I 
115TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 7374 
To provide consequences to States that reduce their State minimum wage 
and to redirects Federal funding to those States to the neediest localities. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
DECEMBER 20, 2018 
Ms. JONES of Michigan (for herself and Mrs. LAWRENCE) introduced the fol-
lowing bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Govern-
ment Reform, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently de-
termined by the Speaker, 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 localities. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Minimum Wage Fair-
ness Act of 2018’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
The Congress finds the following: 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:55 Dec 27, 2018
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H7374.IH
H7374
pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
(1) The Federal minimum wage peaked 50 
years ago in 1968 at $8.68 in 2016 dollars. Since 
that time, Americans have watched their wages re-
main stagnant despite massive increases in produc-
tivity, which has fueled an economically unfair and 
unjust trend for the Nation. The growing income in-
equality has been a destabilizing force on the com-
munities of the Nation, the economy, and the Na-
tion’s very democracy. 
(2) The Federal minimum wage does not only 
affect the young and inexperienced worker. More 
than half of all minimum wage workers are over the 
age of 24. 
(3) Nearly 60 percent of States have raised 
their minimum wage above the Federal minimum 
wage, and in nearly 25 percent of States the wage 
is adjusted yearly for inflation. 
(4) Opponents of minimum wage increases rou-
tinely use dire predictions about job losses and the 
failure of businesses in locations that raise the min-
imum wage. These predictions have proven almost 
entirely untrue. Locations that raise the minimum 
wage largely reap the benefits of a stronger tax base 
and increased consumer demand. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:55 Dec 27, 2018
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H7374.IH
H7374
pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
(5) Those opposed to minimum wage increases 
frequently use more than misleading campaigns, and 
in some cases have interfered with democracy to en-
sure that the will of citizens is frustrated. 
(6) Americans deserve a raise and the voters 
and constituents who support minimum wage in-
creases should not be frustrated by anti-democratic 
special interests who have captured the legislative, 
executive, and regulatory apparatus of States and lo-
calities. 
SEC. 3. SAFEGUARDS FOR WORKERS IN STATES THAT RE-
DUCE THE MINIMUM WAGE. 
(a) REVIEW OF MINIMUM WAGE LAWS.—The Sec-
retary of Labor shall, within 30 days of the each fiscal 
year beginning after the date of enactment of this Act, 
identify any State that has, within the previous fiscal year 
that began after the date of enactment of this Act, reduced 
its State minimum wage, or which has reduced a minimum 
wage increase that would otherwise go into effect. 
(b) COMMUNICATION OF MINIMUM WAGE REDUC-
TION.—The Secretary of Labor shall inform all other Fed-
eral agencies responsible for allocating Federal funds to 
a State for its direct use or for the State to distribute 
within its boundaries, of any State that has reduced its 
State minimum wage. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:55 Dec 27, 2018
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H7374.IH
H7374
pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
(c) REVIEW OF INDIRECT COSTS.—Any head of an 
agency notified that a State has reduced its State min-
imum wage shall review all funds under programs admin-
istered by the head of such agency that would otherwise 
be allocated to a State under Federal law. Such agency 
head shall then review any funds allocated to that State 
specifically designated as for use for the State’s adminis-
trative costs of any such program. Where such administra-
tive costs are not specifically designated, the agency head 
shall— 
(1) determine the amount of such Federal 
funds used by the State to administer any such pro-
gram; and 
(2) presume in the absence of a contrary show-
ing, that a similar amount or percentage will be allo-
cated by the State in the next fiscal year. 
(d) REDUCTION IN INDIRECT COSTS.—Upon deter-
mining the percentage of Federal funding under a given 
program provided to a State that is used for administra-
tive costs, the head of each agency shall restrict the use 
of funds by the State for administrative costs, overhead, 
and salaries for the following year. 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 wage. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
04:52 Dec 27, 2018
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H7374.IH
H7374
pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
(e) EXCEPTIONS.—Where the head of an agency has 
determined that a reduction in program funding for ad-
ministrative costs to a State shall constitute a threat to 
the public health, safety, and welfare of the people of the 
State, 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 reduction. 
(f) REDIRECTION OF FUNDS.—Where possible, 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 question, and where the munici-
pality would be otherwise eligible to use such funds for 
administrative costs. Where no such municipality is eligi-
ble to directly receive such funds, such funds shall be 
available to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment for use only for grants under title I of the Housing 
and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 
5301 et seq.) 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 made. The amount of the funds allocated pur-
suant to this subsection for each such metropolitan city 
or urban county in the State shall bear the same ratio 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:55 Dec 27, 2018
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H7374.IH
H7374
pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
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 106 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 106 for such most recent 
fiscal year. 
Æ 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:55 Dec 27, 2018
Jkt 089200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H7374.IH
H7374
pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS