Minimum wage increase stalls in Senate

LJWorld.com weblogs Congressional Briefing

Posted by Joel Mathis January 25, 2007 at 9:37 a.m.

Here are today's headlines from the Kansas congressional delegation:Etc.[(New York Times) Tax Breaks Sidetrack Minimum Wage Bill:][1] Democrats' promise of a quick increase in the minimum wage ran aground Wednesday in the Senate, where lawmakers are insisting it include new tax breaks for restaurants and other businesses that rely on low-pay workers. On a 54-43 vote, Democrats lost an effort to advance a House-passed bill that would lift the pay floor from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour without any accompanying tax cut. Opponents of the tax cut needed 60 votes to prevail. [Brownback did not vote; Roberts voted against advancing the bill.][2][(Topeka Capital-Journal) Bill would fund Amtrak over next six years:][3] A bill pending in Congress might open the door for more passenger train service in Kansas and make the future of Amtrak's Southwest Chief more secure. Senate Bill 294 would give preliminary approval of continued funding for Amtrak in general over the next six years and provide some assurance that any Amtrak route being operated as of the day the bill becomes law would remain a part of the Amtrak system. ... Topekan John Mills, described by an Amtrak official in Chicago as "a legend" in passenger rail service, is already on the case. He is urging people to ask Sens. Pat Roberts and Sam Brownback, both Kansas Republicans, to co-sponsor the bill.Sen. Sam Brownback (R) ![][4][(Washington Post) War in Iraq: Panel votes against Bush strategy:][5] A day after President Bush pleaded with Congress to give his Iraq policy one last chance, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee rebuffed him by approving a nonbinding resolution declaring his troop increase in Iraq to be against "the national interest." The committee voted 12-9 on Wednesday to send a resolution of disapproval of the president's Iraq policy to the Senate floor next week, setting up what could be the most dramatic confrontation between Congress and the Bush administration since the war was launched four years ago. Many Republicans voiced anguish over the president's policy, but only one, Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, a co-sponsor, voted in support of the resolution. The committee's partisan vote strengthened the hand of Sen. John Warner, R-Va., and a bipartisan group of senators backing a less forceful resolution of opposition. ... Several Republicans indicated they would vote for a resolution of opposition if the language is toned down. Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, a presidential candidate, said he was in talks with Warner on a resolution he could embrace.Sen. Pat Roberts (R)![][6][(Hutch News) Roberts aligns finance staff:][7] Gearing up for his re-election race in 2008, U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts announced finance co-chairpersons for his campaign. They are Gene Bicknell, Pittsburg; John Bush, Lawrence; Phil Howe, Manhattan; Stu Lang, Overland Park; Brenda McCants, Goodland; Fred Merrill, Mission Hills; Bob Regnier, Leawood; Dave Rebein, Dodge City; Karen Seaberg, Atchison; Don Slawson, Wichita; Nestor Weigand, Wichita; Michelle Voth, Topeka; and Charles Walker, Topeka. [1]: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Minimum-Wage.html [2]: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00023 [3]: http://cjonline.com/stories/012507/bus_141395498.shtml [4]: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/fr/thumb/c/c8/Sam_Brownback.jpg/150px-Sam_Brownback.jpg [5]: http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/55842.html [6]: http://roberts.senate.gov/Roberts-020405-18060-080-CFFflipped.jpg [7]: http://www.hutchnews.com/news/regional/stories/roberts012507.shtml

Tumblr
Wordpress
Reddit
Copy and paste the link:

Agnostick 7 years, 2 months ago

"Which Democrats would those be? Both of our Senators are Republicans and neither of them voted for the bill. On top of that, 54 Senators (including all 51 Democrats, I'd bet) voted for the bill."

Maybe, rather than "Bet" and write checks with our mouths that our butts can't cash... maybe we should wait a few days for the "Congressional Record" to tell us how each Senator voted?

Or, have you never heard of a search engine? ;)

Agnostick agnostick@excite.com

budwhysir 7 years, 2 months ago

Why dont people making min wage get to vote on increasing the min wage???? Seems like the people that actualy know if you can make it on the wages would have a say. Politicaly speaking this is a political matter that is getting attention only because it would increase the tax base and put more money into federal funds thru tax payments.

This also will promote more spending and payment of sales tax. Oh, and people can show an increase of income that will allow them to get more credit cards to max out and pay 21 percent interest on.

In todays buy now pay years from now world, doesnt matter what min. wage is except on the tax end

Cait McKnelly 7 years, 2 months ago

angel, the budget wouldn't have to be such a high priority if it wasn't for Bush and the Iraq war. What happened to the SURPLUS Clinton left when he left office? It went down the throat of Iraq right in to a trillion dollar deficit. Our children's CHILDREN will still be paying for this war.

angel4dennis 7 years, 2 months ago

I wish that these Senators would have to live on what we do at $5.15 an hour. There has not been an increase since Sept. 1, 1997. Ten years and nothing has gone down in price at all. If any of them had to actually live on a "budget" to get by paycheck by paycheck, I think they would jump at the vote. What about the "fair" tax breaks? Why tax the poorer people of the state so much? Perhaps I should quit my job and live off the little pension that the government deems is fair, I would be under a bridge in a few months because nothing is affordable anymore. Wake up Congressman and vote for the people, not for the budget you want!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MyName 7 years, 2 months ago

Which Democrats would those be? Both of our Senators are Republicans and neither of them voted for the bill. On top of that, 54 Senators (including all 51 Democrats, I'd bet) voted for the bill. However, it needed 60 votes to overcome the proposed Republican filibuster. So much for a straight "up or down vote" that Republicans have been calling for these past few years.