People hearing what two of Pennsylvania's top state legislative leaders have been saying over the past week might already have reached the conclusion that the time is right for a pity party for the General Assembly.

In trying to justify the need for a pay increase, the Senate's president pro tempore, Robert C. Jubelirer, R-Blair, said demands on lawmakers and the cost of living have far outpaced their $66,203 salaries.

"This job is no longer your grandfather's legislative seat," he said. "It is a full-time job."

Meanwhile, as Jubelirer tried to evoke state residents sympathies, Democratic House leader H.William DeWeese of Greene County tried to remind commonwealth residents that higher pay could be crucial to getting top-quality people into the public sector.

What the bipartisan lamentations of Jubelirer and DeWeese failed to acknowledge is that Pennsylvania has essentially a full-time legislature because lawmakers spend most of their time locked in unproductive partisanship. That's why a lame-duck session is currently under way in Harrisburg.

And, Jubelirer's "grief" didn't acknowledge another important fact - that some states do quite well with part-time legislatures with a limit on their legislative time.

DeWeese's quality-people comment is a worn-out argument without any proof of validity. The reason many more qualified, devoted-to-good-government people don't make themselves available for legislative service is because they don't have the financial resources necessary to wage a strong battle against entrenched legislators.

Besides, when they sought election, every member of the legislature knew what the job pays. If they didn't like the pay, they could have opted to remain in the private sector, from which some lawmakers continue to derive a healthy income in addition to what they receive from their duties in Harrisburg.

For state taxpayers, the sad thing is that a pay raise seems increasingly likely as the lame-duck session continues. Thus, the best advice probably would be to forget the pity party; Jubelirer, DeWeese and most of their colleagues probably would ignore it anyway.

- J.R.K.