Obama to call for passage of highway programs

Associated Press ^ | August 30, 2011

[Free ThinkerNY]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House says President Obama will urge Congress to pass a federal highway bill that he says will protect about 1 million jobs.

The president will make his appeal Wednesday at the White House.

[stylin19a]

“protect”?

[oldbrowser]

We already did that. That's what the Stimulus money was supposed to do. Plus the Federal gasoline tax is supposed to pay for that also. We have already paid for highway maintenance twice, does Obama want us to pay for it again so they can steal the money one more time?

[toddausauras]

Any GOP candidate who doesn’t ask “Why did you wait until now for this jobs proposal???” is a GD idiot.

[baddog 219]

[COBOL2Java]

O good Lord, is he going to MAKE A NATIONAL SPEECH and demand tv coverage?

Netflix time!

[mrsmith]

His media cheerleaders:

“Pave ‘em again, pave ‘em again... Harder! Harder!”

[Iron Munro]

[bray]

A hundred Billion should be enough to put up signs across America, “This Road being repaired by your magnificent Leader.”

Pray for America

[HangThemHigh]

One million jobs?

Which union?

[Iron Munro]

Please, someone enlighten me. Why must EVERY public works job REQUIRE that it be done by a union?

Prevailing Wage Laws.

Most (all?) states have a prevailing wage law and the federal government has one caled the Davis–Bacon Act.

Prevailing wage laws are just another sweetheart deal between government and unions to promote unions without specifically saying that is their purpose. These days the government isn't so subtle.

Prevailing wage laws don't specifically require union labor on public works projects but they do require all work be paid at the "prevailing wage" rate. The prevailing wage is usually the wage paid by the unionized companies. So the non-union companies are not-qualified to bid unless they increase their wage rates to union levels.

The Davis–Bacon Act of 1931 is a United States federal law which established the requirement for paying prevailing wages on public works projects. All federal government construction contracts, and most contracts for federally assisted construction over $2,000, must include provisions for paying workers on-site no less than the locally prevailing wages and benefits paid on similar projects.

[Iron Munro]

[Dilbert San Diego]

The liberal view is that expecting people on public assistance work for their benefits is involuntary servitude.

Liberal radical types hyperventilate about suggestions that people on welfare work. The “baby mamas” have to take care of their kids. But couldn’t the baby daddies work???

[traditional1]

"The “baby mamas” have to take care of their kids. But couldn’t the baby daddies work??"

With the massive use of DNA evidence today to free criminals, how about DNA testing requirements for paternity? These 4th generation welfare ho's, with no fathers in the household, continue to have babies who rely SOLELY on other people's money to exist. Track down the fathers, via DNA, and put them on the road crews at minimum wage.....let them take responsibility for their ho's.....

[FlJoePa]

My company sells and installs synthetic turf. When I am forced (by contract) to use prevailing wage, I usually have to pay over $40/hour if it is indoor (carpet installing wages) or nearly $30/hour if it is outdoor (landscape installing wages).

These are like $14-$16/hour jobs. No more than that.

[traditional1]

"Prevailing wage laws don't specifically require union labor on public works projects but they do require all work be paid at the "prevailing wage" rate"

Works for me...the prevailing wage is zero when you're unemployed, so you don't have to do the work for free; we'll just go out for COMPETITIVE BIDS, Union or Non-Union, and see who is the best bidder without interference.

[ecsmceo]

Good call! I would support such an infrastructure bill if it was done by non-union labor. Another kiss to the unions for 2008 and more importantly 2012. Non-union labor would be much cheaper and stimulate the economy more.

[boop]

Amen. In this economy, screw the “prevailing wage” crap. Remember when we were trying to rebuild N.O. after Katrina? No work could be done unless it was union work, or “prevailing wage”. Ridiculous. If people were willing to work at, gasp, “only” $20/hr instead of the $40/hr why would we allow the unions to hold everyone hostage? I’ve read Davis-Bacon. IIRC, it was designed to prevent black men from “undercutting” union workers. So the black worker was screwed out of being able to work at all, since unions wouldn’t allow blacks to join.

[ken21]

another borrowed money,

fdr program.

[JSteff]

overpriced boondoggles that benefit state workers or union members.

Those are usually one and the same. Worse, they are workers who work for an entity with NO competition, and paid for by taxpayers. The taxpayers pay those workers as to contracts the taxpayers MUST abide by, although the taxpayers have NO say in the terms!

Unions have quite a scam going here that if it where a private business on might call price fixing, a monopoly, etc.....

Nothing to see here though. Move along, move along....

[JSteff]

But couldn't the baby daddies work

Check your state laws. Usually the baby daddies do not qualify for welfare, or it is peanuts and working at a gas station for 1 day a week would pay more and disqualify them anyway.