Making More In America: How Restoring America’s Manufacturing Strength Can Help Rebuild America’s Middle Class

8/3/2019 Making More In America: How Restoring America’s Manufacturing Strength Can Help Rebuild America’s Middle Class

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/making-more-in-america-how-restoring-americas-manufacturing-strength-can 1/49

Making More in America

How Restoring America’s Manuacturing Strength CanHelp Rebuild America’s Middle Class BY STACEY LAWSON

Paid for by

Stacey Lawson

for Congress



Contents

Introduction 03

AMERICA NEEDS TO MAKE THINGS AGAIN

Priority One 10SMALL BUSINESS

Creating conditions or small businesses to thrive

Priority wo 15GOING LOCALPromoting insourcing and local, niche manuacturing

Priority Tree 21ENERGY

Making our own energy again

Priority Four 27EDUCATION

Retooling our workorce or the 21st century

Priority Five 32INNOVATION

Growing our lead in science and technology

Priority Six 36MODERNIZING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE

Equipping the country’s workorce with working inrastructure

Priority Seven 42MIDDLE-CLASS BUYING POWER

Accelerating demand or “Made in America”

Conclusion 48

STACEY LAWSON is an educator, small business owne

and candidate or Congress in

Caliornia’s new 2nd District. Stace

is standing up or the shrinking

middle class and fghting to re-ope

the doors o American opportunity

or everyone, because she lived

it — growing up in a blue-collar

town, earning an education and the

launching a series o innovative

small businesses.

Stacey’s very frst company

developed technology to help

American manuacturers design

better products and stay competitiv

globally, helping to create and kee

new middle-class jobs in America.

She also co-ounded and teaches

at the Center or Entrepreneurship

& Technology at UC Berkeley, one

o the nation’s leading centers o

economic innovation, small busines

advocacy and incubation.



Introduction

America needs to make things again. Why? Because the kinds

o jobs that can send kids to college and provide a secure

retirement are not minimum-wage jobs. Creating high-wage

jobs, middle-class jobs and steady year-round jobs will take

revitalizing the American manuacturing economy.

Te average wage or manuacturing work in America is 20 percent higher than

the national average wage1 — a premium

that reects the tremendous value added to

our economy by the manuacturing sector.

Each manuacturing job produces up to our

downstream jobs and, according to a recent

report, each $1 spent in manuacturing

creates $1.43 in other sectors.2 Tat’s a

“multiplier eect” nearly twice that o other

parts o our economy.3

A healthy manuacturing sector isn’t just

important to individuals looking or high-

wage employment—it is vital to the long-term

health and security o our national economy.

Manuacturing and technological

innovation are so closely linked that

manuacturing is still the principal source o

innovation in the United States. I we don’t

keep innovating, our economy will all behind

and millions more Americans will drop

out o the middle class. Since innovation is

driven by the manuacturing sector, a healthy

economic uture starts with restoring the

health o American manuacturing.

Manuacturing is one o the ew sources o

steady and secure jobs or those who do not

graduate rom our-year colleges. A air and

just economy means creating opportunity

or everyone, not just those who earn college

degrees or, increasingly, advanced degrees.Spurring manuacturing is one o the ways we

can help reverse the rapidly growing equality

gap in our country that has seen the rich get

dramatically richer and virtually everyone

else all behind.

Manuacturing is key to restoring our

balance o trade. I we don’t make things,

we can’t sell things to other nations. Why

does that matter? Because in the long term,

it means other countries gain more and

more power and more inuence over our

economic well-being. I we want to control

FACT

FACT

$1.00

$1.43

1

Making the case for making more in America

manuacturing

job produces

downstream jo

4

spent on

manuacturingcreates

in other

sectors o our

economy

3



our economic uture, we must restore our

balance o trade.

And perhaps most importantly,

manuacturing know-how is a “use it or lose

it” proposition. I we stop making things, we

lose the knowledge base and the workorcethat knows how to make things. We need

the kind o skilled workorce that has the

technical knowledge manuacturing requires,

the engineers and innovators who help drive

product development and the practical

applications that come rom a robust

manuacturing economy.

Te Power of Buying Local

Manuacturing isn’t just big actories anymore.Te “buy local” and “maker” movements have

shown the tremendous economic and creative

energies released, and the environmental

benets gained, when we stay local.

When we buy a piece o urniture that was

made by a local carpenter in Del Norte County,

we keep those dollars at home, we keep those

skills local, we keep a neighbor in steady

middle-class employment and we keep carbon

emissions out o our atmosphere.

And i we buy that musical instrument

rom a small shop in Humboldt, it doesn’t just

keep our local dollars local; it keeps trucks

o the road and giant cargo planes out o the

sky. And it keeps, or creates, new skills here

at home.

When we buy local wine rom a

Mendocino vineyard, we can see orourselves how those grapes were grown—

and understand i they were harvested in a

sustainable ashion.

When a skilled machinist makes tools and

other high value-add products in Sonoma

County, the supply chain created sets o a

virtuous cycle that has actually been shown

to help raise other wages, even o those not

in the manuacturing sector. We know that

spending $100 at an independent business puts $68 back into the local community,

versus only $43 when the same $100 is spent

at a national chain.4 Te same thing happens

when we do more than shop locally — when

we make things locally. We create jobs and

opportunity right here at home.

A Path to the Middle Class

I grew up in a logging town on the coast

o Washington. When I was young, we

lived in a trailer, like a lot o amilies in

our community, struggling as the natural

FACT

Spending

$100 at an

independent

business puts

back into the

local community,

versus only

when the

same $100

is spent at a

national chain.

$43

$68

Employment in millions, seasonally adjusted

1 9 6 0

1 9 6 2

1 9 6 4

1 9 6 6

1 9 6 8

1 9 7 0

1 9 7 2

1 9 7 4

1 9 7 6

1 9 7 8

1 9 8 0

1 9 8 2

1 9 8 4

1 9 8 6

1 9 8 8

1 9 9 0

1 9 9 2

1 9 9 4

1 9 9 6

1 9 9 8

2 0 0 0

2 0 0 2

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 8

2 0 1 0

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

10

12

14

16

18

20

DECLINE IN MANUFACTURING JOBS SINCE THE THE 196 0s

Te loss o

manuacturing

jobs in the U.S. is

directly related

to the shrinking

middle class.

4



resource economy began to shrink.

Our amily wanted the same kind o

opportunities most o us dream about. My

mom and dad wanted a house they could

own themselves. Tey wanted to be able to

send us to college. Tey hoped, one day, tobe able to retire in security and dignity. Tey

didn’t dream about riches — they just wanted

the American dream o a middle-class lie.

And they got it. My dad started a small

trucking company. He took a risk. And it paid

o or him, my amily and me.

With the help o scholarships, government

education loans and access to great public

schools and universities, I was able to go to

college, earn a degree in chemical engineering

and then an advanced degree. I was able to

succeed because my parents were able to build

a secure economic oundation.

What came next or me was a path

made possible by American opportunity.

Ater nishing graduate school, I started a

company that created technology to help

U.S. manuacturers compete in the global

marketplace. Tis was around the time

when American manuacturing started to

shrink. I wanted to help keep the American

manuacturing economy alive. I’m proud we

helped so many companies stay competitive,

so they could stay here in America and keep

high-wage jobs here at home.I went on to co-ound the Center or

Entrepreneurship and echnology at UC

Berkeley. My mission as an educator is

to keep and promote the skills it takes to

maintain America’s lead in innovation and

technology. You know what we have ound?

Long-term economic success isn’t just about

having the engineering skills to design new

products, or the nancial capital to bring

them to market — you also need the skills to

make these products yoursel.

We can’t “outsource” our way to prosperity.

We need to do more than design and consume

products. We need to make things again.

Te Shrinking Middle Class

My story is one that millions o Americans

could tell — or used to be able to tell. Te

challenge today is that the middle class is

Te “buy local”

and “maker”movements

have shown the

tremendous

economic and

creative energies

released, and the

environmental

benefts gained,

when we stay

local.

5



shrinking dramatically — and that adds to

our income gap, it hinders economic growth,

and it takes away the kind o opportunities

that we used to take or granted.

Since 2000, America has lost nearly one

third o its manuacturing jobs, a loss directly

related to the shrinking o the middle class.

Tis recent decline is only an acceleration o

a long-term trend — with manuacturing jobs

alling rom 27 percent o our workorce in

1970 to just over 10 percent today.5

We are proud o our ability to design

products like the iPad —but history shows

that innovation is linked to manuacturing

skills, and i you lose the manuacturing

skills you will eventually lose your

technological edge. And, perhaps most

dangerous o all, this new “winners and

losers” economy has started to undermine

the very idea o the American dream — the

ideal that everyone has the opportunity or

a better lie i they are willing to study well

and work hard.

With just a very ew gaining more and

more economic power, and the rest o

America alling behind, we just can’t be

sure that ideal is still true.

Tat’s why we need to start restoring

the kind o high-wage jobs that are the

oundation o a sustainable economic

recovery, not just or Wall Street, but also or

the Main Streets up and down our district

and throughout our country.

Reasons for Hope

As tough as the American economy is right

now, there is reason or hope when it comes

to Making More in America. Even without a

coherent national policy, our manuacturing

sector is coming back to lie.

Over the past two years, the economy

has added 334,000 manuacturing jobs — the

strongest two‐year period o manuacturing

job growth since the late 1990s.6

Manuacturing production grew 5.7

percent on an annualized basis since its

June 2009 low, the astest pace o growth

o production in a decade.7 But we are ar

rom recovering the more than two million

manuacturing jobs lost in the recession.

FACT

I 20% o

jobs were

in the

manuacturing

sector (like

they were

in 1970),

we wouldcreate 12

million new

manuacturing

jobs and 30

million new

support jobs.

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Percentage change in income since 1979, adjusted for ination

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Top 1 Percent

81st – 99th Percentiles

21st – 80th Percentiles

Lowest Quintile

CUMULATIVE GROWTH IN AVERAGE

AFTER-TAX INCOME, BY INCOME GROUP

Te distribution o

ater-tax income becamesubstantially more unequal

rom 1979 to 2007 as a

result o a rapid rise in

income or the highest-

income households,

sluggish income growth

or the middle 60 percent

o the population, and an

even smaller increase in

ater-tax income or the 20

percent o the population

with the lowest income.

Source: Congressional Budget Ofce

6



Part o this growth is driven by the

incredible productivity o the American worker.

Relative costs in the U.S. have improved with

productivity growth: U.S. manuacturing

productivity—which has always been strong—

continues to improve, rising nearly 13 percentsince the frst quarter o 2009.8 Combined

with an increased cost o labor elsewhere in

the world, it is now more cost-competitive to

invest in American manuacturing workers.

A series o identiable smart actions

and choices by business leaders, educators,

and policymakers could lead to a robust,

manuacturing-driven economic uture.

Alternatively, i the U.S. manuacturing sector

remains neglected, our manuacturing

capabilities could then erode past the point o

no return.

O course we are not going to bring every

manuacturing job back. Tat is a reality. And

we might not want to invest our resources in

reviving extremely low-paying manuacturing

jobs. But we can target high-wage and high-

value jobs that keep hardworking amilies

in the middle class and expand markets or

locally-made goods.

Te upside to bringing these jobs home

can be calculated —and it is signicant. For

example, i we could return to the level o

the late 1970s when about 20 percent o jobs

were in the manuacturing sector — we would

create 12 million new jobs directly and spur

another 30 million new jobs in downstream

support services.9

Why is that number so important? Because

that’s just about the number o jobs we need

to restore and create over the next ten years to

get back to ull employment in the U.S.

Plans versus Politics

O course, we’ve heard our politicians

talk about jobs almost endlessly. But the

problem is that most o them don’t have

much experience in the undamentals o

how to create high-wage jobs and how to

restore economic balance. So many o their

campaigns are unded by Wall Street, the big

banks and giant corporations, that perhaps

they eel beholden. Others have spent their

careers in government ofce — which is a

noble calling — but one that emphasizes

quick xes and sound bites over the kind o

economic undamentals we need to restore

the middle class and create economic

airness in the long term.

Tat’s why I am running or Congress.

And that’s why I am oering my plans or

restoring the American manuacturing

economy.

I’m running because I know — rom

my own lie, my own experiences helping

American manuacturers succeed and my

own career in education working to promote

innovation and technology — we need more

than promises. We need a robust plan to

restore the middle class, starting with the jobs

that sustain the middle class — manuacturing

employment.

My plan can be broken down into seven

major priorities — and I would like to discuss

these briey in the pages ahead. Because I

Restoring our

manuacturing

strength is key

to rebuilding

America’s

middle classand re-opening

the doors o

opportunity or

all Americans.

7



have actually worked to create jobs and spark

innovation, I know that this won’t be easy.

But I have incredible aith in the American

economy, and the American worker, because

I know we are still the best trained, most

creative, most motivated and most innovative people on Earth. Here are seven simple

priorities to help us stay that way.

One o the oundational priciples o my

campaign is the belie that politicians don’t

have all the aswers — but there are answers

out there i we bother to ask and listen.

Let’s get the conversation going. Here

are some o my ideas to get our riends and

neighbors back to work. What do you think?

What are your ideas? What’s right, or wrong,

about the ideas proposed here?

Let me know — you can email me at

[email protected]— and I’ll share your ideas with our growing community.

I’l l be releasing more proposals in

the months ahead — but creating new

middle-class jobs by restoring America’s

manuacturing economy is my rst

priority, which is why I have presented

these proposals rst.

S E VENPRIORITIES FOR RESTORING

OUR MANUFACTURING ECONOMY

1 Creating conditions or small businesses to thrive

2 Promoting insourcing and local, niche manuacturing

3 Making our own energy again

4 Retooling our workorce or the 21st century

5 Growing our lead in science and technology

6 Equipping the country’s workorce with working inrastructure

7 Accelerating demand or “Made in America”

8



1 Michael Ettlinger and Kate Gordon, “Te Importance and Promise o American Manuacturing, Why It Matters

i We Make It in America and Where We Stand oday,” (Center or American Progress, April 2011), available at

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/04/pd/manuacturing.pd.

2 Manuacturing Matters o Te U.S., Manuacturing Jobs Matter to US: A Union Member’s Handbook or Improvingthe Future o Manuacturing Jobs and the Manuacturing Industry in the U.S.,” (Working or America Institute),

available at http://www.workingoramerica.org/documents/PDF/sloan_report_revised.pd.

3 Ibid.

4 “Te Andersonville Study o Retail Economics,” (Civic Economics, October 2004, Modied February 2005), available

at http://www.civiceconomics.com/Andersonville/AndersonvilleStudy.pd.

5 “Report to the President on Ensuring American Leadership in Advanced Manuacturing,” (Executive Ofce to the

President and President’s Council o Advisors on Science and echnology, June 2011), available at

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/deault/les/microsites/ostp/pcast-advanced-manuacturing-june2011.pd .

6 “Investing in America: Building an Economy Tat Lasts,” (White House report, January 2012), available at

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/deault/les/investing_in_america_report_nal.pd.7 Ibid.

8 “A Vision or Economic Renewal: An American Jobs Agenda,”

(Te ask Force on Job Creation and New America Foundation, July 2011), available at

http://newamerica.net/sites/newamerica.net/les/events/Economic-askorce-booklet_FINAL.pd.

9 Ibid.

Sources

9

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-advanced-manufacturing-june2011.pdf




DURING THE 2001 ECONOMIC CRISIS,

small businesses o ewer than twenty

employees lost ewer jobs and recovered

aster than large rms.1 Tat’s just one

example o why economists and policy makers agree — investing in our small

businesses is investing in the bedrock o

the American economy.

From 1993 to 2009, as reported by

the Small Business Association Ofce o

Advocacy in the 2011 Economic Report o

the President, “small rms accounted or

9.8 million o the 15 million net new private

sector jobs,” or “nearly two out o every three

o the period’s net new jobs.”2

Demonstrably,during periods o normal economic growth,

small businesses create enough new jobs to

compensate or job losses created when new

companies ail.3 By investing in our small

businesses, we invest in one o the most

promising sectors or job growth.

And it shouldn’t be lost on us that these

new and expanding small businesses create

one o the most direct paths to the kind o

middle class security we need to promote.Tat’s the path my amily took — as my

ather scraped together a ew dollars to buy a

hauling truck and eventually leveraged that

into the kind o small business that helped

him buy a home and send his kids to college.

In an economy still reeling rom the

eects o Wall Street speculation, promoting

small businesses is a way to also promote

the rock-solid mainstreet companies that are

accountable to their communities — becausethey are part o our commuities.

PRIORITY ONE Small Business Creating conditionsfor small businessesto thrive

FACT

the amount

o additional

investment into

the American

economy that

would result

rom the edera

government

increasing its

percentage o

spending with

small businesse

rom

to

23%

30%

$100BILLION

32

21

14

12

6

8

4

4

Notes: “Other” inc ludes is sues such as ina tion and qualit y of labo r. Data are an a verage of mo nthly Nati onal Fed eration o f Indepe ndent Busine ss surve ys from 2 009. S ources: D unkelbe rg and Wade (2010); CEA calcul ations

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

POOR SALES

TAXES

OTHER

GOVERNMENT

REQUIREMENTS

INSURANCE

COST/AVAILABILITY

COMPETITION FROM

LARGE BUSINESSES

FINANCIAL AND

INTEREST RATES

COST OF LABOR

PROBLEMS FACING SMALL BUSINESSES

10



Everywhere, but particularly in the

manuacturing sector, these small businesses

are wellsprings o innovation. And ultimately

it is innovation that will help bring back more

high-wage manuacturing jobs.

1 Improve access

to capital

Restoring our manuacturing sector — and

restoring our overall economic vitality —

requires expanding the credit available to

small businesses to ensure that they have the

resources necessary to weather economically

challenging times and to invest in growth.

Small businesses receive approximately

ninety percent o their nancing rom

banks, where larger rms are only reliant

on banks or about thirty percent o their

nancing.4 But with the recession, banks have

become hesitant to lend to small businesses,

especially at the rate they were previously.

Small business owners have also

historically drawn upon home equity and

credit cards to support their companies

nancially.5 With the collapse o the housing

bubble, home equity extraction is no longer

available to small business owners in the

same way.6

In addition, nearly eighty percent o small

business owners have reported that their

credit card terms have changed or the worse.7

Since the economic recession, 68 percent o

small business owners reported an increase in

their interest rate and 41 percent reported a

reduction in their credit limit.8

Expanding the availability o resources

to small businesses would provide some

much-needed nancial relie. Te passage

and implementation o the 2009 Recovery Act

had a remarkable impact on lending to small

business by utilizing basic tools available.

While more lenders now are making loans

to small businesses since the implementation

o the Recovery Act, we can do more —starting

with increasing the cap or small business

loans to allow small business owners to move

Economists and policy makers agree that investing in America’s small

businesses is investing in the bedrock o the American economy.

11



orward with their businesses in these

economically rough times.9 By increasing

their companies’ access to capital we will

be able to support this great part o our

economy. Te government should continue

to incentivize lending to small businesses

and responsibly expand the lending limits

to small businesses to give small businesses

a chance to breathe in these tough

economic times.

2Leverage government

purchasing power

Te ederal government should leverage

the trillions o dollars already being spent

to create hundreds o thousands more jobs by increasing ederal purchases rom

small businesses, particularly those with

sustainable environmental and social

practices.

At this point, only 23 percent o ederal

government contracts are required to

be awarded to small businesses.10 With

the credit crunch and a contraction in

consumer demand, small businesses are

seeing a double squeeze. According to a project co-sponsored by the Brookings

Institution and the Small Business

Administration, i the ederal government

increased its percentage o spending

with American small businesses rom 23

percent to 30 percent, the result would

be an additional $100 billion investment

into the American economy annually—

helping to spur an increase in job growth

and solidiy the economic sustainability

or American businesses.11

3Cultivate regional

economic clusters

Across the country, we have seen the

evolution o regional economic clusters

like Silicon Valley. Geographic centering

o research and development has been

proven to increase the quality

and quantity o the developments

produced.12

Te Brookings Institution has

documented this phenomenon:

“It is now broadly afrmed that

strong clusters oster innovation

through dense knowledge

ows and spillovers, strengthen

entrepreneurship by boosting new

enterprise ormation and start-up

survival, enhance productivity,

income-levels, and employment

growth in industries, and positively

inuence regional economic

perormance.”13 Regions like the North Coast

have domain expertise in areas such

as sustainable agriculture, ood

production, and natural resource

utilization (e.g. orest restoration,

rainwater catchment, stream

rehabilitation, biomass and biouels,

to name a ew). Tose strengths

should be used to position the region

advantageously so that the resourcesand skills there are harnessed.

4Foster small

business workshops

One o the greatest problems or

many small business owners today

is the lack o guidance and support

on how to weather the current

period o contraction and loss.

Small business proponents have

recommended the government oster

programs to bring small businesses

together either in a collaborative way

or through workshops to provide

them with inormation on how

to navigate the rougher times.14

Providing inormation to and

educating small business owners

BANK LOANS

TO SMALL

BUSINESSES

Small businesses receive

approximately ninety percent

o their fnancing rom banks,

but with the recession, banks

have become hesitant to

lend to small businesses,

especially at the rate they

were previously.

Value

of loans

in billions

of dollars

Number

of loans

in millions

2 0 0 7

2 0 0 8

2 0 0 9

2 0 1 0

710

700

690

680

670

660

650

640

630

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

12



on the resources available to them can go a

long way to helping to alleviate the burden

o the current economic downturn. Breaking

down the bureaucratic barriers in our system

and bringing the inormation to the people

can help to prevent unnecessary losses in oursmall business sector.

From expanding the lending limits to

small businesses, to supporting local markets

and educating our small business owners,

sponsoring eorts that help bolster this

undamental part o our economy can put

America back on track.

1 MY PRIORITIES FOR CREATING CONDITIONS

FOR SMALL BUSINESSES TO THRIVE

1 Improve access to capital

2 Leverage government purchasing power

3 Cultivate regional economic clusters

4 Foster small business workshops

13



1 “Report to the President, Small Business Financing Forum,” (U.S. Department o the reasury and the U.S. Small Business

Administration, November 2009), available at http://archive.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/small_buss_nan_

orum_report.pd .

2 “Economic Report to the President,” (Council o Economic Advisors, 2011), available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/cea/economic-report-o-the-President.

3 Ibid.



orum_report.pd .



orum_report.pd.

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

8 Ibid.

9 Ibid.

10 Martin Neil Baily, Karen Dynan, and Douglas J. Elliott, “Te Future o Small Business Entrepreneurship: Jobs Generator or the U.S.

Economy,” (Te Brookings Institution, June 2010), available at http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2010/0604_innovation_small_business.

aspx.

11 Ibid.

12 Darrell West, “echnology and the Innovation Economy,” (Te Brookings Institution, October 2011), available at http://www.

brookings.edu/papers/2011/1019_technology_innovation_west.aspx#_edn1.

13 Mark Muro and Bruce Katz, “Te New “Cluster Moment”: How Regional Innovation Clusters Can Foster the Next Economy,” (Te

Brookings Institution, September 2010), available at http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2010/0921_clusters_muro_katz.aspx.



orum_report.pd .

Sources

14

http://archive.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/small_buss_finan_forum_report.pdf


http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/cea/economic-report-of-the-President


http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/2011_erp_chapter7.pdf
















WE NEED TO INVEST IN WHAT WE DO BEST

HERE, AT HOME. We are a country whose

middle class was built by the manuacturing

sector. And growth in the manuacturingsector has a ripple eect, resulting in up to

our new job opportunities in other sectors

or each new job in manuacturing. Yet,

manuacturing now accounts or only about

11.2 percent o our gross domestic product; in

1950, it comprised 27 percent o our GDP.1

1Support locally relevant

niche manuacturing

In the past three decades, while large-scalemanuacturing has moved oshore, niche

manuacturing, or manuacturing products

on a specialized level, has by many accounts

weathered the economic storm. Whether in

Brooklyn, New York, Florida or on the North

Coast o Caliornia, the story is the same —

the niche-manuacturing sector is surviving,

and with the right kind o support, could help

lead our regions back to economic security.2

Even in the lead-up to the recession,

niche manuacturing was bucking the overalllong-term trends in manuacturing. For

example, the loss in jobs and wages rom

niche manuacturers going out o business

was largely made up or by the growth in

employment and wages in the industry

as a whole.3 Niche manuacturing is also

something the North Coast does well.

From Lost Coast Brewery, to Cowgirl

Creamery, to Wing Inflatables o Arcata,

these companies and many more have helpedto put niche manuacturing at the ore o the

North Coast economy.

PRIORITY TWO Going Local Promoting

insourcing and

local, niche

manufacturing

Experts say that with

the right kind o

support, the niche-

manuacturing sector

can help lead regions

like Caliornia’sNorth Coast back to

economic security.

FACT

The averagewage increase

in the North

Coast niche-

manufactur-

ing sector:

7%

15



In the North Coast niche-manuacturing sector, we

have recently seen an average wage increase o around

seven percent and an employment drop o less than

one percent, while the sector as a whole is contributing

a ull ourteen percent to the base economy payroll.4

Local entrepreneurship is an important part o the North

Coast’s identity and economy, and niche manuacturing is

very much a part o that story.

Niche manuacturing hinges on consumers appreciating

the quality o the product being produced. Because it is a

sector that emphasizes extreme specialization and occurs

on a small scale, consumers tend to perceive it as more

expensive. It is not necessarily the case that U.S.-based

production yields a more expensive product, though.

So let’s invest in what we

do well: niche manuacturing.

Let’s grow jobs at home.

Let’s make American-

made products again. Let’s

reinvigorate the American

middle class, a class that

grew in the middle o the

last century largely because

o the manuacturing sector,

with a twenty-rst century

manuacturing sector.

2Incentivize

insourcing

A conversation about the uture

o our manuacturing sector is

meaningless without a sincere

glance at the relationship

between the U.S. economy and

global markets.

According to the President’s

2011 rade Policy Agenda,

“Ninety-ve percent o

consumers reside beyond our

borders, and the International

Monetary Fund orecasts thatnearly 83 percent o world

growth over the next ve years

will take place outside o the

United States. o reach our ull

potential or employment and

economic growth, America must

engage globally to sell more

goods and services abroad.”5

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Manufacturing value added a s a share of total U.S. GDP, 1960–2009

U.S. gross manufacturing value added as share of world

Above Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis ; Below Source: United Nati ons

1 9 7 0

1 9 7 2

1 9 7 4

1 9 7 6

1 9 7 8

1 9 8 0

1 9 8 2

1 9 8 4

1 9 8 6

1 9 8 8

1 9 9 0

1 9 9 2

1 9 9 4

1 9 9 6

1 9 9 8

2 0 0 0

2 0 0 2

2 0 0 4

2 0 0 6

2 0 0 8

1

9 6 0

1

9 6 2

1

9 6 4

1

9 6 6

1

9 6 8

1

9 7 0

1

9 7 2

1

9 7 4

1

9 7 6

1

9 7 8

1

9 8 0

1

9 8 2

1

9 8 4

1

9 8 6

1

9 8 8

1

9 9 0

1

9 9 2

1

9 9 4

1

9 9 6

1

9 9 8

2

0 0 0

2

0 0 2

2

0 0 4

2

0 0 6

2

0 0 8

U.S. MANUFACTURING: A SMALLER

SHARE OF ECONOMY

U.S. MANUFACTURING: A S MALLER SHARE

OF WORLDWIDE MANUFACTURING

16



Te United States is a global leader, but

our competitive edge in international markets

is slipping. We have seen some positive signs

o economic improvement in the past two

years. Insourcing is a recent phenomenon

exemplied by companies that have shited orconsidered shiting production abroad, but are

now producing in the United States. We need

to harness the actors ostering this growth

to ensure that the trends continue to avor

growth here at home.

Tese actors include an improved ability

by the United States to compete with other

countries in the cost o production — due in

part to the increased cost o labor elsewhere

helping to level the playing eld or U.S.labor. In addition to the relative decrease in

the cost o labor in the U.S., the increase in

the production o modestly priced natural

gas — locally sourced energy — has made

investing in production stateside even

less expensive. Furthermore, the business

services located in the United States are also

becoming increasingly marketable abroad

as economies in emerging markets continue

to grow. Te expanded tradability o these

services has led to an aggressive growth o

rms in business services.6

Tese actors result in new nancial

incentives or rms to locate in the United

States. Te White House oers the ollowing

examples:

“In 2010, KEEN, the ootwear designer,

opened a 15,000-square-oot acility to

manuacture boots in Portland, Oregon—

moving production rom China to a

location just ve miles rom its corporate

headquarters. Te company also makes bags

in Caliornia and socks in North Carolina.7

“Ater watching costs rise in its Chinese

actories, Master Lock began bringing

production back to Milwaukee — the same

place where the company was ounded

in 1921.”8

Tese success stories are the beginning

o a positive development or our

manuacturing sector. Yet, we can do even

more by expanding existing tax credits or

companies that base their production in the

United States and by continuing to provide

companies with a top-notch workorce.

We can also be more strategic in these

credits — targeting the kind o high-wage jobs

we seek in the industries that show the most

long-term promise.

3Extend credit to

manuacturers

Much like with small businesses, it is

important to ensure that we extend

resources and support to manuacturers

in weathering the economic crisis and

continue to invest in research, development

and engineering (RD&E) to remain

competitive. As credit rom lenders has

become more difcult to acquire, the ederal

government needs to step in to protect

Companies like Lost Coast Brewery, Cowgirl Creamery

Wing Inflatables o Arcata – and many more – have

helped to put niche manuacturing at the ore o the

North Coast economy.

17



our manuacturing sector rom a drying

well o credit. Tere is no shortage o good

proposals:

Senator Sherrod Brown o Ohio

recommended a ederal program to providea $30 billion dollar revolving loan und or

manuacturers.9 Tis und would provide

manuacturers with the immediate resources

to improve their energy efciency, update

their actories, and und the necessary

training o workers on the new energy

efcient technology.10

Te Manuacturing Extension

Partnership program is also a key proposal.11

Housed within the Department o Commerce’s

National Institute o Standards and

echnology, the Manuacturing Extension

Partnership program helps manuacturers

improve their competitive edge, both in local

and international markets.12 Tis program is

projected to cost about $1.5 billion.13

And the Investments in Manuacturing

Progress and Clean echnology Act could

yield 680,000 manuacturing jobs and

subsequently an additional nearly two million

new jobs in other sectors.14

I support a Locally-Sourced

Manuacturing ax Credit to support local

businesses that can help drive growth in

ways that will allow communities to rebuild

themselves rom within. Te economic

crisis claried the points o vulnerability

in the American economy. By bolstering

sel-reliance within communities, those

communities develop more resilient

economies, no longer dependent entirely

or largely on oreign markets or goods to

produce their nished products. Furthermore

such a tax credit would be another way o

unding the growth o small businesses.

And I propose a new $20 billion

loan guarantee program to stimulate

small businesses and get liquidity out o

the banks to small businesses at minimal

risk to taxpayers. Te program would be

administered by an existing agency like the

Small Business Administration and loan

decisions would be required to be made by

those best qualied to assess risk.

4Get tougher on trade

agreement enorcement

Tere are a tremendous number o trade

laws on the books that exist to regulate the

ow o goods between our country and the

rest o the world. Tese trade laws are only

important and meaningul, though, i they

are enorced. Bill Clinton’s Back to Work cites

the growth o unenorced trade policies.15

Te lack o enorcement means that

U.S. goods and services are subject to

the eects o currency manipulation,

unair dumping practices, unregulated

labor and environmental standards,

intellectual property inringement and other

disadvantages.

In many cases, our leverage to enorce

trade policy is compromised given our

current, problematic nancial positioning

with countries like China. Currently,

according to a report by the United States

FACT

Today, manuacturing accounts or

only 11.2 percent o our Gross

Domestic Product; in 1950, it comprised

27 percent o our GDP.

18



Department o reasury, as o November

2011, China held $1.13 trillion in U.S.

government debt, ar and beyond the largest

holder o our national debt.17 Te close-knit

nature o this relationship makes moving

orward challenging. We need to work both to balance our

budget so we are less nancially beholden

to trade partners, and we need to continue

to enorce trade agreements that are on

the books. Failing to uphold our trade

agreements, the very documents intended to

protect the American economy, will continue

to put us at a disadvantage. Our economy canonly grow i we ensure that it competes on a

level playing eld with our trading partners.

2 MY PRIORITIES FOR PROMOTING INSOURCING

AND LOCAL, NICHE MANUFACTURING

1 Support locally relevant niche manuacturing

2 Incentivize insourcing

3 Extend credit to manuacturers

4 Get tougher on trade agreement enorcement

19



Sources

1 “Report to the President on Ensuring American Leadership in Advanced Manuacturing,” (Executive Ofce to the President and

President’s Council o Advisors on Science and echnology, June 2011), available at

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/deault/les/microsites/ostp/pcast-advanced-manuacturing-june2011.pd .

2 Christine Haughney, “In New York, No Crisis or Niche Manuacturers,” (Te New York imes, January 10, 2009) available athttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/nyregion/11manuacture.html?pagewanted=all.

3 Ibid.

4 “State o the Industry Report 2007; Manuacturing,” (North Coast Prosperity, 2007), available at

http://www.northcoastprosperity.com/les/webm/contents/MgSIR.pd.

5 “2011 rade Policy Agenda and 2010 Annual Report o the President o the United States on the rade Agreements Program,” (Ofce o

the United States rade Representative, 2011), available at http://www.ustr.gov/2011_trade_policy_agenda.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/deault/les/investing_in_america_report_nal.pd.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/deault/les/investing_in_america_report_nal.pd.

8 Ibid.

9 “Brown, Policy Matters Ohio Discuss Steps or Job Creation and Future o Ohio Manuacturing,”

(Sherrod Brown United States Senator or Ohio, February 2010), available at

http://brown.senate.gov/newsroom/press_releases/release/?id=abd4a0de-5160-4164-9b5b-121ab0571393.

10 “Building the Clean Energy Assembly Line: How Renewable Energy Can Revitalize U.S.

Manuacturing and the American Middle Class,” (Blue Green Alliance, November 2009), available at

http://www.bluegreenalliance.org/admin/publications/les/BGA-Phase-II-Report-PRIN.pd.

11 “Te National Institute o Standards and echnology’s Manuacturing Extension Partnership Program, Report 1,” (National Academy

o Public Administration, September 2003), available at http://www.nist.gov/mep/upload/napa_1-2.pd.

12 Ibid.13 Ibid.

14 “Brown, Policy Matters Ohio Discuss Steps or Job Creation and Future o Ohio Manuacturing; Senator Outlines New Bill Providing

ax Incentives to Employers that Hire Unemployed Workers, Next Steps or Jobs Legislation,” (Sherrod Brown United States Senator or

Ohio Press Release, February 2010), available at

http://brown.senate.gov/newsroom/press_releases/release/?id=abd4a0de-5160-4164-9b5b-121ab0571393.

15 Bill Clinton, Back to Work: Why We Need Smart Government or a Strong Economy, (Alred A. Knop, 2011).

16 “Major Foreign Holders o reasury Securities (in billions o dollars) Holdings 1/ At Te End O Period,” (U.S. Department o the

reasury, January 2012), available at http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mh.txt.

20





AS WE PURSUE A POLICY TO RESTORE

the strategically imperative high-wage

manuacturing sector to the American

economy, there is one vital raw material that

we can start making more o in America —

and that is renewable energy.Tere are many reasons to make our own

energy. ransitioning rom our dependence

on ossil uels to more sustainable, low-

impact energy sources is simultaneously an

environmental imperative, a national security

issue and an urgent economic necessity:

By making more renewable energy we

lower the greenhouse gas levels contributing

to global warming and environmental

degradation.

By making more o our own energy, we

lower the “oil subsidy” we now pay to many

nations that would do us harm. Ultimately

that means a saer America and billions o

dollars each year in savings rom money

we now spend to keep oil shipment routes

secure.

By making our own energy, we stimulate

our long-term economic recovery — and stop

the ow o high-wage jobs that inevitably

ollows the billions o dollars we currently send

overseas to buy energy we could make right

here at home.

We will be talking in this campaign about

these important benets — but or the purpose

o this proposal, let’s ocus on the immediate,

mid-term and long-term economic benets

o investing in American renewable energy

production and energy conservation.

1Reduce energy consumption

and spur green-collar jobs through

building retrofts

A key part o restoring high-wage

manuacturing to the U.S. is restoring the

buying power o the American consumer —

and that means getting more Americans

back to work as ast as possible. As green-

jobs advocate Van Jones has pointed out, one

o the most compelling reasons to support

a green economy is that most o these jobs

can’t be outsourced — they must, literally, be

perormed right here at home.1

PRIORITY THREE Energy Making our ownenergy again

Green energy

retroft jobs

cannot be

outsourced; they

must, literally, be

perormed right

here at home.

21



In 2008, buildings in the United States

accounted or a ull eight percent o global

energy consumption.2 In the United States,

our buildings used 40 percent o our energy

consumption, which is 43 percent higher

than consumption accounted or by the

transportation sector and nearly 25 percent

more than the industrial sector.3

Tat’s why, i we could do just one thing

to help create jobs, restore our economy and

create high-wage manuacturing, we should

start with a renewed commitment to energy

retrots o all o America’s homes, ofces, and

public buildings. For some reason, weather

stripping, calk, double-pane windows and

new insulation don’t generate as many

headlines as solar arrays and electric cars.But they should.

Tese simple and relatively low-tech ways

to upgrade our built environment are the

astest and most cost-eective way to lower

energy use. And they create jobs — potentially

millions o jobs. Te National Association

o Homebuilders estimated that or every

$1 million spent in energy retrots, we

create ten new jobs.4 Tese are exactly the

kind o jobs that get young people into the

workorce, help reduce poverty and open a

pathway to the middle class. And these are

jobs our unemployed riends and neighbors

can do right away right here in our district.

I support the tax credit or energy

retrots — but we can do better. We need

to nd innovative ways to und solar

installations, like the promise o the Property

Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program,

that will accelerate installations o energy-

efcient solar panels, insulation, water

conservation systems and more.Te White House has estimated that home

energy retrofts could save consumers $21

billion annually —and that’s a conservative

fgure.5 Others have estimated the savings

are much higher. Even i we take the lower

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Gigawatts

(GW)

Notes: Net summ er generating capacity of wind, sol ar, and geothermal energ y. Percentages are shares of tota l net summer elect ricity capacity.

Sources: Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2011; CEA calculations.

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

28.7 GW (2.8%)

36.2 GW (3.5%)

43.2 GW (4.1%)

49.1 GW (4.6%)

60.8 GW (5.6%)

Geothermal

Solar

Wind

U.S. WIND, SOLAR & GEOTHERMA L ENER GY

GENERATING CAPACITY

Caliornia is leading

the nation in promoting

renewable energy with

a Renewable Portolio

Standard (RPS) that

will require utilities to

deliver one third o our

power rom renewable

sources by 2020.

FACT 280,000 new jobs could be created by investing in the Smart Grid

22



fgure, a dramatic increase in the home and

business retroft market creates high-wage jobs

right now and creates billions in additional

spending power every year —spending power

that will create new markets or the new goods

we want to make here at home, putting thehard-hit building industry back to work. So

i you look at a return on investment both

rom the environmental and the economic

perspective—this is where you start.

2Create the next-generation

smart electric grid

Te next logical step in making more energy

here at home — and one I will advocate or

— is ederal investment and incentives inupgrading the national electric grid. We need

to remember, even the high value-add type o

manuacturing we want to bring back to this

country takes energy — we want that energy

to be aordable, predictably priced and

sustainable.

Te counterattack on renewable energy

is that it is too expensive. Some orms

o renewable energy appear much more

expensive when you look only at the cost

per kilowatt-hour. O course, that’s not

the real price. You also need to look at the

environmental cost o global warming, the

cost o policing our shipping lanes to bring

in oreign oil, the healthcare costs that arise

rom air pollution and other toxins, the

devastating cost o oil spills like we saw in the

Gul on industries like tourism and shing,

the oreign policy impacts o being beholden

to potentially hostile governments because o

our our dependence on oriegn oil, and all o

the other many costs.

Tere is one energy resource in some

areas that already competes on a kWh basis

with natural gas, oil and coal — and that

is wind energy. And with ossil uel prices

certain to rise, wind energy will soon be less

expensive than energy coming rom GHG-

generating sources. Te problem is, we don’t

have the kind o sophisticated energy grid it

takes to deliver the low-cost renewable power

where and when it is needed rom where it is

most economically produced.

Tat’s why we need a “smart grid” and

we need to make it a national priority. Tere

have certainly been some missteps here —

like the poorly communicated plans to switch

consumers to wireless meters. But despite

these missteps, we can grow our economy in

leaps and bounds by investing in an upgraded

national grid to deliver low-cost and stable

renewable energy supplies when and where

they are needed.

ESTABLISH UNIFORM

SOLAR STANDARDS

JUST AS with any new construction

project, installing residential and small

commercial solar must be done well

and be done saely. Permitting is an

important component to help ensure

businesses and residences take all the

necessary precautions, but the permitting

process alls under the control o city

hall and diers rom municipality to

municipality. One report pegged the

average cost o the permitting and

inspection process at $2,516 per

residential installation.14

By contrast, Germany—a country

with about 10 times the installed solar

capacity o the United States and where

it costs about 40 percent less than it

does in the United States to complete

residential installations—has a single,

simple solar permitting process with

rapid approval. 15 16

I propose the establishment o auniorm, simple permitting process or all

o the United States. This will go a long

way to achieving grid parity or solar.

23



Te smart grid has been called the

“Internet o Energy” and I think it is tting

that we apply the Internet model, which

was originally developed by the ederal

government (ARPANet), and then advanced

through private innovation and investment. In partnership with private industry and colleges

and universities, the ederal government

should invest in the backbone and then turn

additional development and innovation over

to the private sector.

One national report estimated that the

smart grid will create 280,000 new jobs and

that 140,000 o those jobs would permanently

support the ongoing operation and

maintenance o this new upgraded grid.

6

In addition to the jobs created by the grid,

the incredible energy savings available will

put billions o dollars back into our economy.

Just as the original Internet sparked a wave

o innovation, job creation and a decade o

economic growth (and helped contribute to

balanced ederal budgets), this new Internet

o Energy can do exactly the same thing.

From making widespread implementation

o electric vehicles possible to helping small

manuacturers make things aordably and

sustainably because they have access to

reliable and aordable energy — the Smart

Grid is vital. We need a stable and reliable grid

to deliver energy where we need it. Tis willnot only help us restore our manuacturing

economy; it will protect millions o other jobs

by ensuring we have secure, stable and clean

energy supplies into the uture.

3Set national renewable energy

and consumption standards

Setting energy consumption and renewable

energy standards is another vital step in

securing a clean energy uture — and there is

one real success story here in Caliornia that

the whole nation needs to ollow.

Did you know that Caliornia is one o

the lowest energy users per household in

the nation? In act, as the national per-

capita energy consumption has gone up by

approximately 45 percent in the past three

decades, Caliornia’s per-capita use has not

ollowed the same upward trajectory because

o proactive energy efciency

legislation passed in the 1970s

and 1980s.7

And now, Caliornia

is leading the nation in

promoting renewable energy

with a “Renewable Portolio

Standard” (RPS) that will

require utilities to deliver ully

one third o our power rom

renewable sources by 2020.8

We need to model these

standards on a national basis —

and go beyond them. With the

existing technology trend, it is

possible to meet the President’s

standard o an 83 percent

reduction in emissions by 2050.9

We should set this as a oor

right now — but we should also

AMERICAN ENERGY INDEPENDENCE BONDS:

One way to pay or clean energy investments

I PROPOSE that we create an American Energy Independence Bond to

support American renewable energy projects. The bonds would pay Americans

2.5 percent—an attractive rate given that most Americans are currently earning

less than one percent on their savings.

The Center or American Progress reports that investing $100 billion in

renewable energy and clean technology over a two-year period would yield

“nearly our times more jobs than spending the same amount o money within

the oil industry, and would reduce the unemployment rate to 4.4 percent over

two years.”11

This plan would help us achieve the President’s goal o doubling America’s

national renewable energy generation and Governor Brown’s goal o generating

1.3 million megawatts o renewable energy as well as bringing nearly 500,000

jobs to Caliornia.12 13 We would decrease our dependence on oreign oil and

help usher our economy into the twenty-frst century.

FACT

the amount

o money

the ederal

government

(not including

the military)

spends each

year on energy

$25BILLION

24



revisit our standards every ve years to see i the technology

has advanced sufciently to raise them even urther.

Te beneft o setting national standards is that we gain

economies o scale. We can lower prices aster and make

renewables competitive by making sure this is a national

project, not a series o one-o, local state incentives. Tose programs got the ball rolling—but this is now a national

challenge and we need national economies o scale.

In our research at the Center or Entrepreneurship

and echnology which I co-ounded at UC Berkeley, we’ve

ound that while government can do a good job o setting

standards and goals, the government is rarely qualied

to make decisions about which technologies to use and

which not to use. It’s just not the expertise o most people

in Sacramento or Washington.

Government should set a standard — a high butachievable standard — and then let universities, innovators

and the R&D departments in private industry gure out

how to meet those standards in the most cost-eective way.

Tat’s the best o both worlds.

And we’ve seen the incredible innovation that can

occur when we ocus the government, our network o

research universities and colleges, and private companies

on big national goals — we get big and lasting technology

breakthroughs that help sustain economic growth.

4Make our military and the ederal

government energy-independent

I we are looking at energy security, we should start by

expanding one o the more successul renewable energy

programs — and that’s the work being done in the

Department o Deense to make our military more energy-secure. Te reality is that much o renewable energy

takes land and sun — and the DOD has bases throughout

Caliornia and the nation with spare land and plenty o sun

(and wind) in places that are not ecologically vulnerable.

Our ederal goal should be to make our military energy-

independent within the next teen years.

Te ederal government itsel should also meet this

standard. Just like any smart homeowner, the government

can save money in the long run by investing up ront in

renewable energy and efciency.I support a goal o making our ederal government a

net-zero generator o green house gases in teen years.

Right now, the ederal government (not including the

military) spends $25 billion each year on energy.10 We

could promote jobs and lower spending in the long run by

having the government do itsel what it encourages others

to do — retrot, reduce consumption and create local solar

and wind generation onsite where appropriate.

3 MY PRIORITIES FOR MAKING OUR

OWN ENERGY AGAIN

1 Reduce energy consumption and spur green-collar jobs through building retrofts

2 Create the next-generation smart electric grid

3 Set national renewable energy and consumption standards

4 Make our military and the ederal government energy-independent

25



1 Van Jones, Te Green Collar Economy: How One Solution Can Fix Our wo Biggest Problems , (Harper Collins, 2008).

2 Buildings Energy Data Book, Chapter 1: Buildings Sector, (U.S. Department o Energy, 2008), available at http://buildingsdatabook.

eren.doe.gov/ChapterIntro1.aspx.

3 Ibid.

4 “Submission o Steven Nadel, Executive Director, American Council or an Energy-Efcient Economy to the Energy and Environment

Subcommittee, House Energy and Commerce Committee, Hearing on: Home Star,” (American Council or an Energy-Efcient Economy,

March 2010), available at http://www.aceee.org/les/pd/testimony/Nadel_HomeStar.03.18.10.pd.

5 “Recovery Trough Retrot,” (Middle Class ask Force and Council on Environmental Quality, October 2009), available at http://www.

whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/Recovery_Trough_Retrot_Final_Report.pd.

6 “Understanding the Benets o the Smart Grid,” (National Energy echnology Laboratory, June 2010), available at http://www.netl.doe.

gov/smartgrid/reerenceshel/whitepapers/06.18.2010_Understanding%20Smart%20Grid%20Benets.pd.

7 “Integrated Energy Policy Report,” (Caliornia Energy Commission, November 2005), available at http://www.energy.

ca.gov/2005publications/CEC-100-2005-007/CEC-100-2005-007-CMF.PDF.

8 David Baker, “Caliornia renewable energy goals come at a price,” (San Francisco Chronicle, November 2011), available at http://www.

sgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?=/c/a/2011/11/23/MNLV1M1CE.DL&ao=all.

9 “President to Attend Copenhagen Climate alks,” (Te White House, Ofce o the Press Secretary, November 2009), available at http://

www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-ofce/president-attend-copenhagen-climate-talks.

10 “Energy Sector Launched,” (Te Pew Charitable rusts, September 2010), available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_report_

detail.aspx?id=85899359699.

11 Robert Pollin, Heidi Garrett-Peltier, James Heintz, and Helen Scharber, “Green Recovery, A Program to Create Good Jobs and Start

Building a Low-Carbon Economy,” (Center or American Progress, September 2008), available at http://www.americanprogress.org/

issues/2008/09/pd/green_recovery.pd

12 “Promoting Clean, Renewable Energy: Investments in Wind and Solar,” (Te White House, Te Recovery Act), available at http://www.

whitehouse.gov/recovery/innovations/clean-renewable-energy.

13 “Brown Announces Clean Energy Jobs Plan,” (Brown or Governor Campaign, June 2010), available at http://www.jerrybrown.org/

Clean_Energy .

14 “Te Impact o Local Permitting on the Cost o Solar Power, How a ederal eort to simpliy processes can make solar aordable or

50% o American homes,” (SunRun, January 2011), available at http://www.sunrunhome.com/download_le/view/414/189/.

15 Ibid.

16 Erik Kirschbaum, “Falling solar prices good or climate, bad or rms,” (Reuters, February 2012), available at http://www.reuters.com/

article/2012/02/01/climate-solar-prices-idUSL5E8CV3L20120201.

Sources

26

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/pdf/green_recovery.pdf


http://www.jerrybrown.org/Clean_Energy








AS AN EDUCATOR AND SMALL

BUSINESS OWNER, I know rst-hand

that we need to invest in training to restore

our manuacturing competitiveness. Unlike

the smokestack-industry, manual-labor or

unskilled jobs o yesterday, most o today’s

manuacturing jobs require a high degree

o training. Instead o bailing out big banks,

we need to lay a strong oundation or our

real economy—like starting our kids out in

better public schools and preparing them

or the 21st century workorce. Tis isn’t

an “entitlement.” Educating our workorce

is one o the smartest investments we can

make to create an economy that works

better or everyone.

Studies have shown the social return

on investment o an eective training

program is as high as $9.10 per dollar

PRIORITY FOUR Education Retooling our workforcefor the 21st century

Source: Public Policy Institute of California

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

LESS THAN HIGH

SCHOOL GRADUATE

HIGH SCHOOL

GRADUATE

SOME

COLLEGE

COLLEGE

GRADUATE

Projected adult education

Projected economic demand

THE

COLLEGE

GAP

Caliornia is not producing enough

college graduates to

meet the demand o our

projected workorce.

Studies show that community college students who do well in mathand English have higher graduation rates than students who don’t.

27



invested.1 Tere is simply no better place to

start than retooling our education system so

our kids can get the training they need rom

an early age.

1 Improve early childhoodand K-12 education

We need to support access to quality

education rom the earliest age— because

even those manuacturing jobs that do

not require advanced degrees demand

high-school degrees or community college

training. Creating a highly trained workorce,

thereore, starts with keeping kids in

school— and the least expensive way to start

doing a better job at that is to invest in early childhood education.

Recent studies have shown up to an

$11 return or every dollar invested in early

education.2 And children who get a strong

start achieve higher graduation rates,

better grades, more college enrollment and

dramatically higher earning potential — up to

$100,000 over a lietime.3

2Invest in community college, trade

and vocational programs; oster

collaboration with local employers

Our goal should be to provide every child the

opportunity to go to college. But the reality is

that many will not obtain a our-year degree.

Some estimates in Caliornia have put that

number as high as 70 percent.4

Tat’s just one o the reasons why

community colleges, trade and vocational programs and our-year institutions should

serve local needs, both equipping a workorce

with skills that are in demand locally and

providing local employers with a workorce

which meets employers’ needs. Tese higher

education institutions, insoar as they are

responsible or re-tooling our workorce, can

also be an incentive or employers to locate

in a community.

Our local institutions should collaborate with employers to ensure that the skills

being taught in career technical education or

specialized science, technology, engineering,

and mathematics (SEM) programs meet the

needs o local employers.

Fostering the development o local

advisory boards composed o leaders rom

various local sectors and the leadership

o the local community colleges can help

ensure that courses being provided at a

given community college equip students

with a set o skills needed by local

employers.

I propose a grant program or local

businesses — with an emphasis on small

manuacturers — that would subsidize the

salaries and training o part-time two- and

our-year college students. By learning on

the job, students can make their academic

skills relevant and acquire additional

necessary skills. Students would graduate

rom the program ready to take their place

in American manuacturing.

Under this program, small grants would

be made to local businesses to give work

experience to high school students pursuing

a vocational career — with aternoon

programs during the academic year and ull-

time summer school programs.

$100,000the increase in lietime earning

potential resulting rom strongearly childhood education

FACT

28



3 Support standardization

o a portion o the coursework

at community colleges

Standardizing basic coursework and program

requirements at community colleges can

allow employers to have a general senseo the skills a student has when that

student graduates rom a local community

college or our-year institution. Because

coursework can dier greatly rom institution

to institution, without standardization,

employers are let trying to decipher a

student’s transcript and degree without a

clear sense, or many programs, o whether

or not those courses have educated students

with the skills necessary to complete the

tasks a job might require.

Standardization o basic coursework or

training programs will give employers some

sense o the basic competencies o a student.

For students, standardizing their basic

coursework can improve the marketability o

their degrees as employers will not need to

guess at the student’s skill level.

4Improve our-year

institution completion

We also need to understand that many actory

and manuacturing jobs now even require a

college degree. Tat’s why college achievement

trends are so troubling. Te U.S. now ranks 12th

in the world in college attainment or the 25-

34 year old population.5 And according to the

Public Policy Institute o Caliornia, Caliornia

is not producing enough college graduates to

meet the demand o the current and projected

workorce.6 Tis is not just isolated to

Caliornia. A recent study by the Georgetown

University Center on Education ound that the

United States is not producing enough college-

educated workers to meet economic needs.7

Te Administration’s our-year

completion plan calls or the improvement

o our high school exit standards. 8 In

the United States, around orty percent

o students, upon entering a our-year

institution, nd themselves in a position o

not being equipped with the knowledge to

move orward with their education and need

to take remedial classes.9 By improving our

standards or high schools, we will improvethe preparedness o our students to take on

the challenge o higher education.

I am interested in the current discussion

around reorming our unding system

or colleges to incentivize retention and

graduation. For example, studies show

that community college students who

do well in math and English have higher

graduation rates than students who don’t.10

Consequently, we should look at unding

models that incentivize colleges to prioritize

early competency in English and math.

5Make higher education

more accessible

It is time we remove the articial barriers to

higher education. Te inamous barrier o

cost needs to become a debate o yesterday.

Our higher education institutions help

to make our workorce one o the most

competitive and well-trained workorces in

the world. We should be taking down barriers

to education, not putting them up, in order to

ensure the strength o our economy.

o do this we need to increase unding

o programs like Pell Grants, which are

key in making it possible or low-income

students to attend college. Additionally,

we need legislation like the College Cost

Reduction and Access Act, to provide aid to

students through their nancial aid ofces.

As institutions around the country eel their

own belts tighten, their ability to lend or

provide grants to students decreases. Te

College Cost Reduction and Access Act will

help ll the gap.

I do not support granting higher

loan limits to students. Our students are

saddled with more debt than ever today

Our goal

should be to

provide every

child the

opportunity togo to college.

But the reality

is that many

will not obtain

a our-year

degree. Some

estimates in

Caliornia

have put thatnumber as

high as 70

percent.

29



and extending the limits up to which they

can borrow is less eective than unding

granting programs and scholarships. We

need to make education more aordable,

not just immediately, but entirely. Students

should not be saddled with tens or hundredso thousands o dollars worth o debt just

to become qualied to participate in our

specialized workorce. We need to reduce the

barrier to entry.

6Increase our number

o STEM graduates

We need to increase the number o students

interested and willing to work in science,

technology, engineering, and mathematics,or SEM elds. Tese elds have been

suering over the years, and it’s time to shit

the decreasing trend.

In order to do this we need to start in

grade school with a strategy o improving

our science and mathematics programs

across the board.11 Starting in high school is

simply not soon enough. Students need to be

exposed to better science and math programsrom an early age to produce the much-

needed increase in the number o SEM

college graduates.

In order to improve our SEM programs

in elementary and middle schools, we need

to improve the quality o our teachers in

these schools. Right now, reports are that

“ewer than one in ve 12th graders have both

high interest in SEM and high prociency

in mathematics.”

12

We can do better. And todo better, we need to strive to ensure that

each school is staed with qualied SEM

teachers.

4 MY PRIORITIES FOR RETOOLING OUR

WORKFORCE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY

1 Improve early childhood and K-12 education

2 Invest in community college, trade and vocational programs;

oster collaboration with local employers

3 Support standardization o a portion o the coursework

at community colleges

4 Improve our-year institution completion

5 Make higher education more accessible

6 Increase our number o STEM graduates

30



1 Social Issue Report; Economic Empowerment; Workorce Development,”

(Social Impact Research, Root Cause, March 2011), available at

http://www.rootcause.org/sites/rootcause.org/les/uploads/WFD-Issue.pd.

2 “High-quality preschool program produces long-term economic payo,” (National Institutes o Health, February 2011), available athttp://www.nih.gov/news/health/eb2011/nichd-04.htm.

3 “Te Case or Investing in Early Childhood Education,” (Maryland Family Network, July 2011), available at http://

marylandamilynetwork.org/pds/Research_Case_Early_Childhood.pd.

4 Hans Johnson and Ria Sengupta, “Closing the Gap, Meeting Caliornia’s Need or College Graduates,” (Public Policy Institute o

Caliornia, 2009), available at http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_409HJR.pd.

5 amar Lewin, “Once a Leader, U.S. Lags in College Degrees,” (New York imes, July 2010) available at http://www.nytimes.

com/2010/07/23/education/23college.html.

6 Deborah Reed, “Caliornia’s Future Workorce, Will Tere Be Enough College Graduates?,” (Public Policy Institute o Caliornia, 2008),

available at http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_1208DRR.pd.

7 “Social Issue Report; Education and Youth Development; College Access and Success,”(Social Impact Research, Root Cause, September 2010), available at

http://www.rootcause.org/sites/rootcause.org/les/uploads/CAAS-Issue.pd.

8 Brian Levine, “A Call to Action on College Completion,” (Te Middle Class ask Force, Te White House, March 2011), available at

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/03/23/call-action-college-completion.

9 Ibid.

10 Nanette Asimov, “Community college dropout rate alarms researchers,”

(San Francisco Chronicle, October 2010), available at

http://www.sgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?=/c/a/2010/10/19/MNN41FUHQH.DL.

11 “Increasing the Number o SEM Graduates: Insights rom the U.S. SEM

Education & Modeling Project,” (Business-Higher Education Forum, 2010), available at

http://www.bhe.com/solutions/documents/BHEF_SEM_Report.pd.

12 Ibid.

Sources

31



THE MANUFACTURING SECTOR PLAYS

a vital role in ostering an environment or

research and technological developments. In

2003, approximately 60% o the $123 billion

spent on research and development in the

United States was spent in the manuacturing

sector, which totaled $123 billion.1

Te public and private support or research

and development is requently an incentive

or companies to locate in the United States

and in specic regions. In many cases, as

companies are trying to decide whether to

invest at home or abroad, they are looking to

the American workorce or its capacity or

innovation and the public sector support o

that innovation. Siemens was recently cited

as spending $50 million annually in training

its U.S. employees.2 Such investments o

companies across the board totaled $228

billion in 2010, a signicant jump rom the just

$153 billion in 2009.3

echnological advancements, while they

can translate to the direct commercialization

o a product and mean economic growth or

a company and the economy, also contributeto the well being o the American workorce.

In addition to the 25-old increase in U.S.

per capita income since 1820, the benets

o technological advancements have greatly

improved the lives o American workers.4

Despite the demonstrable positive impacts

o innovations, the National Science Board

has reported a signicant decrease in the

amount spent by the ederal government in

research and development, a decrease rom

a ull 63 percent in the 1960s to 27 percent

currently. Te private sector has made the

converse jump, increasing rom 30 percent to

68 percent today.5 Overall, the United States

currently spends only 2.8 percent o its GDP

PRIORITY FIVE InnovationGrowing ourlead in scienceand technology

Science and technology are the high ground of our

manufacturing economy. If we keep and grow our lead

here, we’ll be able to regain our lead in manufacturing.

FACT 719,000 the backlog o U.S. patent applications

32



Index 2005:Q1=100

Sources: Bureau of Economic Alalysis, National Income and Product Accounts; country sources; CEA calculations.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201190

95

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

World GDP excluding the U.S.

2010:Q3

U.S. real exports 2010:Q4

on research and development

eorts, less than many other

countries: Sweden spends

4.3 percent; Japan spends 3.1

percent; South Korea spends

3.0 percent.6

We shouldbe unding research and

development at least on par

with other countries.

While the private sector

is helping to compensate or

the drop in ederal unding or

research and development,

the ederal government needs

to step up to the plate. Tere are many good

ideas in the marketplace, but these are agreat start:

1Extend the term o research

and development tax credits

Incentivizing companies to invest in

research and development is a key way o

ensuring that we continue to move orward.

Te 2007 research and development tax

credit provided $8.8 billion in credits to

12,548 corporations and 56,000 individual

taxpayers.7 Such tax credits are estimated to

“translate dollar-or-dollar into increases in

current research spending, especially over

the longer run as businesses develop their

research enterprise.”8 Congress reviews the

research and development tax

credit or private institutions

on a year-by-year basis. Tis

sort o episodic renewal does

not give companies a chance

to plan o the uture.I support creating

legislation that includes a

tax credit over a multi-year

window that would allow

private companies to invest

in research and development

ventures with time horizons

longer than a single year.

Articially constraining these ventures with

such short time horizons can be articially constraining the successes o those

innovators and contributors.

2Spur advanced manuacturing

technology

We can also ocus on harnessing our resources

to spur growth and expansion o our research

and technological advancements. Universities

are the ultimate Petri dish or basic research.

Tere is oten little nancial return or private

companies to invest in basic research — basic

research takes time and the end results are

difcult to predict. Private rms invest in

research that has an anticipated return, and

basic research may not have that. Despite this,

US EXPORTS

AND WORLDGDP

Insourcing is helping

to drive an increase in

U.S. exports.

35MONTHS

the average delay

between a patent

application and a

patent grant

FACT

33



basic research, like the initial

work on the predecessor

to the World Wide Web, is

invaluably oundational.

We need to und this

research as it can help tomove our economy orward.

Universities and other such

public settings are key

centers or such work.

President Obama

Administration’s 2012 budget

currently includes dramatic

increases in unding or

science organizations “to

catalyze breakthroughs or

advanced manuacturing

applications and provides

unding to initiate the

Advanced Manuacturing

echnology Consortia

Program, a public-private partnership that

will help spur innovation in manuacturing

systems and shorten the time needed or

innovations to reach the market.”9 Additional

programs to oster such connections

between the public and private sector can

help to drive innovations and make that

innovative process meaningully protable.

Facilitating the relationships between the

private sector and our research institutions

can help increase the pace o research and

development, which can directly, positively

drive economic growth and expansion.

3Patent our

innovationsTe essence o our science and technology

sectors is the ability to protect the intellectual

contributions o innovators. Te licensing

and patenting o knowledge being produced

in universities and in the private sector takes

place on a time horizon that is ar beyond

what is practical or the market. We should

ocus on and incentivize the patenting and

licensing o innovations at rates that allow

innovators and entrepreneurs nancially

benet rom their work.

Tis means we need to work on

acilitating the processing o patents.

Currently, the U.S. patent ofce aces a

“backlog o 719,000 patent applications, and

the average delay between patent application

and patent grant has risen to 35 months.”10

Tese delays are in many cases prohibitive

or entrepreneurs and other private sector

participants. Te Obama Administration’s

plan to streamline the patenting process and

to hire on additional reviewers can go a

long way to improving the rate at which

patents are processed, which will, in turn,

go a long way toward incentivizing

submission o patent applications and the

innovation process.

4Protect the accessibility

o H-1B visas

Immigration reorm has been a ocus o

politicians or years, and a key part o the

As a successul entrepreneur in the burgeoning technology feld, I saw the

need or students who were prepared to be competitive in a global economy.

That’s why I co-ounded the Center or Entrepreneurship and Technology

(CET) at UC Berkeley—a nationally recognized program in innovation management

and new venture creation.

I now have the great honor and privilege o teaching our amazing young

people about engineering, technology, innovation and how to compete in the global

marketplace. We have incubated and helped create 18 new companies out o the CET

environment, all with young entrepreneurs at the helm. These talented young people

will be the innovators o America’s uture.

So my belie that science and technology are the high ground o our

manuacturing economy should come as no surprise. I we keep and grow our lead

here, we’ll be able to regain our lead in manuacturing.

That’s why our government needs to continue to be supportive o our academic

institutions and private enterprises—so that our innovators and entrepreneurs cancontinue to pursue important innovations across the board to help move our economy

into the twenty-frst century.

34



conversation on immigration reorm is how to keep

those immigrants who specialize in elds like science,

technology, engineering and math — specializations which

can help make the United States a top global manuacturer

again — rom leaving our nation and going to work abroad.

We need a national immigration reorm plan that includes protections or immigrants who are educated in our nation’s

schools, who have grown up in our nation’s cities and whose

parents pay taxes to our nation’s government.

But in lieu o such a comprehensive reorm, the H-1B

visa, which allows employers to continue employing

skilled immigrant workers legally, is a temporary x to

the problem o losing our skilled workorce.11 We need to

continue to support the extension o the H-1B visa to help protect the uture o the American economy until a more

stable solution is created.

Sources1 Robert E. Scott, “Te Importance o Manuacturing, Key to recovery in the states and the nation,”

(Economic Policy Institute, February 2008), available at http://www.gpn.org/bp211/bp211.pd.

2 Matt Compton, “Everything You Need o Know About Insourcing,” (Te White House, January 2012),

available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/11/everything-you-need-know-about-insourcing.

3 Ibid.

4 “Economic Report to the President,” (Council o Economic Advisors, 2011), available at

http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/cea/economic-report-o-the-President.

5 Darrell West, “echnology and the Innovation Economy,” (Te Brookings Institution, October 2011),

available at http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2011/1019_technology_innovation_west.aspx#_edn1.

6 Ibid.



8 Ibid.

9 Ibid.

10 Ibid.

11 Bill Clinton, “Back to Work, Why We Need Smart Government or a Strong Economy,” (Alred A. Knop, 2011).

5 MY PRIORITIES FOR GROWING OUR LEAD

IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

1 Extend the term o research and development tax credit

2 Spur advanced manuacturing technology

3 Patent our innovations

4 Protect the accessibility o H-1B visas

35

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/11/everything-you-need-know-about-insourcing







http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/01/11/everything-you-need-know-about-insourcing



MAKING THINGS AGAIN ultimately means

moving things aster — rom moving digital

inormation and e-commerce through a more

robust broadband inrastructure to moving

goods and services over modern roads,

bridges, rail links and ports.

Faster trains and the interstate highway

system have all increased the pace o our

economy. A network o hub and spoke

airports support the movement o goods and

people. Innovations like the Internet and

email mean that the exchange o inormation

happens at unprecedented rates. Tese

capital investments are and have been the

oundation or the greatness o the American

economy since the Industrial Revolution.

But we are alling behind. Sadly, the World

Economic Forum now ranks the U.S. 24th

in the world in terms o inrastructure.1 We

are still the nation with the proud heritage

o the Erie Canal and the ranscontinental

Railroad, but in the past ty years, we have

watched our inrastructure all into disrepair.In this era, there is no reason why every

American household should not have access

to broadband resources or why constant

reight bottlenecks should limit our ability to

put Americans back to work.

A aster economic recovery hinges

on modern, efcient systems or moving

goods, inormation and services. It is time

to reinvest and rebuild both our digital and

physical inrastructure.

FACT

24thIN THE WORLD

America’s rank

in terms o the

world’s best

inrastructure

PRIORITY SIX Modernizing Our InfrastructureEquipping the

country’s workforce

with working

infrastructure

We lose billions each year

because we can’t get our product

from here to there — economic

recovery hinges on moving goods

information and services faster.

36



Digital Infrastructure

oday, in the United States, 68

percent o households are now

equipped with broadband, up

eight-old rom 2001.2 Tat is a

giant leap in the right direction,but it also means that a third

o our households are currently

operating outside o the digital

economy. It also means that the

U.S. now only ranks 14th in the

world in terms o broadband

inrastructure, and our national

average download speeds rank

24th internationally.3

Te global digital economy,in 2009, contributed to a ull

three percent o the global

GDP.4 Moving in the direction

o bringing that last third o

households online can, in the end,

both provide jobs to a new set o

sectors and reinvigorate existing

sectors. Currently the Internet

employs approximately 1.2 million

people directly or commerce,marketing, and inrastructure-

building and maintenance, and

each o these jobs supports about

1.5 additional jobs elsewhere in

the U.S. economy, according to the

Harvard Business School.5

In real dollars, the Harvard

Business School estimates that

the Internet is responsible or

$175 billon o the U.S. economy,

with $85 billion coming rom

retail transactions.6 McKinsey

& Company estimates that the Internet accounts or 21

percent o GDP growth in mature economies over the past

ve years.7 Tese numbers are too huge to ignore.

As cited by Darrell West in his paper, “echnology and

the Innovation Economy,” “a study o 120 nations between

1980 and 2006 undertaken by Christine Qiang estimated

that each 10 percentage point increase in broadband

penetration adds 1.3 percent to

a high income country’s gross

domestic product.”8 It is also

estimated that or every one

billion dollars invested in wireless

inrastructure, 12,000 jobs arecreated.9 Tese kinds o increases

can help solidiy our ooting in the

post-economic crisis economy.

Tese numbers conrm

what we all know rom our daily

experience — i you’re not on the

Internet (with high-speed access),

you’re being let behind. Tat’s

why we should ocus on two

primary areas:

1Support Broadband

USA 2.0

Broadband USA is a step in the

right direction, and we need to

continue unding uture versions

o this project until the ar

reaches o our rural communities

are online and the cost o those

services are accessible. A ederally unded program attempting

to improve the accessibility

o broadband or our nation,

Broadband USA has invested

$293 million to close the digital

divide.10 But there is still so much

to do.

Many parts o our North Coast

are at a severe disadvantage

with slow, nonexistent or

non-redundant broadband

coverage and limited cellular

phone service. Te economic impacts o broadband

inrastructure include immediate job creation as well as

long-term economic growth and potential with better

inrastructure in place.11 Bringing broadband to the North

Coast will bring commerce to the North Coast to support

local businesses.

Building out the physical inrastructure or Internet

0 5 10 1 5 20 2 5 30 35 40

NETHERLANDS

DENMARK

SWITZERLAND

KOREA

NORWAY

LUXEMBOURG

ICELAND

FRANCE

SWEDEN

GERMANY

U.K.

CANADA

BELGIUM

U.S.A.

FINLAND

JAPAN

NEW ZEALAND

AUSTRALIA

AUSTRIA

SPAIN

ITALY

IRELAND

PORTUGAL

GREECE

HUNGARY

CZECH REP.

POLAND

SLOVAK REP.

CHILE

MEXICO

TURKEY

Subscriptions per 100 inhabitants

DSL Cable

OECD average

Fibre/LAN Other

Source: OECD Information Technology Outlook (2010)

BROADBAND

ADOPTION ACROSS

OECD COUNTRIES

Te U.S. now only ranks 14th in the world in

terms o broadband inrastructure

37



access is one step, but making that access

nancially accessible is another. In rural and

urban areas alike, low-income residents ace

the digital barrier. Access to the Internet

means access to education, to inormation, to

stores, to news. It means a more level playingeld. Paying or the broadband service is

expensive or some, and owning a computer

or laptop is a costly venture. Sponsoring

programs like Broadband USA to bring all

American residents into the twenty-rst

century by making the Internet accessible and

inexpensive should be our goal.

While access at home is key, broadband

access at public institutions

such as our public schoolsshould be non-negotiable.

While technically a ull 97

percent o our nation’s schools

are equipped with Internet

capacity, greater than hal

o our educators report

problematic slow service which

impedes their ability to teach.12

Te digital divide should not

play out in our schools. Our

schools should provide equitable access to

the resources our students need to get ahead

in lie, not additional barriers to entry to

our institutions o higher education and our

workorce. Broadband USA is bringing access

to our rural communities — let’s make sure

our schools are a top priority.

2Build-out our

wireless inrastructure

Beyond broadband, the prolieration o

smart phones, wireless meters, ebooks, and

other wireless technologies has led to an

increased demand or wireless inrastructure.

Te ederal government administers this

invaluable part o our inrastructure.

Projections suggest spectrum demand or our

wireless inrastructure is going to increase to

the extent that our current capacity will be

ar overtaxed in the near uture. Te ederal

government should und the expansion o our

current spectrum capacity. Tis immediate

need has very real implications or the pace

o innovation and commercial success as the

twenty-rst century is dened by a globaltransition to the Internet economy.

A recent NDN/New Policy Institute report

states that, “under the current transition,

every 10 percent increase in the adoption

o 3G and 4G wireless technologies could

add more than 231,000 new jobs to the

U.S. economy in less than a year.”13 In an

economy recovering rom a recession, such

growth cannot be passed up. Te report

goes on to cite a Juniper Research report

that “estimates that the market or mobile-

based cloud services could reach $39 billion

by 2016, assuming wide deployment o 4G

inrastructure and devices.”14 Tis level o

growth would go a long way to alleviating our

economic woes, but we are not prepared or

it. Te ederal government needs to und the

building out o our wireless inrastructure

with an eye to these projected uture

demands. Without the inrastructure to keep

pace with that transition, our economy will

miss the proverbial boat.

Physical Infrastructure

For a country that used to be number one in

terms o physical inrastructure, our physical

inrastructure is seriously lagging.

Te numbers

confrm what we

all know rom our

daily experience:

i you’re not on

the Internet

(with high-speed

access), you’re

being let behind.

38



oday, air trafc delays cost the UnitedStates approximately $9 billion annually

and reight bottlenecks cost around $200

billion annually.15 I we are to meet our

own demand or inrastructure needs,

we need to spend $2.2 trillion over the

next ve years repairing and building

new inrastructure — roads and bridges,

waterways, airports, electric grids and

more.16 Te American Society o Civil

Engineers estimates that a quarter o our

bridges are decient, seven billion gallons o

clean water are wasted each day because o

leaking pipes and a third o our major roads

are in poor or mediocre condition.17 Tese

structures are the gateways or commerce

in much the same way as the Internet is

necessary or e-commerce. We need to

support these structures and repair them to

meet our growing economy’s needs.

1 Fund the six-yearinrastructure plan

President Obama’s administration supports a

six-year, $556 billion dollar plan to modernize

the country’s inrastructure.18 Tis proposal

includes allocations or high-speed rail,

airport maintenance, and roadway repairs —

and could have key positive implications

or the current pace o our economy.19 Te

potential distribution o these ederal undscould support eorts like the expansion o a

North Coast “marine highway” and harbor

development, orest and stream restoration

or an environmentally sound build-out o

geothermal plants to harness the energy in the

North Coast geysers. Caliornia does not lend

itsel to supporting such eorts nancially, but

a ederally sponsored loan program would be

the gateway to making such projects come to

ruition.

2Modernize

our schools

We need to modernize tens o thousands

o schools across the country, building

new classrooms, bolstering better science

programs with technology and improving the

libraries in our schools. Adding $30 billion to

restore school-acility unding would boost

employment by 239,000 jobs.20 Improving our

public school inrastructure is, in the end, a

necessary investment in Caliornia’s uture

workorce to take on the challenges o the

new economy.

3 Support the National

Inrastructure Reinvestment Bank

Te National Inrastructure Reinvestment Bank

is a proposal that has taken on several orms

Experts estimate that

every $1 billion invested

in inrastructure

supports nearly 35,000

American jobs, and

every dollar spent on

public inrastructure

yields a $1.59 boost to gross domestic product.

39



over the years in Congress and White House. It would provide

ederal unding in the orm o loans to give state and local

projects a needed jolt o money. It could help und expansion

projects in the North Coast as well as in the rest o Caliornia.

According to the U.S. Department o ransportation, every

$1 billion invested in inrastructure supports nearly 35,000 American jobs, and Moody’s Analytics estimates that every

dollar spent on public inrastructure yields a $1.59 boost to

gross domestic product.21 22

4Create a

modern WPA

In 1935, under the leadership o President Franklin

Delano Roosevelt, the United States Congress enacted

Te Emergency Relie Appropriation Act. Tis allowed

the president to create the Work Progress Administrationor WPA. Until 1943 when the demand or jobs to prepare

or war dramatically reduced unemployment, the WPA

provided jobs to millions o Americans in the development,

reurbishing, and extension o domestic inrastructure.

oday, it is unlikely that the United States will ever have

the proportion o naturally occurring low-skilled jobs that

it had 50 years ago. Te combination o less expensive labor

internationally and the power o technology have made

many o those jobs disappear.

I propose the creation o a modernized WPA, providing

jobs to otherwise unemployable Americans in the

development, reurbishing and extension o the domestic

inrastructure we need today, such as revamping our

decaying national parks, repairing our pockmarked roadsand modernizing our aging schools. Tis new WPA would

be designed as a program that would create net new jobs

that would not have otherwise been available — no existing

job would be replaced. Instead, both the private and public

sectors would actively pursue projects that would not

otherwise have been completed.

Wherever possible, these jobs should be unded through

small and medium businesses. We will see our nation’s

inrastructure improved, the lives o all Americans enhanced

and oer those who cannot get a job in this economy anopportunity to contribute productively.

Growing our inrastructure is a key component to

growing our economy and supporting our workorce as well

as the businesses that employ our workorce. It is imperative

that we support existing policies, and expand existing

proposals, to best meet the needs o our shiting economy

and transitioning workorce. Without that support, we could

potentially ail to shit to a growing economy.

6 MY PRIORITIES FOR EQUIPPING THE COUNTRY’S

WORKFORCE WITH WORKING INFRASTRUCTURE

DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE

1 Support Broadband USA 2.0

2 Build-out our wireless

inrastructure

PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

1 Fund the six-year inrastructure plan

2 Modernize our schools

3 Support the National

Inrastructure Reinvestment Bank

4 Create a modern WPA

40



1 John Bryson, “Fostering Growth Trough Innovation, Te Commerce Department and Innovation,” (Te Brookings Institution, January 2012),

available at http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/events/2012/0113_growth_innovation/20120113_growth_innovation_bryson_remarks.pd .

2 Ibid.



4 Robert J. Shapiro and Kevin A. Hassett, “Te Employment Eects o Advances in Internet and Wireless echnology:

Evaluating the ransitions rom 2G to 3G and rom 3G to 4G,” (NDN and New Policy Institute, January 2012), available at

http://ndn.org/sites/deault/les/blog_les/Te%20Employment%20Eects%20o%20Advances%20In%20Internet%20and%20

Wireless%20echnology_1.pd.

5 John Quelch, “Quantiying the Economic Impact o the Internet,” (Harvard Business School, August 2009), available at

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6268.html.

6 Ibid.

7 James Manyika and Charles Roxburgh, “Te great transormer: Te impact o the Internet on economic growth and prosperity,” (McKinsey Global

Institute, October 2011), available at http://www.mckinsey.com/Insights/MGI/Research/echnology_and_Innovation/Te_great_transormer.

8 Darrell West, “echnology and the Innovation Economy,” (Te Brookings Institution, October 2011), available at

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2011/1019_technology_innovation_west.aspx#_edn1.

9 “Wireless Broadband and Economic Growth,” (Te Brookings Institution, October 2011), available at

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/events/2011/1017_broadband_growth/20111017_broadband_growth.pd.



11 “Wireless Broadband and Economic Growth,” (Te Brookings Institution, October 2011), available at

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/events/2011/1017_broadband_growth/20111017_broadband_growth.pd.



13 Robert J. Shapiro and Kevin A. Hassett, “Te Employment Eects o Advances in Internet and Wireless echnology: Evaluating the

ransitions rom 2G to 3G and rom 3G to 4G,” (NDN and New Policy Institute, January 2012), available at http://ndn.org/sites/deault/

les/blog_les/Te%20Employment%20Eects%20o%20Advances%20In%20Internet%20and%20Wireless%20echnology_1.pd.

14 Ibid.

15 “A Vision or Economic Renewal: An American Jobs Agenda,” (New America Foundation and Te ask Force On Job Creation, July

2011), available at http://www.americanmadeheroes.com/pics/amh-advocates/hindery/Economic-askorce-booklet_FINAL.pd.

16 “Fact Sheet: Rebuild America Jobs Act,” (United States Senate Democrats, October 2011), available at

http://democrats.senate.gov/2011/10/21/act-sheet-rebuild-america-jobs-act/.

17 Mark Gerenscer, “Re-imagining Inrastructure,” (Te American Interest, March/April 2011), available at

http://www.the-american-interest.com/article.cm?piece=926.

18 “Te Budget or Fiscal Year 2012,” (U.S. Department o ransportation 2012), available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/deault/

les/omb/budget/y2012/assets/transportation.pd.

19 Ibid.

20 “American Jobs Plan, A Five-Point Plan to Stem the U.S. Jobs Crisis,” (Economic Policy Institute, December 2009),

available at http://www.epi.org/page/-/american_jobs_plan/epi_american_jobs_plan.pd.

21 Brian William Greene, “Is Obama’s National Inrastructure Bank the Answer on Jobs?,” (US News, October 2011), available at

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/10/06/is-obamas-national-inrastructure-bank-the-answer-on-jobs.

22 “A Bank Tat Can Get Americans on the Road and on the Job: View,” (Bloomberg, August 2011), available at

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-11/a-bank-that-can-get-americans-on-the-road-and-on-the-job-view.html.

Sources

41

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/events/2012/0113_growth_innovation/20120113_growth_innovation_bryson_remarks.pdf







http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/events/2012/0113_growth_innovation/20120113_growth_innovation_bryson_remarks.pdf



ONE OF THE BEST WAYS to incentivize

Making More in America is to help create

demand or Made in America. Tat’s

simple economics. But it’s also a matter o

undamental airness. When the government

buys local, we’re keeping our tax dollars

circulating here at home, working or us.

When citizens buy local, they’re giving

back to their communities. And when we

restore American buying power through

greater economic equality, we’re making the

American Dream accessible to everyone.

1Require the ederal government

to buy more domestically

produced products

Te ederal government has

tremendous purchasing power

and by many accounts, i it

were to ocus more on buying

local, we could continue to

grow the existing and strong

niche manuacturing sector.

Many ederal grants contain Buy

American provisions — it was

a key eature o the American

Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Constraining ederal purchases

to homegrown products, within

limits, is one way o injecting a

tremendous amount o capital into

our manuacturing sector.

2Encourage Americans to Buy

American, at least once

Roger Simmermaker’s book, How Americans

Can Buy American, outlines more than

sixteen thousand aordable U.S.-produced

and based products and services.1 He also

goes so ar as to oer an online resource

listing where these products can be

purchased in your community.2 While

occasionally locally produced products are

slightly more expensive, as Diane Sawyer’s

Made In America challenge notes, “i every

American spent an extra $3.33 on U.S.-made

goods, it would create almost 10,000 new

jobs in this country.”3 Buying American, when

possible, is a way we can all give back now,

without waiting or the great gears o the

American bureaucracy to turn.For readers who think this is a sot kind

PRIORITY SEVEN Middle-Class Buying Power Accelerating

demand for “MadeIn America”

FACT

10,00NEW JOB

would be create

i every America

spent an extra

on American-

made goods.

$3.33

42



o policy — let me give an example o how

this kind o “market making” is already

working — in our ood supply.

For the past decade local armers, envi-

ronmentalists and concerned consumershave been ocusing on locally grown, organic

and sustainable oods. Many o us were

educated to the need or such products by

environmental groups and journalists like

Michael Pollan and others. So we created a

market or these products, and organic local

armers stepped in to ll it.

It is working — every day more o our ood

comes rom local sources.

I we start to pay attention to where our

goods are manuactured as well — and ask

hard questions like, “What is the carbon

ootprint o bringing this to market?” and,

“Did the worker who produced this earn a

living wage?” we will start to make markets

or more American goods.

3Restore the buying power o the

middle class: economic equality

and tax airness

We know American middle-class amilies

have lost ground in this struggling economy.

But the good news is that they can power

America’s economic recovery — by buying

what we are making in America again. First,

however, our nation must conront a central

barrier to restoring the buying power o the

middle class: economic inequality.

From the Occupy Wall Street movement

to the uproar over Mitt Romney’s tax returns,

our nation is engaged in a renewed debate

on economic inequality, and the statistics

are sobering:

Since 1979, ater-tax income or the top

one percent o households more than tripled,

while increasing by only one third or the

bottom 80 percent.4

CEO compensation has approached

300 times that o the average worker.5

Te richest one percent o Americans

in 2007 took home almost 24 percent o

income, up rom almost nine percent in the

1960s and 1970s.6

While the long-term causes o this

widening gap in incomes are many,7 the

Great Recession has ocused the attention

o policy makers, economists, business

leaders and the pundits on one o the most

devastating results: the massive shortall in

consumer demand that is holding back our

economic recovery.

As President Obama said in a recent

speech: “When middle-class amilies can no

longer aord to buy the goods and services

that businesses are selling, when people are

slipping out o the middle class, it drags down

the entire economy rom top to bottom.”8

American middle-class consumers —

Net worth distribution

2007

Financial wealth distribution

2007

Source: http://whorulesamerica.net/power/wealth.html

Top 1 percent

Next 4 percent

Next 5 percent

Next 10 percent

Bottom 80 percent

43%

29%

11%

10%

7%

35%

27%

11%

12%

15%

NET WORTH AND FINANCIAL WEALTH

DISTRIBUTION IN THE U.S. IN 2007

43



already let behind as the most wealthy

Americans increased their share o

our nation’s total income — are now

staggering rom a toxic combination o high

unemployment and underemployment, the

evaporation o home equity and the hangover

o huge debt as a result o the collapse o the

housing bubble, or worse, the juggernaut o

home oreclosures.

In addition to the other solutions

proposed in this plan, we can make

meaningul progress toward remedying

income inequality and ensuring our

capacity to invest in a prosperous uture

by reorming our tax system to make

sure that everyone — including those

who are ortunate enough to have made

millions — pays his or her air share.

President Obama has proposed making

our tax system more progressive9 — and I

agree.

Tat’s why Congress should take these

our immediate actions:

Repeal the Bush tax cuts or those

making over $250,000 per year

Tough still the subject o debate, there is

much evidence that the Bush tax cuts did

not deliver what President Bush promised—

not on job creation, not on economic

growth, not on increases in middle-class

income nor on improvement to the nation’s

decit.10

But there’s no room or debate on the cuts’

impact on economic equality — they’ve beena disaster. Data aggregated by the Economic

Policy Institute11 show that in 2010, the top

1 percent o earners (i.e., tax lers making

over $645,000) received 38 percent o the

breaks rom the 2001-08 tax changes. And the

top 0.1 percent o earners (i.e., those making

over $3 million) received an average tax cut o

roughly $520,000, more than 450 times larger

than the share received by an average middle-

income amily.Tere are many reasons or repealing

the cuts or the wealthiest two percent o

Americans, not to mention a savings o

approximately $700 billion over ten years.12

But making our tax code airer is among the

most important.

Observe the “Bufett rule”13 —

those making over $1 million a year

should pay the same rate as the average

middle class amily

Billionaire Warren Buett made headlines

last year when he authored an opinion

editorial calling on Congress to “stop

coddling the super-rich.”14

Buett reported that he paid only 17.4

percent o his taxable income, lower than

that o any o the other 20 people in his ofce,

whose tax burdens ranged rom 33 percent

to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent. He

called on Congress to raise tax rates on the

wealthiest Americans and “get serious about

shared sacrice.”

Tis is no small problem. A recent

report rom the nonpartisan Congressional

Research Service reveals the ollowing acts:15

One quarter o millionaires pay a lower

tax rate (less than 26.5 percent) than 10

million middle-income Americans who earn

less than $100,000 annually.

Source: Congressional Budget Oce

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

LOWEST

QUINTILE

SECOND

QUINTILE

MIDDLE

QUINTILE

FOURTH

QUINTILE

81st – 99th

PERCENTILES

TOP 1%

INCOME GROUP

While the top one percent o earners are getting richer, the rest

o us are being let behind.

GROWTH IN REAL AFTER-TAX

INCOME FROM 1979 TO 2007

44



Tere are more than 4,000 “ultra-

millionaires” who earn more than $5 million

a year and pay a lower tax rate (less than

23 percent) than 10 million middle-income

Americans who earn less than $100,000

annually.More than hal o taxpayers who earn

between $100,000 to $200,000 pay a higher

tax rate than 33,000 millionaires and 4,400

ultra-millionaires.

President Obama enshrined the “Buett

Rule” in his principles or tax reorm: No

household making over $1 million annually

should pay a smaller share o its income in

taxes than middle-class amilies pay.16

I agree and I applaud Mr. Buett orstepping orward as a voice or airness in

our tax system.

Cap the value o itemized deductions

and other tax preerences to 28 percent

or amilies with incomes over $250,000

Tis proposed limitation, a eature o the tax

reorms in the President’s plan, would return

the deduction rate to the level it was at the

end o the Reagan Administration.17

Adjust the preerential rate on

carried interest, capital gains and

maybe dividends

According to ax Policy Center estimates,

almost hal o the benets rom preerential

rates on carried interest, capital gains and

dividends (15 percent maximum) go to the

top one-tenth o one percent o households.18

Low- and middle-income households, by

way o contrast, earn most o their income

rom wages and salaries that are taxed at

much higher rates (a at payroll tax rate up

to a maximum and graduated income tax

rates).19 Tey cannot benet rom these tax

breaks like millionaires, nor can they exploit

other tax loopholes and deductions like high-

income households.

President Obama’s plan calls or taxing

hedge und prots, called “carried interest,”

as ordinary income instead o the current15 percent capital gains rate. I agree, but I

believe we should also take a serious look at

some adjustments to preerential rates or

capital gains and perhaps even dividends.

Warren Buett has argued eloquently or

this type o policy shit:

“I have worked with investors or 60 years

and I have yet to see anyone — not even when

capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-

77 — shy away rom a sensible investment because o the tax rate on the potential gain.

People invest to make money, and potential

taxes have never scared them of.

“And to those who argue that higher rates

hurt job creation, I would note that a net o

nearly 40 million jobs were added between

1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened

since then: lower tax rates and ar lower job

creation.” 20

Te American Dream

Tese proposals are really about much more

than buying power or big numbers — they

are about restoring middle-class access to

the American Dream. I grew up watching

my ather work hard and play by the rules.

Tat’s not just a cliché or our amily;

it’s a undamental American value that

allowed us to move into the middle class.

By restoring economic equality, we can

help every amily in America benet rom

the opportunities that mine did. It’s a goal

worth ghting or.

45



Sources

1 Roger Simmermaker, How Americans Can Buy American: Te Power O Consumer Patriotism, Tird Edition, (Consumer Patriotism

Corporation, 2010).

2 Roger Simmermaker, “How Americans Can Buy American,” (Consumer Patriotism Corporation), available at http://www.

howtobuyamerican.com/index.php.

3 “’Made in America’ Pledge: What is American-Made in Your Home?,” (ABC World News), available at http://abcnews.go.com/WN/

MadeInAmerica/mailorm?id=12912252.

4 2011: Te Year that Income Inequality Captured the Public’s Attention, Isabel V. Sawhill, Te Brookings Institution, 12/19/2011 .

5 Ibid.

6 Emmanuel Saez, “Striking it Richer: Te Evolution o op Incomes in the United States (Update with

2007 estimates),” (University o Caliornia, Berkeley, Department o Economics, August 2009), available at

http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~saez/saez-UStopincomes-2007.pd.

7 Josh Bivens and Heidi Shierholz, or example, list 6 policy changes that led to today’s vast concentration o wage incomes: (1) Labor law

changes accelerated the decline o unions in the private sector – the more-insulated public sector saw unionization rates hold steady or

even increase; (2) Te purchasing power o the minimum wage was allowed to be eroded by ination or almost decades-long stretches

– resulting in a minimum today that remains ar below its late-1960s peak in purchasing power; (3) Global integration with much-poorer

trading partners occurred under a regime o trade agreements that provided detailed and rm protections or capital-incomes but none

at all or labor-incomes in any country; (4) Te nancial sector was deregulated and began paying exorbitant rents to its most-privileged

employees, who dominate the upper reaches o the wage-distribution; (5) ax-rates on high-incomes were radically reduced; (6) Te

Federal Reserve let its mandate to pursue ull-employment wither. It akes a Policy Agenda, L. Josh Bivens and Heidi Shierholz, Economic

Policy Institute, June 2011.

8 Remarks by the President on the Economy in Osawatomie, Kansas, December 6, 2011.

9 Living Within Our Means and Investing in the Future – Te President’s Plan or Economic Growth and Decit Reduction, September

2011.

10 Tree Good Reasons to Let the High-End Bush ax Cuts Disappear this Year, Michael Linden and Michael Ettlinger, Center or

American Progress, 7/29/2010.

7 MY PRIORITIES FOR ACCELERATING DEMAND

FOR “MADE IN AMERICA”

1 Require the ederal government to buy more domestically produced products

2 Encourage Americans to Buy American, at least once

3 Restore the buying power o the middle class: economic equality

and tax airness

46

http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2011/1219_inequality_2011_sawhill.aspx

http://growth.newamerica.net/sites/newamerica.net/files/policydocs/Bivens-Shierholz%206-21.pdf


http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/remarks-president-economy-osawatomie-kansas

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf


http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/07/let_cuts_expire.html






http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/remarks-president-economy-osawatomie-kansas



http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2011/1219_inequality_2011_sawhill.aspx



11 enth Anniversary o the Bush-era ax Cuts, Andrew Fieldhouse and Ethan Pollack, 6/1/2011.

12 Tree Good Reasons to Let the High-End Bush ax Cuts Disappear Tis Year, Michael Linden and Michael Ettlinger, Center or

American Progress, 12/29/2010.

13 Stop Coddling the Super-Rich, Warren Buet, New York imes Op-Ed, 8/14/2011.

14 Ibid.

15 Te Tree Tings You Need to Know About Millionaire ax Rates, Sarah Ayres, Center or American Progress 10/14/2011, drawing

rom Tomas L. Hungerord, “An Analysis o the ‘Buett Rule’” (Washington: Congressional Research Service, 2011).

16 Gene Sperling, “Buett Rule Facts and Fictions,” (Te White House, September 2011), available at

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/09/21/buett-rule-acts-and-ctions.

17 Living Within Our Means and Investing in the Future – Te President’s Plan or Economic Growth and Decit Reduction, September

2011.

18 On the President’s Recommendations to the Joint Select Committee, William G. Gale, Brookings 11/19/2011.

19 Ibid.

20 Stop Coddling the Super-Rich, Warren Buet, New York imes Op-Ed, 8/14/2011.

47

http://www.epi.org/publication/tenth_anniversary_of_the_bush-era_tax_cuts/



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html


http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/09/millionaire_fast_facts.html



http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2011/0919_obama_supercommittee_gale.aspx



http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2011/0919_obama_supercommittee_gale.aspx



http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/09/millionaire_fast_facts.html





http://www.epi.org/publication/tenth_anniversary_of_the_bush-era_tax_cuts/



Conclusion

A

place to start. Tat’s what I am proposing with my Make More

in America plan — a place to start restoring middle-class jobs

and a place to start rebuilding the economic balance in this

nation again. Te “American Dream” we share is not one o the

very rich and the very poor — it is the dream o a nation where

everyone who works hard has the chance to succeed.

Tat was my experience growing up. My

mom and dad dreamed o a better lie or

our amily — they worked hard, they took

risks and we all succeeded. Teir sacrice

sent me to college, and then to grad school. I

succeeded on their shoulders.

Our strength as a nation is that we can

draw on the talent and vision o everyone —

not just the lucky ew. Tat’s why we can’t let

the world o American Dreams disappear.

And that’s why I am starting my campaign

or Congress ocused on restoring middle-

class jobs by revitalizing our manuacturing

economy.

Tese are the kinds o jobs that pay living

wages — wages that help buy houses, pay

college tuitions, und decent retirements.

Tese are jobs everyone who works hard and

is willing to get training can do and keep.

Tese are the kind o jobs that add such

tremendous value to our economy — and

add tremendous value to our lives as we

experience the power o making things with

our own hands again.

Now, I am the rst to acknowledge that

many jobs that were once done in America

are not coming back. As a co-ounder and

educator at the UC Berkeley Center or

Entrepreneurship and echnology, we study

these macroeconomic trends. Te indicators

suggest that low-wage and low-skill

manuacturing jobs will not come back in

any real numbers. And the reality is, bringing

back these kind o jobs should not be our

goal. We want jobs that open up economic

opportunity and provide middle-class

stability and prosperity — not low-wage jobs.

But millions o high-skilled and high-wage

jobs can come back. Over the last two years,

we’ve already seen this start to happen. Our

government can do much more to promote

the resurgence o high-wage manuacturing

and that’s what this plan is about.

Stacey Lawson

and her amily

48



We’re lucky to live in the most beautiul

congressional district in America. But we

are also lucky that the hardworking and

innovative individuals who live in our

district are already showing the way to an

America that Makes More again. Our nichemanuacturing sector is a model. It shows

the power o innovation and how keeping

manuacturing local helps bring cutting-edge

products to market aster.

Beyond what we think o as traditional

manuacturing, we see the people o our

district showing how to create sustainable

local economies. When we consume cheese

rom West Marin and Humboldt, or oysters

rom omales Bay, honey rom Mendocino, wine rom the Anderson Valley, resh salmon

rom the waters o Fort Bragg or resh,

organic and sustainable produce rom a

thousand small arms up and down our coast

and valleys — we are participating in an

economic model that should inspire the rest

o our economy.

Buying local works. It gives us power

as consumers. It keeps producers both in

touch and accountable to us, because we

are all neighbors. It recovers lost skills and

builds new knowledge. It helps sustain

and protect our environment. And it has

launched thousands o small businesses,

those transormative economic portals to the

middle class.

We can and will Make More in America

again — i we work together as consumers

and as participants in our government to

make local markets and make national

changes in policy.

I’ve spent most o my career in starting

small businesses, in helping to develop new technologies and in education. One o the

things I have learned throughout my career is

the way to get the best answers is to ask the

people who are actually doing the work.

Tat’s one thing about politics I still don’t

get. Politicians seem to eel they need to

pretend to have all the answers. Maybe that’s

why politicians make so many mistakes. I

don’t pretend to have all the solutions. But

I am committed to making this start — by

presenting you this plan and asking you what

you think.

Please — tell me where you agree or

disagree. ell me what else we should do.

Let me know what you think our next plan

should cover.

I trust this community, this state and this

nation. Our problems are big and times are

still tough. But I know we’ve got the smartest

and most skilled workers in the world. And I

certainly know we’re up to any challenge.

Our strength as a nation is that we

can draw on the talent and vision o

everyone —not just the lucky ew.