Members of the Kansas House Appropriations Committee who voted to exempt their own legislative employees from statewide salary cuts apparently are in denial.

First, their action indicates they don’t understand, or don’t care, that bosses all across the state value their state employees just as much as the legislators value theirs. Second, they apparently are too dim to understand the public relations ramifications of imposing $19 million in salary cuts on other state employees while exempting their own staff members.

“That is the least we can do to show our support,” Rep. Sharon Schwartz, R-Washington, said of the legislative pay decision. “I don’t see how we can carry on our work without these people.”

Do the legislators who voted in favor of this proposal think that leaders in state agencies across the state aren’t also wondering how they can possibly continue to provide the same level of service with reduced funding that likely will result in reduced staffing levels? The legislators obviously expect all other state entities to tighten their belts and do more with less, but they are unwilling to take such steps in their own operations.

The committee members even approved budget increases for some of their support agencies, such as the Legislative Research Department, the Revisor of Statutes and the Division of Post Audit. Although some committee members pointed out the irony of increasing funding for agencies that work directly for legislators while cutting funding for other state salaries, a majority of members defended the cuts. For instance, they said, the Legislative Research Department needs to be able to hire more workers next year to help legislators with the redistricting process. Again, if state agencies across the state are being required to tighten their belts, why shouldn’t the Legislature do the same?

The budget approved by the committee provides for 7.5 percent pay cuts for legislators, justices and judges, statewide elected officials, statutory agency heads and all other state employees with annual salaries above $100,000. Pay cuts for those making between $40,000 and $100,000 a year would be implemented on a sliding scale, and, thankfully, there would be no cuts for those earning less than $40,000.

If these cuts are justified for everyone else, why are they not justified for legislative staff? What message are legislators sending by voting in favor of such cuts for everyone else, while holding their own employees harmless and actually allowing their own support agencies to hire more staff. If legislators are unwilling to share the pain of state salary cuts, they should think again about imposing those cuts on others.