[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
All is Vanity See other All is Vanity Articles Title: Constitution Wrong Place to Set Wage Hikes Says National Restaurant Association To: National Desk Contact: Sue Hensley, 202-331-5964, or Chrissy Shott, 202-331-5902, both of the National Restaurant Association WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following release was issued today by the National Restaurant Association on the minimum wage: How do you make a hazardous economic policy even worse? Engrave it in the state constitution, where it will require the lengthy and costly process of a voter referendum to change it. Ballot initiative proposals to raise the minimum wage in six states recklessly set their wage on autopilot for an annual increase based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which historically has ranged from an average 3 percent per year up to as high as 14 percent. This will not only be troublesome during periods of high inflation or bad economic times, but will be particularly harsh in Colorado, Nevada and Ohio, where the wage policy will actually be amended to the state constitution. These three states would set themselves apart from the federal minimum wage, which is not in the U.S. Constitution, and nearly every other state in the nation. Placing economic policies like the minimum wage in the constitution is dangerous policy, particularly since every state has a different process for amending the Constitution. "The Colorado, Nevada and Ohio proposals take very dangerous economic wage policies one step further by cementing them in the constitution," said National Restaurant Association Vice President for State Relations Tom Foulkes. "Legislatures will be powerless to make emergency adjustments during an economic downturn and the only recourse will be to amend the constitution again -- either in the next campaign cycle or in a special election. Either option is an extremely costly way to fix poor policy." Newspapers in both states have soundly rejected setting the minimum wage in the constitution: Denver Post editorial, 10/16: "Colorado can't afford to cast yet another complex economic formula into the concrete of the state constitution. . . . The recent state budget crisis should have taught Coloradoans the folly of writing complex and often conflicting economic theories into the Constitution. . . ." Rocky Mountain News editorial, 10/10:"the constitution is the wrong place for inflexible formulas that affect our economic welfare. . . . The minimum wage should be raised by statute, not constitutional amendment." Columbus Dispatch editorial, 9/13: "the state constitution is absolutely the wrong vehicle for setting such policy, and Issue 2 is loaded with troublesome baggage that goes well beyond the issue of a fair wage. . . . The constitution is for laying out the fundamental, unchanging principles by which the state is governed. Most specific policies, by contrast, have to be flexible and adaptable. Wage policy, in particular, should be responsive to economic conditions." Las Vegas Review-Journal columnist Erin Neff, 10/8: "The other problem is that the initiative doesn't just raise the wage $1. It will put into the constitution an annual increase of up to 3 percent and require Nevada's minimum wage to always be $1 above whatever Congress sets." Dayton Daily News, 10/14: "Economic policies, even important ones, are best left to legislative debate, where they can be refined without the cumbersome machinery involved in amending the constitution . . . having automatic raises in the constitution could cause very big problems for some businesses if double-digit inflation ever returns . . ." Crain's Cleveland Business, 8/21: "We nonetheless oppose this proposed amendment, in large part because we don't believe it should be etched into stone in the Ohio Constitution. Economic matters require greater flexibility than a constitution affords." Boulder Daily Camera, 10/5: "A constitution should be a government's foundational document, an outline of the state's power and a protector of the citizens' rights. It should not be a collection of contemporary political declarations. This alone is reason to vote against Amendment 42." Pueblo Chieftain, 10/1 "Amendment 42 would cement hourly wage hikes, year after year, in the Colorado Constitution. It would take another constitutional amendment, not a quick or easy task, to change the mandate or make it more flexible to cover future contingencies of the marketplace." "These ballot initiatives trample on the foundation of state government," Foulkes said. "The state constitution is not the place to set economic policies like the minimum wage -- the flexibility of state statute is needed so these issues can easily be remedied when needed." ------ The National Restaurant Association, founded in 1919, is the leading business association for the restaurant industry, which is comprised of 925,000 restaurant and foodservice outlets and a work force of 12.5 million employees -- making it the cornerstone of the economy, career opportunities and community involvement. Along with the National Restaurant Association Educational Foundation, the association works to represent, educate and promote the rapidly growing industry. For more information, visit our Web site at http://www.restaurant.org -0- /© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||