Full Steam Ahead On "100 Hours" Express

House Approves Minimum Wage Hike; Thursday Vote On Stem Cells

(AP)  The House voted to raise the federal minimum wage Wednesday for the first time in a decade, to $7.25 an hour, as majority Democrats marched briskly through their 100-hour agenda at the dawn of a new Congress.

Ebullient Democrats stood and cheered as the final vote - 315-116 - was announced.

"For 10 years the lowest-paid Americans have been frozen out," said Rep. George Miller of California, berating Republicans who had refused for years to allow a vote on a stand-alone minimum wage increase.

"The little guy is not going to be forgotten any longer," said Rep. Bill Pascrell, whose district includes gritty Paterson, N.J. He estimated the increase would mean an additional $4,400 a year for a family of three.

"The small businessmen we are trying to help for the most part are little guys," countered Rep. Howard McKeon, R-Calif. He said Republicans favor an alternative coupling a minimum wage increase with tax breaks for small businesses.

Other Republicans argued that raising the minimum wage would hurt employment chances for the lowest-paid workers.

The legislation, which now goes to the Senate, would raise the current $5.15 minimum to $5.85 effective 60 days after the measure became law. The minimum would go to $6.55 a year later and $7.25 a year after that.

The White House issued a statement of opposition to the legislation as drafted. It called for the increase to be accompanied by "tax and regulatory relief to help small businesses stay competitive and to help the economy keep growing."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has already signaled that Democrats will accept pro-business changes. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, told reporters that he and other lawmakers are working on between $8 billion and $10 billion in relief over 10 years.

Businesses that bring in less than $10 million a year would receive relief under one of the provisions in the emerging legislation, and the restaurant industry would be favored under another.

By contrast to the partisan debate on the wage legislation, one of the House's most cherished traditions fell without a struggle.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., issued an order banning smoking in an ornate lobby just off the House chamber where tobacco smoke and political intrigue have coexisted for generations.

"We can no longer risk the health of colleagues, staff, pages, reporters and others who pass through the Speaker's Lobby each day," Pelosi said, and by midafternoon, the ashtrays were gone. Not so a portrait of John Nance Garner, cigar in hand, one of many past House speakers whose likenesses preside over the room.

There was distress across the Capitol, when 89-year-old Sen. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, who walks with the aid of two canes, arrived in the chamber too late to cast a vote.

Reid had cautioned senators he intended to run proceedings more efficiently. But Byrd observed that the Senate also "reveres tradition, seniority, debate, deliberation, experience and common courtesy."

The minimum wage bill is the second of six measures that Democrats intend to pass in the first two weeks of the new Congress. Legislation aimed at making the nation safer from terrorist attacks passed easily on Wednesday. The agenda for Thursday includes a measure to permit expanded federally funded embryonic stem cell research, a bill Bush has threatened to veto.

On Friday, the House is expected to pass legislation directing the administration to negotiate with drug companies for lower prices on prescription drugs for Medicare recipients. Republicans said Wednesday they believed Bush would veto that bill, as well, if it reached his desk as drafted.

Democrats have long claimed the measure would result in significant savings, but congressional budget analysts bluntly disputed that. "We anticipate that the (administration) would be unable to negotiate prices across a broad range of ... drugs that are more favorable than those obtained" under current law, said a letter signed by Donald B. Marron, acting director of the Congressional Budget Office.

The remaining measures on the early Democratic agenda would cut the interest rate on student loans and raise taxes on energy companies to pay for an effort to reduce dependence on foreign oil.

All 233 Democrats voted for the minimum wage measure, along with 82 Republicans. All 116 votes in opposition came from Republicans.

Less than a week after Congress convened under Democratic control, the minimum wage bill offered an early challenge of the party's ability to maneuver in an environment shaped by friendly outside interest groups as well as the White House and Republicans who hold 49 votes in the 100-member Senate.

House Democrats insisted that the bill pass without any relief for small businesses, and the AFL-CIO has lobbied Senate Democrats to go along. Several officials said the issue flared in this week's closed-door caucus of the rank and file, when some liberals challenged Baucus and questioned a strategy that called for early concessions to Republicans.

In response, Reid said Democrats did not have 60 votes that would be needed to pass a stand-alone minimum wage increase over a Republican filibuster, these officials added.

The final measure will be worked out in negotiations between the two houses, and it is likely that Pelosi and House Democrats will ultimately have to accept tax breaks for businesses if they are to get Bush's signature on one of their top priorities.

Under budget rules enacted last week, though, no tax legislation that clears the House can increase the deficit - meaning that the minimum wage bill would have to contain provisions to offset the costs of the tax cuts.

Inflation has eroded the minimum wage's buying power to the lowest level in about 50 years in the time since the last increase took effect. According to Labor Department statistics, 479,000 workers paid by the hour earned exactly $5.15 in 2005, the most recent estimate available. They tend to be under 25 and never married and more likely to be women, minorities and part-time workers.

More than two dozen states and the District of Columbia have minimum wages higher than the federal level. The political potency of the issue was evident last November, when proposals to raise statewide minimums passed in all six states where they came to a vote.

[afmca]

Don't believe the lies of small business and the Chamber of Commerce. No tax breaks for passing the increase in the minimum wage. Jobs will not be lost - they are never lost. Have you noticed that in Bush America the only two groups that don't have to take any responsibility for their actions are the super rich and corporations. This is the usual cry from businesses that survive through employing illegal immigrants. Congress do the right thing - pass the law without give backs.

[rafterman1]

I saw a report awhile ago that said in the 10 or 15 times that the minimum wage was raised in it's history, only once did unemployment go up. Righties complain about the "lazy" welfare people not looking for jobs. Well, if you make it more economically beneficial to work than to be on welfare, you'd be surprised how motivated those lazy people become.

[bluestardad]

Bush and Rove will try to throw a road block to anything that helps American Workers.

[yoder32]

Ok i have a question. Won't raising the minimum wage also raise prices of goods. If so then won't this do absolutely nothing to help those who aren't making minimum wage. Yea sure the people making minimum wage will start to make more money but it's not going to improve their living because the prices of things will rise and it will be exactly the same as before.

[perception5]

bluestardad, the Dems in Congress voted down raising the minumim wage this past September...because it was attached with eliminating the "death tax". Americans are taxed on their pay, when they buy goods, on their phone and cable bills, when we use toll roads..... etc...... Republicans didn't think that Americans families needed to be taxed when someone die............. the DEMs thought otherwise.......... otherwise the minimum wage would have passed in September by the GOP....

Oh yeah and Karl Rove........where does he go to get his reputation back after a year of our corrupt liberal MSM wolfpack and their corrupt pals the Dems...... telling and reporting everyday that he outed Valerie Plame which all Americans know now was a lie........

[perception5]

jh6379, please provide some ......any..... proof and we will have the courts look into it......thanks....

[webdepot]

perception;

I am always amazed at how you only happen to remember part of the facts in order to make your argument look valid... a typical tactic of a Republican.. The inheritance tax you speak of only applies to estates with a value of, I think 1.5 to 2 million. .. so, unless you come from a family of millionaires, the tax doens't apply to you.. The inheritance tax elimination the Repubs attached to the minimum wage bill would have taken more than 8 billion dollars out of the country's tax coffers, right into the pockets of the wealthies 2% of the people in America.

Sorry, but if an estate is worth that much, it should be taxed... why should the beneficiaries have that income tax free... the benificiaries did not do one thing to earn it... Most people never get a penny that isn't taxed.. so why should the wealthy??

The Republicans are only willing to help the poor, if the wealthies get a hundred times as much at the same time... useless pieces of cr@p that Republican congress was..

As for Rove... he's the sneakiest, most corrupt, do anything to win power, liar that ever advised a president... His reputation is well deserved...

[frankly6]

perception5

The "death tax" as you call it is actually an estate tax and it only effects those that inherrit multiple millions. Of course the GOP is only concerned with the welfare of the poor downtroden millionares and billionares.

[frankly6]

perception5

As usual your head is stuck up your Limbaugh.

[neocon04]

Remember this day when your paying 7 bucks for a Big Mac.

[docpeter-2009]

Why do businesses need to raise prices so much if/when the minimum wage is increased? Heck, just take it out of the +$1M per year the corporate execs pockets and out of the annual stock benefit. So what if a person get $5.00 less per year per share of stock in a company. Internallty limit the corporate execs to $250K per year and you can more than make up for a increase in the minimum wage. It would be a new version of downsizing that would benefit the poor and not eliminate the rich from corporate America.

On the other hand, this wouldn't make sense because the rich wouldn't be as rich. What a shame the corproate exec couldn't buy his wife/kid that new Mercedes for Christmas!

[oleander8]

to: Neocon04

Don't buy a $7 BigMac. They charge what the market will bear - if you don't buy, they can't charge.

[skyk-2009]

It truly amazes me how Fascist continue to just outright LIE about their greed. Let's face it folks the ONLY reason these creatures do not want the wage of the lowest paid to go up is they do not want to give those who toil to make their millions any more than they absolutely HAVE too. History has shown over and over and over that they are NOT right and that the wages of those folks, when raised, makes us all a better people. We should do with this bunch of Fascist what our fathers did with the McCarthy bunch. Put them out of power and keep them out of power... PERIOD!!

[creeper00]

yoder32,

The short answer to your question is "maybe." Rise in price is governed by many things beside wages.

When wages remain depressed for long a long period of time the tendency among minimum wage workers is to say, "I'm not going to bust my butt for $5.15 an hour. When wages rise you have a happier and probably more productive workforce. They're getting paid more but also getting more done.

In the past ten years members of Congress have voted to give themselves pay raises -- technically "cost of living increases" -- totaling $31,600, or more than $15 an hour. The current salary for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $165,200 per year.

I will note here that the most recent attempt Republicans made to thicken the feathers in their nests was blocked in June of last year by then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid...one of the few things Democrats were able to accomplish under the cudgel of Republican control.

I will also note that the only member of Congress to decline a pay raise is Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin.

[jn122736]

Ok i have a question. Won't raising the minimum wage also raise prices of goods. If so then won't this do absolutely nothing to help those who aren't making minimum wage. Yea sure the people making minimum wage will start to make more money but it's not going to improve their living because the prices of things will rise and it will be exactly the same as before.
Posted by yoder32 at 08:31 AM : Jan 10, 2007

No, it would not be the same as before.

Your logic is missing one key element.

Minimum wage earners are only a portion of those paying for any increase in prices.

The result would be a more equitable living standard.

[xNineseveNx]

"Ok i have a question. Won't raising the minimum wage also raise prices of goods. If so then won't this do absolutely nothing to help those who aren't making minimum wage. Yea sure the people making minimum wage will start to make more money but it's not going to improve their living because the prices of things will rise and it will be exactly the same as before."

Of course, but the proponents for a raise in minimum wage won't address this other than saying that those of us that have worked hard, spent time and money to have a career that makes us more than minimum wage will have to pay more for our goods as well, so it will ease the burden on the minimum wage-earners by spreading it out to everyone. They%u2019ll say that since we have more than some others, we should pay more than our fair share so that the lazy and less fortunate don't have to, *gasp*, get an education/training or skill, make themselves presentable and go out and work hard to improve their situation. If you're a career minimum wage earner, I have no sympathy for you, none at all. If you can't even get a $0.15 raise per year, one wonders why anyone would pay you to do anything at all.

[creeper00]

Hey, frankly...I missed you yesterday on the Somali bombing story. You, exusmcsgt, ObservantX, SamtheTVCat, mh4, feelfree and bluestardad and the other clear thinkers here. The "kill 'em all" faction was out in force.

Glad to see you back.

[kphx]

Oh come on, Why do we need to pay more to minimum wage workers. If they are put to work for free, we will have burgers for even less. That's all that matter to us. Who cares about minimum wage workers. I am more bothered about my burger price.

Yes, as some suggested cut the wage at the top end. No exhorbitant severance packages when you get fired / relieve yourself of your duties. The reason some one is being relieved of their duties, is they did not perform well. Then how come the top execs get such a huge severance package, while the guy at the bottom is not supposed to get a decent wage and when he does not perform, his severance package - go to hell.

I am more bothered about the price of my burgers. I don't care about the top exec or the bottom bloke. What a small way of thinking.

[augiedog54]

why not raise it to 100.00 or 150.00 an hour. really make everyone happy.

[xNineseveNx]

Anyone who would oppose tax breaks/incentives to ease the burden on small businesses seems guilty of being a jealous hater of anyone that%u2019s worked hard to make something of themselves. Do you people know what a small business is? It%u2019s that hardware store down on 5th St with 7 total employees or the pizza shop on 1st Ave with 15 total employees. These are the businesses that will be hit hard by the hike because they operate under a slim feast or famine margin, they don%u2019t have 500 stores to absorb the loss if revenue from one store is down for whatever reason and they don%u2019t have millions in profits to put away and diversify in order to make their business financially stronger even in the face of tough markets (who also won%u2019t have to raise prices because their goods come largely from China), but Joe%u2019s hardware will have to pay his 5 cashiers another $2k/yr each.

[xNineseveNx]

He%u2019ll have to raise prices if he cannot offset the increased labor cost, which means more people will flock to WalMart and the like for their hardware because it%u2019s cheaper. Joe may not have the business to keep him open anymore. His employees will head to WalMart for jobs. This keeps them off of the unemployment rolls so things look good on paper, except that the little guy gets pushed out and the big corporation gets bigger. I thought you sensitive people were about fighting for the little guy and going against the big, greedy corporations, or does that only apply to welfare and minimum wage earners and Microsoft?

[polipersona]

The article says that most of the people working minimum wage jobs are under the age of 25, ie meaning kids like me trying to save for and go to college. That is what minimum is meant for- these jobs in burger joints and bakeries are not supposed to be for people whose only source of income is that, its not supposed to be the money you live off of completely. Kids who are still mainly supported by their parents, or older people trying to get a bit more than their social security check. Raising the minimum will be beneficial, but I don't think it will have so huge an effect on the standard of living as they predict. I agree that if you are older and trying to support yourself completely on minimum, you should get some education and find a better job.

[jhindson1]

Minimum wage will bankrupt businesses - more fear mongering by the rich. - The minimum wage of your next door neighbour to the north is already $7.00 - $7.50 in US dollars depending on which Province. Businesses are not suffering.

[random_radar]

The real victims of the minimum wage are not businesses and consumers. The most tragic victims are the black and hispanic teenagers who won't be able to get jobs. What a great recipe for increasing social problems among this chronically unemployed and vulnerable group! And don't claim that I am wrong--the government itself publishes the sad statistics of minority youth unemployment.

The minimum wage will ensure that we always have a large underclass of low-wage workers. It does it by preventing them from getting work experience when they are young and ambitious and have the economic freedom to work cheap and learn. Instead of developing their employability as teenagers, they are on the street getting into trouble.

As adults, they have limited skills, so they are locked into the minimum wage range jobs forever. Since they are obligated to suport themselves and often a family, the opportunity to work their way through school or pursue other avenues of advancement are curtailed. They know they have been somehow cheated in life, but they generally don't understand who did it to them.

It sounds like an ingenious plan to create deprivation rather than cure it. Those greedy business owners should applaud the effects of minimium wage laws in creating multitudes of cheap laborers. But the wage slaves at the bottom of the economic heap should be angry at their false friends who gave them a minimum wage barrier to entry into the American dream.

[morrisray001]

This should have happened a long time ago. Everyone else, inlcuding all of the people who have posted comments on this article, have had one or more pay raises in the last 10 years. It is only right that those are are forced to work for minimum wage should have a living wage.
If you (we) don't watch it the people we have representing us in Washington will stick it to most of those we have working at minimum wage by inserting thier earmarks that will give the restrurant owners the ability of not following the federal or state mandated wage scale.

[random_radar]

morrisray001,

I am working for less money than I earned 10 years ago.

[processor2]

A $2/hour increase times 40 hrs/week times 52 weeks/year equals $4,160 PER employee PER year in extra labor costs.

If you have 11 employees (which I have), that's $45,760 per year increase in labor cost to my business.

THEREFORE, in order to pay for the minimum wage increase, I will have to lay off 3 employees in order to pay for said increase.

[3 employees times 7.15/hr (new rate) times 40 hours/week times 52 weeks/year equals 44,616]

I still come up short

......

[rharrin1]

The republicans wanted a tax break for the rich last time that is why it did not pass. Now they want conditions again I say no VOTE FOR ONE THING AT A TIME. It's the only way to stop the texas bullsh@t

[educates]

I pay $10. for lunch and I am not eating high on the hog. A junk food lunch is $7.50. Poor people put their money back in the economy because they must in order to exist.
If small business can't afford to pay a living wage then perhaps they should go to work for minimum wage and see how they like it.
ed u cates

[mt5937]

Pure window dressing! The more important needs of business, industry, and union labor will promptly fatten the wallets the significant citizens to keep those lowly commoners in their place.

[rharrin1]

processor2

I don't know what business your in. but isn't it possible to raise you price just enough to cover costs?

[processor2]

I don't know what business your in. but isn't it possible to raise you price just enough to cover costs? ....Posted by rharrin1 at 11:32 AM : Jan 10, 2007

ANSWER

and lose all my customers to the competition who has lower prices....yeah,,right

[processor2]

A $2/hour increase times 40 hrs/week times 52 weeks/year equals $4,160 PER employee PER year in extra labor costs.

If you have 11 employees (which I have), that's $45,760 per year increase in labor cost to my business.

THEREFORE, in order to pay for the minimum wage increase, I will have to lay off 3 employees in order to pay for said increase.

[3 employees times 7.15/hr (new rate) times 40 hours/week times 52 weeks/year equals 44,616]

I still come up short

......

Posted by rharrin1 at 11:32 AM : Jan 10, 2007

I don't know what business your in. but isn't it possible to raise you price just enough to cover costs?



ANSWER

and lose all my customers to the competition who has lower prices....yeah,,right

.........

[noomgod]

Ya know if these business owners would buy these million dollar homes and buy *** they don't need then they would have the extra money to pay the increase in minimum wage. Also, all these businesses that keep their workers when the min. wage goes up they're going to increase the price of their products then in-turn the cost of living will go up and make the increase absolete.

[bildooreilly]

If you're working for minimum wage, QUIT YOUR JOB.

[getcentered]

"If you look at the last federal minimum wage, as well as state minimum wage increases that have happened in the past 10 years, we simply have not seen the job losses that are often predicted,......."

"That's the longest stretch without an increase since the minimum wage was established in 1938. Inflation has eroded the minimum wage's buying power to the lowest level in about 50 years. "



TO processor2:
If you had a business and you were paying the minimum wage to your employees, then your business is not profitable and/or you%u2019re a greedy penny pincher.

By the way the hike is to implement over time so businesses don't get slammed with greater FTE's (full time equivalence) all at once.

[madisongirl-2009]

A $2/hour increase times 40 hrs/week times 52 weeks/year equals $4,160 PER employee PER year in extra labor costs.

If you have 11 employees (which I have), that's $45,760 per year increase in labor cost to my business.

THEREFORE, in order to pay for the minimum wage increase, I will have to lay off 3 employees in order to pay for said increase.

[3 employees times 7.15/hr (new rate) times 40 hours/week times 52 weeks/year equals 44,616]

I still come up short

Posted by processor2 at 11:15 AM : Jan 10, 2007

...........

I don't know what business your in. but isn't it possible to raise you price just enough to cover costs?

Posted by rharrin1 at 11:32 AM : Jan 10, 2007

ANSWER

and lose all my customers to the competition who has lower prices....yeah,,right

Posted by processor2 at 11:35 AM : Jan 10, 2007


ONCE AGAIN PROCESSOR2, YOU HAVE HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD

KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK

[getcentered]

I think the Democrats are going to be a breath of fresh air for this country.

[getcentered]

"If you look at the last federal minimum wage, as well as state minimum wage increases that have happened in the past 10 years, we simply have not seen the job losses that are often predicted,......."

"That's the longest stretch without an increase since the minimum wage was established in 1938. Inflation has eroded the minimum wage's buying power to the lowest level in about 50 years. "



TO processor2:
If you had a business and you were paying the minimum wage to your employees, then your business is not profitable and/or you%u2019re a greedy penny pincher.

By the way the hike is to implement over time so businesses don't get slammed with greater FTE's (full time equivalence) all at once.

[madisongirl-2009]

A $2/hour increase times 40 hrs/week times 52 weeks/year equals $4,160 PER employee PER year in extra labor costs.

If you have 11 employees (which I have), that's $45,760 per year increase in labor cost to my business.

THEREFORE, in order to pay for the minimum wage increase, I will have to lay off 3 employees in order to pay for said increase.

[3 employees times 7.15/hr (new rate) times 40 hours/week times 52 weeks/year equals 44,616]

I still come up short

Posted by processor2 at 11:15 AM : Jan 10, 2007

...........

I don't know what business your in. but isn't it possible to raise you price just enough to cover costs?

Posted by rharrin1 at 11:32 AM : Jan 10, 2007

ANSWER

and lose all my customers to the competition who has lower prices....yeah,,right

Posted by processor2 at 11:35 AM : Jan 10, 2007


ONCE AGAIN PROCESSOR2, YOU HAVE HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD

KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK

[observantx]

The ranting about the minimum wage hike putting every mom & pop operation out of business is a red herring. In almost every city in my state and the adjoining states, you can%u2019t find people willing to work for $5.15 an hour. They won%u2019t apply for the jobs. The average McD%u2019s in my town is paying $6.95 and more just to start.

The average restaurant owner in my city has learned that anybody willing to sign up for minimum wage just doesn%u2019t work out. They either can%u2019t handle the job, or just quit after a few days. They pay at least 25% more to get reliable people who show up and do a good job.

The crocodile tears about laying off people because of the wage hike is just so much BS.

[annabanana-1]

Looks like a bunchabot comments on this item...

[davidlar2]

Yet another economic misdiagnosis from the Democratic Party.

America has a high cost of living problem, not a low salary problem. Unskilled labor in America is paid much more than the international market rate. This just makes it worse and is inflationary. Further, it will lead to further outsourcing, since it is that much more expensive to make things in America instead of other countries.

The Democratic vision of America with a high cost of living, high salaries for unskilled labor, low salaries for skilled labor and those with education, trade barriers to keep out cheaper imports, little in the way of exports because of politics making it too expensive to produce anything in this country, ... is a recipie for long term economic disaster.

Further, with inflation a higher nominal wage is not a higher real wage.

[davidlar2]

By the way, isn't that the type of economics that is working wonders in Venezuela- where politicians, not markets set wages?

[bellal-2009]

"The few low-skilled adults who hold these jobs, who basically have a skills deficit ... are most likely to lose their jobs."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mike Flynn, Employment Policy Institute

THank you Mr. Flynn for speaking the truth. I have employed the disabled and sometimes the severely disabled and they love to work, contribute and be a productive member of society. This type of legislation is shortsighted.

[randalds]

Every time in my life when there was a proposal to raise the minimum wage there was whining from business owners predicting doom and gloom and every time there was a tiny ripple effect at most and most times none at all. Quite yer bitc*hin' and go along with the raise! It's well overdue and you dam*n well know it.

[three-o-six]

The socialists just do not understand. Raise minimum wage. Prices increase to absorb the labor increase. They increase by the labor plus profit margin. Within a year those at minimum wage lose purchasing power. This has been proven over and over again - the only way to raise the standard of living of a population is to increase production effeciency. Raising the minimu wage always hurts the poor in the long run (although it does buy votes).

[three-o-six]

Second problem with raising the minimum wage is that our labor base is too high already to compete in a global economy. As global competition increases these minimum wage increases will result in more out-sourcing and a loss of jobs - specially at the low - unskilled end of the spectrum

[bellal-2009]

Randal obviously you missed the entire point, as usual.

[pakaal]

Raising minimum wages have not, and do not, stifle businesses or lead to lower employment. One of many examples is Oregon, which increased its minimum wage to $7.50 in 2002. Result, higher emplyment, higher job growth, better economy.

Four years later, nonfarm payrolls have increased there at twice the national rate, industries that employ many minimum-wage workers have experienced considerable job growth, and unemployment has dropped to 5.4 percent from 7.6 percent in 2002.

As for small businesses suffering, the Fiscal Policy Institute found that, between 1998 and 2001, the number of small businesses (defined as those with fewer than 50 employees) grew twice as quickly in states with higher minimum wages.

As for benificiaries being "part-time employee teenagers", that's also false. Almost 15 million full-time workers will be positively affected by increased minimums.

Time to give the people who really need it - lower-income workers - some much-needed financial relief, instead of yet another tax break for the wealthy.