Six area lawmakers vote for legislator pay increase

Some locals believe amended bill won't get Senate approval

By Matthew Penix
St. Tammany News
Published on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 8:16 AM CDT



Some locals believe amended bill won't get Senate approval

Six of nine St. Tammany Parish area legislators voted in favor of their own pay raise last week in what would be the first pay hike for Louisiana lawmakers since 1980. But it won't be clear until early this week if the money will actually hit lawmakers' pocketbooks.

"It's due time (Louisiana) legislators get their pay," freshman state Rep. Scott Simon, R-Abita Springs, said. "I pay for the same price of gas as everyone else."

(Use arrows above to view more photos)

The original bill, approved 20-16 by the Senate, called for a $52,000 annual salary plus per diems, a 300 percent increase from legislators' current pay of less than $17,000 base salary for the part-time job. But House members snubbed that increase and offered an amendment - approved 56-45 - that gives a 130 percent raise to $37,500, with additional raises adjusted for inflation.

The amended pay raise bill now heads back to the Senate, which will likely consider it Tuesday or Wednesday, said Sen. Jack Donahue, R-Mandeville.

If the Senate does not agree with the proposed changes, it cannot amend the bill further and the bill would die. If the Senate approves the changes to SB 672, authored by New Orleans-based Sen. Ann Duplessis, the bill heads to Gov. Bobby Jindal's desk for approval. Jindal has previously said he would not veto the bill but is strongly against the measure.

But some area legislators aren't sure the bill will make it that far.

"I don't have a good feeling on that," said state Rep. Greg Cromer, R-Slidell, who voted in favor of the scaled down raise. "There is a sentiment that it's all or nothing."

Donahue, president and CEO of Donahue/Favret Contractors Inc., solidified Cromer's feelings Friday afternoon. He said he would follow his original vote and vote no again.

"I would be embarrassed" if the measure passed, he said.

"It just doesn't jive with what I do in business," he said. "10 percent to 15 percent increase? That would be reasonable, but to me it's just so out of line. I don't think it's the right thing to do. And the public is making it clear it's not what they want."

Indeed. News of the proposed hike has dominated talk radio, Internet blogs and newspaper headlines for days. The majority of the public, it seems, is against the increase.

But with more than half of the area's legislators offering support and the majority in both the House and Senate favoring raises, it's unclear how the final vote will unfold.

Cromer cited a 2003 study by the Legislative Compensation Commission in supporting his vote. That commission found legislators should earn $41,500 a year, he said. But still, Cromer's constituents said that was too much of an increase, and a happy medium was somewhere in the $30,000 range, he said.

"I felt I voted the way my district wanted me to vote," he said. "They felt the ($50,000) was too large, and I agreed, but the pay raise (from the House) was justifiable by not being as large."

Simon, of Abita Springs, agreed.

He said since 1980, the last time Louisiana lawmakers voted themselves a raise, salaries for other government jobs such as judges, teachers and others increased between 220 percent to more than 300 percent. The raises are needed, he said, to attract quality legislators.

"If you want quality people, fair compensation is needed," he said.

Sen. Ben Nevers, D-Bogalusa, echoed that sentiment. Nevers, alongside A.G. Crowe, R-Slidell, cast a favorable vote.

"Wealthy people can serve, but when you talk about blue collar and poor people, they can't afford $17,000 a year," he said.

"I want representation from people across the state."

A favorable increase would mean "people can quit their jobs and serve the people," he said.

But Louisiana legislators are considered part-time workers by the state, working two sessions a year, a job description Cromer said doesn't fit.

"Yea, it's considered a part-time job, but we go well beyond that if we are doing our jobs right," he said.


Comments

9 comment(s)

    Marlene A wrote on Aug 3, 2008 2:50 PM:

    " Frankly I am disappointed in all these people at this point "

    Stephen R Brown wrote on Jun 26, 2008 2:50 PM:

    " I blame Jindal for this. He gave his word no pay raise and should stick with it. Everyone know's what a crooked louisiana polition will do. he just proved he's one of the good ole boy's. Boss Hogg "

    Ashamed citizen wrote on Jun 19, 2008 4:03 PM:

    " It's politics as usual. They should never be allowed to give themselves a raise. And why are those who voted against the raise going to take it? Seems as if those people knew it was going to pass but they let the others do their dirty work. "

    R. Side wrote on Jun 18, 2008 9:29 AM:

    " Politians. The reason our law enforcement and educational personnel are paid so little is they for the most part go home after work knowing they have made a contribution to thier community. I would gladly vote for doubling both teachers and law enforcement personnel a 100 percent raise.
    I support this raise, only because it may draw hard working dedicated Americans to seek a political office, vice rich bussiness owners who see this as a ticket to better interest rates, and easier obtainable contracts.

    Where does the taxes to that we pay to support our highways and roads. "

    nshorenative wrote on Jun 17, 2008 9:12 PM:

    " I expect every single legislator that voted themselves this raise to get the school bus drivers the same deal. After all, the bus drivers have to use diesel, which is costing more per gallon that gasoline (even though diesel is a byproduct of gasoline..go figure). And Schroder is the smart aleck that made the comment that the bus drivers do not deserve a raise. His day is coming. "

    Dalbo wrote on Jun 17, 2008 4:19 PM:

    " It figures, if I were in a position to vote on a raise for myself in a job i did poorly, I would vote on it everytime. But alas, Im an honest hard working guy. Not a lying thief like these politicians. Run them out of town and make them get a real job. "

    Daniel M. wrote on Jun 17, 2008 8:31 AM:

    " Senator Crowe might not have voted Yes for the $37,500 but he did vote in favor for the $52,000. Seems to me he wanted the bigger piece of the pie. "

    Bob D wrote on Jun 16, 2008 7:49 PM:

    " Scott Simon may pay the same for gas as everyone else, but everyone else isn't compensated at 50.5 cents per mile as are all legislature members are. He also gets $143 a day per diem and a $6000 per year unvouchered expense account on top of his pay. Pretty good deal for only 4 months of work per year. If it's such a bad gig, how come they all want to run for state senate when they become term limited?????????

    I don't care if they voted for it or not I (they rigged it)......THEY ALL NEED TO GO!!!!! "

    LindaCrowe wrote on Jun 16, 2008 5:35 PM:

    " Senator Crowe voted NO on Monday.
    Please change his voting record. "

WRITE A COMMENT

Use the form below to post a brief comment to this story, or respond to other readers. Please use the word count tool to assist you in keeping your remarks to 100 words or fewer.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. They review submitted comments periodically during the day for offensive or off-topic content before posting. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The St. Tammany News is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.
* Personal Information (phone numbers, addresses, etc.)

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in thesttammanynews.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the St. Tammany News. The St. Tammany News does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized St. Tammany News spokespersons.

Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

(optional)
Current Word Count: