The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[scaeagles]

Now, I intentionally did not post links to see if something like that would be posted. They are out there, but are not major news stories.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Now, I intentionally did not post links to see if something like that would be posted. They are out there, but are not major news stories.

Well, I'm only commenting on the first story, which I believe I learned of from either the Washington Post or CNN, although I wasn't able to find a link to them today. Since I usually don't read blogs however, I must have heard it from one of those two sources, meaning that it did get coverage.

Perhaps the lack of outrage is over the fact that she didn't say anything outrageous. She gave her opinion, one that I think many would agree with. Where you see outrage, I see grasping at straws.

I don't know enough about the second story to comment on it.

[Alex]

I don't find anything objectionable in what Boxer said to Pelosi. I do find slightly more objectionable what you posit being said to Janet Reno, but that is not what was not what Boxer said.

As for the minimum wage thing, America Samoa and the Marshall Islands have always been excempt from the flat standard rate and putting America Samoa into the same classification would be a major change in the way that wages laws are handled there.

America Samoa has minimum wage regulations, just not the same ones as the most of the rest of the country. The Department of Labor has a special board that sets minimum wages within that territory by industry (see the very complex Minimum Wage workplace poster here).

Now, it is certainly open to debate whether America Samoa should get such individual treatment, but simply passing a blanket law that everybody in AS get $7.15 an hour would conflict with several other existing laws pertaining to America Samoa (and keep in mind that the citizens of AS do not have any direct representation in Congress).

So it makes sense to me that AS would be exempted from a blanket bill (as it always has been).

[BarTopDancer]

Visible Mojo for Alex.

[Alex]

That said, I've of mixed mind about minimum wage in the Pacific Islands.

First, if ever there is a compelling argument for fedreal intervention on wages it is in insular environments dominated by a single industry with few individual employers where there is minimal opportunity for competition to drive up wages.

That said, as Hawaii has learned with sugar and pineapples, it is very easy for such industries to bleed away to other Pacific Island nations without wage protections. A good argument could be made that the only reason SunKist and the other tuna processors are still in America Samoa with its relatively high wage protections (compared to other Pacific Island nations) is because America Samoa has special access to American markets (which is why sugar became a staple crop in Hawaii, once that wasn't a sufficient economic benefit it left Hawaii almost as fast as it entered).

I don't know what they right answer is, since I haven't looked into the specifics enough but I do suspect that $7.15 isn't the right answer.

[scaeagles]

In rephrasing my point, let's say that Santorum said to Reno "who pays the price for this decision - you have no family." That's what Boxer said. The implication is that she makes decisions in a callous fashion, unable to understand the price paid by families who lose loved ones. Perhaps others don't read it that way.

As far as the minimum wage, I hate the minimum wage in any fashion. But if a "living wage" should be paid, shouldn't a "living wage" be paid to all, including those in AS? It's a rhetorical position, certainly.

[Alex]

If it's rhetorical, then what is the avenue of discussion?

Whether AS should receive a minimum wage of $7.15 is not the issue you raised (though it is an issue I addressed in my last post), you raised the issue of whether it is unseemly that AS is exempted from the blanket minimum wage law. My response is no, it is not unseemly because the geographical, political, and economic circumstances of America Samoa place it well outside the mainstream of American conditions.

Wage protection laws do not currently exempt America Samoa from the idea that there is a minimum acceptable wage. What it does is say that the circumstances that determine what that minimum acceptable wage are sufficiently unique that a different approach is needed.

Now, I'm an opponent of a federal minimum wage (except maybe for federal employees) and think it should be addressed at the state level. But to me, there is no "outrage" in the fact that America Samoa is exempt from the increase the House passed, which is the is the issue you raised.

So, first, before considering being outraged that Pelosi got some special treatment for Sunkist Tuna, it would be nice if someone offered some evidence that such a thing happened when all that is currently visible is that the same examption that has existed since the end of WWII when America Samoa come under our protectorate has continued.

As for Boxer, it is a valid question: are those who have no personal familiar risk from war more callous in making war? It isn't offensive, though it is perfectly reasonable to response "no, I don't think so." Which is what Rice did. Disagreement is not offensive.

You say that if the parties had been reversed that there would be big cries of outrage. Maybe that's true and those people not outraged now are hypocrites. But I also suspect that if those cries went up those now calling for outrage would be arguing that these cases aren't really that big of a deal. Hypocrites as well? That is the kabuki of a change in party power: on the vast majority of issues the participants switch sides seamlessly and without apparent cognitive disconnect and call the other side a bunch of hypocrites for doing so.


ETA: Just realized I had a brain fart on some history. We got America Samoa as part of the Spanish-American War, not the post-WWII protectorate divvying. So America Samoa has likely been exempted from minimum wage laws since nearly the beginning of them under FDR.

[Alex]

And now I see that for purposes of avoiding the appearance of impropriety Pelosi is calling for AS to be included over the objections of the territories non-voting representative in Congress.

So what is funny is that in the drive to create stupid controversy, Republicans may very well caused the enforcement of wage protection laws that they disagree with into territories where it is very likely they'll actually have the devastating impacts Republicans always (incorrectly, it turns out) claim will happen in the regular United States.

I'm pretty sure that Republicans would impose communisim if they could do it in such a way that it would be embarrassing to Democrats (and, vice versa, Democrats fascism). All the Republican House members know why AS is different but they'll pretend, because kabuki is fun, that they're outraged while failing to note that Del Monte gives all of its campaign contributions to Republicans.

[Not Afraid]

I don't read Boxer's statement the way you've interepreted it, Leo, but, eh, what do I know?

[wendybeth]

What about what her actual message was- that so many people making policy are not going to feel the impact or bear the brunt of their decisions? It was very honest of her to say that it would not impact her family, and that Condi was not likely to have to worry about the toll on hers as well. Her point was valid- the people paying the price have little say, and since she is an elected representitive she has the right and responsibility to speak for them.


Now, what about that 'surge' of troops George is calling for? It'll be interesting to see how they get that many new troops to sign up voluntarily. The reserves have had the limit on tours taken away, and George's old ticket out of 'Nam, the Guard, has basically become a one-way trip to the Mideast for many thousands of personnel. Ironic, in a very sad way.