The State Legislature's pay raise

[JohnDeere 0]

Poll concerning the State Legislature's pay raise.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

The thing that pisses me off the most about the raise is that it was done without a recorded vote or discussion on the issue. It was simply pushed through with a "Hey, you just got a pay raise" and a bang of the gavel.

It seems to me the wise thing to do would be to make good on your promises to the voters of the state, then vote in a raise after your work was done. These folks only work a third of the year. $49,250 for 4 months of work is pretty steep.

[JohnDeere 0]

The thing that pisses me off the most about the raise is that it was done without a recorded vote or discussion on the issue. It was simply pushed through with a "Hey, you just got a pay raise" and a bang of the gavel.

It seems to me the wise thing to do would be to make good on your promises to the voters of the state, then vote in a raise after your work was done. These folks only work a third of the year. $49,250 for 4 months of work is pretty steep.

Sorry to inform you, the veto was overriden.

al.com

MONTGOMERY - The Alabama House and Senate on Tuesday easily overrode Gov. Bob Riley's veto of a 62 percent pay raise that lawmakers approved for themselves on March 8.

The two chambers only needed a simple majority to reject Riley's veto. The Senate voted 20-15 to override, while the House vote was 57-41-3.

[SupperClub 0]

Knowing my Representative and Senator, I'm not surprised one bit at how this transpired. For the record, I voted against both of them in the last election, and I plan on doing it again in the next.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

The thing that pisses me off the most about the raise is that it was done without a recorded vote or discussion on the issue. It was simply pushed through with a "Hey, you just got a pay raise" and a bang of the gavel.

It seems to me the wise thing to do would be to make good on your promises to the voters of the state, then vote in a raise after your work was done. These folks only work a third of the year. $49,250 for 4 months of work is pretty steep.

Sorry to inform you, the veto was overriden.

al.com

MONTGOMERY - The Alabama House and Senate on Tuesday easily overrode Gov. Bob Riley's veto of a 62 percent pay raise that lawmakers approved for themselves on March 8.

The two chambers only needed a simple majority to reject Riley's veto. The Senate voted 20-15 to override, while the House vote was 57-41-3.

Yeah, I just read that. Not shocking in the least.

Hopefully, voters will remember this at the next election. Unfortunately, the state will be cursed with idiots like Rogers forever. His constituency will never vote him out.

[Captain Liger 0]

A 62% pay raise?????? WTF!?!?!?!? Hell, why stop there? Why not shoot for 80%? I could understand maybe a 3% or 5% pay raise but 62%? Un-effing-believeable.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

A 62% pay raise?????? WTF!?!?!?!? Hell, why stop there? Why not shoot for 80%? I could understand maybe a 3% or 5% pay raise but 62%? Un-effing-believeable.

The automatic cost of living adjustments will bring it to the vicinity of 81% by the time their term ends in 2010. Not bad for a days work.

Alabamians need to get their torches and pitchforks and head to Goat Hill.

[Tigermike 3,054]

Knowing my Representative and Senator, I'm not surprised one bit at how this transpired. For the record, I voted against both of them in the last election, and I plan on doing it again in the next.

Not that it will matter to them, but I will actively campaign against all of them and plan on letting them know.

[quietfan 233]

http://www.al.com/news/huntsvilletimes/ind....xml&coll=1

The legislative raise will come in the form of expenses because the state constitution fixes lawmakers' salaries at $10 per day when the Legislature is in session. The expense payments have not been raised since 1991.

If this is the only raise they've gotten since 1991, then 62% over 16 years may not sound as bad. On the other hand, is TIS right that they get automatic cost of living adjustments? In that case, it's a little deceptive to claim they haven't had a raise since 1991.

Frankly, I think they should be forced to work for the constitutional $10/day only until they get their collective a$$#$ in gear and give us a state constitution fit for the 21st century!

[MDM4AU 336]

I am mad as heck about it. But, according to the B'ham News days ago my representatives are on record for being against it. They had a list of those for it, those considering it, and those against it.

[JohnDeere 0]

The remainder of the representatives for Colbert, Lauderdale, Franklin and Lawrence counties voted in favor of overriding the governor's veto, meaning they supported the increase.

Voting to override Riley's veto were Sens. Roger Bedford, D-Russellville, Sen. Bobby Denton, D-Muscle Shoals; Sen. Zeb Little, D-Cullman, and Reps. Marcel Black, D-Tuscumbia, and Johnny Mack Morrow, D-Red Bay.

Bedford said he voted for the pay raise because it's expensive to serve in the Legislature, and the pay has to be set at a rate that will attract the "average'' citizen.

"As an attorney, I lose money either way,'' Bedford said. "You ought to be able to serve in the Senate without being an attorney or in the junior college system.''

Denton said he voted to override the veto because the expense of lodging, transportation and meals increases every year.

Denton wasn't the only legislator who said that Riley forced a veto override when he said the suggested raise was "excessive'' but didn't adjust the raise with a reasonable amount.

"He didn't give us an answer,'' Denton said.

Curtis said he abstained because he knew what the pay was when he ran last year. "I didn't feel like I could take a pay raise,'' he said.

"The governor didn't work this out,'' Irons said.

Black said if Riley believed the raise was "excessive,'' he should have returned the veto with a smaller amount. But he didn't, Black said, forcing a yes or no vote.

The sponsor of the pay raise resolution, House Speaker Pro Tem Demetrius Newton, D-Birmingham, told members they could return the raise to the state treasury if they believe it is excessive. what kind of idiot says this? I would be ashamed to say I voted for this idiot

House Minority Leader Rep. Mike Hubbard, R-Auburn, predicted that members who voted for the raise would "regret it'' when they face reelection in 2010.

"I don't think the public will forget it. At least this vote was on the record, and there's no way to hide it,'' Hubbard said.

Riley sent his veto to the Legislature after protesters held a rally Tuesday morning at the statehouse to voice outrage over the pay increase.

Riley said he feels most people believe the amount is "excessive.''

He said he doesn't question that lawmakers, who haven't received a raise since 1991, deserve more money. But he said it should be smaller and take effect over several years.

But one House member, Rep. Lesley Vance, D-Phenix City, said he thinks legislators deserve the raise.

"We have helped everybody else get raises,'' said Vance, referring to raises lawmakers have approved in recent years for teachers, state employees and judges. "If we continue to not allow having an incentive to serve here we are going to have nobody but the filthy rich over here.''

Senate President Pro Tem Hinton Mitchem, D-Union Grove, said Tuesday was the first time he had voted for a pay raise in his 32 years in the Legislature.

"We don't need government to get to where only the wealthy can afford to serve. We've got people now in the Legislature who can no longer afford to serve financially,'' Mitchem said.

The House and Senate passed the raise March 8 by unrecorded voice votes but had to take a recorded vote to override the veto.

Riley sent the veto shortly after more than 200 people gathered outside the Statehouse to protest the raise. One of the dozens of signs seemed to convey their feelings: "I've got 2 words for ya 'Hell No!''

The protest was organized by Matt Murphy, a talk show host on Birmingham radio station WYDE.

"It is ridiculous to think this Legislature in 2007 believes they deserve a 62 percent raise,'' Murphy told the rally, which was held as lawmakers were beginning to arrive at the Statehouse. In the crowd, protesters shouted "Throw them out.''

TimesDaily

[Captain Liger 0]

Roger Bedford. Ppppfffff. I wouldn't vote that sorry SOB for dog catcher. And Bobby Denton isn't much better.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

On the other hand, is TIS right that they get automatic cost of living adjustments? In that case, it's a little deceptive to claim they haven't had a raise since 1991.

This automatic annual adjustment is part of the raise they just voted themselves.

In order to fend off the pitchforks and torches, they have decided to raise the maximum alcohol content of beer allowed to be sold in the state.

House panel says yes to higher-alcohol beer

MONTGOMERY - The hops have been freed - at least by the Alabama House Travel and Tourism Committee.

The panel voted unanimously on a voice vote Wednesday to send a bill to the House floor that would permit the sale of beer with more than double the alcohol content that state law now allows.

The measure, sponsored by Rep. Thomas Jackson, D-Thomasville, is being pushed by a Birmingham area-based group called "Free the Hops."

The bill would also eliminate a law that limits the size of beer containers to 16 ounces.

A companion bill is being sponsored in the Senate by Sen. Parker Griffith, D-Huntsville. A hearing on Griffith's bill had been scheduled in the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee today, but was canceled.

Jackson's bill would change Alabama's longstanding 6 percent alcohol limit for beer to 14.9 percent. That would permit the sale of what he described as "specialty" or "gourmet" beers.

Similar legislation failed in the 2006 legislative session.

"Times have changed and cultures have changed," said Jackson. "It's time to end the laws that discriminate against beer. There's no other spirits in the state that have these restrictions."

Jackson, who lives in a dry city and county, tried to short-circuit any opposition, saying underage drinkers would not be attracted to the beer because it is too expensive - in some instances $9 per bottle.

Alabama is one of only four states that do not allow the sale of specialty beers in restaurants, supermarkets or convenience stores, said Jackson. The others are Mississippi, South Carolina and West Virginia, and moves are being made to change the laws in South Carolina and West Virginia.

The only opposition came from the Rev. Dan Ireland, executive director of Alabama Citizens Action Program.

Ireland said introducing the higher alcohol-content beers would only add to the problem of alcoholism.

"I'm talking about a very real problem and I hope you recognize it as a very real problem," he said. "I'm concerned about saving the kids. In this country, there is a problem with drinking and driving."

Danner Kline, who operates the "Free the Hops" Web site, said the state is losing thousands of dollars in tax money because its residents are driving to Florida, Georgia and Tennessee to buy the specialty beers. He said it's also losing out on tourism trade.

"High school kids are out to get a cheap buzz," Kline said. "These beers are very expensive and have a strong flavor. These beers are not going to be the beer of choice for minors."

Kline said the state has one brewery, the Olde Town Brewery in Huntsville. But he said it is struggling because it is handicapped by the current state law.

Stuart Carter, a native of Scotland who works at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, said he was shocked by the "dismal selection" of beer when he moved to Alabama.

Carter said he regularly makes trips to Atlanta to buy beer and plans his vacations to avoid Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina and West Virginia.

The Free the Hops group hosted a private beer-tasting for lawmakers Wednesday night.

Linksh

[quietfan 233]

On the other hand, is TIS right that they get automatic cost of living adjustments? In that case, it's a little deceptive to claim they haven't had a raise since 1991.

This automatic annual adjustment is part of the raise they just voted themselves.

In order to fend off the pitchforks and torches, they have decided to raise the maximum alcohol content of beer allowed to be sold in the state.

House panel says yes to higher-alcohol beer

MONTGOMERY - The hops have been freed - at least by the Alabama House Travel and Tourism Committee.

The panel voted unanimously on a voice vote Wednesday to send a bill to the House floor that would permit the sale of beer with more than double the alcohol content that state law now allows.

The measure, sponsored by Rep. Thomas Jackson, D-Thomasville, is being pushed by a Birmingham area-based group called "Free the Hops."

The bill would also eliminate a law that limits the size of beer containers to 16 ounces.

A companion bill is being sponsored in the Senate by Sen. Parker Griffith, D-Huntsville. A hearing on Griffith's bill had been scheduled in the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee today, but was canceled.

Jackson's bill would change Alabama's longstanding 6 percent alcohol limit for beer to 14.9 percent. That would permit the sale of what he described as "specialty" or "gourmet" beers.

Similar legislation failed in the 2006 legislative session.

"Times have changed and cultures have changed," said Jackson. "It's time to end the laws that discriminate against beer. There's no other spirits in the state that have these restrictions."

Jackson, who lives in a dry city and county, tried to short-circuit any opposition, saying underage drinkers would not be attracted to the beer because it is too expensive - in some instances $9 per bottle.

Alabama is one of only four states that do not allow the sale of specialty beers in restaurants, supermarkets or convenience stores, said Jackson. The others are Mississippi, South Carolina and West Virginia, and moves are being made to change the laws in South Carolina and West Virginia.

The only opposition came from the Rev. Dan Ireland, executive director of Alabama Citizens Action Program.

Ireland said introducing the higher alcohol-content beers would only add to the problem of alcoholism.

"I'm talking about a very real problem and I hope you recognize it as a very real problem," he said. "I'm concerned about saving the kids. In this country, there is a problem with drinking and driving."

Danner Kline, who operates the "Free the Hops" Web site, said the state is losing thousands of dollars in tax money because its residents are driving to Florida, Georgia and Tennessee to buy the specialty beers. He said it's also losing out on tourism trade.

"High school kids are out to get a cheap buzz," Kline said. "These beers are very expensive and have a strong flavor. These beers are not going to be the beer of choice for minors."

Kline said the state has one brewery, the Olde Town Brewery in Huntsville. But he said it is struggling because it is handicapped by the current state law.

Stuart Carter, a native of Scotland who works at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, said he was shocked by the "dismal selection" of beer when he moved to Alabama.

Carter said he regularly makes trips to Atlanta to buy beer and plans his vacations to avoid Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina and West Virginia.

The Free the Hops group hosted a private beer-tasting for lawmakers Wednesday night.

Linksh

The libertarian in me has no problem with loosening state constraints on alcohol, but I hope the bill includes extra money for police overtime to handle the increase in mullet violence on those Saturdays when the Tide loses ballgames! ...maybe also Saturday daycare to get the kids out of the house when Daddy's watching the game.