Thank you ‘corrupted’.

Any more specifics available?
She wanted to focus only on legislators, correct?
Legislators are paid about 35k per year, including salary and per diem $, and work full time from Jan 2 to about June 1, and the veto session from Sept 1 to Sept 30 (thereabouts ?)
At other times, they do constituent work and meet voters and discuss issues, etc, and study or prepare new legislation, let us say ( and agree ) for an average of 4 hours a day from June 1 to Sept 1.

When you compare the hours worked and the pay received it ranks about 29/50 of states in the US for legislators, with NH paying 100$ and CA paying 70K.

Benefits are OK, but legislators pay in medical etc, so not ‘comfy ‘ in area of standard benefit package.

For this amount of work after 6 years they get a pension of what amount and for how long? Do they contribute any $? How does this compare to a similar state employee with 35K salary for that amount of hours for 6 years?

Just wondering. Thanks.

Sorry–additional thought — was her proposal to do this retroactively on legislators, eg on those currently serving or just retired, so that those who served with the expectation of pension assistance would not get it, or just to those newly elected after passage of her bill? The latter seems more reasonable. Additional thought: did her husband send back any pension money he received from the state, or did she, if they felt it was undjustified? Seems like this was something one would do if one felt very strongly about it.

Well, Mr. GOP I will try and round up that info as soon as possible, but insinuating that her husband AND her are the same person and think identically on every issue is ridiculous. Maybe her husband wanted to keep those pensions, but the voters didn’t elect her husband, they elected her, and she thought it was wrong that part time employees recieved better benefits in their pensions than full-time state employees.

RE: corrupted most recent post.

Sorry I misunderstood, in you initial post you referenced her filibuster to her husband’s forthcoming pension, and since you connected them, I logically followed suit. I understand, of course, they are not the same person and respect each individually.

Regarding you last point, that legislative ‘part time employees’ are paid at same rate as some full time employees, I placed the work schedule in previously to establish the facts, as I understand them to be, to see if you agree too, to test if your conclusion is correct. As of now, I think you will admit, we do not know it to be true.

Corrupted: 50-50? You must be on the Steelman dole. There were a few shots where Sarah thought she would get him and Sarah’s soft jab was met with a massive uppercut.

I’m intellectually honest enough to admit when my guy or girl gets beat. It’d be nice if ya’ll did the same.

Corrupted: I might have been wrong to insinuate a question about your intellectual honesty. After all, you said 50-50 up top, and then later came out and said that Steelman won outright. The same consistency of your chosen candidate’s campaign.

Like I said, I was wrong to insinuate a question. It is clear that you have absolutely zero.

If your going to call out someone for saying that their only attack is saying that another blogger is on the staff of their chosen candidate is bad, and then do it yourself- you don’t show much consistency. And then attack someone on not being consistent, come on now, at least be consistent on the issue of being consistent.
By the way did you catch the debate today? You said you have the intelligience to admit when your candidate gets defeated, so go ahead and do it. Kenny got slaughtered.

Corrupted:

I’ll admit that on the KY3 debate, Hulshof wasn’t as good as I expected, and Steelman performed OK. I think that it was either 50-50, or Kenny won by the skin of his teeth. On the KMOX debate that this post was talking about, though, I listened to it in my office with an equal amount of Steelman and Hulshof supporters, and the consensus was that Hulshof won it going away.

And, the reason I got onto you is because I see you on every single post on this blog relating to this race, and not once will you ever say anything positive about Hulshof. I’ve lived in the 9th for a few years, and followed it’s politics since before Kenny was the representative. Even the Dems here in the People’s Republic of Columbia don’t think he’s a bad guy, and the worst they can muster is a “rubber-stamp Republican”. So, when I see someone who parrots the talking points of the Steelman campaign, and takes on the same disgusting tactics of the Steelman campaign, I put two and two together.