In Midnight Vote, Senate Opens Door to Giving Themselves $4,900 Pay Raise

AP | 12/08/01

[Bad~Rodeo]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Members of Congress are on their way to a $4,900 pay raise in January as the Senate used a midnight vote to thwart lawmakers who tried to block it.

After a debate that lasted five minutes late Friday night, the Senate used a 65-33 procedural vote to defeat an effort by Sens. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., to stop the increase from taking effect. Under a 1989 law, legislators get an annual cost-of-living raise unless the House and Senate vote to block it, a mechanism that often lets the increases take effect with little notice. .

The latest boost is for 3.4 percent and will raise members' annual salaries to $150,000. .

Feingold questioned the timing of a congressional pay boost when "our economy is in a recession and hundreds of thousands of workers have been laid off." He also noted that the string of four straight budget surpluses is now expected to end. .

Fourteen of the 30 senators running for re-election next year voted against the pay raise. Two who will retire in January - Sens. Phil Gramm, R-Texas, and Strom Thurmond, R-S.C. - voted for the increase, while a third retiree - Jesse Helms, R-N.C. - did not vote. .

Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and Minority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., voted not to block the increase. .

The House has already passed legislation opening the door for the pay increase. .

The January increase will be the third congressional pay raise in the last four years. Before this period, lawmakers increased their salaries less frequently, but the political risk faded as the economy boomed and federal surpluses soared in the late 1990s. .

By tradition, the annual spending bill for the Treasury Department is the battleground for congressional pay raises. .

The final version of that bill, which lacked language blocking the pay raise, overwhelmingly passed the House and Senate this fall and was signed into law by President Bush on Nov. 12. .

Feingold was blocked from trying to stop the pay raise earlier this year. The vote Friday came as the Senate debated the defense spending bill. .

[Bad~Rodeo]

Speaking Engagements, I See. Would you Pay Condit 20k to speak at Your Alma Mater?

[Economist_MA]

And don't get me wrong - the timing of this raise is definitely bad and they should have either done it last year or waited for another year or two. But in principle I have no problem with congressmen being paid on the same level as (say) senior management in plc's or partners in law or consulting firms. I do believe that we need people of this caliber in congress, and that they should not be forced to take too much of a paycut by switching.

[Economist_MA]

What's the point of this question?

[Ms. AntiFeminazi]

Hi! volley bump! Sometimes Neal gets it right. hehe. Merry Christmas Benighted!

[Bad~Rodeo]

I do believe that we need people of this caliber in congress, and that they should not be forced to take too much of a paycut by switching.

Caliber of people...ie?

[Bogey78O]

How? It's one thing to earn your money. No one can stop you from earning money. You can't cite class warfare and envy when you protest people voting themselves pay increases. Would you allow it if they voted a 200,000$ pay increase by citing class envy?

[christianswindler]

Did you notice the split in Arizona? McCain voted to stop the pay raise while Kyl went for the money.

I also like the way that the issue gets framed such that voting "nay" is a vote in favor of the pay raise. These guys are good.

[Bogey78O]

Exactly!!!!!

VA you're giving capitalists a bad name.

[Economist_MA]

as I said: senior management in plc's or partners in law or consulting firms. Folks with significant private sector experience and folks who aren't born on 3rd base.

[Bad~Rodeo]

Yes i did, Welcome Aboard AZ

[Torie]

There is no reasoning with these people. Some seem to think that because Congress doesn't do their bidding, they shouldn't get paid. Others think Congress members shouldn't make much more than they do. None worry that the smart well educated types we want in Congress won't take low pay compared to what they can make elsewhere, particularly if they have kids to educate, unless they are power mad or independently wealthy or humanities professors. And few manage to actually focus on and debate the relevant points to consider, or indeed focus at all. JMO.

[Bad~Rodeo]

IF you are making ASSUMPTIONS that BLUE COLLAR WORKERS ARE ON 3rd BASE, LET TME TELL YOU SOMETHING WANNABE. I have 28 YEARS with a MAJOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO..MAJOR STOCK INVESTMENTS ALL PAID WITH CASH, and STILL BUYING STOCK with CASH. Merry Christmas.

[Economist_MA]

There is no reasoning with these people

:-)
Always think about the lurkers. Just doing my little part in providing balance.

[blaze]

Actually we would probably be better off if they just sat around and voted themselves raises every time they got together!!! The country would probably save a lot of money and grief in the long run!

[Economist_MA]

BLUE COLLAR WORKERS ARE ON 3rd BASE

Oh boy, why don't you look up the expressions "born on 3rd base" somewhere.

By the way, the stock market still looks terribly overvalued by historical standards, so I would be very careful with your investments. Inflation indexed bonds have very attractive yields right now.

Anyway, I have made my point - have a nice weekend.

[Bad~Rodeo]

Only Point you've made is on the TOP of your Head, L~ ciao~

[Torie]

Inflation indexed bonds have very attractive yields right now.

Unlike 3 weeks ago. :) By the way, there is an outstanding piece in the current issue of Fortune by Warren Buffet on this very topic of stock valuations, and the disconnect between them and economic growth, among other things. Be sure to give it a read.

[VA Advogado]

I just voted myself a pay raise.... when can I expect the check?

You need to do some work first. Try getting elected and maybe you'll find something in your mailbox.

[Bad~Rodeo]

You're wasting your time, thanks anyway