Sunday, February 14, 2016

Constitutional Clash on Pay Raise

It appears the state constitution contradicts itself on the issue of lawmakers' annual pay raises.

Constitutional Clash on Pay Raise


It appears that the state Constitution, which is often ignored by our lawmakers and courts when it comes to getting stuff they really want, is in conflict over the question of annual automatic pay raises.

Recently, I and others noted this year's annual raise for members of the largest full-time legislature in America (plus all of our more than 1,000 judges and other state officials) is 2.2 percent, or an extra $1,776 (ironic number) for most members starting Dec. 1.

Leaders, of course, get more.

The annual increase has been in place since signed into law by Gov. Ridge in 1995.

But here's the thing: two sections of the Constitution dealing with the Legislature and legislation seem to be in conflict on the question of compensation.

Article II, Section 8 says, "The members of the General Assembly shall receive such salary and mileage for regular and special sessions as shall be fixed by law, and no other compensation whatever, whether for service upon committee of otherwise."

Since the annual automatic pay increase WAS "fixed by law" back in 1995 it would appear lawmakers are good to go.

But, Article III, Section 27 says, "No law shall extend the term of any public officer, or increase or diminsh his salary or emoluments, after his election or appointment."

Since all members of the House and half the members of the Senate were elected or reelected Nov. 6 and the salary boost comes Dec. 1, it sure seems that lots of folks are getting an increase AFTER their election.

So, either the 1995 law is unconstitutional and somebody should sue to recoup all the tax dollars spent since then on pay raises for legislators, judges and others, OR this is just another case of our lawmakers and judges interpreting the Constitution in ways that benefit themselves.

If there are other options to this conclusion, I'd be interested in hearing them.


Daily News Political Columnist
We encourage respectful comments but reserve the right to delete anything that doesn't contribute to an engaging dialogue.
Help us moderate this thread by flagging comments that violate our guidelines.

Comment policy: comments are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. And please, stay on topic. If you see an objectionable post, please report it to us using the "Report Abuse" option.

Please note that comments are monitored by staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable. Personal attacks, especially on other participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.

Additionally comments that are long, have multiple paragraph breaks, include code, or include hyperlinks may not be posted.

Read 0 comments
comments powered by Disqus
About this blog
John Baer has been covering politics and government for the Daily News since 1987. The National Journal in 2002 called Baer one of the country's top 10 political journalists outside Washington, saying Baer has, "the ability to take the skin off a politician without making it hurt too much." E-mail John at

John is the author of the book "On The Front Lines of Pennsylvania Politics: Twenty-Five Years of Keystone Reporting" (The History Press, 2012). Reach John at

John Baer Daily News Political Columnist
Also on
letter icon Newsletter