PDA

View Full Version : Democrats to Minimum Wage Workers: Drop Dead


PittsburghAfterDark
08-04-2006, 06:03 PM
Senate rejects GOP estate tax, minimum wage bill
Updated 8/4/2006 5:49 AM ET

WASHINGTON (AP) ? A bill combining an estate tax cut with a boost in the federal minimum wage, an election-year combination engineered by Republicans, may see another vote this fall.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., told senators who voted against the bill to "rethink long and hard" during the four-week recess that began late early Friday. Congress reconvenes in September.

Frist also reiterated that the GOP will not split the minimum wage apart from the estate tax, and that future votes on the pay increase will be linked to cutting taxes on multimillion-dollar estates.

"These issues must be addressed as a package, all or nothing," he said.

The Senate late Thursday rejected, 56-42, a bill fusing the cut in estate taxes with a $2.10 increase over three years in the $5.15 minimum wage. The bill also would have revived a host of expired tax cuts, including a business research and development credit and deductions for state sales taxes, college tuition and teachers' classroom supplies.

Republicans needed 60 votes to advance the measure, which passed the House last Saturday.

For Republicans, the combination could have diluted a campaign issue for Democrats who say the GOP has prevented an increase in the minimum wage for nearly a decade. It simultaneously would have advanced the estate tax, which may have an uncertain future if the Republicans lose seats in the November elections.

The GOP strategy also put Democrats in an awkward position. Democrats could have voted against the bill, thus rejecting a minimum wage. Or, they could have voted for the bill, thus supporting a tax cut on large estates.

Most Democrats voted against the bill and criticized Republicans for using a wage increase to deliver a tax cut for wealthy families.

"This Republican plan was cynical, it was contemptible, and it was cowardly," Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said.

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said the vote "told the Republican leadership in no uncertain terms to stop playing games with the minimum wage."

Republicans complained that Democrats voted against the bill only to score a political point, the ability to blame Republicans for being unable to pass important bills.

"They want to say that this is a do-nothing Congress," Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said. "Their strategy is block and blame."

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said the idea had always been a risky.

"The bottom line is that we bet on the wrong horses. Maybe we should've taken a bet that was more likely to pay off," he said.

A few lawmakers voted against the party line.

Four Democrats joined Republicans and voted for the bill: Sens. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bill Nelson of Florida and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas. Two Republicans voted against the bill: Sens. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and George Voinovich of Ohio.

An earlier bid to bring up an estate tax bill for debate fell three votes short of succeeding. House and Senate Republican leaders had hoped adding the minimum wage, along with a package of popular tax cuts, could carry it to passage.

Under President Bush's first tax cut, the estate tax shrinks through this decade and disappears in 2010. It reappears at older and higher rates in 2011.

The estate tax and minimum wage bill would, by 2015, increase the amount of an estate exempt from taxation to $5 million for an individual and $10 million for a couple. Estates worth up to $25 million would be taxed at capital gains rates, currently 15% and scheduled to increase to 20%. The top tax rate on larger estates would fall to 30% by 2015.

Information on the bill, H.R. 5970, can be found at http://thomas.loc.gov
Link (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-08-03-minimum-wage-bill_x.htm?csp=34)

You will now note who was willing to make a compromise.

The Republicans want nothing to do with a minimum wage increase, the Democrats want nothing to do with eliminating the death tax.

One party compromised, one screwed "the working man".

Demonrat politics at it's most obvious. Screw anyone that won't vote for them even if they're screwing their "base".

Alonzo
08-04-2006, 07:44 PM
Republicans simply wanted to remove a campaign issue, as many states are putting wage increases on the ballot. This would have made those moot. They attached something they knew wouldn't pass to one that had majority support.

It wasn't beneficial to the democrats in any way. The minimum wage will still be increased, it just got pushed back a little bit.

lily
08-04-2006, 08:21 PM
So......in order for the poor to make ends meet, the rich need to get richer?

Now Frist can twist this around, in his presidental campaign.

Rider
08-04-2006, 09:39 PM
Lily, you said: "So......in order for the poor to make ends meet, the rich need to get richer?"

I have a lot of concern for working people and I don't like the way things have been going with "free trade" agreements and such. My company has been gutted and chopped to pieces by a new CEO. He made about 80 million the first year while thousands lost jobs and benefits. It makes me sick. BUT- robbing the rich to give to the poor will never work. It will only make things worse. In the open business markets of the world companies can just pack up and go somewhere else if they don't like the enviroment here. I think that the answer is to move toward a model of "fair trade" rather than "free trade".

OK, I'll climb down off my soapbox now.

BoogyMan
08-04-2006, 09:57 PM
Republicans simply wanted to remove a campaign issue, as many states are putting wage increases on the ballot. This would have made those moot. They attached something they knew wouldn't pass to one that had majority support.

It wasn't beneficial to the democrats in any way. The minimum wage will still be increased, it just got pushed back a little bit.


'Zo, please tell me why the government should be able to STEAL 55% of an estate worth 1 Mil. from those who would inherit it???I would just love to hear your sentient and well thought out answer that will change my view of this.

Remember, Robin Hood was fictional so make it good!

Alonzo
08-04-2006, 10:28 PM
Why should they be able to steal from peoples paycheck? Steal is such a loaded word and no more applicable here there with any other tax.

But I didn't say whether I support it or not. I said it was a political move by the republicans, a long shot that, if passed, would remove a campaign issue.

BoogyMan
08-04-2006, 10:40 PM
Why should they be able to steal from peoples paycheck? Steal is such a loaded word and no more applicable here there with any other tax.

But I didn't say whether I support it or not. I said it was a political move by the republicans, a long shot that, if passed, would remove a campaign issue.


That is what the issue is 'Zo, answer the question! The people stealing from the paycheck are the liberals with their tax em till their ears bleed ideology.

Answer the question asked, just once.

lily
08-04-2006, 10:49 PM
Lily, you said: "So......in order for the poor to make ends meet, the rich need to get richer?"

I have a lot of concern for working people and I don't like the way things have been going with "free trade" agreements and such. My company has been gutted and chopped to pieces by a new CEO. He made about 80 million the first year while thousands lost jobs and benefits. It makes me sick. BUT- robbing the rich to give to the poor will never work. It will only make things worse. In the open business markets of the world companies can just pack up and go somewhere else if they don't like the enviroment here. I think that the answer is to move toward a model of "fair trade" rather than "free trade".

OK, I'll climb down off my soapbox now.




While I can sympathize with your problem, Rider. I don't see what it has to do with the estate tax. IMO, it has more to do with NAFTA.

lily
08-04-2006, 10:52 PM
BoogyMan



That is what the issue is 'Zo, answer the question! The people stealing from the paycheck are the liberals with their tax em till their ears bleed ideology.

Sadly.......that's what it's going to take to pay off this debt. Sooner or later, somebody's got to get taxed. The middle class, as usual will have to carry the load........but then I guess I'm off topic.:cool:

CockySOB
08-04-2006, 11:08 PM
What no one mentioned while this issue was before the House and Senate was the fact that the proposed increase to the Federal minimum wage would NOT affect those whose state and local laws already provided for more benefits than the Federal regulation.

Here is a link to the various state regulations and how they relate to the Federal minimum wage via the Federal Standards Labor Act.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

And here's a link to the FSLA question & answer page from the US Department of Labor, including specifics on the relationship between Federal, state and local minimum wage laws and order of precedence.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/q-a.htm

Also of interest should be the state regulations regarding overtime as regards hours per day and hours per week. Well, I find it interesting anyway.

In a nutshell, the Democrats in the Senate chose NOT to increase the Federal minimum wage in order to "strike back" at who they allege are the fatcats of American society. This WILL bite them in the ass in the future. The Republicans played this round expertly, making it a "win-win" scenario for the Repubilcans and a "lose-lose" situation for the Democrats.

CockySOB
08-04-2006, 11:11 PM
BTW, I really, REALLY dislike the employer tip credit aspect of our current minimum wage laws. I've seen a large number of restauranteurs screw their employees using it, most of the time in direct violation of the law. But it is a crime which goes unpunished.

Sorry for drifting slightly off-topic, but I figured the issue is relevant to minimum wage law.

lily
08-04-2006, 11:27 PM
This WILL bite them in the ass in the future. The Republicans played this round expertly, making it a "win-win" scenario for the Repubilcans and a "lose-lose" situation for the Democrats.

That my dear Cocky remains to be seen. Sitting on this side of the fence, it looks like as usual, the Republicans are only out for the rich. Sliding their little rider in, just shows how dis-honest they are.

Also, wasn't it the Democrats that signed on for no raises for themselves until the minimum wage gets raised?

One thing I will give you......this will look good when Frist runs for president......he'll be able to spin this one goooooood.

Alonzo
08-04-2006, 11:35 PM
That is what the issue is 'Zo, answer the question! The people stealing from the paycheck are the liberals with their tax em till their ears bleed ideology.

Answer the question asked, just once.

The OP made the topic as an attempt to present the republican side as a generous compromise and Democrats as being pigheaded and screwing the people. That's what this is about. I have no interest in debating the merits of the estate tax, and did not answer this topic to do so. PAD did not argue the merits of it, neither did my response. The issue of whether the estate tax itself is a good thing was brought up by you in response to my post.

What no one mentioned while this issue was before the House and Senate was the fact that the proposed increase to the Federal minimum wage would NOT affect those whose state and local laws already provided for more benefits than the Federal regulation.

Obviously. Federal minimum wage laws don't dictate how high a state can go, just that they can't go any lower that that set amount.

In a nutshell, the Democrats in the Senate chose NOT to increase the Federal minimum wage in order to "strike back" at who they allege are the fatcats of American society. This WILL bite them in the ass in the future. The Republicans played this round expertly, making it a "win-win" scenario for the Repubilcans and a "lose-lose" situation for the Democrats.


They chose not to vote in favor of this bill because, in doing so, they would be voting in favor of something they strongly opposed.

This will be a non issue. It will make the rounds on shows like Limbaugh and Hannity, and will be portrayed in the way PAD did it. But it won't go beyond that.

They would have been foolish to vote in favor. They would have allowed the repeal of the estate tax, plus put in place other tax cuts, and removed a campaign issue (meaning possibly less democrats in the senate to implement democrat policies).

Any democrat to vote in favor of this, unless they support the non-minimum wage aspects, was a fool.

wonder cow
08-05-2006, 08:31 AM
It's lovely when the congress of the US is used for high stakes games of political chicken. What a wonderful use of our money.

Drocket
08-05-2006, 12:08 PM
I really don't think this is going to particularly hurt Democrats - the way Republicans rigged this bill are just too pathetically obvious. The only people who will be fooled by BS this nonsense is utter morons, such as right-wing idiots who copy-and-paste to political discussion forums anything their superiors tell them to. Not that I'm talking about anyone in particular.

Obviously. Federal minimum wage laws don't dictate how high a state can go, just that they can't go any lower that that set amount.
Actually, if this bill would have passed, it would have. Another provision was stripping the states of their right to set higher minimum wages. This bill was just PACKED with poison pills. Even if it would have passed, the Republicans still would have had tons of ammunition to use against Democrats who voted for it.