What if?

Posted at 9:27 AM on May 13, 2006 by Bob Collins (4 Comments)

Always Right, Usually Correct plays an interesting game of "what if?" w.r.t. the question of public employees campaigning while being paid by the public.

Perhaps we need to think about this more. What are the various permutations of this concept? What if we just separated it from the campaign season and paid them by the hour anyway? You know, punch-in, punch out?

I don't think it's any secret -- is it? -- for example that a great deal of time spent by politicians in Washington is actually spent at the RNC or the DNC dialing for dollars. What if we stuck an old Simplex machine over there and they punch in/punch out there and then that time is deducted from the salaries?

I've heard it said -- and I have no idea if it's true -- that Congress actually meets about 90 days out of the year.

What if we paid prosecutors on the basis of the number of cases they win? Sure, it could lead to abuses of the system, but the system has a cure for that too. Jail.

How 'bout this? How about elective office is a non-paid position? I'm just noodling out loud here but let's think about this a bit. It wasn't long ago that baseball players had to go get real jobs in the off-season. Did that make them more "grounded" in reality?

Statewide, there's that report from a task force that said one of the ways to improve Minnesota lawmaking is to pay Minnesota lawmakers more money. But what if it were a volunteer position? Would it speed things along a little bit? Would it lead to shoddy lawmaking? Bribery? Scandal?

And I haven't even brought up my idea yet of moving the nation's capital around every year from city to city. Fargo? Your day is coming, my friend.

Discuss.

Comments (4)

The problem with state offices being volunteer is that only the people who could afford to volunteer would run - which eliminates a majority of Minnesotans, I think. It would also hurt Greater MN more than the metro since the farther you have to drive for the volunteer position the less likely it is that you can afford to do so. I don't know if more pay is the answer, but no pay is not.

Moving the capital around each year is worth considering - but Fargo isn't an option unless North Dakota becomes part of Minnesota! I would suggest Marshall as a good place - meet during the summer and everyone could stay in the Resident Halls.

Posted by Gwen | May 13, 2006 12:51 PM

It's true that congress is in session only about three months. The salary for a state rep is just over 31,000. I know - I'm an independent seeking the seat in 58A. This is pretty good pay for three months work, as much as I've ever made in a year, but still, virtually all state reps have day jobs.

Jail is an unnecessary and expensive way to deal with the problem. Certain campaign activities are not permitted during the session under the MN Fair Campaign Practices Act, and the penalty for violating these provisions is electoral disqualification. If we just expanded the prohibited activities to include all fundraising during the session, it would fully resolve the problem. Being diqualified is virtually the only way an incumbent loses anyway.

Posted by Justin | May 13, 2006 2:37 PM

// but still, virtually all state reps have day jobs.

I'd like to explore this more. A few weeks ago I posted a cross section of what our House members do for a living. Quite a few teachers. They're obviously not teaching. Are they on leave? Are they getting paid while on leave? Accumulating tenure? There are realtors, lawyers, farmers (they're not farming when they're at the legislature, I don't think. Someone else is).

The hardship question is a difficult one. But who says everone has to come to St. Paul anymore. Maybe video conferencing is the way to go. Hey, even the New York Stock Exchange has gotten religion on the value of electronic transactions.

By the way, I view Fargo as *national* capital material.

Posted by Bob Collins | May 13, 2006 3:42 PM

Under law (below) tenure is probably accrued, but whether the time is pd is up to the employer. Farmers make the best example of why a modest salary should be afforded public officials - as you say, someone else is growing food while the legislature is in session - presuably that person would need to be paid.

MS 211B.10 Subd. 2.

Time off for public office meetings.

A person elected to a public office must be permitted time off from regular employment to attend meetings required by reason of the public office. The time off may be without pay, with pay, or made up with other hours, as agreed between the employee and employer. When an
employee takes time off without pay, the employer shall make an effort to allow the employee to make up the time with other hours when the employee is available. No retaliatory action may be taken by the employer for absences to attend meetings necessitated by reason of the employee’s public office.

Posted by Justin C. Adams | May 15, 2006 9:36 AM

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories