Dems vow to block pay raises until minimum wage increased

June 27, 2006

I’ve been waiting and waiting for [tag]congressional[/tag] Dems to do something exactly like this.

[tag]Democrats[/tag] ratcheted up their election-year push for an increase in the federal [tag]minimum wage[/tag] Tuesday by promising to block a [tag]congress[/tag]ional [tag]pay hike[/tag] unless some of the lowest-paid hourly workers get their first raise in nearly a decade.

“Congress is going to have earn its raise by putting American workers first: A raise for workers before a raise for Congress,” said Senate Democratic leader [tag]Harry Reid[/tag] of Nevada.

[tag]Reid[/tag] refused to spell out exactly how he will block a $3,300 [tag]pay raise[/tag] scheduled for January 1 for members of Congress, who currently earn $165,200 annually. He said with 40 Senate Democrats backing the maneuver, “We can stop anything they ([tag]Republicans[/tag]) try to do with a congressional pay raise.”

This makes so much political sense, it’s astounding it took this long. The public strongly supports an increase to the minimum wage and strongly opposes lawmakers giving themselves a raise.

Reid and the Dem leadership are making this simple: if members want their cost-of-living-increase, then they better be ready to increase the minimum wage for the first time since 1996. (Since the last minimum-wage increase, salaries for members of Congress have gone up $31,600.)

For Dems, it’s a winner: it’s not only the right policy for working families and the economy, but it’s also the right political stand on two issues that matter to voters. Dems can be a little slow sometimes, but they usually manage to get it right eventually….

This I like.
This I like a lot.

  • This is exactly the kind of issue that Democrats need to be focusing on, it paints the STARK contrast between their agenda and say, the solution that’s in need of a problem we’ve been hashing out in the Congress this week before yet another vacation. I wish more of them exhibited this kind of backbone….I hope they can make it happen……

  • Aw hell yeah…

    Last year, when Reid took the body into closed session as a theatrical protest of Pat Roberts’ toadying to the administration on the pre-war intel question, I saw an unfamiliar but very welcome ballsiness to the Democrats. Then it seemed to go away. Until this. Kudos, Senator Reid!

  • More than this, they need to be legally tied to their increases. If Congress needs a COLA of 3%, minimum wage automatically gets one.

    And to Harry, before you’ve used up the sanity you seem to have found, let’s change your vote on the flag descretion issue.

  • In general I support minimum wages with increases to reflect the cost of living. However, my support derives from a general belief in a progressive redistribution of wealth, which I think largely comes from (or should come from) the tax code and various government programs. On that basis, I think the minimum wage is a good idea in spirit, but in practice it is not clear to me that such laws are welfare improving. My reseach has never focused on this issue, but from colleagues I gather that the findings are at best mixed.

    Basically, I support the minimum wage (or usually just stay quiet on the subject) since I think it is mostly harmless — the costs generally outweighs the benefits, but both are very small.

    Is there any credible research that supports minimum wage and/or living wage ordinances?

  • The problem with this is that these same Democrats DIDN’T block the most recent pay raise that started the whole debate in this election cycle. So then why or how will they block future votes?

    The minimum raise didn’t increase last year either, but Congressional pay did. Where were the Democrats then?

    As much as I appreciate this newfound stand by the Democrats, I also see it for what it is: election year politics.

  • We seem to have run out of items for today, so here’s to those Democrats who held the Flag Desecration Amendment to a one-vote failure!

    I liked Frist’s comment that the amendment would honor those who fought to defend the flag. What he didn’t mention is that that would exclude all the Bush Crime Family.

  • Doubtful (#7) beat me to it: pay raises to Congress should have, as a prerequisite, an increase in the minimum wage. It’s been made frightfully apparent that these guys are getting all sorts of kickbacks and perqs, etc., so I’m not buying the poverty excuse.

    Will (#9) also raises a good point that the Dems need to be consistent in their position as well because, the truth is, of course they’re playing politics with this issue. You need more guys like Feingold who, agree with him or disagree with him (and electable or not electable), he takes a position on something and then sticks to it. But at least the Dems have come to this position now – let’s see how long they stick to it, i.e., will that be their position after the midterms? When the next pay raise comes along? I hate a hypocrite no matter if he’s wearing a red hat or a blue one.

  • brilliant–this is why i am a democrat.
    2008 is coming up–we will get the White House back.

  • I don’t mean to pollute your blog with obsenity, but only one phrase comes to mind: Fuckin A.

  • The fact is Hillary, I Know, But she proposed a bill that would link congressional pay raises to raises in the minimum wage! Hey she ain’t no Lieberman.

  • If the Dems do a good thing and no one in the press covers it, does it amount to any good at all? I hope the MSM takes note.

    I get the feeling Frist will come up with some procedural BS to make this go for naught.

  • The objective is to get more money into the hands of those who work. Raising the minimum wage is a bad way to do that. Raising the minimum wage will make American jobs less competitive. That’s a fact.

    There is a BETTER way. Make the FICA a sales tax instead of a labor tax. Workers would get an immediate 12% increase in their takehome pay. Corporations would send the same money to the government and foreign production would begin to pay for some of the costs of replacing US labor.

  • Smart! Words alone won’t cut it anymore.
    Dems remind me of a kitten that is just learning how to hunt.
    They may be the minority party but they feel the majority support of the country. Time to get frisky.

  • #8 – some references:
    http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0622/p01s03-usec.html
    slightly anti-minimum wage article — you have to read carefully because they go back and forth between ‘minimum wage earners’, and people who earn less than the proposed $7.25 minimum wage.

    http://www.janegalt.net/blog/archives/005713.html
    Anti-minimum wage article…not a lot of statistics, but there are some well-thought out arguments. Author does make a few “fuzzy” conclusions though.

    http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/20/kennedy-min-wage/
    Interesting, Kennedy says 15 million people, Christian Science Monitor says 8 million people…

    OK, I found several other analytical articles that were very anti-minimum wage. I haven’t been able to find any economic analysis that supports raising the minimum wage — that is, I don’t see any analysis that shows raising the minimum wage would benefit low-income workers as a group. Surely there must be some, so someone post a link, please!

    At any rate…several million of the minimum wage earners are people who are high school/college age, making some spending money on the side, but on their way to better paying jobs. The people I’m worried about are the several million single moms trying to raise kids. Being the sole family breadwinner and having kids means they are severely hampered in their efforts to improve their income potential (can’t afford $ or time for school, can’t get promoted because they miss so much time because of the kids, etc.). Fellas need to get off their lazy butts and work, but how about we at least make a minimum wage especially for single moms? And make it something they can live off of? Let’s face it — the high school kids working at McDonalds don’t need a raise — they’ll get their money when they’ve paid their dues. So keep the kids at $5.25, give the moms a bump, and that should appease people who worry that everything will get more expensive when you raise the minimum wage.

    Finally, one thing I don’t hear anyone talking about is financial education. We need to be teaching kids in school how to handle money — budget, plan ahead, don’t count on the lottery, etc. I mean, honestly, who among us can say they get every penny’s worth out of their income? If we can teach people to get 10% more out of their income, and then give their income a 40% boost, they’re really in much better shape.

  • The Fact that in every state that raised the wage more jobs were created.
    This is a fact not a “study”.

  • Does the fact escape you that you can walk in off the street and start working nearly anywhere you happen to live for more than the “proposed” new minimum? Walmart, Kmart, MacD’s ————the list goes on

  • “Let’s face it — the high school kids working at McDonalds don’t need a raise — they’ll get their money when they’ve paid their dues.” – Addison

    I just don’t understand this argument. Granted, the high school kids don’t generally have to worry about making money to support a family, but that still doesn’t make up for the fact that the minimum wage hasn’t been raised at all during a period of time where there has been obvious inflation. $5.25 in 2006 doesn’t get you as much as it did in 1996, and workers should be compensated appropriately, whether they make $10,000 a year or $100,000 a year.

  • Yes it’s election year politics, but it’s good politics and it’s a sign the dems are starting to fight. It’s also true that the $5.15 minimum wage is not an effective price floor for most workers, but it is a powerful symbol of how we treat each other as a society. $5.15 is a moral blight, and almost to the extent raising that minimum helps those at the bottom, those just above that will be helped as well. And those just above them, etc. It’s called a slight downward redistribution of wealth, from the coffers of obscene corporate profits to the poor American children struggling through dizzying hunger to learn in school. It’s called real economic stimulus when instead of sitting in the bank accounts of the wealthy, that two extra bucks starts circulating in the economy because the poor have a such a pityful pent up demand for goods and services.

  • #8 and #21: The Economic Policy Institute (epi.org) has much information. Click on “Minimum Wage: Facts at a Glance.”

  • #22 treebark – please publish a reference, that’s all I’m asking.
    #23 doug – your argument would go against raising the minimum wage…if I can already get a job for more than $7.25, then the minimum wage is irrelevant.
    #24 TL – I think you missed my point. I said raise the minimum wage for single moms, but not for teenagers (except, of course, teenage single moms)
    #26 – Thanks Norma, but when I visited epi.org, the only articles I found were anti-minimum wage. I’m looking for analysis that shows the economic benefits of raising the minimum wage.

  • When I started out in the job force in ’97 I initially worked for minimum wage. That was almost a decade ago, so obviously things have dramatically changed since then, but here are my observations:

    1. The minimum wage is especially vital and required for those working in the more remote parts of this country. While your entry level job in a big city will almost without exception provide more than that level of income that won’t be the case in rural America.

    2. The impact of higher income levels on entry level workers is an increase in their ability to seek and obtain training and skills required to progress in the work force. Having these opportunities is the difference between staying in a dead end service industry job and moving to a field which provides personal satisfaction.

    3. There are millions of Americans with jobs at or close to minimum wage who are not starting out who would likewise benefit from these opportunities.

    These are just anecdotal observations, but I think it’s important to at least make the large corporate conglomerates (read Walmart) pay their workers a bare minimum of the inflation adjusted minimum wage we had in the 60’s. Anything less is just robber-barron behavior and should not be tolerated.

    I’m not much in favor of boycotts, but this is one issue where I take exception and chose not to shop anywhere without a living wage. A law to enforce this would be beneficial to say the least.

    As for studies, I think the disparity between the rich and poor is enough for me to know that a declining minimum wage is probably related to the rising difference in the classes. Tip things much further and there will be major social problems for all of us.

  • “#24 TL – I think you missed my point. I said raise the minimum wage for single moms, but not for teenagers (except, of course, teenage single moms)” – Addison

    No, I understand your point, but I also think you’re a little misguided. Let’s say we do raise the minimum wage for single mothers. Suddenly single mothers are less interesting to prospective employers, as they now require a higher wage than employees that aren’t single mothers. Now you have a bigger problem, as single mothers would not be able to even find employment.

    I also believe in equality. To single out a group and state that they should suddenly receive a higher wage than others outside of that group is a slippery slope. What’s to stop us from basing wages on gender, sexual orientation, race, or religious beliefs?

    Ultimately everyone suffers from increases in the cost of living. Most of us reap the benifit of a “cost of living” wage increase every year, but minimum wage workers have not been given that luxury. No matter what an individual minimum wage worker’s situation is, he or she should also be granted an increase in wage that, at a minimum, somewhat imitates the increase of inflation.

  • #29 – fair enough. You cite a common argument against raising minimum wage — that many low-wage earners would lose their jobs so that the others could benefit from the increased wage.

    I agree that people deserve a cost-of-living increase, but there is a fallacy in saying “minimum wage workers have not been given that luxury.” About 66% of minimum wage workers are making well above minimum wage three years down the road. The person making $5.15 today, by-and-large, is not the same person who was making $5.15 in 1997. Over the past 9 years, people who begin minimum wage jobs have suffered progressively, because each year the purchasing power of that $5.15 goes down, but most people don’t work for minimum wage their whole lives. You can’t live on that, hence you’re forced to do something to improve your circumstances, and so most people do.

  • Let’s face it — the high school kids working at McDonalds don’t need a raise — -Addison

    That’s funny, last time I went to McDonalds there wasn’t a single teenager working there. Just sad looking thirty somethings who probably lost a higher paying job.

    If you think only teenagers work jobs like those, you’re making a sad, unfrotunate generalization which is simply wrong.

  • (Since the last minimum-wage increase, salaries for members of Congress have gone up $31,600.)

    It’s worth noting that, assuming Congressmen worked full-time, and I believe they don’t even come close with all the time they spend in recess, that is an increase of $15.80/hour, more than three times what minimum wage earners make. It’s astoundingly ridiculous, and incredibly disappointing that Democrats have not stood up to this until now.

    Treebark, I’m pretty sure jobs have increased in every state, not just the ones which had minimum wage increases. A far more compelling fact to cite would be a comparison of how many more jobs were created in states with an increased minumum wage to how many fewer jobs were created in states without an increase.

  • Re: #31

    NPR cited a Congressional Budget Office statistic a few days ago, that said 60% of minumum wage earners are supporting familes.

    Also, I can’t speak for Addison but I’m pretty sure he meant to compare teenagers who earn minimum wage with single mothers who earn minimum wage and did seem to support the idea of giving minimum wage increases to the latter, just not the former.

    Correct me if I’m wrong.

  • #28 Alex #1 – It’s probably true that more rural workers would be affected, but their cost of living is substantially lower than that of city workers.

    While it may seem intuitive that a declining minimum wage contributes to a “rising difference in the classes”, looking at the demographics of minimum wage earners makes me question that assertion. Since the average household income of minimum wage earners is $43000, and the average minimum wage earner works 10 hours a week, it seems that most minimum wage earners aren’t people just scraping by to feed their families. There isn’t a vast underclass struggling to live on minimum wage. There just isn’t. Of course, all these department of labor statistics probably don’t include illegal aliens, and people who are “off the books”…but then again, the minimum wage increase probably wouldn’t help them anyway.

  • #33 Yes, Rian that’s exactly what I meant!

    #31 – I’m not trying to generalize, doubtful…where I grew up, most of the people working fast food were teenagers. That’s what you did to earn money over the summer, or after school. Either that or mow grass.

  • Addison, I hate to argue, and perhaps I’m looking at different data than you (likely so I’m afraid), but the facts appear to present just that; a large underclass struggling to live at or just above minimum wage:

    Who are minimum wage workers?
    An estimated 7.3 million workers (5.8% of the workforce) would benefit from an increase in the minimum wage to $7.25 by June 2007. Of these workers, 72.1% are adults and 60.6% are women. Close to half (43.9%) work full time and another third (34.5%) work between 20 and 34 hours per week. More than one-third (35%) of the workers who would benefit from an increase to $7.25 are parents of children under age 18, including 760,000 single mothers. The average minimum wage worker brings home about half of his or her family’s weekly earnings.

  • #36 – Alex, THANK YOU! The link you posted was exactly what I’ve been searching for…looks like there are lots of references supporting minimum wage increases. I knew there had to be information like that out there somewhere…(will take me awhile to study all of it though). Thanks!

    Interesting side note…one of the citations from Alex’s link is the US Dept. of Labor, which states there already is a law that allows teenagers to be paid LESS than minimum wage (but at least $4.25) for their first 90 days, as long as they don’t displace other workers. I thought that was interesting in relation to comments #21, #24, and #29

  • “I agree that people deserve a cost-of-living increase, but there is a fallacy in saying “minimum wage workers have not been given that luxury.” About 66% of minimum wage workers are making well above minimum wage three years down the road. The person making $5.15 today, by-and-large, is not the same person who was making $5.15 in 1997. Over the past 9 years, people who begin minimum wage jobs have suffered progressively, because each year the purchasing power of that $5.15 goes down, but most people don’t work for minimum wage their whole lives. You can’t live on that, hence you’re forced to do something to improve your circumstances, and so most people do.” – Addison

    Okay, so let’s say 66% make more money three years down the road. That means that one in three aren’t making more than minimum wage after three years of work! Additionally, what about the period of time when they are living off minimum wage before they find these new-found riches that you tout? Not to mention, is $5.50 an hour really that much better than $5.15? I don’t think so, but by your statistics, they aren’t making minimum wage anymore, so obviously they aren’t poor, right? The proposed minimum wage of $7.25 is vastly different than the current $5.15, which means that many workers making less than the proposed minimum wage, but yet more than the current minimum wage, aren’t accounted for.

    “Since the average household income of minimum wage earners is $43000, and the average minimum wage earner works 10 hours a week, it seems that most minimum wage earners aren’t people just scraping by to feed their families.” – Addison

    How on earth do you think that a family of minimum wage earners are bringing $43,000 home every year while only working 10 hours a week? Those statistics are obviously inflated for every time a middle or upper class family has a child that gets a minimum wage job.

    “Interesting side note…one of the citations from Alex’s link is the US Dept. of Labor, which states there already is a law that allows teenagers to be paid LESS than minimum wage (but at least $4.25) for their first 90 days, as long as they don’t displace other workers. I thought that was interesting in relation to comments #21, #24, and #29” – Addison

    What you are pointing out is an incredibly limited example, obviously meant to encourage the hiring of completely unexperienced, young workers. You could also point out the fact that illegal workers require no minimum wage at all. But these are hardly examples of how separate minimum wages for different groups wouldn’t prove to be a severe problem.

  • No problem Addison. Also interesting is a study Oregon did on the impact raising their minimum wage had on restaurant industry workers.

    The industury hates to admit it, but paying their employees more actually seems to make them more productive and improve the bottom line. Then again I rarely like being told I have to do something myself…

  • #38 – TL, I sense anger in you…

    How on earth do you think that a family of minimum wage earners are bringing $43,000 home every year while only working 10 hours a week? Those statistics are obviously inflated for every time a middle or upper class family has a child that gets a minimum wage job. – TL

    Your response puzzles me…it isn’t my opinion, it was a statistic from one of the previously cited sources. Why does this offend you? So it means that some wage earners are single moms making $10k, and others are teenagers whose parents make $70k. The number of single-earner families where the breadwinner makes less that $7.25 is MUCH smaller than most people think. Before I looked it up, I would have guessed 20 million. It’s closer to 2 million.

    I’m trying to be intellectually honest and figure out what is truly going on. I’m sharing what I find out on this comment thread. Some people say raise the minimum wage, and others say don’t. Let’s analyze the situation and at least get the facts out in the open. What will happen as a result of raising the minimum wage is a matter of conjecture, but studying previous wage increases can help us make an “educated” conjecture.

    To figure out if the policy is a good idea, I think we should ask these questions:
    1) Who is affected?
    2) How much are they affected?
    3) Are the long-term effects good for those affected?
    4) Are the long-term effects good for society?

    I’m sure you’re right that there would be unintended consequences of making a separate minimum wage for different groups (e.g. single moms)…However, I think it’s worth considering (and perhaps test-driving) policies that are more directly targeted to people that need help. Perhaps a tax credit like the EITC, but for single moms. The EITC is great, but single moms probably need more help than that, and the EITC helps everyone, not just single moms.

  • Better than raising the minimum wage, switching the FICA to a sales tax would make all pay levels better off, especially those working at the bottom of the scale. This would alleviate the negative effects of raising the minimum and would directly benefit those intended to be helped by a minimum wage.

    There are several other benefits as well.

    • Comments are closed.