since we didn’t seem to be too interested in debating anything but iraq during the ’06 election cycle, it’s about time that we started looking at proposals we can expect from the new democratic majority. one of these will most certainly be a hike in the federal minimum wage. proponents argue that this change is overdue, and who in their right mind could be opposed to paying more to the struggling american worker? i think that we can all agree that we don’t want anyone to live in poverty, and think that more could be done to help those who are struggling financially. the best way to do that is to get those workers more skills, training, and education, not by the artificial wage inflation created by a higher minimum wage. the minimum wage is a bad idea with the best of intentions.

according to this heritage study, fifty-three percent of minimum wage workers in 2005 were young people between the ages of 16-24. teenagers and young adults around this age don’t generally depend on these jobs for survival or to take care of families. of course, there are exceptions to this, but for the majority in this category, they have other means of financial support. the idea behind entry-level jobs for those workers should be to gain skills and work experience, and then to move on to pursue other opportunities. they are never meant to provide a living wage or to be the primary source of income for the average family. to the extent that this is the case, raising the minimum wage doesn’t solve that problem.

the study concluded that:

Raising the minimum wage has these negative long-term effects because it alters the choices that people make today in ways that have long-term consequences. It induces some students to drop out of school, reducing their long-term employability. By raising unemployment and eliminating entry-level jobs, minimum wage hikes also eliminate opportunities for workers to gain valuable experience and skills that prepare them for future jobs. These unintended consequences severely hamper low-income workers’ future job and earning prospects.

the problem here is that congressional republicans who disagree with this idea aren’t willing to make the opposing case. the public overwhelmingly supports raising the minimum wage, and there are very few politicians willing to risk their jobs by voting against something like this. there are very good reasons to oppose the minimum wage. the main reason is that there are better ways to break the poverty cycle than increasing the minimum wage. that purpose isn’t served well by decreasing the amount of jobs available for lower-skilled workers and encouraging them to work rather than pursuing further educational opportunities. further education and vocational training would allow them to get those higher-paying jobs we all want those workers to have.

while increasing the minimum wage may gain political points for its proponents in congress, it doesn’t begin to address the problem it was created to solve in any significant way. we can do better than this. there are better ways to get the poor out of poverty. we just need to put a little more effort into finding a better solution to this rather than to recycle old ideas that haven’t been proven to work.

tags: minimum wage, democrats