There was a vote in the House of Representatives on July 10, however SEVEN DEMOCRATS did not even vote. The repukes won by a THREE vote margin to support the administration.
One of the NON VOTING DEMOCRATS was that alleged friend of the working person, none other than Tricky Dicky Gephardt of St Louis MO.
I don't know if the link is active but here is something from around July 10
http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2003&rollnumber=351 NOT VOTING:
Cramer
Gibbons
Millender-McDonald
Fletcher
Goss
Owens
Fossella
Harman
Payne
Gephardt
Houghton
Sanchez, Loretta
Posted 7/10/2003 6:27 PM =
Today's Top Money Stories
House backs Bush on overtime rules - 6:27 PM
House backs Bush on overtime rules
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House voted=
Thursday to let the
Bush administration move ahead with proposed rules that could stop at least=
644,000
white-collar workers from receiving overtime pay, heeding a White House vet=
o threat
and taking the side of business in its battle against unions.
Lawmakers voted 213-210 to reject a Democratic provision that would have de=
railed
the regulations. Unless Congress prevents it, the proposed rules could take=
effect
later this year.
Senate Democrats had been planning a similar effort to block the regulation=
s. But
with the outcome in the House vote, such an effort in the Senate would seem=
to be
little more than a political statement.
The House vote was a victory for President Bush and Congress' Republican le=
aders.
With the ranks of jobless Americans growing, Democrats are hoping to use Bu=
sh's
stewardship of the still-weak economy in next year's presidential and congr=
essional
elections by arguing that the GOP has inadequately protected workers.
The proposed rules would require overtime — pay equal to one-and-a-half tim=
es the
hourly rate — for as many as 1.3 million additional low-income workers when=
they
work more than 40 hours per week, the department said. Democrats did not op=
pose
that expansion of the number of workers who would get the extra money.
But the department estimates at least 644,000 white-collar workers now requ=
ired to
get overtime would lose it as a result of new definitions of jobs that woul=
d be exempt
from the extra pay. Unions say that figure would actually exceed 8 million.=
The Democratic provision would have blocked any Labor Department regulation=
s that
would deprive workers of overtime pay they already receive. They offered it=
as an
amendment to a bill providing $138 billion for labor, education and health =
programs
next year.
"Overtime is not a luxury, it is a necessity for millions of American famil=
ies," said Rep.
George Miller, D-Calif., one of the amendment's sponsors.
Republicans said the new Labor Department rules would clarify confusing reg=
ulations
and reduce the growing number of lawsuits by workers seeking overtime.
"The only winners under this amendment are the trial lawyers," said Rep. Ch=
arles
Norwood, R-Ga.
In a statement, the White House said the proposal would help 1.3 million lo=
w-wage
workers by changing "outdated overtime laws" and threatened a Bush veto of =
the
spending bill if the House voted to block the rules. Administration officia=
ls calling
lawmakers in search of votes included Labor Secretary Elaine Chao.
"I listened to her as a courtesy, but my mind was made up," said Rep. Sherw=
ood
Boehlert, R-N.Y., a moderate who said he would vote to block the regulation=
s.
The overtime fight loomed as one of the year's major issues for both labor =
and
corporate America, and no one was pulling their punches.
Both sides sent lobbyists to the Capitol and barraged lawmakers with phone =
calls, e-
mails and letters. Both sides promised to include the vote among those they=
tally at
election time to rate whether legislators are sympathetic to their causes. =
Among the
groups working the issue were the AFL-CIO, the National Federation of Indep=
endent
Business, the National Restaurant Association and the International Union o=
f Police
Associations.
Wavering lawmakers fell largely into two categories: moderate Northeast Rep=
ublicans
from districts with a heavy union presence, and conservative Southern and W=
estern
Democrats.
The new rules, proposed in March, would require overtime for workers earnin=
g up to
$22,100 a year, up from the current ceiling of $8,060 set in 1975.
Numerous other changes would also be made in the complex regulations, inclu=
ding
definitions of which administrative, professional and executive jobs qualif=
y for
overtime. Those definitions have not been overhauled since 1949 and list de=
funct
jobs like straw bosses and gang leaders.
Businesses have complained they must pay overtime to well-paid workers and =
are
being deluged by lawsuits from workers demanding overtime. Unions say the n=
ew
rules would let employers stop paying overtime to workers including license=
d
practical nurses, paralegals, chefs, editors and dental hygienists — though=
it would
not affect those covered by union contracts.
Last month, House GOP leaders unable to round up enough votes had to abrupt=
ly
yank a bill from the schedule that would have let workers choose between ov=
ertime
pay and compensatory time off. Unions opposed that measure as a ploy to und=
ermine
the overtime many workers rely on, while supporters said it would give empl=
oyees a
choice.
The overall bill the House considered would provide a 2.7% increase over th=
is year's
total in the largest of the 11 annual domestic spending measures Congress c=
onsiders
every year.
The bill would provide modest increases over last year for low-income schoo=
l
districts, AIDS treatment, Head Start, job training and biomedical research=
at the
National Institutes of Health. Democrats said the boosts were inadequate an=
d fell
below amounts promised in earlier high-profile bills, and said the GOP had =
squandered money instead for tax cuts.
"Who does this Republican leadership report to? Certainly not the American =
public,"
said Rep. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(133 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
