I am saddened by this day that we are involved in a lengthy debate about the increase in the minimum wage. This should not be happening. It really should not be happening. We are talking about a 90-cent increase over 2 years. It has been 5 or 6 years since we have had any increase at all. The notion somehow that a family--remember, more than 73 percent of the people who get the minimum wage are over the age of 20. If you are on the minimum wage and you are age 20, it is not inconceivable that you are raising a family. We are not talking about teenagers. Few are over the age of 25. Some are. Obviously, then the number comes down. You have a sizable number of people between the ages of 20 and 25. But to suggest somehow that you can live on $36 a day--that is what the minimum wage is--$36 a day, with more than 73 percent of the people earning the minimum wage over the age of 20, and that we can't find it here possible to come up with a 90-cent increase for those people.
On the recordJuly 9, 1996
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Addressing the debate on increasing the minimum wage during a Senate floor discussion.
Share
More from Chris Dodd
Nov 30, 2010
We need to start thinking 'intermestically' about domestic immigration and international economic development policies at the same time.
Nov 30, 2010
There has been a very constructive and positive role that Brazil has played regionally as well, and very exciting.
Oct 30, 2011
In fact, it was the uncertainty inherent in a nontransparent and reckless financial system that made Dodd-Frank necessary in the first place.
Nov 30, 2010
first of all, let me express my gratitude to all of the colleagues and other individuals who have come to the Chamber at this moment. Everyone who serves in Congress usually recalls two moments in their service: the maiden speech they give…





