Quote:
|
Originally Posted by analog
Not many more, no. He's pretty high on the list. Santorum is hot on his heals, though.
|
Take Bush, Delay and Santorum's "ownership" society and place it "where the sun don't shine" !!!!! Greedy, heartless, bastards. Is child labor in sweatshops next on their agenda ?
Quote:
<a href="http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14109065&BRD=1675&PAG=461&dept_id=18168&rfi=6">http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14109065&BRD=1675&PAG=461&dept_id=18168&rfi=6</a>
Delaware Cty, PA Times
Editorial: Even at a minimum, wages need to be raised
The minimum wage proposals presented by our own Republican U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum and Massachusetts Democrat Sen. Edward "Ted" Kennedy were expected to offset one another and fail. But, the content of the two bills reveals the emphasis of both parties.
The $5.15-an-hour minimum wage has been the same since 1996. Nine long years since minimum-wage earners got a pay raise.
Kennedy’s bill would raise the minimum wage in three 70-cent increments over the next 26 months to $7.25. Santorum’s plan offered a $1.10 increase in two 55-cent jumps over 18 months.
But the Republican jump in pay was not merely a counterproposal to the Democrat plan. Kennedy promoted a bill simply aimed at raising the minimum wage. Santorum was spokesman for a minimum-wage bill with an 84-page amendment attached.
The amendment touched on overtime, a constant issue ever since Republicans gained control of the House, Senate and presidency simultaneously. The GOP minimum-wage plan attacked overtime from two sides.
<b>
First was the elimination of the 40-hour work week. Calling it "flex time," Santorum suggested an 80-hour, two-week cycle. Under the terms of this arrangement, an employer could schedule an employee 45 hours one week and 35 hours the second week and not have to pay the five hours overtime for the 45-hour week.</b>
But that’s not all.
Pennsylvania workers engaged in interstate commerce also got a special look in the Santorum amendment. Actually, any state’s workers involved in interstate commerce got the same look. These workers are currently protected by the Fair Labor Standards Act. One of the rights protected under that act is overtime pay (there’s those two words again). The Santorum amendment would eliminate that pay for workers, if they work for a firm with annual revenues of $1 million or less.
But employees have more to fear in this bill than the loss of overtime pay. Some would lose all their pay. In another gracious move to businesses of all kinds,<h3> the 84 pages added to the minimum-wage proposal excused employers whose employees receive tips from paying any salary at all -- if the employees’ tips equal the minimum wage.</h3> Of course that would be the generous $6.25 an hour the bill offers.
There is one more present to business in the amendment. This one goes to struggling firms making $7 million or less. <h3>Our compassionate conservative senator and his colleagues want to exempt those companies from paying fines for violating safety rules for their workers.</h3>
In the past, the Republican majority stopped the Democrats’ attempts to bring minimum-wage legislation to the floor. Monday, they allowed the vote, with the knowledge the competing proposals would keep both bills from passing.
Republican leadership did not care if their bill went down to defeat because they are not really interested in the raising the minimum wage. Republican leadership wants to overhaul bankruptcy laws and believes the minimum-wage issue is getting in the way.
If the legislators working so hard to limit the income of those struggling to get out of poverty or struggling to maintain a middle-class standard had their wage hikes, benefits and retirement incomes tied to the laws they want to enact, the emphasis would be quite different. That, of course, will never happen.
So everyone must pay attention to all amendments included in any wage or benefit or bankruptcy legislation. It’s the fine print that could hurt. The pay cut you save may be your own.
|
The apologists of the republican agenda who post on these boards should examine the threat that the agenda they espouse, poses to the economic security of some of their own family members, friends, and members of their congregations and communities. These republican politicians do not represent the majority of you!