Home Page > Editorial and Op-Ed
Editorial: More Pay, But for More Work
Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:28:00
At a time when fears of a recession are increasing and voter confidence in the State Legislature remains low, giving a pay raise to the members of the Assembly and State Senate seems totally counterintuitive. And yet, a pay raise is precisely the right thing to do—provided that the job itself is reshaped too.
It is true that the current annual base salary of $79,500 is more than many New Yorkers make. But that number, even when paired with various leadership stipends, is still well below what many private sector jobs pay to experienced and valuable professionals. Public service is meant to be a calling, and the honor of serving should perhaps make up for some hit in salary. Some. But when state legislators are making less than half of the standard base salary for associates right out of law school at Wall Street firms, there is a problem.
The Legislature should attract the best and brightest in all fields from across the state. Crucial to doing so is making their salaries at least somewhat more comparable to what would be available to them in other professions. Not only would this almost certainly lead to more bright and capable candidates running for office, but it would also help reduce the pull so many legislators feel to trade in their member pins for offices in lobbying firms.
So raise the salaries. Raise them by a lot. Double them, even.
But do so only on the condition that the jobs are made full-time. This state has more than enough problems to keep legislators busy year-round for decades. Aside from the need to supplement their incomes, there is no excuse for members of both chambers not to be in Albany from January through December, working out compromises and passing legislation to address the numerous problems that are left hanging each time a session ends. Agreement on three or four issues, however major, should not count as a successful session. But what else can we expect when the clock ticks down to June each year, and many legislators go back home to their districts, able to take the impasses off the top of their agendas for another six months?
Proponents of keeping the Legislature part-time tend to trumpet the supposed merits of having citizen legislators who can walk among the people, and thus better represent them in Albany. At this point, though, the best representation for the people would likely be spending a little less time walking among them, and a little more time solving their problems.
Proponents of the half-year session also argue that having the legislators at home for six months helps with constituent services. This in mind, we suggest that additional allocations for constituent service staffing be allocated along with the pay raises and the switch to a full-time Legislature.
Decades ago, Congress used to be part-time as well. Then they realized there was too much for them to do to allow them to leave Washington for half the year, so they now commute from across the country to represent the people’s interest on the federal level. The State Legislature should follow suit. Worth noting: the base congressional salary is $169,300.
It is true that the current annual base salary of $79,500 is more than many New Yorkers make. But that number, even when paired with various leadership stipends, is still well below what many private sector jobs pay to experienced and valuable professionals. Public service is meant to be a calling, and the honor of serving should perhaps make up for some hit in salary. Some. But when state legislators are making less than half of the standard base salary for associates right out of law school at Wall Street firms, there is a problem.
The Legislature should attract the best and brightest in all fields from across the state. Crucial to doing so is making their salaries at least somewhat more comparable to what would be available to them in other professions. Not only would this almost certainly lead to more bright and capable candidates running for office, but it would also help reduce the pull so many legislators feel to trade in their member pins for offices in lobbying firms.
So raise the salaries. Raise them by a lot. Double them, even.
But do so only on the condition that the jobs are made full-time. This state has more than enough problems to keep legislators busy year-round for decades. Aside from the need to supplement their incomes, there is no excuse for members of both chambers not to be in Albany from January through December, working out compromises and passing legislation to address the numerous problems that are left hanging each time a session ends. Agreement on three or four issues, however major, should not count as a successful session. But what else can we expect when the clock ticks down to June each year, and many legislators go back home to their districts, able to take the impasses off the top of their agendas for another six months?
Proponents of keeping the Legislature part-time tend to trumpet the supposed merits of having citizen legislators who can walk among the people, and thus better represent them in Albany. At this point, though, the best representation for the people would likely be spending a little less time walking among them, and a little more time solving their problems.
Proponents of the half-year session also argue that having the legislators at home for six months helps with constituent services. This in mind, we suggest that additional allocations for constituent service staffing be allocated along with the pay raises and the switch to a full-time Legislature.
Decades ago, Congress used to be part-time as well. Then they realized there was too much for them to do to allow them to leave Washington for half the year, so they now commute from across the country to represent the people’s interest on the federal level. The State Legislature should follow suit. Worth noting: the base congressional salary is $169,300.
