A test of character: Obama's federal pay freeze

These days it's hard to decide which institution lets down Americans the most,  the news media or the White House.

Whether he was back to "negotiating against his own side" or paying homage to the ideology -- if not the courage -- of his hero Ronald Reagan, this afternoon Obama ordered a pay freeze for federal civil servants.   Will it help?  According to the EPI, "In the context of the deficit, Obama will get chump change from freezing federal pay, and will only enlarge the degree to which federal pay lags that of the private sector."  Paul Krugman called it "a transparently cynical policy gesture, trivial in scale but misguided in direction."

How is the US media covering the issue?  A NYT journalist turns to the right-wing Cato Institute for the statistics:

Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute referred to federal workers, in a study in June, as “an elite island of secure and high-paid workers, separated from the ocean of average American workers.” 

Mr. Edwards found that federal civilian workers had an average annual wage of $81,258 in 2009, compared with $50,464 for the nation’s private-sector workers. Average federal salaries rose 58 percent from 2000 to 2009, compared with 30 percent in the private sector, according to his study.

Union leaders said Mr. Obama was playing politics at workers’ expense. “It’s a panic reaction,” John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said in an interview. 

More about the NYT coverage in moment.

First, I want to point out that back in August of this year, USA Today turned the Cato institute's misleading statistics into a authoritative looking news story (left).   The lede read, "At a time when workers' pay and benefits have stagnated, federal employees' average compensation has grown to more than double what private sector workers earn, a USA TODAY analysis finds."

Halfway through the story, USA Today juxtaposed it's own analysis (actually Cato's analysis?) with an alternative point of view:   "Public employee unions say the compensation gap reflects the increasingly high level of skill and education required for most federal jobs and the government contracting out lower-paid jobs to the private sector in recent years."

On one hand there's an authoritative sounding "USA Today analysis," on the other, it's "unions say...."  Who is the reader going to believe?

But fundamentally, this is not a "he says, she says" question.  One only needs to get a hold of the right  statistics -- something neither newspaper bothered to do.  Both newspapers seem to believe that following-up misleading figures with a quote from a labor leader (NYT) or a union (USA Today) is the essence of "balanced reporting."  The NYT did not even bother to mention -- not even by way of imparting some leftist group's "opinion"-- the fact that differences in education among groups will have a baring on wage levels.

But it's not a matter of opinion.  Comparing every American in the "the private sector" to "federal civilian workers" -- a group that includes NASA scientists, NIH researchers, and tens of thousands of attorneys and accountants -- is intuitively disingenuous.    But you don't need consult your own common sense intuition or the agenda-driven opinions of union leaders. You just need to look at the data.

The fact is that the average federal civil servant is far more educated than the average private sector employee (sources: US census* and  CBO**):

Percent holding a bachelor's degree: 

US average = 18% *

Fed. employees = 49% ** 

Percent holding a graduate degree:  

US average=  10% *

Fed. Employees = 17% **

It would be strange if the salaries of  federal employees (who are better educated on average) had not risen at a faster rate during the past decade than those of  private sector employees overall (who are less educated on average).  Data on education and inequality in the US indicate that whereas higher educated workers have benefited from wage increases, the least well-educated Americans have seen their wages decline (chart).

While the trend is disturbing, what's driving it has nothing whatsoever to do with the wages paid to federal civil servants.   If it is to function effectively, a government must pay its employees a competitive wage.     

North Korea crisis timeline for 2010

What was the North Korea hoping to gain Tuesday by firing at an inhabited South Korean island?  According to the WSJ: "Privately, military officials said they believe the artillery attack on South Korea is likely linked to the North Korean succession and could be another attempt by Kim Jong Il's son, Kim Jong Eun, to shore up support among hardliners in the military." On the other hand, Bloomberg reports: "North Korea’s attack on a South Korean island, along with its disclosure of nuclear advances, is part of a strategy to draw the U.S. back to the negotiating table, analysts in the U.S. and Asia say."

Here's Jotman's timeline of recent events concerning the crisis on the Korean Peninsula.

2008 12 --- - Last Six Party Talks held with North Korea.  North Korea pledges to abandon nuclear program.

2009 02 20 - Reports that Kim Jong Un next in line to rule North Korea.
2009 04 --- - North Korea launches rocket, Six Party Talks terminated by US and Japan.

2009 09 11 - South Korea grants wage increase to workers at North Korea's Kaesong Industrial Park

2009 11 10 - North Korean sailor killed in naval skirmish with South (first skirmishes in ten years).

2009 11 18 - Obama, visiting South Korea, will send envoy to North Korea for bilateral talks.

2010 03 10 - KDIC warns North Korean suicide teams might use mini-submarines to attack the South.

2010 03 26 - South Korean patrol ship Cheonan sinks, killing 56 sailors.

2010 03 31 - China supports US call for sanctions against Iran.

2010 05 18 - Seoul blames North Korea for torpedoing of South Korean patrol ship Cheonan.

2010 05 24 - Seoul sanctions North Korea trade, resumes FM broadcasts to North.

2010 05 26 - North Korea cuts naval hotline used to prevent clashes on disputed sea border.
2010 06 --- -  UN Security Council resolution backs curbs on loans to North Korea.

2010 06 21 - Clinton and Gates visit South Korea together.

2010 06 22 - Beijing first protests planned US-South Korean naval exercise in Yellow Sea.

2010 07 01 - China stages military exercise in Yellow Sea.

2010 07 22 - US planning to block North Korean elite's banking funds.

2010 07 25 - Joint US-South Korea "indomitable will"military exercise in Yellow Sea.

2010 08 09 - North Korea fires 100 rounds into waters near islands of Byeongryeong and Yeonpyeon

2010 08 16 - U.S. and South Korea hold "Ulchi freedom fighters" exercise.

2010 08 20 - China warns US that joint US-South Korea exercise will anger Chinese, North Korea.

2010 09 06 - North Korea frees 7 detained South Korean fishermen.

2010 09 07 - Kim Jong Un appointed successor in North Korea.

2010 10 26 - Joint US-South Korean naval exercises delayed indefinitely due to "scheduling problems."

2010 11 10 - Obama arrives in South Korea for G20 summit.

2010 11 20 - US scientist Sigfried Hecker returns from tour of new North Korean nuclear facility.

2010 11 23 - North Koreans call South Korea Command, demanding South halt a military exercise.

- - - - - - - - -  North Korea fires 200 artillery shells at Yeonpyeon Island, killing two.
- - - - - - - - -  South Korea returned fire "almost immediately."  Exchange of fire.
- - - - - - - - -  North Korean news agency says "South recklessly fired into our sea area."
- - - - - - - - -  South Korea says a battery on Byeongryeong (8 miles off coast) fired into sea.

- - - - - - - - -  South Korea's leader threatens "massive retaliation" if it faces "further provocations."
- - - - - - - - -  Stock markets, metal and oil prices fall on Korea situation, Ireland bailout, Portugal worries.

President Obama: judge, jury and executioner

A few years back, I blogged about the Jose Padilla trial.  Padilla, an American citizen charged with terrorism, was sentenced to long jail term despite scant evidence.  With so much fear-mongering in the media about terrorism, it seemed questionable to me whether a terror suspect could have a fair trial in the United States.

In hindsight, we can see that during the presidency of George W. Bush, justice might not have been delivered, but at least the system retained its basic integrity.

The very bad timing of the Victor Bout extradition

The Obama administration has worked hard to improve US-Russian relations.  And its efforts have born fruit with respect not only the signing of the New START treaty in April of this year (which awaits US Senate ratification), but also by having secured Russia's vote at the UN Security Council for a resolution sanctioning Iran.  

Then yesterday the relentless efforts of the US to persuade Thailand to extradite arms dealer Victor Bout-- initiated in 2008 by the Bush Administration--finally paid off.   As they say, you should be careful what you wish for.   The timing of Bout's arrival in the US couldn't be worse.

Corporations make US troops carry too heavy burden

CNN recently posted a video about a human "exoskeleton" designed by a major US defense contractor.  The contraption, which looks like something out of Iron Man, exponentially increases a soldier's strength.  One problem is that it requires a large energy supply.  It's also vulnerable to dust.

An American soldier going by the pseudonym krehator commented on the idea:

I am a soldier. Please, for the love of God, stop giving us more junk to carry. We have too much stuff as it is.   If I posted my hand receipt on this sound off, you would be shocked. For example, I have 12 sets of eye protection! I only have two eyes!

Each time we get new stuff, the military rarely has us turn in the old stuff. It just keeps stacking up. I have 6 duffel bags full of issued gear.  It weighs more than I do, and takes up more room than I do. Do you realize how much money is being spent to transport all this?

Also, the gear is often designed with an original intent, which rarely gets honored by leadership. They favor good looks and uniformity over functionality. Some of the gear we have now was meant to flexible for the individual. However, policies always get put out which negate it. So what is the point?

We wear so much armor and gear in combat it is difficult to move. It slows us down. If forces us the take more breaks. It creates heat risks. That is dangerous! The taxpayers are going to get a surprise in about a decade when all the back injuries start popping up in VA hospitals. Get ready to pay!!!!

Finally, beware of the true motivation behind these new creations. Greedy companies try to act like they care about supporting troops, but in the end, they do it for profit, not patriotism. They will waive any flag that allows them to make money. If we don’t make them money, they’ll just go overseas and make it. They do already.

How might the government be inclined to react to this soldier's observation and insight?   See here.

US wars working to China's advantage in Indonesia?

American actions in the Muslim world complicate US relations with the world's third largest democracy, providing an opening China has been quick to seize. 

In 2008 Jotman travelled to Jakarta in search of Obama's "madrasah" (Photo by Jotman).

NYT on the balance of power in Southeast Asia:

American and Chinese officials have been pursuing all 10 countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, but none more aggressively than Indonesia, the world’s fourth most populous nation, spread out across a strategically important, resource-rich archipelago and now led by a democratically elected government impatient to raise the country’s international profile.

The United States will have to contend with challenges, old and new. Despite Indonesia’s enduring suspicion of China, Beijing has been making great inroads here, economically, diplomatically and militarily. And a newly confident Indonesia has been reasserting its independent foreign policy, promoting what it now calls a “dynamic equilibrium” for the region.

At a September US-ASEAN meeting in New York "Mr. Obama was seeking support in pressing China for a resolution to disputes in the South China Sea."  But President Yudhoyono didn't show up.   How do some Indonesians account for Yudhoyono's absence?

Why Obama, despite giving away influence, pleases so few

I thought Obama's remarks about the protests in Pittsburgh were misplaced.... The president's brazen insensitivity shocked me. Consider the fact that the protesters in Pittsburgh must have included many of the same young people who worked tirelessly throughout 2008 to get Obama elected in the crucial swing state of Pennsylvania. 

- Jotman, Sept. 29, 2009

It would appear as if it's not just volunteers that Obama's staff insults and the president ignores.

I think there are two major reasons people give money to political candidates: One is to feel like they are making a difference, to feel important, to feel a part of something bigger than themselves; the second, to buy influence, to get something they want.   I suspect that many donors who seek influence crave respect more than anything else.   Put another way:  influence can always be negotiated, but a simple "thank you" is expected.  I think to the extent that campaign donors are made to feel validated, treated like they matter (#1), many will forgive not having been granted all the influence they might have hoped to get (#2).

Therefore, it seems to me that a principled yet street-smart Democratic president, one who wanted to do his utmost to serve the interests middle class Americans while working within the inherent limitations of today's donor-centric political system, would want to go out of his way to personally validate donors (#1), while being stingy about giving away influence (#2).   That is what I think an idealistic yet pragmatic progressive politician would want to do.

Burma votes

I've posted links to sites and bloggers providing coverage of Burma's sham elections at ThereLive.