The unfunded mandate from Bizarro World

Speaking of Bizarro... (0.00 / 0)

"At some point, the Legislature is going to have to turn its eyes inward if it wants to convince anyone else that it has any credibility in lecturing others in how to better spend money.  That means the size in staffing, that means salaries, and that means the obnoxious health benefits for legislators."

The overwhelming message derived from your comments is that you haven't a clue what you are talking about.

Size in staffing?
Senators staffs average 3-4 members. Representatives staffs average 1-2. Considering the amount of work time and work it takes to manage a schedule, administrate the office, handle constituent casework, work on legislation, etc. this is hardly unreasonable. Many staffers are overworked and, you guessed it, underpaid.... which brings us to:

Salaries?
Whether you're referring to staffers or legislators' salaries, you're sadly mistaken. Neither are unreasonable. Legislators have taken a pay cut, staffers have had to pay more for health insurance and office budget allotments have been reduced as well.

Health Benefits?
Lifetime healthcare for serving 6 years does sound obnoxious. On the other hand, the truth is, it's only healthcare after they turn 55. Even so, it's not too far out to suggest that even that is too much for only 6 years worth of service. And that's something that's been toyed around with by both sides for some time now. Is there a certain number of years of service in the Legislature that should warrent healthcare benefits after age 55? You tell me!

---

by: AndyMSU2003 @ Fri Feb 05, 2010 at 18:58:56 PM UTC

LOL... (4.00 / 1)

I knew eventually someone would come to the defense of lawmaker pay, perks, and staffing.  I just didn't know they'd do it in a way that was so entirely tone-deaf to the political environment we live in.  Here are some more, even more relevant facts:

1.  No one likes the state Legislature.  Everyone hates it.  That is, when they were polling after the last budget fiasco, it was the only person or institution in the state that polled lower than the governor.

2.  People already believe that they're paying full-time salaries for what is essentially part-time work.  And, that's on the part of the lawmakers themselves.  So, you have an already unpopular body that people think is already overpaid for the work output.

3.  There is nowhere, anyplace in the private sector where you get retirement benefits after six years on the job. No place. In fact, that place has never, ever, ever existed.  And, we're at a time and place where people are losing their health and retirement benefits after much longer careers in the private sector.

4.  Used to be, and people actually remember this (I do), when you'd call your legislators' office and actually get your legislator, who was working with either no staff or an assistant, on the phone.  You've also got additional staffing that is political in nature.  This is at a time when it is the universally held perception in the state of Michigan that the Legislature breaks into partisan bickering on every single issue.  Meanwhile, teachers and police officers, who people actually think are important, are being laid off all over the state.

So, your counterpoint is essentially, "Eat it. It's all needed."  Well, I've got some very inconvenient news for you.  When you tell people outside of Lansing that government workers they like (the local firefighter, the local snowplow operator) have to take cuts in pay while the state Legislature defends perks and staffing no one thinks are deserved, I think the nicest thing you'd hear in response is that perhaps you need to revisit your priorities.  You think I'm kidding.  I'd suggest that you go to any school board meeting where cuts for next year are being discussed and broach the subject and defend current legislative pay, perks, and staffing.

And, of course, we get back to my original point (thanks for missing it), which is that the Legislature has to win a public relations battle to get any of these reforms passed. Why? Because there is the widespread belief that the Legislature is incompetent and not capable of doing anything without thoroughly screwing it up in the process ... or were you not paying attention last year when popular support for Andy Dillon's health care plan cratered?  At some point, the Legislature is going to need to do something to build credibility with the public.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Fri Feb 05, 2010 at 20:41:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Got it (0.00 / 0)

Nope, I got your point the first time. It's just incorrect.

You're forgetting about the person who calls their legislator's office when their utility wants them to come up with $1,000 by next week or they will be shut off, and gets an extension because a staffer makes the call to the utility... the person who calls in when their food assistance doesn't show up on their bridge card this month and they can't get a hold of the overworked caseworker at the DHS office, and a staffer speeds the process along for them... etc... I'm pretty sure if you find those people, they won't be as whiney about the Legislature as yourself.

How about the person who got an extra 3 months to sit down with a housing counseler and renegotiate the terms of their mortgage because of a law passed by this Legislature? How about the schools districts that will likely receive millions of federal funding through the Race to the Top program (oh wait, your idealogical blinders won't allow you to see the merits in education reform)..

And with respect to the health benefits issue, I basically agreed with you and asked how long would be a suitable time to serve to earn those benefits. You didn't answer.

---

by: AndyMSU2003 @ Fri Feb 05, 2010 at 21:09:07 PM UTC

LOL, again... (4.00 / 1)

Please, by all means, continue to believe all of this, that the general public believes that the Legislature is so popular in this state that no sane person thinks that it needs to make cuts in employees, pay, or perks.  On the other hand, I remember a few years ago that the Legislature was given a huge pay raise by the compensation commission and nearly started a peasants' revolt.  So, good luck on that.  Me ... I still think you ought to go say all of this at some future school board meeting where they're talking about laying off teachers and cutting bus services.  In fact, let me know when you plan to do it.  I'd like to be on hand to record what responses you get.

How long should legislators wait for retirement benefits?  I don't think legislators ought to get retirement benefits, because none of them can put in anything approaching the time required to get them in the private sector.  Hell, you can't get retirement benefits in the military unless you put in 20 years, and I certainly think those people are a lot more deserving.

Finally, your assertions about "ideological blinders" aside, I'm open to sensible reforms.  They have to be sensible, however, and not reforms rushed through in pursuit of one-time grant money (Race to the Top).  Yes, I know, reforms based on intelligently reforming something, not because the Legislature is so incompetent that it can't come up with enough money for education.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Fri Feb 05, 2010 at 21:27:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

great! (0.00 / 0)

Nice talking points. About par for the course for someone who has no experience in dealing with public policy, but certainly likes to bloviate about it endlessly.

Also par for the course is your ranting without offering solutions of your own. Tell me, how much should a legislator get paid? Should it be a part-time legislature? How much should the office budget be? How much should a staffer get paid?

Why don't you run for office and bring all of your endless competency to the state's legislative body? How would you reform education? How would you fund it? Would you cut elsewhere? Raise taxes?

Race to the Top and the reforms made to compete for that money has nothing to do with our state Legislature's competency or lack thereof to fund education - if it does, are so many other states just as incompetent? Because we aren't the only state trying to get the money.  

---

by: AndyMSU2003 @ Fri Feb 05, 2010 at 22:02:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

LOL, 3 (4.00 / 2)

It's my fault the Legislature can't pass a budget on time.  Of course, how come I didn't see that?

Again, I think you ought to take this on the road, and bring it up at school board meetings where they're discussing cutting programs and teachers.  I'm sure what people are anxious to hear is a stirring defense of the Legislature.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Sat Feb 06, 2010 at 00:19:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Unbelievable (4.00 / 1)

You have got to be kidding me. You're really going to these lengths to defend legislative pay and benefits? It's public service: it's not supposed to some sort of get rich quick scheme for staffers or legislators!

In regard to Race to the Top: you make it sound like the entire program (nationwide) is the sole creation of the brilliant minds of our Michigan legislature, who buck public opinion to do what is right, and that money is already on its way to Michigan classrooms. Right.

Not even opposed to Race to the Top..... but that it seems to be the only item you seem to be able to cite to prove the competency of our legislature is pretty sad.

Perhaps you're right, and it is Eric's fault for not doing a better job controlling the legislature through Michigan Liberal. And, any Michigan citizen's fault, who obviously lacks the "experience in public policy" our Michigan legislative masterminds have shown. But, I doubt it.

---

by: Bootsy @ Sat Feb 06, 2010 at 04:23:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let me chart a course to reform failure... (4.00 / 1)

Let's set this in the city of Ionia.  The city council/commission is discussing budget cutbacks and projections of shared revenue cuts from the state.  During the open comment period, a guy walks up to the mic. He begins:

"Hi, I'm Steve Stevenson.  I work for the city's streets department. During the summer, I help patch potholes. During the winter, I plow the streets after snowstorms.  Two years ago, I had to leave the house on Christmas Eve to salt the streets during an ice storm to make sure everyone could get to the homes of their families the next morning. I hope all of you had a happy holiday; I did, it was my first Christmas with my baby daughter."

I realize it's hard times for everyone, and everyone has to sacrifice a little bit.  The city cut back on their overtime and we street workers have made concessions during our last contract negotiations.  Well, I see the state wants to cut out pay.

Well, me, I didn't know that we had to negotiate with the state. I thought we worked for the city of Ionia, but they're calling the shots in Lansing and I guess there's nothing we can do about it.

I guess I don't mind taking a cut in pay if it helps some of my fellow streets workers stay on the job, but I've got to wonder if it's really needed.  What have our legislators cut for themselves? They get retirement benefits after serving six years. Who else gets that? Have they cut back on their office workers? And, then I read in the Sentinel-Standard that these guys are always going on vacation. They took two weeks off for deer season and none of 'em went hunting. Seems like they're drawing full time pay for part-time work. Must be nice."

This scene repeats itself around the state, with teachers appearing at school board meetings saying the exact same thing.  And, of course, local op-ed pieces appear in what remains of the local press, echoing these sentiments.  Meanwhile, in Lansing, there is a stubborn refusal to believe any of this is important.  Public support for reform tanks because the Legislature looks like it thinks everyone needs to cut back but the Legislature, which everyone already hates and thinks is incompetent and incapable of positive reform.  Meanwhile, the Capitol pundit class loses its collective shit because the unions had the utter temerity to represent their membership while the political class made it pig simple to box them in politically, and blame the unions for the utter incompetence of the collective Legislature to navigate around hazards every other person could see 12 nautical miles away.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Sat Feb 06, 2010 at 14:14:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

hypocrites (4.00 / 2)

i'm tired of the dumbass legislators--who have brought this state to the brink of shutdown twice (and actually succeeded once) with their incompetent idiocy--having no other brainiac idea than to fix our State's problems on the backs of teachers, firefighers, and police officers.

really: should any of those folks even be making LESS than a cretin like mike bishop?

serious question!  

---

by: healtHcareforall @ Fri Feb 05, 2010 at 21:40:56 PM UTC

Never (4.00 / 2)

Elected officials should never be entitled to health care in retirement. I know that sounds harsh to those handful of  officials who have served decades in political office and haven't had an opportunity to secure health care from some other employment. But very few people who serve at any level of government put in the the decades that might justify that kind of benefit. For every Carl Levin, there's 1000 elected officials who serve a few terms and then move along either seeking another political office or get booted from office by the voters. Giving elected officials a health care benefit also promotes a sense of entitlement that is inappropriate. The only guarantee elected officials have is that they'll be able to serve their current term of office. Only arrogant politicians believe that being successful in securing public office more than a couple terms should entitle them to a special benefit.  

---

by: NoviDemocrat @ Sat Feb 06, 2010 at 04:29:17 AM UTC

Those who serve for decades (0.00 / 0)

are likely to be Medicaid eligible by the time they leave office.

I wouldn't mind paying these clowns a good salary if they DID THEIR JOBS!!!!!!

---

by: happy camper @ Sat Feb 06, 2010 at 12:53:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Andy, please remember that (4.00 / 1)

Michigan legislators make more than any other state with the exception of California -- and California lawmakers took a significant pay cut last year($116, 098 in 2008 to $95,291 in 2009) while Michigan held steady at $79,650.

http://www.ncsl.org/Legislatur...

http://www.ncsl.org/default.as...

To give additional perspective, MI legislators make nearly $80K when MI median household income was $51K in 2006-2008.
http://www.statehealthfacts.or...

One last thing: say you have been out of college for ten years, working at whatever, and decide to run for office at age 32. You serve in the MI legislature for six years, then at age 38 you go off and do something else for the next 17 years. By age 55, you'll have been a legislator for just 6 years out of a 36-year career. Why should a mere 16% of your work history-- or 13%, if you keep working & retire at 65 --  qualify you for lifetime taxpayer-funded health care?  

---

by: kelster @ Sat Feb 06, 2010 at 15:31:53 PM UTC

Legislative pay (0.00 / 0)

Do not forget those clowns also draw a $12,000 expense allowance each year. Do not forget the freebies they squirrel away, eat or drink via the lobbyist gravy train each and every day that we never, ever hear about.  

---

by: cueball @ Sat Feb 06, 2010 at 18:52:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]