HARRISBURG -- The middle-of-the-night, 16 percent salary increase state legislators gave themselves this month made them the second-highest-paid lawmakers in the nation, but salaries are just one part of the generous compensation package they receive.

		Related coverage Online graphic: See more information about the legislative pay and benefits. State boosts in minimum wage spark debate

On top of their salaries, Pennsylvania lawmakers, like their counterparts in other states, receive car allowances, daily reimbursements for when they are in session, bonuses for many committee assignments and rich pension and health-care plans.

The raise from $69,647 a year to $81,050, puts the 203 Pennsylvania House members and 50 senators just behind California lawmakers, whose pay is now $99,000 but will increase to nearly $111,000 in December.

Legislative leaders, such as the House speaker, Senate president pro tem, House and Senate Republican and Democratic leaders, party whips, caucus chairmen, and committee chairmen and vice chairmen, will benefit even more, because their salaries will go up as much as 34 percent, topping out at $145,463 a year.

The monthly car lease costs state taxpayers up to $650 a month. Lawmakers say they need reliable transportation to get to and from meetings at the Capitol, where they get free parking, and to conduct legislative business in their districts.

"Per diem" reimbursements are worth up to $128 per day, covering food and lodging on days when legislators are in session.

Only legislators who live more than 50 miles from Harrisburg get the full per diem, which includes $81 a night for lodging and $47 a day for food and incidentals.

Those within the 50-mile radius get just the $47 a day.

The per diem allowance is smaller than that given in a couple of other big states. California legislators get $138 a day, as do those in New York. When state business brings New York lawmakers to the Big Apple, where prices are much higher than in Albany, the per diem jumps to $244. Major League Baseball players don't get a per diem for lodging, but they do get $80.50 a day for food.

Pennsylvania legislators also enjoy generous pension benefits. They're based on a lawmaker's three top-earning years, which obviously will grow based on the new, higher salary.

The pension amount is based on a complicated formula determined by the State Employee Retirement System.

One example would be a legislator who served 20 years at the Capitol. Under the current salary of $69,647, he or she would get a pension of about $41,000 a year. Under the new salary of $81,050, that retiree would get about $48,000 a year.

If that legislator were a chairman of one of the 40 or so committees in the House and Senate, he or she would now be making a base salary of $89,100. So that person's pension would jump to $53,460 a year.

For 2004, according to the state Department of Labor and Industry, the statewide average wage in Pennsylvania was $38,532. The average Pennsylvanian would receive considerably less per year after retirement.

The new formula for legislative salaries is based on their counterparts in Congress, who earn $162,000 a year. Rank-and-file members in Harrisburg will earn 50 percent of Congress. People in leadership posts get additional percentage increases, up to a high of $145,463 for House Speaker John Perzel, of Philadelphia, and Senate President Pro Tem Robert Jubelirer, of Altoona. General Assembly salaries will increase whenever Congress increases its pay.

In addition to cars, per diems and pensions, there are major medical benefits that cost the state $669 a month per legislator; dental benefits, $72 a month; vision, $17.30 a month; prescription drug coverage, $258.47 a month; a group life insurance policy with a death benefit of up to $50,000, $10.48 a month; and long-term care in a nursing home or assisted living facility, $70.17 a month.

There are small co-payments for doctor visits and drugs, said officials at the Bipartisan Management Committee, which administers the benefits program.

There are also "unvouchered expenses," where a lawmaker is reimbursed for work-related expenses but doesn't have to show a receipt.

This is the method legislators have devised for themselves to receive the additional $11,400 in salary until the raise officially takes effect in December 2006, after the next election. Unvouchered expenses typically are used for such purchases as paper, copiers or other equipment needed for a legislator's office.

The unvouchered expense method is being used because the state constitution doesn't permit lawmakers to raise their salary during a current term. But, according to two court cases in the 1980s, they can take the additional money in the form of expenses.

State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-Cranberry, who voted against the raise, said he disliked it both on principle and procedure.

To get the salary increase for the next 14 months, he said, legislators must sign up for an unvouchered expense account. Metcalfe and about a dozen other legislators have said they won't sign up, so their higher salaries won't start until after the November 2006 election.

"I don't think we should vote for our own pay raises, and I don't think it's proper to get it through the voucher system," he said.

He said now wasn't the correct time to increase public officials' salaries when legislators took no action to reduce the state's corporate net income tax, one of the highest in the nation at 9.9 percent, or remove a 5 percent tax on cell phones or reduce the 3.07 percent personal income tax rate.

Metcalfe said he went on a Pittsburgh radio talk show last week and callers were angry about the pay raise. Call-in shows across the state have been bombarded by callers complaining about the raises, some before they were enacted and many more since.

Like many newspapers around the state, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has gotten dozens of letters on the pay raise. Every letter writer opposed the raise except Gov. Ed Rendell, who thought officials deserved it.

Metcalfe said, "We've had quite a bit of contact from constituents stopping into our district office or calling our Harrisburg office. Nobody has called to say they're in favor of it."

Although they didn't carry the day, legislators opposed to the pay raise were numerous in both chambers. The Senate vote was close, 27-23, one over the bare minimum of 26 votes needed. The House vote was 119-79.

Like Metcalfe, a few other legislators who voted against the raise have said they won't take it. Some who did vote for it say they'll donate it to charity or nonprofit groups or scholarships for teens. While lawmakers will have to pay higher federal income taxes on their higher salaries, they could benefit from tax deductions from such donations.

Some legislators contend they voted for the pay package because it benefits 1,039 judges, from the Supreme Court to the magisterial district judge level, as well as Rendell and about 25 Cabinet members and top staffers, as well as the 253 legislators.

All together, the raises are expected to cost the state $16 million this year.

Rendell has complained several times that Cabinet salaries, which range from about $115,000 to $130,000, aren't high enough to attract some of the top talent he'd like to bring to state government.

State Rep. John Maher, R-Upper St. Clair, did vote for the pay raise, but said he didn't take all the perks; he has not used the car lease benefit for his eight years in Harrisburg, for example.

Legislative leaders spent two weeks before adjournment July 7 rounding up pay-raise votes. Some freshman legislators said privately they were allowed to vote against it in order to increase their chances for re-election.

Legislators wouldn't discuss details of the pay-raise bill with reporters and the lengthy bill wasn't released to the media until after midnight July 7, about half an hour before the House voted. There was no debate on the pay in either chamber. The Senate gave its approval about 2 a.m.

Legislators left the Capitol quickly after voting and many have gone on vacation or elsewhere that makes them hard to reach.

A couple of top legislators, such as House Democratic leader H. William DeWeese, of Waynesburg, and Senate Democratic leader Robert Mellow, of Scranton, said they had no apologies to make for the pay raise.

They said most legislators work, or are at least on call, "24/7" at the Capitol or in their districts, meeting with constituents or municipal officials.

DeWeese said legislators work full time, which generally means 40 hours a week, on their state-related duties. But a number of lawmakers have second jobs, some as lawyers, accountants or tavern owners, to augment their state salary.

DeWeese said he wanted to make public service jobs as attractive for new college graduates as private industry, and that higher wages and benefits are needed as "an allurement."

Jim Parreco, a retired human resources director from Shadyside, said he was "outraged over these non-performers in Harrisburg."

During his work career, Parreco said, he designed salary and benefit packages for executives at some major Pittsburgh firms.

There were three criteria for salary: What the competition was paying, a person's ability to meet performance goals and a company's ability to pay.

With legislators, he said, "there's never a lack of ability to pay because they always raise taxes. There's never any preset goals they have to achieve. And, as far as the competition, they're now No. 2 in the country."

G. Terry Madonna, a pollster and public affairs professor at Franklin and Marshall College, has been watching the Legislature for 25 years, including pay-raise votes in 1983, 1987 and 1995. He said he couldn't remember such public outrage.

"There's a bitterness, a harshness, an intensity from the public that I haven't seen before," he said. "I think it's both the sheer size of the pay raise and the process that was used, where they didn't even hold a press conference to explain why they were doing it."

Despite the public anger at the moment, however, another political consultant says he doesn't think a pro-pay raise vote will hurt a legislator's chance for re-election in November 2006 or even in next May's primary.

Larry Ceisler, a Washington County native, runs a public affairs consulting firm in Philadelphia,

"I have seen this issue polled, focus-grouped and tested every which way, and it's never resonated with the public over the long term," said Ceisler, who lives in Philadelphia. "I've never seen outrage that makes voters want to turn an incumbent out of office."

Re-election rates for the Pennsylvania Legislature are historically in the high 90 percent, he added.