logo
This is why a $15 federal minimum wage is getting love from some Republicans

This is why a $15 federal minimum wage is getting love from some Republicans

CNN6 hours ago

A bill to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour from $7.25 is back – but you might be surprised at who's leading the charge: Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri.
Shifts in state and local minimum wages, however, as well as the broader economy, show how Hawley's involvement makes sense, both for his home state and for the country. And experts say having a conservative advocate sponsoring the bill could help the chances of finally getting a federal wage hike for the first time in 16 years.
'Given the fact that it's a Republican leading this legislation, there's certainly a different tone here, and a different group of people thinking about it than in the past,' said Rebekah Paxton, research director at Employment Policies Institute, a conservative think tank that opposes raising the minimum wage, arguing it will cost the jobs of lower-paid workers.
Thirty-one states already require businesses to pay most workers above the federal $7.25 minimum – including Missouri. That might be one reason why Hawley's behind the bill.
Come January 1, Missouri's minimum wage will rise to $15 an hour. A higher starting wage means that businesses looking to expand nationwide might instead opt for a state that has a cheaper wage floor. A national $15 per hour wage would level the playing field, making Missouri competitive with places where businesses can legally pay less.
'I think (Hawley's sponsorship) is an admission that minimum wage increases are very popular,' said Ben Zipperer, senior economist with the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank that supports a higher minimum wage.
'I would like to be optimistic about this. I do think it's an important recognition that the problem with low pay continues to be a concern,' he said.
The current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour was set in July 2009, according to the Department of Labor, and has not changed since.
But thanks to inflation – including a surge in prices during the pandemic – that wage has depreciated. People earning $7.25 in 2009 would need to earn $10.82 today to have the same buying power, according to a Bureau of Labor Statistics calculator that uses the Consumer Price Index as an inflation reference.
And while inflation is closer to the Federal Reserve's 2% target now, the accumulation of more than a decade and a half of price increases means that Americans simply can't afford the same kind of life now that $7.25 an hour bought in 2009.
Hawley alluded to that erosion in a statement about the bill.
'For decades, working Americans have seen their wages flatline. One major culprit of this is the failure of the federal minimum wage to keep up with the economic reality facing hardworking Americans every day. This bipartisan legislation would ensure that workers across America benefit from higher wages,' Hawley said in a statement. (Senator Peter Welch, a Vermont Democratic, is a co-sponsor.)
Hawley's press office did not respond to a request for further comment about the bill.
In 10 states, as well as the District of Columbia, workers already make $15 an hour or more. In several more states, the rates could be higher than that next year, depending on inflation adjustments.
All those states have Democratic senators likely to support a federal wage hike, excepting only Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine.
In fact, Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows that in 2023, the most recent year with information, only 870,000 workers earn the $7.25 an hour minimum or less (the less is allowed for workers who receive tip income or some workers with disability). That's only about 1% of the 80 million hourly workers nationwide.
Far more people, however, make under $15 an hour – about 14 million, Zipperer said.
'The economy has basically moved on' from wages that low, he added. But a pay increase to $15 an hour could do a lot to help those folks.
'Minimum wage bills are always going to affect a minority of the work force,' he said. 'Still, that's nothing to sneeze at.'
But Paxton, of the conservative Employment Policies Institute, said a higher minimum wage could actually hurt those workers by cutting into the number of jobs or hours worked. With human workers earning bigger paychecks, employers could turn to automation or artificial intelligence. Already, AI leaders have warned that new advances in the technology could slash jobs for white-collar workers.
'It's a popular thing. People want to see workers earn more money,' Paxton said. 'Yes, it could boost wages, but it also could kill jobs for a sizable part of the workforce. There's a tradeoff we think he (Senator Hawley) is ignoring.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

5 Reasons Why 'New-Collar Careers' Are On The Rise In 2025
5 Reasons Why 'New-Collar Careers' Are On The Rise In 2025

Forbes

time32 minutes ago

  • Forbes

5 Reasons Why 'New-Collar Careers' Are On The Rise In 2025

new-collar careers are on the rise The term "new-collar careers" was first coined by IBM's former CEO Ginni Rometty to describe positions that prioritize skills and certifications over traditional four-year degrees. Unlike white-collar jobs that require a college education or blue-collar work involving physical labor, these roles focus on practical capabilities and technical competencies. Today, new-collar positions offer median salaries exceeding $159,000, according to research by Resume Genius, representing a fundamental shift in how the American workforce values human capital. Five documented forces are reshaping career advancement, creating opportunities that favor skills-based workers over traditionally credentialed candidates. Average student debt reaches $37,000 per graduate, according to federal data. Meanwhile, 41% of recent college graduates work in positions that never required a degree to begin with, creating a compelling economic case for alternative pathways. Information security analysts earn a median salary of $124,910, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Workers entering this field early can accumulate substantial earnings while college-bound peers accumulate debt. According to Junior Achievement, 66% of teens aged 13-17 are likely to consider starting a business or becoming entrepreneurs, suggesting entrepreneurial thinking may prepare young people for skills-based career paths. Early exposure to real-world work experience and entrepreneurship programs provides significant advantages. Teenagers who participate in business mentorship programs, internships, or entrepreneurial education develop practical skills that directly translate to new-collar careers—such as problem-solving, communication, project management, and financial literacy. What this means for you: The traditional college track may no longer offer the best return on investment, especially in fields where practical skills are more valued than academic credentials. Starting skill development in high school through entrepreneurship programs, real-world jobs, or internship experience can provide a crucial head start. Labor market data reveals dramatic shifts in hiring practices. Information security analyst roles show 33% projected growth through 2033—nearly triple the average rate, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics projections. Computer network architects are projected to experience 13% growth. Health services managers are seeing a 29% expansion. Marketing manager roles look to grow 8% annually. Major employers, including IBM, Google, and Apple, have removed degree requirements for numerous positions, prioritizing demonstrated competencies over educational backgrounds. According to Resume Genius data, 65% of employers will prioritize skills and practical experience over formal education by 2025. Why this matters: The job market is actively rewarding practical capabilities over academic achievements. Workers who focus on building demonstrable skills in high-demand areas can access opportunities that were previously limited to college graduates. Online learning platforms, bootcamps, and industry certifications have made advanced skills accessible without traditional institutional barriers. Workers can acquire specialized knowledge in a matter of months rather than years. Professional certifications carry increasing weight with employers. Industry-specific credentials often signal more relevant expertise than broad academic degrees, particularly in rapidly changing technological fields. The speed advantage is significant: cybersecurity professionals can earn a CompTIA Security+ certification in three months, compared to the four years typically required for a traditional computer science education. What this means for career changers: You can pivot to high-paying fields in months, not years. A focused certification program can provide faster entry to lucrative careers than returning to school for another degree. For young people still in high school, combining entrepreneurship programs or business competitions with technical certifications creates an even stronger foundation for new-collar success. The remote work revolution fundamentally altered career accessibility. Every high-paying new-collar role identified in Resume Genius research offers remote or hybrid options. This geographic freedom reduces cost pressures that traditionally favored college graduates. Workers can maintain competitive salaries while living in affordable areas, maximizing purchasing power compared to peers tied to expensive metropolitan markets. Remote work capabilities particularly benefit younger workers who may lack the resources to relocate to expensive business centers for traditional career opportunities. Why this matters to you: Location no longer limits your earning potential. You can access six-figure salaries while living in affordable areas, dramatically improving your quality of life and financial position compared to traditional career paths that require expensive urban living. Artificial intelligence is on the rise, but it is increasing the demand for roles that require human judgment, creativity, and relationship management. Resume Genius excluded positions with automation risk above 50% from their analysis. The remaining roles require strategic thinking, empathy, and complex problem-solving that machines cannot easily replicate. These roles are rooted in judgment, empathy, and real-time decision-making—qualities that AI can't replicate. What this means for your future: Focusing on skills that complement rather than compete with AI provides job security. Roles requiring emotional intelligence, strategic thinking, and complex problem-solving will become increasingly valuable as automation handles routine tasks. All these forces feed off each other. Student debt pushes people away from college. Employers can't find the skills they need. Technology makes learning faster and cheaper. Remote work opens up geography. AI makes human skills more valuable. The result? A completely different job market. Resume Genius research shows this isn't temporary—it's how the economy will work going forward. Companies win, too. They can hire from a bigger pool of candidates, spend less on recruiting, and get workers who can start contributing immediately—no need to train someone for months when they already know what they're doing. Workers can now choose strategies that align with their learning styles, financial situations, and career goals. Success can be more readily attained in new-collar careers if workers focus on developing practical skills, engaging in continuous learning, and achieving demonstrable results. If you can prove your value through portfolios, certifications, and real-world achievements, you will thrive regardless of your educational background. The economic and technological forces driving new-collar careers show no signs of slowing. The question isn't whether these opportunities will continue growing—the data suggests they will. The question is how quickly traditional institutions will adapt to this documented reality.

Rocket Companies Like SpaceX May Soon Pay Per Pound to Use the Sky
Rocket Companies Like SpaceX May Soon Pay Per Pound to Use the Sky

Gizmodo

time34 minutes ago

  • Gizmodo

Rocket Companies Like SpaceX May Soon Pay Per Pound to Use the Sky

The skies may no longer be free for the space industry. Rocket companies like SpaceX and United Launch Alliance (ULA) may soon be required to pay a fee to support FAA oversight and airspace coordination, part of a broader effort to keep up with the growing launch industry. A budget reconciliation bill released by Senator Ted Cruz last week proposes that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) begin charging licensing fees to rocket companies starting next year. The collected fees would go into a trust fund to help the FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) acquire more resources needed to manage the growing number of rocket launches as it faces budget cuts for the coming year. Today, companies like SpaceX are required to pay small fees that cover the application process for launch and reentry licenses issued by the FAA. In return, the FAA clears airspace of commercial and private flights during the rocket launches and along the path of reentry. Airlines, on the other hand, do pay fees to the FAA, which go into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund that makes up nearly half the administration's annual budget. The burgeoning space industry is placing an added burden on the FAA, and the authors of the proposed bill suggest it's time for companies to start paying their dues. 'You have this group of new users that are paying nothing into the system that are an increasing share of the operations, and I truly believe the current structure isn't sustainable,' former FAA administrator Michael Huerta told NPR in an interview in May 2024. The FAA initially waived fees for space companies to help the industry grow in its early years. Last year, SpaceX launched 134 rockets to orbit, mostly the Falcon 9, and it's aiming to break its record with 170 launches in 2025. As a clear industry leader, SpaceX dominates the use of airspace over the U.S., while other companies like ULA carried out a total of five launches in 2024. SpaceX executives have also been the most vocal against the FAA's lack of resources and its inability to keep up with the growing space sector. In 2023, William Gerstenmaier, SpaceX's vice president, spoke at a hearing by the Senate subcommittee on space and science, warning that the FAA's licensing department is in 'great distress' and 'needs twice the resources it has today.' Perhaps SpaceX didn't anticipate that the funding for those resources would come out of the company's own pockets. The new bill suggests the FAA charge rocket companies based on the weight of the payload per launch, starting with $0.25 per pound in 2026 and gradually increasing by approximately $0.10 every year. In 2033, companies will potentially have to pay $1.50 per pound of payload. For SpaceX, the fee for a Falcon 9 launch of the company's Starlink satellites would amount to an average $9,400 in 2026, according to Ars Technica. SpaceX launched 89 Starlink missions in 2024, which would have cost it around $836,600 under the suggested fee guidelines. The FAA's AST could use that money as it faces a tight budget for 2026. The U.S. administration's skinny budget, released last month, allocates $42 million for AST. The FAA's overall budget request for 2026 is $22 billion, a very small portion of which will be used to expand the staffing for launch and reentry licensing. The budget for the FAA's commercial space office increased from $27.6 million in 2021 to $42 million in 2024 to account for the increasing number of rocket launches. The AST received roughly the same budget in 2024 and 2025, without accounting for inflation or a continually growing industry. The suggested trust fund could help fill the budgeting gap for the FAA, and allow it to expand its rocket licensing operations. Space companies have been quick to criticize regulatory bodies like the FAA for slow processes, but now it might be time for them to pay up to launch their rockets on a speedier timeline.

Nassim Taleb Says Trump's Approach to Tariffs ‘Makes No Sense'
Nassim Taleb Says Trump's Approach to Tariffs ‘Makes No Sense'

Bloomberg

time36 minutes ago

  • Bloomberg

Nassim Taleb Says Trump's Approach to Tariffs ‘Makes No Sense'

By and Sonali Basak Save The Black Swan author Nassim Taleb said President Donald Trump's approach to tariffs will depress US gross domestic product and could soon lead to labor shortages. Taleb, who's also scientific adviser for hedge fund Universa Investments, said tariffs may be necessary, but they need to be 'symmetric.' Much of the US economy is based on cheap labor and constraining that input will have real knock-on effects, he said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store