Warning: Political Junkies Only
July 23, 2008
As you can imagine, elected officials have an enormous about of information come to us daily…..emails, snail mail, phone calls, invitations, and publications.
Tonight I was reading through the recent issue of “State Legislatures” (from the National Conference of State Legislatures) and thought I’d pass some statistics along for those junkies out there who may actually find this interesting.
Did you know?
In 1938, there were 7,480 state legislators representing 113 million people.Since then, the nation’s population has grown to 304 million people and the number of state legislators actually decreased.
In 1938, a House member represented 23,124 people and a senator represened 72, 176. Today, a House member represents 56,216 people and a senator represents 154,330.
In the South Carolina 2004 elections (the last time prior to this year that all House and Senate were on the ballot), 6 candidates for the House raised more than $50,000 campaigning - and lost. In the Senate, 12 candidates raised more than $100,000 campaigning and lost.
In the New Hampshire 2004 elections the most money raised for a House Seat? $12,158 (That was the only candidate to raise more than $10,000).
South Carolina has the lowest percent of female representation (And our Senate next year will have ZERO women).
New Hampshire’s legislature has the oldest (92) and youngest (21) lawmakers in the country.
The New Hampshire legislature has 424 members (400 House, 24 Senate) making it the THIRD LARGEST LEGISLATIVE BODY IN THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING WORLD behind only the United States Congress and British Parliament. (As reference, we have 170)
Legislative Salaries: California $116,098; Michigan $79,650; Pennsylvania $70,163, South Carolina $10,400; New Hampshire $200.
Legislatures that meet biennially: Arkansas, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, Texas.
Average age of state-lawmakers throughout the US: 56
Comments
9 Responses to “Warning: Political Junkies Only”
Got something to say?
[…] Nathans News | Warning: Political Junkies Only […]
Nathan, I was looking at those salary comparisons and asking myself … “is this guy hustling for a pay raise or what?”
JUST KIDDING!
Don’t forget the plush retirement system our legislators have given themselves.
LOL, Earl. You know that would do me no good since I continue to return my legislative salary to worthy causes/groups. (Of course, with mortgage/housing crisis going on, not sure If I can keep that up next year!)
Thanks for reading. I was mainly shocked to see how much money is involved in politics nowadays and how much folks need to really have a serving heart to do the job.
Like folks in business, you have to do more with less. How does New Hampshire pay $200 and expect real work for their people? And why do folks spend $100,000 to run for a $10,400 job?
Chester, I and several others had to work hard to keep the COLA adjustment from going to elected officials this year (and you can imagine how well that went over Inside the Dome).
I first learned of the retirement system differences my second year in office.
We do have a different level and as much as that stinks, I still don’t think folks run for that as a perk.
Since we’re on the topic…..you’d be surprised at how much your income drops while serving. Well….I know some attorneys who end up gaining business they may have not otherwise had (sorry to lump all attorneys together there but you follow what I mean) but I can vouch personally that the time serving constituents (basically everyday of the year) really does cut in to providing for your family at your paying job.
I appreciate your comments. Keep reading and posting!
Presumably, the reason NH has such low spending on races is because of how obviously small the districts have to be, re the large number of legislators. There would be reason to believe that if Jake Knotts and Katrina Shealy were running to be the senator from Red Bank, the budgets would have been much smaller.
[…] I’m into “numbers” this week, I wanted to share some interesting places for you to visit: here and […]
Salary comparisons can be deceptive. For example the Calif. legislature is a full-time legislature while our legislature is in session for approxiamately 6 mos. Now, that being said, time in session may not translate into job completion. Rarely does that state have a budget in on time while South Carolina always does! As for women legislaors in our state, I am working hard to train that new generation of elected officials that will serve for the benefit of their communities!
I am always amazed at the depth of your blogs and always seem to learn something.
I do know that most of the General assembly work hard to get into office and I think that is what drives the cost up. I see the same thing in youth sports and colleges. If you can afford the extra cost then you spend the money because you only have one chance just like any competitive race.
As for the salaries I know Nathan spends a good amount of his time but not all representatives do. Some do not even stay as informed and hate to say it but seem to follow on others advice during their service. Luckily I feel you research and think before you vote. Thanks for the interesting information.