States Still Leading Feds on Minimum Wage

Later this month, the federal minimum wage will increase to $6.65 -- hardly anywhere close to what it should be, but an improvement from where we are now. Fortunately, a number of states will also be increasing their minimum wage rates even higher than the federal rate:

* $6.85 per hour in Nevada
* $7.15 in Pennsylvania (for smaller employers to match the rate already for large employers)
* $7.25 per hour in West Virginia and Illinois
* $7.40 per hour in Michigan
* $7.65 in the District of Columbia
* $7.25 per hour in Maine this October

Adding in states who have already raised their minimum wage, twenty-four states plus the District of Columbia, covering 59% of the U.S. population, will still have minimum rates above the federal rate. And even when the federal rate rises to $7.25 per hour next year, eleven states plus the D.C., covering 26% of the U.S. population, will still have a minimum wage rate higher than the federal level. Five states plus D.C. will have minimum wage rates of $8 per hour or more.

To add a little context, compared to 1968, when the federal minimum wage was the equivalent of $9.34 per hour accounting for inflation, even the highest state minimum wage rates have lost value against inflation. We have a ways yet to go, but it's clear even with an Obama administration and a Democratic Congress, that states will continue to need to lead on this effort.

Comments

[UnbiasView]

What is wrong with that? States should be given the power to make these decisions based on their best interests, you know the way this country was setup?

If Minnesota wants to have a high min. wage with high taxes and South Dakota wants to have a lower min. wage with low taxes . . . they will attract more business and help growth.

Why is Detroit not getting the new auto plants while the South is? Taxes & wages.

[scooperss]

If anything is going to be done in this country it seems it will have to be state by state. And that can be a good idea.