
Thanks to the NC General Assembly, a slew of new campaign laws went into effect last week, including a repeal of the “stand by your ad” law, so that candidates will no longer be required to declare that they “approved this message.” That’s understandable because the new reforms also provide for an increase in the maximum allowable donation to political campaigns while lessening disclosures. Why the change? Because our state lawmakers believed that the limits on political donations should keep pace with inflation. If only they applied that same rationale to minimumwage rates.
The hypocrisy of our elected officials couldn’t be more transparent.
It’s also pretty dispassionate and offensive. These politicians want donations to their re-election campaigns to increase, yet they seem to care nothing about the meager wages of their constituents. Not so in at least 13 other states where increases in minimum wage just went into effect. They include Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington state.
Of course, the rate hikes in those states are minimal and mostly symbolic, but it’s a start, and, in some cases, may have triggered substantive increases in select cities. For example, San Jose’s minimum wage just rose to $10.15 per hour, while San Francisco’s rate jumped to $10.74. And, voters in Seattle just agreed to give 6,000 airport workers a raise from $9.19 to $15 per hour. Moreover, of the 13 states who just raised minimum wage, 10 of them have tied those increases to the cost of living index.
On the other hand, 31 states that don’t currently mandate a higher minimum wage must adhere to the federal hourly wage, which, as Huffington Business columnist Dave Jamieson points out, hasn’t been increased since 2009. That’s the year Congress so generously raised the rate to a staggering $7.25 per hour. Even worse, according to The Economist, in the years since then, the real value of that wage rate has slipped back to where it was in 1998.
Clearly it’s time for Congress to establish a federal minimum wage that gives workers a fighting chance to survive. Last year, US Sen. Tom Harkin attempted to do just that when he introduced the Fair Minimum Wage Act, which calls for a minimum wage of $10.10 per hour, phased in over two years. But guess what? The bill has stalled in committee, and there have been no roll call votes to advance it. Opponents of the bill continue to perpetuate the same old myth: “If we raise minimum wage, businesses will have to cut jobs.”
Thankfully, a number of respected organizations and economists have come forward over the past year to dispel that myth. The Economic Policy Institute, for example, conducted an extensive nationwide survey, and in March 2013 released a report which concluded the following: “Raising the minimum wage would help reverse the ongoing erosion of wages that has contributed significantly to growing income inequality. At the same time, it would provide a modest stimulus to the entire economy as increased wages would lead to increased consumer spending, which would contribute to GDP growth and modest employment gains.” By the way, those modest gains would include the creation of an estimated 140,000 new jobs.
Meanwhile, the Chicago Booth School of Business chimed in with its own survey, concluding that “leading economists agreed by a 4-to-1 margin that the benefits of raising and indexing the minimum wage outweigh the costs.” Princeton professor Paul Krugman put it all much more succinctly, saying that a rise in minimum wage would have “little if any negative effect on employment.” In addition, Bloomberg News reported that “studies find minimum wage increases provide an economic boost as strapped workers immediately spend their raises.” And the Harvard Business Review is on record saying that raising the minimum wage will benefit employers who, by paying the higher rate, will experience a reduction in employee turnover and increased productivity.
Today over 30 million Americans are paid minimum wage, and they deserve better. They deserve a living wage. That’s why we need to pass the Fair Minimum Wage Act. Until then, my solution is for everyone making $7.25 per hour to run for the state legislature this year. If elected they can then vote on raising the minimum wage, while making a respectable salary, and raking in lots of maximum allowable campaign donations to boot. I’m Jim Longworth, and I approved this message.





They make mistakes. But the mark of a great President is his willingness to admit when he’s wrong, and then to correct his mistake. No, I’m not talking about Barack Obama’s botched Affordable Care Act, and his broken promise to let everyone keep their existing health plan. I’m talking about John Kennedy, and how he misread history, unintentionally insulted the state of Virginia, and was compelled to make amends.
The other day I read about a 52-year-old wife and mother who fulfilled her lifelong dream by trying out for and making the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleading squad. I suppose her story was inspiring on some level, and I’m not knocking anyone’s aspirations. I’m also probably the least qualified person in the hemisphere to comment on or criticize cheerleading. Nevertheless, we should all be concerned about the safety and impressionability of our children, and, by association, the relevance of the professional cheerleaders who they seek to emulate. Let’s begin with those NFL role models.
In his address to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 9, 2009, President Obama outlined his vision for healthcare reform. At one point during his speech, the President was reassuring his audience that illegal immigrants would not be covered under the proposed Affordable Care Act (ACA), when he was rudely interrupted by South Carolina Congressman Joe Wilson who shouted, “You lie!” Those in attendance and many of us watching at home were appalled by Wilson’s behavior. After all, this was the President of the United States, and it is just not proper for anyone to interrupt him during a speech. I condemned Wilson at the time, and I still think his actions were inappropriate. But last week we learned that Obama deliberately misled Congress and the nation in order to gain passage of ACA, so now, I must regrettably admit that Mr. Wilson’s concerns were valid.
Once, when The Love Boat was navigating primetime waters and The Mary Tyler Moore Show and McHale’s Navy were still in re-runs, an Entertainment Tonight poll named Gavin MacLeod the most recognizable man on TV. Last week, that likeable icon christened his long-awaited autobiography, and it doesn’t disappoint.



















Posted January 15, 2014 By Triad TodayStay Away From Sochi
There are a number of things that I really dislike. Among them: religious zealots, homophobes, violence, and the Olympics.
Strangely enough, they could all intersect next month in Sochi. Not so strange is that Russia is once again in the middle of a growing Olympic controversy. More on that in a moment, but first, some historical perspective.
In 1956, the Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland all boycotted the Summer Olympics as a way of protesting Russia’s invasion of Hungary. Hungary, however, decided to compete, and when that nation faced off against Russia in a water polo event, violence broke out both in and around the water.
In 1980, the games were held in Moscow, but President Jimmy Carter refused to let our Olympians compete because Russia had invaded Afghanistan. Then, in 1984, the Ruskies invoked what’s known as the “tit for tat” rule, and boycotted the Summer games which were held in Los Angeles. The official reason given for Russia’s pull out was inadequate security to protect their athletes while on the left coast. In truth, it was just the Communists’ way of paying back America for Carter’s boycott four years earlier.
And now here it is, 30 years later, and once again the Russians are causing trouble just prior to another Olympics.
Next month’s games in Sochi have generated controversy for a number of reasons. First, there’s the threat of violence from terrorists. Recent suicide bombings in Volograd killed 34 people, and now, Chechen rebel leader Doku Umarov is urging his disciples to attack the Olympics. It is Umarov who described the Sochi games as, “satanic dances on the bones of our ancestors.”
OK, so this guy is a nut and a religious zealot, but he’s a zealot with soldiers and bombs, and that’s reason enough for American Olympians to stay home next month.
Second is the controversy over Vladimir Putin’s war on homosexuals. There is an official government ban in effect on any so-called gay propaganda, which means just about anyone who speaks or distributes pro-gay messages can be jailed. But Putin’s ban isn’t born out of a narrow view by a select few politicos.
In fact, there exists in Russia today a free rein of gay bashing, including recent comments by noted actor Ivan Okhlobystin, who, according to The Hollywood Reporter, said, “I would have them (gays) all stuffed alive in an oven.” He also said, “I don’t want my children thinking that being a faggot is normal.” It’s no wonder that anti-gay violence is on the rise in Russia.
And so there you have it. Chechen terrorists and homophobic Russians are independently poised to hurt or kill people in Sochi for one reason or another.
If ever there was a good reason for America to boycott an Olympics, this is it. Yet what does our President do? He decides to send a contingent of notable gay American athletes to Russia to represent us in the opening and closing ceremonies. Meanwhile, according to the Associated Press, a number of American athletes are planning to wear symbols that protest Russia’s treatment of gays.
To date, President Obama has made no formal request of Russia to repeal its gay ban. Instead, he is offering up our athletes, both gay and straight, as cannon fodder for terrorists, zealots and homophobes. Hey Mr. President, the Olympic ceremonies are in Russia, not San Francisco, and Sochi is no place to stage an erstwhile gay pride parade.
Sure, I hate the Olympics, but I also hate terrorists, zealots, and homophobes, and Sochi is a ripe staging area for those idiots to do a lot of damage. Mr. President, you’ve already announced that neither you nor Vice President Biden will attend the games, so I urge you to order our athletes to stay home as well. I know you’re still pissed at Putin for granting temporary asylum to Edward Snowden, but for God’s sake, let’s not use that as an unofficial excuse for rubbing the Russians’ face in our western tolerances.
Some will say there is a precedent for Obama’s not so subtle defiance of a foreign leader. After all, we did stuff Jesse Owens down Hitler’s throat at the 1936 Olympics. But that was an entirely different circumstance, a different venue, and a different era. First, the scope of Hitler’s monstrous deeds and his plans for world-wide domination were not yet fully known. And second, American athletes, though disliked by the Fuhrer, were completely safe in Berlin. There’s no way Hitler would have allowed unauthorized violence to erupt during the games.
Not so in Sochi, where neither Putin nor the IOC can fully protect our athletes given the culture of hate that exists in that region.
Personally I could care less about the Olympics, but I do care about preventing violence wherever and whenever possible. Sadly, the only way to keep our Olympic athletes safe is to keep them home.