The Democratic Party scored a major victory in today's elections by winning control of Congress and forcing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld from his post. President Bush conceded the election, took responsibility for the loss and offered to work with Democratic leadership. His statement stressed the importance of the War on Terror, energy independence and educating America's youth. And if he's not serious about cooperating, he can always go the route of Bill Clinton and veto everything that comes across his desk.
Incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi laid down goals for the Democratic-led Congress earlier today. Key issues include increasing the minimum wage, eliminating subsidies to oil companies, implementing price controls on Medicare drugs, further limiting congressional lobbyists, making student financial aid more accessible and supporting stem cell research.
The national minimum wage is currently pegged at $5.15 per hour and Pelosi stated that she would like to see it raised to $7.50. A myriad of arguments exist for and against increasing the minimum wage, but it is important to understand that the inflation-adjusted value has been declining since the 1970s and the increase would roughly restore the previous purchasing power of the minimum wage. Moreover, many of the states with the highest cost of living (i.e. California) already have increased the minimum wage to $7.50 or higher. The real problem here is growing income disparity and all of the associated social problems. I think an expansion of Earned Income Tax Credit could serve the same purpose without some of the drawbacks typically attributed to raising the minimum wage.
The argument against oil subsidies also raises a red flag. If Pelosi is concerned about subsidies and wishes to be fair, she ought to first check out aerospace, electronics, telecom and agriculture--all of whom benefit from greater subsidies. For example, ethanol has been pitched as the solution to our oil problem and its production heavily subsidized. Economists debate if ethanol is more environmentally friendly than gasoline and question the feasibility of full replacement of gasoline by ethanol. Brazil has only achieved 40% replacement in three or four decades of subsidized efforts.
I can't argue with the plans for lobbyists, financial aid and stem cell research. It would be nice to see Congress become a bit more fair, to see more students pursue an education and to see potential advances in medicine.
Recent Comments