Democrat Congressmen Are Trying To Live On Minimum Wage And Finding It Very Hard

[xchrom]

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-trading-power-lunches-for-canned-tuna-in-us-minimum-wage-bid-2014-25



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - It was 4:25 p.m. and all Representative Tim Ryan had eaten so far were the few peanuts he foraged in a U.S. Capitol cloakroom.

His congressional salary is $174,000. But on Thursday, the six-term Ohio Democrat couldn’t afford lunch.

In a Congress thick with millionaires, Ryan and three other Democratic representatives are trying to live on the budget of a minimum wage worker this week in an effort to stir up attention to raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.

Congressional Republicans have blocked the Democratic initiative, claiming it would kill jobs - a contention that is a topic of hot debate among politicians and economists.



Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/r-trading-power-lunches-for-canned-tuna-in-us-minimum-wage-bid-2014-25#ixzz38ZjQccks

[shenmue]

1. This is why

I respect them more. I can't see Repubs doing this. Dems make more of an effort to understand the average person's way of doing things.

[merrily]

2. Trying poverty for a brief time as an experiment is tough. Boo hoo.

Last edited Sat Jul 26, 2014, 09:11 AM - Edit history (2)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5143802

Is this kabuki?

How realistic is it to contemplate seriously that Republican House will vote to increase the minimum wage, or that the Republican minority in the Senate will refrain from a fake filibuster?

Real wages had not increased since the 1970s. The Democrats controlled both Houses from January 2007 to January 2011. During that period, we had near global economic collapse, including massive numbers of foreclosures (and a number of economy related suicides) in the US.

Where were the publicity and the Congressional votes about the minimum wage then? And, if not a minimum wage vote, then at least an EFCA vote?

ETA: My humble apologies. There were several minimum wages vote in 2007, effective in 2009, which collectively increased the minimum wage from $6.55 all the way up to a profligate $7.25.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/24/federal-minimum-wage-five-years_n_5617950.html

(Seriously? That took a series of votes? That can't be correct.)

U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren has pointed out that the federal minimum wage rate would be $22.00 if it had kept pace with increased worker productivity.[7][8][9][10]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States

[CTyankee]

5. I don't think what they are doing is wrong. They are imperfectly trying to experience what

it is like to live on such pittances in an effort to raise the minimum wage. Given the wining and dining of the republicans, I'd much rather see a Dem congressman at least TRY to see the other side of the picture. Living it, even knowing that you can quit and go back to your comfort, is better than rationalizing why being poor "isn't so bad."

[merrily]

6. You didn't address any of the issues I raised, except to say that you are

basically accepting this at face value.

Yet, here we are in election season, with little to zero danger of this passing the House, and this is time for this experiment?

No, it's not necessarily wrong, per se, but that was not my question. My question was whether it was D.C. kabuki.

[CTyankee]

13. Oh, I don't know, merrily...

I suppose you could call it D.C. kabuki but the kind of kabuki I'd rather have our reps do to win votes than to ignore them. At least, they are trying. I'm sure they must have at least suspected that they'd be held up to some ridicule for doing this, but they did it anyway. And at least they are honest in how detached their lives are from most of their constituents.

I guess I prefer "our" kabuki to the other side's...

[merrily]

16. "At least, they are trying." Are they? If so, trying what?

They didn't do much about this when they had the chance; and they can be relatively confident it won't pass. So, are they trying to show up Republicans to get re-elected or are they seriously trying to pass a bill?

[questionseverything]

47. walking a mile in your neighbor's shoes is never a bad thing

it gives knowledge and insight which leads to compassion

that being said, i think it is funny they are showing a pic of expensive Ramon noodles instead of the 15 cent a pack ones poor folks eat

[mcar]

12. Democrats did NOT control both houses for all that time

Can we please stop citing that incorrect meme?

[merrily]

15. Not a meme. Democrats had a majority in both Houses all that time.

That is considered control.

[prairierose]

29. No, they did not control both houses all that time....

The Dems controlled the House but the Dems controlled the Senate,as in 61 votes to overcome any filibuster, for 72 days. This was between the time Al Franken was finally sworn in on July 7 after his long recount and Ted Kennedy's successor was sworn in Sept 24. During this time, Sen Byrd was an unreliable vote due to ill health.

http://sandiegofreepress.org/2012/09/the-myth-of-the-filibuster-proof-democratic-senate/#.U9PDQPldUuI

[merrily]

32. Yes, they did. A majority in a house = control.

Your link speaks of "filibuster-proof" which is an entirely different issue from control of a house.You are conflating control with the number of votes needed for cloture. That is not the same thing.

In plain English, you control a house when you have a majority and get to appoint committee chairs, etc.

[prairierose]

42. In, the Senate, with the rules that have been in place for some time...

the only way that most bills can move forward it so be able to vote for cloture. In other words, because of republicant obstructionism, the Dems do not control the Senate unless they can vote for cloture since almost every bill and every Presidential appointment is filibustered by the republicants. So unless they have 61 votes, they can not move legislation forward in almost all cases. Yes, they may control the calendar and the committees but that is not the same as being able to move legislation forward past a filibuster.

[merrily]

44. NO. I understand the cloture rule. However, again, plain English is that a simple

majority equals control of a House. They controlled both houses as people not at DU use and understand the term. Again, "control" does NOT mean your caucus has enough votes for cloture. It means a simple majority. You are either still conflating or attempting to defend your original conflation.

Words have meanings. Alice in Wonderland to the contrary, words don't mean whatever you want them to mean. Control of a house, including the Senate, means a simple majority.

[questionseverything]

45. not to mention the senate could of changed the rules and used the nuclear option

as was threatened to get the house bill that included the public option passed

same would apply to the min wage bill

[hfojvt]

18. the wage was increased from $5.15 to $7.25

it had been $5.15 since the last increase by Clinton in 1997. It went to $5.85 some time in 2007, $6.55 some time in 2008 and $7.25 some time in 2009.

It took a series of votes to find something that would pass a Senate filibuster and also avoid a Presidential veto. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Minimum_Wage_Act_of_2007

[merrily]

22. Thanks. I thought Huffpo version's couldn't be correct.

$5.15 to 7.25 is much more respectable than $6.55 to $7.25, but still not adequate.

And, when wages go up, prices go up. It's a vicious cycle.

I'm sure some brilliant people somewhere have an answer for that. I sure don't.

[Schema Thing]

20. oh please. the thought that between 2007 and 2009

you could have even mentioned raising the minimum wage w/o being laughed out of the country, is you engaging in theater.

the cries of "you are going to destroying small business in a time of crisis" would have been ringing in your ear so loud you would STILL hear them.

wasn't.going.to.happen. Or even be mentioned.

[merrily]

25. You are mistaken. It did happen. You didn't read my entire post,

including the edit I made on my own, before you posted, or Reply 18.

And you didn't mention 2009 to 2011 at all, though the years I had mentioned were 2007 to 2011.

ETA: Thanks for the great example of the fallacy of the "If Democrats did not do it, it could not have humanly be done in the real world" theory.

[questionseverything]

38. it is all kabuki

but to be fair during the time frame you referred to

the poor did get some help with the 2 % holiday , expanded earned income credits, higher deductions per person on income tax (i think), increased food stamp benefits

i still think everything done in dc is kabuki but since the dems play the "caring role" in this theater, they are our only chance for improvement

[merrily]

40. There was also an increase in the minimum wage. You have to read the edit.

I don't know if it's all kabuki, but I suspect there is a lot of it. I don't know if this experiment with poverty is kabuki, but I thought the question was worth raising.

i still think everything done in dc is kabuki but since the dems play the "caring role" in this theater, they are our only chance for improvement

I don't disagree entirely or agree entirely. I think WE are our only chance for improvement. Kabuki doesn't pay the rent. Unless we hold people accountable for their actions and not only for their speeches and stunts, shame on us.

[questionseverything]

46. holding them accountable is tough

personally i have worked on a campaign to hand count our votes and have citizen oversight of every step of our election process...............w/o much success

it is no coincidence that since the mid 60's and the insertion of electronic vote counting machines we have gone redder and redder

my friend richard charnin has written several excellent books on the subject that prove with math the republicans are the beneficiarys of republican owned vote counting companies...crickets from the main stream media

bev of blackboxvoting.org has shown how in republican precinct in memphis the "who voted list' doubles the rep voters in primaries and triples them in generals

in az we have been in court over 7 years trying to prevent future elections from being rigged riggednomore they have admitted we caught them once on a bond issue

and then there is my muckraker friend brad, of bradblog.com who covers all this for us and is currently helping hold election officials feet to the fire in ca (recent election transparency law was passed but it does not look like election officials are complying)

so anyway,the fight goes on

[LakeVermilion]

3. If you can't pay a living wage,

maybe you shouldn't be in business.

[merrily]

4. Exactly. On The View not long ago, Bill Ransic (sp) made an impassioned

speech about how small businesses are the backbone of America, yadda yadda, so don't increase the minimum wage. (The View has been auditioning male co-hosts.)

I emailed to ask why we expect the lowest paid employees to get along with less to ensure the profitability of small businesses, not government or landlords, or franchisors or suppliers, etc.

[questionseverything]

39. not to mention the economy is 70% based on consumer spending

so the working poor need disposable income to keep the wheels turning

[merrily]

41. Absolutely, but I thought I'd keep my email to the point he thought

he had made.

As best I could tell, the only one I could email was the producer, who I am almost 100% sure is a Republican. I don't think emails do much anyway, but I simply couldn't just be still about that comment.

[Buns_of_Fire]

7. Most congresscritters are damned lucky they're not paid what they're worth.

That said, it was a nice gesture, although it doesn't change a thing.

[MohRokTah]

8. Written by a rightwingnut asshole

You can tell by the first word in the headline.

[LiberalLoner]

9. +1

[mockmonkey]

10. It says "Democratic"

at the link.

[Buns_of_Fire]

14. That it does. It's always good to follow these things up. nt

[Glorfindel]

11. Exactly

I'm sorry it was posted on DU without (sic) following the first word.

[1StrongBlackMan]

17. I haven't/won't read this article ...

(beyond what was excerpted) because I hate the mockery of the publicity stunt ... Anyone can do just about anything for a week, knowing that after a week and 1 minute, one goes back to "real life" (of relative comfort).

If they want to impress me ... they (and their families) would live on minimum wage for their entire first term.

[malthaussen]

19. Damn straight.

Hell, I can live a week without eating at all. Done it before. Publicity stunt indeed.

-- Mal

[1StrongBlackMan]

23. I remember a politician ...

doing the PR stunt of living in the PJs and living on food-stamps and what welfare would have paid for a week. But those PJs had never seen such a law enforcement presence, as during that week ... and, the politician was caught going "home" to shower and change clothes (and get a small snack).

[YarnAddict]

21. Yup. For sure.

It's a stunt, and the RW is having a good laugh over this. You should see the comments on Twitchy!

[handmade34]

24. "hate the mockery of the publicity stunt"

there is no way to mimic living on a minimum wage income… in reality it affects every part of your life and has long term lingering effects… this experiment by the Congresspeople is a stunt (well-meaning, maybe).. it takes living with that little bit of money for months/years to fully understand what it is like

[Schema Thing]

34. In the recent past, I lived on less than minimum wage for a couple of years

Now I make approx 40k.



It would even now be helpful, as a reminder, for me to spend a week or so living on minimum wage, if for no other reason than to save money that I *will* need in the future due to my lack of earnings in the past.


What they are doing is not a stunt; or at least, to the extent it is, it's an instructive stunt, and I wish all people above lower-middle-class wages would occasionally do it... or hell, I wish they'd even think about what it would take to do it during their day.

[jwirr]

26. There is nothing phony about them trying to understand and demonstrate the situation. Back when

George McGovern was in the Senate and working on getting food stamps through a bunch of the Democratic congressmen lived on low income wages for a month. They got their point through.

[1StrongBlackMan]

27. Okay, here is a better "stunt" ...

Congress-folks ... rather than volunteer for a planned week of shoe walking ... how about doing so as an unplanned activity, for an unknown period of time.

How about waking up to find your paycheck didn't hit the bank ... the day after you wrote out your monthly checks. So they'll all bounce and you won't have access to ANY cash until those checks are covered.

How about we give you a SNAP card; but you have to where your best suit into the store to buy the food ... so you get to walk in the shoes of the "you don't desire SNAP because you have nice sh!t" judged.

How about we suspend your tax-payer provided "driver" and "let" you catch public transportation to work ... but only let you have the money that was in the back seat of your car ... the day before you found out your paycheck didn't hit the bank.

And just for shoe walking fun ... how about you having to tell your kid, "No" to everything he/she asks for (that costs money) ... and oh yeah, you have a parent/teacher conference scheduled ... yesterday.

No ... I'm not impressed by these stunts ... the best that can come out of this is if/when the "shoe walking" politician donates the postponed paycheck to those living in the shoes the politicians play at wearing.

[CrispyQ]

28. FFS, why can't we make ALL of them do this?

Everyone in Congress should have to do this once a week, every quarter they are in Congress. It will keep them in touch with The People & perhaps humble them a bit as to the hardships of so many of their constituents.

I applaud these Congress members.

Schakowsky, who takes medication for high blood pressure, warily eyed the nutrition labels on her packages of low-cost Rice-A-Roni and ramen noodles: 28 percent and 38 percent of recommended daily sodium intake, respectively.

Take that, everyone who has wondered why poor people don't eat better. The produce department is one of the most expensive departments in the grocery store! Our food industry feeds us crap & our medical industry rips us off trying to fix us. This country is on such a bad path.

Also, why does our side always have to provide evidence that raising the minimum wage will help the economy? We already have 30+ years of evidence that trickle down doesn't work. Why isn't that evidence enough to try something else? Our dems are so pathetic at framing the issue. Seriously, you have to ask, why don't the dems hire a Frank Luntz type & frame the issues? Is it cuz most of them are happy with the status quo, happy with their place on the gravy train?

[merrily]

33. Better yet, why can't we make them pass a bill raising the minimum wage?

Their eating ramen noodles doesn't really help a busboy.

[CrispyQ]

35. Because most people don't change until they feel the pain personally.

Just my crappy opinion on the state of humanity.

[merrily]

36. Maybe, but WASP males passed the Civil Rights and Voting Acts.

Granted, they were way overdue, but those who did pass them never knew the pain of being discriminated against based on skin color, religion, gender, etc. And disability laws were passed by people without severe disabilities (that we know of).

Besides, voluntarily experimenting with poverty is not the same as feeling the pain of poverty. See 1strongblackman's posts on this thread and this post of mine on an older thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5143802

Maybe we ought to study exactly what does get them to pass decent laws? I believe fear of an uprising used to get them in gear. Don't know if it still does, what with all the "homeland security" and surveillance they have now.

[Zambero]

30. The House GOP needs to counter this

I suggest a select group of them demonstrate to their constituents how difficult it would be to subsist on a meager income derived from a 10 percent estate tax increase for beneficiaries who would stand to inherit, say, a meager $100 million.

[quaker bill]

31. Since they hate the minimum wage

why not attempt to show how easy it is to live on $2.50 an hour...

[Thinkingabout]

37. So we have those here who declare this is a stunt, something the RW would do.

[mattclearing]

43. Democrat is not an adjective. nt

[Marrah_G]

48. They are getting just a tiny taste

I appreciate what they are doing, but to really find out they would have to move into a minimum wage home that is not already stocked with the incidentals, hygiene products, furniture, clothes, kitchenware that food stamps and other things don't cover.

That's when you get your period and realize you forgot to buy pads and you have no money until the next check.

[kentuck]

49. Are they paying their rent and power bill with their minimum wage also?

After rent and basics, not a lot is left for Ramen noodles...