Did Republicans screw up the language on their bait-and-switch bill?
LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- Exactly how much more money workers will get under a minimum wage increase could be a question headed for the courts.
One set of increases that begins taking effect in October already has passed the Legislature and is headed to Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who's expected to sign it.
A competing proposal that would tie future minimum wage increases to the inflation rate, raise wages for employees who make tips and first hike the minimum wage in January could be on the November ballot.
Republicans and Democrats disagree over which measure would trump the other.
The bill on Granholm's desk raises the $5.15 hourly minimum wage to $6.95 in October, $7.15 in July 2007 and $7.40 in July 2008. It also contains language saying that the proposed constitutional amendment, if passed by voters, overrides any wage hikes written in the legislation.
Here is the specific language on the bill-
Notwithstanding subsection (1), if a ballot proposal that establishes a minimum wage is approved by the majority of electors voting on the question at the general election on November 7, 2006, the minimum wage shall be as established in the ballot proposal.
Here is the petition language in the ballot proposal-
THE STATE OR ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS MAY ESTABLISH A MINIMUM HOURLY WAGE RATE OR RATES THAT EXCEEDS, BUT IS NOT LESS THAN, THE MINIMUM HOURLY WAGE RATES PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION (INCLUDING ANNUAL ADJUSTMENTS).
Because the bill language says "shall be established in the ballot proposal", doesn't it automatically defer to the language that says that the state may raise the wage?
The proposal is "establishing" that a higher rate may be set by the state government. The bill is "establishing" that the proposal would set the rate. Because the proposal does take into account a state government raise- it seems like that would trump the bill. The bill language defers to the proposal, yes?
Not in Sikkema's world.
"He who plays the last trump card wins," said Ari Adler, spokesman for Republican Senate Majority Leader Ken Sikkema of Wyoming. "If you vote for the ballot initiative in November, you are voting to lower the minimum wage in Michigan."
Democrats and unions, however, argue their ballot measure sets a floor, not a ceiling. They note that it includes wording that says the state can establish wages exceeding rates proposed in the petition.
It also says the measure cannot "diminish" any statutory rights of employees, which state Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer said includes the $1.80 an hour increase workers are set to get in October.
"People get the higher wage," he said. "This (ballot measure) is a floor. The Legislature can always go above it."
When the minimum wage hits $7.40 in 2008, annual inflationary increases in the constitutional amendment can kick in, Brewer said.
But Adler responded that if the ballot proposal is approved, it is as if the wage hikes in the legislation never existed, because the bill specifically mentions the constitutional amendment.
And that amendment specifically mentions state raises. I think we win this one due to the language, but I'm not a lawyer- so you tell me.