Campaign plans put jobs at stake

Those seeking the Democratic nomination for president have an interesting economic pitch: Our proposals could put you out of work!

Many of those in the large field of candidates have embraced the idea of ending U.S. reliance on fossil fuels in the next few decades. Never mind that petroleum, coal and natural gas accounted for roughly four-fifths of U.S. energy consumption last year, making such a swift transition impossible.

According to the 2018 U.S. Energy and Regulatory Report, traditional energy and energy efficiency sectors employed roughly 6.5 million Americans in 2018. Many would wind up out of work under Democratic policies, although some candidates say they would pay to send those folks back to school or train them for renewableenergy jobs.

A $15-per-hour minimum wage is another must-have for most of the candidates. A report by the Congressional Budget Office found that a $15 minimum wage could help 17 million workers, a fact the candidates like to tout. They're not as quick to mention that the CBO also said the move could result in 3 million or more workers losing their jobs. When the Democratic-controlled U.S. House approved such a bill this year, Rep. Kendra Horn, D-Oklahoma City, voted against it, to her credit, noting that the mandate could put many Oklahoma businesses out of business.

Last week, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who is closing in on front-runner Joe Biden in the RealClearPolitics average of national polls, and leads him in Iowa and New Hampshire, acknowledged that “Medicare for All” could mean job losses for 2 million Americans. During an interview on New Hampshire Public Radio, the interviewer referenced an assertion by University of Massachusetts economist Robert Pollin that Medicare for All would slash roughly 2 million jobs, mostly within the health care industry.

“I agree,” Warren said. “I think this is part of the cost issue and should be part of the cost plan.” She encouraged the interviewer to “recognize on this what we're talking about, and that is in effect how much of our health care dollars have not gone to health care.”

Unlike Medicare for All's leading advocate, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Warren has refused to acknowledge that paying for the plan would require tax increases on middle-class Americans. She has insisted instead that costs will be borne by the ultra-wealthy, with the middle class ultimately seeing savings through lower insurance premiums.

Yet it's largely the middle class that would feel the brunt of those 2 million job losses if they were to happen. Warren says displaced workers could move to other insurance areas, such as auto and life insurance, and she's promising five years of “transition support.”

These proposals may appeal to the party's base, which is what the candidates are striving for at this stage of the campaign. But they are less likely to fly on Election Day 2020 with voters who like their jobs and wish to keep them.