Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senate Amendments voted down yesterday on S256

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Congress Donate to DU
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-03-05 01:17 PM
Original message
Senate Amendments voted down yesterday on S256
Amendments to the Bankruptcy Bill #256. (The screw you, I've got mine bill.)

You can see exactly which Senators voted for and against these Amendments at:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_109_1.htm

Akaka Amdt. No. 15;
To require enhanced disclosure to consumers regarding the consequences of making only minimum required payments in the repayment of credit card debt, and for other purposes.
Voted down Ayes 40 Nays 59

Kennedy Amdt. No. 28.;
To exempt debtors whose financial problems were caused by serious medical problems from means testing.
Voted down Ayes 39 Nays 58

Kennedy Amdt. No. 29;
To provide protection for medical debt homeowners.
Voted down Ayes 39 Nays 58

Corzine Amdt. No. 32;
To preserve existing bankruptcy protections for individuals experiencing economic distress as caregivers to ill or disabled family members.
Voted down Ayes 37 Nays 60

Alert to Dems Remember these votes and use them against any Rethug in '06.
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
ogradda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-03-05 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. a compassionate bunch.
I hope their God shows them the same mercy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-03-05 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Also remember any turncoat Dem who voted against them
Honestly, a pubbie couldn't be worse.

Voting against the incumbent, even if you have to put up with a pubbie for one term, is often necessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-03-05 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I consider the "screw you, I've got mine" bill an acid test of big D
Democratic principles. Anyone who votes to support this RW wet dream should not be supported by the party or Dem individuals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
nathansnewman Donating Member (4 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
4. Santorum's Sweatshop Expansion Amendments
Full details here

Excerpts:

Sweatshops Expanded, Overtime Attacked, and State Minimum Wage Laws Undermined


This is as low as it goes, as the GOP fights to expand sub-minimum wage sweatshops across the country. Pennsylvania's Rick Santorum is leading the charge for a GOP bill that would ostensibly raise the minimum wage by $1.10 per hour, but in reality would cut wages for millions of American workers and expand unregulated sweatshops across the country.

As this Economic Policy Institute analysis details, the bill is a trojan horse for assaulting workers rights.

Licensing Sweatshops: While a $1.10 per hour minimum wage increase by itself would help 1.8 million workers, Santorum includes a poison bill exempting any business with revenues of $1 million or less from regulation -- raising the exemption from the current $500,000 level.

The upshot: while 1.2 million workers could qualify for a minimum wage increase, another 6.8 million workers, who work in companies with revenues between $500,000 and $1,000,000 per year, would lose their current minimum wage protection.

-- snip --

But here's a kicker from a GOP supposedly dedicated to states rights. Santorum's bill would ban states from requiring employers to pay tipped workers with a guaranteed wage. Employers could pay tipped workers nothing and force them to live off tips, while states would be preempted from creating a higher wage standard for tipped workers. . . Essentially, those workers could be hired for zero dollars and told they had to live only off tips, however little those were.

The attack on the tip credit is bad enough, but the precedent of the federal government creating a MAXIMUM standard for wage regulation and restricting the right of states to create a higher standard is even more dangerous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Congress Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC