I don’t think that the editors of the Washington Post realize it but in their proposal for raising the minimum wage they are making the case for federalism:
The Third Way think tank has a plan that deals with these realities by setting the federal minimum wage on a regional basis. Each year, the national minimum wage would be set at “one-half of the hourly wage for nonsupervisory workers.†(The figure, in 2019, would be $11.55.) Then local minimums either above or below that would be calculated for metro areas and rural communities based on their living costs. Rep. Terri A. Sewell (D-Ala.) has offered a bill based on this plan, which would end years of minimum-wage stagnation without undue disruptions. Gov. Larry Hogan (R) of Maryland advocated something similar for his economically diverse state in vetoing an across-the-board raise to $15, but the General Assembly overrode his move on Thursday.
The deficiencies of this plan are obvious. Consider Illinois. Chicago’s median wage is significantly higher than in the rest of the state. Wages that may work in Chicago are unlikely to in Cairo or Mattoon.
The formula would require a federal bureaucracy to administer it and we already have institutions well-positioned to do so called “states” and “counties”.
Rather than trying to work out complex but equitable formulae for the minimum wage we would be better served by deciding why we have a minimum wage. Just as a modest proposal why dictate minimum wages at all? Why not dictate a maximum rent? Or the maximum price of a good or service?
The sad reality is that as our politics becomes nationalized, people gravitate toward nationalized solutions. And though I shouldn’t be, I’m often surprised at how people who live in one place in the USA are so vested in using federal power to force their worldview onto other parts of the country – even when such “solutions” are unconstitutional or not achievable as a practical matter.