OUR VIEW
Chicago isn’t Santa Fe, but wage effort will go on
Give him credit for trying: Santa Fe’s Mayor David Coss last month ventured to Chicago, whose municipal politics make our intrigues at Marcy Street and Lincoln Avenue look like playground games.
  He went there, on labor interests’ dime, to testify in favor of a “living wage;” something more than the federal minimum of $5.15 an hour. Santa Fe’s City Council enacted a far higher wage floor back two years ago: $8.50 an hour. Since then it’s gone up to $9.50— and it might hit $10.50 in 2008.
  Coss addressed a hearing called byWindy City aldermen to build support for their version of a fair-wage ordinance— one that would forceWal-Mart, Target and other “ big-box” chain stores to raise their hourly wage to $13 during the next four years.
  It was a strange approach: Wal-Mart and other mammoth merchandisers might be handy-dandy targets for just about anyone with a cause— but making them pay their workers more than other businesses do? The Chicago proposal was a lawsuit waiting to happen.
  At least as compelling an argument against singling out those stores was that they tend to be suburban — and here Chicago is trying to lure them into the city.
  By targeting them, the ordinance might well encourage such operations to stay outside the city limits.
  Still, the measure passed— but then Mayor Richard M. Daley vetoed it, and a cowed City Council this week upheld his veto.
  Daley had taken umbrage at Coss’ visit, saying he’d match his record against those of Santa Fe and San Francisco— which also has a living-wage ordinance — anytime.
  Our mayor wasn’t there to pick a fight; he only wanted to mention that business continues to do well since the higher wages took effect. And of course Wal-Mart, while fighting the Chicago raise, hasn’t shrunken from its plans to build a new super-store on our community’s south side.
  Most living-wage analysis in Santa Fe is pegged to the $8.50 level; the jury is still out on $9.50. Still, there’s nervousness among many who pay that wage, and our council can expect a fight when $10.50 comes up. And when any business leaves or closes down, living-wage opponents are quick to blame it on wages. Not much of that has happened, however— and Mayor Coss could honestly tell his Chicago colleagues that we’re a better city for having come to the aid of the working poor.
  Meanwhile, what began in Santa Fe and San Francisco is gaining ground: This week, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law a minimum-wage increase reaching $8 an hour by the beginning of 2008.
  The NewMexico Legislature early this year toyed with the idea of a $7.50 minimum— and our state senators and representatives can expect similar proposals when the new Legislature convenes in January. House Speaker Ben Luján, most likely, will be back with his living- wage proposal.
  Congress, of course, remains, uh, inactive on a nationwide raise. Challengers to Republicans in control of the Capitol should remind voters that incumbents, now knocking down $165,000, get automatic raises— yet haven’t moved the federal minimum for nine years.
  Yesterday’s New York Times noted editorially that the Chicago ordinance “raised legal and technical questions.” But it concluded by saying that ”proponents of living wages have the moral high ground, and are increasingly finding a political voice. Chicago hasn’t heard the last of them andWashington hasn’t either.” Nor, we might add, has NewMexico’s Roundhouse.