💵 Economics and policy · Intermediate · Policy resolution

Resolved: The United States federal government should raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour.

The federal minimum wage has been $7.25 since 2009, though many states and cities set higher ones. Should the national floor rise to $15?

Background

The federal minimum wage has been $7.25 an hour since July 2009. Many states and cities have set higher minimums, some above $15, so the federal floor mainly matters in states that haven’t raised their own. [1]

In 2021 the Congressional Budget Office estimated the effects of raising the federal minimum to $15 by 2025. Its average estimate: about 17 million workers would get raises directly (and many above $15 would also be affected), about 900,000 fewer people would be in poverty, and employment would be about 1.4 million lower (0.9%) in 2025, with a wide range of uncertainty. Economists disagree about how much higher minimums reduce jobs; the answer likely depends on how high the minimum is compared with local wages. [1][2]

Where the facts themselves are disputed

How much do higher minimum wages reduce employment?

  • Many studies of past increases find small or no job losses, especially for moderate increases.
  • Other studies, and CBO’s estimates, find meaningful job losses for large increases, falling most on the least experienced workers; effects may differ in low-wage regions.

Key terms

Minimum wage
The lowest hourly pay employers may legally pay most workers.
Indexing
Tying the minimum wage to inflation or median wages so it rises automatically.
Monopsony
A labor market where employers have power to set wages below what a competitive market would pay.
Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC)
A federal tax credit that adds to the income of low-wage working families.

Both sides at their strongest

Each argument is written the way its best advocates would make it, followed by the strongest answer from the other side. Use them to build your case and to prepare for the other one.

Affirmative

A $15 floor raises pay for millions of low-wage workers and reduces poverty.

  1. A1 Millions of workers would get raises.

    Why A higher floor directly lifts the pay of workers below it and pushes up pay just above it, putting money in the hands of families who most need it.

    Evidence CBO (2021): about 17 million workers directly affected and many more indirectly.

    Best answer The negative answers that the same report estimates about 1.4 million fewer jobs, and those who lose work are hurt badly.

  2. A2 It would lift hundreds of thousands out of poverty.

    Why Full-time work at $7.25 leaves a family below the poverty line; higher pay reduces the need for public assistance.

    Evidence CBO’s estimate of about 900,000 fewer people in poverty; data on full-time minimum-wage earnings versus poverty thresholds.

    Best answer The negative replies that many minimum-wage earners aren’t in poor households, so the EITC targets poverty more precisely.

  3. A3 Job losses from past increases have often been small.

    Why Employers can absorb higher wages through lower turnover, small price increases and higher productivity, and some labor markets give employers wage-setting power.

    Evidence Studies of state and city increases comparing neighboring areas; research on monopsony in labor markets.

    Best answer The negative argues that $15 nationwide is much higher, relative to wages in low-cost regions, than most increases studied.

  4. A4 The federal minimum has lost value to inflation.

    Why Since 2009, prices have risen while $7.25 hasn’t changed, so the real wage floor has fallen year after year.

    Evidence Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation data; history of federal minimum-wage changes.

    Best answer The negative answers that most states have already raised their own minimums, and a uniform federal number ignores cost-of-living differences.

Negative

A $15 national floor risks jobs and hours for the least experienced workers, especially in low-wage regions.

  1. N1 It would cost jobs.

    Why When labor costs rise sharply, some employers hire fewer workers, cut hours or automate, and those who lose out are often young and less-skilled workers.

    Evidence CBO (2021): employment about 1.4 million lower in 2025 under its average estimate; studies finding job losses from large increases.

    Best answer The affirmative answers that many studies of past increases find small effects, and CBO’s estimate has a wide range.

  2. N2 One national number ignores regional differences.

    Why $15 is close to typical wages in some low-cost areas, where its effects would be much larger than in high-cost cities.

    Evidence Bureau of Labor Statistics wage data by state and metro area; research on the minimum wage relative to the local median wage.

    Best answer The affirmative replies that the increase can be phased in, and low-cost areas have the most workers living in poverty.

  3. N3 Other tools target poverty better.

    Why Many minimum-wage workers are teenagers or second earners in households above the poverty line, while the EITC goes to low-income working families specifically and doesn’t raise employers’ costs.

    Evidence Census data on the household incomes of minimum-wage workers; research on the EITC’s effects on work and poverty.

    Best answer The affirmative argues the two work together, and the EITC is paid by taxpayers rather than by employers.

  4. N4 Prices may rise and small businesses may struggle.

    Why Restaurants and small shops with thin margins may raise prices or close, and higher prices fall partly on low-income customers.

    Evidence Studies of price effects of minimum-wage increases, especially in restaurants; small-business surveys.

    Best answer The affirmative replies that measured price increases have been small, and higher pay also boosts customer spending.

Strawman or steelman?

A strawman is a weak copy of the other side’s view, easy to knock down and unfair to the people who hold it. A steelman is that view at its strongest. Answer the steelman, and you’ve answered the real argument. (More on steelmanning.)

Affirmative

Strawman “They don’t understand that businesses have costs.”

Why it’s unfair Supporters argue, with evidence, that past increases caused small job effects and businesses adjusted.

Steelman A higher floor raises pay for millions and lifts many out of poverty, and studies of past increases often find small job effects.

Negative

Strawman “They want workers to stay poor.”

Why it’s unfair Opponents argue a high national floor would cost some low-wage workers their jobs and favor tools like the EITC.

Steelman A $15 national floor could cost jobs and hours for the least experienced workers, especially in low-wage regions, while the EITC targets poverty more directly.

Weak arguments to avoid

Affirmative

  • “Raising the minimum wage never costs any jobs.” Even supportive research finds some effects for large increases; overclaiming invites an easy answer.

Negative

  • “Everyone earning minimum wage is a teenager.” Many minimum-wage workers are adults, and some support families. Inaccurate claims hurt credibility.

Questions for cross-examination

Ask the Affirmative

  1. What does CBO estimate for job losses at $15?
  2. How would $15 compare to typical wages in the lowest-wage states?
  3. Would you index the minimum to inflation or to local wages?

Ask the Negative

  1. What does CBO estimate for the number of workers who’d get raises?
  2. Has the real value of $7.25 fallen since 2009?
  3. Should there be any increase? How much?

Reading on both sides

Read at least one source from each side before you debate. Look up each source’s author and publisher too: who wrote it is part of the evidence.

Background and overviews

Both sides in one place

Practice this topic

Sources for the background

  1. The Budgetary Effects of the Raise the Wage Act of 2021, Congressional Budget Office (2021-02-08). Accessed 2026-10-25.
  2. The Effects on Employment and Family Income of Increasing the Federal Minimum Wage, Congressional Budget Office (2019-07). Accessed 2026-10-25.

Teddy Rook Book doesn’t take a side on this resolution. Updated 2026-10-25.

@teddyrookbook GitHub