FROM Ross Kaminsky
The Minimum Wage, Income Inequality and Presidential Politics Two years ago New York City, 200 fast food workers demanded a minimum wage of $15 an hour. They started something. Since then, legal minimums have been raised in red states as well as blue. The current federal floor is $7.25, and President Obama has proposed $10.10. Democrats in Congress are now pushing a federal floor of $12 an hour. Some Republican presidential hopefuls are talking about working class beginnings and cheap off-the-rack sweaters. Are we seeing a political movement? With voters still suffering in the aftermath of the Recession, we look at how income inequality is emerging as a major issue in next year’s campaign.
Will the Campaign Never End? Because of possible runoffs in Louisiana and Georgia, it may be next year before it’s clear if Republicans have taken control of the Senate. Predictions all lead in their direction, but there’s lack of consensus in either party on major issues that have been submerged by relentless attack ads. Gridlock may be the best that President Obama can hope for, with Republicans likely to take harder lines in both the House and the Senate. We hear what to look for in tomorrow’s midterm elections with both parties already focused on the prospects for the next Presidential election in 2016.
America: Democracy or Oligarchy? The evidence is overwhelming. The wealth gap in America is growing. A new study claims that the wealthiest 10% of Americans influence public policy in this country more than any other group. Of that 10%, the top one percent pocketed nearly the entire gains from the recovery from the financial crisis. Yet many pay a lower tax rate than middle class. The top selling book on Amazon is a re-working of Marx's Das Kapital. It argues that income inequality is an inevitable result of free market capitalism, and that it threatens our democratic institutions at almost every turn. Is that just capitalism at work? Has income inequality eroded democracy to a vanishing point? If our country is indeed controlled by the very few and the very rich, how do we level the playing field?
Food Stamps and the Politics of Hunger Families with children, the elderly and the disabled are feeling the first cut ever in the Food Stamp program. Automatic reductions of $5 billion took place on Friday, cutting monthly benefits for 48 million people. For a family of four, that's a reduction of $36 a month, about $1.40 per meal. Democrats are fighting Republican efforts to cut much more, but the Democrats themselves are responsible for what's happening now. As part of the economic stimulus program — and to ease the hardship caused by the Great Recession -- Congress increased Food Stamp benefits in 2009. The number of recipients has doubled in the past six years. Food banks say they may not be able to meet increased need, and low-cost retailers are bracing to take a big hit. Conservatives say cuts have been too long in coming, that Food Stamps create a "culture of dependency." We hear a dispute about economics and hunger.
Will the march for science politicize objective research? Protesters are gathering all over the country for tomorrow's Earth Day March for Science. Since President Trump has proposed massive cuts in basic scientific research, will the movement be perceived as partisan politics — whether scientists themselves like it or not?
Trump's ethical conflicts pile up as transparency diminishes President Trump's refusal to reveal his income tax returns is just one example of a lack of transparency that could be hiding conflicts of interest. Other conflicts are already obvious from his appointments. And he's being sued for using his job to increase his profits.
After Syria strike a new Trump doctrine emerges The President who promised an end to entanglements in the Middle East and snuggled up to Vladimir Putin has now outraged Russia with surprise missile attacks on Syria. That's raised questions about who's running the White House? We hear a variety of answers.