Charles Norwood: “First and foremost, I would ask my colleagues in the nicest possible way, we really should reject this amendment, and we…”

“First and foremost, I would ask my colleagues in the nicest possible way, we really should reject this amendment, and we should do so, frankly, in a bipartisan way. There are a number of things that are going on here, but primarily over the last few years, particularly with a lot of work by our committee, the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and the Secretary of Labor, we have tried very hard to see if we could not bring the wage and hour laws into the 21st century and especially the overtime rules which are not clear, are not simple. Generally they are rules that fatten the wallets, frankly, of our trial lawyers because so many problems have to be solved by judges and courts. That is not what labor law really ought to be about, and we worked hard on this language that is in the gentleman from Ohio's bill, which is good language, and we need to leave it alone. I just would make four quick points about it. Not nearly enough is said in this body by people who would oppose any changes in the labor laws that 1.3 million new people will be eligible for overtime.”