The Louisiana Senate approved a bill Monday that would increase state legislators’ current base salary from $16,800 to $37,500.
The go-ahead from the Senate came days after the House approved the same bill. The original bill, introduced in the Senate, called for a triple in legislators’ pay.
Gov. Bobby Jindal has said he does not support the measure but would not veto the bill if passed through both chambers. He said he does not want to give legislators incentive not to pass his legislation in the future.
“I will not veto this as it is very clear to everyone that the result would be a grinding halt to the tremendous reforms and progress our state is making,” Jindal said Friday in a news release. “I will give [legislators] no excuse to stop doing the people’s business, and I will not allow the momentum of our state to stop over this or anything else.”
Jindal’s reasoning is commendable. He campaigned on change and reform in a state where corruption and politics have gone hand in hand for several years. It is right for him to consider the future just as much as the present.
But while allowing the bill to pass may pay off down the road, Jindal should side with his own beliefs – and the beliefs of many Louisianians – take a stand early in his term and veto the bill if it ends up on his desk. Jindal needs to stand up to legislators and prove he will not bend to the legislature’s unpopular whims.
According to a survey released by the Baton Rouge Business Report on Friday, 84 percent of respondents said Jindal should veto the original measure.
And cutting the proposed pay raise by $13,200 – as the House did Friday – should do little to sway public opinion.
The Legislature needs to be more concerned with funding health care and education, not increasing pay for what in reality is a part-time job.
Very rarely do the governor and general public agree so strongly on an issue. This is one of those instances.
Having a backbone now will earn Jindal respect and would show he is the type of governor that will not cave in to Legislative pressure of an unpopular move. A veto would also show that Jindal recognized what the people want and actually did something about it.
It is unclear whether a veto would affect the relationship between Jindal and the Legislature. But what is clear is that a veto would prove to Louisiana that Jindal might not always agree, but will listen to what they have to say in the months and years to come.
—-Contact the Editorial Board at [email protected]