#211: Teaching, Erecting, Farming
..............
First, we'll link to and describe three plans put forth by Democratic presidential candidates, then we'll assess.
Sen. Kamala Harris: raising teacher salaries (link)
Professional educators make less than other credentialed college graduates. On average $13,500 less.
Harris proposes that the federal government cover that gap by matching state teacher pay increases, 3-to-1, until the gap closes. Additional funding would go to teacher training and recruitment, especially in under-privileged communities.
Harris has received generally positive press, as this would address a problem (inadequate school funding) that is hard to tackle on a local level since many schools receive most of their funding from local property taxes, so poor communities have been out of luck.
Everyone knows a teacher, and teachers are a well-organized, large voting block, so this makes sense politically, as well.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar: infrastructure (link)
Amy (get used to it) recently posted her plan, whose graphics include an energetic-looking Klobuchar, in purple, above the rebuilt freeway bridge crossing the Mississippi, in her home state, Minnesota; a bridge that famously collapsed in 2007. A perfect metaphor: purple will fix it.
She proposes a trillion dollar package that would rebuild schools, ports, roads and mass transit, as well as connecting all Americans with broadband by 2022. A third of the money would be raised using a public/private fund, initially capitalized by the feds with just $25 billion.
This makes sense for her, in that it reminds us of what Trump could have done if he'd negotiated with Democrats in a bi-partisan manner. It's also a smart, non-threatening way to arrive at a Green New Deal's first step without calling it that. Retro-fits of existing buildings, code upgrades, a smart electric grid, incentives for renewable build out, etc., all resulting in good paying new jobs.
Sen Elizabeth Warren: family farms (link)
The depopulating of our nation's countryside is arguably the result of a 'get-big-or-get-out' farm policy that has unfolded over the past 70+ years. With larger farms, population plummets, towns wither away, and wealth escapes to larger urban centers. Meanwhile, corporate agriculture has become ever more adept at squeezing the profit out of farming. Much of this is done when a community has only one buyer/seller for inputs/outputs.
This monopolizing of commerce is the focus for Warren's call to break up monopolies. A recent article in the Washington Monthly by Claire Kelloway (link), lays out the case in much greater detail.
A good first step for a candidate about to visit a farm state. I say 'first step' because the truly effective, but radical, approach would be to address farm size, bringing people back to the heartland, and so creating a newly enlarged rural economy.
Contrasting Approaches
In all three cases, the approach the candidate takes gives us a feel for governing style.
Harris: address inequality and education in a popular manner. Think outside the box.
Klobuchar: dress up a progressive first step in purple bi-partisanship.
Warren: shake a fist at bloated corporate over-reach.
Which is the more likely?
Harris: Would bring out the Democratic base; but, would energize Republicans, too.
Klobuchar: Would capture independents, and is likely the best bet to actually win.
Warren: Would roll the dice on major change. A win would be most satisfying.
............................................
Late addition:
Cory Booker: Steps To Wealth Equalization
Do we want to do something about poor kids getting a real chance? If so, here it is. Booker proposes a bank account created at each poor child's birth, and added to each year until the child reaches maturity. Simple. And because it's not specifically targeted at one racial group (reparations), it's way more likely to make it through congress as a result. But, there's the price tag of course.
No comments:
Post a Comment