Mapping the loss of "Full Employment" from the Dem Party Platform
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Mapping the loss of "Full Employment" from the Democratic Party Platform Control F search has never yielded more disturbing results. We all know full employment policy was abandoned, but I didn't realize the extent at which not even lip service was paid to the term. Putting real Full Employment front and center back in the Party Platform should be the main agenda for progressive Democrats in 2020. In 1980 the Democratic Party Platform there was this: "Full Employment—We specifically reaffirm our commitment to achieve all the goals of the Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment Act within the currently prescribed dates in the Act, especially those relating to a joint reduction in unemployment and inflation. Full employment is important to the achievement of a rising standard of living, to the pursuit of sound justice, and to the strength and vitality of America." And this: "We will adopt a full employment policy, with increased possibilities for part-time work." And finally: "We will continue to work toward full employment in recognition of the importance of self-support."
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29607 By 1984, this was reduced to "job skills development programs":
"—a commitment to full employment. We believe the federal government must develop a major, comprehensive national job skills development policy targeted on the chronically unemployed and underemployed." They also said this: "—We need a vigorous, open and fair trade policy 'that builds America's competitive strength, and that allows our nation to remain an advanced, diversified economy while promoting full employment and raising living standards in the United States and other countries of the world; opens overseas markets for American products; strengthens the international economic system; assists adjustment to foreign competition; and recognizes the legitimate interests of American workers, farmers and businesses."
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29608 In 1988, it's "training and development programs": "We believe that, as a first-rate world power moving into the 21st century, we can have a first-rate full employment economy, with an indexed minimum wage that can help lift and keep families out of poverty, with training and employment programs—including child care and health care—that can help people move from welfare to work...."
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29609 In 1992 there was no usage of the phrase "full employment" whatsoever. Remember, 1992 was the "It's the Economy, Stupid" election and the Democrats weren't even talking about "full employment".
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29610 The term does not reappear in any Democratic Party Platform until 2016, and only in reference to protecting the Fed's "independence": "We will protect and defend the Federal Reserve’s independence to carry out the dual mandate assigned to it by Congress—for both full employment and low inflation—against threats from new legislation." (see last link below). http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29611
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29612
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29613
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=78283
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/papers_pdf/101962.pdf
https://www.demconvention.com/…/Democratic-Party-Platform-7…
-
-
-
-
-
Democrat
Colorado Springs, CO
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Carlitos -- While the federal Job Guarantee (employer of last resort) has not been a part of the Democratic Party platform, there have been advocates for a Basic Minimum Income (or Universal Basic Income) by some in the liberal media. Dylan Matthews of Vox for one has outlined his reasoning: Dylan Matthews, Vox, April 25, 2016: Basic income: the world’s simplest plan to end poverty, explained On the other hand, I certainly understand arguments for a Job Guarantee as proposed by Randall Wray and others in the MMT community. It seems to me that the two camps are arguing past each other at times, perhaps amplifying points of concern to help sell their particular case. However, perhaps we can do both. In my browsing I came across this website which kind of mimics my thinking. Basic Income vs Job Guarantee: A Few Thoughts Comments?
-
-
-
Democrat
Colorado Springs, CO
-
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Schmidt Wrote: Carlitos -- While the federal Job Guarantee (employer of last resort) has not been a part of the Democratic Party platform, there have been advocates for a Basic Minimum Income (or Universal Basic Income) by some in the liberal media. Dylan Matthews of Vox for one has outlined his reasoning:Dylan Matthews, Vox, April 25, 2016: Basic income: the world’s simplest plan to end poverty, explained On the other hand, I certainly understand arguments for a Job Guarantee as proposed by Randall Wray and others in the MMT community. It seems to me that the two camps are arguing past each other at times, perhaps amplifying points of concern to help sell their particular case. However, perhaps we can do both. In my browsing I came across this website which kind of mimics my thinking. Basic Income vs Job Guarantee: A Few Thoughts Comments? I'm more a fan of the universal basic income rather than a job guarantee for various reasons, but mainly because of technology and how it will replace more and more jobs that humans are used to doing. A job guarantee is only as good as the demand for a specific job, but a universal basic income will ensure that food will be on the table regardless.
-
-
-
-
-
|