It is not often that 100 people would each turn down $20,000.
“Have you ever voted down a pay raise?” asked House Speaker Rick Johnson, R-LeRoy, in his office Monday.
The state House rejected a pay raise of that amount Thursday in a 100-6 vote. The proposed raise would increase the salaries of Gov. John Engler, Lt. Gov. Dick Posthumas, Supreme Court Justices, state representatives and senators.
However, the raise can still occur if the Senate does not vote on the proposal. And a no vote is likely in the Senate, said Aaron Keesler, spokesman for GOP Senate Majority Leader Dan DeGrow of Port Huron.
With the raise, lawmakers will receive a raise from $57,000 to $77,000, a 39 percent increase over the next two years.
Despite widespread support for defeating the pay raise, some representatives, like state Rep. Jack Minore, D-Flint, say the increase is necessary.
“I know that a great many people who voted to reject genuinely believed we shouldn’t get the raise,” said Minore, one of the six who voted in favor of the pay raise. “There is a general belief that we are going to get the raise, we should just be open and honest about it.”
Democrats Rose Bogardus of Davidson, Nancy Quarles of Southfield, Vera Rison of Mount Morris, John Hansen of Dexter and Bill McConico of Detroit also voted to accept the pay raise.
“While all the focus has been on legislators, there is no middle ground,” Minore said. “Judges across the state who could make more in private practice would wait two more years with zero raise. It was dependent on us accepting or rejecting.”
Those who didn’t vote included Democrat Dale Sheltrown of West Branch, and Detroit Democrats Keith Stallworth and Samuel Thomas.
Bill Ballenger, editor and publisher of the Lansing-based newsletter “Inside Michigan Politics,” said the vote was not surprising.
“This is exactly what everyone was predicting would happen,” he said. “They’d look like heroes to their constituents for turning it down.
“They voted not to accept it, but they know in the back of their minds their buddies aren’t going to vote to reject it.”
Ballenger expects Michigan lawmakers to receive the pay hike.
“You are going to get it anyway, if the other chamber, the Senate, does not reject it,” Ballenger said. “If they don’t even put it to a vote, then it is going to sail through. They both will get the raise.
“They’ll be able to say ‘I voted against the salary increase, so don’t blame me.’ But the Senate will save them.”
Susan Tabor, R-Lansing, felt the pay raise was warranted yet voted against it.
She said the pubic does not realize the work and long hours that the representatives put forth.
She said the volume of letters and phone calls from constituents persuaded her to turn down the raise.
“I was really troubled by this,” she said. “It was one of those times I totally disagreed with my constituents, but they elected me to (be) their representative.”
Some representatives felt their vote should reflect the people in their district.
“I come from a district of working men and women,” said Clarence Phillips, D-Pontiac. “The people I represent don’t get those kinds of increases.”
Phillips said the lawmakers should receive the increase so that they do not become an exclusive group of only those with “sound economic means.”
However, he felt the increase was too large.
“I think the size of it suggests that there was a political, underlying motive to the raise,” Phillips said.
