I knew that the minimum wage was attached to the Iraq funding bill. But I also knew that a big obstacle was tax breaks to offset the higher prices for small businesses that the minimum wage would produce. The obstacle was resolved, in the usual political fashion, with no one getting what they wanted.
Those concerns delayed passage of the wage hike for months, as Republicans and conservative Democrats in the Senate battled Democrats in the House, who at first insisted that affected businesses get nothing. In March, Democrats tacked the wage issue onto the Iraq spending bill in hopes of breaking the logjam.On the merits, the minimum wage is worse than useless. The article notes that thirty out of fifty states had already raised their own minimum wage beyond the federal rate. If minimum wage laws belong anywhere, they belong at the local and state level. It's ridiculous to think that the minimum wage in NYC is the same as Fargo, ND.The two chambers finally struck a compromise last month that includes tax breaks worth $4.8 billion over 10 years, more than the House wanted but much less than the Senate had sought.
In fact last November in Ohio voters approved a change to the state constitution not only approving a minimum wage hike, but thereafter tying it to inflation. That seems dangerously close to starting an inflationary closed feedback loop, but the main result is that any efforts on the Federal level have lost a lot of their political effect locally.
Democrats have also had a lot of luck increasing their voter turnout and interest with these state minimum wage issues and amendments. That's probably over for the next cycle.
But still, at least the Democrats can say they got something done. Which might ease the pain of their defeat on the Iraq funding.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 1)
1. I just don't see who could be against citizens earning a living wage. Even if it applies to only a few, those few are worth the effort to help.
Steve Bonomo at 5:46PM on May 25th 2007
2. Then maybe you should go get a basic education in economics, Steve. A lot of heart you've got, but apparently no brain.
Jeff at 5:28AM on May 26th 2007
3. OK Jeff, my economics training is old, from the 70s. What's the latest theory on paying a living wage?
Steve Bonomo at 11:25AM on May 26th 2007
4. Minimum wage...right. That's really going to help. Corporations RAISE wages based on minimums and DROP hours to what the poor employees would make at old rates. Minimum wages versus livable wages, no comparison. Out here, without TWO PERSON FAMILY INCOMES, a ONE PERSON livable wage would be around $50 per hour. I said LIVABLE, not COMFORTABLE. Housing can't be found out here, and rentals are tight too with RENT INCREASES At 30% EVERY YEAR!! Wow, those Democrats REALLY know how to take care of those who need it don't they? With friends like that who needs enemies? Illegals who cram 10 people into a one or two bedroom place with wages around $7.00, no skin off their nose.....that's normal for them. What about the rest of us?
Jean at 2:50PM on May 27th 2007
5. minimum wages is not enough to take care of ones necesity..Forget about luxury.You need Both persons in the family to be working. Not a 9-5 jobs..A good 12 hours a piece.With rent sky rocketing, Food, Con ED,Clothes,Child care, Carefare,Medical,Gas,etc.The rents That we have to pay in New York, you can buy a house. 1200.00 not even for one-bedroom a studio apartment.Any bigger forget it...Things are not getting better its, getting worst..Not even 7.00 an hour people is enough....
D.Ruthford at 4:56PM on Jul 18th 2007