Confirmed: Despite Claim, Palin's Pay As Mayor Of Wasilla Went Up
I've just obtained some records from the city of Wasilla that confirm that Sarah Palin's pay as mayor went up, despite her claim that she took a pay cut.
One thing Palin has frequently claimed as proof of her reform credentials is that she "took a pay cut" as Wasilla mayor. As I reported here yesterday, however, local Alaska press clippings seemed to show that this is only true in a very narrow sense.
The clippings indicate that while she did pass a pay-cut ordinance upon taking office, her pay actually went up during her overall tenure.
Now we have records from the city of Wasilla that confirm this. Here is the trajectory of her pay, according to the records:
Upon taking office on 10/14/1996: $64.20001/01/1997: Pay was cut from $64,200 to $61,200
06/01/1998: Pay rose from $61,200 to $68,000
07/01/1999: Pay cut again from $68,000 to $66,000
10/01/1999: Pay rose from $66,000 to $68,000
From late 1999 until the end of her mayoralty in 2002, records show, her pay stayed at $68,000 -- higher than the $64,200 it was when she started out, and significantly higher than the $61,200 she initially cut it to.
The records don't explain the mechanisms by which the pay shifts happened. As best as we can determine, the cuts were engineered by Palin herself through some sort of executive mechanism, and the raises were City Council-mandated hikes.
What's the upshot? Well, Palin's claim that she "took a pay cut" as mayor is true in a narrow sense. She came in and took a pay cut that she engineered herself.
But in a broader sense, the claim is an oversimplification that borders on misleading. The bottom line is that whatever her intentions, over the course of her mayoralty Palin's pay went up thousands of dollars and stayed higher for years, money which she presumably kept. (If any proof emerges that she donated it to charity or channeled it back into city coffers in some other way, we'll happily update.)
This isn't another Bridge to Nowhere. But it does fit a pattern here, where Palin burnishes her reform credentials by describing intentions as realities or otherwise boiling down the record into easily-digestible sound-bites that at best are half-truths, as this latest one has now proven to be.
The McCain campaign has declined to comment on the pay hikes.
We'll bring you the records themselves soon.
Late Update: The documentation is here. It's what the city of Wasilla's Human Resources Generalist will send to anyone who asks for documentation of Palin's pay.















She never tells the truth about anything.
September 19, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sure wish someone from one of those many colleges had surfaced! What was going on with that?
September 19, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bigottry all over on the GOP campaign.
One House, One Spouse.
http://www.cafepress.com/politics2go
September 19, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
If she ever graduated from college, I'm the Queen of the Gypsies.
September 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
My god, I hope we don't end up with a Gypsy Queen!
September 19, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
i think she got F's on everything and since she couldn't fire the teacher she just went to a different school...
Racially Biased Alert: Hate Group, “Blacks Against Obama” Interrupt Obama Rally Again
September 19, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, technically she did get a pay cut, 2 of them, of the course of her mayor-ship.
But it's kind of sad one of her mantras is actually a technicality. Don't look too close people!
September 19, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I would probably faint if she ever told the truth. So, just notify me if she ever tells the truth. Palin's claims and facts:
1, I cooperate with the investigation and then does not!
2. I said no to the bridge but didn't!
3. I will cooperate with the investigation then didn't.
4. I lowered my mayoral salary in Wasilla but the pay check just happened to be bigger.
5. I was against earmarks but we got lots of them when I was the governor.
So on and so on!!!!
September 19, 2008 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm shocked. SHOCKED!
You should send Andy Sullivan an e-mail about this. He's created quite the collection of Palinlies.
September 19, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I emailed Sully the other day and thanked him for the wonderful job he's been doing with all this.
September 19, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Dame's a serial liar.
September 19, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's not mavericky reform we can believe in.
September 19, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sexist. Disrespectful. Non-deferential. Liberal media.
September 19, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sexist how?
Isn't it just as disrespectful to continue to lie and obstruct?
Deferrential? What is she, the Pope?
Liberal media? "Liberal"? Really? You honestly think this word (much less "conservative") has any meaning any more?
yeesh
September 19, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have you listened to any of the Republican talking points in response to any critique of her??
September 19, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
MARC THE SNARK
September 19, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
$68,000 a year? I'll keep my job, thanks.
September 19, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't believe that the part-time mayor of Bumf*ck, AK deserves $60k+ a year! They should have just given her some WalMart gift cards and a nice Hallmark card.
September 19, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um... Are you earning McCain points?
September 19, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
she is fulfilling the legend she created about herself. she is living a lie and seems to think she is above scrunity and press coverage. her story is full of abuse of power and being complicit in unsavory political games. I love seeing her unfavorables go up everyday.
September 19, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup, Intrade should offer contracts for how high her unfavorables will go.
September 19, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
And had the town buy her a $24,000 SUV AND hired a full time "special assistant" at $40K+ to help her with her mayoral duties.
September 19, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus her $50,000 to turn her office space into something a madame of a house of negotiable affection could be proud of, without proper authorization.
September 19, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Off Topic and I don't know how new this ad is however here is Obama's counter-attack to the infanticide 527(?) ad - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6HLkySS388
September 19, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
So much for that Iowa poll showing it "tied" that state is offically off the map. If Minn and Wisc fall in line next few days I think we might be seeing the beginning of the end for pinocchio palian and Mcoutinleftfield
September 19, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
That ad definitely goes against the rule of thumb that says not to repeat your opponent's slurs, even in denying them.
Maybe it works because of all the LIAR and VILE plastering?
Rule of thumb about rules of thumb: You have to learn the rules well to know how to properly break them.
September 19, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops... That ad referenced the Obama spot that Jonze linked to, one comment above jessran's.
September 19, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Has anyone checked out the perks that were given to the mayor? Was she otherwise compensated for her actual payroll loss? Did she get an otherwise uneeded per deum? What is the full spectrum of her pay package?
INQUIRING MINDS...................
September 19, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry guys, this is kind of a shaky story. $64,200 in 1996 dollars is $68,127 in 1999 dollars, when her salary was only $68,000. Check it yourself.
It's not unreasonable to say she took a pay cut. This is a despicable person, but we've got to pick our battles.
September 19, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
agreed, this is a dead-ender if there ever is one.
September 19, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
The argument that going from $64,000 to $68,000 is actually a pay cut because of inflation is truly absurd.
Maintaining a salary of $64,000 from 1996 to 1999 would actually be a pay cut in inflation terms.
But sorry: claiming that 68000 is less than 64000 requires some...oh screw it. Claiming that is just plain ridiculous, like many of the other "claims" of Palin.
September 19, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
The argument that going from $64,000 to $68,000 is actually a pay cut because of inflation is truly absurd.
Agreed. Especially when there are so many folks who'd love to have this type of "pay cut."
September 19, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
College professors were not making that much! And for a part-time job... after there was a city manager! Give me a break!
September 19, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I KNOW! It's a total scam, but IOKIYAR, of course. Her "actual responsibilities" were farmed out to someone else and she was paid in full.
But the truth of the matter is that this hot mess freak show is incapbable of telling the truth. That she can lie as easily as the Bush/Cheney criminal enterprise--well it shows that when you don't stop the deceit, it will only get worse.
September 19, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I also heard tell she saved a lot of money by switching her car insurance to Geico . . .
September 19, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK - I love you!
September 20, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is salary information which seems to be good enough to support her claim that she took a pay cut. This is weak to tar and feather her with but its not enough to claim the reformer mantle either because the salary went back up and ultimately she did not object to this (I guess she gave up on reforming).
A $4,000 increase over six years this seems not too outrageous depending on how $68,000 compares to mayors of other towns of similar situation. What would be a more telling number is total compensation. We should be hearing about this soon.
September 19, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
At least she didn't say she took pay cuts.
September 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, at least she didn't say she took TWO pay cuts.
September 19, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
and meanwhile McWar is still pushing for privatizing social security, even today..
McWar = OUT OF TOUCH..
Sadly, I have no more words to define McWar
September 19, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
PowPow McCrazy
thems my words for him
September 20, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sure she took a cut...then hired a city manager.
"Ya know boss, I'd be willing to take a $10,000 a year pay cut for the good of the company if you'd be willing to hire a new guy to do all my work, and I'll just hang out and take credit for whatever goes right."
Think that would fly? Wanna buy a bridge?
Sarah Palin in the Whitehouse? "Thanks but no thanks."
September 19, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um,do we know who was hired to the City Manager job? Was it one of her guy or gal chums from elementary school? You know, maybe the kid who lied to dress up all fancy and play boss?
September 20, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't even 50,000 a little HIGH for a Mayor's job, especially one of a town the size of 6000?
I live in a town of about 20,000 and our mayor doesn't get NEAR that.
September 19, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, y'all can protest all you want that there is no there there with this story - obviously there is.
It's part of the overwhelming pattern of near-pathological lying out of this woman.
I know this woman - I used to have a good friend just like this - except not a RR wackjob. She was ambitious and a pathological liar.
September 19, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is precisely the point. In and of itself, this story could be debated (see above), even if you'd have to do some parsing and dicing to do so.
However, it's another example of Palin misrepresenting reality. Whether she does it on purpose or does it unconsciously isn't relevant to me. What's relevant is that you cannot believe much of what she says.
September 19, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
The person I knew who best fits this mold was a fundamentalist cult leader who was storing franks 'n beans agin the End Times. Though she was not a Rapturite per se, she was in contact with an alien being known as Alf, her source of prophesy, and Alf prayed to jaaaaysus.
Not much else to do in Cement City, MI...
McLiar has managed to paint himsef into the same exceedingly dangerous corner where telling the truth would cause a physchological 10.0 earthquake, and THIS is reason the denial exists.
September 19, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Near-pathological Lying? I'd say we're definitely in the pathological lying category! I'd say we're in the sociopathic category here. Sociopathic liar!
September 19, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even with McCain who can see it in his face, the eyes blinking, he is not entirely comfortable spewing slime and lies (but he still does it).
Palin on the hand, nice and natural, from day one: "Thanks but no thanks."
September 19, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I noticed the blinking too; pretty blatant . . .
September 19, 2008 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena- SP reminds me many women I have known who are so fricken angry that they were born female (they have no clue) and thus are somehow diminished as humans. So they lie and claw and cheat; everything is always about them and revolves around their daily personal drama. I am sure that menfolk have their version of this, but the model I am familiar with is the female. they are capable of any atrocity.
September 20, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
According to my math, based on the months Palin worked at each salary level (and assuming October 2002 the end of her employment...I couldn't confirm this in a quick google glance)--
Sarah made $403,737 during her six years as mayor.
If she had not taken a "paycut" she would have made only $385,200.
That's 72 months at the original salary of $64,200 ($5350 per month) versus...
3 @ $5350 ($64,200)
5 @ $5100 ($61,200)
13 @ $5667 ($68,000)
3 @ $5500 ($66,000)
48@$5667 ($68,000)
Her average monthly salary after pay cut was $5607.46. That's a 4.8% increase.
$403,737 is also 4.8% more than $385,200
Her final annual salary of $68,000 is a 5.9% raise from the starting salary of $64,200.
September 19, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, and the average inflation rate from 1996-2002 was 2.32%...
September 19, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Annual or over the entire period?
September 19, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
not exactly mathematically perfect, but I averaged the annual CPI inflation rates from 1996-2002 based off of stats from InflationData.com
September 19, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I got $396,916.
03@ $5350 ($64,200)
17@ $5100 ($61,200)
13@ $5667 ($68,000)
03@ $5500 ($66,000)
36@ $5667 ($68,000)
September 19, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
um...yeah...you're are quite right. I missed a year in there. No math on Fridays for me :)
September 19, 2008 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I recieved this email today-
STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES
Thought Provoking. A lot of Americans have become so insulated from reality that they imagine that America can suffer defeat Without any inconvenience to themselves.
Pause a moment, reflect back.
These events are actual events from history.
They really happened!!!
Do you remember?
1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by
Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40.
2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
4. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by
Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by
Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
8. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by
Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by
Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take down t he World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by Muslim male extremists between the of 17 and 40.
12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against
Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by-- you guessed it-- Muslim male extremists between the ages of 17 and 40.
No, I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you?
So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing us,
Airport securit y screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people...
Absolutely No Profiling!
They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winner and former Governor Joe Foss, But leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 and 40
Alone lest they be guilty of profiling.
According to The Book of Revelation:
The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power,
He will destroy everything.
And Now:
For the award winning Act of Stupidity Of all times the People of America want to elect, to the most Powerful position on the face of the Planet -- The Presidency of the United states of America
A Muslim Male in his 40s!
Say what you want, he was born a Muslim (and is still considered a Muslim by his family), to a Muslim father. His mother remarried, yep another Muslim so what makes you think she didn`t raise him as a Muslim? His African family is Muslim, he attended a Muslim school. Have the American People completely lost their Minds, or just their Power of Reason?
I'm sorry but I refuse to take a chance on the'unknown' candidate who will probably appoint as many as 4 Supreme Court Judges.
'Stupid Is As Stupid Does'
September 19, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whee! Still panicking, aren't you?
September 19, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
"STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES"
Your posting that trash proves your point.
September 19, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
For anyone who might believe this nonsense (you can read, not just cut and past, right Dem Billc?)- check this out:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp
September 19, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
Holy shit. This is the best one yet.
September 19, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jeez Louise, you must be choking on that fearshit sandwich.
Even if he was a practicing Muslim: SO WHAT?
There is no personal record of behavior to support any of your rediculous claims.
You are simply scared. Wind yourself back to that; it needs your attention, clearly.
September 19, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's scarier than DemBillC rantings is that there is a woman in my office who believes some of this shit. She was like, "Who knows if he is a Muslim or not..." And I was like, "First of all. He's not. But, even if he was, so what?" And she said, "So what? After what those people did to us, I'd never vote for a Muslim."
I then let out a sigh and asked her to please leave my office.
September 19, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, "the Muslim" is doing pretty well:
http://www.dailykos.com/trendlines
September 19, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You might also like this meta-poll from the Princeton Election Consortium.
It gives Obama a 50-EV margin of victory as of today. It also has a few other interesting analyses. Worth checking out.
September 19, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Likey very much! Thank you sir.
September 19, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sweet! Thanks!
September 19, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's rough. I am related to the same Ilk, and worse. Intellectual laziness is at the heart of it. In 60 seconds with Google, the proof would be enough to convince anyone.
Anyone seeking the truth.
I frankly do not understand the mindset that permits one's self to freely ignore facts, even if it costs reputation, career, or even lives.
This isn't a Red/Blue election, it's now a goddammned choice between True and False.
September 19, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, chill out! DBC's not listening; he's spamming.
His appearances are really just opportunities for some of us to hoot and howl. Taking anything he says seriously is just playing into his game.
September 19, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's official. He's lost it.
This is not just panicking. This troll has shitting his pants.
September 19, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, that Depends™...
September 19, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ouch. ROFL! Dude, you're good.
September 19, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ya know, every person who shot and killed an American President is a White Christian between the ages of 17 and 40. Maybe we should keep track of them too.
September 19, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
It the Last Gasp of the same crew that gave us the McLiar/Sarahcuda Zombie Train. The sun is setting on that power base.
I don't think McPastIt is actually make the campaign's decisions. It's such a clusterfuck. They act like teenagers who get caught and don't realize it.
September 19, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
And what about OK City Bombing. Can't leave them around manure.
September 19, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've seen these emails since March. Every time Obama starts to pull ahead the troglodytes come out of their caves and power on their PC's and spread their vile across this planet.
September 19, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
It comes as quite a shock that Muslim males dominate the Muslim world. And by "shock" I mean "tautology."
September 19, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh my Gawd. Bravo Bill! A+.
September 19, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, please talk to Josh about banning this goddamn spamming cut and paste liar.
September 19, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen, sister.
September 19, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
send them emails about that!
talk at talkingpointsmemo dot com
September 19, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I second that motion.
September 19, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, then: Tena, you've been volunteered to e-mail Josh and get him to ban this foul-smelling spammer. :-)
September 19, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
O why do I always open my big mouth, even metaphorically?
LOL!
September 19, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
She HAS to make shit up. What else does she have???
September 19, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
BOOBIES!
(clap hands together)
September 19, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
YEAH!
September 19, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh dear little boy, did you not ever study elementary logic?
Some Muslims kill people
Person X is a former Muslim
September 19, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg Sargent should have noted that the pay raise was well under inflation. I see from an online calculator that prices rose by roughly 14% between 1996 and 2002 - much more than her 5.9% hike.
Sargent might have compared the generosity of Palin's compensation package to other mayors.
This story could have been handled better.
Inflation calculator:
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
That said, Sargent is usually an awesome reporter. And the inaccuracy of Palin's characterization of her tenure is worth noting.
September 19, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's what I got from Greg's story:
Sarah Palin says: "I took a pay cut".
Greg Sargent discovers that Sarah Palin's salary in 1996 was 64,000. He further discovers that Sarah Palin's salary when she left office was 68,000.
Unless some fundamental aspect of basic algebra have been altered, 68,000 > 64,000. Hence, the dubiousness of the "pay cut" claim. So how is this an issue of how Sargent handled this?
I'm curious.
September 19, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I smell desperation along with the sulphur smell of the mcSoulMates and Partners in Lying.
September 19, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aye and indeed. With the time left, the hammering of it home is going to be just devastating. It is an exceedlingly simple argument to make: hang those liars. It sort of trumps everything else.
No reward for electoral failure. There will be no escape this time.
September 19, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
PBS has an online poll on whether you think Palin is qualified to be VP. Wanna weigh in?
http://www.pbs.org/cgi-registry/poll/poll.pl
September 19, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
That link doesn't work.
September 19, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's an inflation calculator that operates on a monthly basis:
http://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Calculators/Inflation_Rate_Calculator.asp#results
Between October 1996 and October 2002 prices rose by 14.5%.
Between October 1996 and October 1999, the date of her last raise, prices rose by 6.3%, more than the cumulative 5.9% pay hike.
----
But:
Is this pay level a little generous for a town of 5000, given that she hired an administrator as well? After all, Palin appeared to have fewer responsibilities than her predecessor.
September 19, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
So it's a half-truth.. That's progress we can believe in.
September 19, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unless some fundamental aspect of basic algebra have been altered, 68,000 > 64,000. Hence, the dubiousness of the "pay cut" claim. So how is this an issue of how Sargent handled this?
Because decent policy analysis typically addresses the purchasing power of the dollar. And Palin gave herself a pay cut, before arranging/acceding to pay raises.
Now admittedly this is a personnel matter, and in common speech pay cut/pay raises are not stated in inflation-adjusted terms. But I'm saying that if Palin's salary increases are substantially lower than inflation, then it's worth noting in an article such as this.
More generally, inflation-adjusted numbers are the only sensible way of evaluating budgetary policy, and it's best to get into the habit of using them.
Example:
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2008/09/platform_blogging.php
September 19, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe I'm just stupid, but inflation aside, 68,000 still is greater than 64,000. Yes?
September 19, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
If she wanted to spin a story, she should have talked about what she would have been making under typical merit increase scenarios. A 3.5% increase year-over-year would be pretty typical. Assuming she started at $64,200, then after six years, she'd be somewhere around $82,000. Then again, maybe they froze merits and she got none along with everyone else...now there a good story.
September 19, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
So it's a half-truth.. That's progress we can believe in.
Bingo. It's a stretch, not an outright lie. It's best to keep these things straight, you know.
:-)
September 19, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
She took two pay cuts. What's the problem? Of all the things Palin's done or not done, don't you have anything more important to talk about?
September 19, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you missed the point as well as the explanation up thread.
She lied. Again. Apparently every word that comes out of her mouth is a lie including "a" "and" and "the."
September 19, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha! I was just about to post that same line myself, Tena. It's more true of Palin than it ever was of Mary McCarthy's target.
September 19, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Over at RCP, Dvorak claims to have rebutted this post as such
Of course, like most Palin supporters, he has his facts wrong. According to the inflation calculator at http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl, $64,200 in 1996 was equivalent to $68,169.02 in 1999. So, even adjusting for inflation, her pay was only "cut" $169.02.
September 19, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
She took a pay cut before she took a pay raise.
September 19, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sexist? Please explain using more than one word. If you make a claim like that, you must explain how, in your opinion, that is sexist.
September 19, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
You've gotta to be kidding.
This is an issue?
Pure Dem desperation.
Palin's approval ratings will score when she embarrasses Biden in the debate.At that point there will be no time for Batman and Robin to recover.
September 19, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
What subejects is she going to embarrass Biden on? Perhaps her knowledge of shooting wolves from a helicopter? He can't match her on that.
Or maybe she'll reveal her vast knowledge of geopolitical and socioeconomic policy.
HAHAHAHA LULZORZ
September 19, 2008 11:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to the inflation calculator at http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl, $64,200 in 1996 was equivalent to $68,169.02 in 1999. So, even adjusting for inflation, her pay was only "cut" $169.02.
For those keeping score, this turns on whether you compare 1996 and 1999 - the date of the last pay raise, or 1996 and 2002 - the date that Palin left office.
I quote myself:
Between October 1996 and October 2002 prices rose by 14.5%.
Between October 1996 and October 1999, the date of her last raise, prices rose by 6.3%, more than the cumulative 5.9% pay hike.
Apparently every word that comes out of her mouth is a lie including "a" "and" and "the."
No, sometimes she just BSs us. After all, she did give herself a pay cut, before she acceded to a pay raise.
Incidentally, I find Palin's lack of experience to be appalling, but that says more about the guy who chose her.
Her flat-out and uncorrected lies regarding the Bridge to Nowhere are deeply disturbing though. Modern conservatives who look the other way on this matter lack a certain moral stamina, in my view.
September 19, 2008 5:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am on the Davis (California) city council, and have just finished a two year term as mayor. Although Davis is about twelve times the size that Wasilla was when Palin became Mayor, we are paid somewhere around $6,000 a year. This is true of most small cities in California.
Mayors of small towns usually make a real salary only if they handle the day-to-day administrative duties. But I have read that Palin hired a city manager shortly after she became mayor.
At that point, her salary should have been turned into a minimal stipend. Again, this is how most small towns compensate their mayors.
I hope someone will write more extensively about this issue.
September 19, 2008 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is my question, too. My brother is involved in his town government (pop. 7,000) and gets mileage expenses if he has to travel. He's been asked to run for town supervisor - the equivalent of a mayor - and it pays $6,000 plus some health insurance coverage. Thats in New York state. Palin's $68,000/year plus expenses and a car for the mayor of a town of 6,000 people is a very big salary. That mayorship doesn't deal with schools or fire departments which are under a regional authority.
Why is the Mayor of Wassila paid so much?
September 20, 2008 1:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Umm, as with The Bridge and The Investigation, The Guv was FOR giving herself a pay cut until she was against it ...
September 20, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
This could simply be the difference of a few thousand dollars a year.
However, in the absence of the Palin federal tax returns, I can speculate that there may be more to this story.
I assume that Sarah and Todd file joint federal tax returns. Todd's income is variable, depending on how many hours he works for BP and depending on how much money he makes as a commercial fisherman. It is possible that by taking a few thousand dollars off her own income, Sarah Palin shifted the family joint income into a lower tax bracket? This yearly income variability, in both directions, is unusual for someone with a job like her's.
Sarah Palin also got huge amounts of money in non-taxable "expenses" such as the per diem for sleeping in her own house.
I could be wrong, but I smell a tax dodge.
Where are the Palin Federal Tax returns. You need those to put this story in perspective.
September 20, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
A few things:
Alaska has no state income or sales tax. The people there don't pay as close attention to what the government is spending.
Local areas rely on a property tax. However, towns can implement a sales tax. Wasilla did this during Palin's tenure. And it was a pretty big 2.5% tax when no tax existed before. Fairbanks has no city sales tax and I don't think Anchorage does either.
Inflation rates may be different in Alaska, it was my experience that prices didn't change as much. Gas prices hardly fluctuated at all when I lived there.
Alaska does have a higher cost of living, salaries are higher there than other places I have lived.
One last thing, but I am not sure this will make any difference. The Stupid is as Stupid Does poster above said this: "The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent..." Well, I am leery of arguing with a fool, but there weren't any Muslims (nor would there be for hundreds of years) when Revelations was written. So, who is the stupid one?
September 20, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dood... Revelations is a PROPHETIC work. Didn't you know that?
September 21, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the other people with their hands on the levers of power in Alaska should really be worried. It must be occurring to some of them that no matter how the presidential election goes the world as they know it is going to change for the worse at the beginning of the new year. The one sure thing that the must be aware of is that the new congress is going to be a much more Democratic (big D) body. They must conclude that the powers that be in Washington have been paying attention while the prime spokesman for the state of Alaska has been systematically demonizing federal dollars that have been sent to Alaska. It would be logical to assume that all things being equal... things will get more equal and Alaska will get less.
From what I am reading... Alaska is about to be introduced to the 'reality based' economy. The state is going to have to start paying for a bigger share of its own infrastructure. The days of Uncle Sucker picking up the tab are numbered. The players that rose to the top under the old paradigm need to update their play book or get out of the game. This is going to lead to a realignment of the power centers in the state.
And... since the Alaska constitution specifically and explicitly allows for a electoral recall... the good people of Alaska don't need to wait two years to start re-balancing the ship.
She should remember... All politics is local.
September 21, 2008 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink