The saga of Newport News Delegate Phil Hamilton has the blogosphere scratching its collective heads on what should be done with the General Assembly. The body, considered “the oldest continuous law-making body in the New World,” is a part-time affair, meeting in the winter months.

I have long advocated for a full-time legislature, most recently in conjunction with the Hamilton affair.

As I argued more than three years ago, I believe that we are past the point of having a part-time legislature. Virginia is no longer an agricultural society, needing our legislature to meet between planting seasons. And let’s be honest: even though the legislature formally meets for certain sessions each year, there are many more days in which service is required, particularly for committee meetings.

The paltry salary – about $17,000 – despite the demands on the legislators’ time eliminates far too many from the pool. And more than that, it puts in place a system of entitlement that permeates Virginia far more than anyone is willing to admit: high profile appointments or elections to state jobs that allow legislators to “retire,” draw big salaries and then boost their retirement pay when they do finally retire.

Waldo Jaquith – independent of my post – came to eerily similar conclusions.

And how much do we pay legislators for performing this duty that is the centerpiece of their lives?$17,640. That’s the annual salary for members of the House of Delegates. By my math, that’s something like twelve bucks an hour. I know people who make better money assembling sandwiches at Bodo’s.

[...]

Generally speaking, for a legislator to live within the minimal ethical boundaries established by the General Assembly, he must be a) an attorney b) independently wealthy or c) poor. Hamilton clearly had grown tired of option C, and figured that the state owed him for all of the time he’d put in for the public good. Had Hamilton done the correct thing and retired from his seat to earn some more money, he would have been in good company. I’ve never made a study of it, but it seems to me that a great many members of the legislature have stepped down because they simply couldn’t afford it anymore.

Sean Kenney, prompted by Waldo’s post, comes to a different conclusion.

The problem isn’t one of part-time/full-time lawmakers.  Nor is the problem that of self-sufficient farmers vs. self-serving individuals taking slices out of the public trust.  The problem is the culture, that somehow legislators are expected and somehow entitled to a slice of the pie.  Let’s face it, when you have so many people at the trough, with so much money being squeezed out of taxpayers and doled back out, is it so hard to see the temptation?

I would prescribe the exact opposite — avoid the near occasion of sin.  Personally, I would shorten the session.  And I’d reduce every delegate’s and senator’s pay to zero and cut their staff to nothing.  Why?  Because I do believe that public service is just that — a service to the public.

… If you aren’t personally successful — at least enough to take 60 days out of your schedule — then your focus should be on your family or career.

Jim Hoeft isn’t quite sure that we need to do anything just yet.

Therefore, I’d like to first see an investigation across the board in the GA to see if I’m right.

How widespread are these deals?

That’s the logical first step. Before we begin using Hamilton’s example to leap to conclusions about the nature and compensation of service in the General Assembly – and call for widespread reform of a 400 year institution – we should probably have a firm understanding of what we’re dealing with first.

Hoeft may get his wish, depending on what the federal probe into the Hamilton affair uncovers. But it is clear from the discussion that our current system is not working.