As they often are on such matters, Republicans are unified in opposition. The House Saturday approved the amendment (HJR 8) on a 40-24 vote. If it makes it thru the senate and voters give their okay, the amendment would establish a citizens commission to determine the salary legislators would receive beginning in 2026. (Conny amendments don't require gubernatorial approval.)
If the amendment makes it to voters will Democratic incumbents in districts where the R's have a shot be in the crosshairs? '24 is a presidential election year so that may give them cover as a higher turnout tends to benefit their party. Also, legislators in tough battles could maintain they only asked voters to decide the increase, not that they support it. But they would still be on the defensive and risks remain.
The strategy for the GOP is a layup: Have these senators and representatives in the majority done such a good job that they deserve a permanent pay raise? If the crime wave continues to rage they would have a good combination play.
Those supporting salaries argue that it would make the Legislature more representative, attracting a wider range of candidates to run for the Roundhouse that now leans toward attorneys, business owners and other professionals who don't need a salary for legislative service.
That may well be, but if you're a Democrat sitting in a vulnerable district you may want leadership to give you a pass on a bill that could set off political fireworks next election season.
A PLEASING PENSION
That retirement plan benefits were increased at the '22 session. How the plan works bears updating given the serious play underway for solon salaries. Attorney Charles Sullivan explains that after ten years of service a legislator hits the retirement sweet spot:
The golden parachute is now made of platinum. . . For a legislator who has served at least 10 years, his or her pension is computed by multiplying the IRS per diem for Santa Fe times 14% (increased from 11%) times 60 times years of service. . .Here's a hypothetical to show how generous the 10 year plan is.
A male legislator begins service in 2009 and retires at the end of 2022 after 14 years. He will be 46 years old when he retires and has a life expectancy of 29.74 years. In 2022 the IRS per diem for Santa Fe is $202 (now $210).
The legislator starts receiving his pension in 2023. We multiply $202 times 14% for $28.28. We next multiply $28.28 by 60 for $1696.80 We next multiply $1696.80 by the 14 years of service for an annual payment of $23,755.20. If we then multiply that number by a life expectancy of 29.74, we have a total of $706,479.65. Not too shabby. But wait.
There is a cost-of- living provision in the statute. With a first year payment of $23,755.20 and an annual cost of living increase of 3%, after 29.74 years our retiree will have received an astonishing $1,115,608. And how much did the legislator have to contribute to qualify for this regal retirement? He contributed $500 per year for 2009 through 2011 ($1500), plus $600 per year from 2012 through 2018 ($4200) and $1000 per year from 2019 through 2022 ($4000). So, for $9700, he may receive over one million dollars.
14 years of service would be seven, two year terms for House members. Senators serve four year terms.
The state pension system says a lawmaker who retires today with 10 years of service stands to collect a pension of $17,000 a year.
The '22 increase was a nice perk but it did not apply to the roughly 204 retired legislators currently getting pensions. PERA administrators say the increase does not apply to past legislators who are none too happy about it and have quarreled with PERA about the bill's intent.
In a letter to PERA administrators from one of the retired ex-legislators and forwarded here, it states that the average legislative pension in 2021 was $11,000 but jumped to $14,000 with the increase--but not for those already retired. We're told he PERA board has not taken up the complaint of the former lawmakers.
CYFD (CONT. COVERAGE)
 |
Committe chair Joe Cervantes has been showing impatience with the lack of progress at CYFD but Gov. Lujan Grisham has said she does not support the advocate, believing the administration can get the agency under control with new personnel, even though the last four years have seen more child related tragedies.
To keep the advocate nonpartisan the appointee would be attached to the office of the attorney general and appointed by a panel of four top legislators and four Governor appointees. They would choose a chairperson to complete the nine member panel that would name the advocate who would have a six year term and could only be removed for wrongdoing by the state Supreme Court.
CYFD is not all on MLG. Far from it. Remember, Gov. Susan Martinez named an advertising executive to lead the department and led it right into the ground. This is an institutional and cultural problem at CYFD.
Supporters of the child advocate point out that over 40 states already have one. (See chart on left.) They are circulating this long list of unsuccessful "reform efforts" made in recent years by CYFD that are bewildering (and depressing) and that will be perused today by committee members.
This is a top state issue with widespread voter concern. Senate Judiciary could do a service by getting the advocate bill out of committee and giving New Mexico a full legislative airing of the difficult issues facing CYFD and the state's at-risk children who find themselves under the agency's purview.
The bill's sponsors need to stay on an even keel and bring both parties together to get this passed. Then the Governor will need persuading. This will be the most important legislation of the sponsor's political careers--no matter how long those careers last.
They need to go to the mat.
This is the home of New Mexico politics
(c)NM POLITICS WITH JOE MONAHAN 2023