Skip to main content

Governors Mary Fallin (L) (R-OK) and Bobby Jindal (R-LA) listen as Governor Dannel Malloy (R) (D-CT) speaks to reporters after a National Governors Association event hosted by U.S. President Barack Obama at the White House in Washington February 24, 2014.
Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy

Connecticut has become the first state to pass legislation raising its minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. The bill was passed with strong margins in the state Senate and House and Gov. Dannel Malloy plans to sign it Thursday evening:

“I am proud that Connecticut is once again a leader on an issue of national importance. Increasing the minimum wage is not just good for workers, it’s also good for business,” said Malloy, a first-term Democrat facing re-election.
The move is being hailed by President Barack Obama, who held a rally in Connecticut urging an increased minimum wage earlier in the month.

Connecticut was already the first state to pass a paid sick leave law, also under Malloy, and had raised its minimum wage to $8.70 last year. The new bill will increase the minimum wage to $9.15 in 2015, $9.60 in 2016, and $10.10 in 2017; currently, the highest state minimum wage in the country is Washington's $9.32, while Washington, DC, has passed a bill raising its minimum wage to $11.50 in steps.

Though Republicans in Congress are blocking an increase in the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, several states are poised to follow Connecticut's lead:

Maryland’s House this month approved raising the minimum wage to $10.10 by 2017, which is now pending in the Senate. Hawaii’s Senate passed a similar increase. And in Massachusetts, House Speaker Robert DeLeo this month threw support behind increasing the state wage in stages to as much as $10.50, after a larger jump previously passed the Senate.
The movement on minimum wage in states from Hawaii to West Virginia is good news for workers, but Congress needs to take action so that workers in the 29 states currently at the federal minimum wage aren't left behind, living in poverty.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Labor on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 08:23 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tipped and rec'd (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Munchkn

    Good work Connecticut!

    The Stars and Bars and the red swastika banner are both offerings to the same barbaric god.

    by amyzex on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 08:27:18 AM PDT

    •  the south is laughing tonight (0+ / 0-)

      the south is laughing  tonight about conn.

      few Americans understand the southern belief system, very few.

      the tea party folks mostly christian and the chamber of commerce are like two peas in a pod.

      wall street rakes in billions in bonuses and the long term unemployed are looked at as throw them under the bus. welcome to America.

      capitalism has many faces this is just one of them.

  •  $10.10 in 2017? Wow, that's awful. nt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Betty Pinson

    “In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.” Terry Pratchett

    by 420 forever on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 08:27:31 AM PDT

    •  Time Span IS Awful (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CaffeineInduced, Risen Tree, llywrch

      Okay, so, if all the states pass a law like this, workers will get $10.10 by 2017.  By that time how much will have been eaten away by inflation?  These baby step laws PMO!  Why can't we just do ONE decent thing RIGHT NOW????

      •  I totally agree ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wayneonly

        While I appreciate what Connecticut has done, I still think it is far too little, far too late.  

        The State of California passed passed legislation last that will raise the state's minimum wage to $10 by 1/1/2016, while Connecticut's will just be going up to $9.60.

        An increase to $10.10 by 2016 doesn't even make up for the inflationary losses of the past ten years.

        San Francisco has a minimum wage of $10.74 right now, and it seems to be working just fine for them.  Mayor Ed Lee says the minimum wage may increase to as much as $15 per hour.

        The rest of the country needs to wake up to the needs of their lower-paid citizens.

  •  After years of malfeasance of the Roland and Rell (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ericlewis0

    administrations, Malloy has been a breath of fresh air here in CT. He's not a saint, we differ vehemently on education policy, but otherwise, he's been AWESOME and I, for one, will work to re-elect him.

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 08:30:44 AM PDT

    •  Me too, CT voter (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      llywrch, wayneonly

      I agree that it seems like not enough but understand that even some "Democrats" here voted against it and Malloy also backed and signed paid sick leave.  Tough gun laws after Sandy Hook.
      I do not like his education stuff either and he throws too many tax breaks to big businesses to keep them here but comparatively speaking he is a whole lot better than a lot of other "Democratic" governors (Cuomo anybody?)
      And he is going to face a difficult re-election as he won last time by about 5000 votes!
      Here is how ridiculous GOP arguments against were: one rep said to lift folks out of poverty min wage should be $20 an hour but this bill will hurt small business!  Do they listen to themselves?

  •  Has your Rep signed HR 1010 min wage bill? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ericlewis0, Munchkn

    HR 1010 is the bill now languishing in the House that will raise the national minimum wage to $10.10 hr.  

    While the GOP is trying to bottle it up in committee, Dems have introduced adischarge petition to get it out to the House floor for a vote. The GOP fears allowing a vote because it will likely pass.

    So far, 195 members have signed the discharge petition, but it needs 218 signatures to get to the floor for a vote.

    Check this list and see if your rep has signed. If not, call their office and ask them to get on board.

    Money is property, not speech. Overturn Citizens United.

    by Betty Pinson on Thu Mar 27, 2014 at 08:35:45 AM PDT

  •  Good for CT! I have family there (0+ / 0-)

    and its a lovely little state. hopefully other states soon follow suit.

  •  State by State (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kbrown2225

    The wacko financial elitist establishment knows it's over. State by state we are seeing the legalization of marijuana, the legalization of gay marriage, the expansion of Medicare and now the raising of the minimum wage. When it's 1% vs the rest of the population and roughly 75% of the people are for the above said things, the one percent will end up losing.

  •  It isn't enough to raise the minimum wage (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JerryNA, CaffeineInduced, trumanesque

    Many large employers can afford to pay more than minimum wage but do not because they invest far more money in executive salaries and perks. Rather than reduce executive compensation, they will raise prices, negating any gains the minimum wage worker should have gotten from a salary increase - and convincing the vanishing middle class is the fault of minimum wage earners.

    •  Innumeracy is a big problem in America (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JerryNA, CaffeineInduced, WineRev, llywrch

      "they will raise prices, negating any gains the minimum wage worker should have gotten from a salary increase"

      If the only thing that determined the cost of a good or service was the cost of minimum wage labor, this could be true: pay an employee 30% more and whatever he produces costs 30% more to make.

      But it isn't. Businesses have to pay for utilities, property tax or leasing, maintenance, equipment, and a slew of support staff including management. None of that is affected by a minimum wage increase.

      Raising the minimum wage will result in only a small increase in costs, meaning that minimum wage workers will see significant gains in terms of real income.

      You know who won't see gains? Everyone else... at least not until they stamp their little feet and pout and whine that it's not fair that the income gap has shrunk, and raise prices or demand raises... not because economics demands it, not because it's fair, but just because they want a bigger share.

      Blame them for the inflation that results when we give them what they want.

    •  Corporations as Cash Cows (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ahumbleopinion

      The executive Corps of any large corporation have insulated themselves from accountability to the stockholders or anyone or anything else to the point that they can & do give themselves whatever compensation they choose. Since there is no voice for the rank & file workers anymore & the stockholders only have their eye on investment returns the squeeze is put on the workers, the dis-empowered & voiceless. To continue to pay the investors & write their own checks at the same time the workers are the ones who have to pay. The result is an entire generation lulled into a gigantic poverty trap.

    •  Can you list examples (0+ / 0-)

      Thx.

  •  LOL, you ALMOST had me!!! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wilywascal, Rita5018, CaffeineInduced

    I almost loved this article UNTIL I read that the $10.10 an hour won't go into affect until 2017 and by that time $10.10 will pretty much be like $7.00 today, still below the poverty level. Nice try but this still won't get it!! I hope more people see this for what it is, A SCAM to get votes.

  •  I guess this is good news, but (3+ / 0-)

    $10.10 is a water balloon thrown at a house on fire.

    Considering inflation and the time it takes to get these things passed, we probably ought to be aiming for at least $17.

  •  not that smart (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    twocrows1023, llywrch

    Sometimes the so called Red states aren't as smart as they think they are.  Many blue states (Democratic controlled) are actually passing legislation that helps people and not just corporations or the wealthy.  As more and more states do this, just like many are working around the food stamp cuts that came out of Republican congress, or those states that refused the ACA Medicaid expansion leaving millions without coverage, people will start waking up to the discrepancy's between Republicans and Democrats and who works for who.  Republicans have been pushing for more state rights and less Federal, and it could prove to come back to haunt them.  I've already seen on the news that people who have a disease or illness that can be helped with medical marijuana are moving to Colorado and probably other states with legalized medical marijuana and I believe we have over 20 now and more with initiatives on the ballot for this Nov.

    •  We Had That Debate (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Aquarius40

      States rights is supposed to be a dead issue but it is sure fire with every inbred trailer park inhabitant in the south plus the flyover states. That debate was called The Civil War, it nearly finished US & what we never want to do is hold that debate again. For the record the rulers of the south at mid 19th century were the 1%ers of their day. They made their fortunes by the vicious exploitation of their fellow man. History does repeat itself.

  •  I'm glad that now we'll have an example (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shmuelman, llywrch

    of what happens when you raise the minimum wage. Will their unemployment go up or down? When there are no negative effects it will be hard for the right wing to make their usual predictions. We'll have more proof to convince more people to vote the stingy republicans out of office, every office, every state, dare to dream...

  •  Good For Connecticut (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    twocrows1023

    Next

  •  - (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CaffeineInduced, Aquarius40, llywrch
    Though Republicans in Congress are blocking an increase in the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, several states are poised to follow Connecticut's lead:
    What was left unsaid in the diary was, "The Republicans in Congress are blocking said bill because to pass it would 'give President Obama a win.'"

    And we can't have that.  Far better to sacrifice the people on the altar of keeping Obama from leaving a legacy.

    The price of apathy is to be ruled by evil men - - Plato . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . We must be the change we wish to see in the world - - Mohandas Gandhi

    by twocrows1023 on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 05:30:22 PM PDT

  •  CT minimum wage increase (0+ / 0-)

    This is ploy and a disgrace. We are going to see this happening all over the country. Throwing scraps at the working poor, in the hope of shutting them up. $10.10/hr in CT is like $2.00/hr. here in VT. It's a disgrace. Now it will take even longer to raise it to a living wage, which in that state, would be more like $22-$25/hour. CT is the wealthiest state in the nation and the most expensive in which to live.

  •  I am very happy that Connecticut has done this (0+ / 0-)

    Here in Wa State the minimum wage is a nation high $9.32. By a statute passed by referendum in 1998 it is pegged to the national CPI and changed yearly based on that measure..we are doing fine here.  

  •  Minimum Wages & raises are a Human Right. (0+ / 0-)

    Do we support or oppose International Bill of Human Rights (IBHR)? It has the force of international law since 1976.

    IBHR is a composite of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), The Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).  In 1992 the United States ratified the ICCPR and has signed (1977) but not ratified the ICESCR.

    UDHR Article 23 in part says: "Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself (and herself) and his (or her) family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection." Article 23 also states, "Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his (or her) interests." The UDHR is explicitly adopted for the purpose of defining the meaning of the words "fundamental freedoms" and "human rights" appearing in the United Nations Charter, that binds all member states. United States was the primary moving force to draft and in 1948 to adopt in United Nations General Assembly this global expression of rights to which all human beings are inherently entitled.

    By the 1992 U.S. ratification of ICCPR (a treaty) the U.S. holds it a "supreme law of the land" under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. ICCPR is monitored by the United Nations Human Rights Committee which reviews regular reports of States parties on how the rights are being implemented. ICCPR Article 22 is clear: everyone has the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of one's interests. The only restrictions on the right are those which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Under the ICCPR, any restrictions on trade unions must be necessary to a democratic society. Notice that the review of the United States, which was scheduled to be reviewed during the Human Rights Committee's 109th session of October 2013, was postponed in until March 10-to-28, 2014.

    On October 10, 2013 the U.S. requested a postponement of the fourth periodic report of the United States which the U.S. is obliged to submit to the Human Rights Committee on how the rights are being implemented, highlighting its regret at having to make such a request which was caused by an ongoing U.S. government shutdown. On that day the  request was accommodated by the Human Rights Committee which, along with the Secretariat, regretted the inconvenience this postponement caused, in particular to members of civil society who had made arrangements to attend and participate in the meetings to examine the report of the United Statesand address the Committee's concerns and recommendations to the United States in the form of "concluding observations” that were adopted on March 26, 2014. The List of issues in relation to the fourth periodic report of the United States was adopted by the Committee at its 107th session (March 11–28 2013). The Committee raised numerous concerns in the "concluding observations” it adopted on March 26, 2014 including how the U.S. works to further Freedom of assembly and association (arts. 21 and 22). The Committee said, "Please clarify why agricultural and domestic workers and independent contractors are excluded from the right to organize themselves in trade unions by the National Labor Relations Act and provide information on steps taken to ensure that the right to freedom of association is available to these categories of workers." I believe that were these workers allowed to associate in unions, there would be substantially more pressure on us all to raise a minimum wage to much higher and more just amounts.

    ICESCR Article 7  states that everyone has a right to "just and favorable" working conditions that are defined as: fair wages with equal pay for equal work, sufficient to provide a decent living for workers and their dependents; safe working conditions; equal opportunity in the workplace; and sufficient rest and leisure, including limited working hours and regular, paid holidays. Article 8 assures workers can form or join trade unions and protects the right to strike. Like Cuba and South Africa the U.S. has refused to ratify ICESCR. Do we want to oppose raising minimum wages, letting workers organize, and have unions because in our doing so, we are expressing our solidarity with Cuba and South Africa?

    Do we oppose raising minimum wages because we do not like ICESCR Article 9 which mandates "the right of everyone to social security, including social insurance," requiring States parties: to provide some form of social insurance scheme to protect people against the risks of sickness, disability, maternity, employment injury, unemployment or old age; to provide for survivors, orphans, and those who cannot afford health care; and to ensure that families are adequately supported??  Or is our opposition driven by our desire to deprive workers who are U.S. citizens from having what ICESCR Article 11 recognizes as the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living and to a continuous improvement of living condition which is, in Article 12, said to include the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, through a comprehensive system of healthcare, that is available to everyone without discrimination, and economically accessible to all. Do we oppose those standards?

    As discussed by the U.S. for the Human Rights Committee in paragraphs 717 – 720 of its Initial Report and paragraphs 373 – 375 of the Second and Third Periodic Report, the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) establishes national minimum wage, overtime, record keeping and child labor standards affecting more than 80 million full- and part-time workers in both the public and private sectors, 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.

    We all should support raising the minimum wage and doing so in a significant amount no matter what negative arguments those who oppose raising it may pronounce.

  •  Malloy has just announced he's running (0+ / 0-)

    which is no surprise based on the many attempts he's made in the last few weeks at pandering to those he's stepped on during his tenure.  He's scrambling to reconnect to us teachers, but I'd be shocked if the CEA suppported him. Jon Pelto says it well:

    Malloy’s irresponsible budget policies, including the widespread use of budget gimmicks and the inappropriate use of one-time revenues, has ensured that Connecticut will face massive budget deficits in the three years following this year’s gubernatorial election.

    Meanwhile, few will forget that Malloy’s $1.5 billion dollar tax increase disproportionately hit the middle class.  While tens of thousands of Connecticut families faced higher Connecticut income tax rates, along with higher local property taxes, Malloy has consistently coddled the super rich by failing to increase the income tax rate on those making more than $1 million.

    Connecticut’s middle income families are being squeezed out of existence while Connecticut’s most wealthy residents are laughing all the way to the bank.

    If you have read or commented on this diary, remember to thank a teacher.

    by Sprinkles on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 04:57:26 AM PDT

  •  Pressure on Little Rhody? (0+ / 0-)

    If both CT and MA have much higher minimums than we do, workers are likely to decamp. (OTH, the pro-business folks are likely to argue that we should keep the lower minimum to attract businesses to move across the line. . . .)

    With a new and much more conservative Speaker of the House -- the de facto dictator, in RI's weird political system -- it will be hard to get anything progressive passed, so we'll probably keep muddling along with a low minimum wage plus the highest unemployment rate in the nation. (If you want proof that minimum wage and unemployment rates are disconnected, we're it.)

  •  min. wage (0+ / 0-)

    2017???
    the increase should be retroactive,
    back at least 10 years!!

  •  CT min wage bill (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BeninSC

    I'm from CT , so yes I'm glad to see it pass.  However, instead of giving business 3 years to reach that labor rate, it should be more like 12 months.  If I remember the stats accurately, a 1968 min wage adjusted for inflation would be ~ $15 and that wage today would be $22 if it also kept up with growth in productivity.  So while looking like something real was done, in fact slightly more than nothing was done.  The current minimum wage in CT is $8.25. So the State is giving businesses 3 years, 36 months to increase their wages by $1.85.  How much will 3 years of inflation do to that "raise"?  Whereas allowing 12 months to reach that increase would average less than 16 cents per hour per month which seems to me to be totally doable.  Once again business got off much too cheaply.  

    •  Actually, it would be closer to $11 (0+ / 0-)

      per this graph.

      On the other hand, assuming an increase in the cost of living (inflation, CPI, call it what you want), to equate to the minimum wage 1971, the amount in 2017 should be $11.50, more than the expected $10/$10.10 amounts the various state laws will set it to.

      •  revising & extending my min wage remarks (0+ / 0-)

        From the DOL Fed min wage table: 1968 => $1.60 and BLS
        inflation calculator => $10.79 (2014).  I don't know where I was getting "~$15".  I must have mixed it up with some other stats.  However the $22 rate comes from Senator Warren's Q&A in a hearing on min wage.  Whether that includes productivity and inflation adjustment is not clear.The 1968 minimum wage remained at $1.60 until 1974.

        http://www.infoplease.com/...

        http://data.bls.gov/...

        http://www.democraticunderground.com/...

        llywrch, I'm puzzled where you got the $11.50 seeing as we don't know what inflation will do in the next three years.  How did you calculate it?

    •  Sometimes 'go slow' is excruciating. (0+ / 0-)

      Not just in this.

      Agree, MJTEE.

      Welcome from the DK Partners & Mentors Team. If you have any questions about how to participate here, you can learn more at the Knowledge Base or from the New Diarists Resources Diaries. Diaries labeled "Open Thread" are also great places to ask. We look forward to your contributions.

      "The opposite of war isn't peace, it's CREATION." _ Jonathan Larson, RENT -9.62, -9.13

      by BeninSC on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 11:33:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site