According to an article on news center one’s website, the bill causing the governor to take the most pause is the measure to take those under 18 out of the equation for the minimum wage:
Daugaard says he will continue looking over it until he comes to a decision. “There’s about 28 bills that I still need to read through and make sure that I’m comfortable with the way the bill ended up. The youth minimum wage is one of them.
He may be comfortable altering measures just passed by the voters. I am not. Politically, a very foolish thing to do.
Jimmy James,
Comments:
1) Sometimes leadership is not considering the politics but what is best.
2) Voters support for the minimum wage increase doesn’t preclude majority support for youth differential.
Troy Jones,
Comments:
1) Oddly paternalistic line of thought, there. Would you argue that voters at the poll do not know what is best? If so, what’s the deal with this whole “democracy” thing?
2) Actually, it does. If a voter felt that the youth differential was absolutely necessary, they wouldn’t vote for IM 18 as it was written, right? The fact that 55% of voters supported the measure shows that 55% of voters wanted what was written and what was written was a standard minimum wage for all workers.
So if the Governor signs this into law what are the chances of an other ballot initiative to undo it and reinstate what the voters originally intended that the new minimum wage was supposed to be for everyone regardless of age.
I love how everyone seems to know the will and intent of the voters on IM 18. I voted for it, while voting for republicans that I hoped would take out the automatic inflation increase. While I did not ponder a youth differential I’m pleasantly surprised by it and certainly welcome it.
Just because someone voted for the increase doesn’t mean they supported exactly as it was written.
Well Troy, then perhaps what is “best” is for the public to show you who is boss.
If the wage for individuals aged 55 or older was set lower than the regular minimum wage it would be age discrimination and be illegal. I believe the same should apply here. Politicians should also remember, these ‘youths’ will shortly be voters.
Great point, daj
None of them vote however.
I love the hypocrisy in all this. The voters approved a minimum wage hike and the contents of that initiative can not be tampered with because a majority voted for. However a couple of months ago when the Courts overturned a voter approved constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and woman it wa
Didn’t get to finish this for some PC reason–it was roundly applauded by many. Evidently the weight of the people’s voice depends on the issue and whether you agree with it or not. I don’t really care either way–just be consistent.
The voters just gave low income workers a buck an hour increase in the minimum wage which, I believe, is in line with historical pay. Now, some of our fellow Republicans want to pat Cindy Lou Who on the head and steal her dollar.
It looks bad…. because it is.
Jimmy James,
I definitely know by now you strongly support the minimum wage increase as passed. 🙂
However, your assertion it is “bad” has an implication the motives of those who disagree with you are nefarious as well.
Here is my view on the youth wage:
Assuming a young person works for two years fifteen hours a week, the “lost wages” is about $15 a week or $1,500 (15x52X2).
It is simple economics the more something costs, the less demand for that “product” and young people have less experience (economic value), there will be less jobs for available for young people. I believe that first job is the most important job a person will ever have and denying access to that jobs does a disservice to both the young person and society as a whole.
In Sioux Falls, the law has virtually no impact as wages are higher than the minimum even as passed. However, in our small towns, young people have trouble even getting jobs and with the higher cost it is inevitable there will be less jobs.
Finally, you imply this is against the “will of the people.” You don’t really know this. Let me give you a scenario that is possible.
20% of the voters wanted a higher minimum wage as proposed but wanted a youth wage differential. 10% voted against the initiative because it didn’t have a youth differential and 10% voted for it because they wanted the increase more than the differential.
In other words, if there had been a wage differential, it might have gotten 65% support for the initiative vs. the 55% it got and the real “will of the people” is the increase and a youth differential.
Of course, neither of us know that with any certainty and we probably disagree. Its possible and there is nothing nefarious if the Governor and Legislature try to discern the real will of the people.
P.S. I forgot to add after “as a whole” the following: “and thus I think the value of having that job is of greater long-term benefit to the youth worker than $15 a week or $1,500.
Troy. I understand that there is validity to all of your points. My argument is more about political judgement. Even if I agreed with you, doing this so quickly is a political mistake.
When we trip over ourselves to limit the income of low income folks while also supporting farm subsidies and inheritance breaks for the wealthiest etc., we begin to verify a stereotype. They say we represent the richest one percent. Are we spending political capital to prove them right?
And another argument. Does a lower minimum wage for teens reduce the demand for those above that age? I think that most people would agree that it does.
Jimmy James,
Got your view now with better clarity. The stereotype issue is one that I think most unfair yet real so you are right there may be a cost of doing this. That said, in the end, I think good government over-time trumps perceived poor political decisions. A friend once said to me: If you want to raise a Republican, make him get a job where he has to share his money with the government. If you want to raise a Democrat, give him an allowance.
Regarding your last point, I’m sure that is true but the question is the increment/degree to which it has impact. I heard one retailer say to me: “its a question of how much certain things are done. I have to sweep the floors and re-stock the shelves but do I dust the shelves daily or every other day?”
I wish I could say this was the least Republican thing the Legislature did this session. This issue went to a straight up and down vote of the people. What are we doing here guys? People get on this blog and rail against “RINOs” and the threat they pose to our party. Government overriding the clear will of the people is a much scarier problem for Republicans.
I hope the Governor signs this into law. This will come back to bite the party big time and end up being a lesson learned.
i think he’s going to veto it with little if any comment.
The governor has already said publicly that he doesn’t believe in minimum wage laws. His decision ought to be based solely on whether he believes this change makes the law better or even worse.
The consequences in terms of public opinion can’t be predicted and shouldn’t influence the decision even if they could be.
Anonymous 10:10 am:
You just made the best political argument for the Governor signing this law.
Democrats/Liberals will go bananas like they did on EB-5, put all their eggs in that basket, and again get annihilated at the polls.
And, you also made the second best political argument. The Democrats and liberals will go so crazy they will pass another petition and be distracted from winning actual elections.
Jimmy James, as much as I respect your political judgment, I am now convinced the above trumps your political concerns. Its amazing how too often we fail to consider the folly of the Democrats and liberals in this state. 🙂
Troy,
I’m 10:10 commenter. It isn’t just a Democratic or liberal thingy but our argument of the intent behind the ballot initiative. The intent is what I’m looking at and a process that could devalue the ballot initiative is valued since the early days of our state. If the Dems focus their energy on ballot initiatives and neglect actual real party building with fielding competitive candidates it would be a huge tactical and strategic mistake.
Regardless just like private enterprise, athletics and anything competitive we need competition to make us better and keep us on our toes. It does not help the South Dakota Republican Party by not having any serious competition. Too many bad things can happen without good competition as we all know anywhere we look in life.
No competition is exactly how the party became so ideologically confused. Limited government means limited government always, not just when it’s convenient or it’s an issue you agree with. The citizens, not the government, made this law and now our self declared limited government protectors in Pierre wants to make sure nothing gets to far out of line. Like a kid saving for college or a new car or some spending cash should be paid less for the same work simply because of their age. Is it possible the people who support thi
daugaard will veto the change quietly and move on. it’s small potatoes because the part that needed to be struck, the cola, was not affected.