Mike Rowe appeared with Mitt Romney today in Ohio. He spoke with the condition that he was not endorsing anyone and was only there to talk about the issue his foundation MikeRoweWorks focuses on. Dirty Jobs.
Below the orange cloudy thing is the video of his remarks. His remarks start at about the 6:30 mark.
Ed Shultz made a big deal over this on his show today and I kind of see his point. The people Mike talks about in his remarks and the people he works along side with on the show are the same types of people Romney fires or forces to stand behind him as unpaid props while he films campaign ads.
So at first glance I don't see how Rowe could justify standing on the same stage with this guy.
But I do have a theory. He wants to push his idea that there is no shame in cleaning poop out of pipes for a living and I happen to agree with that. The odd part about all of this is that Mike is from San Fransisco and has done probably 20 episodes of Dirty Jobs that focused on Jobs created or funded by stimulus money passed by President Obama. He is well aware of Obama's commitment to workers and infrastructure.
I also think Mike would have stood on stage with President Obama had he been asked too. It seems like Mike wants to inject his thoughts into the national conversation regarding jobs, and maybe jump start that conversation since it has fallen to the wayside a bit. Maybe he will still get a chance to do so with President Obama. If he is truly non-partisan I can't imagine him declining a request to speak at an Obama rally.
Mike said he agreed to speak at Romney's event because Romney answered a letter he sent. A similar letter to the one he sent to President Obama back at the beginning of 2009, a letter he says went unanswered. Now we all know the President was a little busy, but I can imagine Mike getting a little peeved when Obama appeared on an episode of The Myth Busters (which is also on Discovery) but never answered a letter from Mike.
I'm not here to defend Mr. Rowe, just think it helps to look at things from every view point. Honestly I think the only defense of Mike's decision to appear on the same stage with the CEO of BAIN Capital is that speaking to an Obama rally is kind of preaching to the choir. If anyone needed to be told, from a non-partisan source that working people, Government workers, union workers, the down and dirty day to day laborers of this nation are hero's who should be held up as the stewards of modern society, it was that crowd.
Mike made a very Liberal, very Democratic argument in his remarks. That audience needed to hear that argument from a source they couldn't automatically hate and dismiss. So in that way it was kind of win for our side, whether Mike or Romney understand that or not. That said what Mike gets wrong is the idea that there is all this work to be done and nobody willing to do it.
He is right when he says there is a widening gap in trade skills. And he is right when he says there is a lot of unemployment in this country. But he has the timeline wrong.
The jobs left first.
The manufacturing jobs went overseas, then the Government funding for things like "Road Kill Clean Up" and badly needed "infrastructure repairs" were cut and slashed by people in Romney's own party in the name of austerity. People got laid off left and right and suddenly those jobs were not only in short supply, but if that was the only skill you had, you lived in constant fear of losing your job permanently.
Once those jobs are gone, they're gone for good and the ratio of workers to job openings gets even more lopsided.
Seeing that lack of financial support from state, local and federal Governments, a lack of support that continues to this day in GOP lead states like Wisconsin. As well as the lack of foundational support of job security in the private sector, due to exactly the sort of outsourcing Mitt Romney practiced. Results in that type of work being branded as a bad choice for students and adults alike.
If you get out of high school and decide you are going to do "grunt" work for the rest of your life, you are taking a huge risk. Not only will you be more likely to work your body to death without the benefit of health care, or a retirement plan, but you live in constant fear of losing your job to whoever comes along willing to do it for less. You cannot claim a piece of the American dream working for scraps and destroying your body in the process. It doesn't work. Eventually the costs of living, and the costs of keeping yourself alive, add up.
So of course people look for more sustainable or more easily transferable job skills. The old standby jobs like working in a steel mill, or cleaning up environmental waste for the state just aren't there anymore. There are no openings. There haven't been for awhile and the jobs that are still around are on the short list to be cut just as soon as a sweeter deal comes along, or some jackass like Romney needs to justify an expensive tax cut.
For his part Mike was modest and apolitical in his remarks. Fully acknowledging that he wasn't an expert and hadn't studied the problem. But someone needs to let him know that he has it exactly backwards.
Fixing the perception of "dirty work" begins with fixing the nations trade problems, and passing some form of a Jobs bill that focuses on Government work which has been cut dramatically and is seriously holding back the recovery. Until that sort of work is once again seen as a stable and well paying, if still challenging, path to prosperity, people will shy away from learning the skills necessary to do it.
In short the jobs have to come back, the jobs have to pay well and they have to be a lot more stable than they are today before you can expect high school graduates to happily consider that sort of work.
End of Rant.