One Group That Still Is Getting a Raise - Congress

by: Rob Hotakainen  |  McClatchy Newspapers

One Group That Still Is Getting a Raise - Congress
Members of Congress voted to give themselves a $4,700-a-year pay raise starting on January 1, 2009. (Photo: AP)

    Washington - Members of Congress have at least one reason to ring in the new year: They've given themselves a $4,700-a-year pay raise starting Thursday.

    With the economy in a recession and millions of Americans losing their jobs, however, members are under fire to rescind the pay hike, which will increase their base salaries to $174,000, roughly a 2.8 percent raise.

    Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California will get a larger raise of about $6,100, though it's about the same percent increase. Her salary will rise to nearly $223,500. Pelosi's office declined to comment on the raise.

    When Congress begins a new session next Tuesday, critics have an idea for the very first vote: Block the 2009 raise for all 535 senators and representatives.

    "Certainly, the timing could be a lot better.... When you look at the rest of the country, people are hoping to hang on to their jobs, much less get a salary increase or a bonus," said Steve Ellis, the vice president of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

    Other critics say that Congress has done nothing to deserve a raise.

    "The general public can't help but think that lawmakers are patting themselves on the back, and padding their wallets, for presiding over the worst fiscal-policy blunders in recent history," said Pete Sepp, the vice president for policy and communications for the National Taxpayers Union.

    The issue is always sensitive for members of Congress, who've designed a way to raise their pay automatically without even having to vote. They call it a cost-of-living allowance that takes effect each year, unless members vote to turn it down. Conveniently, it allows them to leave no evidence that could be used against incumbents in re-election campaigns.

    "It's a gimmick to essentially avoid something that would be politically dicey," Ellis said. "And both parties are complicit in this system and benefit from it."

    Members of Congress don't often snub an opportunity to make more money. It happened most recently in 2007, when the Democratic-led Congress decided to forgo a raise because it hadn't approved an increase in the minimum wage. Last January, members received an automatic increase of 2.5 percent.

    Ellis said that Congress would be wise to delay its 2009 raise until the recession ended or unemployment declined. That would show that public officials are making a "shared sacrifice" during times of economic difficulty, he said.

    While members of Congress will receive a raise, 12 percent of seniors are living at or below the poverty line, said Daniel O'Connell, the chairman of The Senior Citizens League. A senior who receives average Social Security benefits will get a $63 monthly increase in 2009, he said.

    The congressional pay raise is expected to cost taxpayers $2.5 million next year.

    "This money would be much better spent helping the millions of seniors who are living below the poverty line and struggling to keep their heat on this winter," O'Connell said.

    He said that members of Congress were increasing their salaries after questioning the multimillion-dollar compensation of auto executives earlier this month.

    "As lawmakers make a big show of forcing auto executives to accept just $1 a year in salary, they are quietly raiding the vault for their own personal gain," O'Connell said.

    Four members of Congress from Indiana have announced that they won't accept the pay increase: Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh, Republican Reps. Mike Pence and Dan Burton and Democratic Rep. Brad Ellsworth.

    In Florida, Republican Sen. Mel Martinez and Republican Reps. Gus Bilirakis and Ginny Brown-Waite said they'd vote to block the raise if congressional leaders allowed a vote. California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein said she wanted nothing to do with the raise. Feinstein, the chair of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee, intends to donate her raise to charity, spokesman Phil LaVelle said Tuesday.

    Finding anyone brave enough to defend the pay hike in Washington these days is like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack. When they're asked to comment, usually accessible members quickly go missing, are on vacation, are extremely busy with family members or can't be reached on their cell phones because they're in remote locations. Some congressional aides, however, speaking privately, said they wouldn't be surprised if public pressure forced Congress to revisit the issue when members returned to work next week.

    Sepp called the latest raise "sadly, not surprising" and said it was indicative of a Congress that was out of touch with voters.

    "If 9-11, the resulting economic slowdown and wars couldn't deter these folks from taking a pay grab, how could the current recession shame them into doing the right thing?" Sepp asked. "Salaries for senators and representatives are about the only federal expenditure that average Americans can directly relate to, and yet lawmakers can't grasp why people get so upset over such a relatively small amount of money in the federal budget."

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.





     

»




Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.



The salaries of the

The salaries of the congresspersons would be much more understandable if the money and 'prizes' they get under the table were included in the People's open record.


The raise is less important

The raise is less important than what they are going to do. Write to them and tell them what to do.


The whole thing smells of

The whole thing smells of the same ol', same ol', unmitigated greed!!! unscrupulous money grabbers who , through great arrogance, believe they should be handsomely paid for their very poor work record, in fact, for their dismal failure and cowardly performance in relation to the executive branch. But then, the American people are completely ignorant and have failed in their responsibilities as citizens of a supposed democracy...you don't get what you pay for, you get what you allow! We have allowed our government to lie, steal, deceive, murder, torture, take away civil rights, destroy the constitution, pollute the environment, reward corporate criminals, support dictatorships worldwide, suppress new and innovative technologies, ruin the US reputation worldwide, and for all this we can feel great giving our proud civil servants a handsome raise and thereby encourage them to do more of the same for the next term. We the intelligent, enlightened , democratic society, this we can and will do to the amusement and enrichment of our 'caring' and 'hard working' politicians! It is an enigma why the rest of the world sees us as ignorant and morally bankrupt! Go figure!


So, Congress is giving

So, Congress is giving themselves another cost of living raise! Another slap in the faces of those working Americans who PAY their salaries. Aren’t we getting fed up with being slapped around? I would like to be able to give myself a raise. Better yet, I would like to be able to decide how much my raise should be and have it automatically added to my paycheck. HA! As for Social Security standard-of-living raises—mine was less than the stated $63.00 per month. Then, Social Security tax is deducted from that before the check is deposited. Sorry, but the “shared sacrifice” Congress touts is ridiculous. If they really shared our sacrifices they would rescind the raise, reduce their salaries and be much more prudent with the way they spend and keep track of OUR money. Yeah, that’s the catch: It’s OUR money and it’s painless to spend other people’s money. But, as it looks, Congress has seen that the money is greener on the other side of the automotive executives’ fence. Shame on them.


Can you believe the

Can you believe the salaries...and they call themselves public servants? The only public servants in this country are the illegals they hire to cook, chuefer, and tend their gardens.


My disability is suppose to

My disability is suppose to go from $637 to $674 BUT just in time for Christmas the home care case worker salaried at $150k with only 6 clients faced down inclement weather rescheduling 3 times to appear in person and fill out a simple contract that a 1st grader could manage without assistance at which time he joyously informed me currently at 300% BELOW POVERTY LEVEL I`d be subjected to a $70/mo REDUCTION in home care allowance funds! I have yet to see just how negatively this "raise" will effect food stamps and the irony being caseworkers who get their paperwork in by December 15th are awarded ANNUAL bonuses exceeding what we the disabled clients are made to exist on for 5 years when you factor in the brand new car allowance including insurance, plates and in rural regions no less than $200/mo paid fuel with trade in every 2 years at our expense & we don`t have public or even private taxi service available!


NEW RULE: At the end of

NEW RULE: At the end of every year, when the issue of congressional salaries comes up, let's roll out the voting booths and let We The People - the ones who PAY those salaries - decide if they should get a raise, or perhaps have their salaries reduced based on their job performance. I'll bet that would light a fire under them to get things done properly.


How can we find out exactly

How can we find out exactly which Congressional members voted for this absurd raise? I am so sick of these people and their fish bowl thinking and incompetence. Hubris, big time.


As usual, we are worrying

As usual, we are worrying about the wrong issue, here. Plato's "Republic" is worth a look. Congresspeople are our "Guardians". We should not make them wealthy; instead, we should make wealth irrelevant to their decision-making processes. In order to accomplish this, Plato felt that the public should put its Guardians in a position beyond any consideration of personal wealth, for life. Plato understood that the idea of "salaried Guardians" is absurd and unworkable. Guardianship is not a job; it's a calling, and a sacred duty. We cannot afford to encourage or allow money to corrupt the execution of the public's trust, and anybody who is not willing to trade his personal fortune for custodianship of the public weal is not a candidate for Guardianship.


Stop kvetching, will you! We

Stop kvetching, will you! We know from our experience with CEOs that leaders must be offered huge salaries and perks in order to get the most talented, most hard working, most virtuous people, regardless of gender and race (religion counts these days), to take those horrible, grueling, thankless jobs. Since Congressional salaries are a mite below CEO salaries, their job must be easier and less important, no? But we do need good people, even if less than the best will do. @Steve Newcomb: the Guardians were the (military) protectors from whom the philosopher-kings were chosen partly on the basis of not wanting to rule. Clean slate time, eh?


Simply Disgusting. Not

Simply Disgusting. Not earned. Not warranted. Lifetime employment if you do nothing and take no stands...


Every one is suppose to give

Every one is suppose to give concessions to keep their job and support the economy. Then the guys with a pension after 8 years on the job, the worlds best medical insurance, many perks after their base pay get a raise! Does anyone think they are there for us?


This is totally outrageous!

This is totally outrageous! I would love to see Congress live on what the average person makes with no pain increases. Since all of them in Congress are wealthy and can live very comfortable, how about the rest of us. I haven't been on a vacation in years and am struggling to make ends meet. Instead of their pay raises why don't they donate their raise to help others who will never make what they make. It is time to look at why they they need this money. I am sure none of them are going to lose their homes or go bankrupt any time soon.


This bi-annual raising of

This bi-annual raising of their salary first came to my attention in 1983, in which the Senate voted themselves a $2000 raise. Since then, it has more than doubled. Back then a friend and I went out to raise an army of petioners to march on D.C. in protest of such flagrant disregard of the sensibilities of American citizens. We got maybe 5 signatures. I don't think much has changed since then because the average citizen does not think about these matters; consequently, the government can easily vote themselves raises. Sure, it is noted in the media, but who has the power or the incentive to stop these people? Who has the time? Most people are too busy trying to make ends meet than to worry much about how the criminals on Capitol Hill ripping them off, sad to say.


The raise is less important

The raise is less important than what they are going to do. Write to them and tell them what to do.


The raise is no less

The raise is no less important than the service they provide - not much!! It's time to get off our behinds and speak out. California has the highest paid congress in the country and while they are cutting back on our children's education and our services they still manage to vote in a raise. When are we going to stand up and say NO MORE. How about term limits and no life time benefits. This is a PUBLIC SERVICE job. What kind of public service are we getting?