What is Ballot Measure 1?
Every two years or so it seems Alaska is at the mercy of another group of lower-48 billionaires and left-wing groups pushing another left-wing initiative.
Remember these gems? Automatic voter registration when filing for your PFD. The soft on crime law SB-91. Ranked Choice Voting. Now we have the infamous “minimum wage increase.” All brought to us courtesy of lower-48 entities who love to use Alaska as the cheap date. They can spend very little money here and pass left-of-center legislation via initiatives that would be prohibitively costly in bigger states. They then use us as the shining “example” to push this legislation elsewhere.
However, regarding BM1, it’s like the flashy “sham wow” infomercials years ago – “But wait, there’s more!” It’s not just a minimum wage increase.
BM1 has three separate goals. Let’s start off with the fact that it violates the single subject rule for an initiative. Alaska statute 15.45.050 mandates an initiative must have just one subject. Those who paid attention to the ranked-choice voting initiative four years ago may remember how that also violated the rule with far more than one subject, but the courts let it slide.
So far, no one has challenged BM1 in court and frankly it’s probably too late. Alaskans simply don’t have the money or time to fight off the vast sums of dark money being spent in Alaska for these initiatives. The same dark money that did not go away as promised when they passed the ranked choice voting scheme, is back.
BM1 starts off with the carrot to get Alaskans to bite – increase minimum wage. Sounds great, but here are a few things they’re not telling you.
First, small businesses will be hurt by this. Many of them operate on a razor thin margin. With government mandating what they must pay, they may have to cut workers’ hours, raise their prices, or both. If they can’t, they may be forced out of business. There is a price point consumers are willing to pay for certain things. Beyond that, they stop buying.
Bigger businesses are already paying higher wages, and from a corporate perspective they have the resources to do so. Many small businesses do not. Let’s not forget how union wages are tied into this scheme. They’ll benefit too, so of course they support it. More union pay equals more union dues equals more political power for union bosses.
Second, BM1 requires businesses of 15 or more employees to provide 56 hours of sick leave a year. Those with fewer than 15 employees must provide 40 hours a year. Once again, sounds terrific, right?
BM1 has harmful impacts on many Alaskan businesses and the Alaskans employed by those businesses. Worse yet, something more sinister is imbedded in the language because that’s how these left-wing organizations operate.
But consider the impact. Big companies already provide this type of benefit. Just like providing higher pay, they have the resources to do this without a significant negative impact on their ability to survive. Many small businesses, however, are quite literally on the edge of survival from month to month. Requiring them to provide paid time off on top of higher pay could be the death knell for many a small business owner.
Or take the example that happened to my mom, who worked for a major corporation. The government mandated increased wages some years ago in her state. They paid the higher wages, but then cut her and many other employee’s hours from 40 to 25 so they didn’t have to provide any benefits. In reality her overall pay went down, not up.
You see, it’s never as simple or grand as those pushing these ideas want you to believe. There are almost always downstream consequences and more often than not, it’s the small business, their employees and the consumer who take the hit in one form or another.
Oh, did I forget to mention you will pay more, as the consumer, to make up for the higher costs to businesses to survive? Don’t forget to open your own wallet if you vote yes on BM1.
Finally, let’s get to the third part. Have you heard of the Colorado baker who’s been hounded and sued nearly into oblivion for refusing to make a cake for a LGBTQ activist couple? It went against his religious beliefs, but apparently that’s no longer good enough to protect you from being forced into work that violates your conscience.
ALASKA WATCHMAN DIRECT TO YOUR INBOX
I want you to think very carefully about the very “reasonable” sounding section of BM1, which prohibits business owners from requiring employees to attend political or religious meetings while at work. This is a poison pill, plain and simple.
The proponents will downplay this section, and laugh off such discussion. Friends, the left doesn’t do anything without a plan. They have inserted this provision to be used at a later date in order to file a lawfare suit against some faith-based business or business owner. This is happening all over the country. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the actual reason for the entire ballot initiative is to enact this language for use when they are ready.
Similar to using dark money to scare Alaskans into voting for the terrible ranked choice voting scheme, they are pulling on your emotions – using a minimum wage increase as top cover.
Be careful what you vote for Alaska. Ballot Measure 1 is not a simple minimum wage increase. It will have harmful impacts on many Alaskan businesses and the Alaskans employed by those businesses. Worse yet, something more sinister is imbedded in the language because that’s how these left-wing organizations operate.
Had they simply increased the minimum wage, I would still have opposed BM1 based on my desire to let the business environment drive the economics, not Soviet-Union-styled central planning. This proposal goes well past that red line, and I will be a hard NO on BM1.
The views expressed here are those of the author.
17 Comments
Any ” business ” that cannot offer it’s employees a living wage and sick pay to prevent illness from spreading simply should not be in business. Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize underpaid employees ( WalMart, et al ) nor should these employees be eligible for food stamps and other assistance when they are working full-time. I’m voting ” YES ” and I hope you do too!
I would suspect you have never owned a business, and also would guess you do not work in the private sector. Minimum wage was never intended to be a ‘living wage’ . It is a ‘starting wage’ for unskilled labor, most often students, youth, or a spouse working part time and supplementing income. It is a wage for employees learning to be employees and typically increases with experience, training and education. To force employers to pay unskilled entry level employees to receive instant high wages is ludicrous. It will not only hurt employers – those that provide jobs, it will hurt consumers. Then add in the rest of this nefarious bill. It is bad news.
I am voting, “NO” on ballot measure one because it is the demons that are trying to destroy the small businesses that help keep people employed by organizations other than “Big Brother.”
People, please vote, “NO” on ballot measure 1!
Perhaps it is good to support a minimum wage increase. This forces fast food and other crappy retail businesses towards automation. This removes the space for low intelligence people to be employed and may actually motivate those people to enhance their minds and strive for something better rather than just settling for less and making a career out of low class employment.
We as a people have super computers in the palms of our hands and information is readily available to all without the pesky tuition needed for “higher learning”.
We as a people can self educate and break out of the same old cycles. We can learn more now than ever before! We can enhance ourselves at our own pace and break through into things previously thought as impossible before.
Not to mention there are masses of people staring at their phones, which creates an attention economy where selling content (worthy and unworthy) can make you more money than a conventional 9-5 job.
Humanity has an incredible ability to adapt to any situation. It is only fear that holds one back from advancement.
Vote “NO” on ballot measure 1. There are innumerable small businesses here in the valley that provide a paycheck to many folks. Keep these small businesses alive by not forcing them to pay out more than they can afford. “No” on ballot measure 1.
Thank you for this much needed information. I didnt even realize this was on the ballot.
Thanks for the information. Definitely yes on 1!
Vote “NO” on ballot measure 1 and save small businesses.
I am a small business owner here, and adding 40 hours a year of benefits is out of the question. I CAN”T do it. If this passes I may well go out of business. $00.00 per hour. A vote for this is a vote to put people out of work.
That amounts to about ONE HOUR of sick leave for every TEN DAYS of work. I don’t think tha’s really asking too much, even of a small business.
Typical “moral-busy-body” response. Who cares what YOU think about the fiscal management of SOMEONE ELSE’S business?
Richard clearly stated that he cannot subscribe to your desired economic suicide. Who best to know what is best for Richard’s business? RICHARD! NOT YOU.
You’re trying to be all up in someone else’s kool-aid and you don’t even know the flavor.
I am voting “NO” on ballot measure 1.
Our culture is so dumbed down now by years of lowering the standards of the public education system, along with other tragic societal ills such as broken homes and substance abuse, too many never manage to move beyond entry level wages. Still, further damage to the private sector is not the answer. Better education and steering families would have more lasting effect. Ballot measure 1 will inflict more damage on an already very beleaguered segment of the private sector – small businesses. More and more small businesses will close while big corporations and government continue to grow.
Why would a measure be allowed on the ballot if it is violating state statute? The measure itself aside, this troubles me just as much! I had no idea the original awful ranked choice voting measure also was in violation of Alaska statute 15.45.050? Why should citizens have to file a lawsuit to correct this? It seems it should be something upheld by the division of elections before ballots are printed. Something seems very wrong here.
Jobs are out there that will provide pay and benefits. What I see is potential employees unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to get them.
Yes indeed, Mike; the left’s modus operandi is always deceit. Uninformed voters are most vulnerable.
Businesses that can’t provide a living age for their workers should not hire workers.