School finance might be stuck, but judicial pay raise legislation -- passed in various forms (and more than once) by both Houses earlier this year -- is on its way to Gov. Rick Perry. It would raise minimum annual pay for state district judges to $125,000 from $101,700, for appellate judges to $137,500 from $107,000, and for Texas Supreme Court justices to $150,000 from $113,000. If that comprised the entire Number One Dinner, they'd have already digested it.
But there is a side dish: Legislative retirement checks are tied to judicial pay, so lawmakers have been stuck between helping the judges and avoiding the appearance of helping themselves. They've opted, finally, to help the judges and themselves (and would have done so earlier, but for a last-minute legislative shootout during the regular session that knocked the bill off the calendar). Perry hasn't said he'll sign the raise, but he's favored it in speeches and would have to calm some ticked-off judges if he were to veto it. For lawmakers, retirement pay is figured by multiplying the years served by .023 by the minimum salary for state district judges. So the 23 percent pay hike for judges is also a 23 percent boost for retired legislators, present and future. A lawmaker with 12 years in office would get $34,500 annually upon retirement under the new law ($125,000 x .023 x 12); under current law, the annual benefit is $28,069.20. Legislators have to serve at least eight years to qualify and can start getting benefits when they're 60 years old. If they serve at least 12 years, they get the bennies starting when they're 50 (as long as they're also out of office by then).
If you poke through the House Journals -- the official records of the proceedings, used by lawyers and campaign consultants and others to reconstruct the Legislature's actions -- you'll find a surprising number of lawmakers took time to explain their votes. They fell, roughly, into two camps. Some lawmakers voted yes and said they did it for the judges and in spite of the benefit to themselves. Others voted no and explained it the other way, apologizing to the judiciary while saying they couldn't stomach the legislative retirement benefits. There were some conversations here and there about unlinking the judges and the lawmakers, but that idea never appeared as an amendment to the legislation and so never came to a vote in either the House or the Senate. Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, originally tried to link legislative pay to the governor's salary, so lawmakers could give judges a raise without feathering their own nests. But state budget-writers increased the governor's salary, and Duncan retreated from that idea. It never came up again.
Some legislators like to complain about their pay, which is set at $600 per month, or $7,200 annually. But they get that great retirement for part-time work, and they also do better than average Texans when they're actually on the job. The state pays $128 per day when lawmakers are working in Austin. While 30-day special sessions are hard on some legislators' regular jobs, they're also an opportunity to get an extra $3,840. Without special sessions, lawmakers can get $32,320 for a two-year term in office, including their $600 per month and their "per diem" for the 140-day regular session. Assuming the current special session goes the full 30 days, they'll make an extra $7,680 this year, bring them to $40,000 for this particular two-year term. For comparison, the U.S. Department of Commerce's estimate of per capital income in Texas last year was $30,222.