A Crucial Element of Democracy

This is a blog by Robert Gutierrez ...
While often taken for granted, civics education plays a crucial role in a democracy like ours. This Blog is dedicated to enticing its readers into taking an active role in the formulation of the civics curriculum found in their local schools. In order to do this, the Blog is offering a newer way to look at civics education, a newer construct - liberated federalism or federation theory. Daniel Elazar defines federalism as "the mode of political organization that unites separate polities within an overarching political system by distributing power among general and constituent governments in a manner designed to protect the existence and authority of both." It depends on its citizens acting in certain ways which Elazar calls federalism's processes. Federation theory, as applied to civics curriculum, has a set of aims. They are:
*Teach a view of government as a supra federated institution of society in which collective interests of the commonwealth are protected and advanced.
*Teach the philosophical basis of government's role as guardian of the grand partnership of citizens at both levels of individuals and associations of political and social intercourse.
*Convey the need of government to engender levels of support promoting a general sense of obligation and duty toward agreed upon goals and processes aimed at advancing the common betterment.
*Establish and justify a political morality which includes a process to assess whether that morality meets the needs of changing times while holding true to federalist values.
*Emphasize the integrity of the individual both in terms of liberty and equity in which each citizen is a member of a compacted arrangement and whose role is legally, politically, and socially congruent with the spirit of the Bill of Rights.
*Find a balance between a respect for national expertise and an encouragement of local, unsophisticated participation in policy decision-making and implementation.
Your input, as to the content of this Blog, is encouraged through this Blog directly or the Blog's email address: gravitascivics@gmail.com .
NOTE: This blog has led to the publication of a book. The title of that book is TOWARD A FEDERATED NATION: IMPLEMENTING NATIONAL CIVICS STANDARDS and it is available through Amazon in both ebook and paperback versions.

Monday, February 17, 2014

JUST A LITTLE BIT

A loud and vibrant issue discussed today is that of the minimum wage. I have stated my position on this issue already: a person who works a full time job in the legitimate labor market deserves a living wage. This is, I am claiming a federalist position in that that view of governance and politics holds as a basic value one of equality – not of results, but of one that strives to secure equal opportunity in the most perfect sense possible. This is held above all other considerations, short of societal survival, and is surely held above the amount of employment such a policy affects. Whether one agrees with this position or not, if one were to be guided by a federalist construct in determining content in civics instruction, one can be justified in introducing this topic and asking students what they believe to be moral and prudent concerning the minimum wage. In doing so, a teacher should present all relevant information. This posting presents some of those relevant facts.

Let's put some of the basic figures concerning the minimum wage into more meaningful quantities. First, the national minimum wage is $7.25 an hour. Assuming a worker on minimum wage works a forty hour week, the weekly amount is $290; the yearly rate is $15,080. The highest state minimum wage, in the state of Washington, is $9.32 an hour. Again, under the same assumption, the weekly amount in that state is $372.80; the yearly rate is $19,385.60. The Obama Administration is proposing that Congress pass legislation that would increase the national minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. The weekly amount would be $404; the yearly rate would be $21,008. According to the Federal Register, the poverty level in 2013 for one person is $11,490 a year. Twenty states and the District of Columbia have minimum wages above the federal minimum. Eighteen states have the federal minimum wage. Five states have no minimum wage law. Four states have a minimum wage lower the federal level. It should be noted that not all workers are covered by the minimum wage law or have a lower rate as is the case for workers who traditionally earn tips (for example, servers in restaurants – the amount varies by state).

Most of the discussion over the minimum wage and the potential consequences of raising it is whether a raise will cause lower employment. The simple reason for this would be that an increase in its cost will engender lower demand for labor. This is a straight supply and demand analysis. But what is often not mentioned is that a lower minimum wage, in real terms, will cause a lower supply of workers. For example, if you are a young person from a modestly well-off family, a too low wage will discourage you from seeking employment. Lower supply encourages higher wages. Now this would be a minimal effect because when we are talking about the minimum wage, we are usually referring to low skilled, entry level jobs and a great many of the people who hold them are the most vulnerable and most needful of employment – they'll seek work at just about any level. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, youth hold about half of the jobs that pay minimum or below minimum wage; the other half are older. About three-fifths of those holding minimum or below minimum wage jobs are in the service industries, mostly in restaurants and food preparation positions. The Bureau is a good source for basic information concerning the minimum wage.1 The number of jobs affected by raising or lowering a wage rate is called the elasticity of demand for labor, and the number of workers who are willing to work for varying wage rates is called the elasticity of supply for labor.

Raising the minimum wage will have many consequences, some obvious, some not so obvious. For example, Kirk Johnson2 reports that Oregon, where the minimum wage is $1.85 higher than in nearby Idaho, is experiencing a large commuting worker force from the lower paying state into Oregon. Of course, that means the supply of workers in Idaho has decreased. On the other hand, Kirk observes that in a particular restaurant, a higher minimum wage meant that the business dismissed the dishwasher and is demanding that its remaining workers work many more hours and have heavier work loads. How does the higher minimum wage affect business activity?
while some business owners along the border said raising the minimum wage could keep them from adding extra employees, they also said larger economic forces were more important. For example, minimum-wage service jobs in stores, restaurants and motels have boomed on the Oregon side, despite its higher rate, mostly because Oregon has no sales tax.3
One argument for raising the minimum wage is that the extra money goes to low income people who are more apt to spend any extra income. This will increase the circulation of money and increase demand. In turn, that means more business activity. At the same time, as Kirk and others have warned, increased wages will also mean an increase in prices. This is especially true in markets where the businesses operate on small margins (the differences between costs and revenues) or in businesses where there is little competition.

From this short review of some of the facts, for people with no preconceived notion or vested interest, the argument seems heated and unable to be finalized with any satisfaction. Will increasing the minimum wage have a beneficial or detrimental effect on the economy? The countervailing forces seem to indicate the overall effect to be a wash.

All of this, in my mind, just adds further reason to look elsewhere for justifications for or against raising the minimum wage. I will leave this debate for now with one last word: in real terms, we had a much higher minimum wage in previous years during both times of prosperity and in times of recession. Does this just further indicate that any raise in the level, assuming it is under a reasonable amount, will not make much difference to the overall health of the economy, one way or the other? Yet for those who receive the extra pay, it can go a long way in adding to their quality of life and to the opportunities for themselves and their children.

2Kirk, J. (2014). Crossing borders and changing lives, lured by higher state minimum wages. The New York Times, February 16, pp. 17 and 23.

3Ibid., p. 23.

No comments:

Post a Comment