Dems Adopt $15 Minimum Wage In Platform Draft

[Purveyor]

Source: The Hill

Democrats' platform drafting committee took a first step toward giving Bernie Sanders a major concession, voting to adopt language in support of a $15 minimum wage.

The committee, which will continue drafting the party's guiding document Saturday, also aligned itself with Sanders's support for progressive ideas such as abolishing the death penalty and expanding Social Security, the Associated Press reported. The minimum wage language adopted echoes a common refrain by Sanders, who has called the current federal minimum of $7.25 a "starvation wage."

The platform also tackles financial reform, calling for "an updated and modernized version of Glass-Steagall."

Sanders has refused to suspend his campaign and endorse Clinton despite the fact that she has clinched the nomination. He has turned his focus to instilling progressive ideas into the party's platform — the party adopting proposals in support of a $15 minimum wage and free college tuition could factor into Sanders's potential support of Clinton.

Read more: http://www.thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/284888-dems-adopt-15-minimum-wage-in-draft-platform

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

1. Why not make $15/hr minimum wage the goal, so even if we fall short, we still give the hardest working Americans a decent raise? (the ones who deserve it the most!)

[pipoman]

17. Because $15 in NYC and $15 in Tuscaloosa are two completely different things...

There are many places in the US that $15 would likely have a very negative impact, and others (where a living wage is needed the most) that $15 would still be poverty and have zero effect..

[NYC Liberal]

25. And $15/hr is not even enough in New York.

So if we're really supporting a federal minimum wage that is high enough to be a living wage for everyone in the country, then Sanders' $15/hr is not enough.

And that's why I support Hillary's approach of raising the federal minimum wage a reasonable amount (like $10-12) and then supporting higher wages in specific areas that need it.

[pipoman]

27. I think minimum should be based entirely on cost of living in an area...

I just don't support the $15 because it would have a very big (I believe negative) economic impact where I live and zero impact in places like NYC and San Diego who need a living wage more than anywhere else.

In my area $500 will rent a decent 1 br apartment....in North SD county where my son lives the same apartment would be at least $1200. No static national minimum wage can be anything other than a joke until it has the same impact across the country.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

28. 15 is not enought even in Northport - in Tuscaloosa lol

"negative impact" - these words are not evidence based - they are right wing talking points

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

36. Yup... $15/hr is the BARE MINIMUM anyone could possibly live on.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

37. 15 dollars isn't shit in Tuscaloosa either.

I make 15 an hour in a relatively cheap city and I get by on the bare minimum, sometimes not being able to afford to see a doctor or dentist. I had to put off an eye appointment because I couldn't afford it.

[pipoman]

38. I'm not debating your finances

The per capita income is $20k, in Manhattan it is $100k....the point is that any national minimum wage must be based on the lowest cost of living area leaving NYC, SF, and everywhere else with an ineffective minimum, waste of time.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

39. Right.

So set the national minimum wage at 15. Let NYC go higher if they want.

[TexasBushwhacker]

42. Exactly $15 an hour should be the floor nationwide

Even it will be phased in a dollar or two at a time.

[pipoman]

44. Why do you need a minimum wage if you trust NY to do the right thing?

Why don't you trust every state or local to set their own minimum "if they want"?

[ForgoTheConsequence]

45. Because I'm not a disciple of Ayn Rand.

There needs to be a floor.

[pipoman]

46. I see, you don't know why...

[ForgoTheConsequence]

47. I just told you why.

There needs to be a floor and that floor has not kept up with inflation. Given that we don't have the option of compulsory collective bargaining like other countries we have to rely on the federal government for economic protection.

[pipoman]

48. By your own admission there doesn't need to be a "floor" in NYC, So.Cal. etc...

These are the places that need a "floor" the most...more poverty there than Wichita per capita...

[ForgoTheConsequence]

50. NYC and SoCal aren't part of the United States?

??

[pipoman]

52. This is really simple

The only reasons to have a "floor" is to keep employers paying a "fair" wage that provides a minimum lifestyle. If the national minimum is a living wage in Deluth it will need to be doubled for the same minimal lifestyle if the person is in LA, and taken times 6 if the peraon is on Manhattan.

If you trust the employers in NY, and LA to be fair, why do you need a minimum anywhere...just trust the employers...that is what you appear to be saying...just trust'em to do what's right.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

53. A national floor doesn't prohibit a localized floor.

What are you not understanding? I'm not trusting that employers in NYC are fair, I'm trusting that New York residents will rise up like they have already and demand a living wage that is appropriate.

[pipoman]

56. ...

I'm trusting that New York residents will rise up like they have already and demand a living wage that is appropriate.

Then why don't you trust the people of Cheyenne to do the same?

You said it...it was NYers rising up...who had to...not North Dakotans, Kansans, or Iowans...New Yorkers yet you want to let them do the right thing.

I want the minimum to be indexed to cost of living, not a completely worthless arbitrary number settled on because it isn't too much burden on rural Appalachia...without indexing it is feel good nonsense.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

43. sounds cruel to me

sleep well

[Warpy]

2. Good, they'd rejected it earlier today

which drew a tart retort from me about being wedded to the "business as usual" that would cause Sanders supporters to say to hell with it and stay home in November.

At least this is something. Maybe it will get more people out in the cold to vote if their vote will get them something besides looking at the lives of people with money on a thrift shop TV.

[cstanleytech]

5. "a thrift shop TV" that actually brings up memories of dumpster diving for

tvs I used to do with my brother, best one we found was a black and white one but sadly it didnt have sound.

[Warpy]

6. You should have spent the ten bucks and gotten one with sound

Color sets were usually $25-75, depending on the size. Don't ask me how I know.

[cstanleytech]

14. Back then we didnt even have a dollar to spend let alone ten. nt

[Warpy]

26. Been there too

I didn't have a TV for many years. It was restful. Since then I've had everything from a thrift shop reconditioned 8" b&w from a hospital to a huge projection set. I find 20 inches is about my limit. You can easily ignore a 20 inch set.

There's rarely anything on worth sitting and watching. Usually it's something I glance at now and then as I'm working on things.

[cstanleytech]

34. I find myself watching shows online and or on dvd especially the classics like Hogans Heroes

more than I do broadcast tv itself.

[Warpy]

35. TCM got a new programmer last year and he sucks

so I'm close to dumping the dish. I suppose I'll go through election season but honestly, without TCM there isn't much on.

I'll probably get a Roku box and bite the bullet for an online subscription of some sort.

[TexasBushwhacker]

41. There are a lot of classic movies on digital channels

That you can get with an antenna. There are commercials of course, but there's still plenty to watch.

[TwilightZone]

29. Actually, they didn't.

The plank was already in the platform. Amendments to the plank are what were rejected. The prior threads about it misrepresented the situation based on a video that turned out to not be what it was claimed to be.

[still_one]

3. Then why all the threads saying they didn't

[elleng]

4. Confusing process, probably.

https://twitter.com/finneyk

[still_one]

7. Probably. While there are things that can be discussed on this, it isn't that controversial

of an issue to not have it in the platform

[elleng]

8. Not at all,

and according to Karen Finney, it IS in the platform.

[rhett o rick]

18. I watched the vote on video where they rejected it.

[still_one]

23. They did NOT reject the 15 dollar minimum wage. They redundant wording was rejected,

not the 15 dollar minimum wage:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512217625

Here is one from the Hill which says the platform contains the 15 min wage

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141500250#post3

[elleng]

33. which was not at all clear from the video of the vote.

[TwilightZone]

30. They voted down amendments to the plank.

The plank was already in the platform.

[elleng]

31. So did many of us,

which is why I suggest the process is confusing, considering the 'later' or other news.

[newthinking]

9. Probably because they got heat and then reversed?

[still_one]

10. maybe. As I said, it isn't that controversial. I can think of a lot more controversial things

Regardless, good it is in there

[George II]

16. No.

[Surya Gayatri]

13. Knee-jerk Hillary critiques...what else?

[elleng]

32. Realists.

[Brickbat]

21. People see what they want to see.

[ReRe]

11. I thought I heard Rachel...

... sort of make fun of the fact that the $15/hr wage increase didn't pass by the platform. The Hill gets this article from AP: Hasn't AP screwed up on some articles in the last month or so? I don't know whether I can trust them anymore.

Is this platform meeting being televised by C-Span? It has been before past DNC Conventions.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

12. Bernie is winning.

[bahrbearian]

15. "Pie in the Sky, Never Ever"

[rhett o rick]

19. So what does this video show?

[w4rma]

20. The current platform language about a $15 minimum wage is weak and ineffectual

The platform originally simply stated that the Democratic Party hopes to “raise and index the minimum wage,” with an earlier implication that this could be $15. Ellison proposed that the language be made clearer and stronger, changed from mere support to a demand to “raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour and index it.”
http://www.salon.com/2016/06/25/clinton_appointees_oppose_15_minimum_wage_amendment_in_democratic_platform_sanders_surrogates_back_it/

[Brickbat]

22. A vote on Ellison's amendment to change the $15 language. The change in language failed.

[still_one]

24. That is right, not the 15 dollar minimum wage, that is in the platform

[november3rd]

40. Slight Correction

Sanders has refused to suspend his campaign and endorse Clinton despite the fact that she has clinched the nomination.

You need 2383 pledged delegates to clinch the nomination before the convention. Clinton doesn't have that. That's why she is the presumptive nominee.

The convention will be contested. The votes of the super delegates at the convention will determine who clinches the nomination.

[Thinkingabout]

51. Where did you get the number of pledged delegates being 2383? It calls for 2383 delegates,

not pledged delegates, half of the pledged delegates is 2026, she has more than this number.

[RussBLib]

54. you need 2383 to clinch

Clinton has 2220 pledged delegates and 591 super delegates, which totals 2811.

Recent tally is here.

Until the convention, those super delegates could in fact shift to Sanders. I doubt they will, but until they vote at the convention, Hillary has not "clinched" the nomination.

[Thinkingabout]

55. The post I replied to stated Hillary had to have 2383 pledged delegates.

[Judi Lynn]

49. K & R. So glad to see this. n/t

[Sunlei]

57. Keep on the good work Platform Committee