They have been in power less than a week and already the real democrats are starting to surface. This is going to be a fun two years of watching them ruin a good thing.

President Bush should veto this bill at a press conference and call on the democrats to give him a minimum wage bill with no exemptions for Nancy Pelosi's friends.

What democrat wrote this exemption into the bill?

If the Republicans had done this ABCNBCCBSMSNBCNYTIMESLATIMES would be leading with it every hour.

New democrats, same as the old democrats

As Matt and I know, just all too typical of Pelosi and the Democrats - one thing our liberal and left friends don't realise is that they've been taken for a ride by the Democratic leadership. Be a pure and committed lefty - but your leaders aren't; they'll take your votes, take your donations and do a lot of lefty talk, but when it comes down to their personal wealth, power and privilege, they are like the Bourbons of old - learnt nothing and forgot nothing.

This is the same Nancy Pelosi, who (with her husband) is worth about $55 million, who receives awards from United Farm Workers, but will not employ union labor in the restaurant, resort and vinyards that they own (while also selling their grapes to wineries that do likewise). According to Peter Schweizer's Book Do As I Say (Not As I Do).

The Samoa exception reminds me of Bill Clinton's creation of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, which put its coal off limits to miners. That coal was noted for being one of the cleanest-burning types of coal in the world, and is the world's largest deposit of its type. The second largest such deposit is in Indonesia, and owned by the Lippo Group and Riady family, widely suspected of being behind those foreign campaign contributions during Mr. Bill's time in office.

Anyone expecting any "clean up" of Congress under Comrades Pelosi, Reid, Boxer, Murtha, et al are fools.

The Democrats have a long history of speaking out of both sides of their mouths and hypocrisy. Remember the House exempting itself from it's own laws passed prior to the Republican takeover in 1995?

The real "culture of corruption" is alive and well in D.C. and will be ignored by the willing accomplices in the lamestream media.

Anyone hear any more about Rep. Jefferson (D. La.)?

This is going to be a fun two years of watching them ruin a good thing.

Tom, let's just hope they don't wreck it beyond repair, or as we used to say in the military -- FUBAR.

What democrat wrote this exemption into the bill?

Three guesses, Nebraska, the first two don't count.

New democrats, same as the old democrats

Actually there are some new Democrats, but the main effect of their election on November 7th was to put the "old Democrats" back in charge.

Anyone hear any more about Rep. Jefferson (D. La.)?

Last I heard, he was rewarded with a subcommittee chairmanship, heh.

Re: Jefferson...

News reports recently stated he received a standing "O" upon his entry into a CBC meeting...

Blksheep, that's kind of funny and sad at the same time.

As Goose sardonically stated in the classic 'Mad Max'..."Well well well!"

Funny how these things turn out, huh libs, funny how 'A New Way Forward' turns into 'The Same Old Thing'...and you lapped it up like nectar. Theyre going to sell you down the river whenever its convenient

Still believe America's Grandmother and her old-guard lib cohorts are interested in the little guy, still believe that she and they will give equal time to the red-state democrats on the big issues? Still believe that millionaire democrats honestly know what its like to be an average joe?

Still believe you arent going to get hammered in the next two years as the true nature of the liberal majority manifests itself?

As Bill would say, "Alka Seltzer?"

The right wing blogosphere will obsess on this one point for the next few days, I imagine: A loophole in the minimum wage law for Samoa. Interestingly enough this whole "YOU CAN'T RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE" scare goes out everytime someone proposes it and the jobs never disappear. States that have already raised the minimum wage don't lose jobs to states that haven't raised it.

Most of these "Min wage should be nothing" types are either economics professors who never worked in the private sector, or fat losers who work at a comic book store and still live with their mothers.

despite the payraises, there's no loss of govt jobs now is there.

and that's true for the mom-n-pop (township govt) all the way up to the multinational (feds).

give 'em a raise scruge...

The only surprise is how fast they were to show their true colors. Now President Bush needs to do something he has not done that often, start vetoing the bills. As he vetos' them he should give an explanation as to why, making sure it makes it into the MSM - so everyone can know whats going on. Say a press conference or veto ceremony?

The left must be asleep still. What else would explain their silence?

I have an idea. Rather than giving America's poor help, or hope in a better life, we can just raise the minimum wage and keep them where they are. This way, they will keep voting for us! weee!

You know what they say. Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Keep giving him fish and he will come back to you for a lifetime.

God you people will believe anything. What tuna company? Poor people spend more of the extra money they get helping economies where they live.

You idiots still believe lower taxes create more revenue too.

My present for President Bush that he can open during the SOTU speech later this month.

Happy 110th Congress!

LaMano,

Heh, heh, heh. I love it.

Sadly, it is those of us in the swing vote world who wonder how everyone posting here can be so condescending of the Dems after what the R's pulled for the past 6 years. Everything said about the D's rings true, and yet what choice did anyone have but to change who was in power? The R's had lost control of who they were and were not taxing and spending us into bigger deficits. At least from a basic understanding of budgets and running a business, at least the D's look to match revenue to spending. The R's just spent this century printing money and IOU's while lowering the tax burden. It's great to have a lower tax burden, but jeez, can't we have some fiscal restraint?!?

It's not that the people who voted for the D's thought they were everything they promised. It's that they wanted to have some oversight of the W, to instill some accountability. Swing voters will take the warts and blemishes of the D's over the warts and blemishes of the R's for that single reason. Just as they felt a need to stop Clinton in 1994 when he pushed nationalized healthcare and gays in the military.

LaMano - that sounds and looks really good to me. I just hope he will use it as often as needed.

How about this little tidbit about sleazy Nancy Pelosi:

Majority Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband Paul Pelosi is a primary Del Monte investor, with $17 million in shares.

Del Monte Foods

Seems Queen Nancy has a personal financial interest in keeping the little people slaving away in the tuna packing plants.

Funny how the lib trolls are silent today.

Bill, Tom, Rico...what's up? Finally figuring out ya been duped by the lib media.

How's that 100 hour plan Queen Nancy has been yammering about?

Hypocrite, thy name is Liberal.

The trolls are quiet in this thread, ahh their silence is so telling.

Interesting comments and research being posted on FreeRepublic;

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1766473/posts

Good posts, in particular Bigfoot. I too had a few posts on the "double standards of Pelosi, when
it comes to her/husband's wineries, restaurants.
Seems like the old "double standards here" doesn't
it. Wonder if our Gop Gang will have the balls to
look into this definite "Conflict of Interest", and make the most of it. They need to take these
kind of things and explode it onto the media-one way or another. I know the only one to run it will possibly be Fox, but there must be SOME MSM,
out there, who would like to garner the kind of ratings of Fox,(most watched cable outlet) and jump on this bandwagon. My thoughts are, is that if say CBS, NBC or ABC would do this, their number
would certainly improve. OR...will they still carry the DemonCrat Mantra, and shoot themselves in the foot-ratings wise?

Anyway, sure hope the GOP makes hay on this Pelosi
thing--they DID NOT when the Reid landscheme was dropped in their laps---maybe, just maybe, they are "starting to get the drift, that unless you fight fire with fire---the opposition is going to
put you OUT, like the last of the fires' embers".

HOPE THEY WAKE UP, AND USE THE STICK ON THE DEMS, JUST AS THEY HAVE DONE AT EVERY CHANCE, TREATING THE MORE THAN ACCEPTING GOP, LIKE A BUNCH OF WHIPPED PINATAS.

Another point if I may:

Shouldn't the "private business practices of Madame Pelosi be looked into and put under the microscope"??? Hopefully....

Oh yeah, and Reid, Berger, Jefferson, etc.

Really light on the lefty posts on this thread...wonder what that could mean...heck, I'm here and I just had an emergency root canal...not like its hard to put a comment up.

Should have said: This is going to be a fun two years of watching them self destruct.

Looks like Nancy did not have to be lobbied when the whole time she was recieving dividend checks.

Won't see this story on ABC news.

Hurts like hell till the pain goes away...eh Mark?

I think BS is taking another fatty nap from his meds and the remaining leftists have bugged out!

1. Unlike Virginia, California has a higher minimum wage than the federal wage. It's $7.50 an hour right now (I hope you can make the connection that this is higher than the proposed $7.25/hour federally). However, in the city and county of San Francisco, the minimum wage was just raised to $9.14/hour. Also, people who work in service industries are not exempt from this rule. This means that your waitress, bartender, and bellhop are all making $9.14/hour plus their tips. I think she's exempting California (which I have yet to find in the actual legislation) because we already do a good enough job at keeping up with inflation. What's the reason you exempt someone from Medicare, or other socially progressive services? Well, if they make enough money to do it themselves, why would they need the help? I believe that this is the same line of thought.
2. The federal minimum wage has not been increased since 1998. Are you honestly thinking that this is bad for the economy? Just because you don't make minimum wage, doesn't mean that people that matter don't. Also, look at the price of stock since that time. Look at the number of jobs destroyed, housing prices nationally, health care, etc. Inflation is happening, and one way to allow those who are unable or unwilling to keep up, is to pay them more. These people are working for YOU. Since none of our fiscal worth is any part of a fraction of the world's wealth, why does it matter? If you're responsible and driven, you will make money...there's tons of it to be had...just make it! Also, this will not hurt our economy, it will help. Sure, business owners might rethink their strategy, but by the time that happens, the lower wage people will be buying your products and services to catch up with the rest of us. Once the business owners raise prices, a lot of money will be spent. Also, think of how much money in taxes the government will have. We can use this to fund the war in Iran or to fund our Nuclear warhead development, or to build more spaceships to fly to Mars..yeah!
3. "Yeah, does she really expect us to believe that?" I would expect this comment from a Republican who is incapable of checking facts and formulating an argument that works for those who have opposing views. I'm a HIGHLY objective thinker, and am willing to listen to every side of an argument. However, I immediately deny any credibility to speculation like this. You're not Nancy Pelosi, how would you know?
4. Since ignorance and the absence of fact checking will call me a "troll" and a "liberal" among other things, I invite people to have a civil conversation with me and my friends before making any conclusions. I promise not to turn gay or hug a tree the whole time.

Too bad its all not true. Pelosi's name is not on the bill anywhere. She did not coauthor the bill. Then why does it leave out Somoa you ask? They CAN'T change the minimum wage in Somoa: http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/americanSamoa/ASminwage.htm

"The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), applies generally to employment within American Samoa as it does to employment within the United States. The minimum wage rates for American Samoa are set by a special industry committee (29 U.S.C. 205, 29 C.F.R. Part 511) appointed by the U.S. Department of Labor, as required by the Act. The rates are set for particular industries, not for an employee's particular occupation. The rates are minimum rates (29 U.S.C. 206(a)(3)); an employer may choose to pay an employee at a rate higher than the rate(s) for its industry. "

Yes, however the minimum wage in the Somoa is much cheaper than California.

Everyone deserves some success, but then there are Tyrants who spend profits on his and her Lamborghini's.

See rates here http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/americanSamoa/fishCanning.htm

Nice try benry but you failed miserably when it came to using simple logic to support your specious conclusions..

This based on the simple logic why not exempt the entire state and every other state whose min wage is above federal standards.

That is what would be required for your base point rather than just your home area as well as the area you home has other business interests in...

You then state the Ca. min wage isn't destructive but rather a progressive means to keep up with inflation. Horse pooh... While most min wage jobs will always exist everywhere because they are meant for entry level purposes. The state of California is perhaps the most unfriendly business enviroment in the USA. Workmans comp costs are in some cases 100% of hourly wages. You take a $1 an hour raise and it at a minimum costs the employer $1.50 by the time he pays the extra SS, Medicare, workmans comp etc... The bay area has the highest unemployment rate in the state.. why because of high taxes and cost of doing business...

The state of California is losing businesses everyday to other states such as Oregon, Washington, Nevada, etc..

Lastly back to the minimum wage. It means poop... anyone worth their salt will and does make more than the minimum. What rasing the federal minimum wage will do is allow unions to automatically have every member who works for state, local or federal governments to receive a raise of between 12-15%. This is because all union contracts with government agencies use the federal minimum wage as the index for a multiplication factor to determine the wages. The factor is 3-3.5 X of the min wage.

The min wage increase wasn't to "help" the downtrodden but rather a big ol' BJ of a thank you to the unions..

and in Pelosi's case... like your attempt, a nice try..

ray reynolds aka: rip van winkle

Benry,
Legislation doesn’t exempt the various States because they “already do a good enough job keeping up with inflation.” The State of California is not exempt from Federal Minimum wage under this or any other legislation. American Samoa is exempted for spurious reasons; the largest employer in American Samoa is the Tuna processing plant owned by Del Monte, a San Francisco company ~major contributor to Pelosi and owned, I believe in part by Pelosi’s husband. Medicare is not at this time means tested. Your “facts” are simply wrong.

Minimum wage, State or Federal is well below the poverty income; therefore any extra income below the $12.12 take-home pay needed to remain below the poverty line will not add to the economy as even a large increase in minimum wage does not add to disposable income; it only closes the gap. The historic beneficiaries of increases in minimum wage are white, middle-class, teens and college students; historic losers in the mandated taxation of private industry are minorities, inner-city youth and marginal 2nd and 3rd family wage earners.

“Think of how much money in taxes the government will have” Is this supposed to be humor? Payroll taxes go to social Security and Medicare, they are no to be used for other purposes (remind me sometime and I’ll enlighten you on the “Trust fund” lie.)

But, for now I’ll stick to your DailyKos talking points; there has been job creation since 1998 not “job destruction" and the new jobs are primarily in management, financial, accounting, nursing and other professional occupations, the current state of minimum wage jobs is about the same as it was in 1998 when calculated against the population at large. Inflation has yet to be a factor in the economy as is evident by the Fed’s holding interest rates steady.

Since ignorance and the absence of fact checking, as well as a tragic inability to engage in critical thinking has defined you as a typical liberal, no need for us to engage in name calling; you’ve identified yourself pretty clearly.

Now, now, people--Leader Hoyer said the omission of American Samoa was just an oversight. Why should we not believe him; after all, they promised "the most ethical Congress in history."

As Bill would say: "Leev Ninzy Peeluzy aloon!"

Benry,

She isn't exempting California - she's exempting Samoa...it is in Samoa where Starkist makes its money.

Bane: "Minimum wage, State or Federal is well below the poverty income; therefore any extra income below the $12.12 take-home pay needed to remain below the poverty line will not add to the economy as even a large increase in minimum wage does not add to disposable income; it only closes the gap."

For starters, and though you didn't indicate it (and Census Bureau figures confirm it -- www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty05.html), your "$12.12 take-home pay" figure is based on a 40-hr work week by a single wage-earner, as applied to a family of six (approximately, using their weighted average threshold for the definition of poverty -- click on the Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2005 link and check out pg 45). In a given family of six, chances are that there is at least one additional wage-earner. If so, your assumptions break down.

Also, by the way, according to the same weighted average definition, a person living alone would dip below the poverty threshold when he or she makes less than $9,973/yr. Assuming the person worked 40 hrs/wk, 50 wks/yr, that works out to about $5/hr.

"The historic beneficiaries of increases in minimum wage are white, middle-class, teens and college students; historic losers in the mandated taxation of private industry are minorities, inner-city youth and marginal 2nd and 3rd family wage earners."

Since there hasn't been an increase in federal minimum wage in 10 years or so, and considering that minimum wage demographics have certainly shifted since then (though it's hard to say which shifts are important), it's hard to verify your statement with any degree of accuracy on the federal level. But I think you'd be hard pressed to find unanimous support for your statements (or even more support than less) if you looked at states and/or municipalities that have raised their minimum wage since then. But just on the basis of the BLS statistics (www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2005.htm) on who works for minimum wage, your comments look a little shaky. For example, almost half of those paid minimum wage are 25 years old or older. And minimum wage earners are more than twice as likely to be women than men. My guess is you're still quoting the same 15-year old study you quoted before.

"Anyone who has any basic understanding of economics knows that raising the minimum wage results in higher prices and job losses..."

"5 Nobel winners, others: Phased-in increase to $7.25 would help economy"

Liar.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/americanSamoa/ASminwage.htm

"The minimum wage rates for American Samoa are set by a special industry committee ... appointed by the U.S. Department of Labor, as required by the [Fair Labor Standards] Act."

Rico,
My calculations never “break down". The $12.12 take home pay is based on single head of household of a family of four; the traditional benchmark. If you want me to recalculate for a family of six I can do that too. These are independent calculations based on Department of Labor statistics, and payroll analysis of my own (this is what I do for a living.) Weighting the averages makes the data less trustworthy when calculating poverty income. I don't weight the amount; it is reported as accumulatd.

Next, although the Federal Minimum wage hasn’t changed in 10 years, the various States have; California (a State you’re familiar with) has had 7 minimum wage hikes since 1996. I don’t base my conclusions on a “15 year old study” but on recent events and studies of my own taken for the University system where I work.

Minimum wage for those over the age of 25 is overwhelmingly 2nd and 3rd wage earners in a household; always has been, check BLS further and you’ll find the stats.

Creepy liar, None,
Kenneth Arrow of Stanford University, Lawrence Klein of the University of Pennsylvania, Robert Solow of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Joseph Stiglitz at Columbia University and Clive Granger of the University of California, San Diego (I'll tell him you said Hi)said that the Federal minimum wage should be raised to “help the well being of low wage earners.” Then never stated that it would be “help the economy”. Try reading the statement not Mess NBC.