BLS: Percentage of Hourly Workers Earning Minimum Wage or Less in 2013 Falls to 4.3%

    In the midst of the Obama administration's latest push to increase the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 an hour, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) had released an analysis showing the the percentage of hourly workers earning at or below the minimum wage is down to 4.3%, or 3.3 million workers.  The decrease continues a trend of more than three decades, beginning with a high of 15% back in the early 1980s.  The numbers have occasionally spiked in reaction to economic conditions, most recently in the so-called Great Recession from 2008 to 2010, but then resumed the downward direction.

    Women's gains in this area have been even more dramatic, falling from around 22% in the early 1980s to about 5% in 2013.  The percentage for men during the same time went from about 10% to about 3%.
    The largest segment of the workforce earning minimum wage or below is in food preparation and serving (21.7%) whose wages are often supplemented by tips.  Other industries represented in the survey include service occupations, such as healthcare and protective services (11.3%), and sales and related occupations (6.1%).
    A related report from the BLS includes other facts about minimum wage workers:

• Minimum wage workers tend to be young. Although workers under age 25 represented only about one-fifth of hourly paid workers, they made up about half of those paid the federal minimum wage or less.
• About 5 percent of Black workers, 4 percent of White workers and Hispanic or Latino workers, and 3 percent of Asian workers earned the federal minimum wage or less. 
• Among hourly paid workers age 16 and older, about 10 percent of those without a high school diploma earned the federal minimum wage or less, compared with about 4 percent of those who had a high school diploma (with no college) and about 2 percent of college graduates. 

Note: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Obama on Obama: "Too Many Americans Are Working More Than Ever Just To Get By"

    Here's a rather harsh assessment of the last four years under the Obama administration's economic policies:

Today, after 4 years of economic growth, corporate profits and stock prices have rarely been higher, and those at the top have never done better. But average wages have barely budged. Inequality has deepened. Upward mobility remains stalled. Even in the midst of recovery, too many Americans are working more than ever just to get by—let alone get ahead. And too many still are not working at all.

    Though this may sound like Democratic criticism of a Republican president, in reality it is President Obama's assessment of his own record, taken from his 2015 Budget proposal just released today.  Prior to the paragraph above, the president does point out what he sees his accomplishments:

After 5 years of grit and determined effort, the United States is better positioned for the 21st Century than any other nation on Earth. We have created more than 8 million new jobs in the last 4 years and now have the lowest unemployment rate in over 5 years. Our housing market is rebounding. Our manufacturing sector is adding jobs for the first time since the 1990s. We now produce more oil at home than we buy from the rest of the world. We have cut our deficits by more than half since I took office. And for the first time in over a decade, business leaders around the world have declared that China is no longer the world’s number one place to invest; America is.

We have made great progress, but we must do more to rebuild our economy on a new foundation for growth and prosperity. I believe that what unites the people of this Nation, regardless of race or region or party, young or old, rich or poor, is the simple, profound belief in opportunity for all—the notion that if you work hard and take responsibility, you can get ahead. That belief has suffered some serious blows. Over more than three decades, even before the Great Recession hit, massive shifts in technology and global competition had eliminated good, middle class jobs and weakened the economic foundations that families depend on. 

Note: A version of this post first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Obama Decries 'Winner-Take-All' Economy to Rich Folks 'Who Are Doing Very Well'

    President Obama attended a Democratic fund raising event in Weston, Massachusetts Wednesday night at the home of Alan and Susan Solomont.  Among the 60 attendees were a number of high-profile Democrats, according to the Boston Globe:

Among those expected to attend are House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi; Governor Deval Patrick; Ken Burns, the director of acclaimed documentaries; Representative Steve Israel, who is chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee; Swanee Hunt, former US ambassador to Austria; and retired US Navy admiral James Stavridis. 

Also expected are several members of congress, including John Tierney, of Salem; Niki Tsongas, of Lowell; and David Cicilline, of Rhode Island. Former congressman Barney Frank is also planning to attend, according to a DCCC aide.

    In his speech, the president blasted Republicans for further lowering Washington's image among voters by continuing obstructionism despite the Newtown shootings and Boston Marathon bombing that should have produced a "new spirit in Congress of people pulling together."  He also made some interesting remarks about the economy the United States finds itself a part of in the world today [emphasis added]:

We know that we are entering into an extraordinarily promising but also challenging time in this country.  International competition is fierce.  We have an economy that's never been more productive or more innovative.  But what we've also seen is an economy that produces a winner-take-all situation and folks like those in this room who are doing very well, there are a whole bunch of folks out there who are struggling.  You’ve got a middle class that is anxious about whether their children will be able to replicate their success.  There are questions as to whether, if you work hard in this country, you can still make it. 

     The Globe also noted that the fund raiser "ticket prices ranged from $16,200 per person to $64,800 per couple. The DCCC would not say how much Obama expected to raise in total."


Note: A version of this article first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Census: Households With Children with an Unemployed Parent Increased 33 Percent from 2005 to 2011

    A Census Bureau report released on Tuesday says that the number of households with children under 18 with at least one unemployed parent increased by 33 percent between 2005 and 2011 from 2.4 million to 3.2 million.  In addition, home ownership among households with children under 18 declined by 15 percent to 20.8 million during that same time period.
    The report is entitled America's Families and Living Arrangements: 2012 and touches on all aspects of the living arrangements of Americans.  Jamie Lewis a demographer for the Census Bureau and co-author of the report says that while the recession had an impact, the effects have not dissipated since the recession ended:

Home ownership among families declined, while food stamp receipt and parental unemployment increased. Even after the recession officially ended in 2009, these measures remained worse than before it began.

    Other parts of the report show some dramatic changes in American households in the last several decades.  For instance:

The share of households that consisted of married couples with children shrunk by half between 1970 and 2012, from 40 percent to 20 percent. At the same time, the percentage of households consisting of a person living alone climbed from 17 percent to 27 percent.

    Some other notable report findings:

• A higher percentage of young adults age 25 to 34 lived in their parents' home in 2012 than in the early 2000s. For men of this age, the share living in their parents' home increased from 13 percent in 2000 to 17 percent in 2012. The increase for women age 25 to 34 went from 8 percent in 2000 to 10 percent in 2012.
• According to the 2011 American Community Survey, there were 605,000 same-sex couple households, including both married and unmarried couples, of whom 284,000 were male and 321,000 were female couples.
• Most family groups with children (63 percent) were maintained by married couples.
• A higher percentage of black (55 percent) and Hispanic (31 percent) children lived with one parent than white non-Hispanic (21 percent) or Asian children (13 percent).
• Between 1970 and 2012, the average number of people per household declined from 3.1 to 2.6. 

Note: A version of this article first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Labor Dept.: $64M in Grants For 'Personalized, Re-employment Plans' For Unemployed

    The Labor Department announced Monday the awarding of $64 million in grants to help unemployment insurance recipients find work more quickly.  The funds will be divided up between thirty-eight states, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia.  Acting Labor Secretary Seth Harris announced the awards:

"The grants announced today will help individuals and families facing unemployment get back to work quickly," said acting Secretary of Labor Seth D. Harris. "This is a win-win-win for those looking for work, employers who want to pay less taxes and states struggling to control their budgets."

    The grants fund programs that focus directly on matching individuals and their career interests with job availability in the local job market:

The funds will be used to provide UI beneficiaries with personalized, re-employment plans based on the claimant's career interests and local labor market information. These assessments are done in-person and participants will receive referrals to re-employment services and/or training provided by the American Job Center. The program will also allow for a complete review of the claimants eligibility for UI benefits, to help reduce incidences of improper payments...
A recent report by Impaq International found strong evidence showing that re-employment and eligibility assessments expedite the return of the unemployed to the workforce.

   The five states receiving the most funds are: New York, $11,037,401; Florida, $7,146,196; Massachusetts, $4,280,176; Oregon, $3,693,193; and Ohio, $3,449,135.


Note: A version of this article first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Unemployed, Discouraged, Underemployed Rate Jumps to 14.3%, Highest Since February

    While the Bureau of Labor Statistics jobs report released this morning showed unemployment unchanged at 7.6 precent, the broadest measure of unemployment, the U-6 rate (seasonally adjusted), jumped from 13.8% to 14.3%, its highest level since February 2013.

    The U-6 rate includes "all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons," including discouraged and underemployed workers, as well as the unemployed.  The rate is only a half-point lower than the 14.8% rate a year ago in June 2012.


Note: A version of this article appeared first at The Weekly Standard.

White House Repeats Jobs Mantra: ‘More Work Remains to Be Done’ Nine Months in a Row

    When the monthly employment report came out Friday morning, Alan Krueger, Chairman of President Barack Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, quickly commented on the White House blog.  He began with the observation that "more work remains to be done":

April 4, 2013 - "While more work remains to be done, today’s employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to recover from the worst downturn since the Great Depression. It is critical that we continue the policies that are helping to build an economy that creates jobs and works for the middle class as we dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007."

    If the words sounds familiar, there's a good reason.  After a brief respite in March, Mr. Krueger used the same two opening sentences in the April post that were used in the preceding seven Employment Situation blog posts (although to be fair, Megan Slack is credited with the November 2012 entry.)

March 8, 2013 - "While more work remains to be done, today’s employment report provides evidence that the recovery that began in mid-2009 is gaining traction." 

February 1, 2013 - "While more work remains to be done, today’s employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to heal from the wounds inflicted by the worst downturn since the Great Depression. It is critical that we pursue the policies needed to build an economy that works for the middle class as we continue to dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007." 

January 4, 2013 - "While more work remains to be done, today’s employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to heal from the wounds inflicted by the worst downturn since the Great Depression. It is critical that we continue the policies that are building an economy that works for the middle class as we dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007." 

December 7, 2012 - "While more work remains to be done, today’s employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to heal from the wounds inflicted by the worst downturn since the Great Depression. It is critical that we continue the policies that are building an economy that works for the middle class as we dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007." 

November 2, 2012 - "While more work remains to be done, today’s employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to heal from the wounds inflicted by the worst downturn since the Great Depression. It is critical that we continue the policies that are building an economy that works for the middle class as we dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007." 

October 5, 2012 - "While there is more work that remains to be done, today’s employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to heal from the wounds inflicted by the worst downturn since the Great Depression. It is critical that we continue the policies that are building an economy that works for the middle class as we dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007." 

September 7, 2012 - "While there is more work that remains to be done, today’s employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to recover from the worst downturn since the Great Depression. It is critical that we continue the policies that are building an economy that works for the middle class as we dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007." 

August 3, 2012 - "While there is more work that remains to be done, today’s employment report provides further evidence that the U.S. economy is continuing to recover from the worst downturn since the Great Depression.  It is critical that we continue the policies that build an economy that works for the middle class as we dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007."

    Further searches reveal that these popular sentence appeared before, as well.  For example, May 2012.

    While copy/pasting is quite a common blogging practice, Mr. Krueger has certainly opened himself up to charges that he is phoning in his monthly responses to the disappointing job situation in the country.  It is the same charge that has been leveled at his boss, President Obama, often in the last four years as his priorities have taken him in many other directions.  If there is "more work to be done," the American public could be forgiven for asking where those jobs are.


Note: A version of this article first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Jeeps to be Manufactured in Italy for Export to U.S.

    Lost in all of the hubbub of the Romney/Obama/Chrysler/Jeep/China kerfuffle of the past few weeks was this story out of Italy reported by Autonews.com [emphasis added]:

TURIN - ...  In 2014, Fiat introduces the 500X, a replacement for the current Sedici small crossover likely to be built at its Melfi plant in Central Italy alongside a "baby" Jeep Wrangler small SUV for European and U.S. markets. Alfa will launch the 4C spider and possibly a large sedan, a possible substitute for the discontinued 164 sedan. Maserati will begin sales of the Levante luxury SUV, based on the Jeep Grand Cherokee.

    The story was also reported elsewhere, such as Autoblog:

In a bid to fill some of its empty Italian production capacity, Fiat plans to build a pair of small SUVs at its plant in Melfi starting in 2014, according to Automotive News Europe. With most Chrysler plants running at or near full capacity, the Melfi facility will probably build the new Fiat and Jeep SUVs for export to North America. The final decision could come as soon as this weekend. The new small Jeep is expected to replace the Patriot and/or Compass, which are both produced in Chrysler's Belvidere, Illinois plant...
In addition to these new Fiat and Jeep SUVs, the upcoming Chrysler 100 hatchback could also be built in Italy at Fiat's Cassino plant.

    While Italy is not China, Chrysler and the Obama administration pushed back hard against the idea that any Jeep production was being shifted overseas.  At the height of the controversy and a week before the election, Chrysler chairman and CEO Sergio Marchionne wrote a blog post.  In part, he said:

Jeep is one of our truly global brands with uniquely American roots. This will never change. So much so that we committed that the iconic Wrangler nameplate, currently produced in our Toledo, Ohio plant, will never see full production outside the United States.
Jeep assembly lines will remain in operation in the United States and will constitute the backbone of the brand.
It is inaccurate to suggest anything different.

    Marchionne, though not a politician, seems to have chosen his words carefully and precisely.  For instance, "the iconic Wrangler nameplate, currently produced in our Toledo, Ohio plant, will never see full production outside the United States."  He went on to say, "Jeep assembly lines will remain in operation in the United States", and not "Jeep assembly lines will remain in operation only in the United States."  As I noted in my original post on this story (before national attention became focused on it,) Marchionne's comments in 2011 regarding Jeep and especially the Wrangler were a bit more sweeping:

“This [Toledo, Ohio] plant has been at the heart of what we’ve done. I’ve said publicly that I would never build the Wrangler outside the U.S. and outside of Toledo. These are things that are unthinkable — to assemble a Wrangler somewhere else,” Marchionne said in November, 2011.

 So what is this "'baby' Jeep Wrangler" planned for the Melfi plant in Italy for export to the U.S.?  Will Chrysler give it a different name to keep Marchionne's pledge technically intact?  Wasn't one of the ideas that made foreign production of Jeeps so unthinkable was the importing of those Jeeps with "uniquely American roots" into the United States?  But that sounds very much like Fiat's current plan.  And if that's not enough, there's the more ominous albeit less clear statement in the Autoblog story that says "The new small Jeep [built at the Melfi, Italy plant for export to North America] is expected to replace the Patriot and/or Compass, which are both produced in Chrysler's Belvidere, Illinois plant."  A foreign-built Jeep exported to the U.S. to "replace" an American made model?  How could that be spun as good news for U.S. jobs?

    There is no question that Jeep production in the U.S. is thriving and that it appears no current Jeep-related Chrysler jobs in the U.S. are in direct jeopardy.  However, the argument could be made that if Jeeps are being made in Italy for export to the U.S., those vehicles and the jobs created to build them could be American made cars and jobs.
     Perhaps in an effort to deflect criticism from the Romney campaign, Chrysler overshot the truth in its claims just as the Romney campaign did with their initial claim that "all Jeep production" was going to be shifted to China.  Unfortunately, the Romney campaign never fully retracted its candidate's original erroneous statement, choosing to simply switch the focus to more general assertions that the U.S. automaker was creating jobs overseas.  It remains to be seen if Chrysler will set the record straight about its plans for Jeep production, particularly the Wrangler brand, and how that squares with Marchionne's public statements.

The 100th Day of the Romney Administration

    This is not a parody, but I'll bet heads will roll over at the Onion for not coming up with this first.  Make sure you're not drinking anything when you watch it:

Update on the Jeep Story [Updated]

    Mitt Romney made some news today by citing the story about Chrysler considering restarting production of Jeeps in China.  CBS reports:

On Thursday, Romney told a rally in Defiance, Ohio, site of a General Motors plant, "I saw a story today that one of the great manufacturers in this state Jeep -- now owned by the Italians -- is thinking of moving all production to China. I will fight for every good job in America. I'm going to fight to make sure trade is fair, and if it's fair America will win."

     The problem was in the phrase "thinking of moving all production to China."  The way the Bloomberg was written gave rise to the misinterpretation with the following sentence:

Fiat SpA (F), majority owner of Chrysler Group LLC, plans to return Jeep output to China and may eventually make all of its models in that country[.]

    Another sentence was also misleading and rather awkwardly written:

[Mike Manley, chief operating officer of Fiat and Chrysler in Asia said]“We’re reviewing the opportunities within existing capacity” as well as “should we be localizing the entire Jeep portfolio or some of the Jeep portfolio.”

    However, further into the story, the following statement appears:

 Manley referred to adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China. 

    My post on Wednesday (the first blog to note the story as far as I can tell*) included this quote which was unfortunately absent from some of the other sites which picked up the Jeep story later (one of which was linked to by the Drudge Report on Thursday.)  The Romney campaign apparently passed on the story to Mitt Romney without the clarification.  Left wing media and the Obama campaign jumped on the misstatement, and Chrysler even wrote a blog post to clarify the misinterpretations of the Bloomberg story.

    Besides the hit to Romney's credibility, the most unfortunate part of this episode is that it distracts from the point I was originally making by citing the story.  The Obama campaign has made much hay out of Romney being an "outsourcing pioneer." Then, in the same week the Obama campaign released its second term agenda which includes a photo (at right) of Obama speaking at a Jeep factory touting American jobs, a story comes out that Chrysler, one of the administration's success stories, in thinking about jobs in China.  Personally, I don't have a problem with that and neither do most conservatives.  But the Obama campaign hasn't touted creating jobs in China, and now that irony will be largely obscured.

---------------

*Update:  I found this reference to the Bloomberg story originally posted on 10/22 at a blog called FidoSysop's Blog and Forums.

Ohio, Obama, and Optics: Chrysler Considers Building Jeeps in China

UPDATE here.

    This week, the Obama campaign released a glossy 20-page booklet laying out the President's second term agenda.  On page 3, there is a section entitled "Reviving American Manufacturing":

Manufacturing and technology are the life-blood of middle-class families and key engines of the American economy, sparking innovation, generating higher-wage jobs, and strengthening entire communities. But we can’t create an economy built to last if America doesn’t make things the world buys.

The backdrop for the page is the following photo:

    The photo was taken on June 3, 2011 at a Chrysler plant in Toledo, Ohio, where the president gave a speech.  That's a Jeep Wrangler in the background.

    In a potentially embarrassing coincidence, the following story appeared at Bloomberg on Monday, the day before the booklet was released:

Fiat SpA (F), majority owner of Chrysler Group LLC, plans to return Jeep output to China and may eventually make all of its models in that country, according to the head of both automakers’ operations in the region.
Fiat is in “very detailed conversations” with its Chinese partner, Guangzhou Automobile Group Co. (2238), about making Jeeps in the world’s largest auto market, said Mike Manley, chief operating officer of Fiat and Chrysler in Asia. Chrysler hasn’t built Jeeps there since before Fiat took control in 2009.

    The story does go on to suggest this would not affect its plants in the United States:

Chrysler currently builds all Jeep SUV models at plants in Michigan, Illinois and Ohio. Manley referred to adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China.

    However, a related story at AutoGuide.com notes [emphasis added]:

Jeep is considering shipping its manufacturing to China in a cost-saving measure on the heels of weak European demand.
Weakness in the European auto market lead to slow sales for Chrysler but strong demand in China buoyed the brand. In fact, business in China is good enough that Chrysler might transplant its manufacturing operations. Should brand execs pull the trigger, it would mark the first time Chrysler built Jeeps in China since before 2009 when Fiat took a stake in the company.
That contradicts what Fiat-Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne said almost a year ago amid concerns that Wrangler production might move from its current plant in Toledo, Ohio.
“This plant has been at the heart of what we’ve done. I’ve said publicly that I would never build the Wrangler outside the U.S. and outside of Toledo. These are things that are unthinkable — to assemble a Wrangler somewhere else,” Marchionne said in November, 2011.
But what was unthinkable a year ago might not seem so foreign. Manufacturing Jeep products in China could help the company save money while feeding a growing market with reduced expenses.
Mike Manley, Fiat Chrysler’s COO in Asia, seems bullish of the possibility. “The volume opportunity for us is very significant,” he, said to Bloomberg. “We’re reviewing the opportunities within existing capacity.”
Jeep’s sales in China more than doubled this year to 33,463 units through September, which could encourage the move further.
Despite that, moving all of the brand’s production to China wouldn’t sit well with American consumers.

    Most agree this election will turn on the economy and jobs.  For a campaign concerned about "optics," the timing of this story could not be worse.   And with Ohio's position as the number one battleground state in the upcoming election, the location couldn't be worse, either.

And That? You Didn't Build That, Either!

    Drudge red-headlined this story (LET'S REPEAT AUTO BAILOUT SUCCESS 'WITH EVERY INDUSTRY'...) when it first hit Thursday and it was still on his site Friday morning.  Politico ran the original story on their Politico44 blog (their "Living Diary of the Obama Presidency"):

PUEBLO, Colo. – President Obama, while villifying Mitt Romney for opposing the auto industry bailout, bragged about the success of his decision to provide government assistance and said he now wants to see every manufacturing industry come roaring back.
“I said, I believe in American workers, I believe in this American industry, and now the American auto industry has come roaring back,” he said. “Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry.
“I don’t want those jobs taking root in places like China, I want those jobs taking root in places like Pueblo,” Obama told a crowd gathered for a campaign rally at the Palace of Agriculture at the Colorado State Fairgrounds here.

    The money quote that Politico and Drudge focused on was of course "Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry."  Tacked onto the end of the Politico story, however, is a curious note:

Clarification: This post was updated to reflect the president's intent to express his support for manufacturing success. An earlier version was unclear about his intent.

    I have not been able to locate that earlier version.  I read the story about an hour after it was originally posted, so I do not know how long the unclarified story was up, and I was not able to find a cached or quoted version anywhere.  The curious part of the clarification is, how does Politico (or Donovan Slack, the writer) know what the president's "intent" was?  Did someone at the White House read the story and call Politico?  Or did someone else at Politico read Slack's story and say, "He can't really mean that!"  But the president's choice of words belie Politico's clarification.  He did not say, "Now I want to see the same thing with manufacturing jobs ... in every industry."  He said, "Now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs ... in every industry."  There's a big difference.
    When the controversy over the president's "you didn't build that" remark exploded, the president's supporters argued that the context of the remark made it perfectly clear what he meant.  So what is the context in this case?  From the White House transcript of the speech [emphasis added]:

When all of us share in prosperity, we all do better.  (Applause.)  That’s the choice in this election.  That’s why I’m running for President -- because I believe we’re all in this together.  (Applause.)

We’ve got a bunch of examples of the differences, the choice in this election.  When the American auto industry was on the brink of collapse, more than 1 million jobs at stake, Governor Romney said, let’s “let Detroit go bankrupt.”

AUDIENCE:  Booo --

THE PRESIDENT:  I said I believe in American workers, I believe in this American industry, and now the American auto industry has come roaring back and GM is number one again.  (Applause.)  So now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs not just in the auto industry, but in every industry.  I don’t want those jobs taking root in places like China.  I want them taking root in places like Pueblo.  (Applause.)

Governor Romney brags about his private sector experience, but it was mostly investing in companies, some of which were called “pioneers” of outsourcing.  I don’t want to be a pioneer of outsourcing.  I want to insource.  I want to stop giving tax breaks to companies that are shipping jobs overseas; let’s give those tax breaks to companies that are investing here in the United States of America, making American products with American workers and selling them around the world.  That’s why I’m running for a second term.  (Applause.)

    Obviously the president never uses the term "bailout"in the speech, but the government bailout of GM is the example he makes a beeline for as the premier example of his economic approach versus Mitt Romney.  And then he cites targeted tax breaks:

I don’t want to be a pioneer of outsourcing.  I want to insource.  I want to stop giving tax breaks...

    To borrow the cadence of John F. Kennedy, President Obama is virtually saying, Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what Barack Obama can do for your business.  Time and again, this president returns to his default view that the typical business just can't get along without the active involvement of the government.  In his more guarded remarks, he stresses infrastructure (roads and bridges) as government's primary contribution to the smooth operation of the private sector.  But he was on a roll in this speech, perhaps spurred on by the Romney-induced "booos" and the frequent applause of the crowd, and bailouts and picking winners and losers via revoking and granting tax breaks rose to the surface.
    In any case, Media Matters immediately began the "context" defense, even though the full context underscores the meaning of the president's quote.  Whatever meaning can be squeezed of the president's phrases such as "you didn't build that" and "I want to do the same thing ... in every industry" by the president's defenders, it is clear that his attitude towards government and the private sector is not "get government out of the way and businesses can prosper."  It runs more along the lines of "my way or the highway - and by the way, government built the highway, too."

At These Prices, There Had Better Be a Lot on His Plate!

    Today it was reported that the president's Jobs Council has not met publicly for six months, calling into question the laser-like focus on jobs that the president has often professed as his obsession.  Jay Carney, the president's press secretary was asked about this (via RealClearPolitics):

REPORTER: So there's no reason they haven't met publicly?
CARNEY: No, there's no specific reason except that the president's obviously got a lot on his plate. 

Interesting choice of words... in the last six months:

June 28, 2012 - Marc Anthony's $40,000-a-Plate Obama Fundraiser

June 13, 2012 - Obama Fundraiser Nets $40,000 A Ticket In Washington D.C. 

May 10, 2012 - George Clooney Throws Obama A $40,000-A-Plate Party

May 3, 2012 -  Obama attended two private, $40,000-a-plate fundraisers

April 9, 2012 - Lunch: $10,000 a plate. Good seats to hear John Legend sing: $5,000. Dinner: $30,000 per couple.

March 9, 2012 - Barack Obama ... $10,000-per-plate fundraiser in ... Atlanta, Ga. at the Tyler Perry Studios.  

March 1, 2012 - Obama ... at Jean-Georges Vongerichten’s ABC Kitchen... dinner cost $35,800 a plate. 

February 23, 2012 - Obama's Florida trip includes All-Star NBA [$30,000-a-plate] fundraiser 

February 15, 2012 - Actor George Clooney... joined the president for a $35,800-a-plate dinner.

This list is by no means comprehensive, but you get the idea.  However, the president is not the only one with a busy schedule, and I am out of time.  I've got a lot on my plate, too.  Or at least I will as soon as I make dinner.  I'm still working out the per-plate price.

Insourcing Outsourcing

    For those of you who like your irony sliced thick, this is a real treat.  Thursday, President Obama gave a much-maligned 54 minute speech on the economy in which he mentioned the word "job" or "jobs" 38 times, including several times in the following excerpts:

This is the vision behind the jobs plan I sent Congress back in September -- a bill filled with bipartisan ideas that, according to independent economists, would create up to 1 million additional jobs if passed today...

My plan to reform the tax code recognizes that government can’t bring back every job that’s been outsourced or every factory that’s closed its doors.  But we sure can stop giving tax breaks to businesses that ship jobs overseas, and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in the United States of America -- in Ohio, in Cleveland, in Pennsylvania...

It’s hard not to get cynical when times are tough.  And I’m reminded every day of just how tough things are for too many Americans.  Every day I hear from folks who are out of work or have lost their home.  

When the president speaks of his "plan to reform the tax code" in the 2nd paragraph above, he's referencing his Congress To-Do List which includes the president's top five priorities for Congress (if you don't count his Don't-double-my-rate proposal for student loans about which he tweeted on June 7th:  “The No. 1 thing Congress should do right now is to stop student loan interest rates from doubling at the end of the month.") The very first item on the To-Do list is "Reward American Jobs, Not Outsourcing":

Pass legislation to attract and keep good jobs in the United States by rewarding companies who bring jobs back to America with lower taxes and pay for it by eliminating tax incentives for companies to ship jobs overseas.

Now for the irony.  The day after giving the "I know there aren't enough jobs being created" speech, the President immediately skipped over the five items on his Congress To-Do list and announced a policy change on the treatment of certain illegal immigrants:

In an election-year policy change, the Obama administration said Friday it will stop deporting young illegal immigrants who entered the United States as children if they meet certain requirements... 

Under the new policy, people younger than 30 who came to the United States before the age of 16, pose no criminal or security threat, and were successful students or served in the military can get a two-year deferral from deportation, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said.

It also will allow those meeting the requirements to apply for work permits, Napolitano said, adding that participants must be in the United States now and be able to prove they have been living in the country continuously for at least five years...

Friday's policy change is expected to potentially affect 800,000 people, an administration official told CNN on background. 

While calling on Congress to reward employers for not outsourcing American jobs, the president effectively outsourced up to 800,000 jobs to non-citizens.  While an argument can be made that immigration, even this action, in the long run will be good for the economy, that is not what the president had in mind with this policy that directly contradicts a position he took in March 2011.   As even CNN had to acknowledge in the opening sentence of their story, this was political election year pandering and nothing more.

The Pipeline to Nowhere

    CNN reports today that President Obama will endorse the permitting of the southern half of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline:

President Barack Obama plans to announce in Cushing, Oklahoma, on Thursday that his administration will expedite the permit for the southern half of the Keystone XL pipeline, a source familiar with the president's announcement told CNN.
In January, the Obama administration denied a permit for the 1,700-mile-long Keystone XL oil pipeline, which would stretch from Canada's tar sands development to the U.S. Gulf Coast. That decision was met by persistent Republican criticism that the president has not been doing everything possible to create jobs and combat high gas prices.
Late last month, TransCanada, the company behind the Keystone XL Pipeline, announced it would move forward with the process to build the southern half of the pipeline, which would begin in Cushing - the president's third stop on his two-day energy tour. The White House praised the move.
Senior administration officials would not confirm the president's plan to unveil the effort to cut red tape for the project, though one senior administration official acknowledged the need to deal with the glut of oil in Cushing, where oil from the Midwest hits a bottleneck as it is transported to the Gulf of Mexico.

    It's a far cry from what the pipeline's backers had sought, and the timing of the announcement has led to suspicions that the Obama administration is seeking a way to blunt criticism of the January rejection of the full project.  The recent rise in gas prices also has had the president looking for ways to show that he is trying to help bring down the cost of energy even while claiming a general inability of government to do so.  Needless to say, there will be mixed reactions to this partial permitting announcement.  NPR reports:

What's clear is that Obama's announcement won't be met with cheers from oil executives. The heads of four big energy companies — Continental Resources, Chesapeake Energy, Devon Energy and Sandridge Energy — said as much in an an open letter to the president published in The Oklahoman.
Their message to the president: Approve the entire XL pipeline, now. They write:

"Approval of the entire Keystone XL pipeline should happen now — not after the election. Yes, we are pleased TransCanada decided to build a critical section of the project from Cushing to the Gulf Coast. We note that this section doesn't require State Department approval. However, America's greatest benefit will come when we can transport oil from our best energy partner, Canada, and oil-rich North Dakota and Montana."

    Although most would have to acknowledge some benefit to the partial construction of the pipeline, the section being fast-tracked is only a fraction of the total project.  As the general election season draws near, will the Keystone XL Pipeline turn into the 2012 version of Sarah Palin's support for the Bridge to Nowhere that was resurrected as an issue when she was named John McCain's running mate?  Except in this case, it wouldn't be support for an expensive government project with questionable benefits, but rather the government's lack of support for a private sector project with multiple unquestionable benefits, not the least of which would be thousands of jobs.  The president can only hope that the parallel doesn't catch on.


This post was originally published on March 21, 2012 at Blogger News Network.