House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has promised the "most ethical Congress in history". Well that little campaign promise didn't last long.
On Wednesday, the House voted to raise the minimum wage, one of those things that Democrats had promised to accomplish in the first "one hundred hours". But apparently, a major company in Nancy Pelosi's own district was exempted from the new increase.
One of the biggest opponents of the federal minimum wage in Samoa is StarKist Tuna, which owns one of the two packing plants that together employ more than 5,000 Samoans, or nearly 75 percent of the island's work force. StarKist's parent company, Del Monte Corp., has headquarters in San Francisco, which is represented by Mrs. Pelosi. The other plant belongs to California-based Chicken of the Sea.
Now that seems like a coincidence.
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."
But this is the "most ethical Congress in history", damnit!
"There's something fishy going on here," said Rep. Patrick T. McHenry, North Carolina Republican.
During the House debate yesterday on stem-cell research, Mr. McHenry raised a parliamentary inquiry as to whether an amendment could be offered that would exempt American Samoa from stem-cell research, "just as it was for the minimum-wage bill."
A clearly perturbed Rep. Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who was presiding, cut off Mr. McHenry and shouted, "No, it would not be."
"So, the chair is saying I may not offer an amendment exempting American Samoa?" Mr. McHenry pressed.
"The gentleman is making a speech and will sustain," Mr. Frank shouted as he slammed his large wooden gavel against the rostrum.
Some Republicans who voted in favor of the minimum-wage bill were particularly irritated to learn yesterday -- after their vote -- that the legislation did not include American Samoa.
"I was troubled to learn of this exemption," said Rep. Mark Steven Kirk, Illinois Republican. "My intention was to raise the minimum wage for everyone. We shouldn't permit any special favors or exemptions that are not widely discussed in Congress. This is the problem with rushing legislation through without full debate."
Hmmm. Pelosi wouldn't do anything untoward, would she? Like forcing through a bill so that a hidden exemption, which benefits large companies in her own district, would go unnoticed? Nah! We're talking "Miss Ethical Congress" here, folks, she wouldn't do that!
Would she?
Let's be clear: everyone in Congress needs to be held to the highest degree of professionalism and personal conduct. Stop the petty in-fighting, the personal shots, the maneuvering for political gain, the drug and alcohol abuse, the lying, the criminal acts, etc. and just do what's best for the country.
And she's not the only California lawmaker with ethics problems today. Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer continued her habit of personal attacks today, this time targeting SecState Condoleezza Rice. Rice appeared before the Senate to discuss the president's new plan for Iraq.
Boxer was wholly in character for her party - New York's own two Democratic senators, Chuck Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton, were predictably opportunistic - but the Golden State lawmaker earned special attention for the tasteless jibes she aimed at Rice.
Rice appeared before the Senate in defense of President Bush's tactical change in Iraq, and quickly encountered Boxer.
"Who pays the price? I'm not going to pay a personal price," Boxer said. "My kids are too old, and my grandchild is too young."
Then, to Rice: "You're not going to pay a particular price, as I understand it, with an immediate family."
[...]
The junior senator from California apparently believes that an accomplished, seasoned diplomat, a renowned scholar and an adviser to two presidents like Condoleezza Rice is not fully qualified to make policy at the highest levels of the American government because she is a single, childless woman.
Un-believable. It's nothing new for Boxer, of course, she cheap shots people all the time. But the sheer stupidity of the statement is astonishing. A diplomat has to have a child serving in the military before making any decisions about how this nation should proceed militarily? Does that mean that Hillary Clinton isn't going to run for President? Because I guarantee you that little Chelsea won't be joining the effort in Iraq anytime soon.
Isn't every American paying a price for what happens with the war in Iraq, whether we win or lose? Doesn't every citizen that loves their country have a stake in how their soldiers perform in battle? Did Boxer flunk World History 101?
Is she that stupid or just that vindictive?
Welcome to the era of the "ethical Democrat", folks!
Related posts:
Related reading:
Comments