Arizona Minimum Wage and Paid Time Off, Proposition 206 (2016)
Arizona Proposition 206 | |
---|---|
Election date November 8, 2016 | |
Topic Minimum wage | |
Status Approved | |
Type State statute | Origin Citizens |
2016 measures |
---|
May 17 |
Proposition 123 |
Proposition 124 |
November 8 |
Proposition 205 |
Proposition 206 |
Polls |
Voter guides |
Campaign finance |
Signature costs |
The Minimum Wage and Paid Time Off Initiative, also known as Proposition 206, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Arizona as an initiated state statute. It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported raising the minimum wage to $10 in 2017, and then incrementally to $12 by 2020, and creating a right to paid sick time off from employment. |
A "no" vote opposed this measure, keeping the minimum wage at $8.05, adjusted for cost of living, and retaining employers' ability to decide whether or not to offer paid sick time off. |
In November 2016, voters in Colorado and Maine also voted on measures to increase their state minimum wages to $12. In Washington, citizens voted on an initiative to increase the minimum wage to $13.50. All three measures were approved.
The initiative's paid sick time provisions went into effect on July 1, 2017.
Aftermath
Lawsuit overview | |
Issue: Constitutionality of the measure; Whether the measure creates new costs without providing new revenue sources (which is banned by the state's initiative law) and whether the initiative violated the state's single-subject rule | |
Court: Maricopa County Superior Court and Arizona Supreme Court | |
Ruling: Proposition 206 is constitutional. | |
Plaintiff(s): Jane Ann Riddle, William L. Riddle, III, Valle Luna, Charlottee Chester, Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce, Tucson Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Greater Flagstaff Chamber of Commerce, Arizona Licensed Beverage Association, Arizona Restaurant Association, Yuma County Chamber of Commerce, Marc Community Resources, Inc., Arizona Free Enterprise Club, and Abrio Family Services and Supports, Inc. | Defendant(s): State of Arizona, Industrial Commission of Arizona, Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, Thomas J. Betlach, Arizona Department of Administration, Craig C. Brown, and Arizonans for Fair Wages and Health Families |
Plaintiff argument: The initiative unconstitutionally created new costs to the general fund without providing a new revenue source, and the initiative violated the state's single-subject rule since it was about the minimum wage and paid sick leave. | Defendant argument: The measure is constitutional. |
Source: The Arizona Republic
On December 15, 2016, business groups filed litigation to overturn Proposition 206.[1] The Goldwater Institute, Senate President Steve Yarbrough (R-17), and House Speaker J.D. Mesnard (R-17) filed briefs in support of the challenge to Proposition 206.[2][3]
The measure was contested by the petitioners for two reasons. First, plaintiffs said that Proposition 206 was not a single-subject initiative; rather, the measure addressed the two subjects of minimum wage and paid sick leave. Second, plaintiffs stated that the initiative created new costs to the general fund, as the state needed to pay some state contractors more, without providing a new revenue source.[4] Section 23 of Article 9 of the Arizona Constitution requires that initiatives increasing state expenditures must identify a revenue source.
Judge Daniel Kiley of the Maricopa County Superior Court set a hearing for December 20, 2016.[5] On December 21, Judge Kiley rejected the plaintiffs challenge to Proposition 206, thus upholding the ballot initiative.[6] Plaintiffs announced that they would appeal the ruling.[4]
On December 28, 2016, the Arizona Supreme Court agreed to take up the case.[7] The court refused to place an injunction on the initiative, allowing the minimum wage increased to $10 on January 1, 2017.[8] Oral arguments were scheduled for March 9, 2017.[9] Chief Justice Scott Bales said that arguments would be limited to whether the initiative violated the state constitution through creating new costs to the general fund without providing a new revenue source.[10]
On March 14, 2017, the seven justices of the Arizona Supreme Court unanimously rejected the argument that Proposition 206 was unconstitutional. Gov. Doug Ducey (R) responded to the ruling, saying, "The Supreme Court has spoken. We're going to follow the law." Glenn Hamer, CEO of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, stated, "While we’re disappointed that the result did not go our way, we respect the court’s ruling." Tomas Robles, chairperson of the campaign that supported Proposition 206, said, "We are very proud and ecstatic that Prop 206 will remain intact, and will continue to benefit the families and workers of this great state."[11]
Election results
Proposition 206 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
Yes | 1,465,639 | 58.33% | ||
No | 1,046,945 | 41.67% |
- Election results from Arizona Secretary of State
Overview
Minimum wage in Arizona
Arizona's minimum wage was $8.05 per hour in 2016. The federal minimum wage was $7.25. Due to Proposition 202 of 2006, the state's minimum wage increased with the cost-of-living. Without Proposition 206, Arizona's minimum wage was expected to increase to $8.15 in 2017.[12] In November 2016, voters in Flagstaff, Arizona, voted on and approved a measure increasing their city's minimum wage to $15 an hour.[13][14]
Initiative design
Proposition 206 was designed to increase the minimum wage to $10 in 2017, $10.50 in 2018, $11.00 in 2019, and $12 in 2020. Starting in 2021, the measure increased the minimum wage with the cost of living. The measure retained Arizona's law regarding tipping, which permitted employers to pay employees who receive tips up to $3.00 less than the minimum wage.[15][16]
The initiative also guaranteed 40 hours of annual paid sick time to employees of businesses with 15 or more employees and 24 hours to those of businesses with less than 15 employees. The measure entitled employees to accrue one hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked. The measure permitted earned paid sick time to be utilized for an employee’s medical care, an employee’s need to care for a family member, a public health emergency, or addressing domestic violence.
State of ballot measure campaigns
Supporters raised $4.36 million in funds. Living United for Change in Arizona donated $1.9 million to the campaign. The Arizona Chamber of Commerce launched an opposition campaign, Protect Arizona Jobs, which received $46,677. Polls indicated that around 56 percent of Arizonans supported Proposition 206 prior to the election.
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title was as follows:[17]
“ | INCREASES THE MINIMUM WAGE FROM $8.05 PER HOUR IN 2016 TO $12.00 PER HOUR BY 2020 AND ESTABLISHES THE RIGHT TO EARN PAID SICK TIME AWAY FROM EMPLOYMENT.
A “yes” vote shall have the effect of increasing the minimum wage from $8.05 per hour in 2016 to $10.00 per hour in 2017, and then incrementally increasing the minimum wage to $12.00 per hour by the year 2020; entitles employees to earn 1 hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked with limits based upon the size of the employer; broadly defining the conditions under which paid sick time may be taken, including mental or physical illness, care of a family member, a public health emergency, or absence due to domestic violence, sexual violence, abuse or stalking; prohibiting various forms of retaliation against employees for exercising any rights under the law; and requiring employers to provide various notices to employees about the law. A “no” vote shall have the effect of retaining the existing minimum wage (along with the existing method for annually increasing the minimum wage for inflation) and retaining employers’ existing ability to determine their own earned paid sick leave policy.[18] |
” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary was as follows:[19]
“ | The Fair Wages and Healthy Families Initiative increases minimum wage to $10 in 2017 then gradually to $12 by 2020; provides 40 hours annual “earned paid sick time” for employees of large employers (24 hours for those of small employers); time accrues at one hour earned for every 30 hours worked; time may be used to address circumstances caused by illness of employee or employee’s family, public health emergencies, or domestic violence; prohibits retaliating against employees using the benefit; allows for more generous paid time-off policies; and exempts employees who expressly waive the benefit under collective bargaining agreements.[18] | ” |
Full text
The full text of the measure can be found here.
Fiscal analysis
- See also: Fiscal analysis statement
An extended summary of the fiscal analysis statement can be found here.
Support
Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families led the campaign in support of Proposition 206.[20]
Supporters
Officials
- U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-1)[21]
- U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-3)[22]
- U.S. Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-7)
- Rep. Charlene Fernandez (D-4)
- Rep. Reginald Bolding (D-27)
- Rep. Macario Saldate (D-3)
- Sen. Barbara McGuire (D-8)
- Sen. Katie Hobbs (D-24)
- Sen. Martin Quezada (D-29)
- Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton (D)
- Phoenix Vice Mayor Kate Gallego
- Flagstaff City Council Member Eva Putzova
- Maricopa County Supervisor Steve Gallardo
- Tempe City Council Member Lauren Kuby
- Mayor Jonathan Rothschild (D), Tucson[23]
- Tucson City Council Member Regina Romero
Former officials
- Rep. Phil Lopes (D-27)[24]
Organizations
- Arizona Democratic Party[25]
- Arizona Advocacy Network (AZAN)[22]
- Arizona Coalition to End Sexual and Domestic Violence
- Arizona Education Association
- Arizona Faith Network
- Catalina In-Home Service, Inc.
- Central Arizonans for a Sustainable Economy (CASE)
- Changing Hands Bookstore
- Chicanos Por La Causa
- Fair Trade Cafe
- La Machine
- Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA)
- Mi Familia Vota
- National Employment Law Project[26]
- Neighborhood Ministries
- Nuñez Law Firm
- One Arizona
- Planned Parenthood Arizona
- Protecting Arizona’s Family Coalition (PAFCO)[27]
Unions
Arguments
Supporters made the following arguments in support of Proposition 206:[28]
- The proposition would “ensure that more families can meet their basic needs and lead healthier lives.”
- The proposition would decrease poverty in Arizona.
- The proposition would give more opportunities to working-class families.
- The proposition would increase consumer purchasing-power and help small businesses.
U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-1), who campaigned for a U.S. Senate seat against incumbent John McCain (R), endorsed Proposition 206. She stated:[29]
“ | No one who works 40 hours a week should have to live in poverty and decide between buying groceries, medicine or paying the bills. Raising the minimum wage offers hardworking families the opportunity to put food on the table, care for their children, and creates a better future for our state.[18] | ” |
Tomas Robles, campaign manager for Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families, said:[30]
“ | We feel that this wage increase is that happy medium that protects small business and helps workers who can’t pay their rent at the end of the month even though they work full time.[18] | ” |
Bill Scheel, a consultant speaking on behalf of the campaign, said:[31]
“ | Arizona workers have been falling farther and father behind in terms of their economic stability, and we need higher wages so that people can afford a place to live, pay for groceries and stimulate the economy to create more jobs.[18] | ” |
Former Rep. Phil Lopes (D-27) of Tucson, Arizona, stated:[24]
“ | At the same time, Prop. 206 is opening up opportunities for our economy to flourish.
Consider the increase in purchasing power for our working families after a wage increase. Businesses, small and large, stand to gain from customers with higher wages as those customers spend more on goods and services.[18] |
” |
Arguments filed in support
The following arguments were filed with the Arizona Secretary of State's office in support:[28]
|
Opposition
Protect Arizona Jobs, also known as Vote No on Prop 206, led the campaign in opposition to Proposition 206.[32]
The Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry launched the campaign on September 19, 2016.[33]
Opponents
Officials
Organizations
- Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce[34]
- Americans for Prosperity, Arizona Chapter
- Arizona Farm Bureau[35]
- Western Growers[36]
- Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce[37]
Arguments
Opponents made the following arguments in opposition to Proposition 206:[35]
- The proposition would decrease employment and increase prices for consumers.
- The proposition would encourage restaurants to implement more automation, putting people out of work.
- The proposition places Arizona at a “competitive disadvantage against other states in attracting businesses.”
- The proposition takes a one-size-fits-all approach when urban and rural areas have different costs of living.
U.S. Sen. John McCain (R), who was up for re-election against U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-1), came out in opposition to Proposition 206, stating:[29]
“ | Twice I’ve talked to groups of franchisees here in Arizona, Taco Bell and McDonalds, those places that give you the first rung on the ladder. They said, ‘Fine. The next time you drive up to a window, you won’t be talking to a person. The next time you they hand you a hamburger and French fries, it will come out a slot.' … They have a certain profit margin. They cannot raise their cost of their product or people will stop purchasing it. So what are they going to do? They’re going to automate. So somebody is going to have to convince me that it’s good for employment in America, and I don’t think it is.[18] | ” |
Mike Huckins, Vice President of the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce, said:[34]
“ | [T]his measure has the potential to eliminate more jobs than it would create. In addition, it does nothing to address local governments adopting a higher minimum wage above what this measure calls for, furthering the dangerous potential for a patchwork of wage and benefit policies across the state. ... Passing this measure would have negative consequences, not only from the perspective of the workers the wage increase is intended to benefit, but also for our state’s economy.[18] | ” |
Matthew Glans, Senior Policy Analyst at The Heartland Institute, said:[38]
“ |
Evidence shows increasing minimum-wage laws is not an effective way to address poverty and often creates barriers to entry for workers with less skill and education. In a 2010 study, economists at Cornell University and American University found no reduction in poverty in the 28 states that raised their minimum wage between 2003 and 2007. Promises to raise the minimum wage are often used as a get-out-the-vote tool, but that decision is nothing more than a shortsighted move that could cause real harm for the U.S. economy. To maintain profitability, businesses forced to raise their wages beyond market rates must make adjustments elsewhere. These cuts typically lead to reduced hiring, fewer work hours for employees, diminished fringe benefits for employees, and higher prices for consumers.[18] |
” |
Tom Nassif, President and CEO of Western Growers, stated:[39]
“ | Proposition 206 will hurt Arizona’s farmers and the rural economies dependent on these family businesses. Labor is the single largest line item in a farmer’s budget; simple economics dictates that increasing such costs by nearly 50 percent will cause people to lose their jobs. The truth is, many family farmers, still recovering from the recession, will not be able to absorb the added financial and regulatory burdens of Proposition 206 and will be forced to eliminate countless jobs they currently provide to farmworkers. Furthermore, the cost of living disparity between rural and urban Arizona makes a one-size-fits-all minimum wage law fundamentally unfair to farming businesses in rural communities.[18] | ” |
Arguments filed in opposition
The following were some of the arguments filed with the Arizona Secretary of State's office in opposition:[35]
|
Campaign finance
Total campaign contributions: | |
Support: | $4,358,473.97 |
Opposition: | $46,676.80 |
Two campaign committees were registered in support of Proposition 206. One was registered in opposition to Proposition 206. The contribution and expenditure totals below were current as of January 16, 2017.[40]
Support
PAC | Amount raised | Amount spent |
---|---|---|
Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families | $4,319,318.97 | $4,148,706.92 |
CASE Action for Fair Wages and Working Conditions | $39,155.00 | $43,488.09 |
Total | $4,358,473.97 | $4,192,195.01 |
The following were the top five donors who contributed to the Arizonians for Fair Wages and Healthy Families committee as of January 16, 2017:[40]
Donor | Amount |
---|---|
Living United for Change in Arizona | $1,912,684.00 |
The Fairness Project | $759,425.78 |
CPD Action | $500,000.00 |
National Education Association | $350,000.00 |
Civic Participation Action Fund | $350,000.00 |
Opposition
PAC | Amount raised | Amount spent |
---|---|---|
No on Prop 206 | $46,676.80 | $28,212.48 |
Total | $46,676.80 | $28,212.48 |
The following were the top donors who contributed to the No on Prop 206 committee as of January 16, 2017:[40]
Donor | Amount |
---|---|
Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry | $30,036.78 |
Americans for Prosperity | $7,640.02 |
Walter Brent Kyte | $5,000.00 |
National Federation of Independent Business | $4,000.00 |
Media editorials
Support
- Arizona Daily Sun said: "So to those who contend the government shouldn’t be meddling in the private labor market, we can only say that debate is long over."[41]
- Tucson Weekly said: "We doubt that raising the minimum wage is going solve all our economic problems, but—as with the recreational marijuana initiative—it's a safe bet that state lawmakers are not going to make the effort to raise the minimum wage themselves. (Far too many of our Republican lawmakers don't believe in a minimum wage, period.) In fact, in this last session, lawmakers made it impossible for cities and towns to increase minimum wages in their own jurisdictions. That's rotten politics and it's time to send them a message: Stop preempting local authority or the voters will override you."[42]
Opposition
- The Arizona Republic said: "The notion that a large population is somehow locked into bottom wages is a misleading one. Indeed, one of the enduring built-in features of our free-market system is that wages are based on skills and workforce pool. They are not arbitrarily set. That all workers should earn a living wage is an admirable concept. But it is not one that can simply be willed into reality. It certainly should not be slapped on as a mandate. Vote no on Prop. 206."[43]
Polls
- See also: Polls, 2016 ballot measures
- Between August 17 and August 31, 2016, The Arizona Republic, in cooperation with Morrison and Cronkite News, found that 61 percent of those surveyed support Proposition 206. While the newspaper found support across all demographic groups, support was highest amongst Democrats, voters ages 18 to 35 and people with a high-school diploma or less.[44]
- OH Predictive Insights released a poll on October 10, 2016, showing 53 percent of respondents supporting and 40 percent opposing Proposition 206.[45]
- In mid-October 2016, HighGround Public Affairs surveyed 400 likely voters and found support for the initiative to be 54.3 percent amongst respondents.[46]
Arizona Proposition 206 | |||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Poll | Support | Oppose | Undecided | Margin of error | Sample size | ||||||||||||||
HighGround Public Affairs 10/14/2016 | 54.3% | 38.8% | 6.9% | +/-4.88 | 400 | ||||||||||||||
OH Predictive Insights 9/28/2016 - 9/30/2016 | 53.0% | 40.0% | 7.0% | +/-3.66 | 718 | ||||||||||||||
The Arizona Republic, Morrison, and Cronkite News 8/17/2016 - 8/31/2016 | 61.0% | 31.0% | 8.0% | +/-3.4 | 784 | ||||||||||||||
AVERAGES | 56.1% | 36.6% | 7.3% | +/-3.98 | 634 | ||||||||||||||
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org. |
Background
The minimum wage debate is as old as the United States Department of Labor, an institution established in 1913.[47] The minimum wage was once debated as an issue of constitutionality. The United States Supreme Court ruled the minimum wage unconstitutional in 1923's Adkins v. Children's Hospital, but later reversed course in their West Coast Hotel v. Parrish decision in 1937.[48]
Minimum wage in Arizona
Voting on Minimum Wage | |||
---|---|---|---|
Ballot Measures | |||
By state | |||
By year | |||
Not on ballot | |||
|
Prior to the passage of Proposition 202 in 2006, Arizona's minimum wage was equivalent to the federal government's minimum wage. Over 65 percent of voters approved Proposition 202, which increased the state's minimum wage to $6.75 per hour. Starting in 2007, the minimum wage was adjusted in relation to increases in the cost of living.[49]
In 2009, the federal government increased the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour. As of January 1, 2015, Arizona's minimum wage was $8.05 per hour.[50] The cost-of-living in Arizona did not increase between 2015 and 2016. Therefore, the 2015-level minimum wage was maintained into 2016.[51] Without Proposition 206, the minimum wage was expected to increase to $8.15 in 2017.[12]
Flagstaff Proposition 414
Voters in Flagstaff, Arizona, voted on an additional minimum wage initiative, titled Proposition 414, in 2016. Proposition 414 was designed to increase the minimum wage within the city's boundaries to $15 an hour in 2021 and, thereafter, index the minimum wage to increases in cost-of-living.[13] The measure was approved.[14]
Flagstaff Needs a Raise led the campaign in support of Proposition 414.[52] The group collected more than 3,300 valid signatures to get the initiative on the ballot.[53] Local Flagstaff initiatives required 2,537 signatures in 2016.[54]
Councilmember Eva Putzova, a supporter of the initiative, argued, “Flagstaff’s unemployment rate hovers under 5 percent, yet our poverty rate is about 25 percent overall and 28 percent among children. … Increasing the minimum wage will not only put more dollars into our families’ pockets, but also positively impact other outcomes that are linked to poverty, including community health, educational attainment, domestic violence, and crime.” Stuart W. McDaniel of the Greater Flagstaff Chamber of Commerce criticized the measure, stating, “When minimum wage levels are set without regard to productivity, those without corresponding skill sets would be priced out of jobs. There is nothing compassionate about reducing the chances of someone getting a job. Simply put, minimum wage laws have unintended negative consequences.”[13]
2016 minimum wages
Below is a chart detailing the minimum wage in all 50 states, plus the District of Columbia, in 2016. Washington, D.C., had the highest minimum wage at $10.10 per hour. Georgia and Wyoming both had state minimum wages at $5.15 per hour, which was below the federal minimum wage.[55]
Click "Show" in the State column to expand.
State | 2016 minimum wage | Rank |
---|---|---|
Alabama | $7.25[56] | 31 |
Alaska | $9.75 | 4 |
Arizona | $8.05 | 24 |
Arkansas | $8.00 | 27 |
California | $10.00 | 2 |
Colorado | $8.31 | 18 |
Connecticut | $9.60 | 5 |
Delaware | $8.25 | 19 |
Florida | $8.05 | 24 |
Georgia | $5.15[57] | 50 |
Hawaii | $8.50 | 15 |
Idaho | $7.25 | 31 |
Illinois | $8.25 | 19 |
Indiana | $7.25 | 31 |
Iowa | $7.25 | 31 |
Kansas | $7.25 | 31 |
Kentucky | $7.25 | 31 |
Louisiana[56] | $7.25 | 31 |
Maine | $7.50 | 29 |
Maryland | $8.25 | 21 |
Massachusetts | $10.00 | 2 |
Michigan | $8.50 | 15 |
Minnesota | $9.00 | 10 |
Mississippi[56] | $7.25 | 31 |
Missouri | $7.65 | 28 |
Montana | $8.05 | 24 |
Nebraska | $9.00 | 10 |
Nevada | $8.25 | 21 |
New Hampshire | $7.25 | 31 |
New Jersey | $8.38 | 17 |
New Mexico | $7.50 | 29 |
New York | $9.00 | 10 |
North Carolina | $7.25 | 31 |
North Dakota | $7.25 | 31 |
Ohio | $8.10 | 23 |
Oklahoma | $7.25 | 31 |
Oregon | $9.25 | 9 |
Pennsylvania | $7.25 | 31 |
Rhode Island | $9.60 | 5 |
South Carolina[56] | $7.25 | 31 |
South Dakota | $8.55 | 14 |
Tennessee[56] | $7.25 | 31 |
Texas | $7.25 | 31 |
Utah | $7.25 | 31 |
Vermont | $9.60 | 5 |
Virginia | $7.25 | 31 |
Washington | $9.47 | 8 |
Washington, D.C. | $10.50 | 1 |
West Virginia | $8.75 | 13 |
Wisconsin | $7.25 | 31 |
Wyoming | $5.15[57] | 50 |
This map was current as of December 31, 2016.
Impact on presidential election
- See also: Presidential election in Arizona, 2016
In 2004, President George W. Bush was re-elected during an election that featured a wave of initiatives and referrals banning same-sex marriage. The New Republic, citing academic research, suggested that one such measure, Ohio Amendment 1, played a role in invigorating social conservatives and, in turn, aiding the incumbent Republican in securing a second term.[58] With polls showing a tight race in Arizona, some pundits and activists thought ballot initiatives could help turn the state blue in 2016.[59] Arizona Proposition 206 and Proposition 205, which would legalize marijuana, could have helped Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton gain traction in the historically Republican state.
Politico, NBC News, and Mother Jones all suggested that minimum wage measures, such as Proposition 206, could have increased voter turnout among young people and racial minorities, boosting the prospects of Clinton.[60] Patty Kupfer, the campaign manager of Colorado Families for a Fair Wage, thinks this was a possibility. She said, “This is going to be a driver for Democratic base voters, especially for low-income voters and communities of color.”[61] Geoffrey Skelley, a spokesman for the University of Virginia Center for Politics, stated that he expected progressive initiatives to increase Democratic turnout, but only marginally. He argued, "This stuff is very much on the margins, and it might help a little bit, but the presidential race is the main driver of turnout. It's tough to say that these things are going to make much of a difference in the end. But I guess it can't hurt to try."[62]
Fiscal analysis statement
- See also: Fiscal impact statement
The Joint Legislative Budget Committee of the Arizona Legislature was required to file a fiscal analysis statement statement for Proposition 206. In 2006, Arizonans approved Proposition 202. This measure increased the minimum wage from $5.15 per hour to $6.75 per hour and thereafter adjusted the minimum wage for changes in the cost of living. The Joint Legislative Budget Committee estimates that the minimum wage would have been $8.20 per hour in 2020, assuming an inflation rate of 2.68 percent. This would have been $3.20 less than what the minimum wage will be under Proposition 206. Table 1 details the discrepancies between Proposition 206 and the prior law.[63]
According to the Arizona Department of Administration, 706,845 workers earned a wage of $12.00 or less during 2015.
The committee warned that increasing the minimum wage could increase labor costs for employers, who would pass on costs as price increases to consumers or decrease employment. However, the committee also noted that research on how minimum wage increases impact employment often contradict. Therefore, "the impact that Proposition 206’s minimum wage increases would have on employment in Arizona is highly uncertain."
An increased minimum wage could decrease government expenditures on welfare. Requiring contractors to increase their employees wages, however, could increase government expenditures in some instances.
The committee noted that there is much less academic research and data on the effects of requiring paid sick leave.
Reports and analyses
Grand Canyon Institute
The Grand Canyon Institute (GCI), a self-described nonpartisan and centrist research center, determined Proposition 206 would increase wages for an estimated 790,000 workers or about 30 percent of Arizona's workforce. Dave Wells of the GCI said, "A higher minimum wage isn’t just for teenagers nor is it just for very low income households. Two-thirds of beneficiaries would be older than 24 years old and most would be women. Forty percent of working single mothers would likely benefit."[64]
The report also stated that consumers could expect price increases of 0.5 percent to 1.6 percent for most items and up to six percent for restaurant items. The GCI presented different job-loss scenarios, with the middle-ground scenario showing 13,000 jobs lost under a $12 minimum wage.
Path to the ballot
Initiative proponents needed to collect 150,642 signatures by July 7, 2016, to land the measure on the ballot.
Thomas Robles, deputy chairman for the Fair Wages and Healthy Families campaign, said that, as of May 24, 2016, they had collected nearly 90,000 signatures.[65] Arizona Healthy Working Families reported on July 7, 2016, that they submitted 275,000 signatures to the Arizona secretary of state's office.[66]
The Arizona Secretary of State announced on August 19, 2016, that enough of the submitted signatures were valid to qualify Proposition 206 for the ballot.[67]
Cost of signature collection:
Sponsors of the measure hired Sign Here Petitions to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $900,981.80 was spent to collect the 150,642 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $5.98.
Lawsuits
Lawsuits overview | |
First lawsuit | |
Issue: Signature validity; petition circulators were not legally qualified | |
Court: Maricopa County Superior Court | |
Ruling: The litigation was filed too late. | |
Plaintiff(s): Arizona Restaurant Association | Defendant(s): Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families |
Plaintiff argument: Some petition circulators were not legally qualified. | Defendant argument: The litigation was filed too late. |
Second lawsuit | |
Issue: Violation of contract; signature gathering company was allegedly not paid in full for services. | |
Court: Maricopa County Superior Court | |
Ruling: | |
Plaintiff(s): Sign Here Petitions | Defendant(s): Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families |
Plaintiff arguments: Sign Here Petitions is owed $65,000, as per the contract with supporting campaign. | Defendant arguments: Contract required payment for valid signatures. Around 25 percent of signatures were discarded, but the campaign still paid for 90 percent of them. |
Sources: Arizona Daily Star and The Arizona Republic
Arizona Restaurant Association
On July 15, 2016, the Arizona Restaurant Association filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court, questioning whether the individuals circulating signature petitions were legally qualified. The lawsuit also claimed that there were flaws in the affidavits that circulators were required to sign.[68]
The suit sought a temporary restraining order to prevent signature validation by the secretary of state's office. On July 19, 2016, the Maricopa County Superior Court denied the request for a restraining order.[69]
On August 11, 2016, a Maricopa County judge ruled that dozens of signature collectors for Proposition 206 were not qualified.[70] Judge Joshua Rogers approved the measure on August 19, 2016, on a technicality that the lawsuit was filed too late. Later on the same day, the Arizona Secretary of State announced that the measure had qualified for the ballot.[71]
The Arizona Restaurant Association appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court in an attempt to overrule Rogers' findings and remove Proposition 206 from the ballot.[72] The supreme court rejected the challenge.[73]
Sign Here Petitions
Sign Here Petitions, the firm Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families (AFWHF) hired to collect signatures, filed litigation in Maricopa County Superior Court against the supporting campaign on September 23, 2016. Paul Welch, an attorney representing Sign Here Petitions, claimed AFWHF owed the firm at least $65,000.[74][75]
Bill Scheel, campaign manager of AFWHF, argued that their contract with Sign Here Petitions was for valid signatures. The firm, according to Scheel, did not "properly screen and register the circulators, so tens of thousands of signatures were disqualified and very nearly prevented Arizona voters from being able to decide on this important measure." About 25 percent of signatures were rejected by the Arizona Secretary of State. Scheel said his campaign paid Sign Here Petitions $900,000 or about 93 percent of the contract. The contract was $965,000.
Bonita Burks, owner of Sign Here Petitions, responded, “I'm standing firm: You owe the money, you need to pay it.”[76]
Related measures
Minimum wage measures on the ballot in 2016 | |
---|---|
State | Measures |
South Dakota | South Dakota Decreased Youth Minimum Wage Veto Referendum, Referred Law 20 |
Washington | Washington Minimum Wage Increase, Initiative 1433 |
Colorado | Colorado $12 Minimum Wage, Amendment 70 |
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Arizona Minimum Wage Initiative. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
External links
Support
- Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families
- Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families Facebook
- Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families Twitter
Opposition
Footnotes
- ↑ Connecticut Post, "Chamber of Commerce sues to block minimum wage increase," December 15, 2016
- ↑ Sonoran News, "Goldwater Institute asks court to throw out Arizona Minimum Wage Law that doesn’t apply to unionized companies," January 13, 2017
- ↑ The Arizona Republic, "Arizona Legislature, governor's budget office enter minimum-wage fray," December 28, 2016
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 The Arizona Republic, "Arizona businesses to appeal minimum-wage ruling," December 22, 2016
- ↑ The Daily Courier, "Minimum wage hike not blocked — yet," December 17, 2016
- ↑ KTAR, "Judge rejects challenge to initiative raising Arizona minimum wage," December 21, 2016
- ↑ Albuquerque Journal, "Arizona high court to decide on minimum wage increase," December 28, 2016
- ↑ Your West Valley, "Arizona Supreme Court rejects bid to deny minimum wage from increasing," December 29, 2016
- ↑ KTAR, "Arizona Supreme Court to consider voter-approved measure to up minimum wage," February 14, 2017
- ↑ The Arizona Republic , "Arizona Supreme Court will hear minimum-wage challenge," February 14, 2017
- ↑ The Arizona Republic, "Arizona Supreme Court rejects minimum-wage challenge," March 14, 2017
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 Arizona Daily Star, "Arizona's minimum-wage workers to get small raise in January," September 17, 2016
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 City of Flagstaff, "City of Flagstaff, Arizona 2016 Voter Information Pamphlet," accessed October 4, 2016
- ↑ 14.0 14.1 Arizona Daily Sun, "Flagstaff minimum wage hike passes, as do 411, 412 and 413," November 9, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Secretary of State, "2016 Initiatives, referendums & recalls," accessed March 31, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Legislature, "Adopted Analysis for Proposition 206," accessed September 6, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Secretary of State, "Ballot Measure List 2016," accessed September 6, 2016
- ↑ 18.00 18.01 18.02 18.03 18.04 18.05 18.06 18.07 18.08 18.09 18.10 18.11 18.12 18.13 18.14 18.15 18.16 18.17 18.18 18.19 18.20 18.21 18.22 18.23 18.24 18.25 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Arizona Secretary of State, "Initiative Petition," accessed September 6, 2016
- ↑ Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families, "Homepage," accessed September 6, 2016
- ↑ KNAU, "Ann Kirkpatrick Backs Arizona Minimum Wage Increase," September 23, 2016
- ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families, "About Us," accessed September 6, 2016
- ↑ Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families Facebook, "Thank you Mayor Jonathan Rothschild for endorsing Prop 206 and supporting Arizona's working families!" October 4, 2016
- ↑ 24.0 24.1 Arizona Daily Star, "Phil Lopes: Help working families, support Prop. 206," October 3, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Democratic Party, "The Arizona Democratic Party Endorses Propositions 205 & 206," accessed September 22, 2016
- ↑ Prescott News, "Arizona ballot measure to raise minimum wage to $12 by 2020," April 6, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Capitol Times, "PAFCO urges ‘yes’ vote for Healthy Working Families Initiative," October 20, 2016
- ↑ 28.0 28.1 Arizona Secretary of State, "Arguments Filed in Support of the Fair Wages and Healthy Families Act," accessed July 22, 2016
- ↑ 29.0 29.1 29.2 Tucson Weekly, "McCain and Kirkpatrick Split on AZ Min Wage Prop," September 23, 2016
- ↑ Mohave Valley Daily News, "Petitions circulated for vote on $12 minimum wage," April 3, 2016
- ↑ The Arizona Republic, "Should Arizona workers get a $4 an hour raise?" March 31, 2016
- ↑ Protect Arizona Jobs, "Homepage," accessed October 7, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Daily Star, "Chamber launches campaign against minimum-wage proposition," September 19, 2016
- ↑ 34.0 34.1 Paradise Valley Independent, "Phoenix Chamber denounces minimum wage increase," June 7, 2016
- ↑ 35.0 35.1 35.2 Arizona Secretary of State, "Arguments Filed Against the Fair Wages and Healthy Families Act," accessed July 22, 2016
- ↑ Casa Grande Dispatch, "West growers group opposes minimum wage proposition," October 5, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Business Daily, "Fountain Hills chamber comes out against minimum wage hike proposal," October 19, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Republic, "My Turn: Minimum wage hikes hurt the poor. There's a better way," July 31, 2016
- ↑ Western Growers Association, "Western Growers Opposes Proposition 206," October 4, 2016
- ↑ 40.0 40.1 40.2 Arizona Secretary of State Campaign Finance Database,"Arizonans for Fair Wages and Healthy Families Supporting I-24-2016," accessed January 16, 2017
- ↑ Arizona Daily Sun, "Our View: Hiking minimum wage to $12 by 2020 worth a try," November 5, 2016
- ↑ Tucson Weekly, "Hell Yes! The 2016 Tucson Weekly Endorsements," October 20, 2016
- ↑ The Arizona Republic, "Our View: Prop. 206 sounds good but has heavy costs," October 25, 2016
- ↑ The Arizona Republic, "Poll: Most Arizona voters buy a $12 minimum wage," September 7, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Capitol Times, "Poll indicates fate of marijuana measure uncertain as more money pumped in to defeat it," October 10, 2016
- ↑ HighGround Public Affairs, "Recreational Marijuana on the Brink - Minimum Wage Passing in Latest Statewide Poll," October 18, 2016
- ↑ The Atlantic, "Helpful, Harmful, or Hype? 5 Economists Weigh In on Obama's Minimum-Wage Proposal," February 13, 2013
- ↑ PBS, "Adkins v. Children's Hospital (1923)," accessed August 23, 2014
- ↑ Arizona Legislature, "Fiscal Analysis Statement for Proposition 202," accessed September 6, 2016
- ↑ Labor Law Center, "State Minimum Wage," accessed September 6, 2016
- ↑ The Business Journals, "Inflation adds twist to Jan. 1 minimum wage changes," December 31, 2015
- ↑ Flagstaff Needs a Raise, "Homepage," accessed October 4, 2016
- ↑ KNAU, "Flagstaff Minimum Wage Initiative to Appear on November Ballot," July 22, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Daily Sun, "Flagstaff group has 500 signatures toward living wage ballot measure," April 4, 2016
- ↑ National Conference of State Legislators, "2016 Minimum Wage by State," July 19, 2016
- ↑ 56.0 56.1 56.2 56.3 56.4 Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee do not have a state minimum wage requirement, so the federal wage of $7.25 is applied.
- ↑ 57.0 57.1 Georgia and Wyoming have state minimum wages that are less than the federal minimum wage. When state minimum wage is less than the current federal wage of $7.25, the federal rate supersedes the state wage.
- ↑ The New Republic, "Will Liberal Ballot Issues Give Hillary Clinton an Edge?" September 7, 2016
- ↑ The Arizona Republic, "Poll: Arizona a toss-up between Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump," September 7, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Ballot initiatives could tip the balance in swing states," August 13, 2016
- ↑ NBC News, “Minimum Wage Could Be Democrats' Secret Weapon,” September 8, 2016
- ↑ Mother Jones, "Democrats Hope Marijuana Will Help Elect Hillary Clinton," August 29, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Legislature, "Fiscal Impact Statement for Proposition 206," accessed September 6, 2016
- ↑ Phoenix Business Journal, "Study: $12 minimum wage would give raises to 790K workers, mostly women," October 10, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Republic, "$12-an-hour minimum wage in Arizona? Supporters say they're halfway there," May 24, 2016
- ↑ KTAR, "Option to increase Arizona’s minimum wage likely to reach ballot in November," July 7, 2016
- ↑ 12 News, "Arizona minimum wage initiative qualifies for ballot," August 19, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Daily Sun, "Lawsuits go after wage ballot measures," July 16, 2016
- ↑ KVOA, "Judge won't slow signature validation for state minimum wage," accessed July 20, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Capitol Times, "Minimum wage initiative at risk as judge rules many petitioners not qualified," August 11, 2016
- ↑ Phoenix Business Journal, "Campaign to raise Arizona minimum wage moves forward after judge ruling," August 21, 2016
- ↑ Arizona Daily Star, "Foes want Arizona supreme court to block minimum wage initiative," August 25, 2016
- ↑ The Eagle, "Arizona Supreme Court says minimum wage hike measure on the November ballot, rejects challenge from restaurant association," August 30, 2016
- ↑ KJVV, "Signature Collections Company Sues Backers Of Arizona Proposition 206," September 23, 2016
- ↑ The Arizona Republic, "Irony alert: Minimum-wage measure spurs lawsuit over pay," September 23, 2016
- ↑ Phoenix New Times, "Lawsuit: Arizona Minimum-Wage Initiative Stiffed Petition Firm for $65,000," October 5, 2016
|
State of Arizona Phoenix (capital) | |
---|---|
Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2024 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |