By Michael Bielawski
During a radio interview last week, a candidate for the Legislature said that when lawmakers return in January, they will likely revisit a bill increasing their own compensation.
S-39 was passed by both the House and Senate chambers in 2023 but was vetoed by Gov. Phil Scott. The bill featured:
- Significant pay increases for the Speaker of the House and the Senate Pro Tem
- $1200/week for each legislator when the Legislature is in regular session, usually January – May.
- Per-diem equivalent compensation during special sessions.
- 20% of the $1210 when the session is adjourned, usually late May through the rest of the year.
- Mileage, meals and lodging.
- Health insurance, employee assistance, and flex spending accounts currently enjoyed by state employees.
Doug Wood, a Republican candidate for State Representative for the Chittenden 20 (Colchester) District, was on the Morning Drive radio show on Thursday when the topic of the pay raise came up. That’s when Wood said he’s heard that it’s back on the agenda.
“I’m against any pay raises and apparently that’s going to come up next session,” he said. “That’s what I heard, that’s it’s going to come up next session so they are still going to stay on there,” he said near the closing of Thursday’s show.
Sen. Russ Ingalls, R-Essex, also said in a recent phone call that the pay raise issue will be a priority item once again. “Oh it’s certainly coming up again,” Ingalls said. “They did not kill the bill.”
Ingalls proposed an amendment to S. 39, a bill that passed both chambers in 2023 but never garnered enough support to get past the governor’s desk so supporters pulled it back to the committee walls where stalled or nonstarting bills live. The bill would have effectively doubled their pay on top of new benefits.
“The first time they didn’t have enough votes to override the veto,” Ingalls said. “So they called it up back again this year [2024].” It reemerged as S. 224, a scaled-back version. Ingalls said this year that lawmakers “just knew the tea leaves” were not right for much public support and so it was shelved again.
Ingalls also said, “It’s not an election year… it’s certainly coming back next year [2025].”
The description for S. 39 details some of the benefits being sought, It states, “This bill proposes to make members of the General Assembly eligible for the State employees’ health benefit plan at no cost and to allow them to participate in any flexible spending account program offered to State employees for health care expenses or dependent care expenses, or both.”
It would also have allowed for compensation to lawmakers when the legislative session is over, which is nearly three-quarters of the year. The increased money amounts to “doubling their one future pay” according to Gov. Phil Scott’s veto letter.
“This year, the General Assembly passed several pieces of legislation that will significantly increase costs for Vermonters through new and higher taxes, fees and penalties,” Scott wrote. “In my opinion, it does not seem fair for legislators to insulate themselves from the very costs they are imposing on their constituents by doubling their own future pay.”
The reworked proposal which was S. 224 did not include new healthcare benefits but it still boosted pay by 74%. It did not get passed by either chamber.
Currently, lawmakers make around $15,000 a year and they are reimbursed for meals, lodging, and mileage. The legislative session is supposed to be for about three months of the year, but sometimes it extends longer.
Numerous media pundits panned the 2023 bill for its timing. VDC’s Paul Bean noted on his X account, “The Vermont state legislature is voting to increase their own pay so that way they can afford the high cost of living in Vermont. Meanwhile they’re only creating policies that raise the cost of living for Vermonters. (including raising their own pay) Can someone please tell me who comes up with these ideas??”
The pay raise was marketed as a way to counter the notion that only the wealthy can afford to run for office. Rep. Becca White, D-Hartford, told NBC News in April of 2023, “Serving in the Vermont Legislature is not supposed to be a career, but it’s also not supposed to be a job that only wealthy or retired folks can afford to do.”
As highlighted by political commentator Rob Roper, Rep. Casey Toof, R-St. Albans, summed up the sentiment of many when he explained his no-vote for S. 39.
“I vote no because the audacity it takes to raise our pay by 50% while simultaneously raising our budget by 13% and numerous taxes and fees is unconscionable,” Toof said on the House floor.
The senators who backed S.39 in a roll call vote are: Baruth, Bray, Brock, Clarkson, Cummings, Gulick, Hardy, Harrison, Hashim, Lyons, MacDonald, McCormack, Norris, Perchlik, Vyhovsky, Watson, Westman, White, Wrenner.
The author is a writer for the Vermont Daily Chronicle