Representative Richard A. "Rick" Geist
1126 Eighth Avenue, Suite 402
Altoona, Pennsylvania 16602
(814) 946-7218January 23, 1996
Mr. Gary J. English
1504 Fairmont Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15221Dear Mr. English:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding your opposition to the legislative pay increase. It is a pleasure to hear from you and to have the benefit of your views.
As you are probably already aware, the legislature has passed legislation increasing members' salaries. I realize this does not come as good news to you, but it was a difficult decision for the members. In realizing that the legislature has had only one pay increase in the past 13 years, it seemed reasonable to discuss the possibility of one now. Even with this new 18 percent increase in pay, when these salaries are compared to the past eight years' 35 percent rise in the cost of living, an actual decline in real income is realized. If the salaries earned by the legislature in 1987 had kept pace with inflation, the salary of a legislator in 1995 would be $61,991. In light of these figures, a salary of $55,000 does not seem unreasonable.
Please realize that the job of State Representative is more than a full-time job. Long hours in travelling from home districts to the capitol, meeting with constituent groups, conducting hearings, and investigating issues in committees require constant attention. Most often, these activities occur outside of normal business hours. Furthermore, the new practice in Washington to de-federalize many programs and return them to the control of the states has created an add new workloads for lawmakers.
With all the duties and tasks the job of State Representative entails, it is not always a simple task to attract qualified candidates for office. Often times those who would make good lawmakers pursue more lucrative careers in the private sector. Generally, their talents and time are better rewarded and appreciated in private employment than they are in the government. The number of uncontested seats across the State in the last election attests to this lack of quality candidates. In fact, one-third of the state house seats were uncontested in the 1994 general election and just a few months ago, a State Senator actually had to resign because of family financial difficulties.
As for the unvouchered expense allowances, the courts examined this issue in 1987. It was then that the courts found these unvouchered expenses to be constitutionally sound. While these unvouchered expenses may seem inappropriate, they were implemented for a good reason. Without this expense voucher, the increase could not have been applied to the Legislature's members uniformly. State Representatives would have received their raises in the fall of 1996. However, due to their longer terms and the fact that the entire Senate is not elected at the same time, many State Senators would not have been eligible to receive their cost of living adjustments until the fall of 1998.
To avoid a situation of pay inequity amongst the members of the different legislative bodies, the unvouchered expense allowances were used.
I hope these points help you understand some of the reasons why the salary adjustment was passed. Although we are not in agreement on this issue, I do appreciate you expressing your concerns to me. If I can be of further assistance in this or other matters, please contact my office.
Sincerely,
Richard A. Geist