Since Wikard v. Filburn "Interstate commerce" includes anything that might be seen as effecting interstate commerce (including non commercial activity that occurs only within one state like the grain grown that wasn't for sale in the case).
Even without that expansive definition of interstate commerce, if any of your supplies and equipment is from out of state and you paid for it, then you've engaged in interstate commerce. A mom and pop pizza shop that doesn't sell a single slice outside their state, probably buys sauce or cheese or toppings from out of state, has ovens made from out of state, take credit cards from a company incorporated out of state, has phones that were not made in the same state, might have a table or a refrigerator, or a cutting board, or a pizza cutter from out of state. Most business wouldn't even know where most of their stuff comes from, and it would be pretty hard to keep it all from one state.
Employers can't legally get away with paying less then federal minimum wage (yes they can pay lower wages with tip credit, but that is the federal minimum wage for those employees.
The real exemptions are only for workers with disabilities, full time students, people under 20 for 90 days, tipped employees and "student learners" (internships etc.) . And most of these people are also subject to federal minimum wage restrictions, they just have lower federal minimum wages (young trainees $4.25/hour for up to 90 days, $6.16/hour for some full time students, $2.13 for tipped employees, $5.44 for those in vocational training).
So the state's lower minimum wage doesn't matter much.
Not to mention that if if did Kansas wasn't at all the lowest, in fact some states have no minimum wage at all (other then the federal standard that applies to the vast majority of workers in their state)
Your whole "the experiment has been run" is just flat out wrong. |
