I believe that we need younger folks in our government setting policy right now. This is important for humanity's future, and if they need some financial help to do the hard work, then I say let them have some financial help.

They can’t afford to live in Vermont on only the salary they are paying now.

Not many can.

Politicians are bloodsucking scum.

Kind of a clickbait title.

> 180 lawmakers, who currently make $14,610 per year, would earn just under $30,000. Lawmakers would also become eligible for medical benefits.

Being a lawmaker in VT is a 6 month a year commitment. This will at least make it so you can do so and then survive on a less than stellar job the rest of the time. Maybe it would lessen the number of MA and NY native who walk the halls at the statehouse.

That's the article title - so click bait, if it exists here, is on Seven Days.

I think you should drop the place of birth bigotry too.

The above is one of the most useless comments possible, has no bearing on the subject, nothing to do with Vermont ... and should be removed by the mods.

I was not implying you created the title. Only pointing out that the title of the article while factual is meant to invoke a specific sentiment while the details of the “doubling” is much or nuanced and complex than “government officials double their pay”.

Your out of state comment it noted and ignored. I still believe it is nearly impossible to identify and relate to the historic and generational issues which impact a state when you grow up in a wealthy suburb of an east coast city.

Did you even read the article

Cry me a river.

They gentrified were they lived now have flocked to were we live for it’s beauty, quaintness, and meridian of other reasons. Then realize we don’t have delivery and this place would be great if it had a Starbucks…or insert other mega corp. Said etc out of stater

It should be on a sliding scale. If you're someone like Dick Mazza with plenty of passive income and are well off, then you get less (or nothing) than someone who has a low annual income.

Well now there’s no way we could adopt something so… fair and balanced

[removed]

Rama is the chief shit stirrer here.

Yeah, I usually don't engage but this is an interesting topic outside just the political sphere. Right now VT politics is pretty much restricted to people who can afford to not work 6 months out of the year.

Hopefully this will lead to more working-class folks being represented in the statehouse. Gotta get those landlords out of there.

I'm not against the idea of paying politicians a much higher wage than what is being proposed.

Make the position worthwhile, so it attracts more than people who can do it on the side.

We should set their salary by their record. Every 6 months we go online and see a list of their votes/bills and then award them a set amount per vote or bill we agree with. Saved some turtles? That's a $2k per year raise. Voted to deregulate banks? Lose $5k.

But, Fyucker - won't the two sides just cancel each other out? Not if the politicians focus on what we ALL want.

Sure, there are probably flaws in this system, but I just made it up and I don't get paid to fix politics, plus the flaws could be ironed out.

K

This is Reddit get used to it. The mods are not going to save you nor should they.

[deleted]

Politicians should make a living wage yes.

The current 14k salary is a huge barrier to anyone who isn't already wealthy.

Just be glad that you don't have our insanely over-paid, underworked full-time legislature here in PA that approved automatic raises so they never have to vote for one again.

I would take your state legislature in a heartbeat.

A 6 month session in a state with such a small population is quite long. Should only be 2-3 months but the P/T issue would persist.

It must be really, really bad in PA. Our state legislature sees their job solely as finding ways to make VT more expensive.

Yes why yes it is. Crappy legislature plus 2nd highest gas tax, most expensive toll road, truly bad roads and a landscape filled with warehousing, billboards and roadside trash.

Oh, so this is why you're so infamous. Bigotry. Interesting. And no, we aren't going to drop it. Add New Jersey to that list.

I've heard that exact conversation in winooski too many times to count in the last two years. "On long Island we had x, y, and z."

Cool, maybe you oughta go back.

The comically low salary is a HUGE barrier to entry for average Vermonters to hold office in the state legislature. It pretty much guarantees that only the Rich and well off run for office.

So that's a no?

You just defined bigotry, only you don't realize it right now.

"I can't define who I am unless I define who somebody else is by their place of birth." - That's what is reads like to me.

PS. Wanna talk this out? I don't hide behind anonymity in my public sphere. I'll sit down with you in public and civilly discuss this issue of birth placed bigotry. In public with full disclosure of identities.

Ooooo, mods - "we don't have a job to do, just a title to show off and beat our breasts with"

If I'm "chief shit stirrer" in this sub then you don't have:

a) shit;

b) a pot to stir it in; and

c) a spoon to stir with even if you had a pot which you don't!

In other words - you're imagination is running away with what you want to see happening as opposed to what IS happening.

But, as I've done before and as I don't do my public life cloaked in anonymity, let's talk it out in a non-anonymous, civil, personally in public manner.

If you don't pay lawmakers a solid wage, you're going to get people who are already wealthy running the state. Low salaries are by design; they keeps the "poors" out of the statehouse.

[deleted]

So here's the thing - the way the post is titled makes it sound like increasing statehouse wages is a bad thing. I googled you and see that you've run for legislature before, and I also noticed in one of your comments that you agree this is a good thing.

Ironically, I think a lot of the people who are shitting on you would actually agree with you, but are thrown off by the post title. Notice how the replies supporting increased wages are being upvoted (including yours!), but the actual post is at 0 votes? There's a clear disconnect. Given your opinion on the subject, a more appropriate title may have been "Progress towards livable wages for VT lawmakers".

I have an honest question for you - do you think that the average person knows what a VT lawmaker is paid? I'd wager they don't, and when a person hears that VT lawmakers are going to double their salary, their gut reaction is going to be negative.

PS: I know that you didn't editorialize the title of this post, but do you really think people are going to even open the seven days article? They're coming here for the comments.

I'm not allowed to alter the title.

Wouldn't be the first time a politician realized they couldn't un-say something. Choose your words carefully next time.

Okay, I give up ... what the fuck are you talking about now?

The only way I could post the the article was with heading unchanged from link. Get it? I've nothing to unsay. Read what I wrote and not what you wanted me to write.

For fuck's sake.

It'll auto-fill the title but you can edit it. Alternatively, if you title the post before adding a link, it'll won't set the title automatically.

Alternatively, it's also common to make a regular "post" (not "link") and the include the news article in the body of the post.

Here's a "link" with an edited title:

​

https://preview.redd.it/tdp1zftfwkpa1.png?width=765&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=2d17796c1acc3201d39b991c5e7f462e83559a39

Sure double their salaries but why are there 180 assemblymen . (150 house reps and 30 senators) That's way way too many members . Cut their numbers by half or more and triple their compensation .

I'm done with lunch and gotta run, but I'll try one more time heading out the door: regarding your point about me not editing the headline or putting it in as a regular post .... I am not allowed to.

That's the same as "I am not allowed to."

Take me at my word.

I agree that you can't edit a post title after it's been posted. I accept your word there.

You have to change the title from the default before hitting submit on the original post.

I should have listened.

No, I'm not ALLOWED. I don't have the mod's permission to do so. It's a permission thing, it isn't about otherwise available methods.

I get your point, but the flip side of that argument is that the more legislators there are, the more diffuse political decision making power is and the easier it is for locals to access their state reps.

It it's just about money, then I'll agree with your assessment. But I believe it is about more then just money.

What you really need to do is ask the mods about the Rama-hater club that likes to keep you from seeing and reading what I post. You yourself pointed out the numbers that don't seem to make sense, and that's why they don't make sense.

All you have to do is sort posts and comments by "new", however, and the Rama-haters fail again.

I've got to believe (but am too lazy to research it) that Vt is has the most extreme number of legislators for the population . Plus nominal pay and limited responsibility leads more homogeneity not less . I'm talking seniors of which I am one .

66 myself, and I think New Hampshire is one that has more reps per voters, I'm not sure about other states.

As I said, I think it's about more then just a dollar figure. It's about how we run our common government.

When the Paine Mountain School District (at that time we still called it "Central Vermont Unified Union School District") held it's first organizational meeting, I made sure to push for an increase in what school board members were receiving for a stipend.

I pushed for it so fewer folks would be facing financial barriers to serving their community. I think this issue is important.