Thursday, January 11, 2007

READS: Thursday, January 11 is...

Hostos Day (Puerto Rico)
Aldo Leopold's birthday. Leopold would have been 120 today.

Three reads this morning, then I need to get to work:

Allow me to be one of many who will stand to applaud movement towards universal health care in Iowa. It's about time. And if you're one of those, like speaker Pat Murphy, who's opposed to the plan because gas stations on the border won't sell as many cigarettes, I think you need to re-evaluate your priorities.

I didn't watch President Bush's speech last night, I needed to wash my hair. It doesn't appear things will get any better for him, though, as the speech led David Yepsen to predict the Democrats will win the White House in 2008.

Finally, Chris Woods is peeved this morning because House and Senate Democrats have a disagreement over the correct way to raise the minimum wage. Chris, allow me to remind you of something: It's more important to find the right answer than the politically expedient one.

Tying the minimum wage to cost of living ensures that minimum wage-earning Iowans won't fall back into the hole they're currently in. It's the right thing to do to help people, and it's worth fighting for, even if that fight is within the party. I'm proud of the people who are standing up for working people instead of sitting down for political expediency.



Chris Woods said...

Kyle, I agree with you on tying the wage to inflation. I want that in the bill that gets passed -- but what I was trying to point out was that Democrats had two months to decide this. They knew raising the minimum wage was going to be their premier issue in the legislature, and I think the caucus should have come to a conclusion on the provision before they submitted two different bills. It may have come across like I was looking for political expediency (and to some degree I was) but I'd much rather see it done fast with the provision then done fast without the provision. I was just listing options.

Anonymous said...

The only good part about not tying it to the index is that Dems can use it as a campaign issue down the road.

If they do tie it to the index, that issue, for the most part, is taken off the table.

Kinda like if the R's got Roe v. Wade reversed...they'd win the issue, but lose a big issue to campaign on.