Congressional pay raises....

[kathy88]

Can anyone hook me up with a link to the roll call for this vote? I can't seem to find anything. Perhaps barking up the wrong tree.

[ghengis86]

Can anyone hook me up with a link to the roll call for this vote? I can't seem to find anything. Perhaps barking up the wrong tree.

edit: there was no roll call

the pay raise is automatic unless they vote to freeze the raise. I believe a congressman from Arizona introduced a house resolution earlier this year, freezing the automatic raises but it didn't even make it out of committee.

there is no vote, only sponsors and co-sponsors of the h.r.

[kathy88]

OIC.. thank you. That totally sucks.

[kathy88]

I just took a pay CUT a couple months ago.

[Matt Collins]

Other than symbolism I don't see Congressional pay increases as a big deal. I have no problem with a Congressman earning a good deal of money for their work and efforts. In fact a high salary prevents only wealthy from getting into office.

[TastyWheat]

Other than symbolism I don't see Congressional pay increases as a big deal. I have no problem with a Congressman earning a good deal of money for their work and efforts. In fact a high salary prevents only wealthy from getting into office.
How does the promise of a high salary help poor people get the position? A lot of candidates don't have to fund their own campaigns, they get plenty of money from special interests so they really don't need to fund themselves. I think pay increases should be determined by constituents (for Representatives) and by the states (for Senators) instead of an increase across-the-board.

[Matt Collins]

How does the promise of a high salary help poor people get the position? Let's say they pay Congresscritters $60k a year. Let's say you operate a successful business earning $135k per year.

Chances are you won't want to run for Congress because it would put you into a financial burden to do so. If you win, you will have to take a pay cut from $135k to $60k. That's pretty significant, and chances are most people in that range wouldn't be able or willing to do it.


Now if Congress pays $150 per year, and you make over that amount, dropping down to $150k isn't that hard because ANYONE can currently live off of $150k. And while yes most people can live off of $60k too, it won't support the lifestyle of someone who makes $135k is accustomed to; in other words it would be a distraction.


So if Congress doesn't pay much at all or it pays closer to a real wage, you would usually only see wealthy people running for college because they are the only ones who can afford to do so.

I know that might be hard to grasp, but think through it and it'll become evident. I had to think about it a while too before it made sense to me.


A lot of candidates don't have to fund their own campaigns, they get plenty of money from special interests so they really don't need to fund themselves. No one should fund their own campaigns (unless they are wealthy and just want to buy their way into office). If you can't raise your money and convince people to support you early in the race, chances are you won't be able to convince people to support you.



I think pay increases should be determined by constituents (for Representatives) and by the states (for Senators) instead of an increase across-the-board.I definately think the States should determine how much they pay for Congresscritters because they are representatives of that State.

[ghengis86]

Let's say they pay Congresscritters $60k a year. Let's say you operate a successful business earning $135k per year.

Chances are you won't want to run for Congress because it would put you into a financial burden to do so. If you win, you will have to take a pay cut from $135k to $60k. That's pretty significant, and chances are most people in that range wouldn't be able or willing to do it.


Now if Congress pays $150 per year, and you make over that amount, dropping down to $150k isn't that hard because ANYONE can currently live off of $150k. And while yes most people can live off of $60k too, it won't support the lifestyle of someone who makes $135k is accustomed to; in other words it would be a distraction.

So if Congress doesn't pay much at all or it pays closer to a real wage, you would usually only see wealthy people running for college because they are the only ones who can afford to do so.

I know that might be hard to grasp, but think through it and it'll become evident. I had to think about it a while too before it made sense to me.

No one should fund their own campaigns (unless they are wealthy and just want to buy their way into office). If you can't raise your money and convince people to support you early in the race, chances are you won't be able to convince people to support you.


I definately think the States should determine how much they pay for Congresscritters because they are representatives of that State.

why do we want elitist congressmen again? and what makes the opinions, ideals, morals and intellect of a person making 135k better than someone making 40k?

if the amount of money the person makes is a distraction, they shouldn't be a congressmen. i wonder how easily then they would be 'distracted' by some lobbying group waving money in their face...

[TastyWheat]

Representing districts and the state shouldn't be about money. They should get enough to live comfortably, not live large. I know most of the politicians in Washington don't serve for their country, they do it for money. You could say they do it for power, but what's power if you can't profit from it?

[HOLLYWOOD]

Other than symbolism I don't see Congressional pay increases as a big deal. I have no problem with a Congressman earning a good deal of money for their work and efforts. In fact a high salary prevents only wealthy from getting into office.

What is Skyrocketing is their office budgets and Expense reports:

http://www.legistorm.com/ (http://www.legistorm.com/)


If you open a account, you can viwe their scanned expense reports. I just love the financial kickbacks, like $3000 for days of food... now how about those: Expense Report Bribe Kickbacks?

I don't think I could eat $3000 in Caviar in 3 days.

It's the Highlife of Expense Reports, Office/Operations Expenses, and usage of GOvernment assets and property for THEMSELVES, F & F.

Did you know there are RESORT congressional vacation areas, with staffed booze, etc for the Theives in CONGRESS.

We already know abouyt Pelosi's using Boeing 757s so she does have to stop to refuel in the C-20s. I wonder what miss eco green herself's Carbon footprint is on this planet.

There's plenty more... just use your keyboard and internet connection

[nate895]

How does the promise of a high salary help poor people get the position? A lot of candidates don't have to fund their own campaigns, they get plenty of money from special interests so they really don't need to fund themselves. I think pay increases should be determined by constituents (for Representatives) and by the states (for Senators) instead of an increase across-the-board.

The best way to answer that question is to figure out the cost of living in two separate places. If you are a poor person with little saved up, and you don't own your own business, if Congress made $60,000/year, or even $100,000/year, you'd have to live an extremely modest lifestyle since homes in DC are expensive. You'd probably even be priced out since you'd most likely have to pay both homes mortgage/rent. You could live in the Congressional office, but that would turn off many people from becoming Congressmen. At $160,000 a year, you should be able to afford a comfortable living space both at home and in DC. It won't be luxurious by any means, but it wouldn't be a crap apartment in DC itself, or the office.

Also, at this salary, the most people would be able to afford being a Congressman. If you are a businessman and make around $160,000/year on your own, you can still own the business and get your Congressional salary, and can afford a commodious living in both DC and your home district. If you are rich, you can afford to live wherever you want, and if you are a poor to middle class employee, that salary can afford you a modest property in both places. The only people who would find it hard economically are employees who make between 120K and 250K at their jobs with little savings because they will necessarily have to see a decreased standard of living.

Edit: Or, if you were middle class or poor and managed to get elected, you'd be much more likely to be corrupt and take gifts, junkets, or whatever nuanced things they call bribery these days.