If Pay Kept Pace With Inflation: Lawmakers $147,841; Governor $328,535; Justices $305,538

(Source: MIRS.news, Published 09/04/2026) A 25% pay raise may sound substantial, but for Michigan lawmakers and the governor, it still wouldn't come close to making up for more than two decades of pay falling behind inflation.

The State Officers Compensation Commission (SOCC) recommended last year that salaries for Michigan's governor, lieutenant governor, Supreme Court justices, legislators, attorney general and secretary of state all increase by 25% beginning in 2027.

Whether any of those increases happen is now up to the Legislature, the result of a system Michigan voters put in place 24 years ago.

In 2000, SOCC recommended a 38% increase in legislative salaries. Under the system at the time, lawmakers had to reject the recommendation to prevent it from taking effect.

The increase ultimately brought legislative salaries to $79,650 in 2002 and generated enough public backlash that voters amended the state Constitution that year. Instead of requiring lawmakers to reject a SOCC recommendation, the new system required both chambers to approve one before it could take effect.

There has not been a legislative pay increase since.

In fact, a 10% reduction took effect in 2011, bringing lawmakers to their current $71,685 salary.

SOCC's proposed 25% increase would bring legislative salaries to $89,606 in 2027. The governor's salary would rise from $159,300 to $199,125, while Supreme Court justices would go from $181,483 to $226,854.

Even then, those salaries would trail what state officers made more than two decades ago when adjusted for inflation.

In 2002, lawmakers made $79,650, the governor $177,000 and Supreme Court justices $164,610. In today's dollars, those salaries would equal roughly $147,841, $328,535 and $305,538, respectively.

That means even with the proposed raise, legislative and gubernatorial salaries would remain about 39% below the inflation-adjusted value of their 2002 pay. Justices would remain about 26% below.

Supreme Court justices illustrate another consequence of the system.

SOCC recommended a 7% raise for justices in 2023, but it never received legislative approval. By October 2025, every other state judge was set to earn more than a Supreme Court justice, according to the commission's latest report.

Justices asked SOCC last year for an 11% increase that would restore their salaries above Court of Appeals judges. The commission reported Georgia was the only other state where lower-court judges outearned Supreme Court justices.

Justice Brian Zahra went so far as to ask the commission to recommend another constitutional amendment changing how state officer compensation is set to remove political considerations from the process.

Former Sen. Ray Basham, who was serving in the House when voters changed the process in 2002, said he never expected salaries to remain stagnant this long.

Basham, who now serves on the Wayne County Commission and SOCC, said declining compensation can affect whether qualified candidates seek offices such as the Supreme Court.

"I think there's less enthusiasm for people that are qualified," Basham said. "I think it has an impact on people whether they decide to run for it or not."

He called SOCC's latest recommendation "not even keeping up with the cost of living."

Michigan State University political science professor Matt Grossmann, director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research, said legislative and staff salaries are traditionally considered measures of "legislative professionalism," which research has associated with more effective and durable policymaking.

"If salaries are not rising, then they're reducing the potential effectiveness of the Legislature," Grossmann said.

He cautioned against attributing changes in Michigan government over the last 25 years solely to compensation. Michigan historically had a relatively professional Legislature, with central staff, nonpartisan budget agencies, centralized bill writing and staff supporting committees and individual lawmakers.

Term limits also complicate the comparison.

"Almost everything that I said that legislative professionalism helps, term limits hurt," Grossmann said, adding that experienced staff and adequately compensated policymakers can offset some of the effects of turnover.

At the same time, public trust in government has declined, making pay increases a harder sell politically.

"There's a reason that legislators are fearful of raising their own pay and that of their staff, because they know that the public is not all that supportive of that," Grossmann said.

The system voters approved in 2002 puts that decision directly in lawmakers' hands. Requiring them to affirmatively approve SOCC recommendations "puts it directly in the political spotlight," Grossmann said.

Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids)' spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on whether she would support taking up the SOCC recommendation.

House Speaker Matt Hall (R-Richland Township)'s communications staff directed MIRS to remarks he made last week.

Hall said he and Brinks could move a legislative pay increase if they wanted to.

"We could just come in one day and do that on a voice vote, really," Hall said. "And we don't do that, right? And I think she would do it, but I won't do it, and the reason is because I don't think that's the right thing to do."

Grossmann stopped short of saying the system makes raises impossible, noting other states have increased legislative compensation.

But leaving salaries stagnant raises another question: who can afford to serve?

"You often only have people who already have money or have jobs, like lawyers or real estate people who can kind of do them when they're not doing legislative work," Grossmann said.

Without approval from both chambers, SOCC's latest recommendation will not take effect, leaving the same system created in response to a controversial raise 24 years ago to determine whether Michigan's state officers receive another one.