Angry Louisianans warn Jindal not to approve legislature’s pay raise; Update: Now with angry e-mails! Update: And still more e-mails!
posted at 8:00 pm on June 24, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I have nothing to say about this except to flag it as an early alert that the golden boy’s popularity back home might be in jeopardy. To my surprise, we’ve gotten half a dozen e-mails from Louisianans since the creationist posts advising me that the big issue back home has nothing to do with evolution and everything to do with a pay raise the state legislature just voted for itself — something Jindal promised when he was running for governor last year that he’d oppose. It’s not just our readers either. Check Google News and you’ll find more coverage of the pay raise than the debate over intelligent design. Even the NYT is in on the action:
Conservative talk-radio show hosts and bloggers have denounced it, newspaper editorials have inveighed against it — The Times-Picayune of New Orleans called the increase “greedy” and its main proponent “shameless” — and the legislators themselves received floods of e-mail messages from angry constituents…
“This pay raise is devastating him,” said Moon Griffon, a conservative talk-radio host with a wide following in northern Louisiana, the most Republican and evangelical part of the state. “I’ve gotten over 5,000 e-mails from people who say they voted for him, and who say they would never vote for him again.”
Mr. Griffon added, “People don’t like hypocrisy, and they like somebody with guts.”
The legislative session ended Monday, and Mr. Jindal now has two weeks to veto the pay increase, though he has given no indication that he will do so…
“No matter where I go, they certainly are disappointed, and they are using some very unkind words related to his spine,” said Bernie Pinsonat, a pollster in Baton Rouge. “It’s pretty ferocious.” He added, “I’m quite positive his base is very upset with him.”
I can appreciate the pain of a broken campaign promise but there’s obviously some sort of regional divide here as to the nastiness of a legislative pay hike because we wouldn’t blink an eye at this sort of thing in New York. We’re not talking about some massive sum here: It’s a bump from $16,800 a year to $37,500, seemingly a drop in the bucket of even a poor state but evidently of huge import to voters. (There are 39 state senators and 105 representative, so the total hike should be just shy of $3 million per year.) Jindal’s spokesman claims he’s not going to veto it so as not antagonize the legislature into digging in against the rest of his reform agenda, but if this thing is leaking into national papers I wonder if he has any choice, simply as a way to preserve his popularity back home. As of this afternoon he still insists he won’t oppose it, although he’s ominously adopted the McCain-esque line that he’s “learned his lesson” and will keep closer tabs on this sort of thing going forward. Exit question: Yeah, he went back on his word but he’s doing a good job otherwise. What’s the big deal? What am I missing here?
Update (Ed): I’m a little mystified here myself. Minnesota state legislators get $31,000 per year for their part-time work. It seems to me that without paying the state legislators a decent wage, Louisiana risks having the only people in their legislature either be rich or able to manipulate their power to get there. That certainly was one argument about why the New Orleans PD had such endemic corruption; their starting pay was around $6 per hour a few years ago, about what a security guard made.
Part of governing is compromise, and this doesn’t seem too egregious to me. I understand that Jindal had promised to keep pay raises off the table, but this is a good lesson to Jindal not to overpromise during the campaign. If Obama had learned that lesson, maybe he’d be a better candidate in this cycle.
Update: Louisianans strike back!
YIKES… I know about the Hotair-Jindal lovefest but geeze this is getting silly….
>Yeah, he went back on his word but he’s doing a good job otherwise. What’s the big deal? What am I missing here?
>Part of governing is compromise, and this doesn’t seem too egregious to me.
Over Doubling the pay and having it automagically raising forever (without another vote ever) doesn’t seem egregious???
OK what will qualify it for egregiousness? 3X? 6X? 10X?
What you don’t get is that the BASE pay is just that BASE pay. They also get a per diem for every day the lege is in session. Plus expenses… PLUS a full time staff…. Plus Plus Plus…
The average lege is already making about $36,000 a year BEFORE the pay raise. And before the other perks…. Which BTW is DEAD AT the national average.
http://www.la-par.org/guide_laleg1.cfm
Now they want to get paid $60K a year (almost double the national average) for a part time job…. and you “fiscal conservatives” don’t see the problem here???? No wonder the party is doomed.
==============
and in case you have not been reading your comments Jindal HAS NOT been doing a good job otherwise. He’s pissed off his whole base.Look- I worked on 3 of his campaigns. Never, Never, Never again.
You guys need to wake up and smell the coffee on this one.
Another:
These people have other jobs too! And they have expense accounts and can write a bunch of perks off and not to mention state retirement to go along with the other retirement from their original job. I would consider an increase in pay but it shouldn’t go into affect now…they should have to wait until the next election. I worked for a State Representative back in the early ’90’s. Their job is not hard! 2 months out of the year in session. Give me a break!
Also, they need to be held accountable. Show us what you did to help the state and the constituents, then we will vote to see if you deserve a pay raise.
I am off my soap box.
And another:
The issue you raised in your post is valid, the fact that if legislatures pay were better, more laypeople would run. The problem is that its a 100% increase!!! And it is to take effect immediately, whereas tax cuts will wait until 2010. Had they passed a more modest pay raise or made them active when the tax cuts will be activated OR made the tax cuts active when the pay raise took effect then there would not be a backlash.
Update:I’m glad you guys posted the responses from some of us here in La, but you’re still not getting the whole picture. People are ENRAGED. When they passed the bill, I was so mad on Monday night that I had to do something. I threw together a website (http://www.legewatch.com) to see if we couldn’t at least get a watchdog organization together. I didn’t really expect much response.
This is what they make, not $16k - http://www.legewatch.com/2008/06/debunking-the-pay-raise-lies/ - plus a nice benefits package including $700 - $1200 per month in health insurance benefits. They were already adequately paid for what is constitutionally a part time job – now they leap to one the highest paid legislatures in the country while we languish at the bottom of nearly every quality of life metric there is.
The response has been phenomenal – after three days I had to get a volunteer to act as a spokesperson and he’s been making the rounds of TV and radio shows all over the state. Hundreds of people signed up, we’ve got a rally planned – and if you want pics/video when that happens I’ll be glad to report on it for you – on July 7. I’ve got people upstate chartering BUSES to come down for the rally. This is huge, and very similar to what happened in Pennsylvania in 2005 – in fact we’re modeling our campaign after that one. We’re filming a TV spot on Tuesday. Basically we’ve gone from 0 to 200 mph in the last 6 days. I can’t tell you how big this is, in Louisiana politics. Recall campaigns are starting up statewide; I’m helping the various groups to coordinate and have a workable, effective plan. And I’m not a political operative or anything like that – this really is grassroots.
As for Jindal doing a good job otherwise … I’m a long time supporter of his, and I can tell you he’s been a real disappointment. He let us down with his sham ethics reform and a whole lot more. We want Bobby to tighten up and be the guy we supported in the campaign – and the only way I know to make that happen is to get the facts out.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
He’ll do the right thing…
JeffreyLloyd on June 24, 2008 at 8:06 PM
What’s the average pay in other states?
robblefarian on June 24, 2008 at 8:08 PM
I think he should tie it to a reform package. Tell the legislature they will get thier payraise when they step up to fight political corruption.
William Amos on June 24, 2008 at 8:10 PM
To all those who were/are pushing for Jindal as veep, this is a good reason to let him “simmer” for a while in La. and get his feet.
He’s a good man. But let’s see how he deals with this, and other, issues for a while before we put him on a pedestal.
JetBoy on June 24, 2008 at 8:10 PM
And there you have the reason it’s “leaking” into the NYT.
Either he breaks a promise or he antagonizes the very people he needs on his side to get his agenda accomplished.
Anything to nip the Jindal movement in the bud.
VolMagic on June 24, 2008 at 8:10 PM
I am starting to think that putting ones faith in Messiah’s is a bad idea.
Hilts on June 24, 2008 at 8:10 PM
Hell, most of our “legislators” down here in LA are millionaire fat cats already. If you squint then you can look at it this way: the pay increase would actually give an incentive to someone young and full of vim to run for seats that are now term-limiting out.
BJ* on June 24, 2008 at 8:11 PM
It’s not a regional divide, it’s an ideological divide.
You are a NY, Rockefeller Republican, AP. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.
misterpeasea on June 24, 2008 at 8:11 PM
So much promise to crash and burn so fast.
MB4 on June 24, 2008 at 8:13 PM
Why can’t Jindal, hold a press conference and say, In my campaign, I said that I wouldn’t go for this. I’m going to VETO the bill. Now, I’ve stood my ground and am true to my word. NOW, Its your turn, citizens of Louisiana!! When it comes time to move the rest of the reform agenda through, and people stand in the way, I expect you will thrust just as much pressure upon those that appose the reforms. If your not working with me, none of what I proposed will get done.
PappaMac on June 24, 2008 at 8:15 PM
Here’s an idea:
How about a “means test” for politicians? If they’re independently wealthy, they don’t get a dime.
misterpeasea on June 24, 2008 at 8:15 PM
Pay Raise? This more than doubles their pay. He just needs to veto this and invite them to come back with a more modest pay raise. This, the voters will understand.
Just don’t sit back and let it go into law without your signature, Governor. That’s just as weasely as a “present” vote.
RushBaby on June 24, 2008 at 8:17 PM
Jindal approved the pay raise and also package to cut taxes
William Amos on June 24, 2008 at 8:18 PM
Opps sorry he didnt yet
William Amos on June 24, 2008 at 8:18 PM
Let me see here.
This reminds me of Bush’s (Bush the First) deal with the democrats. If they would cut spending, he would agree to raise taxes after all, going against his, “No new taxes” pledge.
I would surmise that “The deal” here is that if the legislators get their big raise they won’t take bribes anymore or put cronies on the payroll.
If so, will they keep the deal? How did Bush’s deal with the tax increases in exchange for spending cuts work out?
MB4 on June 24, 2008 at 8:20 PM
William Amos on June 24, 2008 at 8:18 PM
From your link:
I hate it that politicians look at their pay as a salary. They should serve the public knowing that if it’s wealth and career they want, it’s outside of politics they should look.
RushBaby on June 24, 2008 at 8:24 PM
All politicial pay raises should be put to the voters in the form of a referendum….
after all, they are supposed to be working for us.
Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on June 24, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Crap……
Jindal 2012!Although I hope I`m flying off the handle and it`ll blow over for him.
ThePrez on June 24, 2008 at 8:28 PM
is the legislature a bunch of Dems? They see a rising conservative star. So what do they do? Find a way to bring him down.
“Lets all vote ourselves a big pay raise and when the Gov signs it we help him destroy himself and get paid doing it!”
Nothing surprises me.
JellyToast on June 24, 2008 at 8:31 PM
RushBaby is right. Our politicians should work for $1.00 a year, like the former Mayor of LA, Richard Riordan. Yes, I know, not all are that rich. After one term, or max. two they should go the hell home. We’re in the mess we’re in because of the professional politicians who don’t know when to retire, live and die, with grace.
If he passes it, the people have something to say. I love the story. Political guillotine.
They’re getting more than double of what they make now. Whom do any of us know, who’s in that position?
This is how the varnish comes off of the best of ‘em.
Entelechy on June 24, 2008 at 8:33 PM
Listening to the New Orleans radio stations (I live outside of Mobile), one can sense that the anger is just seething. Very palpable. Many see it, apparently, as a symbolic issue as Louisiana still is recovering from Katrina. IOW, “The legislature hasn’t finished the job and they’re already raising their pay?”
I’m not sure what the people in the northern parts of the state believe (they’re generally more conservative); but I guess they’re opposed to the raise as well.
Jindal’s got to veto the raise. Otherwise, he’ll have to exert a lot of energy recouping his losses; energy that could be used elsewhere in reforming the state.
‘Course, he vetoes the raise, he’ll lose support in the legislature.
Tough call.
SteveMG on June 24, 2008 at 8:33 PM
When are we going to stop Republicans from have spine removal surgery as soon as they win elections.
Helloyawl on June 24, 2008 at 8:33 PM
There is no question what Jindal should do: He should veto that thing IMMEDIATELY.
Then, if the legislature refuses to pass his reforms, he can run against the legislature. That’s always more popular than signing a pay raise into law.
There is absolutely no reason to sign this thing into law. None. No one is going to vote against you because you didn’t raise a legislator’s salary. And if the legislature puts up a fight, all you have to do is say that they’re greedy.
That he’d even consider going back on a campaign pledge like this indicates he has a LOT of learning to do. Republicans do not raise taxes, nor do they increase salaries for legislators. Period.
Sydney Carton on June 24, 2008 at 8:39 PM
16K? No wonder it’s so corrupt. You get what you pay for.
- The Cat
MirCat on June 24, 2008 at 8:39 PM
I dont think Jindal is going to veto VIDEO
William Amos on June 24, 2008 at 8:51 PM
Jindal had better take heed. This is not the climate in which a GOPer should turn out to be a liar.
madmonkphotog on June 24, 2008 at 8:52 PM
Man you guys love eating your own.
tomas on June 24, 2008 at 8:54 PM
I see the point that 37,500 isn’t a large salary, but more than doubling the salary is a dramatic increase. He has to veto this, then work toward a compromise (maybe scaled increases over a number of years?)
That 16k is a small salary. Is it considered a part-time job, like some other states?
cs89 on June 24, 2008 at 8:55 PM
If these legislators work full-time, they’re barely making minimum wage, so maybe they need a raise to reduce the temptation to corruption. But a 123% raise in one year looks really bad–couldn’t Jindal veto this, and negotiate a slower raise over several years?
Another idea–let’s distribute the money from William Jefferson’s freezer, and give each of them a 3.7% cost-of-living raise!
Steve Z on June 24, 2008 at 9:01 PM
Does anyone know if being a Louisiana state legislator is even a full time job?
MB4 on June 24, 2008 at 9:02 PM
Answering my own question (8:55 PM), the job is part-time.
Again, there probably does need to be an increase. Doubling the salary is going to hurt Jindal’s reformer image, and even if the alternative is ticking off the legislators he’d better not do it.
cs89 on June 24, 2008 at 9:07 PM
Bwahahahaha. Legislators work, max, 5 hours a week. Max.
VolMagic on June 24, 2008 at 9:08 PM
Not on $16,800 a year.
SteveMG on June 24, 2008 at 9:09 PM
I’m reserving judgment until I know what CyberCipher’s dog has to say about this.
manwithblackhat on June 24, 2008 at 9:09 PM
IIRC, the legislature only meets for 3-4 months out of the year.
Folks, this is Louisiana - the land that time forgot.
SteveMG on June 24, 2008 at 9:12 PM
History has proven that they couldn’t do all that cheating in half the time.
Entelechy on June 24, 2008 at 9:12 PM
Honestly, don’t you envy the steely ones on this side, just a tad bit?
Entelechy on June 24, 2008 at 9:14 PM
From the Lousiana legislature webpage:
2008 Regular Legislative Session
Convened on Monday, March 31, 2008
Final Adjournment on Monday, June 23, 2008
Just about four months.
SteveMG on June 24, 2008 at 9:15 PM
I was raised in Louisiana. It’s a beautiful state with some of the friendliest people you’ll encounter anywhere. But there is a strong streak of loser mentality and envy running through the place. For criminy sakes, folks, $37,500 barely covers a Baton Rouge apartment, meals, and gasoline. Ed’s comments are spot on. If you make this “job” impossible for anyone but the rich, postering lawyers looking to pad a resume, or “influence peddlers”… you’ll get what Louisiana has always gotten. And how’s that been working for them?
Sugar Land on June 24, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Bump?! 123% increase?
I can never tell when you’re being sarcastic…
Jaibones on June 24, 2008 at 9:27 PM
In Oregon, a state lawmaker’s annual salary is $16,284 (2005).
MB4 on June 24, 2008 at 9:30 PM
MB4 on June 24, 2008 at 9:33 PM
Do you not remember PA voters losing their sh*t after the pay hike the state legislators passed for themselves? They passed that thing, and immediately after, a bunch of them gave the money back or handed it off to local charities, and they backtracked. People were way pissed.
doubleplusundead on June 24, 2008 at 9:34 PM
I think a raise is probably in order. Not because they deserve it, but because their pay is ridiculously low. But Jindal’s stuck, and he should know it. If he’s worth anything, he’ll know that keeping his word is crucial.
Otherwise, he’s just another lying politician. Remember when Republicans had to resort to a “contract,” in order to come up with a metaphor that would cause voters to believe that a politician would really do what he says?
It worked, too. People care about that stuff. I know I do. The only time I voted against a Republican candidate for President was to vote against W’s daddy. I did that because he lied to me about his resolve in facing down Democrats’ insistence on higher taxes. He promised, and he broke that promise with casual contempt for those he made it to. “Read my hips” indeed. Jindal should veto.
Splunge on June 24, 2008 at 9:43 PM
no, we just expect them to keep their word. it’s a high standard, something a democrat wouldnt understand.
veto this thing bobby. i cant believe you’re even having 2nd thoughts.
chasdal on June 24, 2008 at 9:49 PM
I think it’s the fact that this is obviously the first priority of the legislature, over all of the other important work that Lousiana so desperately needs done, that ticks people off.
A documented promise is not something you can back out of without political consequences. Just ask George Bush, Sr.
joewm315 on June 24, 2008 at 9:52 PM
RushBaby said:
You mean from Private Sector kickbacks and sweetheart deals like the guys in Washington? Its not the salery. Its the Perks!
Unfortunately, the Gov is working to end those outside perks so it doesn’t seem unfair to give them a raise after 20 years.
OBQuiet on June 24, 2008 at 9:54 PM
Three months for everyone else is four months for Louisiana.
Actually, it’s about six.
SteveMG on June 24, 2008 at 10:02 PM
I imagine the people of La. aren’t too happy about the way the state government performed during and after Katrina….A very high percentage of New Qreans is still uninhabitable….Tens of thousands still displaced….levy s still not repaired…corruption still rampant (cold cash Jefferson)….Nagin demonstrably idiotic…I know Nagin is not part of the state government but it’s a blurred line to the victims….And the previous lady Gov., whose name I can’t remember was abominable to even the left….I would be hard pressed to consider rewarding such complete incompetence…Yeah..Yeah…the Fed was bad too, but that is not the present issue..
b4lucy on June 24, 2008 at 10:17 PM
$17K may or may not be a satisfactory salary for 3 months work. I tend towards thinking it’s low. Ed, you mention MN’s $30K as if it some the norm, but there are other states whose legislators get paid even less, if this 2006 list here (warning it’s a PDF) accurate and not changed much since.
Texas — $7,200
Mississippi — $10K
SC — $10,400
Maine — $11K
Indiana — $11+K
South Dakota pays $12k for the two year term.
Now the list doesn’t indicate what a normal session time and that would be worth keeping in mind when comparing, but in general, your argument that LA’s low pay risks having a crappy government or worse a corrupt one, suggests they all risk that, yet the only one seems to live up to the warning, year in and year out, is LA. That too makes me think that pay not such a critical issue as you suggest.
BTW, the list also provides info on extras. LA’s legislators get a $6K expense allowance in addition to, it appears, a $113 per diem.
Dusty on June 24, 2008 at 10:47 PM
“Part of governing is compromise, and this doesn’t seem too egregious to me.”
Some of us think part of governing is doing what you’ve promised. It seems extremely egregious to me for him to change a position he was elected on.
Kevin M on June 24, 2008 at 10:48 PM
Well that $16k makes me feel a lot better about my teacher’s salary.
Bob's Kid on June 24, 2008 at 11:01 PM
“Some of us think part of governing is doing what you’ve promised. It seems extremely egregious to me for him to change a position he was elected on.”
Right - and that is what has people ticked off. It ain’t the money, get off that red herring, folks. Voters are *really* losing patience with people jerk them around after being elected.
fabrexe on June 24, 2008 at 11:10 PM
It’s pretty hard to feel sorry for them (or to consider them “victims”), when they keep voting for this fool.
AZCoyote on June 24, 2008 at 11:16 PM
Re Nagin, around the time he was reelected, plenty of folks from LA explained on HA that his opponent in that race was even worse, and that NOLA made the correct choice.
I heard recently that he isn’t even showing up for City Council meetings.
Jindal’s got his work cut out for him.
RushBaby on June 24, 2008 at 11:42 PM
Why on Earth Jindal would think he’s going to win any hearts and minds in the legislature if he approves this pay raise is beyond me.
The only negative if he vetoes it now is short-term on his reform package, which he can still take to the voters in the off-year election cycle. If he doesn’t veto it and loses support among his own supporters, that will empower Democrats in the Legislature to fight his reform efforts anyway, since they know he won’t have the same type of moral high ground he came into office with to motivate voters to make changes at the House and Senate levels.
So they’ll have their pay raise, and Jindal still won’t have his reform package, while at the same time losing the trust of his core voters. Great strategy.
jon1979 on June 24, 2008 at 11:44 PM
This issue came up with my state legislature a few years back. Their salaries were similar and the raise they wanted was about twice what they were getting also. Heard the same arguments, your get what you pay for, they need to earn that kind of raise like we have to, etc. It went to the ballot and lost. Next time they asked for a more modest raise, about half what they asked for the first time and won. They learned from that but we didn’t. They’re still about half filled with idiots.
Jindal needs to veto it and tell them to try again but this time try to look more reasonable.
Shay on June 25, 2008 at 12:07 AM
Why didn’t they bring this up before Jindal took office? Is this some kind of a trick by Democrats to make Jindal look bad?
SoulGlo on June 25, 2008 at 12:13 AM
My best knowledge is from people who post here from LA. I will defer to them , while I attempt to educate myself further.
But it does appear that there are cracks in this particular levy.
tomk59 on June 25, 2008 at 12:17 AM
If this silly pay raise issue is enough to cause Louisianans to go sour on the first competent bit of leadership they’ve had in decades. . .then I have little sympathy the next time they choose to sit at home during a Cat-5 hurricane.
What a bunch of dopes. . .
Don’t forget your umbrellas.
seanrobins on June 25, 2008 at 12:27 AM
Look, the 16k thing is an out and out lie.
The average legislator, BEFORE the pay raise, is making between $35 and $38k depending on whether it’s an odd or even year. See this chart.
They also get on the state health insurance plan, which racks up another $700-$1200 PER MONTH in benefits. Plus about fifty cents a mile. And there are more benefits… then you’ve got lobbyists falling all over themselves to buy you lunch and employ your family members at ridiculous salaries.
They have low base pay which they then rack up with $140 per diems every time they deal with some idiot legislation like the State Cocktail bill. (Yes, I’m serious.) They submitted over 2200 bills this session and less than 500 were passed, all of which required meetings and committees… cha-ching!
So, NO, they don’t just get $16,800 per year. Ever.
Furthermore our state constitution REQUIRES that the lege be part time - they don’t just get to arbitrarily declare that they are full time and expect to be paid accordingly. If they would lay off the BS legislation like the state cocktail, and stop watching baseball games DURING the sessions, they might be able to get their work done in a more timely fashion.
As for Jindal - we worked our keisters off to give the Gov a line item veto. If he really wanted to stop the lege from taking these pay raises he could have pulled his red pen out and used it on the pork. The lege just granted a bunch of Jindal’s staffers ridiculously exorbitant salaries, and now it’s time for the quid pro quo.
Laura on June 25, 2008 at 12:30 AM
And no, he’s NOT competent, seanrobins. Take his Potemkin ethics reform, for example. The legislature gutted it and he didn’t say a word - just went on Leno and bragged about it. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Laura on June 25, 2008 at 12:32 AM
I hope Jindal keeps his promise and spikes the pay increase. He got national recognition from conservatives for his accomplishments. The country is past the red line with Bush/McCain style betrayals and if he blows this, it will have national political repercussions.
Feedie on June 25, 2008 at 12:33 AM
It doesn’t matter what the numbers are. It could be one penny they earn a year.
The point is, when you permit a Republican candidate to go back on his promise to the base, you’re encouraging RINOness.
Jindal made a promise and now he must stick with it, period.
Sydney Carton on June 25, 2008 at 12:34 AM
That’s an incredibly steep increase no matter who or where you are.
SouthernGent on June 25, 2008 at 1:16 AM
An important early test of leadership, political skill and cojones for the Next Big Thing.
Roy Hobbes would wait for his pitch, then tear the cover off the ball in this situation. Lets give KidGov some room and see how he responds.
Mike D. on June 25, 2008 at 1:17 AM
Yeah, I don’t get why he can’t veto it and indicate he might reluctantly approve like a 50% increase.
freevillage on June 25, 2008 at 1:23 AM
Well Ed and Allah you are nuts.
No gov in all 50 states deserve a pay raise. If anything they deserve a swift kick in the butt for not doing their jobs. Gas at record prices, food at record prices. I wish I could vote myself a pay raise so I wouldn’t have to live under the consequences of the government’s programs too.
Did not Bush one teach you guys anything. “Read my lips no new taxes.” then he raised taxes and lost the election. Or how about the REPs in 2006 and possibly 2008. when you govern differently then you promised too the voters tend to make you an ex-congressperson rather quickly.
There was once a time when campaign promises meant something. If the voters do not hold the elected acountable for there flip flops what is to stop the elected from doing whatever the hell they want once they are elected. McCain and immigration comes to mind.
Jindal made his own bed now he has to lay in it. He should keep his word and veto the pay raise.
unseen on June 25, 2008 at 1:27 AM
Hmm…who does this remind me of?
ClassicCon on June 25, 2008 at 1:43 AM
Uh-oh. Is Jindal the Republicans’ Bambi?
Is that why McCain interviewed him for the Veep slot?
misterpeasea on June 25, 2008 at 1:43 AM
I want him to veto it because that’s the right thing to do… but if he doesn’t veto it, we may be able to duplicate the Pennsylvania revolt of 2005. People are that mad.
Laura on June 25, 2008 at 1:48 AM
It’s admittedly a bit premature to draw conclusions, but I think I detect some talking-points in those emails. Is there a coordinated ad campaign or something?
DaveS on June 25, 2008 at 2:01 AM
Dave, no. But the issue is pretty straightforward -
1. they’re lying and we know it, which just makes people mad. They have had raises in per diems, mileage and various benefits over the years, just not their base salary, which comprises half or less of their total legislative income.
2. it’s a part time job because of the state constitution, and just because they piss away most of their time acting like fat cats with lobbyists and writing nonsense bills like the state cocktail (people are *furious* about how much time has been wasted on that one bill) doesn’t mean they deserve full time pay. We have to manage our time at work, why don’t they?
3. they don’t deserve a raise. Check out our misery index. Why should they be one of the highest paid legislatures in the country with conditions like that?
If you’re seeing these same basic points repeated all over, it’s because that’s pretty much all people here are talking about. We’re kind of egging each other on… which is fine, if we can finally do something about it.
Laura on June 25, 2008 at 2:09 AM
Bobby needs to veto this mess. Veto it, and stand firm. Supposedly, and I believe it’s true, he was told in so many words that if he vetoed this, he’d never get a thing done. So veto it. Veto it, and then make a point that it’s what the PEOPLE want and that’s what matters and that whenever his reforms get opposed, he will stand up and POINT THAT FINGER at the problem. He should make a case over the fact that hey, I’m here, trying to make a difference, and just because their pockets didn’t get lined quite so thickly, they’re fighting me and you. Fighting you, people of Louisiana. Fighting us to change what needs to be changed. Opposing good legislation to spite us over an increase they don’t need. Hell, I’d be happy to make 16k for three months, plus perky-perk-perks. It’s not like they break rocks for three months; they sit in the AC and goof off half the time, wasting resources, self aggrandizing. I want that job. We already have one recall campaign going on, and I know that the other day, there was at least one who made the decision to not take the raise. I forget who, and I’m too annoyed to look it up. This is a HUGE thorn in our collective sides right now.
Veto it, Bobby. Make a stand! We elected YOU for a reason.
LickyLicky on June 25, 2008 at 3:33 AM
LickyLicky on June 25, 2008 at 3:33 AM
Absolutely, veto or step down, because you are good for nothing unless you follow through on your word. Let the legislature look like greedy lazy rats, expose them! Veto! Don’t make Bush’s mistake and try and get along, play hard ball and do your job for crying out loud.
Conservative Voice on June 25, 2008 at 3:38 AM
Laura on June 25, 2008 at 1:48 AM
We the people need to grab our pitchforks and run them all out.
Conservative Voice on June 25, 2008 at 3:41 AM
This is the email I sent to his office. A bit of a ramble, but I think that just lets the anger shine through:
Governor Jindal, you must veto this pay raise. We elected YOU for a reason. You are a shining light, a beacon of hope for our lovely state, and we do not wish you dimmed. I understand that we’ve been threatened with opposition to future legislation and reform if the raise is vetoed. I appreciate the fact that you realize that you need to pick your battles, but do not err on what you assume to be the side of caution on this one. This is a test of your mettle; how you handle this will dictate if you get ‘handled’. Be strong, stand firm, and when the time comes that you get that threatened opposition, stand up and say so. Don’t be afraid to tell us that you are doing your best but can’t get things done for us because of spite over vetoing this bill. We expect it, and we will stand and fight with you when that time comes. We will stand firm beside you and let that opposition know that this is not the Louisiana of old. We are proud, we want change, and we will not tolerate the two hands washing each other while splashing dirt all over us. We need change and we want change. We voted for change when we voted for you! Our legislators are crying poor-mouth; they get their salary and every perk that goes along with their position for a part-time job. How many people don’t make much more than that for a year of real work, not counting the lunches and dinners and doting and fawning? I think they have forgotten that they work for us, not for themselves. You promised to not allow a pay raise during a current term. You need to stand by that promise. Don’t be a RINO, and don’t give anyone the opportunity to use this against you in the future. I look forward to the day when President Jindal sits in the White House, and showing us now that you are a real conservative, through and through, is a step in the right direction. God Bless you, Governor Jindal. Do the right thing for us. Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss this or any other topic.
LickyLicky on June 25, 2008 at 3:54 AM
I’m working on it. I’ve barely slept since last Monday… but I truly believe we can repeat the success in PA. Come to rally, bring a bunch of friends, and get going with us on the recall efforts - while recalls are very hard and legally have to be run like a political campaign with the same reporting laws, we have a plan to help with that.
Laura on June 25, 2008 at 4:01 AM
Overheard in the legislature before they wrapped it up this session:
Page: Speaker Tucker, the voters are revolting!
Tucker: You said it! They stink on ice!
Laura on June 25, 2008 at 4:08 AM
Laura- I see on your site where the rally permit was granted. I live in Hammond and will certainly do my best to schedule around work to be there. It’s the least I can do for all of us.
LickyLicky on June 25, 2008 at 4:09 AM
LickyLicky on June 25, 2008 at 4:09 AM
You guys get all the fun :) I’m stuck here in Hawaii, so can only cheer from afar…wish the people of Hawaii would wake up like LA has.
Conservative Voice on June 25, 2008 at 4:18 AM
Licky, that’s great. I know Jindal says he won’t veto it, but with enough public pressure… you never can tell. And the pressure on the legislature is growing so fast that several of them actually asked Jindal to veto it.
In Pennsylvania they repealed the pay raise four months later, and we are likely to see something like that here.
Laura on June 25, 2008 at 4:25 AM
I agree with my fellow Louisianians; if Jindal lets this thing pass, his political future is forever hosed.
Louisiana voters are a highly visible microcosm of American politics: if the b*stard has a D-besides his name (such as Edwin Edwards; Huey Long, etc.) he can get away with murder, because the Dems have always had that “in your face!” spin to their baldfaced political dishonesty. Louisiana voters lap it up, because it’s Lagniappe in the truest sense of the word. Something Extra. But they have NO patience for a Republican who does an about-face on a stand people regard as principled. Fortunately, neither do Republicans, for the most part.
All you have to do is look at Edwards’ record, keeping in mind that the Louisiana governor can only serve two consecutive terms then must sit out a term before running again:
1972: Edwards
1976: Edwards
1980: Treen
1984: Edwards
1988: Roemer
1992: Edwards
1996: Foster
(after 1996, Edwards finally got nailed for the kinds of shenanigans everyone in the state knew he was up to for years).
If Jindal wants to be more than a one-term flash in the pan, he’d better take a page from Reagan - stick to his principles and appeal directly to voters for their support. Otherwise, he’s gone.
As for why I am still a Republican even in this horrible age of RINOs: I’d much rather be a member of the party that pushed out Mark Foley than the one that allowed Gerry Studds to remain part of its membership.
Wanderlust on June 25, 2008 at 5:35 AM
the average across the nation for state legislators is $25,908
That is a link for Legislators in IL.
I don’t see the problem here. Who in the hell would want to work for 16K a year? No wonder Louisiana is having such ethics issues… Who can live on 16K? That is Poverty, per the Dem’s, in the Country!
upinak on June 25, 2008 at 7:09 AM
And those “Fat Cats” are what the people elect! Gotta get some more people in there… door to door works more then Media realizes.
upinak on June 25, 2008 at 7:15 AM
Rather then throwing out the “salary”, why not tell us what the average cost is to keeping one of these guys in office?
I would take $16,800 if all of my expenses were paid, health care, living, per deim, travel expenses, and only worked 4 months out of the year.
Has there been a shortage of candidates lately?
Sounds to me like they are trying to push the new guy around, one big fat raise…this never came up during the Democrats rule?
Remember our original founders were part time, it was never meant to be “full time”.
right2bright on June 25, 2008 at 8:04 AM
Is it really a part time job though? I mean, true the legislature is in session for only
53 months, but doesn’t each legislator still have to be available for the rest of the year for constituent inquiries, services, emergency sessions, etc? My state has similar rules for sessions, where the full legislature only meets for a couple of months, but that doesn’t mean my delegate disappears after the session. He’s still expected to listen to me bitch about our concealed carry laws for the rest of the year.JohnTant on June 25, 2008 at 8:07 AM
+1
There’s something insidious about an organization that can vote itself more money.
Lehosh on June 25, 2008 at 8:47 AM
Reminds me of American voters who don’t pay federal taxes.
JiangxiDad on June 25, 2008 at 8:49 AM
Did you not see the comment where this is for actually 4 months of work?
fossten on June 25, 2008 at 8:51 AM
This is a good test for our new R “messiah”, Gov. Jindal.
He should ‘choose wisely’ the voters are very concerned about Leaders that are Liars. This does not bode well for other messiah Liars….if you know what I mean!
el Vaquero on June 25, 2008 at 8:57 AM
Ed Rendell signed the midnight pay raise the Pennsylvania legislature voted itself in 2006. (A Republican controlled legislature, by the way.) He said he signed it only because it also contained a long-needed pay raise for state judges.
It took a few weeks for public anger to really build up against this pay raise, and it probably wouldn’t have if Rendell had vetoed the bill. The voters threw out 19 incumbents and for the first time voted out a stiing state Supreme Court justice. The Senate Republican leader lost in a primary to a guy who had never run for office before. The Democrats gained control of the House for the first time in decades. It actually ended up helping Rendell because now he has a lot more Democrats in the legislature to support his bills.
Think about it. If Jindal vetoes this pay raise, then the heat comes off of the legislators who voted for it. Why should he do them such a favor? He should sign it and let the voters respond this fall when these guys are all up for reelection. He might get a lot more reform-minded people in the legislature who he can work with.
rockmom on June 25, 2008 at 8:58 AM
But when was the last time they got a pay raise?
AprilOrit on June 25, 2008 at 8:59 AM
From The Shreveport Times:
“I know that if I veto this, I would be the most popular governor in history,” he said. “The most politically expedient thing would be to veto it.
“Everybody knows it would be in my own self interest to veto this. But I don’t want to give them (legislators) any reason to throw sand in the gears. I don’t want to give the Legislature an excuse to go back to fighting reform.”
Obviously there is some kind of principle at stake here, the Governor fails to make clear. Perhaps some one else here can elucidate on just what the Governor, for what ever reason, seems not, in simple enough terms, prepared to explain.
Nyog_of_the_Bog on June 25, 2008 at 9:05 AM
Probably at the lobbyist luncheon last week. *wink wink*
Lehosh on June 25, 2008 at 9:11 AM
extrapolate that ~3 month pay to 12 months. annually, they would be on track for ~$65k.
their pay is fine.
AZ_Redneck on June 25, 2008 at 9:14 AM
He had better elucidate his position pretty damned quick…
Wanderlust on June 25, 2008 at 9:14 AM
I’m not sure why he won’t veto the raises. A back room deal? Doesn’t want to PO the legislature? I don’t know.
I voted and supported him but my patience is wearing thin. The Governor of Louisiana is a virtual emperor, he’s got all the power.
My rep voted against the pay raise, my senator voted for it. I’m not sure what will happen to the later. Many of the long term legislators pushed this through assuring the rookies that all would be well. I think many are regretting their votes. Some recall petitions have already been filed at the SOS office.
It’s a shame that Jindal can’t look to some Sr. statesman for advice, Louisiana doesn’t have any.
roux on June 25, 2008 at 9:16 AM
seems simple to me … he’s playing “Let’s Make a Deal” with public money. he thinks that is leadership.
AZ_Redneck on June 25, 2008 at 9:16 AM
FWIW even though Louisiana is a red state in presidential elections, the legislature is Democrat, socially conservative but liberal in every other way.
roux on June 25, 2008 at 9:18 AM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »