Is it worker flexibility, or cut your pay bill? Here's another bill that Republicans and Democrats read and see totally different impacts. It's the Working Families Flexibility Act of 2013, which passed the House last week with support from almost all Republicans - including all five from Louisiana - and almost all Democrats opposing, including the state's only Democrat,...
Is it worker flexibility, or cut your pay bill?
Here's another bill that Republicans and Democrats read and see totally different impacts. It's the Working Families Flexibility Act of 2013, which passed the House last week with support from almost all Republicans - including all five from Louisiana - and almost all Democrats opposing, including the state's only Democrat, Cedric Richmond of New Orleans.
The bill allows private employers to offer their employees who work over 40 hours a week a choice: They can continue to get 1 ½ times their regular pay for overtime or instead take future time off - also calculated at 1.5 hours of time off for each hour of overtime worked.
"If you talk to any working mom or dad, you'll hear them say things like, wouldn't it be nice to have flexibility to attend my son's soccer game, coach a tee ball team, take care of my aging parent, or be there to support my children at a time when one of the spouses is being deployed by our military," said Rep. Martha Roby, R-Ala. Her bill, Roby says, gives workers the option of saving comp time for those days they need or want time off.
But Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore., says that employees are likely to feel pressured to take comp time instead of overtime pay, even though the bill says it's supposed to be voluntary.
"A single mom living paycheck to paycheck could work more than 40 hours a week and receive no overtime pay in her paycheck," Bonamici said. "She would still have to pay the babysitter that week for the extra hours she spent on the job with no guarantee she'll be able to take the comp time off when she needs it."
Tea party groups targeted by IRS
The IRS Friday admitted that it had targeted about 75 nonprofit groups with tea party and other conservative ties for extra scrutiny. Rep. Charles Boustany, R-Lafayette, promised an aggressive investigation by his Ways and Means subcommittee.
The IRS said the decision had been made by career employees. "Mistakes were made initially. But they were in no way tied to any political or partisan rationale," the IRS said in a statement.
Boustany requested the IRS provide all communications containing the words "tea party," "patriot," or "conservative," and the names and titles of all individuals involved in the extra scrutiny.
"Since the inception of this investigation, the Ways and Means Committee has persistently pushed the IRS to explain why it appeared to be unfairly targeting some political groups over others - a charge they repeatedly denied," Boustany said. "Despite their unwillingness to cooperate, more than a year later, the IRS has now admitted to what we long suspected - it was targeting tea party groups."
Michelle Obama, center, and host Dr. Mehmet Oz dance with third-graders from the Terence C. Reilly No. 7 School in Elizabeth, N.J., to demonstrate fun ways to keep moving in the classroom during a taping of "The Dr. Oz Show " in New York. Trade a recipe for trip to D.C.
There's not much time. But kids, aged 8-12, if you have a great, healthy recipe, or think you can come up with one on the fly, you have until 10:59 p.m. Sunday to submit it and enter a nationwide competition. Winners, one from each state, will get to attend a Kid's State Dinner at the White House, with a parent, meet First Lady Michelle Obama, and get to do other fun things in Washington D.C. Click for information and an online entry form: http://www.letsmove.gov/blog/2013/04/03/hey-kids-lets-get-cooking
It's sugartime again
The Senate Agriculture Committee is slated to begin work on a new farm bill Tuesday. And already committee members are hearing from two groups with a big interest in the outcome - sugar producers and manufacturers of candy, soda and other sweet products.
At issue is the U.S. sugar policy that says the price of sugar can't drop below 22.9 cents per pound. That's a reasonable price, sugar producers say, to insure that the tens of thousands of people employed in sugarcane farms and refineries can continue to make a living while producing domestic sugar to consumers.
Manufacturers of sweets contend that if only Congress would allow sugar to be sold without controls, the price would go down - thanks to increased competition from imports. The sugar industry ran ads suggesting that the big candy and soda manufacturers selfishly want to inflate their already high profits by eliminating a program that doesn't cost taxpayers any money but keeps an important American industry operating.
The candy and soda manufacturers say that Americans are being forced to pay higher prices for their products because current American farm policies keep sugar prices artificially high. So far, this is battle that the sugar producers have won in almost every farm bill. We'll see what happens in 2013.
First water resources amendments
Legislating is a slow process these days. And that's the case with the water resources bill introduced by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and David Vitter, R-La. The Senate began going through the dozens of amendments proposed by senators. There have been votes on several.
The Senate fell four short of the 60 to approve an amendment offered by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., to "protect the rights of individuals to bear arms at water resources development projects administered by the secretary of the Army." Louisiana's two senators, Democrat Mary Landrieu and Republican Vitter, both voted yes.
The Senate approved another amendment, offered by Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., to create a National Endowment for the Oceans to promote the protection and conservation of United States, ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems. Landrieu voted yes, while Vitter voted no. Proponents say that the environmental threats to oceans and other major waterways aren't being adequately addressed. Opponents fear the legislation might be used to limit development of waterways for seafood and oil and gas.
That pesky debt limit
Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson, praised his Republican House colleagues for passing a bill Thursday that says the United States would continue to pay its creditors and the Social Security Trust Fund should the U.S. exceed the debt limit without a congressional extension. The U.S. is likely to exceed its current debt limit in late September, or October.
"The House took a proactive step to prevent default, provide certainty to seniors, and preserve America's credit rating," Scalise said. "By taking the threat of default off the table, this bill allows Washington to focus on actually solving the spending problem so we can create a healthy economy. This legislation serves as an insurance policy, protecting America's economic security from the harm of President Obama's reckless and irresponsible posturing."
Democrats said it's the Republicans who are being irresponsible.
"Essentially, what this bill says is, okay, let's pay China and the other foreign bondholders first, not American troops, not disabled veterans, not physicians, providers who treat Medicare patients, not small businesses holding contract obligations from the United States, school lunch programs secondary, medical research, Pell grants, taxpayers due refunds, and, interestingly, other Federal trust funds holding Treasury bonds, Medicare, deposit insurance, et cetera, et cetera," said Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich.