The Vermont House on Friday voted to increase the state’s minimum wage twice in the next two years.
The compromise measure, reached in negotiations this week with the Senate, falls far short of Democratic and Progressive goals to raise the wage to $15 an hour. Instead, it would hike the current rate of $10.96 to $11.75 in 2021 and to $12.55 in 2022. In subsequent years, it would again be tied to inflation.
The 93 to 54 vote also falls short of the two-thirds majority necessary to override a potential veto from Republican Gov. Phil Scott. Among those voting no were eight Democrats and four independents.
Friday’s vote marked the second day in a row that House leaders failed to reach a veto-proof majority on a key Democratic priority. On Thursday, the House approved a paid family and medical leave bill by a vote of 89 to 58.
The wage bill, S.23, moves to the Senate next week for an up-or-down vote. It would then go to Scott for his signature or veto. The governor previously expressed hesitation over a $15 minimum wage, but he signaled Friday that he might be open to the compromise measure.
“The Governor remains concerned about the economic impacts, particularly along the New Hampshire border and more rural areas,” spokesperson Rebecca Kelley said in a written statement. “He does recognize that the Legislature has come a long way from their initial $15/hour proposal, and he’ll need to take a closer look at the details and latest analysis.”
During Friday’s debate, some liberals expressed regret that the bill did not go further.
“Increasing the minimum wage has always been a difficult task in this building,” said Rep. Tom Stevens (D-Waterbury), who led House negotiations with the Senate. “We fight for this wage to give these workers a little more money and a little more dignity. We know it is not enough, but anytime we have an opportunity to raise wages for Vermonters, we should embrace it.”
On Thursday, five Progressives opposed the paid leave bill, arguing that it did not go far enough. But on Friday, those same members voted for the minimum wage compromise.
“If there’s one thing I’ve learned being in the legislature, it’s that it does take a lot of little steps to go far,” said Rep. Brian Cina (P/D-Burlington). “And raising the minimum wage is one of those small steps.”
Some moderate Democrats were won over by the compromise. Rep. William Notte (D-Rutland City) opposed last year’s efforts to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. But on Friday, he voted yes.
“I believe that this is an increase that small businesses in Vermont can absorb and afford,” Notte said. “I believe that this is a bill that does right both by working Vermonters and by the small, local businesses that employ them. At the end of the day, there is a huge difference between $12.55 and $15.”
Rep. James Gregoire (R-Fairfield) disagreed. The convenience store owner employs seven people, he said, but can’t afford to give himself a paycheck — so he works two other jobs.
“Even though a lot of money can go through a business, it doesn’t mean a business owner is getting rich,” he said. “We’re not all Steve Jobs. We’re not all Jeff Bezos.”
Rep. Lucy Rogers (D-Waterville) said she worries about those who are unable to earn a livable wage in her rural community and resents employers that fail to do right by their workers. But the Democrat said she could not get behind the minimum wage measure.
“When I vote no on this bill, it’s because I also feel a great amount of fear for the businesses that have stood in my community for generations that have very, very, very small operating margins,” she said.
Corrected at 3:26 p.m.: An earlier version of this story included an inaccurate vote count.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Today’s House vote on S.23 was 93 -54, 2 absent
Interesting the author refers to a 14% increase over 2 years as modest.
Would the author consider it modest if school budgets increase 14% over 2 years?
Another ding on small business in VT. What do the Chamber of Commerce people say?
The House is full of rampant business interests. With the rising costs of housing in Vermont, anything short of $15 is a nonstarter. In Chittenden County, a person working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, would make $31,200, which is considered very low income, eligible for housing subsidies under HUD standards. So a $15 hourly wage costs taxpayers in the subsidies that must be paid, placing the burden of this low wage on the backs of taxpayers. Where are all the conservative voices decrying the “welfare” this wage engenders?
Simplistic solutions to complex problems, whether on the right with “build a wall” or on the left with a high stand alone Vermont minimum wage, can have unintended consequences. The Vermont legislative study on minimum wage and benefit cliff found that going to a stand alone Vermont $15 minimum wage would cause the loss of thousands of jobs each year as well as the loss of small businesses.
The long border with New Hampshire where the minimum wage is $7.25 per hour makes things particularly difficult on this side of our state.
Barbara – I would imagine a conservative might reference the 150k of taxpayer money spent to educate that individual through high school and suggest they get a room mate while availing themselves of discounted tuition at the community college to develop a skill.
That same conservative might also suggest that those workers take a look at Indeed which has many available unskilled positions that pay well over $15.00 per hour available right now. And yes, if you can show up on time they will even hire you with a criminal record or a facial tattoo.
The world can be very hard. Even harder when you’re looking for reasons for it to be so or expecting others to fix it for you.
The conservative might use that trite line… A hand up, not a hand out.
You know what would give workers “a little more money and a little more dignity”? An education and a better job. If people don’t plan their lives better or refuse to get an education to better themselves, why should those poor choices become the responsibility of everyone else? I’m a lifelong Democrat and believe that everyone deserves a helping hand when necessary but ultimately people are responsible for their own lives and a helping hand should be temporary, not a permanent burden to society.
“… ultimately people are responsible for their own lives and a helping hand should be temporary, not a permanent burden to society.”
Do you let the sales clerks at your local retail store or supermarket know that you believe they’re a “permanent burden to society?” when you shop? Why not? How about your child’s day care worker? Who should do these jobs or should society unburden itself of them?
What about folks who have mental or physical disabilities that preclude their doing more highly valued work? What is your suggestion for them?
For perspective, here are a few CDC & BLS statistics for your delectation: “Percent of adults with vision trouble: 12.9% … Percent of adults with hearing trouble: 16.5% … Percent of adults with any physical functioning difficulty: 16.3% … ” https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/disabilit… The percentage of workers paid minimum wage varies annually, in the last 10 years, from 2.3% to 6%. https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-w…
I’m picking on your statement because it’s incredibly harshly expressed, but my questions are addressed to all those who are so contemptuous of people who do poorly paid work?
I think we can all agree… poor, uneducated people have had it too good for too long!