Correcting misinformation on the iraq and Min wage bills!!

[Rosemary2205]

Just got off the phone with Rep. David Scott's (D-Georgia) office. The minimum wage provision along with other items -- and the Iraq bill -- will be put in two seperate bills in the HOUSE ONLY. I was told it is expected they will both pass but the staff person basically the fat lady hasn't sung on this yet and from what she's seen some Dems who planned to vote yes on the Iraq half may end up voting it down afterall. If the info I was given give is accurate then it is total misinformation that the Dems have killed minimum wage hike.

If both bills pass they will be combined into one piece of legislation and sent to the Senate. The Senate is expected to vote on it on Friday but there has been some discussion about them voting tonight (Thursday night).

If it passes the Senate then Bush will get one single piece of legislation containing both the Iraq spending AND the minimum wage hike.

Friends, we are not sunk yet. There is still time to make our voice heard and we should be hammering them right up until it either dies or is actually passed by the Senate. Even if Pelosi and Reid aren't listening anymore, we still have our own reps that can be nagged all the way to the house floor.

[OregonBlue]

1. Yes, that is what I understood too. They will be combined into one bill before it goes to the

Senate.

[Karmageddon]

2. Why are they burying a Dem strength like Minimum Wage in a military spending bill?

That should be a completely stand-alone bill. Make the republicans vote, on the record, on minimum wage increase, period. Wave that one around like a big flag and make sure everyone knows that the republicans tried to kill it again. Why would they bury such a huge Dem asset in a bill like this?

Yeah, I know, because they want it to pass. Well don't the Democrats have a majority? Pass it. Slap it on dickweed's desk and dare him to veto it, then give it to him again, and again, just like they should have done with the damn Iraq Occupation bill with timelines.

Aren't we in the frikking majority? Why does our party keep backing down on this shit? Is there no one in the party leadership with the sack to stand up to the minority? Is there anyone in the party who will stand up to the party leadership.
And REPLACE them.

[Rosemary2205]

3. it takes 60 to get anything done in the Senate

Sticking min wage and Iraq together forces the hawks in the Senate to vote for it. No way does it pass the Senate on it's own.

And, just my extremely humble opinion here -- actually getting the money into people's pockets for years to come is more important to me than a momentary crowing about how GW hates poor people when he vetoes it -- something that will quickly go down the memory hole -- while people having a few more dollars a week won't soon be forgotten.

[Karmageddon]

5. Actually, i think there is a veto-proof vote in the senate for min wage increase.

I readily admit that I could very well be wrong about that though.


I agree that getting the money in the hands of the people who need it is more important than playing politics. But when did the Democratic party become incapable of walking and chewing gum at the same time? They've had minimum wage bills introduced before that never even made it to the floor of the republican senate. Pull one out and put it on the floor. These are supposed to be the best and brightest of us, right? Isn't that why we sent them to D.C. to represent us? Shouldn't we expect, no, demand that they be able to do more than one thing at a time? They're playing politics with soldiers lives, and they totally blew that one.

As for the minimum wage increase, I'm not positive, but pretty sure that there are enough Republicans who agree that we could get it passed in spite of chucklenuts. It's a popular enough initiative, and there are enough GOP Senate seats up in '08, and enough republicans are turning their backs on bush that the minimum wage increase is one we could have almost definitely won.

But not anymore.

[Disturbed]

4. Would Busholini sign a Minimum Wage Bill?

The answer is: No

Placing a minimum wage provision in an Iraq Suplemental is a good idea because Busholini will veto it. Cut more pork out of the next Bill but leave a minimum wage provision and a With Drawl date and he will veto that. Repeat until the funds are such that he must draw down at least 75% of the Troops. Leave around 60K to defend to Oil fields, the Embassy and forces to engage Insurgent groups incl. al Q. That is what the majority of Dems are aiming for in the 1st place.

[Hidden Stillness]

6. Minimum Wage Hike was Never Threatened

This shows yet again, with all due respect, why people on DU are often so fucking stupid that I can hardly believe it. With no evidence whatsoever, people suddenly dreamed up the idea that the raise to the minimum wage was "killed," when really it was safely in the Iraq supplemental as an earmark, (what Bush and the corporate media have called "pork," but with no specific reference to what it was, so people will just react mindlessly, and not know what was really being attacked). All this time, they have been fighting and haggling with Republican obstructionists, but now, it has passed. It is better being in the Iraq bill, because, as had been noted by both Rosemary2205 and Disturbed, it will actually stand more of a chance of passing by being part of that bill, than stand-alone, and now it has passed. Who is actually stupid enough to believe that Democrats would suddenly KILL the Federal minimum wage-raise, when that has been all along one of the cornerstones of the new Democratic platform? I understand the anger at current "leadership" behavior, but use your goddamned brains.