Rep. Frank’s Grand Bargain

Congressman Barney Frank is taking some flak from Progressive writer David Sirota about his thoughts on a grand bargain between Business and Labor. What I understand Rep Frank to have said is that he wanted to explore some collaboration to improve workers conditions and benefits in exchange for lightening regulations on business.

Sirota, a passionate writer and devoted Progressive writes “that politicians will often move to the right unless there are strong, consistent progressive voices holding them accountable.” He is concerned that Mr. Frank is inclined to betray progressive expectations and capitulate to free trade.

I think that it is important for people like Mr. Sirota to be the voice of conscience for his values. Just as Reps. Mike Pence or John Shaddegg are the voices for fiscal restraint.

But I think we elect our Representatives to deliberate among various options to arrive at policies that respect the legitimate interests of the major stakeholders. I don’t expect or desire that one interest group prevail over another. Too much accommodation to labor and we end up with some of the economic problems they have in the EU. Too much accommodation to Business and we have a falling quality of life. It would be fine with me if labor got higher wages, lower cost health care, Pension protection and business got some flexibility on wage and hour laws and some balance between free and fair trade. I prefer that US business be as competitive as possible in the global economy. There are infinite combinations of give and take here.

I don’t want the perfect to be the enemy of the good. I just want to see the ball moved down the field once in a while. The goal being a sustainable and improving quality of life, for us and the entire world.

7 Responses to “Rep. Frank’s Grand Bargain”

1. Jones says:

   December 12, 2006 at 9:34 pm

   free and fair trade

   I wasn’t aware these are mutually exclusive.
2. Paul in Austin says:

   December 12, 2006 at 9:48 pm

   As I understand it Free Trade is lowering the barriers to trade without agreements to raise the labor and environmental standards in the county competing with the US.

   Fair Trade is lowering the barriers, but with those agreements to raise the standards up to the US standards so that it is level playing field.

   It is debatable whether Fair is even possible given how high US standards are as compared to most of our trading partners.

   One alternative is to make sure that, at the very least, US workers do not experience a decline in their quality of life as a consequence of Free Trade. This is where I think Rep Frank is aiming to strike the Grand Bargain.
3. roy says:

   December 12, 2006 at 9:55 pm

   “I don’t want the perfect to be the enemy of the good.”

   Strikes me as a good example of moderate “ideology”.
4. Rudi says:

   December 12, 2006 at 10:07 pm

   It would be fine with me if labor got higher wages, lower cost health care, Pension protection….

   There is no longer a strong Union/labor movement in the US. Health care costs rise while care decreases. Buissness is gutting pension for average workers and passing costs to government and ultimately US taxpayers. The days of Big Labor and the Democrtas is over, now corparations are buying both sides. The Bancruptcy bill was drafted by the banking and credit companies for passage with minimal hearings. What is “good”, reasonable living enviroments or “trickle down” profits for corpation based in the Cayman Islands?
5. Paul in Austin says:

   December 13, 2006 at 10:40 am

   Roy

   Strikes me as a good example of moderate “ideology”.

   What is your opinion of this?
6. Paul in Austin says:

   December 13, 2006 at 12:41 pm

   From Rep Frank:

   My Grand Bargain starts with a way for us to pass a broad liberal agenda – including raising wages (not just the minimum wage), health care, labor and environmental standards in trade agreements, more support for access to education, and an increased public sector in many other areas – and I am prepared to work with some aspects of the business community’s agenda if we can get them. I should add that if we can get labor, human rights and environmental standards in trade bills, I think foreign trade can be a good thing when properly done, and can be particularly helpful to poor people in other countries, whose existence we should not entirely forget.
7. nicrivera says:

   December 13, 2006 at 4:40 pm

   My advice to Congressman Frank:

   Ignore Sirota.

   I’m all for standing on principle and not pandering to the left of the right, and I’m in large agreement with progressives about not capitulating on issues of the Iraq War on civil liberties.

   But Sirota’s “take no prisoner” attitude on fiscal policy is ridiculous. Congressman Frank’s suggestion isn’t even all that conservative. It still retains raising the minimum wage and many of the other things that progressives like, but because Congressman Frank is daring to offer even small concessions to the advocates of free trade, Sirota accuses him of “betrayal.”

   I think this represents a major divide on the left between libertarian-minded liberals who are open to free trade and fiscal restraint and fiscal progressives who seem to want to return to the Big Government liberalism of the 1960′s.