Skip to content
Chicago Tribune
PUBLISHED: | UPDATED:
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

Regarding the story “Maximum of goodies stud minimum-wage bill” (Page 1, Aug. 8), I commend your comprehensive coverage and agree that, in the end, special interests benefited more than workers.

I voted in favor of the bill because I support giving a raise to hard-working, low-income American workers. I also support the original tax breaks for small businesses and individuals that accompanied the increase, such as the exception that allows employees to deduct educational benefits paid by their employer from their gross income. I am, however, adamantly opposed to the special tax breaks added to the bill at the last minute.

It is an outrage that special tax breaks for greedy multinational corporations and insurance companies were included in a bill designed to help the average worker. Special interests abused the legislative process by convincing legislators to add controversial tax breaks to the popular minimum-wage bill during closed-door conference negotiations. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that unappealing riders have been added in conference to “must-pass,” fast-moving legislation.

For this reason, during the first session of the 104th Congress, I introduced what I call the “time-out” resolution. House Resolution 154 would change the House rules to prevent the consideration of a conference report until 10 days after it is filed. This waiting period would allow members of Congress who were not involved in the conference committee to carefully review the conference report and determine if any major or controversial changes were made. It would also allow the administration, the news media and, most important, the public to do the same.

Imagine, for example, that your story had run before the final vote on the minimum-wage bill; I doubt the special interests would have won out then! Under my resolution, during the last six days of a session, when there is a rush to pass legislation, a recently filed conference report could be considered only if two-thirds of the House of Representatives agree to consider the report.

Unfortunately, the resolution has not yet been scheduled for consideration by the House.