About

The Albany Project seeks to return New York State Government to its rightful owners - the people.

New York Blogwire

This belongs to you. Take it back...

No Reform, No Raise Redux

by: phillip anderson

Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 09:57:04 AM EDT

Back in December we launched a project we called "No Reform? No Raise!", an effort to compell legislators to earn a pay raise that many members desperately wanted to vote for themselves by first adopting some badly needed reforms. Now it appears that we may have to resurrect that initiative, though this time we may have to call it "No Accountability? No Raise!" or, perhaps, more aptly, "No Guts? No Raise!". Once again, it's the Assembly Dems that are pushing an idea that would raise legislator's pay, only this proposal would make such increases automatic, freeing them from having to actually having to vote for them. The New York Daily News has more:

Pols' new pay-raise plan

State lawmakers would get automatic pay raises every four years, without having to take the politically risky vote to beef up their own paychecks, under a new bill Assembly Democrats are pushing.
The Assembly is adopting Chief Judge Judith Kaye's proposal to set up a salary review commission that would adjust the pay of both lawmakers and judges every four years, a spokesman for Speaker Sheldon Silver (D-Manhattan) confirmed last night.
The bill takes the thorny issue of higher salaries for lawmakers out of the legislative process, giving the commission binding authority to set the pay levels.
The base pay for the part-time lawmakers is $79,500 a year, but many earn far more than $90,000 with the extra pay they get for committee and leadership assignments.
...
The governor has indicated he is not willing to consider higher pay for lawmakers until they begin adopting legislative reforms.

I'm not unsympathetic to many ofthe arguments made for higher pay for legislators. Really. But, do we really want to remove all accountability from the process? At a minimum, they should earn a raise by actually doing some work in the public interest, by adopting some significant reforms (reforming the rules comes to mind) before considering a raise for part time work. But, relieving themselves from having to take a stand on the issue of legislative pay raises seems cowardly and undemocratic.

Want a raise? Take a stand, lawmakers. Vote for it.

phillip anderson :: No Reform, No Raise Redux

Poll

Make 'em vote:

Yes
No
It's complicated...

Results

Tags: No Reform No Raise, Assembly, Reform, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

No Reform, No Raise Redux | 5 comments

No Reform, No Raise; Know Reform, Know Raise (0.00 / 1)

Perhaps the campaign title aught to be amended to the above?

Were these were Union men, lugging steel and making a living, I'd be all for giving them mandatory raises incrementally. However, most white-collar raises are tied to performance, why should legislators be any different?

One could make the argument that simply having remained in office means that you've already passed the bar for constituents in your home district. In a perfect world, yes. But with incumbency being what it is in New York that doesn't really wash. Besides which, a raise every four years means only two elections per raise. Not exactly stringent criterion, now is it?

And of course lastly, my boss knows when I get a raise, and I'd still like to at least think of my role as voter being a kind boss to the Legislature, wouldn't you?

Watching from just above the water line. . . .

by: DragonFlyEye @ Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 16:39:27 PM UTC

oily politicians, again... (0.00 / 0)

"slippery" is the accurate descriptor for most NYS politicians. Our state government needs a good degreasing as well as a delousing. Their MO always seems to be: pull the wool over everybody's eyes as often as possible, proactively if possible, then act innocent.

Fasten your seatbelts; it's going to be a bumpy night.

by: Glorfindel @ Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 18:53:00 PM UTC

It's not just a NY problem. (0.00 / 0)

Here in Michigan, our legislators are the second highest paid in the country, behind California, topping out at $72K and change. Right now, our Democratic Speaker of the House is working to cut lifetime benefits for lawmakers (we're stuck with ridiculously short term limits) in order to help the economic crisis we're in because of the demise of the auto industry. Of course, plenty of lawmakers (current and former) are mad, but it's not like they can say much without angering their constituents.

Legislators do deserve to be paid for what they do, but they need to earn it. After all, they serve at our pleasure.

Liberal, Loud and Proud from the great state of Michigan

by: LiberalLucy @ Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 19:05:55 PM UTC

So what are the (4.00 / 1)

next steps? Lobbying? LTEs, phone calls?

I am much better at being helpful when someone articulates a problem and then says "If you are interested in this issue, here is what you can do."

It is one thing to "call" for our legislators to do something, and another to put or weight behind it.

What a long, strange trip it's been.

by: LuLu @ Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 22:00:23 PM UTC

On pay scales (0.00 / 0)

I go both ways on this. While, yes, $79K is a pretty nice salary for six months of work per year, at the same time it's really not a six month job. It's a full time job (if done right, anyway). And, again, not a bad salary - but most of these members, if they worked in the private sector (no, not all, not by any means, but most, as many are attorneys, for example) they would be making three, four, five times that salary. Hell, if they worked as lobbyists they'd be making that *and* probably working less than they do now. Sure, political office is a choice - but just like with any job, you can't keep good people without good compensation.

On the other hand, as one commenter above pointed out, raises should be tied to performance. I agree with that, as well. However, they give themselves raises, and when they do, they give it to everyone - wouldn't it make more sense to have something independent decide whether they get raises? I'm not sure how that would be implemented - any thoughts from any of you?

by: irisira @ Tue Mar 13, 2007 at 11:14:44 AM UTC