An N.J. congressman highlights the need for a living wage, but his plan will necver clear a GOP majority House.
When U.S. Rep. Donald Norcross, D-1st Dist., announced a plan to raise the federal minimum wage to $15, many disregarded the second part of his statement -- "by 2023" -- before predicting that he'll make the sky fall on small business and drive inflation to Jimmy-Carter-era levels.
While there are legitimate questions surrounding $15, the only way that a floor wage can become a "living wage" is if the federal government acts.
The current federal minimum has been $7.25 an hour for the past seven years, a travesty in a nation that does not require such a pittance to come with any benefits whatsoever -- no sick pay, no paid vacation, no requirement to offer health coverage to part-timers.
New Jersey, like several other states, has come to the rescue of its lowest-paid workers by adopting higher minimums. So far, despite the naysayers, our reasonable wage lift hasn't drained jobs. No one would argue that $8.38 an hour can lift anyone out of poverty in a high-cost state. The New Jersey rate is now linked to inflation -- but with inflation is so low, there was no increase for 2016.
Here's the problem: Should New Jersey unilaterally boost its minimum to $15 or even $10, it would drive employers elsewhere. There are just too many states still at $7.25 that factories and regional service industries would make a beeline for the bridges. The best states can do is make incremental increases.
That's why it's so important that Congress act. Norcross brings needed attention to the issue, although his plan will earn more publicity than support.
At a news conference, Norcross presented a Sicklerville single mother who works as a certified nursing home assistant, a low-pay skilled job. Gynene Jonas (who does earn a little more than the $8.38 minimum) showed courage as a face of the living-wage problem, detailing tough choices that she and her daughter must make.
How anyone can be cognizant of Jonas' situation and still complain that minimum wage increases "reward lazy people" or claim that all people are paid a fair "market forces" rate is beyond comprehension.
That said, Norcross' plan has no shot. It calls for an immediate 75-cent increase in the $7.25 federal minimum, followed by annual $1 increases until the $15 level is reached. Only after that would the Consumer Price Index be used for future increases.
While it's OK to shoot for the fences, Norcross must know that his bill is unworkable. The current Republican-majority Congress will argue that it's inflationary and will move jobs move offshore. They could be right. Who knows what 2023 will be like?
Instead, why not do essentially what worked in New Jersey? Lift the federal minimum $1 in each of the next two years, then let the CPI trigger future boosts. That should break the $10-an-hour barrier in four to five years, assuming 3 percent inflation.
It's not $15, but it's realistic. And -- as Norcross effectively demonstrated --our nation's lowest-paid workers need action badly.
Send a letter to the editor of South Jersey Times at sjletters@njadvancemedia.com