MISSOURI WATCH: PUBLIC PAY PLANS AND OTHER BLASPHEMY

By random calculations there are probably more Missourians who believe O.J. is innocent than favored the proposed salary increases for state legislators and judges. For one to declare that, yes, a pay raise was justified for the men and women who write our laws, required no small amount of courage, and therefore there were few in the Capitol who held a press conference to announce such political blasphemy.

As one who favors adequate remuneration for public officials, if only because poverty stricken ones have great difficulty in concentrating on the job at hand, I will have to admit that I was slightly taken aback by the size of the pay hikes for both lawmakers and judges. I have it on good authority, because he told me so, that the fellow who named most of the compensation panel members was also surprised.

What seemed like such a good idea only a few weeks ago has turned into a real cropper: public animus, editorial wrath and per diem allowances to die for. The reason sponsors promoted the independent commission idea was as clear as the nose on Tom Jefferson's statue: John Q. Public hates it when public officials ask for more money. Whether we're talking about the President of the United States or the town cop who is expected to risk his life for minimum wage.

I have a theory that this anti-adequate-wage syndrome dates back to Colonial times when to be elected township constable was an honor, there being no money in the coffers to pay for anything else. We have a tendency to believe that high honor and a tin badge are sufficient compensation for most public jobs and that only ingrates ask for enough money to keep body and soul together. Those who feel this way can bask in the knowledge that some legislators, far less than affluent, have been reduced to buying shelter in Jefferson City by the night, unable to write a check for more than one evening's lodging at a time.

By my computations, the salary commission recommended a pay scale for legislators at nearly the same rate as machinists at McDonnell Douglas receive -- if the lawmaker performs absolutely no constituent service. If he or she spends several hours a week -- and most do -- answering constituent mail and requests for assistance with the bureaucracy -- then the pay scale drops to about what a fry cook at a chain burger joint receives. I don't know about you, but I hope our laws are as carefully constructed as the planes we export to China.

The state Senate Appropriations Committee chairman and I visited the other day about an assortment of subjects, one of which included the salary paid the Governor of Missouri, with both of us agreeing that the man in charge of the largest business in the state should receive the highest public salary in the state. He doesn't, of course, and I doubt if Mel would accept a pay hike even if one were offered. But, somehow, it does seem unseemly, for example, that college coaches are among the highest paid employees of the state, benefiting from all kinds of side enterprises that amount to little more than outright gifts. I guess the NCAA is only worried about free trips for student athletes and not free rides by their coaches.

You may be shocked to know that there are dozens and dozens of state officials who draw larger pay checks than the chief executive, even including some who are members of the governor's Cabinet. There are even some of us who remember when a governor received $5,000 annually and legislators were paid the munificent sum of $5 a day when they answered roll call. Oh, yes, they also got $1 a day for meals.

There are good and valid reasons for paying adequate salaries for those who serve the public. One of them, obviously, is that well-intentioned men and women are not transformed into beggars, casting their lot with whoever throws them a bone or a handout. Citizens bristle at the thought of lobbyist-funded dinners, yet abhor any suggestion that officials be paid amounts that preclude the necessity of cadging a free pork steak dinner.

The salary commission reform didn't work the first time around, and there is now talk that per diem allowances can be called cost-of-living increases, thereby avoiding the restriction against immediate second attempts. Lawsy, we seem to be witnessing the power of citizen parsimony to create a whole new criminal class of public officials in Missouri.

~Jack Stapleton of Kennett is the editor of Missouri News and Editorial Service.