The map below shows the estimated share and count of workers in each congressional district who would receive wage increases if the Raise the Wage Act of 2021 were enacted into law. The map also breaks down the share of workers who would benefit by age, gender, and race and ethnicity. Hover over any congressional district to see more information about the workforce that would be affected by the proposed federal minimum wage increase. (Grayed areas denote districts where few, if any, workers are likely to be affected by a change in the federal minimum wage because the prevailing state or local minimum wage will already be $15 or higher by 2025.) The table below the map lists all the data for all congressional districts.

Note: This page and map are an update to “The Impact of Raising the Minimum Wage to $15 by 2025, by Congressional District,” Economic Policy Institute, July 25, 2019.

Minimum Wage

Note that the map shows where affected workers live, which may be different from where they work. EPI’s Minimum Wage Simulation Model takes these differences into account by using data from the American Community Survey to compare the proposed change in the federal minimum wage with the prevailing minimum wage where individuals work. Because the map tracks where affected workers live, there may be small numbers of affected workers in congressional districts where the local minimum wage will already exceed $15 in 2025 (some workers living in those congressional districts may work in a different district). See the methodology for greater detail.

In addition, the Raise the Wage Act of 2021 also gradually raises and eliminates the lower minimum wage for tipped workers. In some jurisdictions that will already have a $15 minimum wage in 2025, there may be tipped workers who would be affected by the change in federal policy because their state or local tipped minimum wage law would still be lower than the proposed federal tipped minimum wage. See EPI’s research on the tipped minimum wage for more information.

Minimum Wage

The federal minimum wage is just $7.25 and has not increased since 2009. The Raise the Wage Act of 2019 passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on July 18 would gradually raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025. EPI research shows that raising the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025 would lift pay for over 33 million workers across the country—that’s 22.2 percent of the U.S. workforce. The increases would provide an additional $92 billion in wages for the country’s lowest-paid workers, with the average affected worker who works year-round receiving an extra $2,800 a year.

The map below shows the estimated share and count of workers in each congressional district who would receive wage increases if the Raise the Wage Act of 2019 were enacted into law. The map also breaks down the share of workers who would benefit by age, gender, and race. Click on any congressional district to see more information about the workforce that would be affected by the proposed federal minimum wage increase. The table below the map lists all the data for all congressional districts.

Minimum Wage

Note that the map shows where affected workers live, which may be different from where they work. EPI’s Minimum Wage Simulation Model takes these differences into account by using data from the American Community Survey to compare the proposed change in the federal minimum wage with the prevailing minimum wage where individuals work. As a consequence, there may be small numbers of affected workers in congressional districts where the local minimum wage will already exceed $15 in 2025 because some workers living in that congressional district work in a different district. See the methodology for greater detail.

In addition, the Raise the Wage Act of 2019 also gradually raises and eliminates the lower minimum wage for tipped workers. In some jurisdictions that will already have a $15 minimum wage in 2025, there may be tipped workers who would be affected by the change in federal policy because their state or local tipped minimum wage law would still be lower than the proposed federal tipped minimum wage. See EPI’s research on the tipped minimum wage for more information.

Minimum Wage

The map below shows the share and count of workers in each congressional district that would receive wage increases if the Raise the Wage Act of 2019 were enacted into law. The map also breaks down the share of workers who will benefit by age, gender, and race. Click on any congressional district to see more information about the workforce that would be affected by the proposed federal minimum wage increase. The table below the map lists all the data for all congressional districts.

Minimum Wage

Note that the map shows where affected workers live, which may be different from where they work. EPI’s Minimum Wage Simulation Model takes these differences into account, by using data from the American Community Survey to compare the proposed change in the federal minimum wage with the prevailing minimum wage where individuals work. As a consequence, there may be small numbers of affected workers in congressional districts where the local minimum wage will already exceed $15 in 2024 because some workers living in that congressional district work in a different district. See the methodology for greater detail.

In addition, the Raise the Wage Act of 2019 also gradually raises and eliminates the lower minimum wage for tipped workers. In some jurisdictions that will already have a $15 minimum wage in 2024, there may still be tipped workers who would be affected by the change in federal policy because their state or local tipped minimum wage law would still be lower than the proposed federal tipped minimum wage. See EPI’s research on the tipped minimum wage for more information.

As the infographic shows, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) resulted in growing U.S.-Mexico trade deficits that caused nearly 700,000 lost U.S. jobs between 1993 and 2010.

Likewise, in the first two years the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) took effect, U.S. exports to Korea declined, and growing trade deficits with that country resulted in nearly 60,000 lost U.S. jobs.

This month’s data show that 10 states and the District of Columbia continue to struggle with unemployment rates at or above 10.0 percent (led by Nevada at 13.4 percent, California at 11.7 percent, and the District of Columbia at 11.0 percent), while 19 states plus the District of Columbia have unemployment rates of 9.0 percent or higher.

The geographic impact of the weak recovery is noteworthy. Over the past three months, states in the Northeast lost more than 29,000 jobs, led by New York, which has lost 22,400 jobs since July. Unemployment rates remain persistently very high in the West and the Southeast.

There is some good news in this month’s unemployment rate data: All of the 12 states with statistically significant changes in their unemployment rates from Sept. 2011 to Oct. 2011 experienced declines in their unemployment rates. Similarly, of the 14 states showing statistically significant changes in employment, 13 experienced positive employment growth. (Only Wisconsin lost jobs between Sept. 2011 and Oct. 2011).

Now that the supercommittee has failed to come to an agreement on deficit reduction, Congress needs to shift its focus decisively to job-creation efforts—including investment in infrastructure such as bridges, schools, broadband—vital to the economic prosperity of every state and the nation as a whole.

In September, 19 states and the District of Columbia continued to have unemployment rates of 9 percent or higher, and unemployment surpassed 10 percent in 9 states and the District of Columbia. Even more troubling is the trend over the past three months.  Since June 2011, 28 states and the District of Columbia have seen their unemployment rates rise, and 22 states have lost jobs.  The states that have lost the most jobs over this period are Georgia, Wisconsin, Illinois, Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

When accounting for population growth since the beginning of the recession, every state except North Dakota has a jobs deficit (jobs needed to get back to the pre-recession unemployment rate).  The states with the largest jobs deficits are California (1,780,300), Florida (972,200), Texas (654,100), Georgia (554,300) and North Carolina (515,000).

States continue to see the harmful effects of meeting revenue shortfalls by cutting state budgets, which hurts private sector employment even more dramatically than public sector employment.  Employment trends will improve in every state if the federal government passes a substantial jobs bill as soon as possible.  Unless such a bill passes soon, too many states will continue to see flat or even negative employment growth.

In August, 20 states and the District of Columbia continued to have unemployment rates of 9 percent or higher, and unemployment surpassed 10 percent in 9 states and the District of Columbia. Even more troubling is the trend over the past three months.  Since May 2011, 20 states and the District of Columbia have lost jobs.

When accounting for population growth since the beginning of the recession, every state except North Dakota has a jobs deficit (jobs needed to get back to pre-recession unemployment rate).  The states with the largest jobs deficits are California (1,807,000), Florida (986,000) and Texas (634,000).

Too many states are seeing the harmful effects of meeting revenue shortfalls by cutting budgets.  Recently unemployed teachers, police officers and firefighters aren’t able to contribute to a sound economic recovery.  Workers in every state need the federal government to pass a substantial jobs bill as soon as possible.

These numbers highlight the necessity of shifting national policy discussions to the immediate economic needs of the American people.  State and federal lawmakers need to work together to put America back to work.  The lack of jobs remains the real crisis facing the nation—other matters, such as the political wrangling over the debt ceiling, are distractions.

Nearly half the states—24—continue to have total employment that is at least 5.0% less than at the beginning of the recession.  Two states—Nevada and Arizona—have job losses that still exceed 10.0% of December 2007 employment levels (13.8% and 10.3% respectively).  The number of states that have lost jobs over the past year (since May 2010) has grown to 12 (including the District of Columbia).  The number of states that have lost jobs in the previous three months has similar spiked, to 18 (including the District of Columbia), up from just seven in April.

On a more positive note, Texas, Alaska, North Dakota and the District of Columbia continue to have employment levels greater than at the beginning of the recession.

These numbers highlight the importance of shifting the national discussion to the immediate economic needs of the American people.  The best way to address longer-term deficit and debt issues is to put Americans back to work today.  State and federal lawmakers need to work together to put America back to work.