Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** New court ruling may force special Senate election
Posted in:
* A good friend of mine and I were talking recently about how legislative salaries have gotten so high that maybe some members were just too eager to stick around.
Now, I’m not one of those people who thinks that legislators work only during session. Most work quite hard when there is no session. It’s also a thankless job. I wouldn’t do it.
* But the Illinois Policy Institute has a new report out that ought to be given some notice…
Today, Illinois state representatives and senators earn a base salary of $67,836—the fifth-highest legislator salary in the country. Only California, Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania pay their legislators more.
Illinois state representatives and senators earn around 47 percent more than the average Illinois resident, who earns $46,110 a year according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Occupations in Illinois receiving comparable compensation to legislators include microbiologists, physics professors, credit analysts and tax examiners.
It wasn’t always this way. Up until 1897, Illinois legislators received no salary and were paid by the number of days in session, starting at 2 dollars per day for the first 42 days and dropping to 1 dollar each day after, along with 10 cents per mile for travel. In 1909, salaries increased to $1,000 and have since gradually increased. Since 1967, legislative leaders have acquired additional compensation, and since 1989, so have committee chairmen and minority spokesmen.
Their full report has a chart plotting this gradual increase…
* They also played with some numbers and came up with this…
A survey by the Illinois Policy Institute found that the 10 states with the lowest legislator salaries only had budget deficits of 19 percent in their general funds for the last fiscal year. In stark contrast, the 10 states with the highest legislator salaries had budget deficits for the last fiscal year that amounted to 30 percent in their general funds.
I’m not sure that really means a whole lot. Texas, for instance, is on the low end of the salary scale, but they have huge oil and natural gas reserves that generously pad its state budget. And California’s 64.5 percent deficit plays heck with that average. Also, if you want to live in Arkansas, Nebraska or Mississippi, be my guest.
* Still there is no denying that in these trying times, the salaries look way out of whack. Yes, many legislators are “full time.” But this is supposed to be a citizens’ assembly, not a professional legislature. If they want to be paid like full-timers, then they probably ought to be subjected to a lot more rules on outside incomes.
Thoughts?
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:12 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** New court ruling may force special Senate election
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
That’s just the base salary. What’s the actual average salary for legislators?
Comment by soccermom Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:20 pm
As Illinois is the 5th largest state by population, this seems about right to me.
Comment by old pol Mike Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:21 pm
I imagine that Downstate legislators probably work more frequently in their district offices than most of their Chicago counterparts do when the General Assembly is out of session. Downstate legislators are considered important officeholders. In Chicago, serving in Springfield is viewed as a lesser office than being a ward alderman.
Looking at the older salaries, one can appreciate legislators holding second jobs or selling insurance or practicing law. Now, it is a case of full-time wages for part-time work.
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:33 pm
Almost every legislator has a committee chairmanship or minority spokesperson role which gives them an extra ~$10k if I recall. Note, most committees never (or very rarely) meet.
Comment by John Bambenek Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:35 pm
“Occupations in Illinois receiving comparable compensation to legislators include microbiologists, physics professors, credit analysts and tax examiners.”
Physics professors? earning only $67K? You must mean physics grad students.
Comment by Jay Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:37 pm
1. Make it a fulltime legislature, and ban outside incomes.
2. Tie legislative salaries to the median salary for a college graduates for the previous year, INCLUDING those who are unemployed but looking for work.
3. Provide forgiveness for college student loans over a four-year period to legislators.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:37 pm
We need to make them full time and forbid outside income, or make them part time and limit session to 90 days per year. It is not right for legislators to make 70+K per year and still pull down tens of thousands from law firms and labor unions which are basically no show special interest payoffs.
What is most offensive is that they make twice the average income of IL residents and the left town early without even taking a hard look at the budget which is their most essential job function. It would be easier to swallow if they worked into August and said we just can’t find any more options. But when you screw the people, violate the constitution, and buzz out of town early with your paycheck, it is a little hard to swallow.
Comment by the Patriot Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:39 pm
There may be less to this than meets the eye. Are the salaries in the Chart adjusted for inflation? If not, if you take the 1971 figure - $17,500 - and adjust for inflation, you would get $91,676.47 in 2009 - see http://www.westegg.com/inflation/ And if you took the $12,000 figure for 1969 and adjusted for inflation, you would get $69,435.47 in 2009. Usually when IPI is analyzing something in state finances, they are always complaining about it growing faster than inflation. In this case, I guess that tack didn’t work, so they took another one. They produce some of the most result-driven “research” in Illinois politics. They know the result they want, and their research reaches it.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:45 pm
Make it a fulltime legislature, and ban outside incomes.
Make it part time. Limit terms and cut the salaries in half. They should be part time citizen legislators and not full time politicians. Also go to two year budget cycle and limit leadership autocratic powers.
JMHO
Comment by downstate hack Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:47 pm
The base salaries, and even the actual salaries, seem like a bargain to me compared to the cost of bad legislation. Suspending disbelief for a moment, I’d like to think that paying adequate salaries might contribute to them spending more time on their legislative work and doing a better job. The thing that is a source of concern, even outrage, for me is the pension and benefit situation, which I think hides much higher costs than salaries. They should just be under SERS and be done with it. Maybe then they could find a way to make the contributions.
Comment by Excessively Rabid Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:52 pm
If you have a legislature that is dedicated, honest, where all members work hard to resolve the issues of the State and are responsive to those who elected them and this is not an issue. We do not have that, hence the issue.
I would agree though that id Legislators are claiming that their jobs are full time. And they get benefits because of that, ie: a higher “full time salary”, furlough day costs that are based on a 24/7/365 day schedule, then they should not be allowed to hold down or work at a second career or they are charged with theft.
I know the argument is that the GA is elected and state employees are hired. But if a State Employee does any work on State time or equipment that is personal in nature where they derive a benefit it is unethical and illegal and they will be fired for it. Since elected State officials apparently fall under the same ethics and laws, then any legislator who claims to work 27/7/365 days to realize a personal gain by reducing the worth of their day to have less deducted from their pay is in violation if they do anything else at a second job where they are compensated or realize personal gain. They have by their own admission stated that every waking minute of their time as a GA member is their legislative job. Then they cannot legally do anything during those waking moments or they are in violation of the same rules that govern any other employee.
I would think that some of them should be nervous about now.
Comment by Irish Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:53 pm
Breaking news! Rich says Blago was right!!
Seriously though, most of the crazy increases came long before our recent troubles. Hard to argue with some sort of cost-of-living adjustment, and I’m always skeptical of these “historical/hysterical” charts that do little more than point out that inflation has happened.
Here’s a more serious approach, adjusting for CPI:
1953 salary in today’s dollars: $40.8K
1971 salary in today’s dollars: $91.5K
1980 salary in today’s dollars: $74.1K
1990 salary in today’s dollars: $62K
2000 salary in today’s dollars: $70.6k
One could argue that legislative salaries haven’t kept up for inflation in the last decade, mostly because of Rod’s fight with the GA. So they just created leadership bumps and made the data above less relevant.
My preference would be to index legislative salaries to the median after-tax wage of the state — now THAT would change the self-interest calculation.
Comment by Vibes Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:55 pm
They are all way overpaid, even if they were doing a good job, and none of them are doing a good job. Plus does this even include all the extra money they get for leadership titles and committees they sit on? It’s disgusting.
Most of the guys and gals in our legislature would be selling insurance or handling dog bite cases in some podunk law practice without this gig, and they know it. So it’s hardly a shock they sell out at every opportunity if they think it improves their chances for survival.
Last I heard in Indiana they get like 11 grand a year. That should be our model. Let’s require some sacrifice. And if we get lots of people too rich too steal, that’s okay too. Would also likely get lots of retirees too old to carouse in the watering holes down there. Again, not a bad thing.
Comment by just sayin' Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:57 pm
Banning outside incomes is probably a no brainer seeing how a lot of these guys use their position to make additional money. There is a conflict of interest here and I can’t understand why they are getting away with it.
Also, the salary level isn’t the problem. It’s that we’re not getting our money’s worth from these guys. The current legislature simply isn’t earning their wage.
Comment by Ahoy Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 1:58 pm
The Texas legislature meets once every two years, Rich.
Comment by Cincinnatus Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:02 pm
YDD what a great idea. Lots of young people with little life or real world experience making decisions fresh out of an ideaological world which operates more on theory then practicality
Comment by Ghost Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:09 pm
“If they want to be paid like full-timers, then they probably ought to be subjected to a lot more rules on outside incomes.”
This is a pretty good idea.
Comment by Boone Logan Square Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:09 pm
The only way to judge the “correctness” of legislators’ pay is to use a common metric, like pay per hour in session, or something like that.
Many here say they should be full-time. I think that we should restructure the government, and have them meet less. Right now, they have too much time in session. This allows them to pass unnecessary laws (why does the number of laws always increase, and a current law never goes away) to fill their time. Less time in session would force the legislature to focus its attention on the truly required, and maybe then they would not pass a stinking new law for everything.
Comment by Cincinnatus Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:10 pm
Paying the legislators a full-time salary opens the system up to more potential office-holders. When it is part-time (say, 90 days), many people would not be able to run for office. Most jobs won’t let you take off for 1/4 of the year. If you want to attract some good people to the job, you need to offer a competitive wage.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:11 pm
Liiks like a high salary crates an unbalanced budget based on the other states paying more than Illinois.
Reduce the salaries and the defecit will go away! :’)
Comment by plutocrat03 Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:15 pm
How about a two-tier salary? Each new legislator would opt for a full-time salary, with outside earned income forbidden, or a lower part-time salary with another job allowed.
Comment by Reformer Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:15 pm
ghost budget, ghost legislators, solid pay … hmmm… count it as another racket in a nation of rackateurs
Comment by Vole Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:18 pm
Pay for results. If we run a deficient, they don’t get paid. If we run a surplus, they get paid but only while in session and only as much as minimum wage allows.
They can continue to earn their living when they are out of session as they now do.
Eliminate stipends for serving on or chairing committees.
Charge a penalty tax for all benefits they receive from lobbyists, which includes travel, meals, entertainment, and severely restrict that income.
Comment by Justice Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:27 pm
If legislator’s pay was based on merit and performance, IL should be at about #50.
Comment by sal-says Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:27 pm
Jay @1:37, 67 K is a fairly normal 9 mo. salary for physics professors. Sure, some senior full professors do a lot better, but plenty make less than that.
Comment by muon Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:27 pm
Vibes and Anonymous-
Thank you for bringing some common sense to this comment section. The legislators are getting paid real wages that are less than what they were making in the 60’s and 70’s. And I’d venture to say they probably are doing more work in most cases. If that’s not the case, vote someone in who will work hard.
I don’t mind conflict checks on outside income, but the last thing I’d want to impose on someone else is forbidding them to earn outside income of any type.
Comment by Joe Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:34 pm
=== YDD what a great idea. Lots of young people with little life or real world experience making decisions fresh out of an ideaological world which operates more on theory then practicality
===
We forgive college student loans to encourage people to represent our nation through the Peace Corps, serve in our military, teach in our schools, and prosecute AND defend accused criminals.
Why NOT to encourage folks to serve in our legislature.
All the “real world” experiance in the current Legislature hasn’t exactly served us well…and don’t Republicans crow that we need more Aaron Schock’s in public office?
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:34 pm
Salary is just one component of a Legislators compensation. To get an accurate indication of the total compensation of a legislator benefits such as health insurance, pension contributions and other fringe benefits make the total significantly higher for these part time positions. Using a conservative estimate of 20% of salary for benefits, the amount of total compensation is $88,186.
Comment by WRMNpolitics Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:35 pm
muon @2:27 — just looked up the salaries. Here are the U of I Urbana, 67 physics professors earn more than $67K (37 of those earn more than $100K), while 5 earn less than $67K. don’t know about other universities…
Comment by Jay Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 2:37 pm
I think we should pay a lot more attention to who we elect and a lot less to bs issues like how much they get paid. Comparing to average salary across the state and stuff like that is silly crap (another conclusion you could draw is that legislators representing Barrington or Winnetka and so forth are woefully underpaid, and ones from certain downstate rural districts terribly overpaid) Simplistic pap! And, I find it hard to persuade myself that IPI is using it for noble ends.
Politics should be one of the the last areas in which we want average people. We could hardly pay a good legislator too much, could we, and there is no salary sufficient to turn a bad one into a good one, and we get to choose who serves, don’t we?
Comment by steve schnorf Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 3:17 pm
Hey Schnorf, return my call, dude.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 3:21 pm
I know that the legislators who chair committees get paid extra for the chairmanship. I know that the LA’s who clerk the committeess get zip. How is that fair
Comment by Wil Bill Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 3:26 pm
>> Lots of young people with little life or real world experience making decisions fresh out of an ideological world which operates more on theory then practicality
That must be why all those naive young ideologists voted George W Bush into office, twice, while their more experienced elders took the full measure of the man, and opposed him.
Oh wait …
Comment by ZC Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 3:31 pm
steve schnorf said,
“Politics should be one of the the last areas in which we want average people.”
Good lord man, do you really mean this? I could not think of a more elitist statement if I tried. There’s a lot more to a person than his education and pedigree. Many “average people” run the small business where you get your pizza and beer (or arugula and pinot noir in your case), and have more than enough common sense, experience and intelligence to do an infinitely better job than most of the people in State government, elected or otherwise.
The elitist attitude shown in your statement is THE EXACT REASON we see a schism between legislators, administrators and state employees and the voters and taxpayers they serve.
Comment by Cincinnatus Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 3:48 pm
How about we abolish pensions for all elected offices? If the idea is to avoid making public office a career or a source of lifetime security, I’d think that would do the trick. Pay them well, or at least adequately, while they do the job, but if they want to be “set for life” they have to look elsewhere.
Comment by Secret Square Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 3:54 pm
===Also, if you want to live in Arkansas, Nebraska or Mississippi, be my guest===
Hey, lay off Nebraska Rich. Just because they pay their legislators minimum wage doesn’t mean they are in the same league as MI and AR.
Nebraska has given this country so much too, from Henry Fonda to the Rueben Sandwich. It’s the home of Arbor Day and the TV Dinner for crying out loud. Nebraska gave us Gerald Ford, was home to William Jennings Bryant and was where Paul Simon attended college. And there’s Malcom X and Fr. Flanagan too.
And now the Cornhuskers are in the Big 10, so consider the above info as topics of conversation at your tailgate parties in Champaign and Evanston beginning in 2011, right before they kick butt on the gridiron.
Mississippi and Arkansas can’t hold a candle to Nebraska. Did Springsteen title an album “Arkansas?” No. he most certainly did not.
Rich, your anti-Nebraska bias is showing clearly today and I’m calling you on it.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 4:01 pm
==We could hardly pay a good legislator too much==
Define “good.”
Almost all would say that Mike Madigan is a very skilled politician. Far fewer would say that the people of Illinois are better off for his tenure as Speaker. His relatives and cronies are far better off though — he’s certainly been “good” for them.
Comment by Rambler Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 4:04 pm
Jay, my numbers can be found at places like the American Institute of Physics. There are three ranges of professors - assistant, associate, and full. For 2006, the AIP reported salary ranges of 54-69 K, 64-85 K, and 80-120 K for those three ranges respectively. Those are for 9-10 month academic year salaries.
Total salary reported for individual positions at the U of I probably include their grant-supported summer research salaries. Those add 10-20% or more to the salary. I didn’t include the grant income, just the base university salary. To get the median of 67 K, that’s probably what the original source used as well.
Comment by muon Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 4:08 pm
I disagree with your interpretation of steve schnorf’s comment, Cincinnatus. I did not get the impression that he meant that “above average” at all had to mean “education and pedigree”. I took it to mean someone who would be good at the job. Your example of a successful small business owner with the “common sense, experience, and intelligence to do an infinitely better job…” (ignoring your implied slam on the competence levels of current government employees) I would say would be someone who is “above average” and we would want to incentivize them to become legislators. Why not?
Comment by Katydid Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 4:10 pm
We forgive college student loans to encourage people to represent our nation through the Peace Corps, serve in our military, teach in our schools, and prosecute AND defend accused criminals.
These programs exist to fill roles that go unfilled. For example, getting teachers to teach in specific underserved areas or regions. Since when do we not have enough politicians?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 4:11 pm
“Did Springsteen title an album ‘Arkansas’?”
No, but that probably had more to do with the fact that the title track of said album was about a mass murderer (Charlie Starkweather) who happened to be from Nebraska, not Arkansas.
Comment by Secret Square Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 4:24 pm
Katydid,
If that’s what he meant, I stand corrected. On this blog, we see many posters that tend to think career public service employees and legislators have some certain insight that makes them uniquely qualified to pass judgements and hold power over the average person. These people also tend to discount the “average” person’s opinion as somehow invalid or uniformed.
If I grouped steve schnorf among these elitists, I apologize to steve.
Comment by Cincinnatus Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 4:40 pm
If you live in Cowden that would be a good salary. But it isn’t good at all if you are in Wilmette.
Comment by PPHS Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 4:54 pm
You reported the GAs base salary but when you factor in the additional amounts of $28,000 for every made up committee they chair or $9,000 for every committee they are in, their salary places them at #1 in the US for legislative salaries. More troublesome is that the committees meet only every two to for years and they do not have to attend. An example is one Carlinville Senator who chairs four committees and serves on three others. Why don’t you report actual incomes. How do you think they earn retirements of over $150,000 a year or in Emile Jones case get a 50% retirement increase one year after retirement!
Comment by EBCDIC Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 4:57 pm
I just did some quick math. The GA will be in session for 120 days this coming session. If the get a base of $67,836 + $132.00 a day per diem to show io and is the chair on two committees (28,000 per committee) and is on four other committees (9,000 each committee (and that is the average for the GA)). Then he/she would earn approximately $175,676 as a minimum salary or $1,463.97 per day. You really think that this makes them 5th? You got to realize the other states do not pay for committees. Why don’t you publish the actual salaries?
Comment by EBCDIC Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 7:19 pm
Thanks for adjusting those figures for inflation IPI!!
Oh wait…..
Partisan hacks.
Comment by the ghost of bubba Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 9:20 pm
–On this blog, we see many posters that tend to think career public service employees and legislators have some certain insight that makes them uniquely qualified to pass judgements and hold power over the average person.==
Harrumph, harrumph!Judges, judge. Legislators legislate. The executive, manages. Somebody’s gotta do it. Generally, the people who want them the most get them, by all sorts of means as we all know.
They’re important jobs. Do you want an average brain surgeon or an elite one? (I know a pretty good one who works for cheap; he did wonders on my sloped forehead).
Ligthen up, dude. Your posts and the handle “Cincinattus” suggest you think you’re a bit elite, yourself.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Jul 22, 10 @ 10:45 pm
Also, if you want to live in Arkansas, Nebraska or Mississippi, be my guest. Nebraska has a unicameral legislature. Something to think about?
Comment by SAP Friday, Jul 23, 10 @ 5:27 am