SHARE
New Hampshire Lawmakers Are Tired of Getting Paid Like It’s 1889
BY SCOTT CALVERT
Members of America’s largest state legislature fight for a raise; ‘$100 a year is just ludicrous’
Think you’re overdue for a raise? Try being a New Hampshire state legislator.
Their pay has been frozen at the equivalent of $100 a year ever since flinty voters etched it into the state constitution back in ’89. 1889, that is.
Small wonder Granite State lawmakers are the lowest paid in the U.S. Their counterparts in most states have salaries, and the average was $47,900 last year, the National Confer-
ence of State Legislatures says. Massachusetts lawmakers, with an $82,000 salary, pull in over $100 by lunch. New York is No. 1 at $142,000.
“Let’s face it, $100 a year is just ludicrous,” says New Hampshire House Speaker Sherman Packard, a Republican who presides over the 400-member body, the fourth-largest in the English--speaking world.
Many past bids to boost pay by amending the constitution failed. Now, there is a bipartisan push to delete the pay language from the foundational document. If it succeeds, legislators could debate the issue and, just maybe, vote themselves a raise.
“Imagine the United States Constitution fixed the salary of the secretary of defense at the level of what it was in 1791,” says Democratic Rep. Russell Muirhead, a Dartmouth government professor who backs both the deletion and higher pay. “There’s something just perverse about this.”
But traditionalists in both parties dislike the proposal, which is set for a House committee hearing Thursday. Changing the constitution requires 60% majorities in the House and Senate, both GOP-led, and approval from two-thirds of voters.
Democratic Rep. Jim Maggiore objects to tinkering with the constitution or juicing his paycheck. “As long as I am asking my neighbors to make appropriations for anything that contributes to their taxes…I don’t get anything from the state or their pocketbook to do this job,” he says.
Maggiore, a stay-at-home dad when his kids were younger, once proposed slashing compensation to a penny. Lawmakers get mileage reimbursements, which can dwarf the $100, but not a per diem.
For statehouse denizens in Con-cord, the question of pay turns on competing views about the makeup of the legislative body and the virtues of volunteer lawmakers.
Higher-pay advocates say many workaday residents can’t afford to serve, so legislators skew rich and retired, which hurts efforts to tackle issues like affordable housing.
Some reps suggest pay in the $6,000 to $20,000 range—enough to cover bills with outside work while keeping the legislature amateur. It would help Rep. Jared Sullivan, who scoops ice cream, substitute teaches and cleans a ski resort after he lost steady consulting work. “I’m just able to do it,” the Democrat says.
For Rep. Kelley Potenza, serving is a full-time job, between the Januaryto- June legislative sessions and frequent constituent service. “I would love to be paid, but I wouldn’t want it to be a lot,” says Potenza, a Republican whose husband is the household’s main earner. Her family’s reaction to the $100: “Are you kidding me?”
Status quo defenders say the ultralow pay befits a citizen legislature. They point to firefighter members and others who balance busy jobs with lawmaker duties. Plus, they say, it would take a hefty increase to make a real financial difference—a pricey proposition with 424 House and Senate members.
“We have pride in the fact we’re called a volunteer legislature. We don’t make money, we just don’t. It is about service,” says GOP Senate President Sharon Carson, who teaches at a community college. She jokes it took her 25 years as a legislator to get a raise, a $25 bump for leading the Senate.
Meanwhile, Jon Kiper, a Democrat running for governor, is suing the state, alleging the $100 pay violates other constitutional provisions like one saying the government is instituted to benefit “the whole community.” Lawyers for the state have moved to dismiss the suit, noting, “The Constitution is not unconstitutional.”
“It’s just so much work to ask people to do for no money,” Kiper says. He mentioned $10,000 a year as a possibility. During his 2024 campaign, he floated $20,000.
The state GOP blasted the suit, invoking his embrace of $20,000: “Democrat Proposes 20,000% Pay Increase in Concord.” (Actually, it’s 19,900%.)
Voter skepticism, political tradition and ingrained frugality loom over the debate, says University of New Hampshire political science professor Dante Scala. “New Hampshire is all about citizen legislatures, etc., etc.,” he says, “but it’s also about doing things on the cheap.”
Technically, legislators receive $200 per two-year term. But since the 1980s they have met every year, so it works out to $100 per annum.
In 1889, delegates to that year’s constitutional convention debated various amounts before settling on $200. At the time, lawmakers got $3 a day during session, but delegates felt they were stretching things out to pad their wallets.
Delegate William Ladd warned against fixing legislators’ pay. “Must we station a guard over them to see that they do not abuse the high trust we have voluntarily given them?” he asked. The measure went onto the ballot and easily passed.
Nearly 137 years later, Democratic Rep. Jonah Wheeler hopes to undo that act as prime sponsor of the proposed amendment. He thinks a per diem probably makes sense but says “right now I’m focused on just getting the cap off the constitution.”
Not all of his Republican amendment co-sponsors would support a pay raise if that happened. “Once you put a dollar sign on things like that…people start doing things for the money instead of for the right reason,” says Rep. Debra DeSimone.
Speaker Packard sees merit in both the amendment and higher pay. Not that he’d bet his paycheck on enough legislators agreeing.
“I just think that many of them knew what they were getting when they ran for office, and they just don’t want to change it,” he said.
SHARE
