California Bucks Alaska and Missouri by Rejecting Minimum Wage Ballot Initiative
The Democratic state displayed more economic literacy than its Republican counterparts.

Californians have voted against increasing the state's minimum wage, despite raising that of fast food workers to $20 per hour with Assembly Bill 1228 in 2023. Of 31 minimum wage ballot initiatives since 1996, California's Proposition 32 is only the third to fail.
Proposition 32 would have raised the state's current $16 per hour minimum wage to $18 per hour for businesses employing more than 25 employees in 2025 and for those employing 25 or fewer in 2026.
One of the unintended consequences of such a staggered minimum wage increase is fewer job openings as firms would wait to employ their 26th employee. Under such a plan, the marginal cost of the 26th worker is $141,440 per year: the sum of one full-time worker paid $18 per hour plus 25 full-time workers paid $2 more per hour. Unless the marginal product of that twenty-sixth worker defies the law of diminishing marginal returns, the 25-person business delays expansion, producing less than it otherwise would. Californians' rejection of Proposition 32 averts this distortion.
Alaska has adopted Measure 1, which raises the state's current $11.73 per hour minimum wage to $13 per hour in 2025, $14 per hour in 2026, and $15 per hour in 2027. The measure also requires businesses with fewer than 15 employees to provide 40 hours of paid sick leave. Firms with more than 15 employees must provide 56 hours of paid sick leave. This fringe benefit increases the effective minimum wage by an additional 50 cents per hour, according to Geoffrey Lawrence, research director at Reason Foundation, the nonprofit that publishes this magazine.
With Proposition A, Missouri will raise its minimum wage from $12.30 per hour to $13.75 per hour in 2025, reaching $15 per hour in 2026. The proposition also requires businesses with 15 or fewer employees to provide their workers with 40 hours of paid sick leave, while those with more than 15 employees will be mandated to offer 56 hours of paid sick leave. Like Alaska, this in-kind benefit translates to an additional 50 cents per hour, according to Lawrence.
A minimum wage is only effective if the floor it sets on the price of labor is above that paid to employees. In Alaska in 2023, mean wages for food preparation and retail workers were $17.48 and $17.47, respectively. This is more than $2 per hour greater than the minimum wage set by Measure 1. In Missouri, it's the same story: The average hourly wage for food preparation and retail workers was $15.92 and $17.17 in 2023, respectively, both higher than the minimum wage set for 2026.
Few full-time workers are paid minimum wage and will not have their income directly impacted by Alaska's and Missouri's ballot initiatives. However, 3 percent of employed teenagers are paid minimum wage, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Increasing the minimum wage disproportionately affects such entry-level workers, many of whom will have their hours reduced or lose their jobs entirely.
A knock-on effect impacts workers whose salaries are pegged to the minimum wage: Those who retain their jobs will enjoy higher incomes, but increasing the cost of labor will decrease employment opportunities and increase the price borne by the consumer.
California's refusal to increase the minimum wage, alongside its rejection of Proposition 33, which would have repealed bans on local rent control policies, is a victory for sound economic policy in the Golden State. Alaska and Missouri should have followed suit.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Missouri voted to raise its minimum wage to something like $13.50. It's stupid and counterproductive, and I voted against it, but that's what that bill was. It also had some mandatory vacation and sick leave provisions. Weird how similar it was to the Alaska bill. Almost like out-of-state interests are writing these proposals.
California voted against raising its minimum wage to something just shy of $40k/year. Their current minimum wage is already $4 more than Missouri's, and more if you work in a disfavored industry like 'fast food'.
The article is a sterling example of the “BOWF SIDEZ!” politics and the Trophy Wife math that supports it.
Two states vote to gradually raise their minimum wage from far below California to closer to, but still below, what California’s current minimum wage is and California is portrayed as exercising ‘fiscal restraint’ or being ‘financially literate’ for not going further fiscally batshit insane than it already is.
Refusing to max out the credit cards with money I don't have makes me more fiscally literate than someone who maxes out their credit cards and pays them off every month!
Jack's still got his panties in a knot over the election. Is this what Reason is going to be for the next four years? I'm still surprised that there hasn't been an article about the Democrats ignoring the State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to count invalid ballots. There's only been a few mentions in the Comments section. I guarantee that if it was Republicans doing it Reason would be plastered with articles.
Yeah, I keep looking for the article about the judge in that case putting the board members in jail for contempt, but so far nothing.
[Refusing to max out the credit cards with money I don’t have makes me more fiscally literate than someone who maxes out their credit cards and pays them off every month!]
If someone is paying off their cards every month, what does it matter how close to their credit limit the balances are getting in between? A person carrying a $200 balance on revolving credit is paying more in interest than someone who's able to clear $200k in monthly charges with no balance carried.
Or maybe the person who's maxing out/paying off their cards each month has requested limits low enough that they're able to easily cover the total as an additional layer of protection from fraudulent charges (if they need more, very few banks would deny them an on-the-spot limit increase of at least 100% for the asking when their record shows significant payments without any delinquencies.
Right. That's the point (maybe the sentence required a /sarc tag). Jack isn't talking about fiscal responsibility, he's explicitly invoking a non-sequitur as a symbolic/deceptive proxy for it.
More Soros and/or Black Rock funding. None of these initiatives are grass roots.
despite what the article sub title says we don't have to worry since the democrat controlled state of California's democrat legislatures will probably raise the minimum wage despite what their woters told them because as we know all voters who vote differently than their betters are just to stupid to know what they are doing
And then factor in 'no tax on overtime' which would make 25 employees gladly work the hours of 30 employees, and you have a significant economic impact.
Sure, what we really need is even more deficit spending. Where exactly do you think the money for that tax break will come from?
Wait, are you one of those who are only deficit hawks in D administrations?
We need to balance the budget. If they want to eliminate tips and overtime from being taxed, they’ll need to cut entitlements to cover that much revenue loss. Do you really think they’ll will do that? They talk a big game, but when it comes time to cut spending they constantly fail to deliver.
The money for the tax breaks comes from not taking it from us.
It should be coupled with a reduction in spending.
What are you talking about? Not taking it from “us” is why the deficit would explode. Without cutting entitlements the deficit would skyrocket because there isn’t enough discretionary spending to cover just the tips and overtime cuts, never mind the other promises he has made.
“Cut spending” is a nonsense phrase. Which spending? Because without that specificity, it’s just empty rhetoric. And to cover the cost of the cuts to tips and overtime, large cuts to Social Security and Medicare would be necessary.
So… let’s run this through the Reason mathinator real quick…
California has already turned the Amps up to 14 thus deafening anyone who dares enter the arena.
Alaska and Missouri just successfully got their voters to turn their amps up to 6 in an attempt to keep up with inflation which has been turned up to 10.
California was attempting to turn their amps up to 17, but voters finally rejected that proposal.
Conclusion: Alaska and Missouri are economically illiterate while California shows a remarkably astute, balanced and calm approach to economic reality.
that's a good tldr
While I may agree with the no vote on the min wage items, I do find California and its wages do influence these votes, I'd like to see more of a deep dive of effects of the California high min wages it flow to the other businesses within that state and then how those higher paid jobs in Cali are affecting other states as they let them become wholly are partially remote thus distorting local and regional economies.
Hamburgers cost 15 bucks already. At some point, even progressives want to be able to afford lunch.
The progressive elites will be eating your children.
That takes a different turn when Shrike and a Jeffy enter the equation.
Where are you getting your hamburgers from that they’re $15?
Any fast food joint in California?
https://order.online/store/original-tommy's-los-angeles-210679/?hideModal=true&pickup=true
$18 for a combo.
https://order.carlsjr.com/location/-ca-los-angeles-1005-s-fairfax-ave/menu/charbroiled-burger-combos/big-angus-famous-star-combo
$15.49 for a combo.
Tommy's probably doesn't have enough locations to be subject to the state's "fast food union" conditions directly.
Of course, every restaurant in the state has to compete with the larger chains which are subject to the higher minumum wage for labor, so even with the hypothetical exemption the state is still setting an effective floor for the labor market which is likely only to be broken in the case of family run operations (where there's an informal version of "equity" implied in the overall compensation for family members to work there)
This is fantastic.
Jack here is literally trying to paint already-extreme California as the more reasonable State here, against highly-moderate Alaska and Missouri. It's like that scene from Dumb and Dumber.
"You drove almost a sixth of the way across the country in the wrong direction!" Then later, after trading the van for a scooter, "Just when I think you couldn’t possibly be any dumber, you go and do something like this… and totally redeem yourself!"
California: thousands of bad choices, but one smart one!
Missouri/Alaska: thousands of smart choices, but one bad one!
OBVIOUSLY CALIFORNIA IS THE SMARTESTEST AND BESTING!
“ against highly-moderate Alaska and Missouri”
Alaska and Missouri are moderate states? In what world? Alaska may be a bit more center-right (though still completely red), but Missouri is all-in on being deep red.
Where's Elon's chart...
Ahh, yes, here it is: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1519735033950470144
Don’t worry, they’ll Democrat harder next time and approve it when it’s $25/hour.
minimum wage proponents are the flat-earthers of economics.
The same people who support rent controls.
^ and THIS!
^ THIS!
"The Democratic state displayed more economic literacy than its Republican counterparts."
I have never, in my life, seen any evidence that ballot initiatives like this are determined based on "economic literacy". Whether we're talking minimum wage, criminal penalties for petty crimes, rent control, or whatever else, it's not the economics that wins, it's the vibes and feels, and that's as true in California as is it is in Alaska and Missouri.
Simply put, most voters don't take the time to study the ballot initiatives enough to make an economically-informed choice. Most will read the blurb on the ballot. Some will go the extra step and read the summary in the voter guide. Few people will go beyond that and see if the voter guide is actually a fair summary.
Which is to say... support or deride the outcomes as you will, but this is a win/loss for marketing, not literacy.
And many such initiative are written on the ballot to deliberately obfuscate what the language means, so most voters who have not deeply studied the issue have no idea what the full effects will be.
Maybe the voters came to the realization that raising the minimum wage to $20/hour actually cost them jobs.
The people of California also voted to reinsate criminal penalties for shoplifting and drug dealing.
They threw out London Breed(mayor of San Francisco) and Oakland mayor, Sheng Thao( who’s home has been raided by the FBI). They also kicked Geroge Gascon’s butt out of the prosecutor’s office as well as another useless Soros owned D.A.
Maybe next time a recall vote against Newsom will succeed.
How do you know? CA still hasn't finished counting the ballots.
Should be lots of lawsuits coming.
> The Democratic state displayed more economic literacy than its Republican counterparts.
Duverger's Law. Just because California has a Democrat supermajority does not mean Duverger's Law goes out the window. The polity still wants to split into two opposing nodes. So the crazy wacko alt-left stuff is getting countered by economic and mathematically literate moderates. Which is why so many of the recent crazy state initiatives aren't passing in a state where crazy state initiatives routinely pass.
I think the main split among the CA "majority" is between the State Dem machine (left-authoritarian) and the DSA-leaning left who would set about dispossessing the tech billionaires and Hollywood $ten/hundred Millionaires who make up the donor class of the machine politicians' alliance with the public employee unions.
That's why the DSA-backed props to enable nearly universal rent control have failed in three of the last 4 election cycles, and by increasing margins despite the apparent flight of many of the state's remaining non-leftists (which is being cited as the reason for the trumpward swing in NV and AZ).
For a hot minute it was starting to look as if the new split in CA might end up becoming Hollywood vs Silicon Valley (with the SAG/WGA strikes against the streaming platforms run by Dem megadonors with names like Bezos and Hoffman)
I really want to do the experiment of raising California's minimum wage to $100k a year. I just want to see how bad it could be. California seems like a good place to try it.
A $100k/year minimum wage would at least have the merit in CA of being within sight of the local poverty line in L.A. and SF. At least for the first few months until the wage/price spiral kicked in.
Maybe there's some hope left in CA after all.
Or maybe all the socialists have moved-out and onto another 'greener-pasture' to "conquer and consume".