Peter Roskam Casts Anti-Family Vote to Oppose Paid Parental Leave

On June 10, 2009, in Executive Compensation, Healthcare, Middle Class, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, by RSR
1

If I don’t have much good to say about Peter Roskam these days, I can at least credit him for being consistent. Roskam is quite consistently opposed to anything that might possibly benefit an ordinary working man or woman at the expense of the giant corporations and wealthy individuals whose interests he uses his seat in Congress to represent.

It was no surprise when Peter Roskam voted against the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2009 on June 4, 2009. Congressman Roskam has been a fierce advocate of unlimited pay for corporate executives, but God forbid any working mother or father should be given the time and the financial wherewithal to care for a new child. Why that would make us no different than those Commie countries like… like Canada!

H.R. 626 provides for 4 weeks of paid parental leave to federal employees surrounding the birth or adoption of a child. Federal employees currently receive 12 weeks of unpaid leave (as do all employees subject to the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993). The bill further provides that the employees can use accumulated sick time and vacation time to convert some or all of the balance of that 12 weeks into paid time. Finally, the Office of Personnel Management would be enabled to extend the paid period to 8 weeks. The measure applies only to federal employees and would be at best a weak immitation of pro-family policies in place in many Western countries. Hell, even Zimbabwe gives mothers 90 days at 100%.

Roskam, of course, in addition to not wanting to spend a dime of our federal tax dollars on a working family, fears that the bill will be a foot in the door for future further enhancements to FMLA, something that Roskam’s corporate overlords at the U.S. Chamber and at the National Association of Manufacturers virulently oppose.

Despite Roskam’s vote, along with those of most of his Republican colleagues, H.R. 626 passed by a vote of  258-154. It will now have to be taken up by the Senate.

Peter Roskam deserves to be shamed for his anti-family vote. Please contact him today.  You can reach him at (202) 225-4561 in Washington or at (630) 893-9670 in Bloomingdale.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 

Peter Roskam Throws Hissy Fit on House Floor Over Taxes on Dead Rich Folks

On May 22, 2009, in Economic Justice, Estate Tax, Middle Class, Peter Roskam, Poverty, by RSR
0

Received a Tweet from Peter Roskam  wanting to know what I thought about his floor speeech regarding the estate tax, which Peter and other wingnuts like to call the “death tax”.

Well. I always want to do my part to help my Congressman so here goes.

First off,  I was  pleased to hear him name publicly one by one the interest groups to which he is beholden: U.S. Chamber, National Association of Manufacturers, etc.

I was also impressed by Peter’s emotion, the passion that this issue arouses in him. Thought his hairpiece was going to fly off at the end ;) .

What troubles me deeply, however, is that it it is only taxes on rich people that can get Peter aroused this way.  Not homeless veterans on the streets of DuPage County, not children in Wood Dale without adequate health care, not torture and illegal detention authorized by the President and Vice President in Washington. Nope. Just taxes on rich white people in Wheaton, or in this case, rich dead white people in Wheaton.

The truth about the estate tax, which Peter Roskam is unwilling to share with you, is that the estate tax will affect only 0.24 percent of all people who die in 2009, individuals who die with an estate valued at $3.5 million or more or married couples (heterosexual) with an estate of $7 million or more. What’s really sad is that Peter Roskam has chosen to use his seat in Congress, OUR seat in Congress, to represent the financial interests of only that tiny fraction of the residents of his district.

Repealing the estate tax, as Roskam, would have us do, would cost billions in reduced revenue, necessitating either increased taxes on the poor and middle class or major reductions in spending. Cuts to the bloated defense budget, of course, are off limits, to Peter and his Republican colleagues, so cuts would have to be made for things like college financial aid, food stamps, Medicare, veterans services, childrens’ health care – all those programs to help poor and middle class families that Peter has fought against so vigorously during his time in office. More than likely, it would be a combination of both increased taxes and reduced services that would be required to give this expensive gift to a few very wealthy dead people.

So, thanks, Peter for letting me know about your speech.  I honestly have to say though that I didn’t care for it much.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 

Notre Dame Confers Honorary Degree on Child-Killing U.S. President

On May 17, 2009, in Abortion, Barack Obama, Death Penalty, by RSR
0

Obama Notre Dame

It happened on May 20, 2001. President George Bush delivered a commencement address at Notre Dame, focused mainly on compassion, and on his plan for establishment of religion through the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives.  The President was awarded an honorary doctor of laws degree.

Now in fairness, President Bush had not yet distinguished himself as Torturer-in-Chief and did not yet have the blood of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians on his hands. But he had just come off a run as Governor of Texas, where he had proven to be an enthusiastic practitioner of capital punishment, sending 152 people to their deaths by lethal injection over his 6 years as Governor, a record pace in modern times. In order to maintain that pace, Bush had to deny clemency to virtually everyone who petitioned (serial killer Henry Lee Lucas being the lone exception) and execute all comers, including the mentally retarded. In this herculean task he was ably assisted by his toady, and future Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales.  Much later, as President, Bush would attempt to institute a “fast track” for the death penalty to get things moving at a more satisfying pace.

And yet this monster Bush, is pretty much deified by the so-called “pro-life” movement in this country. Makes it pretty hard to take their protests at Notre Dame today seriously.

Abortion isn’t pretty. It would be difficult to defend it as a positive good. But the State compelling women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is equally ugly. My judgment is in agreement with President Obama: abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. Women should be allowed to reach their own ethical evaluations of the option of terminating a pregnancy with the counsel of their families, physicians, and spirtual advisors. The State should not be allowed to intrude into this process.

I applaud President Obama for his stance in favor of allowing women to control their own bodies and I applaud the University of Notre Dame for standing up to the anti-abortion protesters in defense of the ideals of a university.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •