By Rob Roper
There is an old joke around the Vermont State House that says the only people who serve are those who need $10K and those who don’t need $10K. It highlights a real problem that our legislature is made up disproportionately of retirees, who could use an extra ten grand to help pay their property taxes, and wealthy “trust funders,” who just toss their legislative pay on the pile with the rest of it. The other category that the joke misses is full time activists whose employers essentially pay them to be elected lobbyists for their particular special interest. For them the $10 grand (actually closer to $12,000) is just a taxpayer funded year-end bonus.
I do sympathize with the dilemma that serving in Montpelier is not well compensated. I do agree that we would be much better off as a state if more people who worked for a living — as in those who can’t take four-and-a-half months off every year because they have jobs — could participate. Do the folks who do serve today deserve more than they currently receive? Probably. However….
If we shorten the legislative session to 60 days in year one and 30 days in year two we can not only save money, but attract candidates for office who can hold full time jobs outside of the legislature, are focused on public service rather than public employment (there is a difference), and due to time constraints if nothing else, will have to focus on the fundamentals of managing key elements of state government and not the latest cause celeb coming out of California.
We do not want, nor does Vermont need a full time, professional political class. These people are a big enough menace as it is with the time and resources they already have.
Instead of paying our elected lawmakers more money, what we really should do is decrease the time commitment. Instead of forcing folks to huddle under the Golden Dome from January to mid-May (or beyond) every year, how about we take a page out of Virginia’s constitution and do thirty calendar days in odd years and sixty in even years. Certainly, if a state of over 8.5 million people with an annual budget of $75 billion can wrap things up in two months/one month, Vermont having to manage just 640,000 people shouldn’t even need that long to parcel out a mere $8 billion.
Or, looking at states of similar population to Vermont, Wyoming meets for just forty days in the odd years and twenty in the even years. This is how “citizen legislatures” are supposed to operate.
But here in Vermont, S.39, An act relating to compensation and benefits for members of the Vermont General Assembly, comes before the full senate for a vote this week.
Some of the things this bill does: It nearly doubles the weekly salary of a rank-and-file legislator to $1,210, or just over $19,000 for sixteen four-day weeks. Over the rest of the year when not in session, and this is an entirely new thing, they will get paid “an amount equal to one-fifth of the annually adjusted weekly compensation. That’s another $242 a week or $8,712. So, we’re up to about $28,000 per year.
Also new is health insurance benefits provided through the state, stipends for childcare and/or elder care of up to $1600, and new rules around per diem meal ($67 per day), travel, and lodging ($127 per night) reimbursements that make legal all the little cheats legislators had to pull on the sly to pocket the cash while secretly carpooling and brown bagging their lunches.
According to the Joint Fiscal Office, the cost to the taxpayer of all these new benefits, when they fully kick in, will be $4,759,000 annually by 2026. That’s an additional $26,439 per legislator. No, it’s not going to get you on a Forbes list, but it’s getting to a point where you could get by not doing much of anything else, which is their point – but misses the point of having people in office who also hold real jobs.
Even more concerning than the concrete changes wrought by S.39 is the “Working Group” it establishes to look into things like, whether even more supplemental compensation should be provided to members who hold leadership positions, including caucus leaders and committee chairs. It will consider adding caucus staff and possibly allowing members to hire at public expense their own personal staff. And if, just maybe, the legislature should meet year-round.
Again, Vermont is a state of 640,000 people with a (temporarily oversized with federal bailout money) budget of $8 billion. There are 25 U.S. cities bigger than we are. Rather than give these people a raise we should fire them all and elect a mayor and a council of a dozen or so individuals to manage the place.
We have a small population, a small geographic footprint, and a small economy. But we do have some things that are bigger here than anywhere else in the United States, bar none: political egos.
And that is what S.39 is really about: feeding those political egos. The folks running the show in Montpelier feel like they are saving the world and deserve all the trappings that go with that mighty calling. What’s more, it shouldn’t be expected of them that their talents be distracted by other mundane tasks such as other gainful employment. They want to be a full-time, full-pay class of political elites who do nothing but figure out ways to meddle in the lives everyone else 24/7/365.
Nope. No thanks!
Instead, if we shorten the legislative session to 60 days in year one and 30 days in year two we can not only save money, but attract candidates for office who can hold full time jobs outside of the legislature, are focused on public service rather than public employment (there is a difference), and due to time constraints if nothing else, will have to focus on the fundamentals of managing key elements of state government and not the latest cause celeb coming out of California. That sounds like much better deal to me.
Rob Roper is a freelance writer who has been involved with Vermont politics and policy for over 20 years. This article reprinted with permission from Behind the Lines: Rob Roper on Vermont Politics, robertroper.substack.com
Very much a fan of this “less is better” for our legislature. We might also ask for consideration of an alternating agenda: Even years…NEW legislation can be considered —- Odd years…Agenda is Audit&Repeal current laws.
When the legislature is in session, no man’s purse is safe!
–Some Longdead Guy
Add property/liberty/ad infinitum
Things look quite different when you stop and think about the fact that there are many businesses today that have more employees than Vermont has residents.. and many do a much better job than the government of VT of course.
Also consider how small VT is in size..
When thinking about how Wyoming does this, it’s even more impressive when you add in the huge size of that state.
Vermont not only has a small population, the state itself is very small.
More importantly then want or need is we can’t afford the one we have now. Can you even imagine what the cost to taxpayers would be with a full time or even longer session then we have now? What we do need is a law that legislators can not have a interest in the bills their voting on. Back in pre 80’s we had more public minded candidates, now we have more agenda driven ones which is why the cost of living here is becoming unbearable.
As Treasonous as these Miscreants are, who needs them?
When these folks run for office they promise to do what they have to do to improve the lives of Vermonters. It appears they forget about this the minute they are sworn in. I thought they had to take an oath to serve and protect and follow the United States and Vermont Constitution. The more the people object at what they are doing the more they dig in and show that they don’t care at all about what the people want. One example is this horrible heating bill. It’s been brought up over and over how this will hurt a large number of Vermonters. The answer is “ get used to it because it will happen “ and another genius in the legislator suggested “ Vermonters buy heavier shirts and jackets. “ I don’t know about you but I did not vote for these self serving ideologues to do what they want at the expense of the citizens. We need to hold these folks responsible to whatever oaths and promises they make. The more we vote them in the more powerful they become. The answer is TERM LIMITS, TERM LIMITS, TERM LIMITS. Another question is why are they allowed to take money from people who do not even live in Vermont. How can out of state money help Vermonters ? It cannot. The dirty secret is that everybody but the hard working people of Vermont are profiting. As long as we are on these legislators not helping us what are they so fearful of about law abiding people owning guns ? It appears that every few months they come up another useless law that does nothing to protect the citizens. Here’s a novel idea, try going after the actual criminals who are committing these heinous crimes and stop worrying about non existent threats from law abiding citizens. We write letters and they mostly ignore us. Try and get a phone call back from one of them, good luck. The answer is we need to put the fear of GOD into them and vote them out. My grandmother used to say “ the better the devil you know “ but I say we need to try someone new until we get it right.
You are absolutely right!!!
I don’t understand this constant cry for “Term Limits”.
We have Term Limits NOW–it’s called “Don’t Vote Them Back In”.
That is how you limit their term, don’t vote them back in !!
You could limit every single one of their terms in the next election if you decided too– Don’t vote for them again!
When I ran for governor in 2016 (as a liberal Democrat), I proposed shortening and streamlining the legislative session. Right now, too much time is spent on bills of little consequence and repetitive committee hearings with the same lobbyist witnesses. Every Vermonter deserves to be heard on a bill but just once. Instead, Vermont Committee Chairs allow lobbyists to participate in mark ups, often speaking more than the elected legislators. Of course, few private citizens could afford to participate in Committee mark ups but lobbyists are paid to do just that. Congress doesn’t allow lobbyists to speak in mark ups and they go much more quickly than those in Montpelier. I agree legislators should receive a weekly pay raise but for 10 week sessions at the most–not 18 weeks or more
Why would anyone admit to being a liberal? You worthless liberals have screwed up my state and country.
Easy on Mr. Galbraith, Bob Parzych. He was upfront & honest, stating he is a liberal Dem. Most won’t. And, he agree’s of the too long a legislative session, spending time on too many wasteful, nonsense bills (most every one liberal, eco, enviro, Kumbaya nonsense).
FYI, Bob P…Peter Galbraith is the son of John Kenneth Galbraith…very famous economist. Peter Galbraith is equally bright (too bad a lib :)…
“Ambassador (Peter) Galbraith earned a B.A. degree from Harvard College, an M.A. from Oxford University, and a J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center.”
Peter G was first US Ambassador to Croatia…an envoy in Kurdistan and similar in Afghanistan…as well as a high level U.N. advisory position….So, Bob P…cut Peter G some slack :)…we’d like to see him post & share here, more! Maybe we can alter some of his thinking :)….wishful, but doubtful
I had to laugh,..Mr. Galbraith…you say, saw & realize this:
“…Vermont Committee Chairs allow lobbyists to participate in mark ups, often speaking more than the elected legislators. …”
You do know whom they refer to, largely?. It’s the “Wizard Behind the Curtain”….the “Shadow Government of Vermont”….Never elected, nor ever appointed…but they control any & all they wish – of VT’s destiny – and have for DECADES … their uber eco-enviro agenda. It is the Conservation Law Foundation….CLF. They own all…Legislators, Media, Education, voters, newspapers, VPR…you name it, the CLF has their hand in it. OH? Did I forget the VT COURTS? Don’t you know?…The CLF might was well have sleeping cots in every VT court. Mostly, all they do is sue people (and if the State of VT does NOT PASS CLIMATE CHANGE, THE CLF WILL SUE VT!)… this is where they exist & excel, to torture those whom they dislike – and they revel in it……Read Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”… that is the CLF.
Rob,
You hit the winning button.
Amen,
It’ll never happen….Libs, Dems, Progressives are too ingrained with their drunken power. Look at Gov. Scott? HE is the CEO of VT, and Dems just make him their puppet…He is just a eunuch..powerless. A UNIQUE first step might be this…. that to qualify as an elected legislator, that before you take office after winning, you must pass a ‘Financial Literacy” test. BINGO! A financial literacy test, mandated, would likely eliminate 60% of elected Progressives, Socialists and Dems….and some may not even run then, if they face such tough testing, cuz’ they know they fail it. The percentage pass rate for Repubs would be far, far higher