|
Jamie Raskin on Jobs
|
|
|
Low minimum wage causes wealth inequality
Increasing Economic Opportunity and Uplifting Wages and Benefits for all Americans: "While our nation has experienced dramatic productivity growth over the last four decades," Jamie says, "wages and benefits for working families have remained stagnant.
The result is the greatest wealth and income inequality America has ever seen." Jamie wants to go to Congress to close the gap: "It erodes the conditions for real democracy when CEOs are making hundreds of times what workers are making and
simultaneously have the power to dominate our politics. I will be a leader for the 99% in Congress because the billionaires and CEOs already have all the lobbyists they need."Jamie wants to increase the minimum wage and will fight for a true living
wage for all American workers. Jamie worked to build unanimous support for an increase of Maryland's minimum wage, and he'll bring that same conviction to Washington to fight for improved wages, benefits and labor standards for all working Americans.?
Source: 2016 Maryland House campaign website JamieRaskin.com
, Nov 8, 2016
Raise the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2018
Legislative Summary: Incrementally increasing the State minimum wage rate to $10.10 beginning July 1, 2018; authorizing specified employers to pay employees under the age of 20 years a specified wage under specified circumstances;
requiring the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to increase reimbursement of community providers serving individuals with developmental disabilities; requiring the
Governor, in specified fiscal years, to include in a specified budget proposal specified funding increases. Legislative Outcome:
Passed Senate 34-13-0 on April 5; Sen. Jamie Raskin voted YEA; passed House 87-47-7 on April 7; signed by Gov. Hogan on May 5.
Source: Maryland legislative voting records: HB 295
, Apr 5, 2014
Raise minimum wage to 15% above poverty level.
Raskin co-sponsored H.R.122
Congressional Summary:
- The federal minimum wage should be adjusted every four years so that a person working for it may earn, as a minimum, an annual income at least 15% higher than the federal poverty threshold for a family of four;
- it should be set at a level high enough to allow two full-time minimum wage workers to earn an income above the national housing wage; and
- Congress, or any local or state government, may establish a higher minimum wage.
Opponents reasons for voting NAY: (Time magazine, 9/5/13): The Washington DC council sent a bill to the mayor's desk that would require large retailers like Walmart and Target to pay its workers a "living wage" of $12.50 per hour--significantly higher than the District's $8.25 per hour minimum wage. Here are common misunderstandings about the DC bill and minimum wage laws in general:
- Myth 1: "Living Wage Bills help all workers." The DC law exempts retailers with stores smaller
than 75,000 square feet and less than $1 billion in sales, so it doesn't help many workers in small and medium sized businesses. The size requirement has the effect of protecting giant retailers that happen to do business in relatively small stores like Nike and Apple.
- Myth 2: "High minimum wages reduce employment." Standard economic theory says that if you raise the minimum wage, businesses will hire fewer workers. But over the past decade, San Francisco has instituted a minimum-wage requirement that rises with inflation, currently $10.55. These laws have not reduced employment; instead, businesses seem to have merely adjusted their models by training workers and retaining them longer.
- Myth 3: "Inflation has shrunk the minimum wage." Advocates point out the minimum wage, when adjusted for inflation, has actually fallen to $7.25 today from the equivalent (in today's dollars) of $10.70 in 1968. But the earned income tax credit has more than made up for that decline.
Source: Original Living Wage Act 15_H122 on Jan 6, 2015
Sponsored bill for strengthening union organizing.
Raskin co-sponsored PRO Act
H.R.842 & S.420: Protecting the Right to Organize Act: This bill expands various labor protections related to employees' rights to organize and collectively bargain in the workplace:
- revises the definitions of employee, supervisor, and employer to broaden the scope of individuals covered by the fair labor standards;
- permits labor organizations to encourage participation of union members in strikes initiated by employees represented by a different labor organization (i.e., secondary strikes); and
- prohibits employers from bringing claims against unions that conduct such secondary strikes.
The bill also allows collective bargaining agreements to require all employees represented by the bargaining unit to contribute fees to the labor organization for the cost of such representation.Biden Administration in SUPPORT: The Administration strongly supports The PRO Act. America was not built by Wall Street. It was built by the middle class,
and unions built the middle class. Unions put power in the hands of workers. H.R. 842 would strengthen and protect workers' right to form a union by assessing penalties on employers who violate workers' right to organize.
Rep. Mo Brooks in OPPOSITION: H.R. 842 [is] a radical union bill that tramples the rights of citizens by forcing them to enter into union servitude, including:
- Overturns right-to-work laws in 27 states, thereby forcing citizens, against their will, to pay millions of dollars in dues to labor unions.
- Denies citizens' rights to vote by secret ballot on whether to join a union by imposing a biased "card-check" scheme.
- Deprives individuals of entrepreneurial opportunities. The PRO Act would eliminate the franchise industry and sharing economy as we know them.
Legislative Outcome:Passed House 222-204-4 (Rollcall 82) on 03/09/2021; received and read in the Senate on 3/23; no further Senate action during 2021.
Source: H.R.842/S.420 21-HR842 on Feb 4, 2021
Page last updated: May 27, 2022; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org