,i  #aaeth ,,congress  #b;d ,session    
,h4 ,r4 #gcgd  ,,in ,,the ,,house ,,of  
,,representatives  ,december #bj1 #bjah 
,ms4 ,jones of ,michigan 7for herself   
and ,mrs4 ,lawrence7 introduced the     
following bill2 which was referred to   
the ,committee on ,education and the    
,workforce1 and in addition to the      
,committees on ,oversight and           
,government ,reform1 and ,financial     
,services1 for a period to be           
subsequently determined by the ,speaker1
 in each case for consideration of such 
provisions as fall within the           
jurisdiction of the committee concerned 
,a ,,bill  ,to provide consequences to  
,states that reduce their ,state minimum
 wage and to redirects ,federal funding 
to those ,states to the neediest        
localities4  #a4 ,short title ,this ,act
 may be cited as the ,minimum ,wage     
,fairness ,act of #bjah4  #b4 ,findings 
,the ,congress finds the following3     
7#a7 ,the ,federal minimum wage peaked  
#ej years ago in #aifh at #h4fh in #bjaf

 dollars4 ,since that time1 ,americans  
have watched their wages remain stagnant
 despite massive increases in           
productivity1 which has fueled an       
economically unfair and unjust trend for
 the ,nation4 ,the growing income       
inequality has been a destabilizing     
force on the communities of the ,nation1
 the economy1 and the ,nation's very    
democracy4  7#b7 ,the ,federal minimum  
wage does not only affect the young and 
inexperienced worker4 ,more than half of
 all minimum wage workers are over the  
age of #bd4  7#c7 ,nearly #fj percent of
 ,states have raised their minimum wage 
above the ,federal minimum wage1 and in 
nearly #be percent of ,states the wage  
is adjusted yearly for inflation4  7#d7 
,opponents of minimum wage increases    
routinely use dire predictions about job
 losses and the failure of businesses in
 locations that raise the minimum wage4 
,these predictions have proven almost   
entirely untrue4 ,locations that raise  
the minimum wage largely reap the       

benefits of a stronger tax base and     
increased consumer demand4  7#e7 ,those 
opposed to minimum wage increases       
frequently use more than misleading     
campaigns1 and in some cases have       
interfered with democracy to ensure that
 the will of citizens is frustrated4    
7#f7 ,americans deserve a raise and the 
voters and constituents who support     
minimum wage increases should not be    
frustrated by anti-democratic special   
interests who have captured the         
legislative1 executive1 and regulatory  
apparatus of ,states and localities4    
#c4 ,safeguards for workers in ,states  
that reduce the minimum wage  7a7       
,review of minimum wage laws ,the       
,secretary of ,labor shall1 within #cj  
days of the each fiscal year beginning  
after the date of enactment of this     
,act1 identify any ,state that has1     
within the previous fiscal year that    
began after the date of enactment of    
this ,act1 reduced its ,state minimum   
wage1 or which has reduced a minimum    

wage increase that would otherwise go   
into effect4  7b7 ,communication of     
minimum wage reduction ,the ,secretary  
of ,labor shall inform all other        
,federal agencies responsible for       
allocating ,federal funds to a ,state   
for its direct use or for the ,state to 
distribute within its boundaries1 of any
 ,state that has reduced its ,state     
minimum wage4  7c7 ,review of indirect  
costs ,any head of an agency notified   
that a ,state has reduced its ,state    
minimum wage shall review all funds     
under programs administered by the head 
of such agency that would otherwise be  
allocated to a ,state under ,federal    
law4 ,such agency head shall then review
 any funds allocated to that ,state     
specifically designated as for use for  
the ,state's administrative costs of any
 such program4 ,where such              
administrative costs are not            
specifically designated1 the agency head
 shall-- 7#a7 determine the amount of   
such ,federal funds used by the ,state  

to administer any such program2 and     
7#b7 presume in the absence of a        
contrary showing1 that a similar amount 
or percentage will be allocated by the  
,state in the next fiscal year4  7d7    
,reduction in indirect costs ,upon      
determining the percentage of ,federal  
funding under a given program provided  
to a ,state that is used for            
administrative costs1 the head of each  
agency shall restrict the use of funds  
by the ,state for administrative costs1 
overhead1 and salaries for the following
 year4 ,such a restriction shall reduce 
the amount the ,state may spend on      
administrative costs by a percentage    
equivalent to the ,state's reduction in 
its ,state minimum wage4  7e7           
,exceptions ,where the head of an agency
 has determined that a reduction in     
program funding for administrative costs
 to a ,state shall constitute a threat  
to the public health1 safety1 and       
welfare of the people of the ,state1    
then the head of such agency may        

withhold from the ,state for            
administrative costs a lesser amount    
than that equivalent to the percentage  
of the ,state's minimum wage reduction4 
7f7 ,redirection of funds ,where        
possible1 the head of each such agency  
shall direct any funds withheld from a  
,state under this ,act to a municipality
 located in that ,state where the       
municipality is an eligible recipient of
 the funding program in question1 and   
where the municipality would be         
otherwise eligible to use such funds for
 administrative costs4 ,where no such   
municipality is eligible to directly    
receive such funds1 such funds shall be 
available to the ,secretary of ,housing 
and ,urban ,development for use only for
 grants under title ,i of the ,housing  
and ,community ,development ,act of     
#aigd 7#db ,u4,s4,c4 #ecja et seq47 for 
metropolitan cities and urban counties  
in such ,state that were eligible to    
receive grants under such title in the  
most recent fiscal year for which such  

grants were made4 ,the amount of the    
funds allocated pursuant to this        
subsection for each such metropolitan   
city or urban county in the ,state shall
 bear the same ratio to the total amount
 of funds for the ,state allocated under
 this subsection as the amount of funds 
awarded to such city or county under    
section #ajf of such ,act for such most 
recent fiscal year bears to the total   
amount of funds awarded to all          
metropolitan cities and urban counties  
in such ,state under such section #ajf  
for such most recent fiscal year4