Partisan fight erupts over LePage’s retirement benefits

AUGUSTA — A bill to revoke the lifetime pension of a governor not elected for a second term caused a partisan argument in committee Monday morning that culminated with a Republican representative saying he’ll “never have respect” for Assistant Senate Minority Leader Troy Jackson, D-Allagash.

Troy R. Bennett/Bangor Daily News

Maine Senate Assistant Majority Leader Troy Jackson, D-Allagash.

Jackson acknowledged last week that the bill targets Republican Gov. Paul LePage because, in Jackson’s opinion, LePage targeted state workers and retirees in his pension reform efforts.

“This [bill] to me is absolute arrogance. It’s attacking one person,” said Rep. Jethro Pease, R-Morrill. “It does exactly what I hoped would not happen in here. It absolutely pits Republicans against Democrats. I will never, ever have respect for the person who sponsored this because it is an attack.”

Jackson’s bill, “A Resolution Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution of Maine to Limit a Governor’s Pension to Governor’s who have Served Two Full Terms,” was voted ought not to pass by an 11-1 tally Monday morning in the Legislature’s State and Local Government Committee. Jackson’s bill sought a statewide referendum to amend the Maine Constitution so that a governor who leaves office after Jan. 1, 2012, or the spouse of a governor who leaves office after that date does not qualify for a retirement allowance based on the governor’s service unless the governor had served at least two full terms as governor.

The bill was co-sponsored by four Senate Democrats, including Sen. Emily Cain, D-Orono, Sen. Stan Gerzofsky, D-Brunswick, Sen. Dawn Hill, D-Cape Neddick, and Sen. John Patrick, D-Rumford.

While some on the committee said the bill was a partisan attack aimed squarely at LePage, others insisted that it is an issue of fairness. Jackson said legislators become eligible for $3,360 a year after 10 years of service and only after they pass age 62. The governor, on the other hand, according to Jackson, earns a lifetime pension of $26,000 a year on his or her first day in office.

Jackson said part of his rationale for the bill was that LePage proposed and then signed into law a biennial budget two years ago that cut retirement benefits for state workers. When he introduced the bill last week, Jackson said he wanted to make the change for the future but worded his bill retroactively so it would apply to LePage.

“At a time when Gov. LePage and others are asking state employees to sacrifice, even at the expense of their own pensions which were promised to them when they signed their contracts, the governor should be held to the same standard,” said Jackson last week.

Outside Monday’s committee hearing, Jackson said he wished he’d had the opportunity to respond to Pease’s comments.

“I can’t get over that personal attack,” said Jackson. “I can’t understand why it’s not appropriate to reach back into a pension that no one else gets.”

Gerzofsky was the only committee member who opposed the ought not to pass motion.

“I think if we’re going to lead, we should lead by example,” said Gerzofsky. “If we’re going to take politics out of this, we ought to start by ourselves. If it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander.”

But Gerzofsky was rebuked by other lawmakers on the committee, including some Democrats. Chief among them was Rep. Terry Hayes, D-Buckfield, who said holding the governor singularly responsible for hurting state retirees with his biennial budget is not fair because the Legislature also voted in favor of it. She said she did not want to be “a pawn in some kind of political record poking a stick at the chief executive.”

“The governor did not affect state retirees and teachers on his own,” said Hayes. “We also voted on the budget. The governor cannot impact the retirement program without our help and we helped. This is political showmanship. This is a distraction. It does not behoove us. … This to me is trying to be a revisionist historian by suggesting that the governor did something horrible and we didn’t stop him and that’s not true.”

Rep. Anne Graham, D-North Yarmouth, who is co-chairman of the State and Local Government Committee, said she saw Jackson’s bill as a potential solution to an inequity and took issue with statements that votes in favor of LePage’s budget bill meant the people who cast them support cuts that hurt state workers.

“I voted for a complete budget,” she said. “I believe in our leadership and I believe that when the budget is fully vetted there are going to be parts of it that I hold my nose about. … Changing the Constitution is a huge deal, it’s a very big deal, and I would like to find a way to create fairness in our system in a different vehicle.”

In addition to Jackson’s bill, the State and Local Government Committee will hear a bill Monday afternoon introduced by Rep. Diane Russell, D-Portland, titled “An Act to Partially Fund Tax Breaks for the Wealthy by Eliminating Certain Gubernatorial Benefits.”

The bill would repeal the governor’s retirement allowance, eliminates his health plan eligibility and authorizes the state finance commissioner to sell the Blaine House, which is the state-owned governor’s mansion next to the State House, with the proceeds to benefit the General Fund.

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



FRANK EARLEY's picture

OH, The "Gall" of some people....

If this fool gets a pension after his one and only term in office. I'm running for "Governor" after he's out. Where else can you find a job, spend your entire time angering your colleagues, threatening not to do your job. Blackmailing the taxpayers and receiving free room and board to boot. Imagine sitting back and watching all the poor little people running around like a bunch of ants in an ant farm. Running to the polls to vote their feelings, only to be told that what they think is null and void. The Governor knows whats best for you. We pay our taxes in the hopes of a better way of life, not in this State. With severe cuts to funding to cities and towns, more and more service restrictions due to lack of funding, no more assistance to those who need help feeding their children or keeping their homes warm,
I could handle a job like this. Imagine, after four years of doing as little as possible, screwing as many poor, elderly, and sick people as I can get away with, I'm still going to get paid a monthly pension, thats even more than a typical disability check. Where do I sign up????????

JERRY ARIPEZ's picture

Pension Vesting have terms

On most kinds of pensions, vesting is established on a fifth year anniversary. Why is any elected official allowed any type of compensation unless they have done so. Why should the taxpayers have to fund their retirement when legislatures have not come close to achieving a full year on any term.

I recall that in years past vesting into a pension was 10 years, which made it a hardships for those to having to stay in that profession, before they could move forward to another profession.

NO body deserves a state funded pension unless they have served two terms or an total of 5 years for a Governor or 3 full terms for a rep being vested on the 5th year.

Just like the quitter Palin only serving two years whereas the title and any benefits should also be removed.

Noel Foss's picture


A partisan argument over a politically-based bill?! I cannot believe that the SJ would ever publish such obviously untrue nonsense!

Sheesh. With bills and bickering like this, it's no wonder nothing important ever gets done in Augusta.


The silly season

Oh, I don't know. Selling the Blaine house to pay off the hospital debt isn't a whole lot crazier than sitting on voter approved bonds because we are too poor for bonds but advocating bonds against future possible liquor sales and bonds for a prison and bonds for roads that do not have voter approval. And for my money cutting the size of government should start by cutting the bill for elected officials and their perks.


This is a completely stupid

This is a completely stupid over reaction....first there is no guarantee that LePage will not serve 2 complete terms. seems to be meant to bring things into a more balanced alignment....Third...regardless of whether it is a governor, a representative or a senator NONE of them need a retirement pension. They choose to run for office, get elected, get paid, lose an election, go back to the private sector...people in governmental positions do not need to have a pension they can get that from the private sector and leave government money for the running of the government not people who are doing nothing anymore.

GARY SAVARD's picture

At $1500 to $2000 per bill,

At $1500 to $2000 per bill, maybe someone should submit a bill that requires legislators that are complete idiots to foot the bill when they submit crap like this. The really sad thing about all of this is that because Maine has a gaggle of part time legislators, all we end up with in most cases are people that don't have to go to a full time job every day, unless we are fortunate enough to get qualified retirees and such. Maine would be better served with a much smaller and better paid legislature.

Jason Theriault's picture

Partial agree

I clicked agree. I disagree with the first part - that's why there are committees.

But I think a smaller, better paid congress in Maine would work better.

Jason Theriault's picture


This is stupid. Hey, while your at it, why don't you pass a bill called "Make LePage look like an ass act" which requires him to wear lederhosen.

There are serious issues to discuss, and putting forward such nonsense makes you, and any subsequent idea you put forward, look stupid.


Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...