I believe we are about ready to vote. A lot of the debate has occurred, and I think it has been healthy and to the point. I do believe we should reiterate a couple of points. First off, the original regulations are not what are at issue. The original regulations have been fundamentally changed. When the Senator from Massachusetts says, as I take it to be a fact if he represents it here, that $33,000 is the average income of people who have incomes which are overtime related, that is fine. Under this new regulation, those people are not going to be impacted because this regulation, first, raises the minimum where one is guaranteed overtime from $8,000 to $23,400. So anybody making $23,400 is guaranteed overtime no matter what their job classification is. People between $23,000 and $100,000 are also exempt under this language because of the way the regulation has been proposed. The only people who are at risk under this legislation are people earning more than $100,000 who are working white collar jobs. Blue collar jobs over $100,000 of income are not at risk. There are potentially 6.7 million people who benefit from this regulation, directly immediately, because they are the people who are making up to $23,000. This is not even an accurate number--it may be much less--potentially 100,000 people making more than $100,000 may be impacted as a result of holding white collar positions which are no longer overtime related.
Judd Gregg: “I believe we are about ready to vote. A lot of the debate has occurred, and I think it has been healthy and to the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing changes to overtime regulations and their impact on workers.
Share
More from Judd Gregg
My experience in these debates, the person who wins is the person who establishes himself with the American people toward the audience, this can be a huge audience, as being one reasonably likable.
Without the 99 nuclear power plants that operate in 30 States, carbon emissions from the U.S. electric sector would be approximately 25 percent higher.
I subscribe to Senator Gregg's emphasis on value-based reimbursement. I think we're making progress on Medicare. It's not hopeless.
I think Dr. Rivlin is absolutely correct on both points, and Simpson-Bowles did the same thing that Domenici-Rivlin did, which was to actually increase benefits to single women over 85, and low-income individuals.