|
|
 |
March 8, 1996
|
In his new book, Time Present, Time Past: A Memoir, retiring Democratic Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey expresses concern that great leaps in productivity from the information revolution mainly benefit shareholders and management. He points out that nine million of the 130 million jobs in America are potentially endangered by the information revolution. Traditional job opportunities are already being challenged. For example, one of the largest employers in America is Manpower, Inc., a temporary job employer. Bradley believes the current situation raises major questions about trust, loyalty, and commitment.
His prescription is to create more jobs in the civil society to address our social needs, such as mentors, basketball coaches, music directors, nurses. Bradley believes America should concentrate on jobs that only a human can do--person-to-person relationships that transform lives.
"I think where Democrats went wrong is that we denied what was obvious to many people in America, which is that the people who get a lot of their tax dollars are often the loudest, are the ones with the best paid lobbyists, and we sought compromises, gave a little bit to everybody, as opposed to principle that said no to somebody. And here we have an opportunity to say we're not defending big bureaucracy, we are, instead, taking those resources-- --and recycling them to the institutions of civil society." (David Gergen interview, January 31, 1996)
What do you think? Can Bill Bradley's ideas help the middle class weather the economic revolution caused by the information age?
----------------------------------------
A question from Peter Carlyle, Scarsdale, NY:
I believe society would benefit from the jobs in civic society, but that the real tough question is how to encourage the private sector to create better, more highly compensated jobs? Another issue starts with recognition that the old corporate America with life-time job security will be no-more. Good jobs probably will come from small business and new workers will have to be flexible and change jobs periodically. Should the government thus encourage more individual savings to take care of the between jobs times. Effective jawboning by the President would also be good and the pity is that Senator Bradley is not in that position to do so.
-------------------------------------------------
Senator Bradley responds:
The problem with the American society is economic growth unfairly shared. We need a balanced budget, the lowest possible tax rates on income, more of the tax burden moved to consumption, major investments in lifetime education, and an underlined commitment to research, and finally the lowest possible interest rate. Therefore, the economy will grow and there will be more good paying jobs at all income levels. I talk about this in chapter 17 of "Time Present, Time Past."
----------------------------
A question from Emily Devoti of Los Angeles, CA:
Do any examples of the implementation of your civic job plan exist? If so, where? What is the closest thing?
Senator Bradley responds:
There are examples in communities throughout the country. In your own city of Los Angeles there are innumerable people working in synagogues, mosques, and churches. They are there because of their commitment to their fellow human beings. If you want to know specific examples you can call the Catholic Archdiocese in Los Angeles or Councilman Mark Ridley Thomas who can provide them for you. The closest thing in my state of New Jersey is the New Community Corporation which is in Newark, New Jersey. The 1993 Urban Empowerment Zone legislation also requires a bigger involvement for the institutions of a Civil Society in a cities applications for Empowerment Zone status. Other examples of individuals making a difference in their communities are placed throughout my book, "Time Present-Time Past."
---------------------------------------------
A question from Rick Sigrist LaRue, Ohio:
Citizens are scared about losing their jobs and are scared about making enough money to keep their heads above water. How can we job train people for future jobs when we do not know what kind of jobs will be available? Service industry jobs are now starting to disappear and real fear is all around industries, such as banking. Job training has not done the job in Europe with their high unemployment so why would it work here? This job security issue is not going to go away, regardless of who is elected president in November!
Senator Bradley responds:
The way we can best train people for the future is to make it easier for them to obtain lifetime education which means expanding income contingent loans that will make it easier for people to get the money to go to college now and pay it back as a percentage of future earnings. The one skill that I believe will be critical, one the you possess now, is not only the ability to use information systems but to have intuitions about the Internet and it's applications to our lives-to think in systems and not linearly. This is chapter 17 of "Time Present-Time Past."
---------------------------------------------
A question from Dave McGuffin of Ottawa, Ontario:
Pat Buchanan has been successful by tapping into a real fear in Middle America--- the Middle Class obviously feels it has been left behind economically. How should Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party address this in the upcoming election? Also, what kind of scenario do you see for the presidential election in 2000 ? Do you agree with E.J. Dionne that progressivism is on the rebound and will be the next political movement?
Senator Bradley responds:
I agree with E.J. Dionne that we are on the "Brink of a Progressive Era", Pat Buchanan has diagnosed our nation's problem as economic insecurity, but his prescriptions-pointing the finger at foreigners, immigrants, and blacks-is irrelevant at best and enormously destructive at worst. I believe the Democratic Party should point out that the only balance to private power is public power. If we did that creatively, focused on the workers without ignoring the importance of technology, we can win the presidential election. If we fail to do that a third force could arise and displace portions of the Republican and Democratic Parties.
-----------------------------------------
A question from Wesley Hsu of New Haven, CT
Some political observers have suggested that the time may be right for a third party. A few are suggesting that this party might draw pro-choice Republicans who do not wish to kowtow to the Christian Coalition. In addition, the new party would draw more fiscally conservative democrats who feel that the federal government serves an important purpose, but that its role must be limited. Your name, along with Governor Weld, Senator Specter, and Mr. Tsongas', often comes up during discussions about this third party. Would you be interested in leading such a party, and what effect would such a party have on the current political scene. Finally, will this party doom the Democrats?
Senator Bradley responds:
I believe that there is a substantial opening for a third party, in the areas of using public power to balance private power on behalf of the middle-class. Reducing the role of money in politics with fundamental campaign finance reform, promoting racial healing, protecting the environment, balancing the budget, and producing a tax system with the lowest possible rates on income with the fewest number of special interest loopholes. At the same time, there are tremendous financial, organizational, and ballot access obstacles to an emergence of a third party. I think the Republicans are more likely to fragment then the Democrats, but a third party will take some from both parties whether it arises or not depends on how well one or both parties address the issues that I have just enumerated.
--------------------------------------
A question from Lucy Thomas, Santa Barbara, CA:
Is there some way to find a balance in this downsizing mania? Is there some way to keep the middle class alive? I am trying to stay a member of this class and see the working middle class as the real strength of a democracy. I see us threatened both by the very rich who won't take a little less profit, and by the very poor who need more and more help as the tax burden escalates. This is an area that needs national attention.
Senator Bradley responds:
The finest accomplishment in the last 100 years is the creation of a stable middle- class. The only way to prevent corporations from running roughshod over the lives of middle-class Americans is to use public power to balance their relentless drive to maximize profits. That should be done in a way that does not impede our prospects for economic growth. At a minimum, companies with more than 100 employees that downsize a worker, who has worked for that company for more than 10 years, should pay for one year's healthcare for that worker's family. In addition, pensions should be portable, homeowners should be able to sell their homes tax free from age 40, not 55, and programs that aid the poor should be held accountable for results. These programs should work less through giant federal bureaucracies and more through the institutions of the Civic Society, such as churches, synagogues, mosques, and community development organizations. These organizations are successful because of their commitment to their fellow human beings and with more resources can do an even better job. Above all we must never hesitate to use public power to balance private power on behalf of middle-class Americans. Middle-class Americans are the backbone of our country and now too often are shoved aside by corporate America, as many people who are poor have been for years. Efforts should be rewarded, self-reliance encouraged, and economic growth share more fairly.
----------------------------
Additional Comments and Questions:
Larry Garvin of Spokane, WA
My only concern, as I read the proposal, is another WPA disaster of shovel leaners. If this program is run as a business, with responsibility for completion included, it stands a chance. It does bother me that the "machine", which I am currently using to send this message, is replacing jobs all over the world. I'd sure like to hear some answers to this dilemma.
-----------------------------------------
Oliver Character, Jr. of Atlanta, Ga
I wish Senator Bradley and General Colin Powell were running mates on an Independent or third party ticket. This would bring charismatic and crucial change in America and the world for the 21st century.
-----------------------------------------
James Friedson of la crescenta CA
I have intuitively suspected for some time that the automation age would finally catch up with us. My question is: How are the people who will fill the new jobs in the "civil society" you propose be paid? Will there be a market demand for these new jobs? (It's hard enough for teachers to earn a living in Los Angeles...)
-----------------------------------------
Marie Fritz of Terre Haute, IN:
Technology is changing the entire American landscape--no the landscape of the world, even the universe. As businesses and government demand a better prepared workforce and as universities grow in their capacities to provide the avenues to post-secondary education, what should be their role? What technologies should universities use and how should they use them?
Should we prepare for change or stand firm against the techiversity because it lacks that personal touch? That ability to insure quality? Thank you.-----------------------------------------
Catherine Lahti of Metamora, MI
My point is that the United States HOPE for economic success in the future, and for the future of the lower and middle classes is NOT decent paying blue-collar jobs -- those are gone! Burger Doodle will never be a career choice upon which one can raise a family of 4! Our hope, our great resource in the U.S. is our EDUCATIONAL infrastructure! We need to quit waving the union flag and bragging about our industrial production prowess -- because that is not going to employ the millions of Americans who are not highly educated, skilled professionals! Instead we need to re-educate our labor force! Nurses, mentors, etc., sounds great -- but we also need scores of people who can program in C++ and Foxpro! Not everyone is the touchy-feely type who wants (or should) work with children or in a "people position."
-----------------------------------------
Raymond W. Vegso Ph.D. of Buffalo, NY
Bradley (& Gephardt) are among the few who seem to be trying to discuss serious and fundamental issues of great importance to all of us.
Most Business executives operate without regard for anything except their own narrow interest and that of shareholders (and only short term interest at that). The concept of long term stewardship and balancing multiple obligations to multiple stakeholders, including employees, community, and nation is rapidly declining. Each firm operates for its own benefit but does it at some cost to the larger system. In systems terminology we have sub-optimizing behavior. As the number of firms seeking to optimize their narrow interests by sacrificing obligations to other stakeholders increases, the cumulative negative effects on the entire system gradually build up.
There are two paths to remedy the situation: The first solution would be to have wiser executives who understand their obligations to all stakeholders and operate with enlightened self-interest and stewardship. This seems increasingly unlikely I'm afraid.
The second solution is for society to exercise greater control over corporations via market forces (consumers, investors, unions) or via government action at all levels. The government actions would be to modify the rules of the game, the system of rewards and penalties which firms are subject to, without doing damage to the general benefits of a free market system. Some of the changes are simply to reverse some of the perverse incentives we have which encourage firms to do the wrong things.
This issues is a subset of the larger debate we need on how to develop national business and economic strategies, and supporting infrastructure, policies, and rules of the game.-----------------------------------------
Clayton Clark of Walnut Creek, CA
Mr. Bradley: I couldn't agree more with the ideas expressed above. The average American is learning too late that the only obligation corporations have is to their shareholders. But in order to realize the new socio-economic model briefly mentioned at the top of this page, I believe we must come to terms with the concept of "Economic Growth" and start thinking about the possibility of economic stability. The very term economic growth seems to favor the corporation, which is. We've all seen the toll boom/bust economies take on individuals who do not have the corporations resources to weather economic ups and downs. The concept of a global village and world economy sounds good on paper, but I believe it poses the greatest threat democracy has ever experienced. Who has elected these multi-national corporations as mayor of this global village? If I did so either in deed or disinterest, then I am a traitor to my country and my neighbors. I believe the time is right for the ideas you put forth. Corporations who are now looking overseas for cheap labor and new markets may not have the time, energy and interest in thwarting small domestic enterprises they perceive as a threat. Money that has now goes to lobbyists will be spent bribing corrupt foreign civil servants, possibly allowing voice of small businessmen to be heard in Washington. More importantly, we won't have to the corporate aristocracy using various mediums to blame the lower and middle classes for the moral decline of this country. I won't bore you further, except to say that I look forward to reading your book.
-----------------------------------------
Edward Bassett of Hermosa Beach, CA
First, I'm a non-partisan voter and I have to say I respect greatly your decision -- more than if you'd remained in the Senate.
Q: Your ideas on the civil society as employer sound much like those of Jeremy Rifkin in "The End of Work," only he predicts a world transformation threatening a lot more than 9 million jobs, even in America. Do you think you've under- estimated the problem, and what reforms in education can mitigate it?
I get worried when I see the distaste for math and other information skills on students, and the prevalence of an anti-school culture among youth, esp. minorities.-----------------------------------------
Woody Goodstein of Long Island, NY
This question is not about America's economic future per se, but about your ideas and thus viability as a presidential candidate as a whole. In short, your integrity, your values, your sense of morality seem to be such as would be incompatible with a presidential race, never mind with today's general political climate! How do you plan to reconcile these things with doing what is needed to win a presidential race? (Personal note: please find some way to do it! I am obviously an admiring fan!)
-----------------------------------------
John Baughman of Dayton Ohio
Dear PBS:
Bill Bradley might be on to something if we lived in a vacuum. Other countries around the globe will employ technology and become more efficient no matter what we do. We might as well quit complaining and start to provide tax incentives for job retraining.-----------------------------------------
Anne Tanner of Coralville, Iowa
I think it's crucial that we coin new language to describe the jobs that are offered now. Perhaps we could use a full-time equivalent terminology; that way, we could make sense of what's happening. For example, when a hospital is forced to close a wing and lays off, say, 300 nurses, we'd know how many full-time jobs have been lost, and when President Clinton says that one million new jobs have been created, he'd have to add that the FTE is 225,000. If a job cannot support an individual worker above the poverty line, I'd like it not to be called a job; perhaps a half-job. (That would make Congress a triple-job!)
If we are to respond intelligently to the new (depressing) economy, we will need the terminology to discuss it without ambiguity.
The only other comment is that two of your four categories of positions that we should try to increase, nurses and music directors, are being laid off constantly these days, and most mentor positions are not paid! Sad, isn't it.-----------------------------------------
Eric Seldner of Woodbridge, NJ
Workplace Democracy should be near the top of the list of any progressive political agenda.
How do you assess the political chances of laws to require privately held companies to be more open to their employees about their finances and executive salaries?
-----------------------------------------J. Field of Fort Worth TX
Listen, as an Engineer I have to tell you that all of us are not interested in interpersonal type jobs such as nurse or basketball coach etc. A lot of people are interested in MAKING things. That is a simplistic way of saying it but the point is that we need a lot of the kinds of professions that are being moved out of the country.
It is one thing to automate a job out of existence, that is inevitable and we don't want to be luddites about it. We also can't just accept that industries will take the jobs somewhere that work is cheap and pollution is unregulated then send the products back here. Just look at how many things are made in China today! I have been in some stores where it is hard to find anything else!
The only solution I can think of is to make a consumers union. The idea is to make a list of products that are made in the U.S. then allow people to decide what is important to themselves. If we all continue to buy junk made in China or Japan or other places that don't allow free access to our companies and even then, if the industries can't sell what they are making then they will start coming back quick enough. The point is that the decision must be voluntary. No "walls around America" or tariffs etc.
There would be a role for government however. To make sure the same companies don't cheat there would have to be an "official" list of products and what percentage was Made in USA. Along with stiff fines for cheating. This is a proper role for a governmental agency.
Our politicians then could jawbone the issue and use the threat of making public a particular manufacturer, or group as in the case of Japans MITI supported cartel.
If the American people voluntarily did this no nation could cry foul. In addition, we would be directly supporting more good jobs for ourselves and our children.
-----------------------------------------James Stine of Bethlehem, PA
My question for Bill Bradley Do you think that your comments about today's information age are without thought for today's generation. My thoughts are for the children of today. Many such as myself hold a more optimistic outlook of the future as opposed to yourself.
I believe many older senators during the 60's thought your agendas were hogwash during your freshman years as a senator. Do you use a computer? If so, how and when and what software. You are right when business' of tomorrow are going to be different than today. But, the same could be said for the business of the 70's and 80's. My generation will dominate the future which is given, but I do not think jobs will be lost.
----------------------------------------
Larry Stark of St. Paul, Minnesota
In his book, "Head to Head," Lester Thurow argues that it is the emphasis on profit in American business that puts the U.S. at such a disadvantage. Since stockholders have no necessary long-term stake in a company and can pull out at any time, corporate executives are forced to pursue short- term profits, even at the expense of sacrificing workforce, R&D funding, or any other long-term commitments that might otherwise be in the best interest of the company.
Do you agree that this is a major problem? If so, would some alternative way of capitalizing businesses be in order, such as using employee pension funds or even privatized but independently managed social security funds?
Click to see a Forum Menu.
 |
        |
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
