|
WASHINGTON,
D.C. – U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) issued today’s “Bush
Administration’s Misstatement of the Day” on jobs and wages.
Acting
Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy Mark Warshawsky said today in a
statement:
“Building
on the progress started by the Jobs and Economic Growth Act, the President
is continuing his efforts to strengthen the economy and create jobs…” (Department
of Treasury, 1/23/04)
Jobs:
However,
job creation “progress” under the Bush Administration has resulted in only
1,000 new jobs in December. At that rate, it will take 192 years
and eight months for the economy to return to the number of jobs at the
beginning of President Bush's term of office. (House Budget Committee,
Democratic Staff)
In
Addition, under President Bush, an average of 66,000 jobs have been lost
per month, while the Clinton economy created an average of 236,000 jobs
every month. (Chicago Tribune, “If only President Bush would
speak the truth,” Molly Ivins, 1/23/04)
Wages:
The
Center for American Progress reports that the “the
Administration's tax cuts for the wealthy have done little to deal with
this very serious problem” of wage disparity.
According
to a Wall Street Journal article titled “The Gap in Wages
Is
Growing Again For U.S. Workers, 1/23/04):
New
data from the Labor Department show that after adjustment for inflation,
salaries of the country's lowest-paid workers -- those who fall just inside
the bottom 10% of the pay range -- fell 3% last year, from 2002. Meanwhile,
the salaries of the highest paid workers -- those who are just inside the
top 10% -- were unchanged. The divergence appeared to grow in the fourth
quarter as higher-paid workers gained ground and lower-paid workers slipped
further, based on comparisons with original year-earlier data that are
subject to revision.
The
numbers continue a movement to greater wage inequality that began around
the time President Bush succeeded President Clinton and the economy slid
into recession three years ago. The trend represents a reversal from the
late 1990s, when the lowest unemployment rates in a generation had enabled
the lowest-paid workers to keep pace with those at the top.
|
|