In a huge surprise, SCA 23 which would prohibit the Calif. Citizens Compensation Commission from awarding pay raises to legislators during a budget deficit year, failed in Senate committee today. It also provided clarification that the Commish could decrease those same salaries if it saw fit to do so.
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:00 am
Doug –
You’re being cynical – please think this bad policy through before you snipe.
For the record – this bill cannot effect me in any way. I’m termed out and can never serve in the legislature again for the rest of my life (I’ve maxed out in both houses). I say this because I want readers to understand there is absolutely no self motivation for my NO vote. In fact, as I said in committee, voting YES could’ve been a cheap and easy vote for me – because I could’ve done it without feeling any of the consequences.
I voted NO because this is just terrible policy. Authors of bills like these (this one being authored by Senator Maldonado) tend to introduce them to get headlines. It’s bad public policy, but the newspapers eat it up.
Here’s why I voted NO: It’s real simple – if you control someone’s pay – YOU CONTROL THEM.
Now, I know, lots of Californians think that if you’re elected to the legislature that that means you’re a rich wealthy fat cat. That just simply isn’t true.
Granted there are some very wealthy legislators (they also tend to be the ones that introduce and support bills like this – doesn’t really affect them much), but a lot of legislators live month to month – like the rest of the real world.
So, what did Senator Maldonado’s bill do? It said if the budget was in deficit – or the economy (state or national) was bad – that the Pay Commission could cut legislators pay.
Now if you’re a cynical Californian and think that legislators are self-motivated (like I believe), then let’s look forward into the future. If we have a deficit – and a wayward, self-interested, living month-to-month financially, Republican knows that unless we RAISE TAXES he (or she) is going to get a pay cut – that is exactly what he/she will do —– it gives a real perverse incentive to justify a tax increase.
If you don’t think this will happen, you don’t really understand that legislators are people too – with all their weaknesses and fears.
I know several members that are over extended and living day to day financially. Hey, we learned today that CONGRESSWOMAN Richardson just had her house foreclosed – because she couldn’t make her mortgage payments.
There is a reason why the U.S. constitution prohibits the congress from reducing federal judges pay – because if you can control someones pay, you can control them.
Our forefathers saw this – Abel Maldonado didn’t.
And, here’s the best proof of all. I made the tax arguement in committee today and Senator Don “raise taxes, raise taxes” Perata agreed with me and voted YES on the bill! He knew a law like this would make it a lot easier to raise taxes.
If you don’t believe me – believe Don Perata.
Good headlines don’t necessarily make good public policy.
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:00 am
If a Republican is willing to raise taxes because he took a pay cut then they should not be an elected official. I have no sympathy for elected officials who are forced to take a pay cut because they fail to get the job done. If you can’t live on the pay of an elected official then quit and go into the public sector, there is a line of people just waiting to take your place. I can’t recall any candidate ever say I’m running because of how well this job pays. If you are living month to month maybe your focus should be getting your own financial house in order, if you can’t balance your own budget we can’t trust you to balance the state’s budget. I think I speak for the vast majority of citizens when I say boohoo the legislators can’t pay their own bills.