Should we pay ’em more?

The reporting on three Texas legislators being eligible to collect a whopping six-figure salary after serving in the Legislature for a long time brings to mind an issue that has stuck in my craw for as long as I have lived in Texas.

Do we pay these men and women enough to serve in the Legislature?

State Sen. John Whitmire and state Reps. Senfronia Thompson and Tom Craddick now are eligible to collect salaries totaling $144,000 annually, thanks to a law enacted in 2021 that rewards legislators for their lengthy terms of service. Whitmire turned it down; Thompson and Craddick haven’t disclosed their plans.

They earn normally just $7,200 per year, plus a per diem expense when the Legislature meets every other year for 140 days.

Is that enough to sustain these individuals’ interest in public service? I tend to think it’s a challenge.

Many legislatures put their members on full-time salary status. Yes, they become professional politicians. Then again, so do Texas legislators, even though we pay them a mere pittance to write laws. Even the lieutenant governor — as the Texas Senate’s presiding officer — draws the same measly “salary” as the senators over whom he presides.

This chintzy salary structure makes it nearly impossible for a working man or woman — someone with a regular job — to take time away, to spend five months every other year in Austin. How does that work for a guy who, say, sells shoes for a living at JC Penney? Have you seen any shoe salespeople serving in the Legislature? I didn’t think so!

What’s left? We get seriously rich men and women, such as heirs to family fortunes. A “citizen legislature” ought to be a place where working men and women can serve. I am not sure we have that now.

I am not suggesting a hefty six-figure sum is in order, but something a good bit more than the chump change they receive now is worth at least some serious discussion.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com