DC Council pauses $2 raise for tipped workers
The Brief
D.C. Council voted to delay scheduled $2 wage increase for tipped workers.
Mayor Bowser pushing to repeal Initiative 82, citing economic challenges.
Council's decision has sparked controversy among business owners and workers.
WASHINGTON - Tipped workers in the District will not see their scheduled wage increase next month after the D.C. Council voted Tuesday to pause the $2 raise.
The decision comes as Mayor Muriel Bowser seeks support for her proposed budget, which aims to address economic challenges for the city.
Economic pressures are being felt across sectors, with rising office vacancy rates, uncertainty in the hotel industry, and restaurant closures at D.C.'s Wharf. Bowser is pushing for the repeal of Initiative 82, which raises the base wage for tipped workers. A salary increase to $12 an hour had been scheduled to take effect in July.
READ MORE: DC Council votes to pause Initiative 82 $2 raise for tipped workers
Restaurant owners argue that rising food costs and fewer customers make the higher wages unaffordable. The council's vohttps://www.fox5dc.com/news/tipping-out-of-control-survey-2025te delays the increase to allow for further study of the economic impact, sparking controversy across the District.
What we know
Bowser's proposed 2026 budget outlines plans to move forward amid reduced federal support. The District was blindsided when Republican lawmakers blocked the release of local revenues.
Federal downsizing could lead to vacant office spaces and the potential loss of 40,000 jobs over the coming years.
Bowser's budget plan includes downtown investments during the Capital One Arena renovation, efforts to bring the Washington Commanders back to the RFK Stadium site, and incentives for tech companies through business development changes.
While the budget avoids tax increases and layoffs, it imposes a hiring freeze and cuts certain social programs. The council is expected to vote on the budget in August.
READ MORE: Tipping culture is "out of control," more Americans say in annual poll
The Source
Information in this article comes from the Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington and the D.C. City Council.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The spectacular end of Elon Musk and Donald Trump's bromance
During a press conference in the Oval Office last week, President Trump praised Elon Musk, his adviser and the outgoing head of the president's Department of Government Efficiency, for waging war on the federal workforce. 'Elon has worked tirelessly to lead the most sweeping and consequential government reform program in generations,' Trump said alongside Musk, who wore a black DOGE hat and 'DOGEfather' T-shirt while standing next to the president. For nearly an hour, Trump heaped effusive praise on the billionaire Tesla chief executive, SpaceX founder and owner of X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, whose stint as a special government employee had come to an end. 'Elon's really not leaving,' the president added. 'He's gonna be back and forth I think.' What a difference a week makes. Trump and Musk's unlikely bromance unraveled in spectacular fashion on Thursday, with the president telling reporters in the Oval Office that he was 'very disappointed' with Musk's criticism of his 'one big beautiful' spending bill, and Musk railing at Trump in real time on X. "I'm very disappointed in Elon," Trump said before a bilateral meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. "I've helped Elon a lot." The president suggested that Musk, like many others before him, had become 'hostile' upon leaving his administration. "I'll be honest, I think he misses the place," Trump said. 'People leave my administration, and they love us, and then at some point they miss it so badly, and some of them embrace it, and some of them actually become hostile." "They leave, and they wake up in the morning, and the glamour is gone," the president added. "The whole world is different, and they become hostile. I don't know what it is." Trump also suggested that Musk was upset that the Republican-backed reconciliation bill did not include an electric vehicle mandate, which would have benefited EV manufacturers, including Tesla. 'He knew the inner workings of the bill better than anybody sitting here. He had no problem with it. All of a sudden he had a problem and he only developed the problem when he found out we were going to cut the EV mandate." "False, this bill was never shown to me even once and was passed in the dead of night so fast that almost no one in Congress could even read it!" Musk wrote on X. 'Whatever,' Musk continued. 'Keep the EV/solar incentive cuts in the bill, even though no oil & gas subsidies are touched (very unfair!!), but ditch the MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK in the bill.' 'In the entire history of civilization, there has never been legislation that [is] both big and beautiful. Everyone knows this!' Musk added. 'Either you get a big and ugly bill or a slim and beautiful bill. Slim and beautiful is the way.' Musk, who was one of Trump's most fervent and visible supporters during the 2024 campaign, wasn't done. "Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate," Musk wrote. "Such ingratitude." Trump wasn't done either. 'Elon was 'wearing thin,'' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!" 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' Trump added. 'I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!' Musk tried to get the last word in, suggesting Trump's name is in unreleased FBI files on Jeffrey Epstein, the late financier and convicted sex offender. "Time to drop the really big bomb," Musk wrote. "@realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!" "Mark this post for the future," Musk added moments later. "The truth will come out." On Thursday night, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement that 'this is an unfortunate episode from Elon, who is unhappy with the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' because it does not include the policies he wanted." She added "The president is focused on passing this historic piece of legislation and making our country great again.' The split capped a longtime partnership for the pair, with Musk stumping for Trump on the campaign trail, and the president, after installing Musk as the head of DOGE, boosting Tesla amid criticism of Musk with an unusual event at the White House. ("Trump turns the White House lawn into a Tesla showroom," NBC News proclaimed.) But in the last few months, there had been reports that Trump was privately growing tired of Musk. On May 27, three days before Musk's farewell press conference in the Oval Office, CBS aired a clip that showed him expressing disappointment that Trump's signature spending bill would undermine his DOGE work. Then on Tuesday, Musk went full blast on the spending package. "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore," he wrote on X. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." "Call your Senator, Call your Congressman," Musk wrote on Wednesday. "Bankrupting America is NOT ok! KILL the BILL." That brought us to Thursday, when Trump was asked about Musk's attacks during his Oval Office meeting with Merz. "Elon and I had a great relationship," Trump told reporters. "I don't know if we will anymore." In a phone interview with CNN on Friday morning, Trump said he was "not even thinking about" Musk and would not be speaking with him anytime soon. 'I'm not even thinking about Elon. He's got a problem. The poor guy's got a problem,' Trump said, adding: "I won't be speaking to him for a while I guess, but I wish him well.'
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bipartisan group of Georgia lawmakers pushes back on proposed federal 10-year ban on state AI limits
Six Georgia lawmakers joined more than 250 of their colleagues nationwide to ask Congress not to hamper their ability to regulate artificial intelligence. Midjourney/AI-generated art A bipartisan group of state lawmakers, including six from Georgia, is calling on Congress to cut a provision out of the massive federal spending bill that freezes state regulations on artificial intelligence for 10 years. 'As state lawmakers and policymakers, we regularly hear from constituents about the rise of online harms and the impacts of AI on our communities,' the lawmakers wrote. 'In an increasingly fraught digital environment, young people are facing new threats online, seniors are targeted by the emergence of AI-generated scams, and workers and creators face new challenges in an AI-integrated economy. Over the next decade, AI will raise some of the most important public policy questions of our time, and it is critical that state policymakers maintain the ability to respond.' The Georgia signers were Sen. John Albers of Roswell and Reps. Todd Jones of South Forsyth and Gary Richardson of Evans, who are all Republicans, as well as Democratic Reps. Scott Holcomb and Tanya Miller of Atlanta and Sam Park of Lawrenceville. In all, 261 legislators from all 50 states signed the letter. Georgia lawmakers from both chambers met over the summer last year to discuss potential AI regulations. Albers, who chairs the Senate AI study committee, often stressed that he did not wish to overregulate, saying that he saw lawmakers' duty as balancing protections for Georgians with creating a friendly environment for businesses. During this year's legislative session, no major AI bills passed into law, including broadly popular provisions like increasing penalties for using AI to create child pornography or deceptive 'deep fake' campaign advertisements. An Albers bill intended to create a new state advisory board on artificial intelligence and to require local governments to report on their use of the technology died in the Senate Economic Development and Tourism Committee on the advice of Suwanee GOP Congressman Rich McCormick. Then-committee chair Brandon Beach, who now serves as U.S. Treasurer, said at the time that McCormick told him not to take any action on AI because Congress would take care of it. Senators created a new committee this year to examine artificial intelligence and digital currency, but members have not yet been appointed and no hearing dates have been set. The GOP's megabill, which has become the cornerstone of President Donald Trump's domestic agenda, passed the House by a single vote and is now in the hands of the Senate. Getting the legislation through the House was a challenge the first time, with factions within the Republican Party at odds over the size of cuts to federal programs and the expected increase in the deficit. The new focus of the AI provision could prove to be another sticking point. Members of the House including Rome Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene have indicated they were not aware of the regulation ban when they voted for the bill and will not support it when it comes back to the House unless the rule is removed. 'I voted for President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill because it delivers his MAGA campaign promises and he endorses the bill and wants Congress to pass it in order to fund his MAGA agenda,' Greene said on social media. 'Do I love the price tag? NO. But I want OUR policies funded. I campaigned across the country for YEARS with Trump, more than any member of Congress, and the man NEVER said he would destroy state rights for 10 years to let AI tech companies run rampant!!! TAKE IT OUT OR I'M VOTING NO WHEN IT COMES BACK TO THE HOUSE!!!!!' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House Dems Get Bonus Hearing on Crypto Market Structure, Assail Trump Conflicts
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. President Donald Trump's crypto ventures were once again under the microscope during a House Financial Services Committee hearing that otherwise saw legal experts express worries about how regulators might police digital assets under a market structure bill. The committee held a "minority day" hearing — meaning the witnesses were primarily picked by the Democrats, the current minority party in the House — on Friday, letting lawmakers ask questions more targeted on concerns they have with the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, the Republican-led market structure legislation that will receive a markup vote next week. Maxine Waters, the ranking Democrat on the committee who'd demanding this extracurricular hearing after the panel met earlier in the week on the same topic, pointed to Trump's various crypto efforts in her opening statement, saying her goal was to stop Trump from profiting off of his crypto ventures to the extent he has been. "What I'm opposed to in this act … is the crooked president of the United States of America, who's decided to use the office of the presidency to enhance his access to profits," Waters said. Republicans focused on a different tack: "Currently, there is no federal framework for non-security digital assets," Committee Chair French Hill said in his own opening statement, a stance echoed by his colleagues Bryan Steil and Warren Davidson. They contend that Democrats and the administration of former President Joe Biden allowed years to pass in which they failed to protect consumers by offering no rules to oversee crypto. Crypto has driven an ideological wedge into the Democratic Party on Capitol Hill, with many Democrats — typically skewing toward the younger members — supporting the advancement of digital assets legislation despite the direction of their leadership. Most of the Democrats attending this bonus hearing on the Clarity Act were in the crypto-critical camp, though Representative Jim Himes, a Connecticut Democrat, has supported crypto bills in the past and questioned witnesses at the hearing about his concerns that the bill may include loopholes that could allow financial firms to dodge oversight. Himes, a yes vote on last year's predecessor to the Clarity Act — the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act, or FIT21 — said some of the provisions in the new effort may allow for a carveout that can be abused by certain types of issuers under Securities and Exchange Commission regulations. The Clarity Act itself is more complicated than it needs to be and does not address some of the cybersecurity risks posed to the cryptocurrency industry, said Carole House, a former White House adviser who is now a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council GeoEconomics Center. She pointed to recent crypto hacks, including crypto exchange ByBit, as an example. Amanda Fischer, policy director at Better Markets, a Washington group advocating for financial policies that favor the public, said her bigger issue was with the exceptions that exist for companies to seek regulation under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission rather than the Securities and Exchange Commission, saying that it might provide loopholes for issuers or other crypto companies that otherwise would be regulated under the SEC and be subject to securities registration and reporting requirements. But as has been seen in other recent hearings, Trump's crypto ties again reappeared as the star of the show. Bart Naylor, a policy expert at Public Citizen and a former investigator for the Senate Banking Committee, said he believes Trump is specifically soliciting gifts through his memecoin and selling favors through actions like his memecoin dinner or by terminating SEC lawsuits against companies which donated money to him. White House officials have routinely denied Trump is exhibiting a conflict of interests in his pursuit of digital assets business gains. Waters had staged a walkout last month from what was meant to be a joint hearing of this and the House Agriculture Committee on crypto policy, though industry insiders were careful to note that not all the panel's Democrats followed Waters' departure.
