I appreciate where he is coming from--the private sector, the era that believes that individuals and businesses know how to set labor rates better than the Federal Government. He happens to be right. This does not keep the law as it is. As a matter of fact, this expands Davis-Bacon. It goes well beyond any scope of the original passage of Davis-Bacon, because it says that fair labor standards--or ``the administrator will have prevailing wage rates provided under this part including any assistance derived from repayments to the State loan fund.'' That is all State money. So what we are doing is expanding the Federal mandate of Davis-Bacon, and that mandates high labor rates to the States. It is an unfunded State mandate. States are going to be saying: Wait a minute, we have paid into this fund; that is our money, but you are mandating that we have the Federal Government set the labor rates on these projects when we are spending our own money. That is not right.
Don Nickles: “I appreciate where he is coming from--the private sector, the era that believes that individuals and businesses know how…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of the Davis-Bacon Act during Senate floor debate.
Share
More from Don Nickles
I would have to look at the figures. The baseline scored by OMB was 521. The baseline scored by CBO was 477. The figure we had before us in the budget resolution, I would want to check. CBO is in the process of revising that. We use CBO…
If you no longer allowed intangible drilling costs to be expensed, you would shut down the shale revolution.
If somebody is activated and they go to Afghanistan or Iraq, don't they receive full health care costs without paying the 28 percent?
I have heard some statements where people are insinuating that American combat personnel are getting gypped by this bill. That is false. We are giving them a benefit they didn't have before. We are saying they can use combat pay in…





