Pay problem: most legislative salaries lag behind the private sector, but raising them can cause a political firestorm.

• Author: Cullen, Morgan

Legislators are leaving their homes and families this month and returning to statehouses to face the fallout of a still-sluggish economy, the phase out of federal stimulus money and more cuts to vital state services.

Although most lawmakers would agree the gratification that comes with public service far outweighs the personal sacrifices involved, the job has become tougher. Economic hard times demand lawmakers work longer hours, spend more time away from home and postpone some career goals.

Like many of their constituents, their salaries have not kept pace with their workload. Most legislators have forgone salary increases in recent years, and five states even reduced compensation last year. In 2009, California--the country's highest paid legislature--lowered salaries by 18 percent from $116,208 to $95,291.

Like many tough decisions facing states, reducing legislative salaries has consequences, especially in states where salaries are already low. Maintaining adequate legislative compensation promotes diversity among elected officials so the entire population is adequately represented. If pay is a significant barrier to public service, many potential candidates will not be able to serve in the legislature.

"Salary is an especially important component that can alter the recruitment landscape for any legislature" says Gary Moncrief of Boise State University.

He notes that, in 1998, then Colorado Senator Norma Anderson told him there were a lot more people running for the legislature than in previous years, perhaps because there was a substantial increase in salary--from $17,500 to $30,000--beginning with the 1999 legislative session.

In most legislatures, it's up to lawmakers to decide if they should raise their own salaries, making it almost impossible to do so. The issue is often too politically charged to touch. Fourteen states have not raised legislative salaries in at least 10 years, and others have seen only a modest increase. Many legislators agree the political fallout of raising their salaries isn't worth the trouble.

30 YEARS AND COUNTING

Louisiana is a case study in the politics of pay. Two years ago, lawmakers decided it was time to raise their salaries. Legislators hadn't received a salary increase since 1980. In those 30 years, the compensation of Louisiana legislators declined by 15 percent in real terms--taking inflation into account--without even considering the increase in workload. In the last 40 years, the time demands of legislative work in Louisiana have gone from about a one-third time job to one that legislators estimate to be about three-quarters of a full-time job.

Lawmakers argued an increase was necessary to ensure all Louisianans could effectively serve in the Legislature regardless of age or wealth. Representative Joe Harrison, who supported the bill, believes increasing legislative salaries is fundamental to democracy.

"In my district, I have experienced four hurricanes and an oil spill since I took office. That keeps me working 60 hours a week year-round," he says. "I have colleagues in the Legislature who are leaving simply because they can no longer afford to serve. Eventually our Legislature will consist of only the very wealthy or retired people. We will have eliminated the citizen Legislature as we know it."

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The bill that ultimately passed the House and Senate and arrived on the governor's desk increased Louisiana legislators' pay from $16,800 to $37,500.

Throughout the process, lawmakers supporting the bill were the target of intense criticism in...