House votes to increase minimum wage.
By on Jan 10th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
House votes to increase minimum wage.
For the first time in nearly a decade, the House of Representatives voted 315-116 today to boost the minimum wage from $5.15 per hour to $7.25 per hour.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
YAY!!
***jumping up and down clapping***
January 10th, 2007 at 5:33 pmThe “100 hours train” has left the station! Awesome.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:34 pmHooray!
January 10th, 2007 at 5:36 pmGood start to the first hundred hours.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:36 pmTrolls???
I hope Dubbie vetoes the bill, very publicly. Seriously, the more coffin nails this “guy” can be handed, the better. Impeachment won’t be much of a stretch once his poll #’s are down in the teens, and he’s hammering those nails as fast as he can get his greedy little hands on them – WOO HOO!
January 10th, 2007 at 5:36 pmI always talk sh*t about US. Now, I will celebrate this announcement. Thats one of the things I admire about US: its strong working middle class. Too bad it prefers to ally with the ruling class rather than with the opressed class.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:36 pmJuan, they just don’t know any better for the most part! What do we expect when they get their info from the likes of Fox?
January 10th, 2007 at 5:41 pmThis should help a little – but not the middle class so much as the poorest. I can’t imagine trying to live on $7.25 myself (here in the Bay Area, one of the most expen$ive places in the country), but i know there are people who will be thrilled with the raise!
let’s see. On actually voting bill comparison this congress and the last. We’d be in mid summer going on their tortise pace.
Rock on Congress.
Rachel, you sad little, lonely, deprived, angry, self absorbed ingrate. Now you can afford those extra long life batteries for that special little device on your night stand.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:43 pmSKdeA.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:47 pmI live in Mexico, do you think what would happen if suddenly we had that minimum wage? The 13 million mexicans working in US would be back in a blink. Let me tell you, thats a lot of money here.
You know this only puts kids out of work and helps no one.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:50 pmKevin, can you point to any year in the history of the minimum wage in which an increase in the wage led to fewer minimum wage jobs? You can’t because there hasn’t been one. And, yet, you keep repeating the same mantra over and over. It’s kind of like a religion for you, isn’t it?
January 10th, 2007 at 5:52 pmYou know this only puts kids out of work and helps no one.
Comment by Kevin
To raise people’s hourly wage?
January 10th, 2007 at 5:53 pmYou know this Kevin? How do you know this?
January 10th, 2007 at 5:54 pmw00t! and might I add “giiit er done!”
I’d like to know 116 that voted against. Is this info out there yet?
January 10th, 2007 at 5:54 pmIf raising the minimum wage is bad, why hasn’t it just remained the same as it was from the beginning? And you can’t tell me this latest raise was too soon since the last one.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:55 pmgood one, Kevin. I’d like to see a list of the 116 who voted against it.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:55 pm***jumping up and down clapping***
Comment by Zoo
I would actually like to see that.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:55 pmIt helps people making minimum wage. Duh!
January 10th, 2007 at 5:56 pmWoo-Hoo! (Insert “Minimum Wage” by They Might Be Giants here.)
Thats one of the things I admire about US: its strong working middle class. Too bad it prefers to ally with the ruling class rather than with the opressed class.
Comment by Juan C
Juan, you’ve been a good visitor here for a while now. I hope you would understand that what our government does, it does not do on behalf of the entire population. And this administration has been working very hard on behalf of the wealthy. But we (liberal types) generally don’t believe in using violence to solve problems, so we work hard to persuade our fellow citizens non-violently. We also realize that some people will only respond to violence, but when we reach the point where nothing else works, then we’ll have one last meeting before taking further actions.
But please, I hope you know that people like us (and you) have not supported the president on his tax policies. We believe that he’s ruining the country. We’re just now collectively getting fed up with having our patriotism questioned because we don’t agree with the illegal actions of our president.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:56 pmsurely WW111 is more important ??? maybe wages go up BUT if theres no bleedin world then come on democrats get some real bills for congress
January 10th, 2007 at 5:57 pmYou know this only puts kids out of work and helps no one.
Comment by Kevin
I know Rush doesn’t like to tell you this (because it’s true), but a large majority of the people in this country earning minimum wage are over twenty years old.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:59 pmI would actually like to see that.
Comment by ForTruth
Heh. :P
January 10th, 2007 at 5:59 pmsurely WW111 is more important ???
Well, we’ve got another 108 World Wars to get through before we reach that one. Relax. There’s time.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:00 pmHola Juan! Yes, that would be excellent wages in Mexico! And I hope someday that it will happen, it is extremely unfair! Mi esposo es Mexicano, un Chilango – donde vivas?
January 10th, 2007 at 6:01 pmRachel,
It means more people can afford a faster internet connection to call you out on your dung.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:01 pmPassing in the Senate will be another matter. Repubs will load the bill down with extraneous crap.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:05 pmYou know this only puts kids out of work and helps no one.
Comment by Kevin
Poor Kevin, this attracts more competition to his burger-fipping career.
Watch out! There’s a younger, better suited candidate after YOUR JOB NOW!
January 10th, 2007 at 6:05 pmLooks like Rachel got deleted (well, her comments anyway, too bad we can’t actually delete the trolls themselves!).
January 10th, 2007 at 6:06 pm#29 SKdeA
January 10th, 2007 at 6:07 pmVerily.
If i read the text of the legislation correctly, it won’t be $7.25 for at least 24 months :(
January 10th, 2007 at 6:09 pmPassing in the Senate will be another matter. Repubs will load the bill down with extraneous crap.
Comment by Barfly
Only if the Democrats in charge let them. I imagine that if too many unpalatable Republican amendments get added in the Senate, guess how many Republicans there’ll be at the conference report to stop them from being taken out? Very few! Ha-ha.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:17 pmI live in Mexico, do you think what would happen if suddenly we had that minimum wage? The 13 million mexicans working in US would be back in a blink. Let me tell you, thats a lot of money here.
Comment by Juan C — January 10, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
LOL
This is excellent news! And long overdue.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:17 pmThe f*cking escalation has already begun — new thread above.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:17 pmBetter 24 months than never! Which is how Bu$hco would like it…
January 10th, 2007 at 6:19 pmThis is actually symbolic in a way – the eligibility ranges for food stamps and welfare need to be raised as well. The dynamics of government support and taxation need to be adjusted as well. I am not demeaning Democrats, but the dynamics of our economy are not as simple as just the minimum wage. I believe that there should also exist a maximum lifetime income (Say half a billion.) – after that is attained, 100% of all income, interest and capital gains would go into government coffers. Eliminate the Inheritance tax entirely except for the first 5 million dollars per heir (pegged for inflation) and after that 100% to the same coffers. Keep the gift tax at the current level of the minimum wage except for college expenses (Excluding that luxury car for travel or paid summertime excursions to resorts elsewhere in the World.).
January 10th, 2007 at 6:20 pmkeep in mind that this is not a raise all at once. it’s suppose to happen over a period of time, i believe 2 yrs. and when 09 comes around 7.25 looks like 5.15. these pricks aren’t fooling anyone. greedy, fat, f. bastuuuurds.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:33 pmGotta start somewhere bs!
Unless they can IMPEACH BUSH and CHENEY, this is the best it gets…
I know the steps are small, but so was the climb to DEMOCRACY! BUSH has all but DESTROYED it, and it will take some time to get us back to what AMERICA used to be…
A COUNTRY!
January 10th, 2007 at 6:48 pmOnly if the Democrats in charge let them. I imagine that if too many unpalatable Republican amendments get added in the Senate, guess how many Republicans there’ll be at the conference report to stop them from being taken out? Very few! Ha-ha.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
At this point, its about creating a negative image for Dems, not about gettting a republican-friendly bill (one they can sign onto because it contains provisions they favor), that addresses their supposed constituents’ needs. The Right has already begun with the bogus spin about the Dems schedule, and they’ll be building their case for ’08’s recapture of both Houses by mean-spirited little ploys designed to do nothing more than spatter the dems with mud. This legislation will be a prime target, as it will tarnish dems “first hundred hours” theme, if they can drag it out as long as possible.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:59 pmI know the steps are small, but so was the climb to DEMOCRACY! BUSH has all but DESTROYED it, and it will take some time to get us back to what AMERICA used to be…– IraqVet
While Bush has done his best to destroy democracy, he hasn’t. He can’t because we have too many processes and people in place to prevent that. If democracy were easy to destroy it probably would’ve happened a long time ago. But what it has done is shown the people – such as Bush and the Republican Neocons – who are hostile against it.
But IraqVet I understand your frustration.
January 10th, 2007 at 6:59 pmThank goodness! The Republicans are tightwad, tight-ass, skin-flint, mean-spirited Scrooges. Thank heavens for the end of the Republican greed-fear-and-smear, do-nothing Congress.
January 10th, 2007 at 7:10 pmThe f*cking escalation has already begun — new thread above.
Comment by Zoo
Hahahahaa
Sucker
You were all looking left when you should have been looking right
It is none of your business how George Bush conducts the war or how many troops he sends or when he sends them
nuff said
I wont embarrass you anymore you have done a fine job all on your own you fools
Seems you democrats got your asses roundly and soundly whipped AGAIN !! hahahaha
My kids feel safer already
Stay safe vote REPUBLICAN in 2008
January 10th, 2007 at 7:37 pmrachel b = piss-soaked troll
January 10th, 2007 at 7:39 pmIt is none of your business how George Bush conducts the war or how many troops he sends or when he sends them.
Said Rachel, as George opened her mail, like a common prisoner.
January 10th, 2007 at 7:48 pmSeems you democrats got your asses roundly and soundly whipped AGAIN !! hahahaha
The Democrats, I am not one, are letting the Repubs hamstring themselves, this war is highly unpopular with Americans, Even the troops on the ground did not want escalation, they wanted more Iraq troops.
You know, the catchism, as they stand up we will stand down.
January 10th, 2007 at 7:54 pmBut really Rachel you seem to be slightly sociopathic, could you at least try to act a little concerned for the troops, my brother in law is fighting for your freedom to rant like a little hateful schoolgirl. You don’t sound like a parent.
Kudos!
I wish the next bill on their agenda was universal health care. Let’s hope so.
I was scrolling down through the various comments, and WALTTHEMAN’S comments encompass a bit of what I was going to say.
I do think there should be a cap on MAXIMUM INCOME. What the maximum income should be is probably not set in stone? Too many CEOs seem to have their hands in the compnay till.
I think Barry Diller had the highest take-home pay in 2005. His total compensation package was around $500,000,000. WOW! WOW! WOW! Remember, this is just one year’s income. His base salary was around $250,000,000 and then he had stock options. Most financial experts seem to think Diller takes the award as the most highly overpaid executive.
A $500,000,000 salary is outrageous. I didn’t know Match.Com was that lucrative, nor the Home Shopping Network. However, he does own other companies.
Yes, this is America and people dream big, but when does a big income become toooooooo big? It’s still beyond me how these big shots can pull off these salaries, and how Home Depot’s Nardelli pulled off a $210,000,000 severance package?
John
January 10th, 2007 at 8:37 pmPelosi is serious….this is good news.
January 10th, 2007 at 8:40 pmIn Washington this week, the Democratic-controlled House takes on the first minimum wage increase since 1997. But while the federal government has blocked help for 13 million working Americans (9.8% of the workforce) for a decade, many states have already moved forward with their own minimum wage hikes. And as you might imagine, few of them happened to vote for George W. Bush for president.
For the details, see:
January 10th, 2007 at 8:56 pm“The Minimum Wage in Red and Blue.”
In Washington this week, the Democratic-controlled House takes on the first minimum wage increase since 1997. But while the federal government has blocked help for 13 million working Americans (9.8% of the workforce) for a decade, many states have already moved forward with their own minimum wage hikes. And as you might imagine, few of them happened to vote for George W. Bush for president.
For the details, see:
January 10th, 2007 at 8:56 pm“The Minimum Wage in Red and Blue.”
rachel b = vinnie, etc.
January 10th, 2007 at 9:32 pm#42 rachel b
Ha-ha, rachel. You got your ass whipped again. A bunch of Republicans sided with the Democrats to pass the 9/11 bill yesterday. A bunch more sided with the Democrats to pass the minimum wage bill today. And a bunch of Republican senators will vote aginst funding the escalation. HA-HA-HA. You lose forever. You’re the biggest loser of all time. Your GOP congressmen are abandoning you and going over to the Democrats’ side. What a schmuck!
January 10th, 2007 at 9:41 pmhttp://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0110/p01s03-usec.html
“Similarly, for the state of Massachusetts, the economy hasn’t imploded, despite seven years with a minimum wage 31 percent above the federal floor of $5.15. But poverty hasn’t disappeared, either.
Man, it must really stink when the neo-con talking points prove to be false!
“Both critics and advocates of the minimum wage have exaggerated its effects,” says Isabel Sawhill, an economist at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “It doesn’t do a great deal of harm. At the same time, it’s no panacea for the low earnings of less-skilled workers.”"
So, what should we do for those who work at the minimum wage for extended periods and have families? Continue to NOT raise the MW?
January 11th, 2007 at 9:06 amSome action is better than NO action!
I heard a report yesterday that raising the minimum wage hurts the black community most. If you ever wanted to study the effects of Democratic policies, you need only look at the stats of the black community – abortion rates, unemployment, incarceration, illigitimate births, fatherless homes with children, bad schools, etc. Raising the minimum wage is just one more way that the Dems do something harmful to their constituents, while making themselves “look good”.
On the other hand, raising the minimum wage benefits whites the most, who tend to lean Republican – thanks Dems.
January 11th, 2007 at 10:53 am#53 – Mr. Hendler, and from where could we find this so-called report you heard about? Is it asking too much for you to provide a source?
As for your assertion: “raising the minimum wage benefits whites the most, who tend to lean Republican” I believe you’re projecting your desires onto reality. Sweetie, it does your veracity no good when you make unfounded assertions.
By the way, what do you think about the Military service men & women trending away from being Republican party members? Think it could be the fact that the Republicans sent them to war with no plan for success, no definition for success, and no exit strategy?
January 11th, 2007 at 11:09 amYAY! I might just get off my lazy ass and get a job now.
Ethics reform is passed. 9/11 commission recommendations passed, minimum wage passed… and today: Stem cells.
Go Democrats!!!
January 11th, 2007 at 3:00 pmgood one, Kevin. I’d like to see a list of the 116 who voted against it.
Comment by loretta — January 10, 2007 @ 5:55 pm
Go to house.gov, click on H.R. 2 (its either H.R. 2 or H.R. 3, I can’t rememer, just find it) and click Roll Call.
It’ll list every member who voted yes and every member who voted no.
January 11th, 2007 at 3:04 pmThe law exempts American Samoa — a territory that would become the only U.S. territory not subject to the minimum wage law.
Why?
Well, StarKist Tuna owns one of the two tuna packing plants on the island. Together, those plants employ more than 5,000 Samoans, or nearly 75% of the workforce on the island.
According to the Washington Times, “StarKist’s parent company, Del Monte Corp., is headquartered in San Francisco, which is represented by Mrs. Pelosi.”
Talk about a new Culture of COrruption. Pelosi is already giving handouts.
January 11th, 2007 at 3:18 pmvacation home house plans
I can’t believe that I missed your point, I will have to do some research on this.
August 19th, 2008 at 10:16 pm