In wake of stunning move to dump all of their much-maligned salary increase, Senate and House now locked in stalemate. But insiders agree: Sooner or later, it will happen.
By Tom Murse
Published Nov 03, 2005 13:32
After enduring nearly four months of intense pressure, state lawmakers came within inches of tearing up their entire pay raises Wednesday.
But what appeared to be a done deal earlier in the day quickly deteriorated into sniping between House and Senate leaders.
By midnight, the sides remained at odds over a controversial provision of the repeal, and House members went home.
The two chambers remained at a standstill this morning. But lawmakers and analysts agree a complete rollback of the 16- to 54-percent pay raise is certain — whether it’s today or two weeks from now.
“The horse has left the barn, and I don’t think it can be recaptured. The pressure is now so great,” said G. Terry Madonna, the director of Franklin & Marshall College’s Center for Politics and Public Affairs.
State Sen. Gibson E. Armstrong, a Republican from Refton who supported the repeal, said: “This is a done deal. There’s no way this is not going to happen. We pushed the launch button.”
The House is not expected to return until Nov. 14, but a spokesman for House Republican leader Sam Smith said representatives may be summoned back as early as Monday. Senate leaders said they were willing to return promptly if asked by the House.
The two chambers disagree on how to handle the pay-cut repeal for judges. The state constitution says judges cannot have their salaries diminished during their term of service, unless the law applies to all “salaried officers of the Commonwealth.”
The repeal would would affect the salaries of more than 1,300 officials — lawmakers, judges, prosecutors and senior officials of the executive branch, including Gov. Ed Rendell.
Senator leaders said they anticipated a lawsuit challenging the judicial pay rollback. Under their version of the repeal, the pay raise for judges could potentially be restored under appeal without doing the same for the legislative salaries.
“The constitution says you cannot reduce the (compensation) of the judiciary,” the Senate’s president pro tempore, Robert C. Jubelirer, said. “The reason being so the General Assembly can’t blackmail the judiciary, otherwise we could cut their salaries every time we disagree with them.”
The Senate approved the measure unanimously and sent it to the House.
There, however, a handful of Republicans and Democrats insisted on inserting a clause to the repeal that, if successfully appealed in state court, would restore pay raises for not only judges but lawmakers as well.
House leaders said the public expected all the salary increases to be repealed, and questioned whether the Senate was trying to protect judges’ raises, including the one for Jubelirer’s wife, Renee Cohn Jubelirer, an appellate court judge.
“I think this is about protecting the salaries of judges ... and the fact that one of them happens to be married to the president pro tem, yeah, I think that is in fact what this is about,” said House Republican Leader Sam Smith.
State Rep. Katie True, a Republican from East Hempfield Township, said three GOP House members insisted on inserting the clause.
“There were members in our caucus who said, ‘Let’s amend it. Let’s stick it to the Senate because they’re letting the judges get raises, and Jubelirer’s wife gets it,” she said.
“The feeling I got was that the fury was just directed at (Senate Majority Leader David “Chip”) Brightbill and Jubelirer,” True said. “A lot of it had to do with the fact that Jubelirer drove the pay raise in the first place, and he twisted a lot of arms to get votes.
“That amendment was to teach them a lesson,” True said.
The House amended the legislation and approved it 196-2. The “no” votes were cast by Democratic Reps. H. William DeWeese and Michael Veon, the party’s two highest-ranking House members.
Later, the Senate stripped the House amendment, approved it and sent it back to the House, which had already gone home.
That the Legislature had gone this far, however, in trying to repeal the middle-of-the-night pay raise stunned lawmakers and analysts alike.
“Last week at this time there was not a hint that any of this would occur,” said Madonna.
Wednesday began with most lawmakers ready to ban only the controversial practice of taking the pay raise mid-term by claiming unvouchered expenses.
But Allegheny County Democrat Sen. Sean Logan, the first member recognized on the Senate, surprised some colleagues by instead introducing a total repeal.
The Senate, including Jubelirer and other leaders who lobbied hard for the pay raise four months ago, quickly agreed on the repeal, bowing to public pressure.
All eyes are now on the House.
“We’re going to have to concur and get this done,” said True. “It should have been done months ago. I’m glad we’re going this. But I don’t think it’s going to save anybody.”
(This article contains information from The Associated Press.)
