Commentary Magazine


Posts For: December 31, 2013

Can Midnight Basketball Be Far Behind?

I wanted to add to Jonathan’s post on the story in the New York Times in which we’re told, “Democratic Party leaders, bruised by months of attacks on the new health care program, have found an issue they believe can lift their fortunes both locally and nationally in 2014: an increase in the minimum wage.” 

To put this in context: Barack Obama is coming off what the Democratic pollster Peter Hart calls “a terribly ragged year.” The president’s approval ratings are near historic lows for a fifth year in office. Public confidence in his honesty and trustworthiness is sinking. His second-term agenda is dead in the water. And his failures, particularly related to his signature domestic achievement, are multiplying. And in the face of this Democrats are turning to the minimum wage as a 2014 strategy?

Apparently so. Representative Steve Israel of New York, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told the Times, “The more Republicans obsess on repealing the Affordable Care Act and the more we focus on rebuilding the middle class with a minimum-wage increase, the more voters will support our candidates.” Dan Pfeiffer, the president’s senior adviser, added, “You can make a very strong case that this will be a helpful issue for Democrats in 2014.”

No you can’t. 

Read More

I wanted to add to Jonathan’s post on the story in the New York Times in which we’re told, “Democratic Party leaders, bruised by months of attacks on the new health care program, have found an issue they believe can lift their fortunes both locally and nationally in 2014: an increase in the minimum wage.” 

To put this in context: Barack Obama is coming off what the Democratic pollster Peter Hart calls “a terribly ragged year.” The president’s approval ratings are near historic lows for a fifth year in office. Public confidence in his honesty and trustworthiness is sinking. His second-term agenda is dead in the water. And his failures, particularly related to his signature domestic achievement, are multiplying. And in the face of this Democrats are turning to the minimum wage as a 2014 strategy?

Apparently so. Representative Steve Israel of New York, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told the Times, “The more Republicans obsess on repealing the Affordable Care Act and the more we focus on rebuilding the middle class with a minimum-wage increase, the more voters will support our candidates.” Dan Pfeiffer, the president’s senior adviser, added, “You can make a very strong case that this will be a helpful issue for Democrats in 2014.”

No you can’t. 

Here’s some free counsel to Messrs. Israel and Pfeiffer: When the history of the 2014 mid-term elections is written, the Affordable Care Act will be a dominant, and maybe the dominant, issue while the minimum wage will not merit even an asterisk. The latter is hardly a topic that is on the hearts and minds of the American people. You can find here and here recent polls from the Gallup organization listing the top concerns of the American people. The minimum wage doesn’t show up; and, in fact, more people are concerned with America becoming a socialist country than are concerned that the minimum wage is too low. 

In addition, the idea that increasing the minimum wage is the key to rebuilding the middle class borders on being comical.

What this is all about is a president and a party who see a “wave election” in the making–one triggered in large part by the politically catastrophic effects of ObamaCare. And so Mr. Obama and his aides and allies are trying to deflect attention away from their failures.

It’s kind of pathetic, really. It not only won’t work; looking to the minimum wage to be their political talisman simply underscores the fact that the modern Democratic Party is politically desperate and intellectually exhausted. 

Can a push for midnight basketball be far behind? 

Read Less

Minimum Wage Won’t Save Dems in 2014

Democrats have had a generally miserable 2013, but they think they have the answer to how to make 2014 end on a better note for them. Some on the left may still be holding onto the forlorn hope that ObamaCare will somehow magically be transformed from the millstone around their necks to a popular initiative like Social Security or Medicare. But they are thinking clearly about the political impact of the health-care fiasco. Rather than just bang their heads against that wall, Democrats are looking to change the subject. So rather than try to sell skeptical Americans on the dubious idea of increasing the government’s involvement in health care is a good idea, they appear to be set on convincing the electorate that the key issue facing the country isn’t the looming ObamaCare disaster but the notion of inequality.

As the New York Times reported in a front-page feature yesterday, Democrats seem to think provoking a debate about raising the minimum wage is the magic bullet that will slay Republican candidates in a year in which the GOP is generally favored to make midterm gains in Congress if not take back the Senate in November. The minimum wage proposal doesn’t stand alone, as it is part of an effort by the White House to pivot back to the start of 2013 when the president unveiled a laundry list of liberal ideas in his State of the Union speech. The minimum wage was part of a package that was supposed to be the core of the reelected Obama’s second-term program in which income inequality would, along with climate change, gun control, and an expansion of entitlements, herald a sharp left turn in American politics. But while the president is hoping for a mulligan on a 2013 which was marked by scandals at home and foreign-policy disasters like Egypt and Syria abroad, life is rarely that simple. Though the minimum wage seems like a political winner to his strategists, the problem is that while the bully pulpit of the presidency can help set the country’s political agenda, mere strategy can’t divert voters from the impact of problems that affect the lives of large numbers of citizens. Though a pivot left will please the president’s base, it is no match for the havoc that ObamaCare will have on the nation over the course of 2014.

Read More

Democrats have had a generally miserable 2013, but they think they have the answer to how to make 2014 end on a better note for them. Some on the left may still be holding onto the forlorn hope that ObamaCare will somehow magically be transformed from the millstone around their necks to a popular initiative like Social Security or Medicare. But they are thinking clearly about the political impact of the health-care fiasco. Rather than just bang their heads against that wall, Democrats are looking to change the subject. So rather than try to sell skeptical Americans on the dubious idea of increasing the government’s involvement in health care is a good idea, they appear to be set on convincing the electorate that the key issue facing the country isn’t the looming ObamaCare disaster but the notion of inequality.

As the New York Times reported in a front-page feature yesterday, Democrats seem to think provoking a debate about raising the minimum wage is the magic bullet that will slay Republican candidates in a year in which the GOP is generally favored to make midterm gains in Congress if not take back the Senate in November. The minimum wage proposal doesn’t stand alone, as it is part of an effort by the White House to pivot back to the start of 2013 when the president unveiled a laundry list of liberal ideas in his State of the Union speech. The minimum wage was part of a package that was supposed to be the core of the reelected Obama’s second-term program in which income inequality would, along with climate change, gun control, and an expansion of entitlements, herald a sharp left turn in American politics. But while the president is hoping for a mulligan on a 2013 which was marked by scandals at home and foreign-policy disasters like Egypt and Syria abroad, life is rarely that simple. Though the minimum wage seems like a political winner to his strategists, the problem is that while the bully pulpit of the presidency can help set the country’s political agenda, mere strategy can’t divert voters from the impact of problems that affect the lives of large numbers of citizens. Though a pivot left will please the president’s base, it is no match for the havoc that ObamaCare will have on the nation over the course of 2014.

Republicans, however, should not underestimate the appeal of inequality rhetoric. Though raising the minimum wage is economic snake oil that will do far more harm to business and employment than it will help poor workers, such efforts do speak directly to values that most Americans support. Voters like such laws because they sound as if they speak to fairness and the idea of soaking the wealthy even if the impact will hurt those seeking work at the bottom of the pay scale. As the Times rightly notes, polls consistently show broad support for minimum wage increases and the GOP must be wary of being drawn into a fight over the issue.

But a genuine pivot left requires more than the transitory rhetorical advantages that might be gained from the discussion of minimum wages. Americans like giving the poor a break, but they are far more concerned with the impact of higher taxes, out-of-control government spending, and, most of all, the impact of government interference on the cost and quality of their health care.

The Democrats aren’t mistaken to think they can trick the Republicans to force them to defend economic positions that are fiscally wise but unpopular, such as opposing the minimum wage increase or not extending unemployment benefits. Their mistake lies in misunderstanding the far-reaching impact of the president’s signature health-care plan will have on vast numbers of voters.

At its heart, the talk about income inequality is rooted in a belief that the fuss about ObamaCare is only temporary and more about website glitches and embarrassing presidential sound bites (“If you like your health insurance, you can keep it”) than about the law itself. Liberal strategists are in denial not only about what has already happened on the issue but also what is about to unfold in the coming year. As Lanhee Chen wrote yesterday for Bloomberg News, Democrats are going to like the feedback about the Affordable Care Act in 2014 even less than they did in 2013. The president and his team front-loaded the measure to allow its more popular elements to go into effect before the 2012 election with the less savory elements held back until he was safely reelected. But as bad as things look now in terms of approval for a law that has always been opposed by most Americans, it’s about to get worse:

First, some of ObamaCare’s least popular provisions go into effect in 2014. This includes a new $60 billion tax on health insurers, which will be levied relative to premiums collected and directly passed on to consumers. And, of course, ObamaCare’s requirement that individuals secure health insurance coverage (or pay a tax penalty) kicks in during the coming year as well.

Second, millions of Americans who buy their coverage on the individual market or get it through small employers will be shocked by just how much their premiums go up in 2014. The young and healthy will be especially susceptible to this rate shock, and this in turn will further drive them away from purchasing coverage in future years. Given skyrocketing premiums, the economic incentives for many of these “young invincibles” are aligned against buying coverage in the coming years. But these are also the people that the ACA most needs to be enrolled through its health insurance exchanges to offset the comparatively higher risk and costs associated with insuring the sick and old. These dynamics may lead to even higher premiums in the coming years.

Third, not only will millions of Americans on the individual and small group markets who like their plans be unable to keep them in 2014, but many will experience what it’s like to be unable to continue seeing the doctors they know and trust. As health insurers face pressure to keep costs down while providing the richer package of benefits that ObamaCare mandates, many are limiting their networks of doctors and other health-care providers. A cancer survivor’s opinion article in the Wall Street Journal illustrated the horrible situation that ObamaCare will place some Americans in: Being forced to choose between doctors that have been critical to their care or, in some cases, not having access to any of their existing health-care providers.

Finally, ObamaCare’s Medicare cuts will continue to hurt senior citizens. For the 14 million people enrolled in the Medicare Advantage program, the ACA’s $200 billion in cuts over the next 10 years will accelerate in 2014 and have tangible impacts on beneficiaries. Insurers predict that seniors in Medicare Advantage plans will see higher premiums, increased cost-sharing for primary and specialist visits, and limits on the doctors they can see. Although the ACA is not solely responsible for the headwinds the Medicare Advantage program faces, it will (and should) shoulder most of the blame.

When combined, these four elements set the stage for a political tsunami that will drown any effort to distract the public with talk about inequality. Democrats have assumed that once it was implemented, ObamaCare would be as popular as Social Security and Medicare. But they are only just starting to grasp the fact that unlike those programs that spread the wealth with few, if any, voters being worse off for their passage, the misnamed Affordable Care Act creates a vast population of Americans who are going to be hurt by the law. In 2014, their number will grow, not shrink. The first year of the president’s second term ended with ObamaCare as the top political story of the year. The likelihood that it will remain so in 2014 spells big political trouble for Democrats whose fate will be determined more by this fiasco than any fights they can pick about the minimum wage.

Read Less

Grade Inequality, Failures, and Presidential Candidates

As President Obama pivots to the issue of income inequality, Harvard has already advanced fairly far in eliminating grade inequality. At a faculty meeting earlier this month, Harvard government professor Harvey Mansfield elicited an admission from the dean of undergraduate education that the most common grade at Harvard now is an “A” (the term “Harvard fail” refers these days to a grade somewhere in the “B” range).

Last week, Harvard Magazine posted a sophisticated defense of the college’s grading system by Michael Zuckerman, a recent graduate whose remarkable commencement address in 2010 was a reflection on adversity and failure. Zuckerman noted the concerns that Harvard’s easy grading system was “failing to prepare its students to weather failure”–one of the inevitable post-graduate experiences. But he downplayed the significance of the inflated grades, since he found that Harvard provided many extracurricular ways to learn about failure. He cited a small-group class he had taken on community organizing:

Read More

As President Obama pivots to the issue of income inequality, Harvard has already advanced fairly far in eliminating grade inequality. At a faculty meeting earlier this month, Harvard government professor Harvey Mansfield elicited an admission from the dean of undergraduate education that the most common grade at Harvard now is an “A” (the term “Harvard fail” refers these days to a grade somewhere in the “B” range).

Last week, Harvard Magazine posted a sophisticated defense of the college’s grading system by Michael Zuckerman, a recent graduate whose remarkable commencement address in 2010 was a reflection on adversity and failure. Zuckerman noted the concerns that Harvard’s easy grading system was “failing to prepare its students to weather failure”–one of the inevitable post-graduate experiences. But he downplayed the significance of the inflated grades, since he found that Harvard provided many extracurricular ways to learn about failure. He cited a small-group class he had taken on community organizing:

[The tutorial] was built entirely around controlled failure: each of the 10 students had to conceive, plan, and execute a 10-week organizing project around a salient social-justice issue. We were all highly optimistic at the outset—I launched, for example, a community-service program within a 2009 Democratic primary campaign for the U.S. Senate, hoping to spur a “service politics” movement—and, needless to say, we all came up short. It is, after all, nearly impossible to transform society in 10 weeks.

It is an example of failure teaching a good lesson. Perhaps there is a broader one: even four years may not be enough to fundamentally transform society, especially if you don’t learn the lessons of failure along the way. It may not even be enough time to implement your own signature legislation (notwithstanding your assurance to a joint session of Congress four years ago). As Zuckerman’s commencement address indicated, it can be a double loss if one not only suffers failure but fails to learn the lesson failure might have taught.

One wonders if President Obama ever took a class in community organizing (or the Middle East peace process), and what other classes he took, who taught them, what grades he received, etc.–back in the days when a transcript was a transcript. Unfortunately, the protective press did not make an issue of the non-disclosure when he first ran for president. The only reason we know about John Kerry’s college grades is he found himself during his own presidential campaign in a situation that can only be fully appreciated by those who know Shalom Aleichem’s great story, “The Yom Kippur Scandal.”

Harvard’s grading system seems unlikely to change soon; indeed, Princeton’s grading system seems to be moving in Harvard’s direction. But the good news is that, within a couple of decades, presidential candidates may no longer have to campaign under the constant fear that someone might puncture their pretensions by disclosing their college transcripts, since the transcripts by then will likely show all of them to have been A students. The candidates of the future will thus be able to focus fully on the issues of the day, such as hope, change, and their opponent’s record as a high school bully.

Read Less




Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.