Does SC’s top lawyer deserve a bigger retirement plan? How about $68K more?”
The retirement benefits for the state attorney general would improve, under a proposal sitting in the House.
Lawmakers are considering a bill to move the attorney general into the more lucrative Judges and Solicitors Retirement System and out of the South Carolina Retirement System.
It’s a move that would cost the state an additional $95,000 a year, plus a one time cost of $1.1 million to cover the additional unfunded liability.
The attorney general’s retirement benefits would increase by $68,000 a year.
In late 2022, the state increased the salary of most of its statewide elected officials including raising the attorney general salary to $208,000 from $92,000 in an effort to encourage more qualified candidates to run for office.
The retirement system move is in the same spirit.
“Nobody wants to vote for a pay raise, up there, it’s all about politics, but most of the time, you get what you pay for. There are a lot of people who run for public office, but they’ve got to work, they’ve got a regular job and they’re not afforded some of the possibilities we are,” said state Rep. Jackie Hayes, D-Dillon.
The attorney general’s office is supportive of the legislation.
“The Attorney General is the chief prosecutor of the state and has supervisory authority over all the solicitors. It just makes sense for them to all be on the same pension plan,” the office said in a statement.
House Ways and Means members added full time masters in equity to the pension system, a move which would set the retirement system back $17 million.
Still, Ways and Means Committee members had concerns of increasing the costs on the pension system which is underfunded.
“I don’t think it’s fair, I don’t think it’s right, it’s troublesome to me,” said state Rep. Leon Stavrinakis, D-Charleston. “We got to understand that these decisions cost a lot of money not just, the person could transfer some money in, but it costs taxpayers’ money when we do this, sooner or later it’s got to get paid.”
Others are concerned about having a bill that is perceived to benefit just one person.
“We’ve got a billion dollars unfunded liability right here. I don’t think anybody in Irmo, Chapin or anywhere in the state is sitting around going ‘you know what, our A.G. needs a better retirement plan.’ I’m sorry to be the turd in the punch bowl here,” state Rep. Nathan Ballentine, R-Richland, said. “I just got a problem (that) we would do one thing for one individual in this manner.”
An effort to add magistrates to the legislation failed in the Ways and Means Committee, but adding magistrates was an effort to avoid having legislation just for one person. However, it would have been an additional cost for counties.
“If you want to attract good people or more importantly you want to keep good people you have to compensate them at levels they could be compensated if they were not doing that particular job. I’m with you in not singling out anybody,” said House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford, D-Richland.
