Upwards of 77,000 federal employees make more than the governors of the states in which they live, the Congressional Research Service reports.
Washington Times (“77,000 federal workers paid more than governors“):
More than 77,000 federal government employees throughout the country — including computer operators, more than 5,000 air traffic controllers, 22 librarians and one interior designer — earned more than the governors of the states in which they work.
The findings, from a Congressional Research Service report requested by Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, were released at a time when public workers’ salaries and benefits are under scrutiny across the country as governments try to streamline.
CRS reviewed 2009 salary figures, the most recent available, and found 77,057 employees who earned more in annual pay than their respective governors. Of those workers, 18,351 were doctors — the highest percentage. The second-highest total was for 5,170 air traffic controllers — likely both front-line controllers and their supervisors.
In Maryland, 7,283 federal employees — about 7 percent of all full-time federal employees in the state — earned more than Gov. Martin O’Malley’s $150,000 salary. Maryland was topped by Colorado, which in 2009 had 10,875 employees who made more than the $90,000 salary of the governor, Bill Ritter.
“Across America, governors are being asked to do more with less, often at lower pay than federal employees in their states. The pay gap between governors and federal employees should prompt Congress to take a closer look at federal salaries,” Mr. Coburn said. “With our debt and deficits spiraling out of control, now is the time to ask agencies — not just governors — to do more with less.”
The CRS report itself, alas, is not available online, making it hard to analyze. Obvious questions to ask: How much does each state pay its governor? What kinds of employees are making more than the governor? Are we comparing apples to apples or is salary a bigger component of one group’s total compensation package than the other?
Left only with a report from a newspaper with a known agenda, it’s hard to get too excited about this. On the one hand, it seems outrageous on its face that air traffic controllers and librarians–let alone an interior designer–would make more than a state governor. On the other hand, governor is not a career position; it’s typically held for a short time by someone who’s already a millionaire and will go back to raking in big money once their term ends.
Beyond that, in most if not all states, there are many state employees who make more than the governor. Athletic coaches, physicians, attorneys, college presidents–and sometimes even college professors!–have been known to make more. Hell, Connecticut has 24 retired state employees making more–in some cases, much more–than the governor. And 1126 current state employees make more than the governor’s $150,000 salary. These stories are common and make for interesting discussion. I’m just not sure that the comparison is meaningful.
Rick Moran disagrees:
What the hell happened? It is mind boggling that we have now reached this point where it is so lucrative to work for the government. It used to be considered “public service.” Now it’s “Public Reaming” as unelected bureaucrats hold sway over huge swaths of our economy and our daily lives.
I don’t buy the argument that we have to pay exorbitant salaries to attract and retain good help. There is a higher calling that should be at work. No one should get rich at the taxpayer’s expense – not politicians, and certainly not bureaucrats.
This conflates a lot of issues.
First, the fact that bureaucrats have too much power really has nothing to do with this discussion. Take that up with the elected officials who’ve abrogated that power to them.
Second, I agree that there’s something to be said for low salaries for elected officials, who are indeed supposed to be in the business of public service. Especially since they’re the ones setting the salaries. But those arguments don’t apply to rank-and-file workers who are going to do the job for decades; it’s unreasonable to expect them to work for peanuts simply because the taxpayer is footing the bill.
Third, while Ritter’s $90,000 salary is hardly minimum wages, it’s not “getting rich” money, either. I’m actually shocked that Colorado has only 1100-odd state employees making more than that.
Indeed, I suspect–and, again, I don’t have the report available to me–that states which pay governors relatively low salaries account for the lion’s share of the 77,000 figure that’s being sensationalized.
