Workloads and pay hikes - quid pro quo?
The Brouhaha over the recent salary increases awarded by Illinois state legislators, Chicago aldermen and Cook County Board commissioners has created a sharp cleavage between the voters and their elected representatives in the state, the city and the county. The voters believe that the members of those legislative bodies were not entitled to the raises that they voted for themselves, while the elected officials argue that their salaries had not kept pace with the inflation. Who is right, the aroused citizenry or the aggrieved legislators, aldermen and commissioners?
There is surely reason and justice, and irrationality and selfishness on both sides of the controversy. But there is also the danger of applying a single standard to the actions of the three legislative bodies and of reacting to their actions without evaluating the relative merit of the arguments made for the three different bodies.
The workload and level of responsibility of the three bodies is significantly different. The state legislators have had their workload steadily increased in recent years; legislative sessions have lengthened, requiring more time in Springfield and more committee work; and there is less time for family responsibilities and the pursuit of personal income. The legislators are surely entitled to a raise.
Chicago's aldermen are members of a city council which is more of a ratifying assembly than a legislative body. The council meets normally only twice a month; most legislation is shepherded through by Mayor Michael A. Bilandic and his aides; committees meet infrequently, and voting is by rote, after perfunctory and prearranged debate. The legislative load of the aldermen is light, relatively undemanding and has not increased significantly since their last pay raise four years ago. But aldermen, especially if they are ward committeemen, have substantial responsibilities as ombudsmen to their ward constitutents. In Chicago, voters consider it their right to request favors of their aldermen, sometimes demand action and occasionally harass or threaten them when they respond unsuccessfully to their constituents' needs. The aldermen are probably entitled to some kind of a raise.
And then there is the Cook County Board of Commissioners, ten Democrats automatically elected at large from the city and six Republicans automatically elected at large from the suburbs. The commissioners have no constituencies in wards or legislative districts and no role to play as county ombudsmen. Their legislative functions are also minimal. The board meets normally twice a month, mainly to approve administrative matters negotiated by county departments. They automatically approve an annual budget and a tax levy drawn up by board President George W. Dunne with some help from the chairman of the Finance Committee. Most of the committees meet infrequently and have little responsibility. The board governs only 185 square miles of unincorporated area of Cook County, encompassing a total of 175,000 people. The other 5,300,000 people in Cook County are governed by their municipalities. The board has little control over the other major county officeholders except to approve their budgets and personnel. In other words, the commissioners have little to do, and indeed their responsibilities have decreased with the urbanization of the unincorporated areas of the county into municipalities.
How much should the legislators, aldermen and commissioners have raised their salaries? Perhaps a fair standard would have been to raise the legislators (and the governor) the same percentage they have raised the state's appropriations real dollars) for people on welfare, for the state's mental hospitals, for children and family services and for salaries fort state employees.
The aldermen, who raised their pay over 100 per cent four years ago, should have received a pay raise this year, at most, commensurate with what the city is giving its employees. And the county commissioners, whose responsibilities were never significant and whose current obligations are being steadily diminished (except for President Dunne), should have left their salaries at $25,000 per year, since that was more than adequate compensation for what is, at most, a part-time job. The pay raise controversy may slowly fading, but the salary raise issue is really subordinate to the central ques-tions of how much our representatives should be paid for their efforts and what we can fairly require of them in return
There are already proposals to trim the cost of government by reducing the Illinois House of Representatives by at least one-third, and the Chicago City Council and the Cook County Board by one-half to two-thirds. Bodies of that size could probably function more effec-tively; we could pay the members ade-quate salaries and make it a full-time job, and both officeholders and vote would keep in closer contact. Perhaps it is time for all concerned officeholders, voters, political analysts and scholars — to take a good, hard look at our legislative needs, work loads, size of bodies and fair compen-sation, and plan for our legislative futures in Illinois, Chicago and Cook County with less emotion and sell interest, and a higher degree of reason and concern for the public's interest.
March 1979/Illinois Issues/34
