Lawmakers could get pay increases of more than a third next year under a plan discussed Thursday. But decision makers postponed a final vote on increases that would cost the state $1.5 million next year until the day after next month’s election.
The Citizens’ Committee on Legislative Compensation met at the Idaho Capitol to discuss a proposal for 34% pay increases for state legislators.
In the 2024 fiscal year, which began July 1, lawmakers — who serve part-time — received $19,394, not including per diems. The new pay rate would take effect in December and increase their salaries to $37,801 over the next year.
Instead of setting pay rates with small increases each year, the commission appointed by Idaho’s governor and Supreme Court on Thursday considered a proposal from Legislature leadership that would cap lawmakers’ pay at 40% of the median household income in the state. According to legislative staff, the average annual income of an Idaho household is $94,503.
By comparison, salaries for most candidates elected to full-time statewide office are in the six figures. Lt. Governor Scott Bedke of Idaho is the lone exception, receiving $52,990 in annual salary.
The Idaho Legislature’s new compensation package would also change the compensation lawmakers receive under the proposal. Currently, all lawmakers receive a $74 allowance each day for meals, which would be eliminated as part of the higher salaries. Lawmakers who live 50 miles or more from the Idaho Capitol — about 58% of the Legislature — also receive a daily subsistence allowance of $165, which they would still receive under the new plan.
If approved, lawmakers would still receive travel reimbursements during the roughly three-month legislative session. Terri Kondeff, director of the Legislative Services Office, said she expects all lawmakers would receive more money for their work than they do now, even without some of the current per diem rates. Under the proposal, the average increase in take-home pay for each lawmaker would be $6,466.
Although lawmakers set pay rates for other state workers and officials, the Idaho Constitution requires the appointed citizen commission to set pay rates for lawmakers every two years. Thursday’s proposal came from leaders of both the Republican and Democratic parties in both chambers.
During a presentation Thursday, Republican leaders of the Idaho House and Senate said they supported the wage increase because current rates are too low to attract a diverse group of candidates.
“We’re almost like volunteers here, based on what we get paid,” said Senate Prof. Chuck Winder, R-Boise, whose term in the Senate ends Nov. 30. The longtime senator previously lost his Republican primary. this year.
While many lawmakers are traditionally ranchers or farmers who may have more free time in the winter, lawmakers today have broader professional backgrounds, he said. “We’re all getting a little long in the tooth,” Winder told the committee.
“We want some gray hair, we want some experience, but we also want the next generation of people to be attracted to serve in the Legislature,” he said. “No young person I know with a family can afford to leave a job and come (serve) for what is paid here.”
House Speaker Mike Moyle, R-Star, echoed Winder’s comments to committee members.
“Younger people today won’t stay with us for long because they can’t afford to live in this building,” he said.
Commission postpones vote
The committee went beyond its scheduled meeting time Thursday as some members expressed concerns that they did not have enough time to weigh the decision. While most members appeared to believe that lawmakers deserve significantly more pay than they receive, some said they were concerned that a large percentage increase in one year could lead to public backlash.
After a two-hour meeting, a vote to accept the legislative leadership’s proposed pay package ended in a 3-3 tie and was thus not passed.
“I’m afraid to approve such a big change in such a short time,” said committee member Bryan Mooney.
Another member, JoAnne Stringfield, said she was also unsure whether she supported the changes. She agreed that lawmakers have been significantly undercompensated for years, but was unsure the proposed increases were the right ones.
Stringfield said she has spent much of her career in human resources, and was unsure why the Legislature had chosen to set rates at 40% of household income, which is often good for two earners, versus the average salary, which she thought would be more directly comparable to a lawmaker’s income. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average annual income in Idaho in 2023 was $44,240.
Although based on legislative staff’s conversations with lawmakers about their time commitments, Stringfield said the 40% threshold felt arbitrary.
“If I’m the person who gets called (from the public) because my name is on this committee, it’s going to be hard for me to make a case based on the median household income in Idaho and the 40% number,” she said.
After voting 4-1 to defer their decision, Dennis Johnson, the committee’s chairman, decided to reconvene the group on the morning of November 6.
Origin of new compensation formula
Kondeff told committee members Thursday that “quite a few” lawmakers have asked for a review of the compensation. She noted that, due to population growth, lawmakers now serve about 42% more constituents than they did two decades ago, and that lawmakers have received a $4,200 pay increase over that same period.
Adjusted for inflation, this amounts to 25% less pay than lawmakers received in 2005, according to Kondeff.
Kondeff said legislative staffers arrived at the more than one-third pay increase by suggesting that pay rates for lawmakers would be set at 40% of the state’s median household income. The annual legislative sessions last an average of 88 days. Lawmakers also often have off-season responsibilities, such as meeting with constituents or drafting legislation.
In addition to the higher pay for all lawmakers, leaders of both chambers would receive an additional 10% based on median household income.
Lawmakers cannot increase their pay themselves, but in Idaho they do have the authority to reject or reduce the pay plan set by the commission.
Committee members concerned about appearing to give lawmakers large raises in one year raised the possibility of spreading the increase over the next two years.
In response to those concerns, Moyle suggested that in politics it is often better to simply “rip off the Band-Aid.”
“The political fallout happens and you get over it,” he said.
