Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Monday, July 31, 2006

N.D. Congressman shows his true partisan colors

Congressman Earl Pomeroy, our lone voice of in the House of Representatives, fancies himself as a “progressive.” He touts himself as a “fighter for North Dakota.” I know Real Progressives. Each and every one of them is in favor of boosting the wages of Working North Dakotans.

Last Friday night (July 28th) the House voted on the “Estate Tax and Extension of Tax Relief Act.” The Republican Majority had decided to attach an increase to the Minimum Wage as a way to ease the Estate Tax cut through Congress. With no help from our representative, the bill passed (230-180) to pave the way to a three-year implementation of a $7.25 minimum wage; the first increase since 1997. While our representative’s vote would not have changed the outcome, it does give us a great glimpse into his motivations.

He could have easily voted in favor for this bill just as his colleague Colin Peterson just over the river in Minnesota did and not faced retribution within his party. The Republicans had the votes already so it was like a freebee. But our representative did not do that. Instead, he chose to vote the party line because he thinks his seat is safe.

He chose to vote in favor of the type of class-warfare the Estate Tax is about. With his vote, he told every North Dakotan earning the minimum wage “I would rather stick it to a handful of wealth taxpayers than give you a raise.”

Our representative believes that we as North Dakotans will look past the fact that of his $1.2 million war-chest, a mere $39,000 was raised here in North Dakota (source: OpenSecrets.org).

North Dakotans may look past that, but we will not look passed the fact that he fell for a Republican rouse – hook, line, and sinker. We must now question whether after 14 years in office, “does he know how that game is played yet?”

Our representative’s competition, Matt Mechtel, may not have name recognition. He may not have $912,000 from out-of-state PACs. But he has the common decency to give hardworking North Dakotans at the bottom of the wage scale a raise, while also allowing people’s heirs to keep more of their loved one’s hard earned money. He has the common sense to realize that when the Republican Party of all things is advocating such a steep increase in the minimum wage, maybe this time it’s ok to break from the traditional party line.

Comments

Avatar for hamfist

Maybe next time Congress votes to increase their own wages, they can tack on the estate tax cut.

hamfist on July 31, 2006 at 05:55 pm
Avatar for The Whistler

Good idea hamfist!

If he was voting AGAINST the minimal wage it’d be one thing.  Everyone with the brain of a flea knows that it’s bad economics.

The Whistler on July 31, 2006 at 06:09 pm
Avatar for robert108

The “estate tax” is an immoral and illegal tax, anyway.  There is no cost to govt from someone dying and passing their estate to whomever they wish, since it is their property.  Since there is no cost to govt, why should govt take any money?  It’s just govt greed.

robert108 on July 31, 2006 at 06:10 pm
Avatar for troutsky

Typical cowardly and cynical move on the House Republicans part, unwilling to face separate votes on the two issues.The richest four percent of Americans have hoodwinked the angry white males into thinking ending the “death tax” is all about liberty and freedom.That wealth is made from the sweat of the workers to whom the money was to be re-distributed. Chumped and played for fools again and they expect you to keep voting them in. And you will.

troutsky on July 31, 2006 at 06:57 pm
Avatar for WOOF

Parts of the House bill unmentioned:

would shift costs of health care and environmental reclamation from coal companies to the federal government at a cost of nearly $4 billion

give timber companies a tax break worth $428 million over five years.

WOOF on July 31, 2006 at 06:58 pm
Rob
Rob
17185 comments
Send a private message

Troutsky, spoken like a true socialist.


The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on July 31, 2006 at 07:07 pm
Avatar for robert108

troutsky(or Trotsky): “That wealth is made from the sweat of the workers to whom the money was to be re-distributed.”

What a perfect recitation of phony Marxist economics.  It isn’t the job of govt, in a free society, to redistribute wealth from those who earned it to those who don’t know how to earn it.  Without capital, workers are slaves.  Get serious!  Return to capital is why free enterprise works and socialism/communism doesn’t.

robert108 on July 31, 2006 at 07:08 pm

troutsky said, The richest four percent of Americans have hoodwinked the angry white males into thinking ending the “death tax” is all about liberty and freedom.

Why did you bring skin color into this? Is that supposed to make us run away? Anyways, care to explain how letting people keep their own money isn’t about liberty and freedom?

That wealth is made from the sweat of the workers to whom the money was to be re-distributed.

No. That wealth is their wealth to which you have no moral claim on.

Chumped and played for fools again and they expect you to keep voting them in. And you will.

Is this an argument?

likwidshoe on July 31, 2006 at 07:09 pm
Avatar for The Whistler

That wealth is made from the sweat of the workers to whom the money was to be re-distributed.

The workers get paid first.  What’s left over after all of the expenses is profit. 

Failures are always jealous of success.

The Whistler on July 31, 2006 at 07:10 pm

Failures are always jealous of success.

No. Some “failures” use their failure as a learning experience and move on. They’re usually the ones who become rich later.

likwidshoe on July 31, 2006 at 07:12 pm
Avatar for robert108

Woof: You continue to look through the distorted lens of Marxism, and so you continue to misunderstand how real life works.  The costs of “environmental cleanup” are incurred by the phony junk science of environmentalism, and should be paid for by the people, who will soon toss the environmentalists out, as soon as they realize how much their mythology is costing taxpayers.  We pay the cost, one way or the other, and stopping the masking of it as a cost to consumers should be ended.  As far as “tax breaks” for the timber industry, what part of “decreased costs” for something we want don’t you understand?  Those excessive taxes were imposed by the enviro lobby, and they raised the price of everything made with wood.  Maybe they shouldn’t tax the timber companies at all.  We just pay for it with higher prices, anyway.  You fool!(sorry about that, just couldn’t resist)

robert108 on July 31, 2006 at 07:15 pm
Avatar for FreeRepublicans.com

Failures are always jealous of success.

Jealousy is not inherently bad as long as it is a positive motivation.

Coveting other’s property without intending to aquire it honestly is inherently bad.

FreeRepublicans.com on July 31, 2006 at 07:19 pm
Avatar for The Whistler

No. Some “failures” use their failure as a learning experience and move on. They’re usually the ones who become rich later.

Some people fail, but they aren’t failures.  But aside from that I agree.  I was referring to the failures as the ones that quit trying.

The Whistler on July 31, 2006 at 07:19 pm

Some people fail, but they aren’t failures.

Yeah...I kind of gathered that after I had already hit the Post button.

Teach me to nitpick!

likwidshoe on July 31, 2006 at 07:21 pm
Rob
Rob
17185 comments
Send a private message

Jealousy is not inherently bad as long as it is a positive motivation.

I agree with that.  The problem is that far too many jealous people use that jealousy as a motivation to demand things like increaes in the minimum wage rather than as motivation to go out and earn higher wages for themselves.

The fact that we’re cutting the estate tax by raising the minimum wage makes me sick.  This is a terrible move, and I hope it stalls in the Senate.

I don’t think the President will veto it if it gets that far.


The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on July 31, 2006 at 07:23 pm
Avatar for The Whistler

Coveting other’s property without intending to aquire it honestly is inherently bad.

Agreed.  What one person should not do, society should not do.  Having a 51% majority does not give society the right to confiscate someone’s property.

The Whistler on July 31, 2006 at 07:23 pm
Avatar for robert108

TW: “The workers get paid first. What’s left over after all of the expenses is profit.”

Thanks for that one.  Sometimes I get so caught up in the structure of the free enterprise system I forget about the practicality of how businesses actually run.  Yes, the business owner gets paid last.  Marxists just don’t know squat.

robert108 on July 31, 2006 at 07:24 pm
Avatar for robert108

"Jealousy is not inherently bad as long as it is a positive motivation.”

A definite oxymoron.  Feelings aren’t a reliable guide to action.  Jealousy isn’t necessarily incentive to do anything but damage someone or exact revenge in some way.  Enlightened self-interest is so much better an incentive, don’t you think?
Jealousy isn’t a positive anything.

robert108 on July 31, 2006 at 07:28 pm

Robert108, interesting comments… but isn’t expectation of an emotional response a form of motivation?  (The expectation in turn can be generated by rational thought.)

Jealousy, like anger, may not be a great positive force, but if it can get you off your duff and moving, then I think it’s served a positive role....

Carrick on July 31, 2006 at 07:48 pm
Rob
Rob
17185 comments
Send a private message

I think jealousy can be positive if your response to it is directed in the right direction.

If I see my neighbor driving around in a nice new pickup and I focus my energies on earning more money so that I can have a new pickup, isn’t that a positive thing?

The key is not to let jealousy turn into an impulse to use the government to punish those who have more than you.


The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on July 31, 2006 at 07:51 pm
Avatar for robert108

Carrick: Technically, yes, it is a form of motivation.  The question here is what form of motivation is it? Is it likely to yield a positive or negative result?  Jealousy is a form of anger, and so is much more likely, IMO, to motivate one in a negative direction.  For some, though, any direction might be seen as positive, in a way.  It’s a judgement call, but the odds aren’t real good.  Anger, or any strong emotion, for that matter, tends to disconnect parts of the brain needed for rational decision-making, which is why the chances for success, especially long term success, are low for jealousy as a form of motivation.

As far as expectation(of anything) is concerned, I take the Zen approach, told to me by my Spiritual Teacher: “If you don’t make any appointments, you won’t experience any disappointments.” In other words, expectation is a two-edged sword.

Rob: That’s not necessarily jealousy.  Jealousy would motivate you to take your neighbor’s truck away from him.  See the difference?  Otherwise, if you want one for yourself, and don’t begrudge your neighbor, it’s inspiration.  He triggered your awareness of wanting a new truck.  On the other hand, if it has to be exactly like your neighbor’s truck…

robert108 on July 31, 2006 at 08:14 pm
Rob
Rob
17185 comments
Send a private message

Robert, I suspect we’re arguing semantics more than anything else as I’m positive we are on the same page philosophically.

I guess what I call “jealousy” is seeing someone with a new gadget or something and saying to myself “Hey, cool.  I want one of those.” And then figuring out how to get it for myself.


The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on July 31, 2006 at 08:18 pm
Avatar for robert108

Rob: Well, it’s really word definition.  You are talking envy, which is simply coveting something.  Jealousy is the toxic desire to take something away from someone out of anger.  It might be to destroy it, not even possess it.  Envy usually desires possession, and isn’t necessarily angry at all.  It’s just a lust for something.  Jealousy is what lefties feel when they see successful people, and makes them want to confiscate their money and take it for their own.  With jealousy, you hate them for having what you think you deserve.  With envy, you just want to have one of those.

robert108 on July 31, 2006 at 08:25 pm
Avatar for WOOF

Nothing distorted about the industry
that abandoned the mines cleaning them up. 
Clean your looking glass Alice.

WOOF on July 31, 2006 at 08:28 pm
Rob
Rob
17185 comments
Send a private message

Well then call me envious.


The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on July 31, 2006 at 08:37 pm
Avatar for The Whistler

I guess what I call “jealousy” is seeing someone with a new gadget or something and saying to myself “Hey, cool. I want one of those.” And then figuring out how to get it for myself.

If it’s under $25 at Walmart....

The Whistler on August 1, 2006 at 04:18 am
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.