Congress trying to quietly kill a bill that would cut their pay...

[NC_Nurse]

http://moneywatch.bnet.com/saving-money/blog/devil-details/cut-my-pay-now/2829/

Cut My Pay — Now!


Ann Kirkpatrick wants a pay cut and she’s getting testy about having to wait so long to get it.

Last March, U.S. Rep. Kirkpatrick sponsored legislation to cut congressional salaries a modest 5%, saying it was high time that Congress shared the pain with the rest of America. As U.S. workers have suffered layoffs, pay cuts and furloughs over the past two years, Congress has actually been spending more money than ever. In fact, if it hadn’t been for another bill that Kirkpatrick supported, Kirkpatrick and her colleagues in the U.S. legislature would have gotten automatic pay raises this year, as they did in 2008 and 2009.

The notion of cutting Congressional pay is wildly popular. A recent survey by the Rasmussen Reports found that 75% of Americans think members of Congress should cut their pay until the budget is balanced. And nearly one in eight think members of Congress should not be able to get a raise unless taxpayers vote for it.

As things stand, members of Congress set their own pay and they’ve been quite generous. Rank and file members of congress now earn $174,000 annually — more than about 97% of the rest of the country. That’s up 23% over the past decade.

[Skittles]

1. they should cut their pay at least 15%

[NC_Nurse]

2. No kidding - but they don't even want a 5% pay cut. Meanwhile, everyone else

is supposed to "buck up" and work harder for less money. Assholes.

[Skittles]

7. and that's just their pay

they get all kind of perks we do not get :mad:

[Mnemosyne]

13. "the best health care in the world", by their own admission. KnR for gov. reps pay/perk cuts! n/t

[Mimosa]

21. And travel expenses.

Do they get housing assistance in Washington?

[ejpoeta]

3. i am going to bet that that won't happen. they aren't going to take away from themselves

when they can take away from the rest of us.

[pennylane100]

4. That would make an excellent campaign issue,

The unions should threaten to make it an issue unless reform for them is passed.

[mike r]

5. I'm sure they can live on $100,000

Make them earn it, too.

[Davis_X_Machina]

6. The problem with Congress is not their pay....

...this is a bright-shiny-thing you're being asked to chase, instead of worrying about why so many people in Congress don't actually need their Congressional salaries to live on in the first place.

The operating expenses of the entire legislative branch, including the Library of Congress, don't approach 4% of the Federal budget, in any case.

[Indydem]

9. 4% of the 2010 budget

is 142 BILLION dollars.

If you can sneeze at that and ignore that as if it doesn't matter then we have bigger problems.

[Davis_X_Machina]

10. Of that the lion's share goes to the Library of Congress, the Architect of the Capital...

...staff and such that would all still be expended even if every elected legislator works for a dollar a year.

The bill can't be taken seriously as as a cost-cutting measure, and it does nothing to change or improve who represents us in Congress.

It's demagoguery pure and simple, and I don't like it when the Right does it, I don't like it when the Left does it.

It's intellectually dishonest.

[left is right]

8. I always felt that Congress’ pay

should be based on their states’ mean (the exact middle) pay. Congress critters from poor states like Mississippi should receive considerably less than richer states such as New York

[safeinOhio]

11. It is the high pay

that attracts the high quality House Reps we have.





:sarcasm:

[chill_wind]

12. and makes them so genuinely empathetic with the little people

who haven't seen a raise in years if they are lucky to have a job at all.

MEANWHILE...

"Rank and file members of congress now earn $174,000 annually — more than about 97% of the rest of the country. That’s up 23% over the past decade."

And that's chicken scratch compared to to what awaits most of them in the private sectors and the revolving door lobby firms when their gigs are up.

[mindwalker_i]

14. Too bad we can't lay some of them off

Maybe target a few states for "inertial reduction efforts" :)

[onethatcares]

15. I'd be happy if they'd just

have to pee in a bottle every 6 months. One strike and they're out.

[dreamnightwind]

16. Pay them way more, not less

We'd all be a lot better off if we payed them enough that they wouldn't need to leverage their power into huge sums from other sources. $170,000 is NOTHING to pay a US Congressperson. They should make 10 times that, easily. No, I'm not joking.

What hurts us isn't their salaries, quite the opposite, what hurts us is the other things they do to make money.

Pay them appropriately for the importance of their position, and tighten the revolving door rules so they will serve the people instead of serving their future financial interests.

I know it will never be possible to legislate corruption out of politics, but we can do much better, and cutting their pay is not the way to do it. Quite the opposite.

[Angry Dragon]

19. Last I heard is that 243 of them are millionaires

Raising the pay is not the answer.

[dreamnightwind]

26. I'd say it's part of the answer

In private business, that $174,000 is not so much. Not nearly as much as the importance of being a congressperson would indicate. I'd like to see a list in my own area of people making more than their congressperson makes. It would put this discussion in better perspective to see the job titles.

We need campaign finance reform so that non-millionaires can get elected. We need high pay so they can actually feel well compensated without selling us out for their own financial interest. And we need more rules to keep them from getting money other ways, while they're in office and after they leave it for a few years.

Lower pay, or even just the pay they currently get, is basically telling them they're expected to get the real money elsewhere.

[Hannah Bell]

17. they should work for free & just live on their bribes and kickbacks.

[coti]

18. Of course, if we cut their pay, they'll just "get us back" by whoring themselves

out even further to those who continue to contribute big money to their campaigns.

[dreamnightwind]

24. at least somebody gets it

In the current situation, these people aren't doing their job for the $174,000/year. To many of them, I'm sure that's fairly small change. They're doing the job for the access to real money it gets them, oh and to make this world a better place (bwahaha).

[Swamp Rat]

20. Considering they fucked up our economy and killed thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan,

they should be docked 100% of their pay for the next year at minimum, and their salaries reduce to 1/4 for the remainder of their terms.

If they don't like it, then they can get the fuck out of politics forever.

[Mimosa]

22. LOL!!! ITA! n/t

[Swamp Rat]

23. bonjour, mon ami

:hi::hug:

[kentuck]

25. How many of these dumbasses can make that in the private sector?

A very small percentage, I would guess? That is why they make it a career. It is the best job in America. They are not "representative" of the people. They are in the top 3% of wage earners in the country. And they give themselves raises. A total disgrace!