now on Job Tracker. We’ve added the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Inspections database of violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Widespread corporate abuses of their employees are real, but they can seem distant or abstract. With Job Tracker, you can find out the real story in seconds, and learn what businesses in your neighborhood are breaking the law or destroying jobs. By sharing what you’ve learned, you can help hold companies accountable.
Come check out the new features of Job Tracker today.
Can we all agree on something? $400,000 is a lot of money. That’s more than most folks make in a year, or even four years. It’s about eight times the average annual income for an American household in 2010.
But to Congressman John Fleming (R-LA), $400,000 is a pittance. Just watch:
Fleming is himself a businesses owner, so Jansing asked, “If you have to pay more in taxes, you would get rid of some of those employees?” Fleming responded by saying that while his businesses made $6.3 million last year, after you “pay 500 employees, you pay rent, you pay equipment, and food,” his profits “a mere fraction of that” — “by the time I feed my family, I have maybe $400,000 left over.”
Jansing pointed out that whining about tax increases while making $400,000 annually is “not exactly a sympathetic position.” Fleming could only respond by saying that “class warfare has never created a job” and that his success is a “virtue.” But he noticeably never answered Jansing’s question about whether he would actually be forced to lay off workers if his taxes went up.
Fleming’s apparent disgust at the mention of $400,000 is disposable income is laughable in today’s economy, but he’s not alone in this view. Rep. Danny Rehberg (R-MT) told a town hall that he is “struggling, just like everyone else,” despite a net worth of $10.9 million. Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI), referring to his $174,000 congressional salary, told an unemployed constituent “I’m not living high off the hog.”
Take in that context the comments of Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), who rejected concerns of U.S. poverty by claiming that the “poor are getting richer even faster” than the already rich.
With these statements, Fleming and his colleagues demonstrate how different they are from most of the country. 46.2 million Americans were living in poverty in 2010, and the average household income is $50,000, which is 2.3 percent lower than it was the year before. The idea that having hundreds of thousands of dollars – after expenses – is somehow problematic, and the idea that somehow struggling families are getting richer in an environment of stagnant wages…we’re not buying it.
What the President proposed yesterday isn’t class warfare, and it isn’t extreme. It’s where the country is at. And until Rep. Fleming spends some of that $400,000 “leftover” cash to field his own poll that says otherwise, he and his GOP buddies might want to come along with the rest of us.
In a White House speech today, President Barack Obama put forth a proposal to deal with long-term deficits, a proposal that should play a role in negotiations of the deficit “supercommittee” which holds its next meeting on Thursday.
We’re still looking at the details of his proposal to see how it would affect people like Working America’s members, but a few things stand out positively. Obama puts jobs first in line, requesting the passage of the American Jobs Act. This makes a lot of sense, because we can’t hope to make progress on deficits without broadly-shared economic growth.
The other noteworthy thing is that Obama’s proposal puts tax fairness on the table. Part of the cost of reducing deficits, in Obama’s proposal, will be paid for with common-sense tax changes—letting the tax cuts for the very wealthiest expire and closing a loophole that allows many finance-industry millionaires pay a lower tax rate that middle-class families do.
The benefits of economic growth have gone increasingly to a smaller and smaller segment of society, even as the median income for the rest of us has dropped and poverty has increased. The ideological talking point that miniscule taxes for the very wealthiest are the key to job growth is contradicted by the simple reality of our lost decade. It’s only fair to ask that the small minority of people who have actually gotten ahead in the past decade to contribute their fair share.
It’s also important to note what’s not in the proposal—President Obama is not proposing cuts to Social Security, which would be a devastating blow to seniors and to future retirees. He’s also not proposing the oft-discussed, economically unsound idea of raising the Medicare eligibility age. This makes a real difference to people like Working America’s 3 million members, many of whom are retired or approaching retirement. We can’t afford to sacrifice our promises to retirees while pursuing a discredited ideology on taxes.
A proposal that relies on drastic cuts to needed services is exactly the wrong step for our economy—we can’t make short-sighted cuts that will cost jobs for teachers and public safety officers and leave our communities vulnerable, nor can we balance the budget by undermining the guarantees we’ve made to seniors through Social Security and Medicare. To his credit, Obama has promised to veto bills that rely entirely on those kinds of cuts.
Contrast this proposal to the talking points of the House GOP leadership: they claim that the way to create jobs is to double down on Bush-era policies by slashing programs, cutting taxes and removing regulations that protect workers and consumers. It is, as economist Jared Bernstein notes, “their usual agenda, now opportunistically mapped onto the current jobs crisis…the arguments lack substance.”
The fact is that corporations aren’t broke from taxes. They’re sitting on literally trillions in cash because of a gap in demand due to millions of under-employed and underpaid Americans. Working America members get this—they know that their local businesses can’t hire without customers and that people can’t keep the economy going when they can’t make ends meet.
The usual talking points from House leadership have been proven drastically wrong by the past decade of light taxes, increasing inequality and stagnant wages. Yet they keep repeating them and trying to tilt policy further and further in the direction of their wealthy funders. It’s no wonder that working people like President Obama’s jobs proposals, but don’t trust Congress to pass them.
The bottom line is that we need to focus on the immediate crisis of jobs before we worry about the longer-term impact of deficits. Every day, Working America canvassers talk to thousands of middle-class and working-class people whose top concern is the ability to find work, stay in their homes and provide for their families.
The conversation in Washington D.C. needs to start with those concerns—not with slashing away the safety net for retirees or continued giveaways to the very wealthiest.
Across the country, Working America members are getting engaged in the issues that matter to their communities. One of the ways they get the word out is through letters to the editor of their local paper. What top the list of our members’ concerns over the past week? The ongoing job crisis and how to fix it.
Here’s what Muriel Gschnell, a Working America member in Butler, Pennsylvania, had to say in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette last week:
President Obama’s plans to invest in public education and infrastructure are critical for a thriving economy and for ensuring that America has a bright future. Our schools need the support, especially now, due to the extreme education cuts that Pennsylvania’s children are enduring. And investing in infrastructure will be beneficial. Infrastructure improvements have contributed enormously to the safety and morale of my town, which previously had two frighteningly eroded bridges that have been replaced with safe, beautiful ones.
Further ensuring that America’s future will be prosperous is the president’s support for collective bargaining. Collective bargaining, as he said, equips us for a “race to the top,” instead of a “race to the bottom.”
And here’s what Romina Halabi of Denver, Colorado wrote to the Denver Post:
Where are the jobs for educated young workers in Colorado?
I graduated from the University of Denver two years ago with a master’s degree in international studies and have yet to procure a job. My student loans have been deferred as long possible, and every month I see the interest compound upon itself. I have done sporadic temp work to avoid homelessness, with no real career opportunities on the horizon. Remember when society told you that if you worked hard, got good grades and had the drive, you could live the American dream? I did that. Instead, like many young Americans, I am treated like a disposable worker. Where is the future career I dangled in front of myself as motivation all these years? Will I ever get a job with good benefits like a secure retirement or paid sick days?
Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) last week proposed a concept that shouldn’t be too controversial: that as the 12-member “Super Committee” weigh different options for deficit reduction, that the impact of their plans on job creation and unemployment be paramount.
Specifically, that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) “score” the plans for their effects on job creation and unemployment, in addition to usual scoring on overall cost.
Strip away the legislative minutia and here’s what it says: Jobs are the priority. Putting America back to work is job number one. Jobs should be the main factor when considering any change in course.
The Jobs Factor. Do you have it?
As we continue to say, Working America talks to thousands of men and women across the country every week, and almost none of them are primarily worried with the deficit and the debt. Overwhelmingly, the questions and concerns are about the lack of available jobs in their community, the absence of help for friends and family who are long-term unemployed, and the fear that they won’t be able to buy groceries or pay for a doctor’s visit.
In other words, our members and the other working class Americans we talk to are already on board with the Jobs Factor. They already view Washington’s policies through the lens of job creation. And they want the 12-member Super Committee to do the same.
Luckily, they are not alone. National heavyweight groups are already throwing support behind the Jobs Factor. Here’s MoveOn:
This is a responsible way to ensure that any proposal out of the Super Committee takes into account the impact it will have on the nation’s economy. While millions of Americans can’t find a job, and are increasingly losing hope in the promise of the American Dream, it’s imperative that the Super Committee’s proposal is not a job-killer.
We are in the middle of a jobs crisis and the last thing we should be doing is passing legislation that kills jobs. Senator Merkley’s amendment would help the Super Committee avoid proposals that kill jobs. We strongly urge all elected representatives of both parties to support this effort.
As the Super Committee embraces their charge to reduce the deficit by more than a trillion dollars, we urge them to embrace Senator Merkley’s proposal to report the jobs impact of their decisions. The Super Committee should focus on doing what’s right and get our country back to work. No more political gamesmanship that leaves struggling families out in the cold yet again.
Now, Super Committee, it’s your turn. We hear through the grapevine that the six Democrats are already considering adopting the Jobs Factor, but we haven’t heard something similar from Republicans. They talk a lot about “job creators” and “job killers” when it suits them – but when the CBO offers hard, non-partisan numbers instead of vague political slogans, will they step up to the plate and do what’s best for working families?
It’s time that both parties get the Jobs Factor. We’re already there. Come and join us.
First, the good news: Congress averted a real threat to over 80,000 jobs by passing a bill extending funding for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and for transportation projects last night.
The Senate’s ability to pass the bill by today’s deadline was thrown into doubt by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), who put a hold on the bill over a provision in the highway funding. The result of killing the bill would have been another FAA shutdown like the one this summer that cost taxpayers millions and furloughed thousands of workers for two weeks.
Freed from Coburn’s threat, the bill passed by a 96-2 margin. As too often happens in the Senate, broadly popular policy was put at risk by procedural shenanigans and showmanship.
For the people whose jobs were at stake here, this passage is good news—for now. Transportation funding will be extended through March, while FAA funding will be extended through January. Congress is divided over longer-term bills for both of these priorities, and passing them next year in a version that protects workers and jobs won’t be an easy fight.
Unfortunately, the news out of Congress isn’t all good. Yesterday the U.S. House passed a bill designed to cripple the National Labor Relations Board and prevent it from enforcing laws protecting employees. Arguing against the bill, Rep. George Miller (D-CA) aptly noted that it would empower companies to outsource and retaliate against employees that exercise their rights. The bill passed on a mostly party-line vote of 236-186.
This isn’t serious policy aimed at creating jobs. It’s a transparent attempt to tilt the playing field away from working people and even further towards corporations. The Senate is not expected to take up the anti-NLRB bill, but it shows the priorities of House leaders.
No wonder the thousands of people we talk to at the door every week are feeling buyer’s remorse over the new House majority.
Thankfully, at least one elected official is asking that question.
Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR), is suggesting that the 12-member Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction, aka the “Super Committee,” submit their proposals to the Congressional Budget Office to determine their effect on jobs and unemployment. Greg Sargent explains:
He doesn’t want the CBO to evaluate the proposals just for their budgetary impact. Rather, he wants the CBO to reach a conclusion on the impact the proposals will have on unemployment, whether positive, negative, or neutral.
“We need to have every proposal that the super-committee brings out to have it scored by its jobs impact,” Merkley told me in an interview this morning. He plans to urge Democratic and GOP leaders to agree to this standard, and hopes to build a campaign to make it happen.
Members of Congress routinely submit pieces of legislation to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to be “scored” for their effects on revenue and debt. While Sargent points out that there is precedent for similar scoring on jobs impact, it’s not done often.
Merkley hopes this move would encourage the supercommittee — and the rest of us — to view the supercommittee’s work through the lens of job creation. At best it could create an incentive for the “supercommittee” to incorporate a meaningful push for jobs creation into its mission. But, barring that, this could also alert us when its proposals risk causing further job loss, which in theory would dissuade committee members from adopting such proposals or at least keep the public in the loop on what’s happening
“We need to have a `no-harm’ standard,” Merkley says. “At a minimum, people on both sides of the aisle should be able to agree that the proposals do no harm to jobs.”
In our nearly 20,000 weekly conversations with working men and women across the country, we rarely hear anyone express that the deficit or the debt is their most pressing issue. Regularly, they express concerns about jobs and the economy first and foremost, with a combination of health care, education, and retirement security after that.
That’s why we’re glad to hear that at least the six Democrats on the Committee are considering Merkley’s idea. Unfortunately, for the six Republicans, their recent statements indicate that they might not listen to the nonpartisan CBO no matter what it finds.
Supercommittee Republicans to numbers from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office when they say austerity is bad for jobs: “That’s just like, your opinion, man.”
But as mad as you are, if you see an elected official, it’s not a good idea to pour a beer on their head.
