• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Company in Pelosi's district get minimum wage exemption

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I think it's horrible how DeLay blocked the worker protections for the slave-like laborers in the Mariannas. I saw video of them, and then of DeLay at the party hosted by the wealthy, as he toasted them on what model employers they were. It was revulsive seeing those poor people suffering from him taking the bribes.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
It seems that a minimum wage increase is good for you and me and every U.S. territory, except America Samoa. In fact this new bill extends the minimum wage to the Northern Mariana Islands for the first time, yet for some reason the people of America Samoa don?t get such treatment.

Now why would this be? Could it be that America Samoa is dominated by one main industry, tuna canning. And wouldn?t you know it, the largest cannery, owned by StarKist Tuna, which is in turn owned by Del Monte which just happens to have its headquarters in San Francisco, home of new speaker of the house Mrs. Pelosi.

Read the following links and tell me if this is hypocrisy at its finest, or just good business policy.
link 1
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."
On Wednesday, the House voted to raise the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour.
The bill also extends for the first time the federal minimum wage to the U.S. territory of the Northern Mariana Islands. However, it exempts American Samoa, another Pacific island territory that would become the only U.S. territory not subject to federal minimum-wage laws.
Click to expand...
Just how much do the workers at this Tuna plant make?
link 2
The loophole pleases the tuna corporations that employ thousands of Samoans in canneries there at $3.26 an hour -- an industry-specific rate set by the U.S. Department of Labor. They have lobbied Congress for years, arguing that imposing the federal minimum wage on Samoa would cripple the economy by driving the canneries to poor countries that don't require a minimum wage.
Click to expand...
Link 3
Under a Democrat-backed legislation that is now before the House of Representatives, employers on the Northern Mariana Islands would have to pay workers the federal minimum wage. American Samoa and the tuna industry that dominates its economy would, on the other hand, remain free to pay wages less than half the bill's new mandatory minimum.

Democrats have long tried to pull the Northern Marianas under the umbrella of U.S. labor law, accusing the island's government and its industry leaders of coddling sweatshops and turning a blind eye to forced abortions and indentured servitude.

American Samoa has largely escaped such notoriety, and its low-wage canneries have a protector of a different political stripe, Democratic delegate Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, whose campaign coffers have been well stocked by the tuna industry that virtually runs his island's economy...

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.

"However, I continue to believe it is a crying shame that for years StarKist's parent company, Heinz, paid its corporate executives over $30 million per year in salary and stock options and bonuses while workers in American Samoa have not been paid decent wages on scale with our local economy. This is why I have fought year after year for increased wages for our tuna cannery workers and I will continue to make my views known before Special Industry Committees which have been established by federal law.
Click to expand...
Good thing for John Kerry that Hienz sold Starkist a few years ago.

Apparently the $3.30 an hour Starkist pays its employees is one of the highest in the region and several people have commented that raising the wage their to the Federal minimum would cripple the industry and cause the tuna companies to close up shop and head to South Asia where they can get away with paying less than $1 an hour.

But if we are going to exempt a region for the minimum wage laws because applying them would be a hardship to the industries there then couldn?t that idea be applied elsewhere? The hypocrisy seems very evident.
Click to expand...

allow me to pull a profjohn.

"The republicans didn't raise minimum wage in American Somoa in 1995 either."
 
AFAIK, American Samoa has always been exempt from US federal minimum wage laws, so your point here is moot.
What exactly is your point again?
 
Umm for all of you who missed the sub title of the topic let me repost it:
Corruption, hypocrisy or good policy?

I was questioning whether it was one of the three.

Now here is how it breaks down so far:
1. Corruption: there is no evidence that Pelosi had anything to do with this so she is most likely free and clear on that charge, although the Democrat Rep. Faleomavaega seems a little bit tainted by where all his money comes from.

2. Hypocrisy: well it would seem there was some in that we want to raise wages for everyone, but those people on America Samoa, however look at number 3 before we decide if this is a good thing. (Also note that Pelosi is apparently going to change the bill and add America Samoa to the new law, but I am not sure if that will actually happen or is just idle chat)

3. Good policy: this is the hardest thing to determine. Several sources say that the $3 something an hour they get paid now is HIGH for that part of the world. And that raising their rate of pay to $7 could kill the industry. That is why I question whether leaving America Samoa out was in fact good policy. Of course if it is good policy then it proves that minimum wage laws can have adverse affects on the people who work those types of jobs.

The idea that raising the minimum wage for people in the states while leaving it alone for places like America Samoa illustrated how complex such an issue is. I?ll stick with believing that minimum wage laws are there more for show than for anything else. And as a way to make voters think the people in power are looking out for them. (and to help union workers, the REAL reason Democrats push so hard for these bills.)
 
Because it's not a company in Pelosi's district getting exemption, it's American Samoa, which is not even an incorporated territory of the US, and is already exempt from US Federal minimum wage. So it's not Pelosi who is adding this exemption, it's already there. So this incenuation that she is doing it for a company in her district is disingenious. Which of course has never stopped rightwing rags and rightwing pundits.
Click to expand...
Yet if this story applied to a Republican member of Congress, some of you would be screaming from the rafters.

Granted, the plight of Samoan tuna fisherman really isn't a blip on the radar screen for most Americans.

However, the debate over minimum wage in this country is a valid one, and companies that continue to base their operations in America may choose to outsource under the constraints of ever increasing operating costs...rather telling that Del Monte is utilizing labor from an American territory to which federal minimum wage laws do not apply.
 
Originally posted by: Rainsford
It's a little hard to read through the bullshit that lines every Washington Times article, but it sounds like what's going on is that minimum wage simply isn't being extended to cover American Samoa the same way it is being extended to cover other non-state territories. I personally don't have a problem with minimum wage applying to ALL our territories, but given how the issue has been dealt with in the past, it seems like Northern Mariana Islands is the exception, not American Samoa. And even if that wasn't the case, I see nothing to indicate there was ANY undue influence or similar political crap going on. The fact that this is in the Washington Times leads me to believe this is more Republican political crap than anything else...you know, the kind they bitched about the Democrats slinging around for the past several years.
Click to expand...
The Times can spin it however it wants, but if it has the facts right, this is ridiculous. If it's good for the goose, why isn't it good for Samoa? The exact arguments that they are using against implementing the minimum wage in Samoa are the exact same arguments that the bill's opponents argue that it will have throughout the nation. I'm no economist, but I've yet to run into an economist who supports a minimum wage, much less such a high wage.

Now, people at McDonald's will be making more than the average grad student, whereas last year we had them beat by $15/year. 🙁
 
Originally posted by: Rainsford
It's a little hard to read through the bullshit that lines every Washington Times article, but it sounds like what's going on is that minimum wage simply isn't being extended to cover American Samoa the same way it is being extended to cover other non-state territories. I personally don't have a problem with minimum wage applying to ALL our territories, but given how the issue has been dealt with in the past, it seems like Northern Mariana Islands is the exception, not American Samoa. And even if that wasn't the case, I see nothing to indicate there was ANY undue influence or similar political crap going on. The fact that this is in the Washington Times leads me to believe this is more Republican political crap than anything else...you know, the kind they bitched about the Democrats slinging around for the past several years.
Click to expand...

ahahahahaahahahahaahaha....
 
Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Because it's not a company in Pelosi's district getting exemption, it's American Samoa, which is not even an incorporated territory of the US, and is already exempt from US Federal minimum wage. So it's not Pelosi who is adding this exemption, it's already there. So this incenuation that she is doing it for a company in her district is disingenious. Which of course has never stopped rightwing rags and rightwing pundits.
Click to expand...
Yet if this story applied to a Republican member of Congress, some of you would be screaming from the rafters.
Click to expand...
And so you're merely proving that the GOP/right-wingers aren't any better? Honestly, I think there are more important issues on the table besides whether our minimum wage laws extend to American Samoa.
 
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Originally posted by: Rainsford
It's a little hard to read through the bullshit that lines every Washington Times article, but it sounds like what's going on is that minimum wage simply isn't being extended to cover American Samoa the same way it is being extended to cover other non-state territories. I personally don't have a problem with minimum wage applying to ALL our territories, but given how the issue has been dealt with in the past, it seems like Northern Mariana Islands is the exception, not American Samoa. And even if that wasn't the case, I see nothing to indicate there was ANY undue influence or similar political crap going on. The fact that this is in the Washington Times leads me to believe this is more Republican political crap than anything else...you know, the kind they bitched about the Democrats slinging around for the past several years.
Click to expand...
The Times can spin it however it wants, but if it has the facts right, this is ridiculous. If it's good for the goose, why isn't it good for Samoa? The exact arguments that they are using against implementing the minimum wage in Samoa are the exact same arguments that the bill's opponents argue that it will have throughout the nation. I'm no economist, but I've yet to run into an economist who supports a minimum wage, much less such a high wage.

Now, people at McDonald's will be making more than the average grad student, whereas last year we had them beat by $15/year. 🙁
Click to expand...

I hope this doesn't come as a surprised but not everywhere is the same,

What can be a valid argument in one case is just BS in another case.
 
Originally posted by: Lothar
AFAIK, American Samoa has always been exempt from US federal minimum wage laws, so your point here is moot.
What exactly is your point again?
Click to expand...

I am still waiting for the rightwing Pelosi hating hypocrites to reconcile this fact.
The same republicans complaining about Pelosi not extending the minimum wage to American Samoa also did absolutely nothing to do it themselves.
 
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Lothar
AFAIK, American Samoa has always been exempt from US federal minimum wage laws, so your point here is moot.
What exactly is your point again?
Click to expand...

I am still waiting for the rightwing Pelosi hating hypocrites to reconcile this fact.
The same republicans complaining about Pelosi not extending the minimum wage to American Samoa also did absolutely nothing to do it themselves.
Click to expand...

Sadly, they can't.
 
Here is what I think. The GOP has been exposed as a party of extreme corruption, incompetence, and anti middle class zeal. It's been thrown out of office by the voters. But instead of cleaning itself up and doing some soul searching to align themselves more with the American public interest, they have decided they will just be slinging mud and trying to bring down the Democrats by trying to "expose" hypocrisy and corruption where there isn't any. It just goes to show how far the GOP is from ever earning back the people's trust.

 
Originally posted by: senseamp
Here is what I think. The GOP has been exposed as a party of extreme corruption, incompetence, and anti middle class zeal. It's been thrown out of office by the voters. But instead of cleaning itself up and doing some soul searching to align themselves more with the American public interest, they have decided they will just be slinging mud and [trying to bring down the Democrats by trying to "expose" hypocrisy and corruption where there isn't any. It just goes to show how far the GOP is from ever earning back the people's trust.
Click to expand...

Are you freaking kidding me. It amazes me how the very people in this thread who are defending Pelosi, are the same ones who were screaming about how corrupt our government is and needs a change.

How do you explain the fact that Pelosi's husband own a good share of stock in companies benefiting from this legislature?

If anything, this thread yet again shows the hypocricy of the lefties in general who start 10 topics on anything remotely related to corruption in the Republican party, yet make any and every excuse for democrats who do the same.

The issue its self shows how people will say anything to get elected, and then turn around and do exactly what they were campaigning against.
 
Originally posted by: BoomerD
So Professional John, are you saying it was OK for them to be exempted from this when it was lobbied for by Abrahamoff, but NOT ok now?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-05-06-abramoff-bush_x.htm

"In President Bush's first 10 months, GOP fundraiser Jack Abramoff and his lobbying team logged nearly 200 contacts with the new administration as they pressed for friendly hires at federal agencies and sought to keep the Northern Mariana Islands exempt from the minimum wage and other laws, records show.

The meetings between Abramoff's lobbying team and the administration ranged from Attorney General John Ashcroft to policy advisers in Vice President Dick Cheney's office, according to his lobbying firm billing records.

Abramoff, a $100,000-plus fundraiser for Bush, is now under criminal investigation for some of his lobbying work. His firm boasted its lobbying team helped revise a section of the Republican Party's 2000 platform to make it favorable to its island client.

In addition, two of Abramoff's lobbying colleagues on the Marianas won political appointments inside federal agencies.

"Our standing with the new administration promises to be solid as several friends of the CNMI (islands) will soon be taking high-ranking positions in the Administration, including within the Interior Department," Abramoff wrote in a January 2001 letter in which he persuaded the island government to follow him as a client to his new lobbying firm, Greenberg Traurig.

The reception Abramoff's team received from the Bush administration was in stark contrast to the chilly relations of the Clinton years. Abramoff, then at the Preston Gates firm, scored few meetings with Clinton aides and the lobbyist and the islands vehemently opposed White House attempts to extend U.S. labor laws to the territory's clothing factories.

The records from Abramoff's firm, obtained by The Associated Press from the Marianas under an open records request, chronicle Abramoff's careful cultivation of relations with Bush's political team as far back as 1997."

"The Marianas' lobbying paid off ? it fended off proposals in 2001 to extend the U.S. minimum wage to island workers and gained at least $2 million more in federal aid from the administration.

Abramoff's team bragged to the cash-strapped Marianas government that the taxpayer money would cover its lobbying bill: "We believe that this additional funding ? along with other funds we expect to secure by the end of the year ? will make clear to even our biggest critics that we pay for ourselves," Abramoff teammate Kevin Ring wrote in October 2001, copying in Abramoff."
Click to expand...

The entire House Minimum Wage bill as passed by the House

here is the entire bill as passed by the House of Representatives.
If you will look at the bill, it does not mention American Samoa anywhere in the bill.
It does target/mention the Northern Mariana Islands specifically because of the labor abuses mentioned here. McHenry and the Republicans are attacking Pelosi by implying she did a political favor for a constituent but not by inserting special language into a bill but BY OMISSION. That's ridiculous.
If the Republicans care so much about American Samoa, fight for the minimum wage increase in Conference. Somehow, I doubt that will happen.
 
Originally posted by: smack Down
I hope this doesn't come as a surprised but not everywhere is the same,

What can be a valid argument in one case is just BS in another case.
Click to expand...
Then why is the federal government passing the law? If it needs to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, it should leave it to local governments, right? Or should someone making minimum wage in north St. Louis make the same as someone living in Manhattan? Better yet, why don't we listen to people who actually know about economics and not pass a minimum wage? My only reason for posting was to point out how stupid it is to suggest that a nationwide uniform minimum wage should be applied with this one specific exception, where that exception is purportedly to avoid driving out employers. Why would the application of minimum wage here have a different effect from its application elsewhere?
 
Fending off charges of favoritism, House Democrats say a just-passed minimum wage bill will be changed to cover all U.S. territories _ including American Samoa _ before it reaches President Bush's desk.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters she has instructed the House Education and Labor Committee to help get the bill changed to "make sure that all of the territories have to comply with the U.S. law on minimum wage."
Click to expand...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/13/ap/business/mainD8MKJESO0.shtml
 
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: senseamp
Here is what I think. The GOP has been exposed as a party of extreme corruption, incompetence, and anti middle class zeal. It's been thrown out of office by the voters. But instead of cleaning itself up and doing some soul searching to align themselves more with the American public interest, they have decided they will just be slinging mud and [trying to bring down the Democrats by trying to "expose" hypocrisy and corruption where there isn't any. It just goes to show how far the GOP is from ever earning back the people's trust.
Click to expand...

Are you freaking kidding me. It amazes me how the very people in this thread who are defending Pelosi, are the same ones who were screaming about how corrupt our government is and needs a change.

How do you explain the fact that Pelosi's husband own a good share of stock in companies benefiting from this legislature?

If anything, this thread yet again shows the hypocricy of the lefties in general who start 10 topics on anything remotely related to corruption in the Republican party, yet make any and every excuse for democrats who do the same.

The issue its self shows how people will say anything to get elected, and then turn around and do exactly what they were campaigning against.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that you don't get it? The exemption in the law for Samoa was there before this legislation. Those companies are not benefitting from this legislation, because federal minimum wage laws didn't apply to American Samoa to begin with. Show me where Pelosi campaigned for raising the minimum wage in American Samoa? That's right, you can't.
 
I was not aware that U.S. Territories, such as Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands and American Samoa had a minimum wage. I know that they cannot vote in the Presidential election.
 
Originally posted by: senseamp
Show me where Pelosi campaigned for raising the minimum wage in American Samoa? That's right, you can't.
Click to expand...

OK, you obviously are lost here. You just argued my point for me. Thank you. Of course she wouldnt argue to raise the minimum wage in American Samoa. BECAUSE HER HUSBAND IS A SHAREHOLDER OF COMPANIES WHO PROVIDE 75% OF THE WORK THERE!
 
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: senseamp
Show me where Pelosi campaigned for raising the minimum wage in American Samoa? That's right, you can't.
Click to expand...

OK, you obviously are lost here. You just argued my point for me. Thank you. Of course she wouldnt argue to raise the minimum wage in American Samoa. BECAUSE HER HUSBAND IS A SHAREHOLDER OF COMPANIES WHO PROVIDE 75% OF THE WORK THERE!
Click to expand...

That's your OPINION. Don't pass it off as a FACT. The fact is that she raised the federal minimum wage, and under current law the federal minimum wage does not apply to American Samoa, which is an unincorporated territory of the US. So it has nothing to do with her husband being a shareholder. So it's not Pelosi who made Samoa exempt, it was already exempt.
 
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: senseamp
Show me where Pelosi campaigned for raising the minimum wage in American Samoa? That's right, you can't.
Click to expand...

OK, you obviously are lost here. You just argued my point for me. Thank you. Of course she wouldnt argue to raise the minimum wage in American Samoa. BECAUSE HER HUSBAND IS A SHAREHOLDER OF COMPANIES WHO PROVIDE 75% OF THE WORK THERE!
Click to expand...

That's your OPINION. Don't pass it off as a FACT. The fact is that she raised the federal minimum wage, and under current law the federal minimum wage does not apply to American Samoa, which is an unincorporated territory of the US. So it has nothing to do with her husband being a shareholder. So it's not Pelosi who made Samoa exempt, it was already exempt.
Click to expand...

I see. So ethics only come into question when its a republican.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top