The House voted 240-173 on September 4 (see "Roll Call: House Avoids Direct Vote On Members' Pay Raise") against holding a direct up-or-down vote on a congressional pay raise, letting stand a law that will boost by 2.2% the 2004 wages of representatives and senators.
If that stands, members will be paid $158,000 in 2004. That’s $3,400 more than this year, and $21,300 more than the $136,700 they were paid in 1999.
Democratic Sen. Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, however, says he will try to block the pay raise in the Senate by attaching an amendment to one of the annual appropriations bills. With President Bush’s request for $87 billion to fund the war in Iraq, next year’s budget deficit is now expected to exceed $500 billion.
HUMAN EVENTS Assistant Editor David Freddoso asked a sampling of senators if they supported giving themselves another raise.
Sen. Feingold is planning to block the congressional pay raise this year. It’s the fifth pay increase in a row, and it would be about $3,400 this time. Will you support his efforts to block the pay increase?
SEN. WAYNE ALLARD (R.-COLO.): Well, I haven’t looked at the amendment on this one, I haven’t had a chance, but I’ve never supported a pay increase for members.
You expect you probably would-
ALLARD: We’ll see.
You’d lean toward it?
ALLARD: Yes. I need to look at his amendment.
Will you support Sen. Feingold’s effort to block the congressional pay raise this year?
SEN. JIM BUNNING (R.-KY.): I don’t know that he’s going to have one.
He’s announced that he-would you if he does?
BUNNING: Probably.
Would there be any determining factor that would make you vote for or against?
BUNNING: I have never voted for [a pay raise] in my life.
Sen. Feingold plans to block the automatic congressional pay increase this year. Will you support that?
SEN. MARIA CANTWELL (D.-WASH.): No.
Some people are saying we have a $500-billion deficit. We need to save the money, and also, does Congress deserve a pay hike of that scale?
CANTWELL: I think that the commission process works well and once you get that established, it should be the marker of the data about where the salary needs to be, because that way you take the politics out of it.
To just have an automatic adjustment, regardless?
CANTWELL: No???(inaudible)???Do I think other people should get COLAs (Cost of Living Adjustments)? Absolutely. Should that be a budget priority? Yes.
Including members of Congress? They’re going to get a $3,400 raise this year, bringing the salary up to $158,000. You think it should be at least that much?
CANTWEL: I just think we should look at this issue from a long term perspective and get our information based on-and try to take the politics out of it year after year, of making it political. We should base it on some information and stick to that instead of just politicizing it. The real issue is whether we support COLAs for other people who deserve it.
Sen. Feingold plans to try to block the automatic congressional pay increase this year. Will you support that?
SEN. NORM COLEMAN (R.-MINN.): I haven’t even thought about that yet. I’m too new here to figure out-you know-those issues at this point, so I’m not even going to-I don’t have an opinion on it at this point.
We have a $500-billion deficit. Does Congress deserve a pay hike?
COLEMAN: I don’t think the two are related. I don’t know the history, but the issue of getting a pay hike is not related to what the budget is. It’s about doing our jobs and getting the economy going forward. So I’m not tied into that. I just don’t know the history. I don’t know the last time we got a pay hike. If Congress hasn’t gotten a pay hike in a long period of time, then maybe they’re deserving of one.
It’s been the last five years, every year.
COLEMAN: They have had one every year?
Yes, every year.
COLEMAN: I don’t know if I’ve got the issue. But I wouldn’t buy the argument that-Well, we need to get the economy moving.
Thank you, senator.
Sen. Feingold plans to try to block this year’s automatic congressional pay raise-the cost of living adjustment. Will you support that move?
SEN. MIKE DEWINE (R.-OHIO): I have not voted for a pay raise before. I’m not fan of pay raises.
Thank you very much.
Senator Feingold plans to block the automatic congressional pay raise this year. Will you support that?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R.-S.C.): I haven’t thought about it really. I guess it depends on how we treat other federal workers, what we wind up doing there.
Given the $500-billion deficit-
GRAHAM: Yeah, I know, yeah.
-does Congress deserve a pay hike? They’re spending all that money.
GRAHAM: Yeah, you ask people, does Congress ever deserve a pay hike, they’ll say no. There’s two ways of looking at this. Do we deserve a pay raise? Probably the country would say no almost any time. There are a lot of people up here serving who have kids, who have two homes, so there’s an economic side of wanting to treat them differently than other people serving their country. I don’ t know what I’ll do. But it might be a good symbolic move to vote against the pay raise, just to let people know that we got it, that when things are not going well we need to sacrifice too. I think that’s probably where I lean. Vote to sacrifice.
Sen. Feingold is planning to block the congressional pay raise this year. It’s the fifth pay increase in a row, and it would be about $3,400 this time. Will you support his efforts to block the pay increase?
SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D.-LA.): No. Um, no.
Are congressmen paid insufficiently as it is, would you say, or-
LANDRIEU: I just want to say no.
Okay. Thanks, senator.
Do you plan to support Sen. Feingold’s efforts to block the congressional pay raise?
SEN. FRANK LAUTENBERG (D.-N.J.): I haven’t really reviewed it. I’m not sure, but I’m going to think about it, and try and see exactly the extent of the opposition. But what it is, I think there are certainly staff personnel-that there’s some attempt to keep abreast of their cost of living. There shouldn’t be any shame attached to appropriate raises for those who serve the public as well. We don’t want to see congressional salaries skyrocket. But keeping abreast of living costs-they are certainly high here-and to maintain a home here and a home there is a costly endeavor.
Given the $500-billion deficit, some would say Congress is in charge of the purse, they’re the ones who’ve overspent. Does Congress deserve a pay hike?
LAUTENBERG: Congressional representation deserves a wage that can help them take care of their obligations, educate their children, take care of their parents who may need assistance, to provide housing. I don’t think it’s appropriate to go ahead and give tax breaks to people like me who have been successful and suddenly are going to get a kicker in their paycheck as a result of this tax break that is neither needed nor in many cases wanted. I would prefer to see my tax break be invested in making sure that our government is stronger, and we can take care of our obligations for leadership, that we can do the research necessary to fight disease, that we can educate our children as we promised. That’s where I’d rather see it. So to isolate an increase in wage for congressional people, I think those people work hard, they deserve it, and if it’s commensurate with the responsibilities that these folks would have otherwise, I think it is a good thing to do. We don’t just want wealthy people coming to the U.S. Congress.
Senator, since this wage hike would be about $3,400-probably about the same as the tax break-wouldn’t this be a more direct way of plowing that money back into fighting disease and all the other things the government is doing?
LAUTENBERG: It’s a hostage choice. You don’t say that -There is a group of people who are providing the services of society. Should they be paid enough to cover their needs? Of course. And once again, I would reiterate that we don’t want just wealthy people coming here. We have people here who live very modestly. They pay taxes.
