|The SD Minimum Wage Meme|
The biz guy in the pic is looney, imo
(cartoon from www.dineshbakshi.com)
Outraged supporters of the law are nonetheless getting a bit carried away with their "will of the people" defense of it. Sponsors of HB 1094 are acting well within their capacities to mount this challenge, and do so at some political risk. I say go for it. The minimum wage law merits a vigorous public examination, if only because of its pervasiveness. What irks me about the criticism of this challenge is the rhetorical argument that it somehow violates "the will of the people." Seems to me that some of these critics are the same ones who are mad at South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley for defending the gay marriage ban that was put into place by South Dakota voters in 2006. Jackley has repeatedly noted that he is constitutionally bound to defend state law, an argument that I accept, particularly as the ban was passed at the ballot by a 52-48 majority.
Outraged opponents of Jackley's persistent defense of South Dakota law consider him to be defending the "tyranny of the majority." That phrase is actually part of the complaint filed
|The Word "Marriage" Is Gender-Neutral|
Neither the majority nor history can change that
(photo from The Chicago Tribune)
I unequivocally support the minimum wage law, including its provision that the wage shall never be decreased. I unequivocally support the right of same-sex couples to be married, in every legal, social and religious sense of that word. But the use of hackneyed political bombast like "the will of the people" and "the tyranny of the majority" as cheap rhetorical political devices that substitute sloganeering for clear and informed thought? The discussion deserves better.