English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

House Republicans yesterday declared "something fishy" about the major tuna company in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco district being exempted from the minimum-wage increase that Democrats approved this week.
"I am shocked," said Rep. Eric Cantor, Virginia Republican and his party's chief deputy whip, noting that Mrs. Pelosi campaigned heavily on promises of honest government. "Now we find out that she is exempting hometown companies from minimum wage. This is exactly the hypocrisy and double talk that we have come to expect from the Democrats." Washington Times stated today that San Francisc based Star Kist Tuna will be exempt from the new minimum wage bill.

2007-01-12 10:04:13 · 20 answers · asked by Mr.Wise 6 in Politics & Government Politics

20 answers

Democrats have only been in power a few days.
And we are beginning to see the REAL CULTURE OF CORRUPTION.

They are a corrupted and evil, lying bunch.
THEY ARE GOING TO BE SO MUCH FUN.

2007-01-12 10:07:35 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6 5

Well, you should be honest in your question, which you aren't!

Star Kist, a subsidiary of Del-Monte, IS NOT exempt as you would have others believe, except it exempts American Samoa, a Pacific island territory that would become the only U.S. territory not subject to federal minimum-wage laws. Before the Democrats passed the bill, both American Samoa AND
the U.S. territory of the Northern Mariana Islands were both exempt under the Republicans. Now there is only 1 exempt!

See how dishonest people can be with the press and their opinions based on things that ARE NOT fact!

StarKist is not based in Palosi's district. Del-Monte is. StarKist is a subsidiary!

You act like California doesn't have any Senators

2007-01-12 10:28:32 · answer #2 · answered by cantcu 7 · 3 0

Funny how you selectively left out one little fact: The Star Kist Tuna plant you are referring to is located in American Samoa.

P.S. Good work Jenny B.

2007-01-12 10:19:15 · answer #3 · answered by Hemingway 4 · 2 0

I frankly do not understand how anyone can be exempt from a national law. Pelosi does not have the right to exempt San Francisco. If she does then she should be impeached along with Bush. Of course Pelosi is a liar and a hypocrite. What's the difference? Republican or Democrat? They are all liars and once they get into power, woe to us.

2007-01-12 10:10:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3 4

American Samoa has never been subject to our minimum wage. Their economy could not sustain it, because they are a one industry economy.

From the article:

In a statement in response today, Faleomavaega said "despite recent claims made by the Washington Post which suggest that American Samoa is exempt from the federal minimum wage process, I wish to set the record straight."
He says since 1956, the Wage and Hour Division of the US Department of Labor has conducted Special Industry Committees every two years in American Samoa to determine minimum wage increases.
"While these Industry Committees have been phased out in other US Territories due to their more diversified economies, American Samoa continues to be a single industry economy. In fact, more than 80% of our private sector economy is dependent either directly, or indirectly, on two U.S. tuna processors, Chicken of the Sea and StarKist. As has been repeatedly stated at our Special Industry Committees, a decrease in production or departure of one or both of the two canneries in American Samoa could devastate the local economy resulting in massive layoffs and insurmountable financial difficulties," the Congressman says.

"For this very reason, I do not support efforts to apply mainland minimums to American Samoa at this time. The truth is the global tuna industry is so competitive that it is no longer possible for the federal government to demand mainland minimum wage rates for American Samoa without causing the collapse of our economy and making us welfare wards of the federal government.

2007-01-12 10:10:18 · answer #5 · answered by Mrs. Bass 7 · 4 4

Pelosi has always been hypocritical. What is good for the House she never complies with. The Contra Costa Times last year reported that she has taken the most trips and personal vacations and meals paid for by lobbyists and special interest groups in Washington. The Times estimated her total take a $185,000 in vacations she took her family that was paid for by lobbyists. She did not report any of this on her income tax return.

This represents a massive ethics violation because she has voted to represent these lobbyists, but the Ethics violation will likely not be addressed this year because she is now Speaker and on her agenda is. . . Guess what: Ethics overhaul.

The fox now owns the henhouse.

She is evil. She is the next Tom Foley. She is the next Dan Rostenkowski. She is taking advantage of Washington politics and using graft and corruption to enrich herself.

2007-01-12 10:15:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5 4

There is nothing in the bill exempting any business and no related bill referenced in the congressional record.

2007-01-12 10:17:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

Nancy was not expecting being in the limelight this much! She must have thought she was exempt from being watched.

Here's the story.

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070112-120720-2734r.htm

2007-01-12 10:19:05 · answer #8 · answered by JudiBug 5 · 0 5

Partial information. Tell the whole story before you start flame throwing.

2007-01-12 10:12:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 4

Nothing surprises me anymore.

2007-01-12 10:12:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

fedest.com, questions and answers