Ocasio-Cortez calls for congressional salaries to be furloughed during next shutdown

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on Saturday called for congressional salaries to be furloughed during the next government shutdown.

Roughly a quarter of federal agencies closed when Congress failed to meet a midnight funding deadline on Friday. Lawmakers arrived Saturday at the Capitol as congressional negotiators try to find a path forward on a deal to end the funding lapse.

“It’s completely unacceptable that members of Congress can force a government shutdown on partisan lines & then have Congressional salaries exempt from that decision,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote on Twitter.

“Have some integrity,” she added, calling for salaries to be furloughed for the next shutdown.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/budget/422605-ocasio-cortez-calls-for-congressional-salaries-to-be-furloughed-during

[Autumn]

1. She's right you know.

[politicaljunkie41910]

39. She's only partially right. Actually, all government money is appropriated. Appropriations identify

where the money is coming from and where it's going. Appropriations are a series of numbers and Alpha characters that tell the government accounting dept what year the funding is coming from, and the sources and the type of money (i.e. Construction, supplies, travel, etc. ) Money can only be spent for the purpose for which it was intended. Appropriations are usually 1 year, 3 year, and 5 year appropriations with any remaining funds expiring or canceling at the end of the period. The Money appropriated for one purpose (i.e. construction) cannot be used for any other purpose . ( i.e. travel) An appropriation may have several types of money. You cannot spend more than the amount appropriated. Money must be used before it's expiration date. If it is not spent, it cancels, and if the obligation still exists, you will have to obtain new money.

[Autumn]

43. Then perhaps it's time to make changes. nt

[NCjack]

52. Pay them while the government is shutdown. I don't want them to vote for a bad deal

just to restart their pay flowing to themselves. Instead, for the members who can afford and feel solidarity with those being injured, they can donate their salaries to charities that provide relief to the needy.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

57. I know!! As usual!!

[Andy823]

2. Although I totally agree

Congress should not get paid, it has been suggested many times in the past by Democrats, but nothing ever happens. This is not a new idea.

[tecelote]

16. But very relevant now.

Why aren't more speaking out?

We know the answer.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

55. It'll take someone with the gravitas of AOC as a new Congresswoman to finally

push for real change... there's a new sheriff in town. Go Alexandria!!

[WeekiWater]

3. 27th Amendment

Also see Article 1 Section 6

[Trumpocalypse]

20. That sounds like a politician's

weasel response to a good idea.

[WeekiWater]

25. First off, that's unnecessary.

Second, it’s the proper response.

[Trumpocalypse]

37. Depends on how you define proper

It dodges the issue and hides behind the constitution.

[WeekiWater]

40. It doesn't dodge the question.

It is one hundred percent on the topic. The exact opposite of dodging.

“Hides behind the constitution”

“I, AOC, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;”

Yeah, the constitution is just a fleeting thought.

I dodged the issue in no way at all. I have no clue how you have come to the conclusion of either of your comments.

Knowing the constitution is important for elected officials and anyone who wants to discuss governance on a political discussion board.

[Trumpocalypse]

45. Don't be so defensive

And the constitution isn’t always right unless you think African Americans should be denfined as 3/5s of a person.

[jberryhill]

26. Yeah, well, it's also a provision of the Constitution

[Trumpocalypse]

38. Maybe but

that is just something to hide behind.

[jberryhill]

42. The Constitution is just something to hide behind?

Lol... that's a good one.

So the US government is just sort of a "make it up as you go along" thing, eh?

[Trumpocalypse]

46. It is when it is used to dodge the issue

and shut down discussion.

[jberryhill]

47. And a post on an Internet forum "shuts down discussion"?

Did it paralyze your fingers, or do you just not have an answer to the obvious constitutional problem?

[Trumpocalypse]

60. The constitution can be changed

and reinterpreted. Unless you think that African Americans should still be considered 3/5s a person.

[jberryhill]

61. Yeah. It's been changed a bunch of times

Including elimination of the provision which you keep quoting and which hasn’t been part of the Constitution for well over a century and several decades.

Absent changing the constitution, you can’t change the compensation of Congress effective on the same session.

So, sure, go round up 3/4 of the states to pass it. I missed that part of what she has suggested here.

Alternatively, she is free, like many of her colleagues, to forgo all or part of her compensation and donate it to some cause. There is no one on earth requiring her to accept it.

[Trumpocalypse]

62. So just give up and don't try to change things

because it might be too hard. Thank god Lincoln, FDR, JFK and others didn’t feel that way.

[jberryhill]

63. An idiotic symbolic gesture is hardly a priority

There are a lot of things that need attention and change. Being able to separate those things from rhetoric about empty gestures is a useful leadership skill. Missing several weeks of salary would mean approximately nothing to most persons in Congress and is not meaningfully connected to anything worth expending the effort to amend the Constitution.

[Trumpocalypse]

65. It's only idiot in your opinion

Others don’t agree. And the Constitution doesn’t need to be amended. It depends on how the bill is worded.

[treestar]

48. They could pass it to take effect in the future

Though I guess this Senate will not do so.

[WeekiWater]

49. Insignificant considering their average worth...

And that it would most likely be nothing more than delayed compensation. The average days a shutdown lasts, historically, is very short. I see no significance when it comes to congress taking time on an issue like this. It’s significance is only in the fact it would make some people feel good. I see no reason Pelosi shouldn’t be getting paid right now. I don’t see where you or Cortez have made a solid case. Let’s not give those in congress who are not very wealthy a reason to support something like the wall simply to make sure a weeks pay isn’t delayed for them. It’s unethical in that aspect.

[treestar]

58. I wasn't really trying to make the case

Simply commenting that the section of the Constitution cited would allow it, but it could not apply to the Congress that passed it, but only to the next one.

Cortez was one not making much money before - didn't she have problems being able to pay for DC housing; I thought I read that.

But it does seem ironic that they and the pResident are the ones who don't agree, yet they get paid, while the little people don't.

[Andy823]

4. I like this idea

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) announced early Saturday morning that she would again donate her salary to a charity for every day the federal government is shut down.


https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142228872

This should shame the republicans, but I won't hold my breath.

[sheshe2]

5. I just saw that.

[lapucelle]

31. Hopefully AOC will follow Catherine Cortez Masto's example once she's on the payroll. N/T

[wasupaloopa]

6. You can do that is you have money.

[Andy823]

8. 10 poorest members of congress

https://www.rollcall.com/news/10_poorest_members_of_congress_owe_big-227786-1.html

Only a few could not afford it. Remember these are the poorest.

[Autumn]

17. That was from 2013.

[TJKatd]

41. Andy, that was a very interesting read....

Last edited Mon Dec 24, 2018, 01:23 AM - Edit history (1)

even though it was a few years old. I was especially surprised to find Debbie Schultz on the list. However, if makes me wonder a little if it's accurate. As long as she's been in Washington, I'd guess she's worth a considerable amount.

I've always found it curious when DC-based politicians are decently wealthy when they have no other means. Of course, the occasional book deal helps. But, most of them don't usually sell well. Seriously, none of them ever sound interesting.

I don't get too worked up about it, though

A good test will be the Cortez congressman from NY. By her own admission, she's poor as Job's turkey, even to the point of not having saved enough to pay an admittedly steep DC rent. Members of Congress do so-so for a DC wage. If she ends up quite comfortable with no financial problems, one would have to wonder how it came about.

I spent many years in Arkansas, where Clinton and Huckabee were governors for a few years. Both started out modestly from a fincial standpoint, and the guv's salary was well less than $100k. Both left office doing quite well. How?

A politician should not leave office after many years with a pile of money in the bank. I will, however, make allowances for a pension.

[iluvtennis]

11. Ditto.

[Baltimike]

7. and the president's. nt

[flibbitygiblets]

9. +5 billion

Dump is so cheap, this would pass him off "BIGLY"

[TheBlackAdder]

10. The President, his family and all congress critters must stay within 20 miles of DC until resolved.

.

No one should go on vacation, no one should go home, no one should collect pay. All stay local.

Air Force One is effectively grounded, unless fleeing from a military attack.

.

[erronis]

13. I would suggest that they all reside in a lock-down until resolved.

Some facility with padded walls, no liquor, no drugs (including adderral), just water and crackers (or rice cakes for the non-glutinous ones.)

This would be the last time they pulled these shenanigans and probably the last time many would pollute the body politic.

[TheBlackAdder]

30. I could subscribe to that.

[wryter2000]

12. I don't dislike the woman

But do I have to hear every word that comes out of her mouth? Will I hear what she has for breakfast next?

[LovingA2andMI]

15. You ain't never lied...

Thank You.

[kstewart33]

18. It's tiring.

Getting really, really tiring.

[wryter2000]

19. Glad it's not just me

She hasn't been sworn in yet

[Alhena]

27. Same, I wonder how long it's going to go on

[kstewart33]

32. Until a highly respected member of the House sits her down.

And tells her that she needs to learn the job with all its complications because once she's sworn in, she's just another freshman who will be ignored by those in power until she proves herself. Stirring things up and making a lot of noise is easy. Actually getting things done is far more difficult and meaningful.

[womanofthehills]

51. I find her refreshing

Calling out the old white Republican men on their shit.

[Trumpocalypse]

21. Sounds like you you do.

[wryter2000]

22. I dislike the press coverage

I don't want her to stop talking. I don't see why she gets more attention than everyone else

[Trumpocalypse]

24. She young and attractive

Plus she beat someone who was in leadership. Not to hard to figure out.

[Power 2 the People]

34. +1

[Devil Child]

29. There is an auto-trash by keyword feature

I'm wishing her a fulfilling and healthy breakfast whatever she chooses.

I'll keep you posted if I hear anything

[pdsimdars]

14. She always seems to get right to the core. So smart.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

56. So true!!

[lilactime]

23. Good for her!

[Devil Child]

28. Rep. Ocasio-Cortez calls out the bullshit again, loving it!

[keithbvadu2]

33. It's been suggested before. Never got very far.

It's been suggested before. Never got very far.

[former9thward]

35. It violates the Constitution.

The 27th Amendment. Maybe that is why it has not gotten very far. A new Congresswoman should read it.

[keithbvadu2]

36. It could be passed, now for later or could have been passed previously for current times.

It could be passed, now for later or could have been passed previously for current times.

In looking ahead, the vast majority of Congressfolk don't want to see such a possibility coming down the pike.

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/how-a-c-grade-college-term-paper-led-to-a-constitutional-amendment

[lapucelle]

53. AOC should propose the change once she's in office.

She might also consider imposing a "self-furlough" on her own pay (once she's actually in Congress) by waiting to cash any paychecks until the government re-opens .

[Joe941]

44. She makes sense.

[ck4829]

50. K&R

[KPN]

54. Others have said this before, but I'm glad she's speaking up on it again. The point she is making

is a good (mortally and logically right) one, especially as related to federal employees who are classified essential and must work without getting pay checks during the shutdown.

A better solution however would be an amendment that eliminates the possibility of shutting down the federal government as leverage for achieving a party's goal. It's an idiotic way to do business (could you imagine a corporation operating that way?).

[MineralMan]

59. Says the Freshman House Member who will be living paycheck

to paycheck while in office and can't afford to rent an apartment until she gets her first check. Nice idea, but she can't afford it.

[TSheehan]

64. I thought we weren't supposed to bash Democrats here.

Am I wrong?

[SMC22307]

66. You're not wrong.

Some of these anti-AOC posts sound like something straight out of Ben Shapiro's mouth. Or that Washington Examiner loser who stalked her and tweeted about what she was wearing. Curious.