|
Help save yourself
— join CLT
today! |
CLT introduction and membership application |
What CLT saves you from the auto excise tax alone |
Make a contribution to support
CLT's work by clicking the button above
Ask your friends to join too |
Visit CLT on Facebook |
Barbara Anderson's Great Moments |
Follow CLT on Twitter |
CLT UPDATE
Friday, January 20, 2017
|
Despite the usual Massachusetts political intrigue and
treachery that follows below, congratulations to the
United States of America and we its citizens as today we
celebrate the inauguration of the nation’s 45th
president, Donald J. Trump. It’s so encouraging and
refreshing to look forward to a new president, not from
the political class, who has vowed to “Make America
Great Again!” |
Committee hears unconstitutional pay
raise proposal
"All
eyes are on Washington, DC this week with the
inauguration of the 45th President of the United States
of America occurring on Friday. While the world is
focused on President-Elect Donald J. Trump and his
incoming administration we'll also be keeping a weather
eye on Beacon Hill. When nobody's watching is when
mischief sneaks in."
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
CLT Update
Monday, January 16, 2017
Citizens for Limited Taxation is
blasting Massachusetts lawmakers who are interested in
reviewing their compensation levels.
Lawmakers are planning a Thursday hearing on
a 2014 report from a compensation commission that found pay
for the state's constitutional officers and legislative
leaders is "generally outdated and inadequate." The
commission recommended pay increases....
Base pay for Massachusetts lawmakers is
currently $62,547, though leaders receive additional pay due
to their positions. The pay is adjusted through a mechanism
in the state's constitution, and lawmakers just received an
increase to the current level.
"This makes them the sixth-highest paid
state legislators in the nation, even without their
additional leadership and committee pay, expenses, and per
diems," Citizens for Limited Taxation said in a
statement Wednesday.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate
President Stanley Rosenberg make roughly $97,000 a year,
according to the State House News Service.
The group also noted that the hearing on the
2014 report is being held on Thursday, which is the day
before "the inauguration of a new President of the United
States of American when all eyes will be on Washington."
Voters passed a 1998 statewide ballot
question setting up the mechanism to determine salaries, and
it was "sold to voters as a means to prevent legislators
from ever again voting to increase their salaries," the
group said.
"Now legislative leaders are looking for
ways to end-run the constitution to boost their pay even
more," the group added.
The Springfield Republican
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Citizens for Limited Taxation group rips
Massachusetts lawmakers for exploring increase in pay
At first blush, the sudden attempt by Beacon
Hill leaders to pass huge pay hikes for themselves appears
to face serious hurdles: a potential gubernatorial veto, a
conflict of interest prohibition, and the possibility that
opponents will ask voters to repeal it in next year’s state
election.
But legislative leaders, who bristle over
salaries they consider paltry, might just be able to pull it
off.
Considering the historic battles to kill
legislative salary raises — often won by grassroots anti-tax
activists — that would be a major coup....
What may help lawmakers most: The push for
pay increases comes amid a far different political dynamic
than in past years, when raises were politically explosive.
With the public focused on the controversial transition of
power in Washington, Beacon Hill leaders may have an easier
time pushing through such legislation.
Indeed, Steve Aylward, a conservative
Republican activist, said he did not hear any initial ruckus
among his colleagues when DeLeo and Rosenberg announced
their intention to move on the pay hikes.
“I don’t feel a lot of momentum and concern
among the grassroots,’’ said Aylward, who led the successful
2014 effort to repeal a legislative plan to tie automatic
gas tax increases to the rate of inflation. “I think there
are bigger fish to fry than pay raises.”
Still, Geoffrey Diehl, a Republican from
Whitman who has been a strong anti-Beacon Hill voice,
discounted notions that opponents would not take action.
“When the time is right and we get a full
briefing about the pay issue, myself and other fiscal
conservatives will make more of an issue of it,’’ said
Diehl. He also noted the potential pay raises come at a time
when new tax proposals are on the table, creating fertile
ground for a grassroots movement.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Will lawmakers succeed in raising their own pay?
Beacon Hill really does have its own special
sense of timing.
Just weeks after Gov. Charlie Baker
announced that legislative salaries are going up — a
determination left to him by the state Constitution,
governed by changes in median salaries — legislative leaders
are convening a hearing to decide whether they and other top
state leaders are worthy of another salary hike....
Of course, the folks who occupy those
offices know exactly what the salary is when they seek a
place on the ballot — and where is it written that public
servants should be compensated on par with the private
sector?
That report has been sitting on the shelf
for two years, but out of the blue House Speaker Robert
DeLeo and Senate President Stan Rosenberg have now dusted it
off. Perhaps they think enough time has gone by that they
won’t be laughed off Beacon Hill when they revisit the
recommendations....
DeLeo and Rosenberg were vexed recently when
Gov. Charlie Baker issued mid-year budget cuts, calling them
“premature.” Now their reaction makes some sense. Cutting
the budget because of lagging revenues is rather an
inconvenience when there is a plan afoot to raise
politicians’ salaries.
A Boston Herald editorial
Thursday, January 19, 2017
A pay grab on tap
The Legislature intends to hold a hearing
Thursday on a plan to give top state officials pay raises
ranging from 35 percent to 70 percent, and Chip Faulkner
of Attleboro promises to be there to fight against it.
Faulkner, communications director for
Citizens for Limited Taxation, questioned how raises can
be given out at a time when the state budget is in
deficit....
Faulkner, communications director for
Citizens for Limited Taxation, questioned how raises can be
given out at a time when the state budget is in deficit.
Gov. Charlie Baker recently made $75 million
in emergency budget cuts and is warning much more will have
to be trimmed as expenses go up and revenue remains flat.
Faulkner also objected to a call for raises
just after many state officials got a cost-of-living raise
last month.
"I'm going to testify against it," he said.
Faulkner also questioned if the hearing was
timed near the inaugural of Donald Trump as president, so
the pay raises would get less publicity.
"I'm cynical of the timing," he said.
The hearing is on a two-year-old proposal to
raise the pay for constitutional officers, such as the
governor and attorney general, and for leaders of the
Legislature.
The Attleboro Sun-Chronicle
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Tax foes vow to fight big pay raises for state leaders
Beacon Hill lawmakers waded into potentially
treacherous political waters Thursday as they started the
ball rolling on what could become significant pay raises for
legislative leaders and statewide officeholders.
Two years after a special, non-partisan
commission recommended raising the salaries of the state's
most powerful public officials, leadership in the House and
Senate convened a hearing on short notice to discuss the
panel's work. More than two dozen members of the House and
Senate Ways and Means committees showed up to listen.
Top lawmakers offered no hints as to whether
they planned for forge ahead, but it's possible that
leadership may want to take on the issue early in the
two-year session and as far removed from re-election
campaigns as possible....
No one other than members of the
two-year-old commission testified in favor of pay increases.
Chip Faulkner, who represents
Citizens for Limited Taxation, was the only voice
raised in opposition. He argued that the Legislature
should not boost its own pay during a time of economic
uncertainty for the state and while some state-funded
programs are coping with level or reduced funding.
"We're running a budget deficit and
according to some reports the budget deficit coming this
July could be as much as $500-600 million in the state
budget. Giving these raises or publicizing these increases
in pay in the face of a budget deficit is just not kosher,"
Faulkner said. "Why would you do that? If people are
suffering under budget cuts that the governor has had to
make, then why are other people getting raises from $102,000
to $170,000?"
State House News Service
Thursday, January 19, 2016
Lawmakers get ball rolling on potential pay raises
At the State House Thursday, lawmakers’
strategy to get legislative pay raises through without
arousing public outrage was working better than expected.
Few people showed up for a hearing on the proposal, and
legislators didn’t engage much with the lone voice of
opposition.
“No questions?” asked Chip Faulkner,
the anti-tax activist who has fought legislative pay raises
for decades.
There were none.
The hastily called hearing by the House and
Senate Ways and Means committees was part of the legislative
leaders’ unexpected move to jam through huge pay raises for
themselves while the public’s attention is riveted on the
transition of power in Washington....
The hearing took less than hour, with
Jackson and his fellow commissioners taking up most of the
time making their case.
Normally, salary increases for legislators
generate outrage from the public, and fiscal conservatives.
But the lack of public outcry Thursday was palpable. Only
Faulkner, communications director for Citizens for Limited
Taxation, spoke in opposition.
The Boston Globe
Friday, January 20, 2016
Pay raise hearing draws sparse crowd
Critics questioned the timing of the
hearing, which was announced just two days ago by House
Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President Stan Rosenberg,
both Democrats.
“What’s the rush? The commission first
released its recommendations in 2008, again in 2014. No
hearings were scheduled. Until now January 19th in the
opening days of this new legislative session. A day before
the inauguration of a new president of the United States of
America when all eyes will be on Washington,” the group
Citizens for Limited Taxation said in written statement.
Associated Press
Friday, January 20, 2017
Massachusetts lawmakers consider pay increases
But the group Citizens for Limited Taxation questions
the timing and urgency of the pay raise hearing.
A committee of experts told lawmakers on
Thursday that salaries for the state's highest public
officials should be increased.
"Compensation for the most important public
officials in the Commonwealth is outdated and inadequate and
needs to be adjusted to better conform to responsibilities,"
said Ira Jackson, vice provost of UMass Boston and a former
state revenue commissioner, who chaired the 2014 Special
Advisory Commission Regarding the Compensation of Public
Officials....
The anti-tax group Citizens for Limited
Taxation opposes the raises, noting that Massachusetts
lawmakers' salaries are already the sixth-highest
nationwide, even without considering additional pay for
leadership and committee roles, expenses and per diem
payments for travel.
Chip Faulkner, a spokesman for
Citizens for Limited Taxation, on Thursday called the
proposed jumps in pay "incredible" and far beyond what
voters wanted when they approved a constitutional amendment
in 1998 tying lawmakers' pay to median household income.
Additionally, Faulkner said, "Giving these
raises...in the face of a budget deficit is just not
kosher."
The Springfield Republican
Friday, January 20, 2017
Lawmakers consider raising salaries for top elected
officials
“We were surprised,” said UMass vice provost
Ira Jackson, a former commissioner of revenue who chaired
the special commission set up by the Legislature to study
compensation. “There’s never a good time to have this
conversation but it’s long overdue to have this
conversation.”
Jackson and several members of his panel
testified before the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.
While there were more than two dozen lawmakers in
attendance, there were very few questions. There is no
legislation yet, and it’s unclear when, and if, a bill will
emerge on Beacon Hill....
Chip Faulkner, executive director
[sic - communications director] of Citizens for Limited
Taxation, and Thomas O’Neil, a retired businessman from
South Deerfield, were the only two people to testify, both
opposing the plan.
“What part of the constitution do they not
understand?” Faulkner asked, citing the amendment that
specifically spells out how salaries can be increased. “This
is far beyond the spirit of what voters want.”
Falkner also lambasted the timing of the
hearing, noting Donald Trump is set to be inaugurated with
many of the state’s Republicans heading down to Washington
for the event....
State Rep. Angelo Scaccia of Reading [sic -
Readville/Boston] was the only lawmaker to voice support for
the proposal, which does not include significant
compensation increases for rank and file members.
Scaccia, who is not a part of House Speaker
Robert DeLeo’s inner circle, said he was making $75,000 a
year a decade ago as a committee chairman. But after losing
his stipend for holding a chairmanship, he made just $60,000
last year. He applauded Jackson’s commission for raising the
issue and said once “the big guys” are taken care of, there
should be an effort to increase the rank and file pay, which
he said is so low that it keeps some people from running for
public office.
“Without a raise, you may not get the
quality of people that you want,” said Scaccia. “We do this
because we love it, but nobody’s running any more. It’s
absolutely nuts. I love what you’re doing today.”
In December, Baker signed an order granting
lawmakers a 4.1 percent increase in base salary, bringing
their pay to $62,547 for the next two years. Lawmakers’ base
salary was set by a constitutional amendment passed by
voters in 1998 and mandates it be increased or decreased by
the governor in line with fluctuations in median household
income.
Scaccia said his wife made plans for the
couple to fly to the Caribbean for a conference when she
learned he was getting a raise, but then canceled the trip
when she discovered how small it was before taxes.
CommonWealth Magazine
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Quick and quiet hearing on salaries report
Lawmakers ask few questions in hearing to raise compensation
for Speaker and Senate President
It’s a controversial issue. A state
commission believes the governor, state lawmakers and other
public officials are underpaid....
Chip Faulkner from the “Citizens
for Limited Taxation” criticized lawmakers for
scheduling a public hearing with just 72 hours [sic - 48
hours] notice on the day before the Presidential
Inauguration. Faulkner believes the deliberations come at a
bad time.
“Publicizing these lucrative increases in
pay in the face of a budget deficit is just not kosher,” he
said.
WWLP TV22 News
Springfield, MA
Thursday, February 19, 2017; 6:17 pm
State commission, the public weigh in on
compensation for elected officials
"If we're going to raise the Speaker's (pay)
constitutionally here, we're going to have to raise the
majority leader and certainly the chair of ways and means,
who hold the whole commonwealth together," Rep. Angelo
Scaccia, the House's current longest-serving member, said at
a hearing on a two-year-old report that recommended raising
the pay of the Speaker, among others, by roughly 75 percent
to $175,000.
"That's why I think it's great we do your
things first," Scaccia said in comments directed at authors
of the report, who estimated it would cost $934,000 to
implement its recommended salaries.
But Scaccia said he doesn't see the tab
stopping there.
"It's going to be multiple millions because
some of these people will now start paying staff people, who
kind of run this building, more money. And they should get
it," he said. "I love what you're doing today."
Scaccia's comments came amid a largely
friendly, hour-long hearing that was scheduled just two days
prior and drew just two speakers beyond the commissioners
that wrote the report....
But the comments by Scaccia and others
suggest lawmakers, irked by their own base $62,000 salary
that's gone up just once since 2009, are hungry for more.
The majority and minority leaders make
$22,500 on top of the base pay, while the job as chair of
ways and means carries a $25,000 stipend. All lawmakers
currently get another $7,200 to cover office expenses....
Rep. Alan Silvia, a Fall River Democrat,
claimed some members didn't attend the hearing to shy away
from the "uncomfortable" issue of raising salaries.
"I'm not afraid to talk about this issue,"
said Silvia, a Fall River Democrat, adding that in his
two-plus terms, he's seen a dozen members of the House leave
for the private sector. "They left because they couldn't
survive. They couldn't survive.
"We don't do this because we expect to make
what's in the private sector," he added. "But we need a
living wage."
It's unclear what legislators will do with
the proposed report, though critics argue that it would be
unusual to hold a hearing if it wasn't a prelude to some
type of legislation. Dempsey and Senate chair Karen Spilka
both left the hearing without commenting to reporters, and
both their offices said this afternoon that they weren't
immediately available for an interview.
The hearing drew just two other speakers:
Chip Faulkner, of the Citizens of Limited Taxation,
who opposes the pay hikes, and Tom O'Neil, who said he is
disabled former business owner and traveled from South
Deerfield to submit testimony urging a more gradual approach
to salary increases.
"You guys should have a raise. You don't
make enough money," O'Neil said. "But when I gave raises at
my business, I never doubled anybody's pay."
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 20, 2017
In hearing on pay raises, legislators say they want to
spread the money around
State lawmakers, decrying their nearly
$70,000-a-year pay as substandard to a “living wage,”
appeared to prime the pump yesterday for a raft of hefty
Beacon Hill salary hikes for legislative leaders across the
board, a controversial move that could be pulled off without
another public hearing.
Lawmakers used a hastily called hearing
yesterday, just ahead of Donald Trump’s inauguration when
many pols are in Washington, D.C., to mark his swearing-in,
to discuss a proposal to boost the pay of the state’s top
elected officials by as much as 70 percent.
State Rep. Angelo Scaccia suggested that
upcoming votes also could be used to jack up the pay of
members of leadership and committee chairs.
“If you’re going to raise the big people,
you’re going to raise the people underneath,” said Scaccia,
the longest-serving House member, adding that any pay raise
package will extend far beyond the roughly $1 million a 2014
commission suggested....
Legislative leaders have not said they are
crafting a bill around the recommendations; a spokesman for
House Ways and Means chairman Brian Dempsey said officials
are “continuing to do our due diligence.”
But critics have noted it would be unusual
to hold a hearing without intentions of legislative action.
Aside from a standalone bill that would require a formal
hearing, it could emerge in other ways, including the annual
budget or a far smaller supplemental budget bill that
wouldn’t require such vetting.
“If this is the only hearing, that wouldn’t
be ideal. That would be an issue for us,” said Pam Wilmot of
the government watchdog group Common Cause....
Chip Faulkner of Citizens for
Limited Taxation noted a deficit still looms ahead,
which one budget watcher said could be as high as $615
million for next fiscal year.
“Giving these raises or publicizing these
increases in pay in the face of a budget deficit is just not
kosher,” Faulkner told the committee. “Why would you do
that?”
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 20, 2017
Pols on Beacon Hill make case to jack up salaries
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
"When nobody's watching is when mischief
sneaks in" was the understatement of the week if not longer.
Being a Beacon Hill watcher for a few
decades, you tend to know when to expect chicanery and book the time ahead to
deal with it. With (almost) everyone distracted elsewhere, this was just
too good of an opportunity for the Legislature to pull something sneaky like
this. A sudden committee hearing announced only 48 hours in advance on a
two-year old report that had been relegated to the Legislature's dustbin, on a
highly controversial, unconstitutional pay raise nobody dared touch until this
moment. What could be wrong with that? Just business as usual on
Beacon Hill.
And everyone wonders why the hearing was so poorly attended by opposition?
If we hadn't issued our statewide
news release on
Wednesday most if not all of the media probably wouldn't have caught it.
We might still not know a thing about it.
And we're often asked why we're so "cynical."
I'm amazed how little attention has been given to the unconstitutionality of
this dusty report's solicitous recommendations, how little if any mention has
been made to the constitutional fact that legislators are prohibited from voting
to increase their base salary. Increasing the governor's compensation and
that of other constitutional officeholders isn't precluded by that
constitutional amendment — only legislators'
— but that's apparently not getting in the way of
some legislator's expectations, and I expect their lust.
In the news release, I reminded the media of other broken legislative promises,
e.g., the 1989 "temporary" income tax hike.
The legislative sponsors of their 1998 constitutional amendment granting them
automatic pay raises promised it "would
prohibit state legislators from changing their base pay and instead would adjust
that pay according to changes in median household income." Now it looks
like another promise will be cavalierly broken, the state constitution violated
with impunity.
But they want voters to trust and believe
them again next year. The proposed graduated income tax constitutional
amendment, aka, "the millionaire's tax," aka, "the tax-fairness
amendment," that will likely appear on the 2018 ballot —
they assure us
—
will only tax millionaires, and every cent it extracts will be "dedicated to
education and infrastructure."
Even as they consider violating another
promise, they make yet another we're supposed to believe. Charles
Shultz warned us of this situation over and over again with one unforgettable
icon that said it all:
But you promised . . .
Too many Bay State legislators have taught us, if nothing else, that their
promises and their word are transient, issued for political expediency to
achieve a desired goal at any cost, discarded like a used Kleenex when no longer
convenient or adverse to their self-interests.
Whether or not this disgusting, sneaky attempt ever makes it into law and passes
a court constitutional challenge, whether or not it ever takes from our pockets
and puts into theirs, it's a stark reminder — a
shameless demonstration — of how little we citizens
can trust any promise or assurance made by the Legislature. That
this latest self-serving money grab is even being considered is evidence
of legislative faithlessness.
Remember the value and worth of a legislative promise when that constitutional
amendment to impose a graduated income tax is offered. Don't allow
yourself to again become a Charlie Brown victim to the Legislature's Lucy.
CLT communications director Chip Faulkner's after-action report of yesterday's
sudden hearing follows.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
Bizarro Hearing on Pay Raises
After-Action report by Chip Faulkner
Only in the
Massachusetts State House could the Joint
Committee on Ways and Means suddenly out of
nowhere call for a public hearing with less than
48 hours’ notice on the day before the
Presidential Inauguration ― and for what?
Believe it or not, it was for testimony on huge
raises being proposed for the legislative
leadership and constitutional officers. This was
all prompted by an advisory commission which had
recommended big hikes in pay for the above
mentioned in a report issued in December of
2014, over two years ago.
I was there, of course, testifying on behalf of
Citizens for Limited Taxation in opposition to
this proposal. Many times I’ve given testimony
before committees during which only three or
four House or Senate members are present. The
average committee has anywhere from 6 to 17
members, Ways and Means has 54. About half of
the 54 were there yesterday. The room contained
around 75 people, including two reporters from
the Boston Globe sitting directly behind me. The
meeting started promptly at noon in Room 1A,
with testimony from the five-member advisory
commission reiterating all the reasons why the
Legislature deserves more dough. Their emphasis
was on the legislative leadership and the
constitutional officers, but it was obvious they
believed the largesse should extend to the
supposedly long-suffering, underpaid
rank-and-file legislators in the House and
Senate.
After boring and tedious speeches from the
commission (which took about 45 minutes) the
chairman announced that they would now welcome
input from the public. To my astonishment, I was
called up first. As it turned out I was the
only one to testify in opposition to this
proposal. The next, and as it turned out last,
speaker was all over the place in his opinion of
the pay hike ― basically, they deserve more,
just not right now. The entire hearing lasted
just over an hour, likely a record for brevity.
My opposition testimony centered on the fact
that the voters approved a constitutional
amendment on the 1998 ballot which tied
legislative pay increases (or decreases) to “the
median household income for the Commonwealth…”
The salary proposals heard today were completely
indifferent to what the voters had approved and
showed complete disdain for the State
Constitution. I asked “What part of the
Constitution don’t you understand?” Complete
silence followed that question. This
hearing belonged in the Bizarro World.
Our tax dollars at work.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Faulkner
Communications Director |
|
|
|
|
|
The Springfield Republican
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Citizens for Limited Taxation group rips
Massachusetts lawmakers
for exploring increase in pay
By Gintautas Dumcius
Citizens for Limited Taxation is blasting
Massachusetts lawmakers who are interested in
reviewing their compensation levels.
Lawmakers are planning a Thursday hearing on a
2014 report from a compensation commission that
found pay for the state's constitutional
officers and legislative leaders is "generally
outdated and inadequate." The commission
recommended pay increases.
Base pay for Massachusetts lawmakers is
currently $62,547, though leaders receive
additional pay due to their positions. The pay
is adjusted through a mechanism in the state's
constitution, and lawmakers just received an
increase to the current level.
"This makes them the sixth-highest paid state
legislators in the nation, even without their
additional leadership and committee pay,
expenses, and per diems," Citizens for
Limited Taxation said in a statement
Wednesday.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President
Stanley Rosenberg make roughly $97,000 a year,
according to the State House News Service.
The group also noted that the hearing on the
2014 report is being held on Thursday, which is
the day before "the inauguration of a new
President of the United States of American when
all eyes will be on Washington."
Voters passed a 1998 statewide ballot question
setting up the mechanism to determine salaries,
and it was "sold to voters as a means to prevent
legislators from ever again voting to increase
their salaries," the group said.
"Now legislative leaders are looking for ways to
end-run the constitution to boost their pay even
more," the group added.
Gov. Charlie Baker, asked about the hearing on
Tuesday night, said he is satisfied with the
salary he makes. Baker receives $151,800 per
year, and he declined to take the pay hike
recently allowed under the formula within
state's constitution.
But he said he was willing to review a future
proposal from legislators about their pay.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Will lawmakers succeed in raising their own pay?
By Frank Phillips
At first blush, the sudden attempt by Beacon
Hill leaders to pass huge pay hikes for
themselves appears to face serious hurdles: a
potential gubernatorial veto, a conflict of
interest prohibition, and the possibility that
opponents will ask voters to repeal it in next
year’s state election.
But legislative leaders, who bristle over
salaries they consider paltry, might just be
able to pull it off.
Considering the historic battles to kill
legislative salary raises — often won by
grassroots anti-tax activists — that would be a
major coup.
Senate President Stanley C. Rosenberg and House
Speaker Robert DeLeo, who shook the State House
with their unexpected announcement Tuesday, are
seeking increases for themselves of more than 70
percent, from $102,279 to as much as $175,000. A
hearing on the proposal will be held Thursday.
Raises for other leadership posts and for
constitutional officers, including the governor,
are also part of the package, first recommended
by a special commission in late 2104. The total
package would cost close to a $1 million a year.
What may help lawmakers most: The push for pay
increases comes amid a far different political
dynamic than in past years, when raises were
politically explosive. With the public focused
on the controversial transition of power in
Washington, Beacon Hill leaders may have an
easier time pushing through such legislation.
Indeed, Steve Aylward, a conservative Republican
activist, said he did not hear any initial
ruckus among his colleagues when DeLeo and
Rosenberg announced their intention to move on
the pay hikes.
“I don’t feel a lot of momentum and concern
among the grassroots,’’ said Aylward, who led
the successful 2014 effort to repeal a
legislative plan to tie automatic gas tax
increases to the rate of inflation. “I think
there are bigger fish to fry than pay raises.”
Still, Geoffrey Diehl, a Republican from Whitman
who has been a strong anti-Beacon Hill voice,
discounted notions that opponents would not take
action.
“When the time is right and we get a full
briefing about the pay issue, myself and other
fiscal conservatives will make more of an issue
of it,’’ said Diehl. He also noted the potential
pay raises come at a time when new tax proposals
are on the table, creating fertile ground for a
grassroots movement.
The Democratic leadership’s biggest hurdle may
be getting a two-thirds majority in the Senate
and House to override a possible veto. Governor
Charlie Baker, a Republican, has so far not
rejected the pay package, but the best informed
sources are convinced he will not sign the pay
bill.
For a governor expected to seek re-election next
year, the politics are tricky. Baker has
developed a close working relationship with the
moderate DeLeo and, to some degree, with the
liberal Rosenberg. Still, he gets high marks
from voters for being a Republican governor who
keeps a check on the heavily Democratic
Legislature.
And Baker, who wants to avoid a primary election
challenge in 2018, must also keep an eye on his
right flank — particularly the Tea Party wing of
the state GOP. Next week, those forces are
challenging the re-election of his hand-picked
party chair, Kirsten Hughes at a state committee
meeting. A loss would be major political setback
for the governor.
As for ethical barriers, Beacon Hill political
leaders apparently believe they have that
figured out. Public officials cannot legally
vote for legislation that will financially
benefit them, which would prohibit lawmakers
from taking the raises created from a
stand-alone pay hike bill during the current
two-year session.
But if the measure is part of “general
legislation” — such as a state budget bill —
they can collect the pay increases immediately,
simply filing a disclosure with the State Ethics
Commission.
Additionally, any effort to repeal the raises by
putting the issue on the 2018 ballot would be
thwarted if they were attached to a budget bill,
which is immune to repeal petitions.
If lawmakers attempted to raise their pay via a
stand-alone bill, they would want to make sure —
despite the ridicule it would get — that the
legislation contained an “emergency preamble”
requiring the new law to go into effect
immediately rather than after a 90-day waiting
period. That preamble also would prevent the
normal suspension of the law until the issue was
decided on the 2018 ballot.
(State law defines such an emergency as
“necessary for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, health, safety, or convenience.”)
The pay issue is of particular interest for
veteran legislators like DeLeo, who at 66 is
beginning his ninth year as House speaker. His
pension would be greatly enhanced by a big pay
hike because it is based on the top three
earning-years.
Such salary increases have a long, fraught
history on Beacon Hill.
In 1988, a $10,922 pay hike that lawmakers voted
for themselves was roundly rejected at the polls
by voters, after a vigorous campaign by Citizens
for Limited Taxation.
In 1994, one of the most controversial
legislative pay hikes was the work of a GOP
governor, William F. Weld, who cut a late-night
deal with a lameduck legislature to give
lawmakers a $15,000 a year raise. In turn, they
approved his plan for a cut in the state capital
gains tax.
Weld, House Speaker Charles Flaherty, and Senate
President William M. Bulger took off early the
next day for a trade mission to Ireland.
But not before Weld, a former federal prosecutor
who made his reputation on political corruption
cases, brushed aside charges that a corrupt
bargain had taken place.
“Good will does beget good will,’’ he told
reporters as he headed to the airport.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 19, 2017
A Boston Herald editorial
A pay grab on tap
Beacon Hill really does have its own special
sense of timing.
Just weeks after Gov. Charlie Baker announced
that legislative salaries are going up — a
determination left to him by the state
Constitution, governed by changes in median
salaries — legislative leaders are convening a
hearing to decide whether they and other top
state leaders are worthy of another salary hike.
A massive one.
Maybe they figure — in for a penny, in for a
pound.
Two years ago a special advisory commission —
created by the Legislature — recommended huge
salary increases for the state’s constitutional
officers as well as the House speaker and Senate
president. The commission noted that these
officials earn less than many others in state
government and their salaries aren’t in line
with the private sector.
Of course, the folks who occupy those offices
know exactly what the salary is when they seek a
place on the ballot — and where is it written
that public servants should be compensated on
par with the private sector?
That report has been sitting on the shelf for
two years, but out of the blue House Speaker
Robert DeLeo and Senate President Stan Rosenberg
have now dusted it off. Perhaps they think
enough time has gone by that they won’t be
laughed off Beacon Hill when they revisit the
recommendations.
The commission called for the House speaker and
Senate president to be paid $175,000, which at
the time the report was issued would have topped
all 50 states. It would be a more than 70
percent salary hike.
The governor ought to be paid $185,000, the
panel recommended, and collect a $65,000 housing
allowance — for a grand total increase in
compensation of 65 percent. Other constitutional
officers would see big pay hikes, too.
DeLeo and Rosenberg were vexed recently when
Gov. Charlie Baker issued mid-year budget cuts,
calling them “premature.” Now their reaction
makes some sense. Cutting the budget because of
lagging revenues is rather an inconvenience when
there is a plan afoot to raise politicians’
salaries.
The Attleboro Sun-Chronicle
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Tax foes vow to fight big pay raises for state
leaders
By Jim Hand
The Legislature intends to hold a hearing
Thursday on a plan to give top state officials
pay raises ranging from 35 percent to 70
percent, and Chip Faulkner of Attleboro
promises to be there to fight against it.
Faulkner, communications director for
Citizens for Limited Taxation, questioned
how raises can be given out at a time when the
state budget is in deficit.
Gov. Charlie Baker recently made $75 million in
emergency budget cuts and is warning much more
will have to be trimmed as expenses go up and
revenue remains flat.
Faulkner also objected to a call for raises just
after many state officials got a cost-of-living
raise last month.
"I'm going to testify against it," he said.
Faulkner also questioned if the hearing was
timed near the inaugural of Donald Trump as
president, so the pay raises would get less
publicity.
"I'm cynical of the timing," he said.
The hearing is on a two-year-old proposal to
raise the pay for constitutional officers, such
as the governor and attorney general, and for
leaders of the Legislature.
Rank-and-file legislators, such as local
lawmakers, would not get a raise, but the per
diem they receive for travel to Boston would be
replaced with a $10,000 office expense.
The entire pay raise plan will cost taxpayers
almost $1 million a year.
Locally, legislators said they didn't know much
about the plan and had not yet formed definite
positions.
State Rep. Jay Barrows, R-Mansfield, said he has
only briefly looked at a report recommending the
raises, and has been concentrating on meeting a
deadline for filing new bills, instead.
However, he said, "The salary change is a hot
issue for sure, and with all the budget
uncertainty, the timing couldn't be worse."
State Rep. Steven Howitt, R-Seekonk, also said
he hasn't looked closely at the plan, but Rep.
Betty Poirier, R-North Attleboro, said she likes
the idea of doing away with the per diem.
She said the payment is misunderstood by
taxpayers, and she gets "beaten up" over it
every year, even though she donates it to local
causes.
Increasing the office expense payment is a
better idea, she said, because legislators have
to pay for the postage they use for official
business, along with other expenses.
A report by an independent committee came up
with the pay raise idea.
It found the governor of Massachusetts ranks
11th in the nation in salary. Raising it from
$151,000 to $185,000 would make it the
second-highest paid nationally.
Senate President Stan Rosenberg and House
Speaker Robert DeLeo would get the biggest
raises, going from $102,000 to $175,000.
State House News Service
Thursday, January 19, 2016
Lawmakers get ball rolling on potential pay
raises
By Matt Murphy
Beacon Hill lawmakers waded into potentially
treacherous political waters Thursday as they
started the ball rolling on what could become
significant pay raises for legislative leaders
and statewide officeholders.
Two years after a special, non-partisan
commission recommended raising the salaries of
the state's most powerful public officials,
leadership in the House and Senate convened a
hearing on short notice to discuss the panel's
work. More than two dozen members of the House
and Senate Ways and Means committees showed up
to listen.
Top lawmakers offered no hints as to whether
they planned for forge ahead, but it's possible
that leadership may want to take on the issue
early in the two-year session and as far removed
from re-election campaigns as possible.
"There was a hearing on Ways and Means today,"
Rep. Paul Donato said after the roughly one-hour
meeting. "Now the question is, what's Ways and
Means going to do with the report. Are they
going to send it out as a bill, or are they just
going to digest it as a report and be done with
it, and then we'll go to the next step."
The House and Senate held their sessions open
while the hearing was taking place, but then
adjourned until Monday.
The 2014 commission, chaired by UMass Boston
Vice Provost Ira Jackson, recommended
significant increases in salary for the
governor, speaker, Senate president and all
other constitutional officers.
Comparing their current wages to comparable
positions in the private sector, Jackson told
lawmakers that higher pay, though “inherently
controversial,” was essential to maintaining
talent and integrity in government.
“Compensation of public officials should be
adequate enough to attract and retain qualified
individuals to a public career and ensure that
there's not a temptation to betray the public
trust. We also believe strongly that personal
wealth should not be a prerequisite or
qualification of service," said Jackson, who
served as revenue commissioner under former Gov.
Michael Dukakis.
No one other than members of the two-year-old
commission testified in favor of pay increases.
Chip Faulkner, who represents Citizens
for Limited Taxation, was the only voice
raised in opposition. He argued that the
Legislature should not boost its own pay during
a time of economic uncertainty for the state and
while some state-funded programs are coping with
level or reduced funding.
"We're running a budget deficit and according to
some reports the budget deficit coming this July
could be as much as $500-600 million in the
state budget. Giving these raises or publicizing
these increases in pay in the face of a budget
deficit is just not kosher," Faulkner said. "Why
would you do that? If people are suffering under
budget cuts that the governor has had to make,
then why are other people getting raises from
$102,000 to $170,000?"
The Boston Globe
Friday, January 20, 2016
Pay raise hearing draws sparse crowd
By Frank Phillips
At the State House Thursday, lawmakers’ strategy
to get legislative pay raises through without
arousing public outrage was working better than
expected. Few people showed up for a hearing on
the proposal, and legislators didn’t engage much
with the lone voice of opposition.
“No questions?” asked Chip Faulkner, the
anti-tax activist who has fought legislative pay
raises for decades.
There were none.
The hastily called hearing by the House and
Senate Ways and Means committees was part of the
legislative leaders’ unexpected move to jam
through huge pay raises for themselves while the
public’s attention is riveted on the transition
of power in Washington.
The hearing included an appearance by Ira
Jackson, an old Democratic hand and current
UMass Boston vice provost, who chaired the
Legislature’s Special Commission on Public
Official Compensation. That group recommended
the raises in the first place.
The hearing took less than hour, with Jackson
and his fellow commissioners taking up most of
the time making their case.
Normally, salary increases for legislators
generate outrage from the public, and fiscal
conservatives. But the lack of public outcry
Thursday was palpable. Only Faulkner,
communications director for Citizens for Limited
Taxation, spoke in opposition.
Even Jackson was perplexed by the lack of
interest. But he wasn’t ready to ready to answer
questions about the timing of the hearing.
“I gotta get out of here,’’ he joked to
reporters, bolting from the hearing room and out
of the State House.
Associated Press
Friday, January 20, 2017
Massachusetts lawmakers consider pay increases
But the group Citizens for Limited Taxation
questions the timing and urgency of the pay
raise hearing.
By Steve LeBlanc
BOSTON — Lawmakers heard testimony Thursday on a
more than 2-year-old report recommending hefty
pay raises for the governor, other
constitutional officers and top lawmakers – as
critics questioned the timing of the hearing so
close to the presidential inauguration.
The report suggests hiking the governor’s annual
salary from $151,800 to $185,000 with a new,
yearly $65,000 housing allowance. Massachusetts
is one of only a handful of states without an
official governor’s residence or housing
allowance.
The report also recommends increasing the salary
for the attorney general and state treasurer to
$175,000. The attorney general now draws a
$130,582 salary. The treasurer earns $127,917.
Ira Jackson, chairman of the Special Advisory
Commission on Public Official Compensation said
one goal of the higher pay is to attract and
retain qualified individuals to public service
and help make sure they’re not tempted to betray
the public trust.
“We also believe that personal wealth should not
be a prerequisite or qualification for public
service,” he said.
Critics questioned the timing of the hearing,
which was announced just two days ago by House
Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President Stan
Rosenberg, both Democrats.
“What’s the rush? The commission first released
its recommendations in 2008, again in 2014. No
hearings were scheduled. Until now January 19th
in the opening days of this new legislative
session. A day before the inauguration of a new
president of the United States of America when
all eyes will be on Washington,” the group
Citizens for Limited Taxation said in
written statement.
The Springfield Republican
Friday, January 20, 2017
Lawmakers consider raising salaries for top
elected officials
By Shira Schoenberg
A committee of experts told lawmakers on
Thursday that salaries for the state's highest
public officials should be increased.
"Compensation for the most important public
officials in the Commonwealth is outdated and
inadequate and needs to be adjusted to better
conform to responsibilities," said Ira Jackson,
vice provost of UMass Boston and a former state
revenue commissioner, who chaired the 2014
Special Advisory Commission Regarding the
Compensation of Public Officials.
The commission, a group of nonpartisan experts,
released a report Dec. 1, 2014. The report
looked at elected officials' salaries,
considering factors such as job
responsibilities, the ability to attract
talented individuals, comparisons with public
officials in other states and with private
sector jobs, cost of living and the impact on
state finances.
The report concluded that the current
compensation structure for constitutional
officers and legislative leaders "is generally
outdated and inadequate." The report recommended
large pay hikes to the salaries of the governor,
House speaker and Senate president.
But lawmakers never acted on the report when it
came out. More than two years later, the
Committee on Ways and Means held a public
hearing on the report, indicating that lawmakers
are now deciding whether to raise salaries for
state lawmakers and elected officials.
State Sen. Karen Spilka, D-Ashland, said she
hopes having an open, public process will "help
produce a more well-rounded perspective."
The cost of implementing all of the report's
recommendations would be $934,300 a year.
The report recommends raising the governor's
salary to $185,000, plus a housing allowance of
$65,000, compared to the current $151,800.
Jackson said Thursday that the governor is CEO
of a $36.5 billion organization with 136,000
employees.
"The governor's job is singularly important,
demanding, high profile and certainly 24/7,"
Jackson said. Yet, he noted, 1,254 state
employees earn more than the governor -- a
number that swells to 2,000 when overtime pay is
included.
Those earning more than the governor include
every member of the governor's cabinet.
Massachusetts is also one of just six states not
to offer their governor an official residence.
"Unless increased, the current compensation for
governor can serve as an impediment to
attracting a diverse pool of talented candidates
who are representative geographically and
socioeconomically of the public who the governor
is sworn to serve," Jackson said.
The report recommends paying the attorney
general and treasurer $175,000 a year; and the
secretary of state, auditor and lieutenant
governor $165,000 a year. Currently, those
positions pay between $122,000 and $135,000
annually.
Attorney General Maura Healey, for example,
earns less than most first-year associates at
prominent Boston law firms.
The commission recommends increasing salaries of
the House speaker and Senate president to
$175,000, from the current $102,233. The current
figure includes a base salary of $60,033, a
$35,000 stipend for the leadership positions and
a $7,200 stipend for office supplies.
Mike Widmer, former president of the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and a member
of the compensation committee, acknowledged that
there is "rarely if ever a good time"
politically for lawmakers to increase their
leaders' pay. But he noted the additional
$35,000 stipend awarded to the House and Senate
leaders has been flat for 34 years. When
adjusted for inflation, it should be $86,000.
Widmer said he would like to see the salaries
for House and Senate leaders adjusted every two
years according to a formula, the same way rank
and file legislators' pay is adjusted. He said
that would create "an appropriate and fair way
to do this every other year, modestly and with a
formula."
The commission recommended some reforms to
accompany the pay raises, including banning
outside employment by the constitutional
officers, the House speaker and the Senate
president, and eliminating the per diem travel
expense given to lawmakers in exchange for
raising office expense reimbursements with a
bump for legislators living more than 50 miles
from Boston.
Committee member Lynn Griesemer, executive
director of the UMass Donahue Institute, said
under the current pay structure, "You can only
be a constitutional officer in this state if you
have wealth, have a spouse who has wealth, or
live in Boston already."
In 2014, as governor-elect, Baker said he
opposed pay raises at a time when a budget
deficit was forcing cuts to services.
Recently, Baker again made mid-year cuts to the
state budget to keep it in balance. He is in the
process of formulating his fiscal 2018 budget.
Baker declined to comment on specific pay raise
proposals.
"I think our message to the Legislature is that
the lieutenant governor and I are fine with
where we are, but we'll obviously take a look at
anything that they pursue on their own and give
it a good, solid review," Baker said earlier
this week.
A Baker spokesman said the governor and Lt. Gov.
Karyn Polito have no plans to accept pay raises,
but Baker will review any legislation that
reaches his desk.
Baker recently gave Massachusetts lawmakers a
4.2 percent pay raise, from $60,000 to $62,500,
after a biennial review process in which
legislative salaries are adjusted based on
median household income, which was $70,600 in
Massachusetts in 2015. Baker and Polito declined
to accept their own raises.
The anti-tax group Citizens for Limited
Taxation opposes the raises, noting that
Massachusetts lawmakers' salaries are already
the sixth-highest nationwide, even without
considering additional pay for leadership and
committee roles, expenses and per diem payments
for travel.
Chip Faulkner, a spokesman for Citizens
for Limited Taxation, on Thursday called the
proposed jumps in pay "incredible" and far
beyond what voters wanted when they approved a
constitutional amendment in 1998 tying
lawmakers' pay to median household income.
Additionally, Faulkner said, "Giving these
raises...in the face of a budget deficit is just
not kosher."
State Rep. Alan Silvia, D-Fall River, said in
two terms in the Legislature, he has seen a
dozen lawmakers leave for private practice or
industry where they could make a better salary.
"They left because they couldn't survive,"
Silvia said. "We need a living wage."
South Deerfield resident Tom O'Neil, a disabled
businessman who previously ran Toyota
dealerships, traveled to the Statehouse to
testify against the pay raises.
"Folks like myself get x amount of dollars every
year, and we have to take those dollars and
stretch them to pay the electric bill," O'Neil
said.
He said he would not oppose gradual pay raises
for state officials, but the proposed hikes are
too great for pay raises that will come from
taxpayers' pockets.
CommonWealth Magazine
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Quick and quiet hearing on salaries report
Lawmakers ask few questions in hearing to raise
compensation
for Speaker and Senate President
By Jack Sullivan
One of the authors of a report recommending
higher compensation for the state’s top elected
officials said on Thursday he was “surprised” a
joint legislative panel took two years to hold a
hearing on the matter but said the pay raises
should be adopted to ensure the state’s top
elected officials are paid what they’re worth.
“We were surprised,” said UMass vice provost Ira
Jackson, a former commissioner of revenue who
chaired the special commission set up by the
Legislature to study compensation. “There’s
never a good time to have this conversation but
it’s long overdue to have this conversation.”
Jackson and several members of his panel
testified before the Joint Committee on Ways and
Means. While there were more than two dozen
lawmakers in attendance, there were very few
questions. There is no legislation yet, and it’s
unclear when, and if, a bill will emerge on
Beacon Hill.
The special commission’s report calls for
raising the governor’s salary from its current
level of $151,800 to $185,000 and providing a
$65,000-a-year housing allowance.
“You can only be governor in the Commonwealth if
you have wealth, if you have a spouse with
wealth, or you already live in Boston,”
commission member Lynn Griesemer, executive
director of the Donahue Institute at the
University of Massachusetts, told the
legislators.
The report also recommends increasing the
salaries of the speaker, Senate president,
attorney general, and state treasurer to
$175,000 and the lieutenant governor, auditor,
and secretary of state to $165,000. All the
increases would put Massachusetts at the top or
very close to the top in the nation for those
positions, with the proposed salaries for
speaker and Senate president being the highest,
even when adjusting for the state’s high cost of
living.
The two legislative leaders would see the
biggest boost with a whopping 71 percent hike
from their current $102,579 pay, which includes
a $35,000 stipend for the positions and $7,200
in undocumented expense money that all
legislators receive. The other constitutional
officers would get raises between 22 and 37
percent.
“They lead co-equal branches of government and
they should earn as much as the other equal
branches of government,” Jackson said. “We have
an attorney general who is the chief lawyer for
the state and she earns less than a first-year
associate at a major Boston law firm.”
Chip Faulkner, executive director [sic -
communications director] of Citizens for Limited
Taxation, and Thomas O’Neil, a retired
businessman from South Deerfield, were the only
two people to testify, both opposing the plan.
“What part of the constitution do they not
understand?” Faulkner asked, citing the
amendment that specifically spells out how
salaries can be increased. “This is far beyond
the spirit of what voters want.”
Falkner also lambasted the timing of the
hearing, noting Donald Trump is set to be
inaugurated with many of the state’s Republicans
heading down to Washington for the event.
State Rep. Angelo Scaccia of Reading was the
only lawmaker to voice support for the proposal,
which does not include significant compensation
increases for rank and file members.
Scaccia, who is not a part of House Speaker
Robert DeLeo’s inner circle, said he was making
$75,000 a year a decade ago as a committee
chairman. But after losing his stipend for
holding a chairmanship, he made just $60,000
last year. He applauded Jackson’s commission for
raising the issue and said once “the big guys”
are taken care of, there should be an effort to
increase the rank and file pay, which he said is
so low that it keeps some people from running
for public office.
“Without a raise, you may not get the quality of
people that you want,” said Scaccia. “We do this
because we love it, but nobody’s running any
more. It’s absolutely nuts. I love what you’re
doing today.”
In December, Baker signed an order granting
lawmakers a 4.1 percent increase in base salary,
bringing their pay to $62,547 for the next two
years. Lawmakers’ base salary was set by a
constitutional amendment passed by voters in
1998 and mandates it be increased or decreased
by the governor in line with fluctuations in
median household income.
Scaccia said his wife made plans for the couple
to fly to the Caribbean for a conference when
she learned he was getting a raise, but then
canceled the trip when she discovered how small
it was before taxes.
WWLP TV22 News
Springfield, MA
Thursday, February 19, 2017; 6:17 pm
State commission, the public weigh in on
compensation for elected officials
No bill has yet been filed to adjust
compensation for elected officials
By Tiffany Chan
It’s a controversial issue. A state commission
believes the governor, state lawmakers and other
public officials are underpaid.
The Special Advisory Commission on the
Compensation for Public Official’s Ira Jackson
said, “Compensation for the most important
public officials in the Commonwealth is outdated
and inadequate and needs to be adjusted to
better conform with responsibilities.”
The commission said the role of a governor is
both demanding and high-profile, yet hundreds of
state employees earn more than Governor Charlie
Baker.
They recommend bumping his annual salary from
$151,800 to $185,000 with a yearly $65,000
housing allowance. South Deerfield resident Tom
O’Neil learned about Thursday’s State House
hearing after watching 22News. O’Neil is
concerned about the size of the increases while
he and others try to get by on disability
benefits.
He said, “I figured I had to be here. It affects
me. I only have so much money a month and I
don’t mind giving people raises, but let’s
figure out where to get the money from.”
Chip Faulkner from the “Citizens for
Limited Taxation” criticized lawmakers for
scheduling a public hearing with just 72 hours
[sic - 48 hours] notice on the day before the
Presidential Inauguration. Faulkner believes the
deliberations come at a bad time.
“Publicizing these lucrative increases in pay in
the face of a budget deficit is just not
kosher,” he said.
Some state lawmakers, who earn a base salary of
about $62,000 each year, believe the pay is
keeping many qualified people out of public
office. Fall River state Representative Alan
Silvia said, “We don’t do this because we expect
to make what’s in the private sector, but we
need a living wage.”
No bill has yet been filed to adjust
compensation for elected officials.
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 20, 2017
In hearing on pay raises, legislators say they
want to spread the money around
By Matt Stout
Lawmakers hearing a proposal to significantly
hike the pay of the state's top elected
officials say any salary raises shouldn't stop
there, signaling efforts to seek out a raft of
pay bumps could be on the way.
"If we're going to raise the Speaker's (pay)
constitutionally here, we're going to have to
raise the majority leader and certainly the
chair of ways and means, who hold the whole
commonwealth together," Rep. Angelo Scaccia, the
House's current longest-serving member, said at
a hearing on a two-year-old report that
recommended raising the pay of the Speaker,
among others, by roughly 75 percent to $175,000.
"That's why I think it's great we do your things
first," Scaccia said in comments directed at
authors of the report, who estimated it would
cost $934,000 to implement its recommended
salaries.
But Scaccia said he doesn't see the tab stopping
there.
"It's going to be multiple millions because some
of these people will now start paying staff
people, who kind of run this building, more
money. And they should get it," he said. "I love
what you're doing today."
Scaccia's comments came amid a largely friendly,
hour-long hearing that was scheduled just two
days prior and drew just two speakers beyond the
commissioners that wrote the report.
The commission's recommendations included
bumping the pay of the governor from $151,000 to
a $250,000 package, including a housing stipend;
elevating the Speaker and Senate President, who
make just over $104,000 with expenses, to
$175,000; and raising the pay of the state's
other five constitutional officers to between
$165,000 and $175,000.
"Compensation for the most important public
officials in the commonwealth is outdated and
inadequate, and needs to be adjusted to better
conform to responsibilities," said Ira Jackson,
the commission's chair, in remarks to members of
the committee of Ways and Means.
But the comments by Scaccia and others suggest
lawmakers, irked by their own base $62,000
salary that's gone up just once since 2009, are
hungry for more.
The majority and minority leaders make $22,500
on top of the base pay, while the job as chair
of ways and means carries a $25,000 stipend. All
lawmakers currently get another $7,200 to cover
office expenses.
Scaccia, a Readville Democrat, notes that Boston
city councilors make $99,500.
"And this guy over here," referencing Ways and
Means chair Brian Dempsey, "makes $85,000
(before expenses). You've got to be kidding me?
It's absolutely nuts."
Rep. Alan Silvia, a Fall River Democrat, claimed
some members didn't attend the hearing to shy
away from the "uncomfortable" issue of raising
salaries.
"I'm not afraid to talk about this issue," said
Silvia, a Fall River Democrat, adding that in
his two-plus terms, he's seen a dozen members of
the House leave for the private sector. "They
left because they couldn't survive. They
couldn't survive.
"We don't do this because we expect to make
what's in the private sector," he added. "But we
need a living wage."
It's unclear what legislators will do with the
proposed report, though critics argue that it
would be unusual to hold a hearing if it wasn't
a prelude to some type of legislation. Dempsey
and Senate chair Karen Spilka both left the
hearing without commenting to reporters, and
both their offices said this afternoon that they
weren't immediately available for an interview.
The hearing drew just two other speakers:
Chip Faulkner, of the Citizens of Limited
Taxation, who opposes the pay hikes, and Tom
O'Neil, who said he is disabled former business
owner and traveled from South Deerfield to
submit testimony urging a more gradual approach
to salary increases.
"You guys should have a raise. You don't make
enough money," O'Neil said. "But when I gave
raises at my business, I never doubled anybody's
pay."
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 20, 2017
Pols on Beacon Hill make case to jack up
salaries
By Matt Stout
State lawmakers, decrying their nearly
$70,000-a-year pay as substandard to a “living
wage,” appeared to prime the pump yesterday for
a raft of hefty Beacon Hill salary hikes for
legislative leaders across the board, a
controversial move that could be pulled off
without another public hearing.
Lawmakers used a hastily called hearing
yesterday, just ahead of Donald Trump’s
inauguration when many pols are in Washington,
D.C., to mark his swearing-in, to discuss a
proposal to boost the pay of the state’s top
elected officials by as much as 70 percent.
State Rep. Angelo Scaccia suggested that
upcoming votes also could be used to jack up the
pay of members of leadership and committee
chairs.
“If you’re going to raise the big people, you’re
going to raise the people underneath,” said
Scaccia, the longest-serving House member,
adding that any pay raise package will extend
far beyond the roughly $1 million a 2014
commission suggested.
“It’s going to be multiple millions because some
of these people will now start paying staff
people, who kind of run this building, more
money,” he said. “And they should get it.”
The comments were spurred by a 2014 report
dusted off this week by lawmakers that proposed,
among other things, pay packages of $175,000 for
the Speaker of the House Robert A. DeLeo, Senate
President Stanley C. Rosenberg and several
constitutional officers, from the governor to
the treasurer and auditor.
Legislative leaders have not said they are
crafting a bill around the recommendations; a
spokesman for House Ways and Means chairman
Brian Dempsey said officials are “continuing to
do our due diligence.”
But critics have noted it would be unusual to
hold a hearing without intentions of legislative
action. Aside from a standalone bill that would
require a formal hearing, it could emerge in
other ways, including the annual budget or a far
smaller supplemental budget bill that wouldn’t
require such vetting.
“If this is the only hearing, that wouldn’t be
ideal. That would be an issue for us,” said Pam
Wilmot of the government watchdog group Common
Cause.
Wilmot said that her organization hasn’t taken a
stance on the proposal but urged that the public
get the chance to address any formal legislation
should it emerge. “There are ways around it,”
she said. “And that remains to be seen.”
Some lawmakers, for now, aired their grievances
with the current pay, which includes a $62,250
base salary plus $7,200 to cover expenses.
Various posts carry far more, including the
chair of ways and means, which has a $25,000
stipend, and that of the majority and minority
leaders, which each have a $22,500 stipend.
DeLeo and Rosenberg each get $35,000 extra,
pushing their current salaries to $104,700.
“We don’t do this because we expect to make
what’s in the private sector,” state Rep. Alan
Silvia, a Fall River Democrat, said at the
hearing. “But we need a living wage.”
Chip Faulkner of Citizens for Limited
Taxation noted a deficit still looms ahead,
which one budget watcher said could be as high
as $615 million for next fiscal year.
“Giving these raises or publicizing these
increases in pay in the face of a budget deficit
is just not kosher,” Faulkner told the
committee. “Why would you do that?” |
| |
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Citizens for Limited Taxation ▪
PO Box 1147 ▪ Marblehead, MA 01945
▪ 508-915-3665
BACK TO CLT
HOMEPAGE
|
