There is a reason why the political left has worked so hard to control public and higher education in this country. The saying that best describes the strategy is “Those who fail to learn from their history are doomed to repeat it”. If you are never taught the full view of history, or how to think for yourself, then you can never see or understand that there are patterns that clearly show truths about human nature, ideologies, and failed policies that claim the “best of intentions” as a promise but then only claim personal liberty as a result. Control how (and what) people are educated (indoctrinated) and you win over the hearts and minds of the future.

   This along with other strategies such as controlling media, inducing poor economic conditions, limiting opportunities for upward economic mobility, and creating divisions among people are all part (but not all) of the plan to cast off our Constitution for good and remove all limits on the power of the federal government. These strategies are part of what some of us conservatives call the “playbook”. We call it that because just like with sports, if you have the understanding to see the patterns of history repeating itself and you are paying attention, you can recognize the same strategies being employed. Giving a speech about the Obamacare website while the people are asking about Benghazi- running an end around; telling Americans that talks broke down with Iran then two weeks later announce a deal with Iran- play action pass; go on television countless times saying “if you like your….” -all-out blitz, all examples of how there is a strategy being used by these people that there is a “playbook”. The good news is, just like in sports, when you become familiar with their playbook you can design counters to the plays they are running. The first step to countering their actions is always to recognize the play.

   Well the political left is running a triple option against the American people right now as they try to convince low-wage earners that the federal minimum wage should be $10.10 per hour and that quick service restaurant workers should be paid $15 per hour. The first thing that they are trying to do here is further the class-warfare agenda of dividing Americans along economic lines. The second thing is to pivot from the Obamacare debate as the primary topic among Americans so that people stop asking questions and just accept the government power grab that was sold as helping people. The third, and possibly the most concerning, now with Rep. Keith Ellison demanding that Obama raise the federal minimum wage by executive order they are trying to implant the idea that it is somehow acceptable for our President to behave as a tyrant and ignore the rule of law. (Not that Obama hasn’t already ignored the constitutional separation of powers, i.e. delaying the employer mandate in Obamacare)

   This past Thursday, December 5, 2013, Washington D.C. was the site of the “Fast Food Forward” protest. This little protest, and oh yes it was small by way of numbers of people there, was meant to rally quick service restaurant workers to continue with the unrealistic demand of a $15 per hour wage and convince others that this is a reasonable wage for low skill jobs. The U.S. Representative for Minnesota’s 5th congressional district Keith Ellison took a turn at the microphone and said, “We demand it, right now. Mr. President, sign the executive order! Give the pay raise, the livable, fair wage. Let’s do it now.” It’s no surprise that Ellison is willing to say this as he is a professed progressive but it should be very upsetting to the people who elected him to represent them since he doesn’t seem to want them to be represented. No need for Congress if all you need is an executive order and then without Congress there is no representation. Never before this administration, have you heard multiple Congressmen and Senators advocate for bypassing their role in governing and there by bypassing the will of the people to be heard via the congressional process. While it was Rep. Ellison, who happens to be the first Muslim elected to Congress and is the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (like we need a progressive caucus in Congress), who made this call for exceeding the legal authority of the office of President we have heard Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Charley Rangel and others suggest that Obama should just sign an executive order on issues ranging from immigration, healthcare, gun control, and now federal minimum wage just to name a few. What makes it worse is that there is not one of these people who does not know that what they are suggesting is illegal but they do know that there are (sadly) many Americans who do not know that it is illegal.

     The President of the United States may issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Executive orders have the full force of law when they take authority from a power granted directly to the Executive by the Constitution, or are made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress (laws) which explicitly delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power. Just like with statutes or regulations put in place by government agencies, executive orders are subject to judicial review, and may be struck down if deemed by the courts to be unsupported by statute or the Constitution. Major policy initiatives require approval by the legislative branch, but executive orders have significant influence over the internal affairs of government. There is no constitutional provision nor statute that explicitly permits executive orders, however there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II,Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Most executive orders use these Constitutional reasoning as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties, the intent being to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government. All that said, the power of an executive order is very limited and does not have the force of law if the order falls outside the realm of anything not in the Executive Branch’s constitutional listed powers.

   The play here is to get Americans used to the idea of being ruled, not governed but ruled, by executive order. The more these people put the idea out there, the more they believe you will become comfortable with having no voice in D.C. as they pretend to be your voice. That is why they pick issues like immigration and the federal minimum wage to make the argument for executive orders so that they can claim to be fighting for the poor as they try to emotionally link executive orders with things low information voters think that they want (in this case more money). The whole time these so-called progressives know full well that rather than helping the poor these policies actually make things worse for the working poor because of the effects on the job market but those who do not understand it buy into the lie that they are working to help. The pattern here has been seen before in almost every single communist revolution in history. Rally the poor to arms with the promise of making things better for them (always a broken promise) and then grab as much power as you can in the chaos that follows.

   The counter must be to inform everyone. Some won’t listen, but we must all try. We must show everyone the patterns so that the current low information voter can see for themselves the danger to personal freedom of by passing Congress and giving up your voice in our government.    

   For the past few years there has been an effort underway to raise the federal minimum wage from the $7.25 per hour that it has been since July of 2009 to something closer to $10 per hour. The push for this increase hadn’t really gotten much traction in Congress until the last couple of years and now there is “work” being done on a bill that would raise minimum wage above $10 an hour. (With the bill still in development it is unknown right now how much over $10 the desired new pay rate per hour will be. However Obama has used $10.10 as his talking point on the issue.) The charge for the increase is being led by Democrats who are using the “tried & true” battle cry that it’s “for the poor”, which sounds good and plays well with those who don’t understand that it is these same Democrats who have put in place countless barriers to the upward mobility of the economic under-class aka “the poor”.

   All of the arguments about minimum wage (pro and con) aside, Obamacare has done many things to make an increase in wages a moot point for most of the working poor. (After all, it doesn’t matter if the minimum wage is a million dollars per hour if you can’t get a job and as we all know jobs are at a premium in the Obama economy.) We have already seen the reduction in new hires and transition of full time employees to part time employees by companies looking to be ready for the so-called corporate mandate part of Obamacare. (Complete with the spin of hundreds of thousands of jobs created … you know… all of the new part time positions needed to cover the hours once worked by full time employees who had their positions reduced to part time.) Well, as it turns out there is more harm to job prospects for the working poor on the horizon due to the employer mandate and that is the employer’s cost per employee.

   Just like with price increases in energy, transportation, ingredients/parts, and loss (waste, mistakes, and thief), increased payroll costs force businesses of all sizes to reevaluate their policies, procedures and systems in order achieve the highest efficiency levels possible. When the expense of payroll becomes too high companies must find ways to do more with fewer people or they will put themselves out of business when they can no longer balance what they can bring in (how much people are willing to pay for their service or goods) with what they must dole out (what it costs them to do business i.e. power, insurance, and yes payroll, just to name a few). Every company should want to maximize it’s efficiency because that’s where company improvements, wage increases, and profits come from, but no company wants to increase it’s employees work load due to a need to reduce personal; because unhappy employees have a hard time taking pride in their work and employees who do not take pride in their work always cost companies more than they will ever earn for the company.

   How is the employer mandate a problem for low-wage earners finding jobs or keeping the jobs they have now? Well let’s start by looking at the numbers. Obamacare requires employers with 50 or more employees to offer qualifying health coverage (an Obamacare approved plan) to their full-time workers. This health coverage is expensive and that is why so many companies had already made public their plans to either keep their workforce under 50 or to move as many of their employees to a part time status as possible and still meet their customer’s needs . In 2015, when the mandate will take effect, it will add $2.24 per hour to the cost of employing a worker with single coverage (more for family plans). Companies that do not provide coverage will be fined $2,000 per employee per year (after the first 30 workers) that comes out of after-tax dollars. That is a $3,279 increase in pre-tax payroll costs—$1.64 per hour. When you combine federal or state minimum wage rates, payroll taxes, unemployment insurance taxes, and then Obamacare’s employer mandate, employing a worker full-time will cost the employer a minimum of $10.30 an hour. The government has made the hiring of unskilled workers more costly without raising workers’ pay a single cent. (And, just FYI, if the federal minimum wage was to be raised to $10.10 an hour that $10.30 per hour cost to employers becomes $12.71 per hour.)

   Now put yourself in the roll of the hiring manager or small business owner. If each and every employee you hire is going to cost you more than $10 per hour then you are quickly faced with the reality that you need to be far more selective about who you are willing to add to your workforce. Any new hire must be more flexible to the company’s needs and already have at least a good set of both hard and soft skills. This makes entry-level jobs harder to get as normally you get hired for the soft skills and are trained for the hard skills in most entry-level employment. The majority of people use the entry-level jobs as a stepping stone to training which leads to higher pay.

   This mandate will force companies to raise the minimum standards for their entry-level employees. Adding an increase to the federal minimum wage will only force these companies to raise those standards even higher. Many companies will be forced to let go of current employees that are lacking in their skill set and these newly unemployed will be at a disadvantage in seeking other employment because all of the other companies have also raised their minimum requirements for new hires. Here I will remind you that raising minimum wage will do no good for anyone who can not get or keep a job so that they may EARN that wage.

   The point is that Obamacare is even more of a job killer than most conservatives thought it would be and sadly it will hurt the low-wage earners the most. But to the issue of raising the federal minimum wage; Obamacare has, from the employer’s standpoint, already raised it past $10 per hour. The employee will never see the extra cash but your employer is paying it just the same. Beyond that, two thirds of minimum wage workers receive a raise within a year making them no longer minimum wage workers. But more to the point, minimum wage jobs are meant to be entry-level jobs, they are meant to be a stepping stone. At no time has any employer intended for their employees to make a career out of a minimum wage job. And despite the efforts by some this past year to convince quick service restaurant workers that they should be paid $15 per hour for their entry-level positions; if there really is anyone out there that expected to be able to raise a family on a minimum wage, then the problem is with that person not the company that hired them.