Obama vs. Romney 101: 5 ways they differ on jobs

Whether Mitt Romney or Barack Obama occupies the White House in January, one of them will have to deal with more than 12 million jobless Americans, or a little over 8 percent of the total workforce. Where do the candidates stand on issues relating to jobs?

4. Minimum wage

Kevin Lamarque/Reuters/File
President Obama, in Washington, makes a statement on new minimum wage and overtime protections for in-home care workers on Dec. 15, 2011.

About 9.5 million people either make the minimum wage or are near it. If they work full-time at $7.25 an hour – the current minimum wage – they make $15,000 annually. If their wage were increased to $9.80 an hour – as proposed in a bill pending before Congress – they would make an extra $5,000 a year.

Raising the minimum wage would generate more than $25 billion in consumer spending, which would result in an extra 100,000 new full-time jobs, estimates the Economic Policy Institute in a study this August. But the impact might actually be larger: the EPI estimates that another 28 million Americans – 20 percent of the workforce – would see their wages increase because the minimum wage is the floor from which their wages are figured.

So, where do the candidates stand on the issue?

When Obama was campaigning in 2008, he said he would raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2011. “Since then, there has not been a peep,” says Jen Kern, the minimum wage coordinator at the National Employment Law Project, an advocacy group in Washington. “Our hope is that this will come up in the campaign.”

It already has for Romney – during the primary. Asked by NELP about his stance on the issue, he said in February he favors raising the minimum and then raising the wage each year to reflect inflation. “He said that was what his position was in Massachusetts and had been ever since,” says Ms. Kern.

Then an editorial in The Wall Street Journal questioned his stand, followed by a verbal spanking by radio commentator Rush Limbaugh. By the time he got to "The Larry Kudlow Show" on CNBC, Romney was full retreat. In March, his spokeswoman, Andrea Saul, told The Huffington Post, “Given the high rate of joblessness, this is not the time for anyone to be proposing an increase in the minimum wage."

4 of 5

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.