Why a Congressman Wants to Take a $104,000 Pay Cut

FILE-In this Friday, May 31, 2013, file photo U.S. Rep. Mike Michaud, D-Maine, appears at an event in Brewer, Maine. Michaud is forming an exploratory committee and is beginning fundraising for a possible challenge of Gov. Paul LePage in 2014, taking a jab at the blunt-spoken Republican incumbent on Thursday, June 13, 2013, by saying Maine needs a governor who "can restore civility in Augusta."
National Journal
Michael Catalini
See more stories about...
Michael Catalini
Aug. 20, 2013, 3:30 p.m.

Con­gress­men who leave the Cap­it­ol to cash in for high­er-pay­ing jobs are a bit of a Wash­ing­ton cliché. So when Rep. Mi­chael Michaud says he wants to leave of­fice to be­come Maine’s next gov­ernor — and take a $104,000 pay cut — he stands out.

In­deed, the Maine Demo­crat wants to leave be­hind his $174,000-a-year con­gres­sion­al salary in a seat he’s won by healthy mar­gins in the last four elec­tions for a chance to serve as the coun­try’s low­est-paid chief ex­ec­ut­ive, at $70,000 a year.

Why would any­one do that?

“Good ques­tion,” said Michaud, 58. “A lot of people are ask­ing me about that. Well, I nev­er got in­to pub­lic ser­vice to make money. I got in pub­lic ser­vice to help the people of Maine.”

That’s es­sen­tially what his fel­low Demo­crats say as well. The de­cision, they ar­gue, fits with his blue-col­lar back­ground and a le­gis­lat­ive ca­reer that began at the state House of Rep­res­ent­at­ives in 1980 and con­tin­ued in the state Sen­ate in 1994 be­fore he ever got to Wash­ing­ton.

For nearly three dec­ades, Michaud, who did not at­tend col­lege, punched a clock as a mill work­er at the Great North­ern Pa­per Com­pany in rur­al East Millinock­et, Maine. He began in the “pa­per room,” where pulp trans­formed in­to pa­per, then moved to the ship­ping de­part­ment. When he was in the Le­gis­lature, he com­muted from Au­gusta to work overnight shifts on the week­end. He’s the kind of law­maker who could cred­ibly con­vene a “beer sum­mit.”

“I don’t think there’s a com­pel­ling fin­an­cial reas­on to get in­to this race,” said Mike Cuzzi, a Maine Demo­crat­ic strategist whose wife is a former Michaud cam­paign man­ager. “Mike de­serves a lot of cred­it in my mind for hav­ing the cour­age and the where­with­al to get in­to this race, leav­ing the safety of that con­gres­sion­al seat as well as the salary that comes with it.”

Ul­ti­mately, Michaud ac­know­ledges the fin­an­cial risk in run­ning, but waves the salary ques­tion aside. Un­like many oth­er mem­bers of Con­gress, though, whose net worth is es­tim­ated in the mil­lions, Michaud does not have that kind of wealth.

Michaud’s net worth in 2010, ac­cord­ing to data ana­lyzed by The Wash­ing­ton Post, was $524,000, nearly $200,000 be­low the me­di­an and sig­ni­fic­antly be­low the $6.5 mil­lion av­er­age net worth of House mem­bers in 2011, ac­cord­ing to the Cen­ter for Re­spons­ive Polit­ics.

Of course, the gov­ernor’s man­sion does have its perks.

For one, a gov­ernor has more power com­pared to a mem­ber of the minor­ity party in Con­gress, even con­sid­er­ing that Michaud is the rank­ing Demo­crat on the House Vet­er­ans’ Af­fairs Com­mit­tee, said James Melch­er, an as­so­ci­ate polit­ic­al sci­ence pro­fess­or at the Uni­versity of Maine.

It also of­fers ex­ec­ut­ive ex­per­i­ence that, to­geth­er with Michaud’s Wash­ing­ton years, could bring luc­rat­ive of­fers should he de­cide to leave pub­lic life.

There’s also a fin­an­cial safety net for re­tir­ing law­makers. Mem­bers of Con­gress are ves­ted in their fed­er­al pen­sions after five years of ser­vice. Elec­ted in 2002, Michaud would qual­i­fy for a pen­sion, join­ing 527 re­tired mem­bers of Con­gress who were re­ceiv­ing fed­er­al pen­sions as of Oc­to­ber 2012. Av­er­age pen­sion rates vary from about $71,500 to $40,600 a year, de­pend­ing on a num­ber of factors, ac­cord­ing to the Con­gres­sion­al Re­search Ser­vice.

Then there’s the po­ten­tial that Michaud will be a polit­ic­al god­send for his party.

Maine Demo­crats have suffered a string of statewide de­feats, in­clud­ing los­ing three-way races for gov­ernor in 2010 and for Sen­ate in 2012. The pres­sure, then, was on to re­cruit a top-tier can­did­ate, and Michaud provided that.

“Mike gives them that blue-col­lar im­age, and the name is cer­tainly well known in the 2nd Con­gres­sion­al Dis­trict,” said Philip E. Har­ri­m­an, a former Re­pub­lic­an state sen­at­or who served with Michaud in the Le­gis­lature.

The race is shap­ing up to be a con­test pit­ting Michaud, who an­nounced last week, against vul­ner­able Re­pub­lic­an in­cum­bent Paul LePage and wealthy in­de­pend­ent Eli­ot Cut­ler, who fin­ished second to LePage in 2010, beat­ing Demo­crat­ic can­did­ate Libby Mitchell by al­most 100,000 votes.

“If Mike did not run, there was a pretty good chance that the Demo­crats would prob­ably come in third again,” Har­ri­m­an said.

To Demo­crats, it’s an open ques­tion wheth­er Cut­ler’s voters will back him again in 2014. Polit­ic­al watch­ers in both parties also agree that Cut­ler’s can­did­acy cuts in­to Michaud’s mar­gin more than LePage’s. Demo­crats point out that LePage’s path to vic­tory re­quires Cut­ler and Michaud to “de­vour each oth­er,” as Cuzzi put it.

Har­ri­m­an al­lots a base of about 30 per­cent to LePage and Michaud, and 25 per­cent to Cut­ler. So, Har­ri­m­an cal­cu­lates, that leaves the three can­did­ates fight­ing for about 15 per­cent of the vote.

“Michaud’s op­por­tun­ity is to con­vince people that a vote for Cut­ler is a wasted vote,” he said.

Michaud is op­tim­ist­ic he can cut in­to Cut­ler’s sup­port, though he vows he will not run a neg­at­ive cam­paign.

“Yes, Eli­ot came in second, but the Demo­crat­ic can­did­ate was plum­met­ing in the polls about three weeks out in the elec­tion and there was nervous­ness,” Michaud said. “It wasn’t that they really be­lieved in Eli­ot. About a third of Eli­ot’s sup­port­ers are there be­cause they don’t like the gov­ernor.”

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Maher Weighs in on Bernie, Trump and Palin
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.

Source:
×