OUR VIEW: If it's bad timing for Alabama lawmakers to accept this year's $1,800-a-year cost-of-living raise, wait until next year during the election campaign
Article written by The Editorial Board - The Birmingham News May 09, 2009 2:02 AM
Turning down an $1,800-a-year, cost-of-living increase is a little bit easier than forgoing a $1,900-a-month raise.
So there's nothing surprising about records in the state comptroller's office showing 96 percent of lawmakers accepted a $1,900-a-month raise they voted for themselves two years ago, while just 58 percent said they would take the automatic, $1,800-a-year cost-of-living raise that took effect in April.
"I thought it was bad timing in this environment and economy," state Rep. Craig Ford, D-Gadsden, told Dana Beyerle of the New York Times Regional Newspapers in explaining why he turned down the cost-of-living raise.
It's bad timing for another reason: 2010. As in, next year, when lawmakers seek re-election. The raise lawmakers gave themselves ought to be among many issues Alabama voters should consider in deciding whether to return their representative and senator to Montgomery.
How to judge your lawmaker on that front?
Remember, at the very beginning of the first legislative session after their 2006 election (or re-election), lawmakers used a voice vote to approve the $1,900-a-month increase, which boosted their pay an outrageous 62 percent to almost $50,000 a year for a part-time job. Gov. Bob Riley vetoed the measure, forcing House and Senate members into a recorded vote to override his veto. House members voted 57-41 to override, while the Senate voted 20-15 to defeat Riley's veto.
Unfortunately, those vote totals tell voters less than they need to know. A vote to override the veto was definitely a vote for the pay raise, but a vote against the override didn't necessarily mean a lawmaker opposed the pay raise. It's worth remembering there wasn't a single peep of protest in the House, and little debate in the Senate -- certainly no talkathon filibusters -- before the votes to override.
Probably the best way to know who really opposed the pay increase is to look at who refused to accept it. Of 136 lawmakers, there were a grand total of five: Rep. Paul DeMarco, R-Homewood, and Sens. Del Marsh, R-Anniston, Harri Anne Smith, R-Slocomb, Benjamin Brooks, R-Mobile, and Hank Erwin Jr., R-Montevallo.
But there's been enough fear of political fallout over the pay raise and cost-of-living increase that 57 lawmakers turned down last month's increase. Many of those lawmakers, rather than leaving the money in state coffers, are giving it to charities and schools in their districts. Their raise becomes just a little bit more legislative pork to spread around.
Some lawmakers no doubt hope turning down the automatic increase helps ease any voter anger over the 62 percent pay increase. A whole lot of other lawmakers, especially those who accepted the 2007 increase and this year's cost-of-living raise, are hoping for voter amnesia next year. (Interestingly, there were no long lines of lawmakers lining up to refuse last year's automatic cost-of-living raise, apparently because the media didn't report about it.)
Speaking of 2010, there will be another automatic cost-of-living increase for lawmakers next year, just about the time they're gearing up their re-election campaigns. Talk about bad timing...
