The stories you want. The opinions that matter.
No, thanks
Tag: tim pawlenty
Romney: ‘I Think We Ought To Raise’ Minimum Wage [Video]

Romney: ‘I Think We Ought To Raise’ Minimum Wage [Video]

Former Massachusetts governor and presidential candidate Mitt Romney broke with his party on Friday, echoing President Barack Obama’s repeated calls to raise the federal minimum wage.

“I, for instance, as you know, part company with many of the conservatives in my party on the issue of minimum wage. I think we ought to raise it,” Romney said during an appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. “Frankly, our party is all about more jobs and better pay, and I think communicating that is important to us.”

Romney’s comments come 10 days after Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would have raised the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour; only one Republican, Senator Bob Corker (R-TN), voted in favor of the measure.

This is not a new position for Romney; he has spoken out in favor of pegging the minimum wage to inflation since his failed 1994 Senate race against Ted Kennedy. He reiterated that belief during the 2012 campaign, although he later backtracked under pressure from his party’s right wing.

Romney is the third 2012 candidate to endorse a higher minimum wage in the past two weeks. Previously, former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty and former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum called for a hike.

Romney’s insistence that a higher minimum wage is consistent with the Republican Party being for “more jobs” directly contradicts House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), who has claimed that such measures are job killers. But it does align Romney with hundreds of top economists, who insist that “increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market.”

The vast majority of Americans also agree with Romney and the Democrats; a Gallup poll from earlier in the year found that 73 percent of Americans support raising the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour.

Video of Romney’s remarks is below, via MSNBC:

Photo: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Want more political news? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!

Baseball, Tim Pawlenty, And Celebrity Politics

Aug. 18 (Bloomberg) — You might have missed the news that several courthouse guards are being investigated for accepting autographed baseballs from Roger Clemens, one of the greatest pitchers of the modern era, after his mistrial on charges of lying under oath about steroid use.

This might seem like a minor offense, but it isn’t. Suppose the guards were accused of receiving $200 in cash — one estimate of the resale value of the autographed baseballs. Suppose further that the person handing out the bills happened to be an accused drug dealer, whose case had similarly ended in a mistrial. Presumably we would be outraged, and the story, rather than crawling across the bottom of the screen on the sports channels, would be leading the evening news.

But here is the trouble: Had the offer of a gratuity come from the drug dealer, one assumes the guards would have rejected it out of hand.

Why the difference? Because Clemens is a celebrity, and in the presence of celebrity, people seem to believe it is perfectly normal to act ridiculous — if by ridiculous we mean abandoning whatever notions of duty, morality and common sense that ought to guide our judgment. Celebrities, too, have a societal license to act ridiculous in their own presence, and often do — and, oddly, they often increase the value of their celebrity as a result.

Much has been written over the years about why we follow the doings of celebrities at all, and why we often become goofy in their presence. Some theorists point to data suggesting that celebrity worship fulfills a need formerly satisfied by religious affection. Others, armed with brain scans, contend that celebrities touch our romantic selves, so that our irrationality around them is much like our irrationality around our loved ones. Whatever the reasons, the effect of celebrity is undeniable.

Most of the time, our silliness is harmless. Standing alongside the barrier outside a night club or an awards show, shrieking and swooning as the famous go by, might be a peculiar way to expend energy, but it does no particular social damage. In 1966, when Willie Mays hit the 535th home run of his career – – making him, at the time, the greatest right-handed home run hitter ever — umpire Chris Pelekoudas stepped up to shake his hand as he crossed home plate. Pelekoudas reported himself to the league office for this act of partiality, and was told not to worry about it.

But our love of celebrity can also cause terrible harm — especially when the celebrity culture overflows its banks and pollutes the roiling waters of our politics. In a democracy, politics at its best is a serious business, calling upon all the best traits of our character — reflection, steadfastness, courage, tolerance, compassion, determination. When we instead conduct politics according to the rules of celebrity, we bring into democracy all that is worst in our culture.

Politics of Celebrity

Last week former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty dropped out of the race for the Republican presidential nomination after finishing third in the Iowa straw poll, a contest that few voters can accurately describe. (Neither can many journalists, evidently: You do not have to hunt far to find dueling stories on whether, for example, anyone who shows up at the door can vote.)

I am not a registered Republican, and I have no particular brief for Pawlenty. But there is something troubling in the media descriptions of the ex-governor’s failings — that he seemed boring on television, for example, or that he never connected with voters. (Not, of course, that there have been any votes cast in the 2012 race yet.)

These criticisms are unrelated to the quality of his ideas, or his capacity to think through tough issues and reach wise decisions. They are, rather, the sorts of comments that a Hollywood producer might make in explaining why a particular actor just isn’t right for his upcoming film.

One sees a version of this battle being fought even today over the legacy of Ronald Reagan. What made him so successful and popular a president? To liberals, it was the power of his communication skills, his ability to connect with voters; to conservatives, it was the power of the ideas he was communicating. I do not pretend to know the answer in Reagan’s case, but I do think it is better for democracy if, in this case, the conservative side is right.

The theory of self-governance rests critically on the notion that we as citizens will take the time to inform ourselves about the issues before making our choices. Unfortunately, as the novelist John le Carre once noted, we tend to reward making a good point badly, and punish making a bad point well. It is style, not substance, that draws our attention.

Triumph of Glibness

The culture of celebrity politics too often rewards the mouthy, the glib and the outrageous, and hurts those who are thoughtful. What becomes important is not being able to present and defend good ideas, but having something succinct to say all the time. If a political candidate answers a question by saying, “That’s a tough one, I’ll have to consult with my advisers and think it over,” we should be delighted; instead, we will probably dismiss him as not ready to lead. Abraham Lincoln possessed a reedy speaking voice and a distracting accent associated at the time with the uneducated; in today’s politics, he would be a miserable failure.

So much of the energy of the partisan is nowadays committed to attacking, to sloganeering, to emoting. We all complain about the raucous absurdity of much of the cable world, but enough people tune in to keep the profits coming. Perhaps what appeals to the viewer is not the battle of great ideas but the conflict itself. Research cited by Daniel L. Wann and his collaborators in their book “Sports Fans: The Psychology and Social Impact of Spectators” suggests that at least among men, a contest becomes more interesting if they know that the teams are bitter enemies.

Yet here one is reminded of the wisdom of Bertrand Russell, who warned that if we never spend time alone with our thoughts, we never have thoughts of our own; we only have other people’s thoughts in our heads. Writing back in the 1930s, Russell argued that we should work less hard, because the vapidity, as he saw it, of popular entertainment was a function of our perpetual exhaustion: We are too tired to think, and so choose to be amused instead.

But if we take democracy seriously, we cannot let politics become amusement. Self-governance is hard work, and a self- governing people should require of its public debate more than telegenic candidates mouthing snappy answers.

(Stephen L. Carter, a novelist, professor of law at Yale and the author of “The Violence of Peace: America’s Wars in the Age of Obama,” is a Bloomberg View columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)

Copyright 2011 Bloomberg

Pawlenty Quits Presidential Race

Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, who had said he needed to do reasonably well at the Ames Straw Poll to continue his candidacy, dropped out of the race today, telling ABC News he didn’t have the financial strength to continue:

Bachmann, Pawlenty Trade Barbs At Debate

AMES, Iowa (AP) — Minnesota rivals Tim Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann sparred bitterly Thursday night during an eight-candidate Republican debate, trying to break out of the GOP presidential pack ahead of an Iowa test vote with huge consequences. Each seeks to become the main challenger to Republican front-runner Mitt Romney.

Their efforts were newly complicated by Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who stole some of the spotlight from afar by making it known hours before the debate that he was running for the GOP nomination.

Romney, a multimillionaire businessman who casts himself as a jobs creator, made his own stir earlier in the day when, at the Iowa State Fair, he declared that “corporations are people,” drawing ridicule from Democrats.

Those were just the latest twists in the most consequential week yet in the 2012 Republican presidential nomination fight.

In the two-hour debate, the squabbling by Pawlenty and Bachmann allowed Romney, the GOP front-runner making his second presidential bid, to remain above the fray and emerge relatively unscathed by his rivals.

Though every debate participant assailed President Barack Obama, it was clear from the confrontations between Pawlenty, a former Minnesota governor, and Bachmann, now a member of Congress, who had the most on the line ahead of Saturday’s straw poll that could well winnow the field.

On stage just a few minutes, Pawlenty, who is struggling to gain traction despite spending years laying the groundwork for his campaign, accused Bachmann of achieving nothing significant in Congress, lacking executive experience and having a history of fabrications.

“She’s got a record of misstating and making false statements,” Pawlenty said.

Bachmann, who has risen in polls since entering the race this summer and has eclipsed Pawlenty, quickly responded with a list of what she called Pawlenty’s liberal policies when he was Minnesota’s governor, including his support for legislation to curb industrial emissions.

“You said the era of small government is over,” she told Pawlenty. “That sounds a lot like Barack Obama if you ask me.”

Much of the rest of the debate was heavily focused on the Democratic incumbent, with Romney and his seven rivals each seeking to prove he or she was the strongest Republican to take on Obama.

“I’m not going to eat Barack Obama’s dog food,” Romney said when asked whether he would have vetoed the compromise legislation that Congress gave to the president that raised the debt ceiling. “What he served up is not what I would have done if I’d had been president of the United States.”

Notably absent from the eight-candidate spectacle were Perry, who was in Texas preparing for a weekend announcement tour to early primary states, and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who isn’t a candidate but was stoking presidential speculation anew with a visit to the Iowa State Fair.

The nation’s teetering economic situation shadowed the debate, with stock market volatility and a downgrade in the U.S. credit rating giving Republicans ample opportunities to criticize Obama. The Democratic president will get his shot to counter the criticism next week during a Midwestern bus tour that will take him through this state that helped launch him on the path to the White House four years ago.

On Thursday, he, too, tried to align himself with a public fed up with economic uncertainty and Washington gridlock. “There is nothing wrong with our country. There is something wrong with our politics,” he declared in Michigan, where he was touring an advanced-battery factory

In Iowa Thursday night, the Republicans commanded the spotlight.

Seven candidates — Pawlenty, Bachmann, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and businessman Herman Cain — sought to separate themselves from the packed field and emerge as the chief alternative to Romney.

Pawlenty, who hesitated in a June debate to criticize the former Massachusetts governor, this time accused him of sharing views with Obama on spending and health care. “We’re going to have to show contrast, not similarities” with the incumbent president, Pawlenty said.

He sought repeatedly to tie Romney and Obama together by poking at both.

“Where’s Barack Obama on these issues. You can’t find his plans on the most pressing issues in this country,” Pawlenty said, promising audience members and TV viewers he would “come to your house and cook you dinner” if they could find Obama’s proposals. “Or if you prefer I’ll come to your house and mow your lawn … In case Mitt wins, I’d limit it to one acre.”

Romney, who has several homes, smiled and took a pass when given a chance to respond, saying: “That’s just fine.”

He kept his focus on Obama, saying: “Our president simply doesn’t understand how to lead and how to grow the economy.” He also criticized Democrat Obama on the downgrade of the nation’s credit rating.

Appearing in his first presidential debate, Huntsman acknowledged he had not yet presented an economic plan, but he cited his economic record as governor of Utah as evidence of what he would accomplish as president. He defended his service as ambassador to China under Obama as a patriotic act.

Huntsman, who is not competing in the Iowa caucuses where social conservatives dominate, also tried to differentiate himself from the rest of the field. He defended his support for civil unions and offered no apologies for other moderate positions he holds.

Gingrich, pressed on the implosion of his campaign amid financial strife and infighting earlier this summer, chastised the Fox News panel for “gotcha questions.” He said Republicans including Ronald Reagan and John McCain had staff defections during their campaigns, and he said he intended, in his words, to “run on ideas.”

Roughly 45 minutes into the debate, Santorum raised his hand and said: “I haven’t gotten to say a lot.”

Showing the wide diversity of opinion, Paul gave a staunchly libertarian answer to nearly every question from the economy to foreign affairs, essentially saying the United States should have friendly relations even with countries that violate human rights and not interfere in their internal affairs. “It’s about time we talk to Cuba,” Paul said at one point. He also said the United States had created the hostile relations between itself and Iran.

Even before the debate began, it was a campaign day to remember.

At an appearance early in the day, Romney was badgered by hecklers at the state fair. In response to chanting about corporations, he said that “corporations are people,” a comment Democrats predicted would be a defining moment of his campaign.

Romney, who has struggled with an aloof and elitist image as he tries for the GOP presidential nomination a second time, made the remark while outlining options for reducing the federal deficit and overhauling entitlement programs.

Despite tea party outrage that sometimes focuses on banks and auto companies, Romney has said to applause from GOP audiences that the rights of business are being trampled under Obama to the detriment of the struggling economy. But in Thursday’s audience, the line encountered resistance.

A few hours after Romney’s awkward moment, Perry spokesman Mark Miner confirmed that the Texas governor would announce that he was running for president while in early primary states on Saturday.

Perry’s candidacy is certain to upend the race, and he could challenge Romney for the role of jobs-focused candidate.

The conservative governor is seen as a potential bridge between the party’s social and economic wings.

Asked about Perry’s candidacy during the debate, several of his opponents welcomed him to the race — and used the opportunity to criticize him. Cain called Perry “one more politician,” while Paul said he was pleased Perry was joining the field because “he represents the status quo.”