The fact that we need a jobs bill in this country is by itself, not news. With Washington "on vacation," there's lots of talk but barely a whisper of any kind of solution from today's pols. The one person who has actually outlined a jobs plan is pundit Chris Mathews who used to work as an aide to the late Speaker of the House, Tip O'Neal as well as speechwriter to former president Jimmy Carter. In other words, when it comes to the ways of Washington, he knows the terrain. His jobs proposal sounds extremely pragmatic which is to go state by state, get a list of the bridges & roads that need fixing & basically challenge the House members to vote against such proposals when not only is it in their own personal interest [to bring jobs to their district] but an outright threat if those infrastructure problems present a credible yet unattended danger. Everyone who hears the Mathews proposal thinks it sounds good...except me.
The Solution Proposed Is Out Of Step With The Times
Don't get me wrong. I applaud Mathews for at least attempting to talk constructively about something that no one else seems to be addressing [including the president]. I simply think the solution he is shopping is out of step with the times. Why? Mathews is proposing this strategy to get people back to work making a good middle class income but recent history shows us that this is no longer how construction & repair jobs are done today. They are first privatized & then outsourced so that you no longer have Americans working these jobs [especially union workers who come with the unwanted "baggage" of healthcare, benefits, & safety concerns] ; additionally the jobs are no longer necessarily done with American material [also an engine for jobs]. Case in point: the San Francisco Bay Bridge has desperately needed to complete the retro-fitting & reconstructing required since it fell apart in an earthquake in 1989...1989!!!! It took the San Francisco & Oakland politicians forever to settle on a design, to put the funds together, & then to hire a company to actually do the construction. As they played politics year after year, the cost for the job kept going up. Therefore while this is essentially a classic example of what Mathews is suggesting, it doesn't exactly play out the way he has proposed even though it sounds promising on its face. Why? The job is being done by a Chinese company, employing Chinese workers & using Chinese steel [do we really need to import cheap Chinese steel when we have high quality Pittsburgh steel; constructing a bridge is not the time to cut corners]. This is just one example of why in today's market, the kinds of jobs that Mathews is suggesting will no longer address the unemployment problem of today.
Comments