Unions Push for Solis Confirmation
Oh wait… the unions support her, so the fact that her husband failed to pay taxes doesn’t matter. Carry on.
Labor unions accused Republicans of seizing on questions about unpaid taxes to stall the confirmation of Labor Secretary nominee Hilda Solis because they dislike her policies.
The nation’s largest labor federation, the AFL-CIO, along with other unions, women’s and Hispanic groups, began calling and writing lawmakers Friday, urging them to confirm the California congresswoman.
“Enough is enough,” AFL-CIO president John Sweeney said, warning GOP senators “to stop obstructing and confirm Rep. Solis now.”
Damn straight. Why should it matter if it is not her business?
What’s next? We start holding up confirmations when a second cousin twice removed is discovered to have an overdue library book?Posted by Mike Thomas on February 07, 2009 at 2218 hrs
Don’t be a moron. It’s her husband. I don’t know how it is in your family, but my wife and I are pretty close. If she were deliberately cheating on her taxes (in a community property state like Wisconsin), I’d not only know, I’d be jointly responsible.
Posted by Owen on February 07, 2009 at 2224 hrs
Actually Owen, it is her husband’s business.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 07, 2009 at 2323 hrs
Hey kids,
In most places, being married means you share debts and income.
But there is no escaping this very simple fact: If they file jointly, they are both responsible, and both signed the paper work.
She can blame him - but she is, by marriage, guilty of tax evasion.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 0146 hrs
But the unions know she will push for the end to the secret ballot and they can start intimidating employees again for card check.
Who cares if more jobs will go overseas because the companies can’t compete. Dammit - the unions need more members.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 0840 hrs
The Employee Free Choice Act will maintain the choice for a secret ballot election or card check to unionize a workplace as it currently stands. It will just allow employees to make the choice, instead of allowing the employers alone to make that decision. I might add that currently employers routinely ignore the results of secret ballot elections, too. Forgive me for being a little skeptical when Big Business is suddenly concerned about the sanctity of the secret ballot.
And yeah, Solis shouldn’t be held up because of her husband’s business issues.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 1049 hrs
I might add that currently employers routinely ignore the results of secret ballot elections, too.
Citations and evidence please?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 1207 hrs
Married, filing jointly…
Ever heard of it?
Posted by Fred on February 08, 2009 at 1214 hrs
Just finished reading an excellent article about WalMart from the perspective of a journalist who went undercover to take a job there.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/02072009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/fly_on_the_wal_154007.htm?page=0
A few things that jumped out at me:
Fed. Min. wage is $6.55/hour; average dept. store wage is $8.67/hour; WalMart average full-time wage is $10.86/hour.
WalMartWatch.com is partnered with Service Employes International Union, WakeUpWalMart.com is partnered with United Food Commercial Workers International Union.
The union that gets WalMart stands to gain $500 million in annual dues from WalMart associates.
So, what would WalMart associates gain? Would their pay come down to the sector’s average, or would they stay about the same and their wages would set the floor for everyone else in their sector?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 1222 hrs
Fred and UmmmDuh- That would be the case is this was their personal taxes, but he files his business taxes separately.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 1225 hrs
You guys should know by know that with Democrats, the spouse is a complete separate and independent unit where any ties by marriage are pretty much irrelevant and shouldn’t be factored into anything. See Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 1243 hrs
Ah - Steve,
Thanks for the reminder. The behaviors and acts of spouses only count when it is 20+ year-old DUIs by Todd Palin or prescription drug addiction by Cindy McCain.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 1302 hrs
She should be doing time for tax evasion, like everyone on here would be if we pulled crap like that. The whole washington culture is broken on both sides. For people like her and the rest of the increasingly long line of tax cheats, the question shouldn’t be should she get this promotion. It should be how quickly can we strip them of the offices they already hold. We are comtemplating a trillion dollar pork fest, and it seems that half of the people involved in creating it are criminals.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 1330 hrs
Enough is enough,” AFL-CIO president John Sweeney said, warning GOP senators “to stop obstructing and confirm Rep. Solis now.”
Maybe this thug genius may recall the the Dem’s control the committee and the senate. The GOP isn’t doing anything. What a buffon.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 1410 hrs
Wow. all of this to-do about $6500 tax issue. I guess that is a nice diversion from these issues:
1) She is top of the House list for missed votes - 79%. The second highest is 48%
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/111/house/vote-missers/
2) She may have violated House ethics rules -
seemingly innocuous letter sent to the Clerk of the House of Representatives last Thursday by President Obama’s Secretary of Labor nominee Hilda Solis raises serious and troubling legal questions about her nomination and apparent violation of House ethics rules. Not only was she involved with a private organization that was lobbying her fellow legislators on a bill that she has cosponsored, but she apparently kept her involvement secret and failed to reveal a clear conflict of interest.
Solis was a co-sponsor in 2007 of the so-called “Employee Free Choice Act,” the card check legislation that would effectively eliminate the secret ballot and destroy the ability of employees to make an anonymous decision (without fear of retribution) on whether they want to join a union. She was also a co-sponsor of the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, legislation that would force states to allow public safety officers to form unions. At the same time, however, Solis was a board member of a pro-union organization, American Rights at Work, that has been lobbying Congress on both of these bills. According to a letter filed by Solis with the House Clerk on January 29, 2009, she was not just a director of the ARW, along with fellow travelers like David Bonior, Julian Bond, and John Sweeney, she was actually the treasurer. In other words, she is the official legally charged with the fiduciary duty of approving and signing off on all spending by the organization. And
to make matters worse, she did not reveal to her colleagues in the House of Representatives that membership on her financial disclosure forms, which may constitute a separate ethical violation.http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/101mswgc.asp
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 08, 2009 at 1526 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 101
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/12/2012 04:40 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).