But How Much Does it Cost to Ride the State Capitol?

As if to prove the point made by yesterday's Almanac --- that people in the Mon-Yough area don't appreciate Kennywood --- there was a letter to the editor in the Daily News last night complaining about the prices. Sigh.

You know, Kennywood isn't a utility or a public park. It's a business. And I have to wonder if any of the people complaining about the prices at Kennywood have priced tickets at Geauga Lake, Hersheypark, Cedar Point or any of the other parks within a half-day's drive of Our Fair City. (Geauga Lake's ride-all-day price is $24.95, a little less than Kennywood's $28.95 price. You can also use a Kennywood ride-all-day pass to get admission to Sandcastle on the same day. Cedar Point's is $44.95 and Hersheypark's is $39.95.)

Anyway, at least one of my predictions was correct --- Kennywood is buying the old Union Railroad shop property under the bridge at the southwest corner of the park. The details of how the park intends to use the land remain to be seen.

Kennywood is also asking for tax relief, especially from local taxes. In 2003, West Mifflin increased the amusement tax from 50 cents to 5 percent per ticket. According to the Post-Gazette, Kennywood's taxes now make up almost 12 percent of West Mifflin's revenues.

Former state representative and current West Mifflin Councilman Richard Olasz Sr. argues that the borough views Kennywood as "a golden goose." Isn't that what I wrote yesterday? It isn't often that I find myself on the same side of a political issue as Mr. Olasz, but he's right. Kennywood does strain certain government services, especially police, and especially during the evening hours when the park closes --- try to get a car down Hoffman Boulevard at 11 p.m. on the night of a big school picnic or Italian Day --- but 12 percent seems a bit excessive. How much does Century III Mall contribute, for instance?

Meanwhile, the state General Assembly has approved an average 16 pay raise for itself, which according to published reports would make them the second-highest paid legislators in the country, after California. The new pay scales, which also cover judges and members of the governor's cabinet, are tied to federal salaries for comparable jobs. For instance, state representatives are going to be paid 50 percent of the salary of a member of the U.S. House, plus an annual cost-of-living allowance.

Alert Reader Arden asks if there isn't some way to tie state legislature pay to the mean annual wage in Pennsylvania --- which is $35,780 --- say, by making legislator pay an even multiple of that average. (One is tempted to suggest that the multiple should be "0," but that's not very nice.) Arden suggests that citizens should rally and get a referendum on the ballot to amend the state Constitution.

The problem is that under Article XI of the state Constitution, amendments have to be approved by the General Assembly. There is no provision to amend the Constitution via a referendum. (And to digress for a minute, I'm not sure that there should be. You could end up with an endless stream of confusing, contradictory propositions being placed in the ballots all of the time, as in California.)

Now, do you really think anyone would vote to potentially lower their own salaries?

Legislators argue that they deserve to be compensated at a level commensurate with the amount of work that they do, and I have no argument against that. I know of a few who I truly admire, because they are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to answer constituent questions and meet with other political leaders, and are constantly on the road somewhere. But I also know of a few who got elected and immediately vanished until the next primary election.

So how much should a legislator be paid? I'm not sure. If you go to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, you can look up the average wages for various occupations in Pennsylvania. There aren't many that are being paid more than a state legislator's new minimum salary of $81,000.

Some of the occupations that make more than the new minimum for Pennsylvania state legislators include air-traffic controllers ($97,120), surgeons ($167,860), general practice doctors ($132,590), podiatrists ($91,360), dentists ($109,660), optometrists ($90,350), lawyers ($100,790) and physicists ($91,840).

Legislators will make more than architects ($64,330), electrical engineers ($71,530) and pharmacists ($77,610), among others.

Some of the occupations that will now have comparable salaries to state legislators in Pennsylvania include sales managers ($84,020), operations managers ($88,420), nuclear engineers ($81,650), computer scientists ($87,640) and epidemiologists ($82,930). (You may think that being a state legislator isn't rocket science, but you'd be wrong. Aerospace engineers, according to references (1, 2) I was able to find, make anywhere from $59,520 to $97,250 per year.)

Managers in general have a mean salary of $79,060 in Pennsylvania, and if you can view state legislators as managers of a sort, then a minimum $81,000 doesn't seem that outrageous. On the other hand, it's my tax money, dagnabbit, and Pennsylvania isn't exactly known for its low taxes.

It's also worth noting that 79 members of the House and 23 senators voted against the pay raises. I couldn't find a breakdown by name of how various legislators voted. As soon as I do, I'll post the votes from the Mon-Yough area.

So what say you? Leave your comments below (and keep 'em clean, please!).