Governor Ehrlich's Vetoes
On Thursday May 19, Governor Ehrlich vetoed Maryland’s Fair Share Health Care Act (aka the WalMart bill). Read his press release here. See our commentary on this issue here.
The following day Gov. Ehrlich vetoed 24 additional bills, including a bill that would have increased the minimum wage in Maryland from $5.15 an hour to $6.15 an hour. Read his veto message.
Gov. Ehrlich noted that raising the minimum wage "is a bad decision that elevates politics over economics." Is it "politics" when the legislature passes a law that reflects the priorities of the community-at-large? We'll look for some Maryland polling data on this issue, but note that on ballot initiatives last fall voters in both Florida and Nevada ("Red" states, mind you) voted by 2-1 margins in favor of raising the minimum wage in their states.
Gov. Ehrlich’s first reason for vetoing the minimum wage was the same argument offered by the highly-compensated corporate executives who testified against the bill: "It hurts the very people that it claims to help." It sounds like a good reason, but it isn’t true (see myth number 1).
Gov. Ehrlich also noted this it would "adversely affect small business." That sounds good, too, but again, it isn’t true (see myth number 3).
Gov. Ehrlich claimed that a higher minimum wage would establish a "dangerous precedent that disrupts the marketplace." We commented on that issue too.
Forty percent of the people in the U.S. live in states that have minimum wages higher than the federal minimum. None of those people work in Maryland, which happens to be the state tied for first with the highest family incomes.
The legislature cannot consider overriding vetoes until they reconvene, which isn’t schedule to occur until January 2006.
Check out the governor’s veto list. Do these choices reflect your values and priorities? If not, what did YOU do to make your views known?
And, just to make sure that we're connecting the dots here, see our blog post on housing assistance (or more accurately, the lack of housing assistance). Just how do our very low-income neighbors make ends meet?
The following day Gov. Ehrlich vetoed 24 additional bills, including a bill that would have increased the minimum wage in Maryland from $5.15 an hour to $6.15 an hour. Read his veto message.
Gov. Ehrlich noted that raising the minimum wage "is a bad decision that elevates politics over economics." Is it "politics" when the legislature passes a law that reflects the priorities of the community-at-large? We'll look for some Maryland polling data on this issue, but note that on ballot initiatives last fall voters in both Florida and Nevada ("Red" states, mind you) voted by 2-1 margins in favor of raising the minimum wage in their states.
Gov. Ehrlich’s first reason for vetoing the minimum wage was the same argument offered by the highly-compensated corporate executives who testified against the bill: "It hurts the very people that it claims to help." It sounds like a good reason, but it isn’t true (see myth number 1).
Gov. Ehrlich also noted this it would "adversely affect small business." That sounds good, too, but again, it isn’t true (see myth number 3).
Gov. Ehrlich claimed that a higher minimum wage would establish a "dangerous precedent that disrupts the marketplace." We commented on that issue too.
Forty percent of the people in the U.S. live in states that have minimum wages higher than the federal minimum. None of those people work in Maryland, which happens to be the state tied for first with the highest family incomes.
The legislature cannot consider overriding vetoes until they reconvene, which isn’t schedule to occur until January 2006.
Check out the governor’s veto list. Do these choices reflect your values and priorities? If not, what did YOU do to make your views known?
And, just to make sure that we're connecting the dots here, see our blog post on housing assistance (or more accurately, the lack of housing assistance). Just how do our very low-income neighbors make ends meet?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home