Rep. Tim Goodwin had this to say:
Lawmakers pay raise approved.
The legislature voted a pay raise for itself. Yep, of the 105 legislators, (70 in the House and 35 in the Senate), only 22 of us voted against giving ourselves a pay raise, using your tax dollars!! First off, I look at public service in the legislature as a way to give back to my great district (30), the great state of South Dakota, and to the country. It is an honor to serve, and I do it because I care, not because of the money. I waited until my family was raised and I was in a semi-retired mode before I decided to run. Julie Frye-Mueller and Senator Russell also voted no.
So, what did we make before the pay raise? While in session, $6000 per year plus per diem of $144 per day and $0.42 per mile to travel to and from Pierre. On our first and last trip, we get $0.05 per mile. This year we had a 37-day session; 37 times 144=$5328. The $5328 is for housing and meals, commonly called “per diem”.
Why did I vote against the pay raise? I have several reasons, but the straw that broke the camel’s back was that I couldn’t get HB-1133 and SB-168 passed. I was the prime sponsor of the House bill as it was introduced to the House. It required legislators take a drug test for illegal drugs. The House of Representatives killed the bill in committee 13 to 2. Only Rep. DiSanto and Rep. Latteral voted in favor. In the Senate, SB-168 passed the Judiciary committee 4 to 3, with Sen. Lance Russell as chairman, only to be sent to a second committee, Appropriations. That committee tabled it 7 to 2. Interesting side note: Senator Billie Sutton voted against tabling it. I had an anonymous donor to pay for the drug testing, so no cost would fall to the taxpayers. What was equally disappointing is that both bodies, House and Senate, did everything possible to prohibit a floor vote, and they were successful. My opinion is that the reason they prohibited a floor vote was that they have something to hide. Why else? The bill did not have an emergency clause attached, meaning that if it passed, the first drug test would not take place until we begin the 2019 session. My intent was that each member would have until then to get off illegal drugs, or choose not to run for re-election. We all run every two years, and this is an election year.
I closing, my opinion is that the legislature rejected a drug test, thus giving the impression that we are above the law. To make matters worse, we ARE the LAWMAKERS! Basic leadership principles instill that you lead by example, and this example is embarrassing!
SO, HELL NO WE DID NOT DESERVE A PAY RAISE!!
- Tim R Goodwin, Representative, District 30
- Tim.goodwin@sdlegislature.gov or tgoodwin1955@gmail.com
- Facebook: Goodwin In The House
Editors note: HB1311 provides an increase of approximately 75%, and automatic annual increases tied to a percentage of the SD median household income. SEE BILL HERE
I wrote a letter to the editor stating that everyone running should accept the challenge to take a drug test. Why not? As Representative Goodwin indicates, if you don’t have anything to hide, why not take the test and practice what you preach? And yes, the perception is always that the rules apply to those who are ruled and never the self serving rulers. South Dakota lawmakers really should think of how this looks to voters.