PDA

View Full Version : State Congress salaries are too low




willwash
11-04-2011, 01:24 AM
This is just my personal opinion. Some states pay their representatives a livable wage, but others are atrocious!

Just stay with me for a few seconds here. Paying representatives a salary is a constitutionally authorized expenditure (at least on the federal level, I assume so for each state). But take New Hampshire (they are the most extreme example). Their state rep salary is like 10 dollars a year or something ridiculous like that. That makes for a great sound bite about frugality in government, but think about what it really means. It really means that only the independently wealthy can ever hold state office in NH. And of course, the independently wealthy are disproportionately represented by banksters, corporatists, and other elitists who benefit from the current corrupt system.

I don't live in NH, but if I did, I could never run for state Congress...I have a family to support! How many other hard-working, liberty loving middle class New Hampshire-ites are similarly excluded from holding state office? Too many.

I don't think states should be like the federal Congress and pay some 200k a year plus a bazillion lucrative benefits plus a cushy-as-all-getout retirement program. But any state Congressman should be paid at least 40, 50k a year.

Am I completely wrong here?

Vessol
11-04-2011, 01:27 AM
Where is the money going to come from to pay those increased salaries?

willwash
11-04-2011, 01:30 AM
Well, if you follow my thinking, it would come from more guys like me getting elected and making cuts elsewhere. As it stands, I could never hold office and support my family.

In any case, paying a few hundred people 50k a year works out to 20, 30 million dollars, which is pretty cheap for ending elitism in state representation. And I'm assuming congressional salaries ARE constitutionally authorized

Knightskye
11-04-2011, 01:34 AM
New Hampshire pays $100 per year. What would you change that to?

willwash
11-04-2011, 01:36 AM
New Hampshire pays $100 per year. What would you change that to?

As I said, somewhere between 40 and 50 thousand a year. Enough to live modestly and support a small family. That's all. Enough to allow you to focus on your work as a representative in the event you DON'T have millions already stashed away.

EDIT: 424 people in NH state Congress. Paying them 40,000 a year apiece would cost 16.7 million per year. 50,000 a year would be 21.2 million. Doubling these figures based off of NH's two year budget of 11.5 billion would make Congressional salary range from 0.3 and .1 percent of state spending. That's a lot of bang for your buck. And as I've said, the effects of such a change would probably result in cuts being made elsewhere.

Vessol
11-04-2011, 01:38 AM
I guess my main issue is where the money actually comes from..but, I won't go on about it and derail this thread.

Austrian Econ Disciple
11-04-2011, 07:55 AM
Absolutely not. Representatives should not get paid, and they should meet for a few weeks out of the entire year. I would also raise the number of reps from 424 to 900. That would increase both the number of liberty-activists elected, as well as their higher ability to be elected, and the representatives would actually be representative at that point with them being the voice for ~900-1000 people.

The reason NH is as free as it is, is because of the high number of Reps. as well as their extremely low pay. You do not want career Government-agents (and elected Reps. count as them). It is supposed to be a civic duty in the defense and vanguard to maintain the liberties all ready fought for. Why on Earth would you want to pay people a living wage to write laws restricting your liberty, freedom, natural rights, and property? No, sir; absolutely not!

Golding
11-04-2011, 08:18 AM
Lavish pay generates lifetime politicians. I disagree with creating more incentives to stay.

FreeTraveler
11-04-2011, 08:20 AM
This is just my personal opinion. Some states pay their representatives a livable wage, but others are atrocious!

Just stay with me for a few seconds here. Paying representatives a salary is a constitutionally authorized expenditure (at least on the federal level, I assume so for each state). But take New Hampshire (they are the most extreme example). Their state rep salary is like 10 dollars a year or something ridiculous like that. That makes for a great sound bite about frugality in government, but think about what it really means. It really means that only the independently wealthy can ever hold state office in NH. And of course, the independently wealthy are disproportionately represented by banksters, corporatists, and other elitists who benefit from the current corrupt system.

I don't live in NH, but if I did, I could never run for state Congress...I have a family to support! How many other hard-working, liberty loving middle class New Hampshire-ites are similarly excluded from holding state office? Too many.

I don't think states should be like the federal Congress and pay some 200k a year plus a bazillion lucrative benefits plus a cushy-as-all-getout retirement program. But any state Congressman should be paid at least 40, 50k a year.

Am I completely wrong here?

Easy-peasy. Just issue them each a gun and let them go directly to the taxpayers for however much they want. Then they could be just like FedGov. :rolleyes:

specsaregood
11-04-2011, 08:22 AM
It seems to me like NH is doing it right and the other states aren't. In my state, all the Reps make 50+k/year + benefits AND it is considered a part-time job AND its got the highest property taxes in the nation. Coincidence? I think not.

Southron
11-04-2011, 08:42 AM
Glen Bradley makes a pathetic amount in NCGA. If you are going to make them work full time, then you need to pay them.

Icymudpuppy
11-04-2011, 08:54 AM
Civil service should be a sacrifice. Representation should be a part-time activity during the slow business season. Most of our founders were farmers with a lot of free time from December - March. They took that time to meet at the local, state, and federal level to take care of what little business was absolutely necessary. Only the governors and president were full time positions and with a livable salary, but then they also have term limits.

Congressmen I think should get paid only for the time spent actually in session, and that should be limited to two weeks a year except in emergencies. The daily salary of each congressman should be equal to the average daily wage of a person in his district. Thus, a Manhattan congressman will get paid a lot more than a Birmingham congressman. Campaigning should not be paid.

Icymudpuppy
11-04-2011, 08:56 AM
Glen Bradley makes a pathetic amount in NCGA. If you are going to make them work full time, then you need to pay them.

Glen is serving and sacrificing for his country. That is noble. There is nothing noble about making a career of politics.

Southron
11-04-2011, 08:59 AM
Glen is serving and sacrificing for his country. That is noble. There is nothing noble about making a career of politics.

You can't feed a family on what he makes. You need to be wealthy, single, retired or corrupt to live off what he makes.

specsaregood
11-04-2011, 09:02 AM
You can't feed a family on what he makes. You need to be wealthy, single, retired or corrupt to live off what he makes.

And you say that cuz Glen is great; how do you feel about how the rest of the representatives are paid? Think you are getting a good bang for your bucks from the other NC assemblymen?

brandon
11-04-2011, 09:05 AM
This is just my personal opinion. Some states pay their representatives a livable wage, but others are atrocious!

Just stay with me for a few seconds here. Paying representatives a salary is a constitutionally authorized expenditure (at least on the federal level, I assume so for each state). But take New Hampshire (they are the most extreme example). Their state rep salary is like 10 dollars a year or something ridiculous like that. That makes for a great sound bite about frugality in government, but think about what it really means. It really means that only the independently wealthy can ever hold state office in NH. And of course, the independently wealthy are disproportionately represented by banksters, corporatists, and other elitists who benefit from the current corrupt system.

I don't live in NH, but if I did, I could never run for state Congress...I have a family to support! How many other hard-working, liberty loving middle class New Hampshire-ites are similarly excluded from holding state office? Too many.

I don't think states should be like the federal Congress and pay some 200k a year plus a bazillion lucrative benefits plus a cushy-as-all-getout retirement program. But any state Congressman should be paid at least 40, 50k a year.

Am I completely wrong here?

I completely agree. They should be paid more than a "living wage." They should be paid a solid middle class wage for the area they live in. I imagine this would be anywhere from $50,000 - $120,000/year. Otherwise as you said, it limits potential candidates to the independently wealthy and retired senior citizens. Any free marketeers should know that you get what you pay for.

Matthew5
11-04-2011, 09:09 AM
It's supposed to be a part-time, volunteer type position anyway. And with modern technology, it's easier more than ever to conduct official business from home/office.

erowe1
11-04-2011, 09:15 AM
Well, if you follow my thinking, it would come from more guys like me getting elected and making cuts elsewhere.

But if you make those cuts, shouldn't 100% of the money saved go to its rightful owners in the form of tax cuts?

You could always set up a charity for people to donate money to underpaid politicians.

As for the constitutionality of it, I don't see why that matters. What's wrong is wrong, constitutional or not.

Southron
11-04-2011, 09:20 AM
And you say that cuz Glen is great; how do you feel about how the rest of the representatives are paid? Think you are getting a good bang for your bucks from the other NC assemblymen?

If they have to be there full-time, I just think they should be paid. I think they make a little over $12000 a year plus per diem in NC.

They should at least make as much as a government school teacher.

I like part-time legislatures. But I think a man is worthy of getting paid for working and don't think we should pay part-time wages for full-time work.

fisharmor
11-04-2011, 09:20 AM
I'm going to put out there right away that I am one of those loons who thinks nothing would be better than smashing the system with a hammer and not replacing it.

That said, if Virginia paid a living wage for state reps, I would run in a second.
But they don't, so I'm not.
There is simply no way I can survive and raise children on $11k per year.
Why? Because I haven't gamed the system and taken advantage of the myriad ways a man with a modicum of cleverness and fairly loose morals can make a pile of money. So I'm not sitting on a pile of money.

Very few of the wealthy here got that way without taking advantage of some ethically dubious method. Northern VA is part of the DC cloud, which contains the highest per-capita income in the country right now.
What do we make here? Nothing.
What services do we provide? Nothing.
Everyone here with money got it by either making bombs, dropping bombs, or serving as a middle man between the making and dropping of bombs.

So who do we get as state representatives? Do you think these people ever stopped to ponder why I-395 has some of the country's worst traffic, yet goes right alongside a completely ferry-less Potomac River? Do you think these people are at all concerned with the fact that absolutely nothing is manufactured here?
Are you kidding? What does that have to do with the making or dropping of bombs?

Rifleman hit it on the head: wealthy, single, retired, or corrupt. Problem is, a lot of the first category overlaps with the fourth to begin with.

willwash
11-04-2011, 10:04 AM
I agree that state representation should be a part time job. But it's not. And because it's not, it's impossible to hold any other job while you are a representative. And therefore only the independently wealthy can run. One or the other of those needs to change, and until the former changes, the latter should too

Zatch
11-04-2011, 10:12 AM
The Georgia General Assembly is only in session 40 days out of the year.

Warrior_of_Freedom
11-04-2011, 10:37 AM
Only travel expenses should be paid, and they are, aren't they? Like flying to D.C. and whatever.

HOLLYWOOD
11-04-2011, 10:51 AM
here: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Comparison_of_state_legislative_salaries

Look's like Socialized Hell of Communist California takes the cake:


California (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_State_Legislature)
$95,290.56/year

+$141.86/day for each day in session.




Comparison of state legislative salaries


http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/images/thumb/SLP_badge.jpg/160px-SLP_badge.jpg (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Portal:State_legislatures)

Features of State Legislatures


Standing committees analysis for 2011-2012 session (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Standing_committees_in_state_legislatures_during_t he_2011-2012_session) • Length of terms of state representatives (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Length_of_terms_of_state_representatives) • How vacancies are filled in state legislatures (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/How_vacancies_are_filled_in_state_legislatures) • States with a full-time legislature (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/States_with_a_full-time_legislature) • State legislatures with term limits (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/State_legislatures_with_term_limits) • Comparison of state legislative salaries • When state legislators assume office after a general election (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/When_state_legislators_assume_office_after_a_gener al_election) • Population represented by state legislators (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Population_represented_by_state_legislators) • State constitutional articles governing state legislatures (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/State_constitutional_articles_governing_state_legi slatures) • State legislative sessions (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/State_legislative_sessions)



This page contains a comparison of salaries for state legislators in the 50 states.

torchbearer
11-04-2011, 10:53 AM
our state congress is part time and are paid part-time.

Keith and stuff
11-04-2011, 10:58 AM
But take New Hampshire (they are the most extreme example). Their state rep salary is like 10 dollars a year or something ridiculous like that.

I don't know if you are serious. The NH Constitution calls for $100 per year per lawmaker. Since it is hard to change the Constitution, that amount hasn't gone up and doesn't look to go up any time soon. IMO, the lawmakers shouldn't be paid a salary. Lawmakers in NH do get paid 50 cents per mile so they aren't losing money. Well, that isn't entirely true, lawmakers usually make 50 cents per mile but sometimes they don't make anything. Some of the reps weren't paid for driving for part of this year in a new effort to cut costs. Here's the story, Mileage reimbursement for legislators less than last year
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20111101/NEWS06/711019973/-1/news06


"The New Hampshire House have cut mileage reimbursement requests by 36 percent between July 1 and Oct. 20, when compared to the same period in 2009, Speaker of the House William O’Brien’s office said Monday."

To be a state rep in NH averages out to a 10-30 hour per week commitment, depending on how much you want to do. To be a state senator in NH, it takes about twice as much time per week. I volunteer about as much as a NH state senator works and I don't get paid anything, even mileage. I'm not complaining. I love liberty.

As you likely know, NH has by far the most pro-liberty House of Reps in the US. In the 1990s, NH had a Libertarian Party caucus with 4 Libertarian Party state reps. Currently, NH has around 80 or so libertarians serving in the House of Reps. Here is a list of the bills that went through the House of Reps last year, it is amazing to look at when compared to anywhere else in the world, http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?303849-2011-New-Hampshire-Liberty-Related-Bills-Report More reps from NH have endorsed Ron Paul than all other states combined. Plus, 4 reps even endorsed Gary Johnson. A couple state senators even endorsed Ron Paul. Additional, NH is the freest state in the US. IMO, it's partly because NH pays the folks so little.

As for what the reps do for a living. You have a point. I personally know dozens of reps. I'll tell you what some of them do. The Speaker of the House is a lawyer. Mark is a realtor. Kyle works at a fast food place. Cam sells phones. Steve used to be a taxi driver, not sure what he does now. Laura is a mother. Seth is an IT guy. My friend Andrew ran but lost, he was a waiter when he ran. My friend Will may run, he is a factory worker.

low preference guy
11-04-2011, 11:04 AM
I don't live in NH, but if I did, I could never run for state Congress...I have a family to support! How many other hard-working, liberty loving middle class New Hampshire-ites are similarly excluded from holding state office? Too many.

Yet it's arguably the most liberty friendly state in the nation. They should keep doing what they are doing.

low preference guy
11-04-2011, 11:06 AM
Glen Bradley makes a pathetic amount in NCGA. If you are going to make them work full time, then you need to pay them.

They make themselves work full time. If they want they could meet twice a year, and everybody will be better off. The low salary (preferably zero) should be a motivation to meet as rarely as possible.

low preference guy
11-04-2011, 11:08 AM
..

heavenlyboy34
11-04-2011, 11:11 AM
Absolutely not. Representatives should not get paid, and they should meet for a few weeks out of the entire year. I would also raise the number of reps from 424 to 900. That would increase both the number of liberty-activists elected, as well as their higher ability to be elected, and the representatives would actually be representative at that point with them being the voice for ~900-1000 people.

The reason NH is as free as it is, is because of the high number of Reps. as well as their extremely low pay. You do not want career Government-agents (and elected Reps. count as them). It is supposed to be a civic duty in the defense and vanguard to maintain the liberties all ready fought for. Why on Earth would you want to pay people a living wage to write laws restricting your liberty, freedom, natural rights, and property? No, sir; absolutely not!
This! ^^ If they are "public servants" as Constitutionalists like to claim, why should they be paid more than other servants?

heavenlyboy34
11-04-2011, 11:14 AM
They make themselves work full time. If they want they could meet twice a year, and everybody will be better off. The low salary should be a motivation to meet as rarely as possible.+a zillion. "No man's life, liberty, or property is safe when congress is in session." -Mark Twain

low preference guy
11-04-2011, 11:16 AM
+a zillion. "No man's life, liberty, or property is safe when congress is in session." -Mark Twain

Good quote but I thought that was Franklin for some reason.

Jingles
11-04-2011, 11:38 AM
They make $75,000 or something in PA, plus all the benefits. I think that is more than adequate for the horrible things that they do.

heavenlyboy34
11-04-2011, 11:41 AM
Good quote but I thought that was Franklin for some reason. I've seen it attributed to Franklin and Twain, so I just picked one.

gerryb
11-04-2011, 12:02 PM
You can fix this you know.


Start a NH non-profit for giving a liveable salary to liberty legislators who apply for it. Take up collections and get a fund together to pay those salaries.

Stop being a statist and looking to the government to provide a solution =)

nobody's_hero
11-04-2011, 01:06 PM
In terms of what a state should be doing versus what little the Feds should be doing, it doesn't seem quite right that they get paid less than federal representatives. But I wouldn't raise state rep. salaries. Just cut the feds down to less than what the average state rep. salary is.

I'd like to see donation-based salaries, but even that has potential for abuse, I suppose.

Just put a check-box on an income tax form if you'd like to donate a dollar (or whatever) to your representative at the end of the year. If they do crappy, they won't get any donations and maybe they won't even run again, lol.

freshjiva
11-04-2011, 01:06 PM
You can fix this you know.


Start a NH non-profit for giving a liveable salary to liberty legislators who apply for it. Take up collections and get a fund together to pay those salaries.

Stop being a statist and looking to the government to provide a solution =)


Isn't that the textbook definition of "bought and paid for" politicians?

nobody's_hero
11-04-2011, 01:08 PM
Isn't that the textbook definition of "bought and paid for" politicians?

That's why I think it could be abused. It would be a neat experiment to try though.

kahless
11-04-2011, 01:21 PM
If you believe they need to be paid a living wage and work full time, then your government is already too big and oppressive. The goal should be privatization of services to make it less necessary for the people to bare the burden of cost of government employees and elected politicians.

These positions should be elected volunteers with minimal to no salary that meets just several times a year. Having a politician working full time is never a good thing.

Seeing this thread here in this forum and some of the responses is really depressing. We are so screwed. :(

Keith and stuff
11-04-2011, 02:06 PM
If you believe they need to be paid a living wage and work full time, then your government is already too big and oppressive. The goal should be privatization of services to make it less necessary for the people to bare the burden of cost of government employees and elected politicians.

I totally agree, state governments are way too big. Unfortunately, being a state senator is usually a full time job. However, $100 per year pay is $100 too much in pay. I understand that state senators in some states make over $100,000 per year, but even the $100 in NH is too much.

As for people talking about living wages. In NH, $15,000 is fine as a living wage for 1 person. It's more than enough money to cover the vast majority of needs for most people and even many wants for most people.


These positions should be elected volunteers with minimal to no salary that meets just several times a year. Having a politician working full time is never a good thing.

Yes, yes, yes. That statement is so full of win!


Seeing this thread here in this forum and some of the responses is really depressing. We are so screwed. :(

It is scary that some folks on here would support big time statism like this. Maybe most of them are just kidding? Maybe they just don't understand this issue?

RileyE104
11-04-2011, 02:42 PM
As long as "minimum wage" exists, that's the most any politician should be making. Maybe a little higher.

Keith and stuff
11-15-2011, 08:05 PM
OK, I blogged on this issue.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/entry.php?471-How-to-Become-a-Pro-liberty-State-Representative


How to Become a Pro-liberty State Representative

Do you like liberty? Do you want to get involved with the system and make a difference? Would you like to be a State Representative? If you answered yes to all three questions, continue reading because I know how to make it happen.

I’ve been involved with dozens of campaigns. Many of those campaigns were successful campaigns for State Representative in New Hampshire. Before I go into the how to get elected part, I’ll explain why you have the best chances of getting elected in NH.

• NH has 400 State Reps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Hampshire_Legislature). No other state has even close to 400 State Reps. NH has a State Rep for every 3200 people. No other state has anything close to a State Rep per person ratio as low as NH.

• Many State Reps in NH are in very large, multi-seat districts (http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2011/07/11/six-senators-one-legislative-district-eastern-states-wrestle-with-moving-away-from-multi-member-districts/). Some of the districts include fourteen seats. The number of districts and sizes of the districts encourage large swings in which State Reps are elected from election to election.

• Because of these factors, being an incumbent is a less important factor in determining reelection in NH than anywhere else. Nationally, state legislators are reelected at a 94% rate (http://www.followthemoney.org/press/ReportView.phtml?r=420&ext=1); in 2008, NH’s turnover was 34.5 (http://www.calwatchdog.com/2011/04/18/how-to-dilute-politicians-power/)%.

• NH has the most competitive State Rep races. In 2008, nearly 10% (http://www.followthemoney.org/press/ReportView.phtml?r=424&ext=8) of all competitive legislative races in the US were in NH.

• The average State Rep in the US costs $68,490. In NH, State Rep races are the least expensive at just $4,472 on average (http://www.followthemoney.org/press/ReportView.phtml?r=420&ext=2). To put this in perspective, the cost of all 400 State Rep races in NH is nearly equal to the cost of just one State Rep race in Texas.

• State Reps in NH receive a salary of $200 per term instead of over $100,000 per year (http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=20117) like in several other states. With such low pay, the legislators are more like volunteers, not career politicians.

• Being born in NH isn’t a factor in an election. 57% of Granite Staters were not born in NH. Around 300 NH State Reps (http://concordfactcheck.com/fact-check-sen-shaheens-comments-on-speaker-obrien-incorrect-hypocritical) were not born in NH.

• Most importantly, liberty candidates are more likely to get elected in NH than anywhere else. In 2010, 119 pro-liberty State Reps (http://www.nhliberty.org/2010/endorsements) were elected.

• NH is the freest state according to 2009 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/29/americas_freest_states_96717.html) and 2011 (http://mercatus.org/freedom-50-states-2011/NH) surveys.

• NH voters vote for anti-tax candidates for legislative offices. In 2009, adults were asked if they would be more likely to vote for a candidate if the candidate wanted to increase property taxes, sales taxes or income taxes. Only 6%, 24% and 31% (http://www.unh.edu/survey-center/news/pdf/gsp2009_winter_tax21109.pdf) of NH adults said yes to the questions.

• Perhaps you do not agree with my assessment. Here is an alternative point of view (http://www.jbartlett.org/bigger-is-better-at-least-for-the-new-hampshire-legislature) which basically reaches the same conclusions.

How to Run for Office

1. The easiest way is to move to a multi-seat district that leans overwhelmingly Republican in elections. These are typically large towns in NH that don't have wards. So for example, if a town had 19,000 people but didn't have wards it could be a 5 to 7 rep district.

2. Become well liked in the town by political insiders by attending GOP political events and being nice to everyone while having a nice appearance and not saying anything radical. So for example, if you have 38 pro-liberty bumper stickers on your car, take them off. Do not yell, berate, curse at or preach to people. I cannot stress this enough, you must be genuinely accepted by the community. If you truly are a good neighbor and want to do what is right for the community, you will be accepted.

3. Volunteer in the community on a local board or two. Network with various community organizations. Before you run for office, help on a campaign of a near-by pro-liberty politician that is liked by the community.

4. After a few years, run for office the way the Leadership Institute recommends; there is a 5 day training event that LI gives for people considering a run for office. Attend this event. Also, attend the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance or similar training events with your campaign manager.

5. Fill out the surveys for the local gun groups, the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire, NHLA, New Hampshire Republican Volunteer Coalition, Americans for Prosperity New Hampshire and sign the Tax Pledge. If you do this right, you should get a lot of endorsements, some campaign donations and even volunteers.

6. As long as you do all of that and actually run for office the way the LI recommends, which is time consuming, you are very likely to get elected. Keep in mind that it may take a couple tries to get elected.

Of course, regardless of what position you run for or where you live, don't lie. Be honest with yourself and with the voters. Run you campaign on popular issue that both you and the voters agree on. In New Hampshire, most voters support things such as no increased property taxes, no increased sales taxes, no increased income taxes and medical marijuana. Find out what other issues are important in your community and become a leader in those issues.

Xenophage
11-17-2011, 01:51 AM
I think the solution here is not to increase their wages, but to decrease their power and prestige. If being a representative only meant meeting for a couple weeks out of the year, and possibly handling much of your station from home, then you could afford to keep a job.

Having real working people in the congress could go a long way toward curbing some of the ridiculous regulatory overreach.

Keith and stuff
11-17-2011, 02:09 AM
I don't live in NH, but if I did, I could never run for state Congress...I have a family to support! How many other hard-working, liberty loving middle class New Hampshire-ites are similarly excluded from holding state office?

My guess is almost none if they got really creative. I know a guy that works at Burger King. I know a guy that used to be a taxi driver. I know a IT guy. I know a cell phone salesman. It is not like it is a full time job. It is only around 20 hours per week of volunteer work. Liberty is worth it. I would have so much more free time if I only spent 20 hours per week promoting liberty.


New Hampshire pays $100 per year. What would you change that to?

If it were up to me, the salary would be taken away. There is no reason a state rep or state senator should be paid anything more than mileage and if they live far from the state house, motel expenses. They are citizen legislators and should be treated as such. If they don't want to be a state rep, let them volunteer on the library committee or budget committee.

Perhaps volunteer work isn't for everyone. Personally, I love to volunteer and am involved with many community and political causes. If someone doesn't want to volunteer, perhaps I will be left perplexed, but I will not use force against them. Also, I will not offer them over $100,000 per year like professional career politicians in PA and CA make.



I think the solution here is not to increase their wages, but to decrease their power and prestige.

Reducing prestige would be excellent. It's already pretty low in NH. After all, there are 1000s of ex-state reps. As for becoming a state rep in NH, in a lot of cities, it's harder to become a city councilor or school board member than it is a state rep.

Lothario
11-17-2011, 02:24 AM
we could either raise the salary for representatives (and hope cool guys like you get in and save us some of our own money), or we could get rid of the idea that we need representatives altogether and save more of our money.

John F Kennedy III
11-17-2011, 03:01 AM
My guess is almost none of they got really creative. I know a guy that folks at Burger King. I know a guy that used to be a taxi driver. I know a IT guy. I know a cell phone salesman. It is not like it is a full time job. It is only around 20 hours per week of volunteer work. Liberty is worth it. I would have so much more free time if I only spent 20 hours per week promoting liberty.



If it were up to me, the salary would be taken away. There is no reason a state rep or state senator should be paid anything more than mileage and if they live far from the state house, motel expenses. They are citizen legislators and should be treated as such. If they don't want to be a state rep, let them volunteer on the library committee or budget committee.

Perhaps volunteer work isn't for everyone. Personally, I love to volunteer and am involved with many community and political causes. If someone doesn't want to volunteer, perhaps I will be left perplexed, but I will not use force against them. Also, I will not offer them over $100,000 per year like professional career politicians in PA and CA make.




Reducing prestige would be excellent. It's already pretty low in NH. After all, there are 1000s of ex-state reps. As for becoming a state rep in NH, in a lot of cities, it's harder to become a city councilor or school board member than it is a state rep.

Is it possible for a NH State rep to decline their $100 pay? Have any done this? I doubt this would be a big enough issue to help during a campaign, but I'm interested in the answer.

Keith and stuff
11-17-2011, 03:32 AM
Is it possible for a NH State rep to decline their $100 pay? Have any done this? I doubt this would be a big enough issue to help during a campaign, but I'm interested in the answer.

You could campaign saying that you were going to send it back to the state or a charity. I know a state rep that donates his $100 to the Boy Scouts. I think if someone tried to campaign in the issue (not taking the money), they would look silly and lose some votes. Maybe someone running for a higher office like governor could do that. I know Ron Paul is doing something similar and I love it :)

A friend of mine ran for city council (it pays several grand a year) and she offered to have a lottery and give all of the money to one person in her district. An opponent told on her and the attorney general claimed it was a bribe.

John F Kennedy III
11-17-2011, 04:13 AM
I imagined that would be the case. And yes Ron will only make $39k :)

Keith and stuff
11-20-2011, 09:21 PM
NH State GOP Committeemen and Portsmouth, NH City Councilor elect makes an excellent argument for not paying state legislators. This interview originally aired on a Portsmouth, NH based libertarian radio show.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEJZj2IRgN4

ShaneEnochs
11-20-2011, 09:41 PM
I've been looking through the pages at some of the numbers you folks think Reps should be paid. Where I live, if you're making above 20k a year, you've got a DARN good job.

Lothario
11-20-2011, 10:52 PM
I've been looking through the pages at some of the numbers you folks think Reps should be paid. Where I live, if you're making above 20k a year, you've got a DARN good job.

I don't care what number people come up with - it's immoral to vote my money away to someone else.

Noob
11-21-2011, 06:04 AM
Why should they be paid at all? Since The First lady spends millions of tax payer dollars for their vacations, why should tax payers have to pay for it?

Keith and stuff
12-14-2011, 05:17 AM
A saw a presentation titled The Secret Life of Politicians at Harvard recently. It was put on by a former MI State Rep and government policy expert. Part of the presentation was about incentives for politicians to [seek office in the first place and] stay in power.

The three main reasons listed in the presentation were:
Money: Best paying job for many
Ego: ‘Honorable me’ in the Capitol bubble
Perks: Junkets, Super Bowls [free entrance to events and the like] and sidelines

The presenter went into great detail about all three reasons. He said the Ego part was the most important reason. After the presentation I spoke with him about State Reps in New Hampshire.

In NH, unlike all of the other states, the pay isn't there. There is no way it is the best paying job a person can find. The Ego part does exist in NH. However, with 400 State Reps and 1000s of former State Reps, it isn't anywhere near as big of an issue. Because there are 400 State Reps in NH, the perk factor is mostly mitigated, also. There are perks. State Reps are more likely to be invited to certain parties because they are State Reps. The New Hampshire Liberty Alliance gives State Reps a discount on tickets to the annual Liberty Dinner, for example. However, the perks are few and far between compared to every other state. The lobbyist simply cannot effectively lobby 400 State Reps when the benefits for the lobbyists are so small. You see, since NH only has 1,300,000 people, there isn't much to be gained. The taxes collected are a small amount compared to most states. Even the size of NH is small compared to most states.

Because NH has 400 State Reps, and because the State Reps are paid so little, all three main reasons are much less important in NH than any other state.

gerryb
12-14-2011, 05:37 AM
What we need is more reps and no pay. We used to have 1 congressman per 35,000 people, now we have one per 750,000. Similar scenario for state reps.

If you want your rep to be paid take up a collection

Hospitaller
12-14-2011, 05:38 AM
Politics should idealy not be a career for the purpose of attaining money, it should be a voluntary burden that a patriot uptakes for his state or nation.

Keith and stuff
12-19-2011, 01:12 AM
I somewhat disagree with his solutions. I prefer the solutions we are talking about here. Though, he seems to support the New Hampshire legislative system above every other system in the US and perhaps beyond.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-emnQFZMS8

Lothario
12-19-2011, 01:58 AM
If you want your rep to be paid take up a collection

What if you don't want any rep at all, and instead, you'd like to keep all your money AND make your own decisions within society?


Politics should idealy not be a career for the purpose of attaining money, it should be a voluntary burden that a patriot uptakes for his state or nation.

And yet, even if politicians were 'volunteers,' if they still maintain the right to impose their legislative decisions on me, then I am not free - and their choice of 'career' will not be as a 'patriot,' but rather a power-seeker.

Keith and stuff
12-28-2011, 04:26 PM
Legislature quality can be hard to quantify
By Krista Kano and Alyssa Moni/Daily News Correspondents
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/news/x987651745/Legislature-quality-can-be-hard-to-quantify

Here is an article that tries to make a case for paying state legislators more money. Notice how the authors of the article use 2010 numbers instead of 2012 numbers and get the facts wrong, over and over again. For example, contrary to the article, legislators in NH make a salary of $100 per year, not $200 per year. Also notice that even though NH has far more legislators than any other state, how far less bills are filed in NH than average.

GunnyFreedom
12-28-2011, 04:46 PM
A saw a presentation titled The Secret Life of Politicians at Harvard recently. It was put on by a former MI State Rep and government policy expert. Part of the presentation was about incentives for politicians to [seek office in the first place and] stay in power.

The three main reasons listed in the presentation were:
Money: Best paying job for many
Ego: ‘Honorable me’ in the Capitol bubble
Perks: Junkets, Super Bowls [free entrance to events and the like] and sidelines

The presenter went into great detail about all three reasons. He said the Ego part was the most important reason. After the presentation I spoke with him about State Reps in New Hampshire.

In NH, unlike all of the other states, the pay isn't there. There is no way it is the best paying job a person can find. The Ego part does exist in NH. However, with 400 State Reps and 1000s of former State Reps, it isn't anywhere near as big of an issue. Because there are 400 State Reps in NH, the perk factor is mostly mitigated, also. There are perks. State Reps are more likely to be invited to certain parties because they are State Reps. The New Hampshire Liberty Alliance gives State Reps a discount on tickets to the annual Liberty Dinner, for example. However, the perks are few and far between compared to every other state. The lobbyist simply cannot effectively lobby 400 State Reps when the benefits for the lobbyists are so small. You see, since NH only has 1,300,000 people, there isn't much to be gained. The taxes collected are a small amount compared to most states. Even the size of NH is small compared to most states.

Because NH has 400 State Reps, and because the State Reps are paid so little, all three main reasons are much less important in NH than any other state.

Well, I'm losing all kinds of money in the NCGA because of how the leadership has 'forgotten' our part time status, I throw up in my mouth a little every time I hear the word "honorable" so much my own friends tease me about it, and I have vehemently rejected every "perk" and party to the point where people in the NCGA who like me worry it will hurt my standing with that crowd.

So I don't seem to fit any of the three categories at all. ;)

Keith and stuff
12-28-2011, 11:18 PM
Well, I'm losing all kinds of money in the NCGA because of how the leadership has 'forgotten' our part time status, I throw up in my mouth a little every time I hear the word "honorable" so much my own friends tease me about it, and I have vehemently rejected every "perk" and party to the point where people in the NCGA who like me worry it will hurt my standing with that crowd.

So I don't seem to fit any of the three categories at all. ;)

I love you and all but you do get a lot of money for being a legislator. You know you do :)

GunnyFreedom
12-28-2011, 11:45 PM
I love you and all but you do get a lot of money for being a legislator. You know you do :)

$21k plus per diem hardly qualifies as "a lot," and I'm absolutely living paycheck to paycheck. I had more disposable income working production at Kinkos. If they didn't keep monkeying with the schedule and special sessions every month I could work another job and be sitting pretty good. But the only people who can earn extra pay in the private sector in this environment are the folks who operate in the upper echelon, because the schedule is downright chaotic.

Anti Federalist
12-29-2011, 12:56 AM
Great post, I was going to say much of the same things myself.

All four of my NH reps are all middle class folks who manage to find the time for it.


I don't know if you are serious. The NH Constitution calls for $100 per year per lawmaker. Since it is hard to change the Constitution, that amount hasn't gone up and doesn't look to go up any time soon. IMO, the lawmakers shouldn't be paid a salary. Lawmakers in NH do get paid 50 cents per mile so they aren't losing money. Well, that isn't entirely true, lawmakers usually make 50 cents per mile but sometimes they don't make anything. Some of the reps weren't paid for driving for part of this year in a new effort to cut costs. Here's the story, Mileage reimbursement for legislators less than last year
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20111101/NEWS06/711019973/-1/news06



To be a state rep in NH averages out to a 10-30 hour per week commitment, depending on how much you want to do. To be a state senator in NH, it takes about twice as much time per week. I volunteer about as much as a NH state senator works and I don't get paid anything, even mileage. I'm not complaining. I love liberty.

As you likely know, NH has by far the most pro-liberty House of Reps in the US. In the 1990s, NH had a Libertarian Party caucus with 4 Libertarian Party state reps. Currently, NH has around 80 or so libertarians serving in the House of Reps. Here is a list of the bills that went through the House of Reps last year, it is amazing to look at when compared to anywhere else in the world, http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?303849-2011-New-Hampshire-Liberty-Related-Bills-Report More reps from NH have endorsed Ron Paul than all other states combined. Plus, 4 reps even endorsed Gary Johnson. A couple state senators even endorsed Ron Paul. Additional, NH is the freest state in the US. IMO, it's partly because NH pays the folks so little.

As for what the reps do for a living. You have a point. I personally know dozens of reps. I'll tell you what some of them do. The Speaker of the House is a lawyer. Mark is a realtor. Kyle works at a fast food place. Cam sells phones. Steve used to be a taxi driver, not sure what he does now. Laura is a mother. Seth is an IT guy. My friend Andrew ran but lost, he was a waiter when he ran. My friend Will may run, he is a factory worker.

Anti Federalist
12-29-2011, 12:57 AM
Ron Paul is wealthy.

He managed not to be bought off by the system.

You only become corrupt if you choose so.

Keith and stuff
12-29-2011, 09:20 AM
$21k plus per diem hardly qualifies as "a lot," and I'm absolutely living paycheck to paycheck. I had more disposable income working production at Kinkos. If they didn't keep monkeying with the schedule and special sessions every month I could work another job and be sitting pretty good. But the only people who can earn extra pay in the private sector in this environment are the folks who operate in the upper echelon, because the schedule is downright chaotic.

So I don't seem to fit any of the three categories at all.

You don't fit into those categories not because of how your state is designed, but because you are a superstar state legislator! The same goes for Ron Paul. Ideally, the system would be designed in ways to discourage those three categories.

I am sorry. I don't mean any disrespect. Thank you for your sacrifices to the people of NC. I am sorry that you are living low even though you are doing so much good. It is too bad the NC system of government isn't like the NH system so that you could work full time and be a State Representative at the same time.

Serving in office is supposed to be a sacrifice, though. It is supposed to be hard and people aren't supposed to do it but for a few terms or so. For example, like one of the three NH State Senators that endorsed Ron Paul. State Senator Ray White thinks the 30-60 hours per week of work for $100 per year and gas money is too much for him and he announced that he isn't going to run next year to spend more time with his family. I know another NH State Senator that also had family issues because of the 30-60 hours per week of State Senator work. But nevertheless, I still think these great friends of liberty are given too much of taxpayer's money.

Inflation is unfortunate but one positive is that since the NH salary stays at $100 per year, as the money supply continues to be inflated, their $100 per year continues to be worth less and less. So, in NH at least, their salary continues to go down most terms in buying power.