STATEOFNEWMEXICO

COUNTYOFSANTAFE

FIRSTJUDICIALDISTRICTCOURT

NEWMEXICANSFORFREEENTERPRISE,

THESANTAFECHAMBEROFCOMMERCE,

MARKKIFFIN,MARKC.MILLER,MAURICEZECK,

PEPPERSFOOD&BEVERAGECO.,INC.,

PRANZO,ZUMACORPORATION,

ROBBIEDAY,JOSEPHHOBACK,and

PINONGRILLATTHEHILTONOFSANTAFE,

Plaintiffs,v.

CITYOFSANTAFE,

Defendant,

CaseNo.D‐101‐CV‐2003‐00468

Memorandum of Amici Curiae Santa Fe Partnership for Social Justice, HispanicRoundtable of New Mexico, Somos Un Pueblo Unido, Mexican American LegalDefense & Education Fund, New Mexico Federation of Labor, AFL‐CIO, NationalEducation Association‐New Mexico, Democratic Party of Santa Fe County, GreenParty of Santa Fe County, Coalition for Equality in New Mexico, Hunger‐PovertyNetworkofNorthernNewMexico,NewMexicoHumanNeedsCoordinatingCouncil,andNewMexicoPublicHealthAssociationJerryToddWertheimJones,Snead,Wertheim&Wentworth,P.A.PostOfficeBox2228SantaFe,NewMexico87504tel.(505)982‐0011 CounselforAmiciCuriaeTABLEOFCONTENTSTABLEOFAUTHORITIES.............................................................................................................iiSTATEMENTOFINTERESTOFAMICI.......................................................................................1

SUMMARYOFARGUMENT........................................................................................................3ARGUMENT...................................................................................................................................4I. SantaFe’sLivingWageOrdinanceIsanAppropriateMeasure forExpandingAccesstoFamily‐SupportingJobsforWorkingSantaFeansandFightingSantaFe’sGrowingEconomicInequality..................4A.InSantaFeandManyAmericanCommunities,theHighCostofBasicNecessitiesIs Causing Serious Economic Hardship for the Working Poor and TheirFamilies.....................................4B.TheErosionoftheFederalMinimumWageinRecentDecadesHasHarmedtheWorkingPoor5C.InResponse,Cities,CountiesandStatesAreSteppingForwardtoEnactHigherMinimum Wages to Help Local Families Meet BasicNeeds..............................................................................6D. AfterCarefulReviewandPublic Input, SantaFeEnacted ItsCitywideLivingWage Ordinance with Broad PublicSupport..........................................................................................................9II. Economic Research Indicates That Minimum Wage Laws Raise LivingStandards for Low‐Income Workers Without Risking JobLoss.................................................................................................12

A. Recent Economic Research Has Led the Nation’s Leading Economists toEndorse Raising the MinimumWage...............................................................................................................................12B.SantaFeCarefullyConsideredtheEconomicEvidenceinFashioningItsLivingWageOrdinance14III.LivingWageLawsHaveBeenEndorsedasElementsofaSoundandJustPublicPolicy by aBroadArrayof Civic,Religious,Anti‐Poverty, Immigrants’Rights, CivilRights, Labor and Political Groups in New Mexico andNationally........................................................................................................................................19CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................24APPENDIXTABLEOFAUTHORITIESCASESANDLEGISLATIVEMATERIALS29U.S.C.§218(a)...........................................................................................................................7D.C.Stat.§32‐1001etseq..............................................................................................................8Mayor & City Council of Baltimore v. Sitnick, 254 Md. 303, 255 A.2d 376(1969).......................8

Santa Fe City Council Resolution No. 2002‐15..................................................................................9Santa Fe Living Wage Ordinance..............................................................................................passimBOOKS,ARTICLES,REPORTSANDTESTIMONYJaredBernstein,IncreasingtheMinimumWage:Don=tLettheSlowdownSlowItDown(EconomicPolicyInstitute,IssueBrief,June11,2001)...........................................13JaredBernstein&JohnSchmitt,MakingWorkPay:TheImpactofthe1996‐97 Minimum Wage Increase (Economic Policy Institute1998)....................................13HeatherBoushey,ChaunaBrocht,BethneyGundersen&JaredBernstein,HardshipsinAmerica:TheRealStoryofWorkingFamilies(EconomicPolicyInstitute2001)........................................................................................5,6SamuelBowles,TestimonyontheEconomicImpactofanIncreaseintheMinimumWage (Before the FinanceCommittee of the Santa FeCity Council, Feb. 17, 2003)..........................................................................15DavidCard,UsingRegionalVariationinWagestoMeasuretheEffectsof

theFederalMinimumWage,46 Indus.&Lab.Rel.Rev.22‐37(1992).............................13DavidCard&AlanKrueger,MinimumWagesandEmployment:ACaseStudyofthe...........Fast‐foodIndustryinNewJerseyandPennsylvania:Reply,...........90Am.Econ.Rev.No.5,1397‐1420(Dec.2000).............................................................13DavidCard&AlanKrueger,MythandMeasurement:TheNewEconomicsoftheMinimumWage(1995)..................................................................................12,13,14Jeff Chapman, Behind the Crystal Ball: A critique of the Employment PoliciesInstitute’s analysis of minimum wage proposals (Economic Policy Institute2003)..........................................................................18JeffChapman,StatesMoveonMinimumWage:Federalinactionforcesstatesto...........raisewagefloortoprotectlow‐wageworkers(EconomicPolicyInstitute,...........IssueBriefno.195,June11,2003).......................................................................................7John Kenneth Galbraith, The Good Society (1996).........................................................................14LawrenceB.Glickman,ALivingWage:AmericanWorkersandtheMakingof...........ConsumerSociety(1997)....................................................................................................22

KarenKraut,ScottKlinger&ChuckCollins,ChoosingtheHighRoad:........... Businesses that Pay a Living Wage & Prosper (Responsible Wealth2000)...........................14J.W. Mason, Living Wage Junkonomics, City Limits (May2002).....................................................14DavidA.Macpherson,TheEffectsoftheProposedSantaFeMinimumWageIncrease(Employment Policies Institute Feb.2003)............................................................................................................................17,18Lawrence Mishel, Jared Bernstein & Heather Boushey, The State of WorkingAmerica,........... 2002‐03 (EconomicPolicy Institute2003).........................................................................5,6RobertPollin,MarkBrenner&StephanieLuce,Intendedvs.UnintendedConsequences:EvaluatingtheNewOrleansLivingWageProposal(Univ.ofMass.PoliticalEcon.Research Inst.,WorkingPaperno.9,2001)...................14,17RobertPollin,StephanieLuce&MarkBrenner,EconomicAnalysisoftheNewOrleansMinimumWageProposal(Univ.ofMass.PoliticalEcon.ResearchInst.,ResearchReportno.1,1999)......................................................................13RobertPollin,TestimonyonProposedSantaFe,NewMexicoLivingWageOrdinance

........... (Before the Santa Fe City Council, Feb. 26, 2003).........................................................16,17WilliamSpriggs&JohnSchmitt,“TheMinimumWage”inReclaimingProsperity:ABlueprintforProgressiveReform(ToddSchafer&JeffFauxeds.,1996)...........................................................................................................13StateofWisc.Dep=tofWorkforceDevel.,EqualRts.Div.,LaborStandardsBur.,HistoricalResumeofMinimumWageRegulationsinWisconsin(1998)............................................................................................8Louis Uchitelle, A Pay Raise=s Impact, N.Y. Times at D1 (Jan. 12,1995).......................................13Jerold Waltman, The Politics of the Minimum Wage(2000)................................................................6OTHERMATERIALSAssociationofCommunityOrganizationsforReformNow(ACORN)LivingWageResourceCenter,LivingWageWins..................................................................8Deuteronomy24:14–15..................................................................................................................23

GeneralAssemblyUnionofAmericanHebrewCongregations,Resolutionon........... Living Wage Campaigns (adopted Dec. 15‐19,2002)..........................................................23JewishCouncilforPublicAffairs,ResolutiononLivingWageandLow‐Income...........Workers(adoptedFeb.28,2000)......................................................................................23Rabbi Mordechai Liebling, The Commandment for a Living Wage...................................................23Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Letter on Christian Marriage (Dec. 31, 1930)...........................................23Social Principles of the United Methodist Church(2000).................................................................23U.S. Dep’t of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer PriceIndices...........................................6STATEMENTOFINTERESTOFAMICIAmici are a diverse array of community, religious, civic, labor, immigrants’rights,civilrightsandadvocacyorganizationsfromSantaFeandacrossNewMexicoandthenation.TheyshareacommoninterestinensuringthattheSantaFeLivingWageOrdinance isupheldand implemented inorder toensuredecentwagesandfamily‐supportingjobsforSantaFe’slow‐incomeworkers.

The Santa Fe Partnership for Social Justice is a partnership of local RomanCatholic parishes and other organizations committed to combating poverty andaddressingissuesofsocialjusticeinSantaFe.The Hispanic Roundtable of NewMexico is a coalition of over 40 Hispaniccommunity organizations from across New Mexico dedicated to ensuring thatmembersoftheHispaniccommunityhavetheopportunitytoparticipatefullyinthestate’scivicandeconomiclife.SomosUnPuebloUnidoisanadvocacygroupfortherightsoftheimmigrantcommunityinSantaFeandnorthernNewMexico.TheMexicanAmerican LegalDefense&Educational Fund is a national civilrights and legal advocacy organization dedicated to ensuring that MexicanAmericans and members of all of our nation’s Latino communities have theopportunitytoparticipatefullyinAmericancivicandeconomiclife.TheNewMexicoFederationofLabor,AFL‐CIOistheumbrellaorganizationofNew Mexico’s labor unions and the 58,000 working New Mexicans whom theyrepresent.ItisthestateaffiliateofthenationalAFL‐CIO,theumbrellaorganizationfor13millionunionmembersacrosstheUnitedStates.TheNationalEducationAssociation‐NewMexicorepresentsmorethan6,000teachersandeducationalemployees inNewMexicoand is thestateaffiliateof thenationalNEA,withmorethan2.5millionmembersacrosstheUnitedStates.The Democratic Party of Santa Fe County is a political organization thatsupportscandidatesandissuesinlocal,stateandnationalelections. It isaffiliatedwiththestateandnationalDemocraticParty.TheGreenPartyofSantaFeCounty isapoliticalorganization that supportscandidatesandissues in local,stateandnationalelections. It isaffiliatedwiththestateandnationalGreenParty.The Coalition for Equality in New Mexico is a coalition of sixty‐two gay,lesbian,bisexual,transgenderandalliedorganizationsfromacrossNewMexico.TheHunger‐PovertyNetworkofNorthernNewMexicoisanadvocacygroupthatpromotespoliciestocombathungerandcontributetotheeconomicwell‐beingofallpersonsinnorthernNewMexico.The New Mexico Human Needs Coordinating Council is a statewideorganizationofindividualsandcommunitygroupsthatadvocateforpublicpoliciestoexpandaccesstobasicsupportandeconomicopportunityforallNewMexicans.

The New Mexico Public Health Association is an organization representingpublic health physicians and other public health professionals throughout NewMexico.SUMMARYOFARGUMENTAsalegalmatter,itisnotrelevantthattheSantaFeLivingWageOrdinancereflectssoundandcompellingpublicpolicyandthat theSantaFecommunityandtheCityCouncil considered extensive public testimony and economic evidence for morethanayearbeforeultimatelyenactingthelawinFebruary2003.AsexplainedintheCityofSantaFe’smotionforsummaryjudgment,regardlessofthepolicywisdomoftheordinanceortheevidentiaryrecordsupportingit,SantaFe’slivingwagelawisalegally valid and appropriate exercise of the city’s powers under the constitutionand lawsofNewMexicoand fullycomplieswithall requirementsof thestateandfederalconstitutions.Nonetheless, amici ― a diverse array of community, religious, civic, labor,immigrants’ rights, civil rights and advocacy organizations concerned about thewell‐being of low‐income Santa Feans― submit thismemorandum to underscorethe that living wage ordinance does, in fact, reflect sound and compelling publicpolicyandissupportedbyfarmorethanthemere“rationalbasis”requiredbylaw.Low‐incomeworkingfamiliesinSantaFefacerealhardshipinlightoftheregion’shighcostoflivingandtheerosionofthefederalminimumwagetothepointthatitno longer ensures a minimally decent standard of living for working people.Responding to theseurgent needs, theCity of Santa Fehas joined scores of citiesacrossthecountryinenactingalivingwageordinancetoraisepayforlow‐incomeworkers.SantaFe’sdecision,whichwasmadeaftermorethanayearofextensiveresearch,hearings,andcommunityconsultation,issupportedbythebesteconomicevidence.According to economic research over the past decade by the nation’s mostinternationally respected experts on low‐wage labor markets, higher minimumwagesraiselivingstandardsforlow‐incomeworkerswithoutriskingsignificantjoblossesorotheradverseconsequences.Fortheseandotherreasons,acrossthenation,abroadarrayofcivic,religious,anti‐poverty, immigrants’ rights, civil rights, labor and political groups have endorsedlivingwagelawsaselementsofasoundandjustpublicpolicy. Thetwelvegroupssubmitting this amicus memorandum are representative of the more than 1,500localresidentsandmajorcivicgroupsinSantaFeandacrossNewMexicothatcametogethertosupportSantaFe’sdecisiontoenactalivingwageordinancetohelplocalworkingfamilieshelpthemselves.

ARGUMENTI.SantaFe’sLivingWageOrdinanceIsanAppropriateMeasureforExpandingAccesstoFamily‐SupportingJobsforWorkingSantaFeansandFightingSantaFe’sGrowingEconomicInequalityInrecentyears,SantaFe’sworkingfamilieshavefacedadeepeningeconomiccrisis.An escalating cost of living and substantial erosion in the value of the federalminimumwagehaveleftlow‐incomeSantaFeansincreasinglyunabletomeettheirfamilies’ basic needs. After receiving extensive public input for nearly two years,our community has concluded that expanding our city living wage ordinance torequireSantaFe’slargeremployerstopaytheirworkersatleast$8.50perhourisanappropriateandimportantstepforaddressingthiscrisis.A. In Santa Fe and Many American Communities, the High Cost of BasicNecessitiesIsCausingSeriousEconomicHardshipfortheWorkingPoorandTheirFamiliesIn Santa Fe and many American communities, low‐income working families arefacing rising costs of basic necessities and a growing shortage of jobs that pay alivingwage.Nationally,thecostsofhousing,healthcareandchildcareforworkingfamilies have risen dramatically over the past twenty years. But pay levels forworkers in the bottom half of the income distribution have been stagnant and,particularly formen, have actually eroded in real terms duringmuch of the pastthreedecades.[1]The crisis of the working poor is even more pronounced in Santa Fe. In ourcommunity,workingfamiliesfaceacostofliving18%ofabovethenationalaverage,includingadireshortageofaffordablehousing.[2]ArecentstudybytheEconomicPolicyInstitutefoundthatinordertomeetbasicneedsofhousing,food,healthcare,childcareandtransportation,aworkingparentwithonechildinSantaFeneededatleast $28,062, and a family of two parentswith two children at least $38,227.[3]Thefigureswouldberoughly10%highertoday,sincethesecalculationswerebasedoncostsin1999.[4]

YetaveragewagesinSantaFelag23%belowthenationalaverage.[5] Asaresult,close to 40% ofworking families have incomes that fall below these basic needslevels.[6]B.TheErosionoftheFederalMinimumWageinRecentDecadesHasHarmedtheWorkingPoorAsignificantpartoftheproblemisthefederalminimumwage.Startinginthemid‐1970’s,Congressbegantoallowtherealvalueofthefederalminimumwagetoerodesubstantially.Ifthe1968federalminimumwageof$1.60perhourhadbeenupdated to keep pace with inflation, it would be worth approximately $8.45 perhourtodayin2003dollars.[7]Insteaditstandsatjust$5.15perhour—39%lessthan its real value in1968. As a consequence, a full‐timeminimumwageworkerearnsjust$10,712peryear―notnearlyenoughtomeetbasicneedsforevenoneperson,letaloneanychildren,particularlyinacommunityasexpensiveasSantaFe.The low value of the federalminimumwage has contributed to the ballooning oflow‐wagejobsinoureconomy,roughlyone‐quarterofall jobsintheUnitedStatespaying$8.50perhourorless.[8]C.InResponse,Cities,CountiesandStatesAreSteppingForwardtoEnactHigherMinimumWagestoHelpLocalFamiliesMeetBasicNeedsFacedwiththeerodingvalueoftheminimumwageandlackofactionatthefederallevel, in recent years, cities, counties and states across the nation have steppedforwardtoenacthigherminimumwagestohelplocalfamiliesmeetbasicneeds.Fornearlyacentury,federal,stateandlocalgovernmentsintheUnitedStateshavesharedconcurrentresponsibilityforensuringdecentworkingandlivingstandardsforournation’slow‐wageworkforce.Historically,theearliestregulationstoensuredecentwages for theworking poorwere adopted at the state and local levels.[9]When Congress finally adopted a national minimum wage in 1938 with the FairLaborStandardsAct(“FLSA”)―PresidentFranklinRoosevelt’slastmajordomesticreformoftheNewDeal—itexpresslyelectedtopreserveamulti‐tieredregulatorysystemunderwhich state and local governments retain the power to enactmoreprotectivewagerequirements.SeeFLSA§18,52Stat.1069,29U.S.C.§218(a)(“Noprovision of this chapter or of any order thereunder shall excuse noncompliancewithanyFederalorStatelawormunicipalordinanceestablishingaminimumwagehigherthantheminimumwageestablishedunderthischapter.”).

Especially in recentdecadesasCongresshasallowed the real valueof the federalminimum wage to erode, state and local governments have increasingly foundthemselvesforcedtostepintoensuremoreadequatewageprotectionstohelppoorfamilies support themselves. Over that period, twelve states have raised theirminimum wages above the federal level.[10] And at the local level, cities andcounties have increasingly chosen to exercise their regulatory authority to adoptlocallawsprovidinggreaterwageprotectionsforlow‐wageworkers.Todate,morethan one hundred cities and counties have enacted laws establishing wagestandardshigherthanthecurrentfederalminimumwageof$5.15perhour.[11]The laws comprising this recent generation of local‐level wage regulation havegenerallybeenlabeled“livingwage” lawsinordertocommunicatethatthehigherwagelevelsrequired―typicallyfrom$8.00to$12.00perhour―arecloser(thoughstill not enough) to the pay that full‐time workers need in order to supportthemselvesandoneortwochildrenatasubsistencelevel.This recent generation ofmunicipal‐level livingwage laws has taken a variety ofapproaches in extendingwage requirements to different categories of employers.Manycitieshavefocusedonfirmsthatreceivesignificanttaxpayer‐fundedbenefits― for example, city service contracts, city economic development subsidies, theopportunitytoleasecityproperty,orthebenefitsofoperatingconcessionsatcity‐controlled facilities such as stadiums, convention centers, or airports. Cities haveenacted legislation requiring that, in exchange for these significant publiclysubsidizedbenefits,employersmustpaytheirworkersalivingwage.Othercitieshaveextendedlocalwagelawsmorebroadlytocovermostorallprivateemployers in the city. These broaderwage ordinances offer away to helpmorestrugglingfamilies.Yetbecausecoverageisnotlinkedtocitycontracts―wherethecity’spurchasingcostsmayrisesomewhatbecauseofthewagerequirement―theydonotinvolvenewcostsforcash‐strappedcitybudgets.Various cities across the United States such as Baltimore[12] and Washington,D.C.[13]havehadsuchbroadlocalwageordinancesonthebooksforyears. Somestateminimumwage lawshavealsoestablishedhigherminimumwages forcities,recognizing thathigher costsof living inurbanareasnecessitatehigherminimumwagestoensurethatworkingfamiliescansupportthemselves.[14]In recentyears,moreandmorecities thatbeganbyenacting livingwage laws forcity contractors have gone on to explore broaderwage laws. This approach hasprovenparticularlyattractivetocitieslikeSantaFewithtourism‐basedeconomieswhereserviceworkerssuchashotelroomcleanersanddishwashersoftenstrugglewithexceptionallyhighcostsoflivingandscarceaffordablehousing.

D. AfterCarefulReviewandPublicInput,SantaFeEnactedItsCitywideLivingWageOrdinancewithBroadPublicSupportRecognizing the consensus among Santa Feans that something had to be done toaddress the widening economic inequality in their community, the Santa Fe CityCouncilbegananearlytwo‐yearprocessofcraftingalivingwageordinancetailoredtolocalneeds.In 2002, Santa Fe lawmakers enacted the first phase of the city’s living wageordinancebyestablishingarequirementthatbusinessesreceivinglargecontractsorgrants of financial assistance from the citymust pay aminimumwage of at least$8.50perhour.However,SantaFe’sresidentsandtheCityCouncilrecognizedthattheyneededtodomore.Asinitiallyenacted,thelivingwagelawwouldhavehelpedonly a few hundred local low‐wageworkers, since relatively few local businessesreceiveservicecontractsortaxpayer‐fundedeconomicdevelopmentbenefits.Persuaded that it made sense to extend the ordinance to askmore of Santa Fe’sprivate employers to pay a living wage, the City Council enacted a resolutionaccompanying the initial living wage ordinance in February 2002 establishing a“LivingWageRoundtable,”whichitchargedwiththeresponsibilityto“exploreanddevelopaproposedamendmenttothecitycodethatwouldrequireacitywidelivingwage.”[15]The Living Wage Roundtable began a six‐month process of extensive research,assessmentandpublicinput,whichledtothecrafting,introductionandenactmentofthecitywidelivingwageordinanceinFebruary2003.TheRoundtable,whichwascomposed ofmembers of the City Council and representatives of local businessesand workers, spent months reviewing economic data and investigating policyoptions. Based on that review, the Roundtable issued a Majority ReportrecommendingthattheinitiallivingwagebeextendedtoapplyaswelltoalllargerbusinessesoperatinginSantaFe.TheRoundtablememberswerenotabletoreachconsensus, and so a dissenting group of members issued a Minority Report thatcalledforfurtherstudybeforeanyactiontoextendthelivingwageordinancewastaken.In January2003, theCityCouncil introduced legislation foranew,extended livingwage ordinance based on the recommendations contained in the Roundtable’sMajorityReport. TheCityCouncilandrepresentativesofallsegmentsoftheSantaFecommunityconsideredanddebatedtheproposal fornearlytwomonthsduringJanuaryandFebruary2003. TheCityCouncilheldaseriesofhearingsatwhich itreceivedandconsideredtheeconomicimpactoftheproposal,andheardextensivepublic testimony. During that process,more than 1,500 Santa Fe residents, civicorganizations,communitygroups,churches,unionsandbusinessownersendorsedtheproposal.

Sensitive to the concerns of small businesses and other economically fragileemployers, theCouncil carefully crafted and refined theproposal so as to exemptfirmswith fewer than25workers, persons employedby familymembers, certainMedicaid‐funded healthcare providers for the elderly and disabled, and certainemployees such as work‐study students. See Santa Fe Living Wage Ordinance(“Ordinance”)§§28‐1.5(c),28‐1.5(a)(4). Soastoavoidtheriskthattherelativelyfewemployersthatprovidehealthorchildcarebenefitstotheirlow‐wageworkersmight cut benefits in order to raise pay, the ordinance allows the value of anyemployer‐providedhealthorchildcarebenefitstobecreditedtowardstherequiredlivingwage.SeeOrdinance§28‐1.5(b).And to enable the City to monitor the impact of the living wage ordinance,determinewhether itresults inanyunforeseenproblems,andassesswhetheranychanges or improvements may be appropriate, the City Council amended theordinance to provide for a review and evaluation process.[16] By requiring thecollectionofdataonSantaFebusinessandemploymentconditionsbeforethelivingwagetakeseffect,andthencommissioningastudyofitsimpactafterthefirstyearorso,SantaFe’slawmakersareprudentlyensuringthattheyhavetheinformationnecessary to continuemaking informeddecisionsaboutwhatpublicpolicymakessensefortheircommunity.OnFebruary27, theCityCouncilvotedseven‐to‐one toenact thenew livingwageordinance. When it takeseffecton January1,2004, itwillensure thatbusinessesemploying 25 or more persons ― a group which represents roughly 9% of allbusinessesinSantaFebutwhichemploys60%ofallworkersinthecity―paytheirworkers at least $8.50 per hour. Approximately equivalent to what the federalminimumwagewould beworth today if its value had not been allowed to erodeoverthepast30years,theSantaFeLivingWageOrdinancewillhelpthousandsofworkingSantaFeansintheirstruggletosupportthemselvesandtheirfamilies.II. Economic Research Indicates That Minimum Wage Laws Raise LivingStandardsforLow‐IncomeWorkersWithoutRiskingJobLossInformingSantaFe’sdecision to enact the livingwageordinanceand thenationaltrend towardsmore robust regulation ofwages at the state and local levels havebeenimportantnewresearchfindingsconcerningtheeconomicimpactofincreasesinminimumwage rates. These findings indicate that it is feasible formany low‐wage employers to pay higher wage levels without a risk of significant negativeeffectssuchasjobloss.

A. Recent Economic Research Has Led the Nation’s Leading Economists toEndorseRaisingtheMinimumWageOver thepastdecade, amountingbodyof empirical economic researchhas foundthatincreasesintheminimumwage—evenincreasesadoptedduringrecessionaryperiodssuchas1990and1991—haveresultedinnodiscernablejoblosses.ThisresearchbeganwiththepioneeringworkofDavidCardandAlanKrueger,whoarerecognized internationally as the top economists doing statistical studies of labormarkets. Card and Krueger’s 1995 book, Myth and Measurement: The NewEconomics of the MinimumWage (Princeton University Press), and their relatedresearchhasclarifiedresearchers’understandingofthedegreetowhichminimumwageincreasesleademployerstocutjobs.For their research, Card was awarded the John Bates Clark award from theAmerican Economics Association in 1995 ― the so‐called “junior Nobel Prize” ineconomics―astheoutstandingU.S.economistundertheageof40.Kruegeristheleading scholar in the laboreconomicsprogramatPrincetonUniversityandCard,after leaving Princeton, heads a similar program at theUniversity of California atBerkeley. ThesearethetopcentersforresearchonlaboreconomicsintheUnitedStates.CardandKruegerexaminedtheimpactonfastfoodjobs―oneofthenation’smostlow‐wage and price sensitive industries ― when New Jersey raised its stateminimumwage in1992,whileneighboringPennsylvaniadidnot. Their surveyofemployers found that the minimum wage increase resulted in no discernablereductioninemploymentatrestaurantsontheNewJerseysideofthestateline.[17]Subsequent research by Card andKrueger examining the impact of the 1991 and1992federalminimumwageincreasesconfirmedthesefindings.[18]Laterstudiesexaminingtheimpactofotherrecentstateorfederalminimumwageincreaseshaveyieldedsimilarfindings.[19]Such research has prompted many leading American economists to adjust theiranalyses of the economics of the minimum wage. For example, Nobel laureateRobertSolowoftheMassachusettsInstituteofTechnologyexplains,“Themainthingabout the research is that the evidence of job loss isweak. And the fact that theevidence isweak suggests that the impact on jobs is small.”[20] In thewords ofRichard Freeman of Harvard University, perhaps the country’s foremost laboreconomist, “the entire literature on the minimum wage [now agrees] thatemployment losses are modest.”[21] The eminent Harvard economist, JohnKenneth Galbraith, has commented even more pointedly, “That [an adequateminimum wage] will diminish employment opportunity, the argument mostcommonlymadeinopposition,maybedismissedoutofhand,forthatis,invariably,

the special plea of those who do not wish to pay the wage, and it is withoutempiricalsupport.”[22]Thisbodyofresearchhasdemonstratedthatemployerdemandforlow‐wagelaboris lessprice‐sensitive than someeconomistshadpreviouslybelieved. Economistsare continuing to assess how the higher labor costs associated with raising theminimumwageareabsorbed.Aportionofthelaborcostsappeartobepassedoninthe form of slightly higher consumer prices for services supplied by low‐wageworkers―forexample,restaurantmealsandhotelrooms[23]―whilesomeofthecostsappeartocomeoutofmodestlytrimmedemployerprofitmargins.[24]B.SantaFeCarefullyConsideredtheEconomicEvidenceinFashioningItsLivingWageOrdinanceIn the course of fashioning its living wage ordinance, Santa Fe consultedleadingeconomicexpertsandweighedarangeofeconomictestimonysubmittedbyboth supporters and opponents of the proposal. From that review, city leadersconcluded that the best economic evidence indicated that a citywide living wagewouldprovideaneffectivetoolforhelpingasignificantnumberofstrugglingSantaFeansandwasunlikelytoleadtosignificantjobloss.Amongothers, theCityCouncilwasadvisedbyDr.SamuelBowlesof theSantaFeInstitute,Dr.RobertPollinof theUniversityofMassachusetts atAmherst, andDr.DavidMacphersonofFloridaStateUniversity.Dr.SamuelBowles.Dr.Bowles,theDirectoroftheEconomicsProgramattheSantaFe Institute and an emeritus professor of economics who has taught at HarvardUniversity and the University of Massachusetts, submitted written and oraltestimony to the City Council. See Samuel Bowles, Testimony on the EconomicImpactofanIncreaseintheMinimumWage(BeforetheFinanceCommitteeoftheSantaFeCityCouncil,Feb.17,2003),Ex.WtoDefendantCityofSantaFe’sMotionforSummaryJudgment.Dr. Bowles confirmed that David Card and Alan Krueger are recognizedinternationallyasthetopeconomistsdoingstatisticalstudiesoflabormarkets,andthat theirminimumwageresearchhaspersuaded thenation’s leadingeconomiststhatthejoblosseffectsofminimumwageincreasesareverymodest.BasedonCardandKrueger’sresearch,Dr.Bowlesprojectedthat:(1)theproposedSantaFelivingwagewasunlikelytoresultinjoblosses;(2)hotelsandrestaurantsinthecitywouldbethebusinessesaffectedmostbyalivingwagerequirement,sincetheyemploythelargest concentrations of low‐wage workers; (3) the increased labor costs thatwould result from theminimumwagewould instead likely be accommodated by

modest increases inthepriceschargedbyaffectedbusinesses;and(4)themodestpriceincreaseswouldbeunlikelytoresultinalossofcustomers,mostofwhomareout‐of‐town tourists whose decisions whether to visit Santa Fe and to patronizelocal hotels and restaurants are unlikely to be affected much by marginal pricechanges.Id.at2,4‐5.Dr. Robert Pollin. Dr. Robert Pollin, professor of economics at the University ofMassachusetts at Amherst, also submitted oral andwritten testimony to the CityCouncil. See Robert Pollin, Testimony on Proposed Santa Fe, NewMexico LivingWage Ordinance (Before the Santa Fe City Council, Feb. 26, 2003), Ex. Y toDefendantCityofSantaFe’sMotionforSummaryJudgment. Dr.Pollinisaleadingnationalresearcheronlivingwagelawsandhasconductedindepthstudiesoftheprojectedeffectsofsimilarprivatesectorlivingwagelawsthathadbeenconsideredor adopted by two other cities in the United States — New Orleans and SantaMonica. Dr.Pollin testified regarding: (1) the characteristicsof theworkerswhowould receive a raise under the proposed extension of the Santa Fe living wageordinance; and (2) how the affected businesses would likely respond to theincreasedcosts.Dr. Pollin found that the minimum wage workers who would be helped by theproposedordinancewouldbeoverwhelmingly(89%)adults,predominantly(57%)Hispanic, andmostly living in familieswhere the low‐wageworker contributes asignificant share (60%onaverage) of the family’s income. He found that60%ofSanta Fe households with low‐wage workers currently cannot meet basic familyeconomicneedsandwouldbenefitsubstantiallyfromtheproposedminimumwageincrease.Id.at3‐4.Asfortheimpactonaffectedbusinesses,Dr.Pollinconcludedthat(1)theresearchbyCardandKruegerandothereconomicliteratureindicatethatemployerswouldbeunlikely tocut jobs in response toaprivatesector livingwage inSantaFe; (2)thattheindustrieslikelytoseethemostsignificantcostincreaseswouldbehotelsandrestaurantsinlightoftheconcentrationsoflow‐wageworkersinthosesectors;(3) that most restaurants and hotels cater to a consumer base of out‐of‐towntourists and can reasonably pass on much of the increased cost in the form ofmodest price increases without risk of losing business; and (4) that few affectedbusinessescanbeexpectedtorelocateoutsideofSantaFetoavoidthelivingwage,because those employing significant numbers of low‐wage workers areoverwhelminglyconcentrated in thehotel, restaurantandother service industriesthatbenefitsubstantiallyfromdoingbusinessinSantaFe,andwouldlosemuchoftheirclienteleweretheytoleave.Id.at6‐8.Thisfinalpointissignificantbecause,evenwithoutjoblosses,businessflightfromSantaFecouldharmtheeconomyandreducethebenefitsofacitywidelivingwage.An extensive analysis of this question, conducted by Dr. Pollin and a team of hisresearchers inreviewingasimilarproposal inNewOrleans, foundthat theriskoffirm relocation is low because of the nature of the low‐wage jobs affected by a

citywide living wage. Most low‐wage jobs involve the provision of services —restaurant,hotel,janitorial,andhomehealthcareservices,forexample—thatmustbe performed at a particular location. The number of businesses affected by aminimum wage that would incur more than moderate cost increases and thatinvolveservicesnotsubstantiallydependenton theircity locationareexceedinglysmall.Id.at8.[25]Dr.DavidMacpherson. TheSantaFeChamberofCommercealsosubmittedtotheCityCouncilareportbyDr.DavidA.Macpherson,professorofeconomicsatFloridaState University, which was prepared for the Employment Policies Institute— abusiness‐fundedresearchcenterthatgenerallyopposesminimumwages.SeeDavidA. Macpherson, The Effects of the Proposed Santa Fe Minimum Wage Increase(Employment Policies Institute Feb. 2003), Ex. Y to Defendant City of Santa Fe’sMotionforSummaryJudgment.Dr.Macpherson’sreportagreedwithDr.Pollin’sanalysisofthebasicdemographicsoftheSantaFeworkersthatwouldreceivearaiseunderacitywidelivingwage.Hefound that those affectedwould be overwhelmingly adults (83%), predominantlyHispanic(64%)and fromfamilieswith far lower thanaverage family incomes(anaveragefamilyincomeof$33,770foraffectedworkersversus$59,709forSantaFeasawhole).Id.at2.Inaddition,Dr.Macphersonprojectedthatthelivingwageordinancewouldresultin154workersbeinglaidoffbySantaFebusinesses.However,Dr.Macphersonbasedthisprojectiononapresumedjoblossrate(technically,a“labordemandelasticity”)thatisdirectlyrefutedbytheinternationallyrespectedCardandKruegerminimumwage research. Instead, Dr.Macpherson relied on restaurant‐industry supportedresearchthathasbeenwidelycriticizedasmethodologicallybiasedandnotreliable.See Jeff Chapman,Behind theCrystal Ball: A critique of theEmploymentPoliciesInstitute’s analysis ofminimumwage proposals (Economic Policy Institute 2003)(attached as Appendix) (explaining that Dr. Macpherson’s conclusions are basedentirely on restaurant‐industry supported research that is widely criticized asmethodologically biased and not reliable); see also Samuel Bowles, Testimony onthe Economic Impact of an Increase in the MinimumWage, supra page 15, at 3.Because of this fundamental flaw in Dr. Macpherson’s analysis, the Councilappropriatelydidnotaccorditmuchweight.After their extensive review of the economic evidence, lawmakers decided that acitywide livingwagemade sense for Santa Fe, offering significant benefits for thecity’s working families and manageable costs for affected businesses. Mindful,however,oftheirresponsibilityforsafeguardingthecity’seconomicwell‐being,theCityCouncilbuiltcarefulmonitoringandevaluationproceduresintothelivingwageordinancetoensurethattheywouldbeabletoassesstheeffectsofthenewpolicyandbepreparedtorespondtoanyproblems.

III. LivingWage LawsHave Been Endorsed as Elements of a Sound and JustPublicPolicybyaBroadArrayofCivic,Religious,Anti‐Poverty,Immigrants’Rights,CivilRights,LaborandPoliticalGroupsinNewMexicoandNationallySantaFe’slivingwageordinanceandthebroadermovementbyothercommunitiestoadopt livingwagepolicieshavewonthestrongendorsementofawiderangeofcivicorganizations inNewMexicoandacross thenation. Prominentamong themhave been representatives of the faith community, anti‐poverty groups, Latinocommunity organizations, immigrants’ rights groups, civil rights groups, labororganizations,andpoliticalparties.Thisdiversearrayofsupportersspeakstoboththedepthofconcernaboutgrowingeconomic inequalityandtheconvictionthatamoreadequateminimumwageisnecessarytohelpNewMexico’scitiesbuildstrongeconomiesthatwillensurefamily‐supportingjobsandrealopportunityforallNewMexicans.Immigrants’RightsandLatinoCommunityGroupshavestronglysupportedmakingtheminimumwagea livingwage. These include theHispanicRoundtableofNewMexico,acoalitionofover40Hispaniccommunityorganizations fromacrossNewMexico;SomosUnPuebloUnido,anadvocacygroupfortherightsoftheimmigrantcommunityinSantaFeandnorthernNewMexico;andtheMexicanAmericanLegalDefense & Educational Fund, the nation’s leading Latino civil rights and legaladvocacy organization. Both in New Mexico and nationally, Latino workers aredisproportionately concentrated in the lowest paying jobs, and face significanthardshipinsupportingtheirfamiliesontheerodedfederalminimumwage.TheseandotherLatinocommunitygroupsrecognizethe importanceofamoreadequateminimum wage for ensuring that Mexican Americans and members of all of ournation’sLatinocommunitieshave theopportunity toparticipate fully inAmericancivicandeconomiclife.Anti‐PovertyandPublicHealthGroupshavesimilarlyendorsedlivingwagelawsasimportantelementsofapublicpolicythatallowslow‐incomefamiliesandworkerstohelp themselves. Supporters include theHunger‐PovertyNetworkofNorthernNewMexico,acoalitionofgroupsthatpromotesresponsestohungerandpovertyintheregion;theNewMexicoHumanNeedsCoordinatingCouncil,astatewideallianceofindividualsandcommunitygroupsthatadvocatesforthebasicneedsofallNewMexicans; and the New Mexico Public Health Association, the professionalorganization of the state’s public health physicians and other public healthprofessionals. Many local physicians, health providers, and other public healthgroups spoke in support of the Santa Fe Living Wage Ordinance before the CityCouncil,and/orsignedanadvertisementintheSantaFeNewMexicansupportingit.These included Dr. Michael J. Adee, Dr. Pam Burnham, Concerned Citizens for

Nuclear Safety, Dr. Erica Elliot, Dr. Marvin Godner, Dr. Bruce Gollub, Dr. MichaelGregory,Dr. ValerieGremillion,Dr.MattKelly,Dr. PaulKovnat,Dr. Leslie LaKind,McGee Therapy Services, Dr. LeahMorton, Dr. Jeffrey Ross, Dr. Justina Trott andWomen’sHealthServicesofSantaFe.OtherCivilRightsandCommunityGroups includingtheAssociationofCommunityOrganizationsforReformNow(ACORN),whichsignedtheNewMexicanad,andtheCoalitionforEqualityinNewMexico,acoalitionofsixty‐twogay,lesbian,bisexual,transgender and allied organizations from across the state, have supported SantaFe’s living wage, recognizing its importance as a tool for promoting economicopportunityforall.Labor Unions and Advocates for Working Families have been leaders in themovementforalivingwage.SantaFe’sordinanceissupportedbytheNewMexicoFederation of Labor, AFL‐CIO, the umbrella organization of New Mexico’s laborunionsandthemorethan58,000workingNewMexicanswhomtheyrepresent,aswell as the National Education Association‐New Mexico, which represents morethan6,000teachersandeducationalemployeesinNewMexico. NewMexicostateandlocalaffiliatesoftheAFL‐CIOthatspokebeforetheCityCounciland/orsignedtheNewMexican ad include the American Federation of Government Employees,theAmericanFederationofState,CountyandMunicipalEmployees(AFSCME),theNew Mexico Building and Construction Trades Council, the CommunicationsWorkers of America, the New Mexico Federation of Educational Employees, theNorthern New Mexico Central Labor Council, the International Brotherhood ofElectrical Workers, the Ironworkers, the Laborer’s International Union of NorthAmerica, the Sheet Metal Workers International Union, the National Union ofHospital and Health Care Employees, the United Association of Plumbers &Pipefitters,theUnitedFoodandCommercialWorkers,andtheUnionofProfessionaland Technical Employees. Nationally, the AFL‐CIO and major American unionsrangingfromtheServiceEmployeesInternationalUniontotheAmericanFederationofState,CountyandMunicipalEmployeeshavesupportedlivingwagelaws,ashavenon‐union advocates for low‐income workers such as the National InterfaithCommitteeforWorkerJustice.Political Parties and elected officials fromacrossNewMexico have supported theSantaFecommunity’sdecisiontoenactalivingwageforworkingfamilieseitherbyspeakinginfavoroftheordinanceorbysigningtheNewMexicanad.Theseinclude,amongothers,theDemocraticPartyofSantaFeCounty;theGreenPartyofSantaFeCounty; State Representatives Gail Beam, Max Coll, Ray Ruiz, and Mimi Stewart;StateSenatorsRichardMartinez,CiscoMcSorley,andNancyRodriguez;SheriffGregSolano; andSantaFeSchoolBoardSuperintendentGloriaRendonand then‐BoardChairMarcyLitzenberg.Religious Groups in New Mexico and nationally have been leading supporters ofSantaFe’sandotherlivingwagelaws,believingthatanadequateminimumwageisessential to an economic system that ensures fairness and dignity for working

families.Locally,theSantaFePartnershipforSocialJustice,apartnershipofRomanCatholic parishes and other organizations committed to combating poverty andpromotingsocialjusticeinSantaFe,isastrongsupporteroftheSantaFeordinance.Other religious community supporters include the St. Vincent De Paul Society ofSantaFe,thePeaceandJusticeCommitteeofSt.FrancisCathedral,andtheSantaFeDeaneryParishPartnership,whichallsignedtheNewMexicanadand/orspokeinfavorof theordinancebefore theCityCouncil, asdidother local religious leadersincluding Rev. Holly Beaumont, Brother Jim Brown, Rev. Barbara E. Dua, RabbiMalkaDrucker,RabbiLeonardHelman,Rev. JesseMalmed,Rev.David J.McGown,Rev. RichardW.Murphy, Rev.WandaRoss Padilla, RabbiMarvin Schwab,DeaconAnthonyTrujillo,andRabbiNahumWard‐Lev.Nationally,majorChristianandJewishdenominationshavebeenleadingsupportersof the living wage movement.[26] Major Christian churches and organizationsincludingtheNationalCouncilofChurches,atleasttwentyRomanCatholicdiocesesincommunitiesrangingfromChicagoandCleveland,toCharlotteandHouston,[27]the United Methodist Church, and the United Church of Christ (a major nationalassociation of churches in the Congregational tradition) have all called for livingwagelegislation.Similarly, nationally and in states across the country, numerous Jewishdenominations and community organizations have actively supported livingwagecampaignsand laws. These includetheUnionofAmericanHebrewCongregations(representingReformJudaism,America’slargestJewishmovement),[28]theJewishCouncilforPublicAffairs,[29]andnumerouscongregationsandJewishcommunityorganizationsacrossthenation.Groundedinthesocialandmoral teachingsof their traditions,[30]majorreligiousdenominations and other faith‐based organizations have been outspokensupporters of efforts across the United States to secure livingwages forworkingpeople.In a striking consensus, this broad array of community, immigrants’ rights, civilrights, anti‐poverty, religious, labor andpolitical organizations representingmanyoftheleadinggrass‐rootsandinstitutionalvoicesincivilsocietyhavecometogetherto embrace a higherminimumwage as a key element of a sound and just publicpolicyforlow‐incomeworkersandfamilies.CONCLUSIONSoundandcompellingpublicpolicyreasonssupportSantaFe’sdecisiontoenactitscitywide living wage ordinance. In light of the legal arguments presented bydefendant theCityof SantaFe, amici respectfully suggest that summary judgment

for the City should be granted and the Santa Fe livingwage ordinance should bedeclaredlegallyvalid.DATED:August25,2003SantaFe,NewMexicoRespectfullysubmitted,______________________JerryToddWertheimJones,Snead,Wertheim,&Wentworth,P.A.PostOfficeBox2228SantaFe,NewMexico87504tel.(505)982‐0011CounselforAmiciCuriae

AppendixJeff Chapman, Behind the Crystal Ball: A Critique of the Employment PolicyInstitute’sAnalysisofMinimumWageProposals(EconomicPolicyInstitute2003)CERTIFICATEOFSERVICEIcertifythatatrueandcorrectcopyofthisMemorandumofAmiciCuriaewasmailedthis25thdayofAugust,2003byregularfirstclassmail,postageprepaidtothefollowing:GREGORYL.BIEHLERZACHARYS.RIGDONAttorneysforPlaintiffs6715AcademyRdNEAlbuquerque,NewMexico87109(505)828‐3600THECITYOFSANTAFEBruceThompsonCityAttorneyP.O.Box909SantaFe,NewMexico87504‐0909(505)955‐6511

PAUL,WEISS,RIFKIND,WHARTON&GARRISONLLPSidneyS.RosdeitcherMatthewGaul1285AvenueoftheAmericasNewYork,NewYork10019‐6064(212)373‐3000THEBRENNANCENTERFORJUSTICEATNYUSCHOOLOFLAWPaulK.Sonn161AvenueoftheAmericas,12thFloorNewYork,NewYork10013‐1205(212)998‐6328________________________JerryToddWertheim[1]Lawrence Mishel, Jared Bernstein & Heather Boushey, The State of WorkingAmerica,2002‐03,at128Table2.6,130Table2.7(EconomicPolicyInstitute2003)(hereinafterStateofWorkingAmerica).[2]SantaFeLivingWageOrdinance§28‐1.2(e).[3] See Heather Boushey, Chauna Brocht, Bethney Gundersen & Jared Bernstein,Hardships in America: The Real Story ofWorking Families at Tables A4.1& A4.5(EconomicPolicyInstitute2001)[hereinafterHardshipsinAmerica].[4]According to the federalgovernment, averagenational inflationbetween1999and 2003 totaled approximately 10%. See U.S. Dep’t of Labor, Bureau of LaborStatistics,ConsumerPriceIndices(availableathttp://www.bls.gov/cpi/home.htm).[5]SantaFeLivingWageOrdinance§28‐1.2(e).

[6]HardshipsinAmerica,supranote3,at17.[7]AdjustedforinflationusingtheU.S.DepartmentofLabor’sConsumerPriceIndexCalculator, the federalminimumwageof $1.60perhour in1968wouldbeworth$8.45in2003dollars.SeeU.S.Dep’tofLabor,BureauofLaborStatistics,ConsumerPriceIndices,supranote4.[8]TheStateofWorkingAmerica,supranote1,at128Table2.6.[9]JEROLDWALTMAN,THEPOLITICSOFTHEMINIMUMWAGE29‐30(2000).[10] See Jeff Chapman, States Move on MinimumWage: Federal inaction forcesstatestoraisewagefloortoprotect low‐wageworkers(EconomicPolicy Institute,IssueBriefno.195,June11,2003)(availableathttp://www.epinet.org).[11] As of July 2003, a total of 109 cities and counties had adopted living wageordinances.SeeAssociationofCommunityOrganizationsforReformNow(ACORN)Living Wage Resource Center, Living Wage Wins (available athttp://www.livingwagecampaign.org).[12]SeeMayor&CityCouncil ofBaltimorev. Sitnick,254Md.303,255A.2d376(1969)(upholdingBaltimoreCityMinimumWageOrdinancehigherthanMarylandandfederalminimumwages).[13]SeeD.C.Stat.§32‐1001etseq.[14]SeeStateofWisc.Dep’tofWorkforceDevel.,EqualRts.Div.,LaborStandardsBur., Historical Resume of Minimum Wage Regulations in Wisconsin (1998)(between1947and1967Wisconsinstatelawmandatedhigherminimumwageforcities) (available at http://www.dwd.state.wi.us/dwd/publications/236e/LS‐39E‐P.pdf).[15]SeeSantaFeCityCouncilResolutionNo.2002‐15,ClerkAffidavit,Ex.Fat107,accompanyingDefendantCityofSantaFe’sMotionforSummaryJudgment.[16]TheordinanceprovidesthattheCitywill(1)gatherdataonemploymentandbusinessconditions in theCityprior to theordinance’s takingeffect; (2)retainanindependent thirdparty researcher toevaluate theordinance’s impactonce ithasbeen in effect for someperiod; and (3) based on that information, conduct a Cityreviewoftheordinance’ssuccessby2005.SeeOrdinance§28‐1.12.[17]SeeDavidCard&AlanKrueger,MythandMeasurement:TheNewEconomicsofthe Minimum Wage (Princeton Univ. Press 1995) (hereinafter Myth andMeasurement); David Card& Alan Krueger,MinimumWages and Employment: ACaseStudyoftheFast‐foodIndustryinNewJerseyandPennsylvania:Reply,90Am.Econ.Rev.No.5,1397‐1420(Dec.2000).

[18]SeeDavidCard,UsingRegionalVariationinWagestoMeasuretheEffectsoftheFederal MinimumWage, 46 Indus. & Lab. Rel. Rev. 22‐37 (1992); see also JaredBernstein, Increasing theMinimumWage: Don’t Let the Slowdown Slow It Down(Economic Policy Institute, Issue Brief, June 11, 2001) (discussing the precedingresearchfindings).[19]See,e.g., JaredBernstein& JohnSchmitt,MakingWorkPay:The Impactof the1996‐97MinimumWage Increase (Economic Policy Institute 1998), discussed inWilliam Spriggs& John Schmitt, TheMinimumWage, in Reclaiming Prosperity: ABlueprint for Progressive Reform (Todd Schafer & Jeff Faux eds., 1996); RobertPollin, Stephanie Luce & Mark Brenner, Economic Analysis of the New OrleansMinimum Wage Proposal at 22‐24 (Univ. of Mass. Political Econ. Research Inst.,ResearchReportno.1,1999).[20] Quoted in Louis Uchitelle, A Pay Raise’s Impact, N.Y. Times at D1 (Jan. 12,1995).[21]QuotedinJ.W.Mason,LivingWageJunkonomics,CityLimits(May2002).[22] John Kenneth Galbraith, The Good Society 67 (1996). Indeed, the formerRepublicanGovernorofMassachusetts,PaulCellucci,“admittedthathispriorbelief— that increasing theminimumwagewouldhurt theeconomy—waswrong.HechangedhismindafterwitnessingthecontinuedeconomicgrowthinMassachusettsfollowing a previous minimum wage hike in the mid‐1990’s.” Kraut, Klinger &Collins,ChoosingtheHighRoad:BusinessesthatPayaLivingWage&Prosperat8(ResponsibleWealth2000).[23] See Robert Pollin,Mark Brenner & Stephanie Luce, Intended vs. UnintendedConsequences:EvaluatingtheNewOrleansLivingWageProposalat10‐11(Univ.ofMass.PoliticalEcon.ResearchInst.,WorkingPaperno.9,2001)(discussingCard&Krueger findings that fast food restaurants increasedprices to cover higherwagecosts).[24]SeeMythandMeasurement,supranote17.[25]SeePollin,Brenner&Luce,supranote23,at19‐20.[26]Indeed,inthenineteenthcentury“[r]eligiousreformerswerethefirstgroupofpeopleoutsideofthelabormovementtocallforalivingwage,beginningwithPopeLeoXIII’sencyclicalof1891.. . .”LawrenceB.Glickman,ALivingWage:AmericanWorkersandtheMakingofConsumerSociety134(1997).[27] At least seven Catholic dioceses ― Los Angeles, Houston, Richmond,Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Portland, and Burlington (Vermont) ― were activeparticipants in living wage campaigns. Thirteen more dioceses ― Cleveland,

Chicago, San Francisco, Washington D.C., Duluth, Lexington (Kentucky), Albany,Brooklyn,Syracuse,Raleigh,Charlotte,Austin,andSanAntonio―formallyendorsedandsupportedlivingwagelegislation.[28] General Assembly Union of American Hebrew Congregations, Resolution onLiving Wage Campaigns, adopted Dec. 15‐19, 2002 (available athttp://www.rac.org//issues/issuemwres.html).[29] JewishCouncil forPublicAffairs,ResolutiononLivingWageandLow‐IncomeWorkers (adopted Feb. 28, 2000) (available athttp://www.jewishpublicaffairs.org/equal/resolutions/low‐income‐2‐28‐00.html).[30] Among Catholics, Canon Law and Papal teaching have long recognized themoral imperative of a basicwage that is sufficient tomaintain a family. See, e.g.,PopePiusXI,EncyclicalLetteronChristianMarriage¶117(Dec.31,1930)(“[N]oris it lawful to fix such a scantywage aswill be insufficient for the upkeep of thefamilyinthecircumstancesinwhichit isplaced.”)(citationsomitted). TheUnitedMethodist Church’s official statement of basic social principles declares: “Everyperson has a right to a job at a livingwage.” See Social Principles of the UnitedMethodistChurch¶163(c)(2000).TheJewishtraditionteachesthattheorganizedJewishcommunitymustbeactiveintheefforttobuildajustsocietyandthat,underthe Hebrew Bible and Talmudic law, it is unacceptable to pay a workerunconscionablylowwages.See,e.g.,Deuteronomy24:14–15(“Thelawisdesignedtoprotectaworker’sdignityandphysicalneeds.”);RabbiMordechaiLiebling,TheCommandment for a Living Wage (available athttp://www.socialaction.com/1999andearly2000/liebling‐livingwage.phtml).