The Lawrence Eagle-Tribune
Sunday, November 15, 1998
Lawmakers Head for $100,000
By John Macone
Eagle-Tribune Writer
Many voters were outraged when lawmakers gave themselves a 55 percent pay raise in 1994.
They may not realize that on Nov. 3 they
themselves approved a raise that in the long run is far more generous to lawmakers -- and
guaranteed in the state constitution.
"They are now the only human beings
in the world, as far as I know, who have constitutionally guaranteed pay raises,"
said Barbara Anderson, executive director of
Citizens for Limited Taxation and Government.
"They will eventually be the highest paid legislature in the country, and there's
nothing we can do about it."
Question 1 on the November ballot,
approved by a 68-32 margin, took away lawmakers' power to raise their pay from its current
base of $46,410 a year.
But it put future raises on automatic
pilot -- tying legislative pay to the growth in the state's median household income. Over
the past 20 years, that has gone up an average of 5 percent a year, according to figures
from the U.S. Census Bureau.
In effect, Question 1 accomplished what
lawmakers sought in 1994: raises that reflect the growing incomes of the state's workers.
But it does it in a quiet way that spares them the wrath of angry constituents, said Mrs.
Anderson.
Every two years, starting in 2001,
lawmakers will get a raise that goes up -- or, in theory, down -- by the same percentage
as the median household income over the prior two years.
In 1997, the most recent year for which
there is a figure, median household income was $41,212, according to the U.S. Census
Bureau.
Charles Tontar, associate professor of
economics at Merrimack College, said projections of median income in the Merrimack Valley,
which closely mirrors the statewide figures, show the median income could increase by as
much as 10 percent per year through 2005, thanks to the region's booming economy.
"Good lord, I'd love to have that
deal," he said of the Question 1 raises.
The pay raise plan was initiated by
state lawmakers in response to the criticism they took in 1994.
"It takes the politics out of pay
raises," said state Rep. Barry R. Finegold, D-Andover, echoing many lawmakers who
supported the amendment.
Lawmakers raised their pay to $30,000 in
1983. Then, just weeks after the 1994 election, they raised it to $46,410, drawing howls
of protest from critics who said the move was stealthily engineered to diffuse voter anger
-- voters would have to wait two years to try to throw out the raise, or the legislators
who voted for it.
Lawmakers argued they were raising their
pay in keeping with the increase in the household median income.
Critics did try to revoke the raise with
a ballot question, but it was thrown out by the state Supreme Judicial Court.
State Sen. James P. Jajuga, D-Methuen,
who also supported Question 1, said it makes sense to tie legislative pay to the fortunes,
or misfortunes, of the average working family. From now on, legislators will be affecting
their own pocketbooks when they pass laws that affect the economy and the wealth of the
average person.
"It's very distracting and
time-consuming to vote for your own pay raise," he said. "This way, the
Legislature gets treated like everyone else."
In 1994, he said, citizens were not
upset by the raise but its size: 55 percent.
"I'm like anyone else: I have a
mortgage, I have to pay for my car, I have bills to pay," he said. "The feeling
was we had gone so long without a raise, certainly no one in any other business would go
so long."
He makes $54,000 per year, including a
$7,500 bonus as chairman of the Senate Public Safety Committee on top of his $46,410 base
pay.
Hard to change
To change the state's Constitution,
lawmakers had to convene a constitutional convention and vote twice to adopt the amendment
before sending it to voters for final approval.
Because it was passed as a
constitutional amendment, citizens would have a hard time reversing it without the
Legislature's support.
Mrs. Anderson doubts the Legislature
would go along, given its resistance to efforts to put term limits in the state
Constitution.
Leaders in the Legislature refused to
even bring term limits to a vote at their constitutional conventions, which forced term
limit proponents to take their case directly to voters in the form of a ballot question.
Voters approved term limits, but the state Supreme Court again sided with lawmakers and
threw the law out as unconstitutional.
Mrs. Anderson said she thinks voters did
not know what they were approving when they passed Question 1, misled by the first
sentence of the question stating lawmakers will be prohibited from raising their own pay.
"A lot of people I talked to said,
'Yeah, I'm going to vote for this and tuck it to the Legislature,'" she said.
"The thing they missed was what the rest of it said."
The second sentence described how the
pay increases would be determined. She thought even people who read it did not understand
how large an increase lawmakers were getting.
If the state's median household income
continues to grow at 5 percent per year, lawmakers will be making $74,744 a decade from
now and close to $100,000 by 2015. Pensions will also rise for retired lawmakers.
Mrs. Anderson said the Constitutional
amendment has loopholes that could mean even bigger increases.
For one thing, the question only
addresses "base pay."
Many Democratic lawmakers also get
$7,500 bonuses for chairing committees, while leaders such as the Senate president and
House speaker get bonuses of $34,590.
Chairmen are appointed by legislative
leaders, who also set the amount of the bonuses.
"If times get tough, everyone could
be called a leader, and everyone could get bonuses," she said.
Another loophole lies in the way the
median family income will be determined, said Mrs. Anderson.
"The governor decides what it is,
he could use any formula. There's no requirement that he use real figures," she said.
Gov. A. Paul Cellucci said he voted
against the ballot question because he did not like the automatic pay increase provision.
This report was prepared by Statehouse
reporter John Macone. If you have questions, comments or material to add on this subject,
please feel free to contact him by phone at 685-1000, by mail at Box 100, Lawrence, MA
01842, or by e-mail at jmacone@eagletribune.com.