After much debate, the House has passed HB 100, to remove a special retirement perk that sharply boosts the pensions of longtime lawmakers who, late in their careers, do brief stints in high-paying state jobs, by counting all their years of legislative service as if they were served in the higher-paying job. The vote was narrow: 38-32. UPDATE: Shortly before adjournment this afternoon, House Majority Caucus Chairman John Vander Woude, R-Meridian, moved to reconsider the bill. "I believe there's a better solution than this one," he said.

Rep. Ryan Kerby, R-New Plymouth, argued the bill would result in “not as good a quality of people filling these positions. … I think it’s a bad bill,” he said. “Please join me in giving it a red light.” Rep. Stephen Hartgen, R-Twin Falls, said he thought the bill raised “substantial questions,” including legal and constitutional questions. “The pool of individuals, particularly younger representatives and how that pool of people which often forms a necessary part of administration of state government, is likely to be reduced by the passage of this particular legislation,” Hartgen said.

Rep. Lance Clow, R-Twin Falls, said, “The bill implies that legislators are part-time by definition.”

Rep. Ken Andrus, R-Lava Hot Springs, countered, “If we come here for the retirement, I think we’re here for the wrong reason and we probably should step down.”

Rep. Kelly Packer, R-McCammon, a co-sponsor of the bill, said lawmakers granted themselves the perk in the ‘90s, and if there are legal or constitutional problems with lawmakers voting on something relating to their own compensation, that’s when it occurred – and it should be reversed. The bill now moves to the Senate side.