|
By Jim Abrams
Associated Press
March 9, 2006
WASHINGTON
(AP) Union construction workers would gain a hiring advantage
for more projects under legislation the House passed Friday,
the latest in a series of pro-labor measures by Democrats that
President Bush has promised to veto.
The 303-108 vote involves water projects funded by federal
lending. Republicans tried but failed to strip out a provision
requiring contractors to pay wages equal to those prevailing
locally.
The White House said advisers would recommend Bush veto the
bill if it retained the Davis-Bacon Act provisions on paying
prevailing wages on public works projects. The requirement
typically gives an advantage to unionized companies bidding
for federal contracts.
A GOP-backed amendment to eliminate the wage provision was
rejected on a 280-140 vote.
Bush has also threatened to veto a broad anti-terrorism bill
now on the Senate floor because it gives limited union rights
to airport screeners. Bush, who has vetoed only one bill in
his presidency - a measure expanding federal funding for stem
cell research - promised another veto last week over a
House-passed bill that eliminates the right of employers to
demand a secret ballot election when workers try to organize.
Labor rights have quickly become a hot topic under the new
Democratic majority, with Democrats pressing issues that
received little attention under Republicans. One of the first
acts of both the House and Senate was passing separate bills
to raise the minimum wage, stuck at $5.15 an hour for the past
10 years.
The House bill passed Friday authorized $14 billion over the
next four years for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, a
source of low-interest loans that has not been replenished for
more than a decade, partly because of the labor dispute.
Davis-Bacon has not applied to wastewater project loans for
the past dozen years.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Republicans, in
their 12 years of running the House, had consistently voted
against raising the minimum wage so "it is not surprising
to me that you are not for paying a prevailing wage to workers
on a public project."
Republicans responded that Davis-Bacon drives up costs for
local communities and hurts minority and other small
businesses overwhelmed by red tape. The bill "benefits
big labor bosses at someone else's expense," said Rep.
Pete Sessions, R-Texas.
The White House, in its statement, noted that the legislation
would also expand Davis-Bacon coverage to nonfederal clean
water projects, including projects financed by funds
contributed solely by states and money repaid to the revolving
fund.
In September 2005, after Hurricane Katrina, Bush became the
fourth president to suspend Davis-Bacon for federal
contracting in response to an emergency situation. He
reinstated the wage law two months later.
A coalition including the Associated Builders and Contractors
Inc. and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in a letter that it
was "vehemently opposed to any reapplication of
Davis-Bacon requirements to this loan program" and urged
lawmakers to vote against it
But supporters argued that Davis-Bacon, in addition to
providing workers with more livable wages, attracted more
experienced and better trained workers, and resulted in more
efficient, less costly projects.
"My district needs to keep wages up, not lower our
wages," said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich. "We should
stop this madness. We come here and it's always like a race to
the bottom, who can do it for cheaper."
Terence M. O'Sullivan, general president of Laborers'
International Union of North America, said the Davis-Bacon law
has "long helped working families support themselves and
their families and helped maintain local community economic
standards."
Ross Eisenbrey, policy director at the liberal-leaning
Economic Policy Institute, a research group in Washington,
said the prevailing wage in a community is not always the
union wage, but they are likely to be similar in large
construction projects such as water projects.
Nonunion companies can still win a contract, but when wages
are taken out of the bidding equation, union companies become
more competitive and are more likely to get the contract
because they tend to be more productive and efficient, he
said.
It was the third water infrastructure bill approved by the
House this week, after passage of a five-year, $1.7 billion
bill to provide grants for sewer improvements and a $125
million bill to promote alternative water sources. The
administration opposed the other two as well, saying they were
too expensive. All three water bills still have to be
considered by the Senate.
---
The bill is H.R. 720.
On the Net:
Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov/
|
