Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 12/9/2001 5:16:10 AM EST
[Last Edit: 12/9/2001 5:11:42 AM EST by shooterX308]
[b]Intel:[/b] AP Washington - 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 Sen. Russel 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% 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 expectd 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-TX, and Strom Thurmond, R-SC, - voted for the increase, while a third retiree, Jesse Helms, R-NC, did not vote. [b]Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-SD, and minority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss, voted not to block the increase.[/b] [b]Targets[/b] Your congressional rapresentatives. No, that is not a typo. [b]Rules of Engagement[/b] This is a Free-Fire condition as it pertains to your lawful, if not necessarily genteel, expression of your opinion regarding this situation. As usual, Team Ar15 will deny any knowledge of its existence or your participation should you do something stupid. Lock and Load, ladies and gents.[devil]
Link Posted: 12/9/2001 12:39:09 PM EST
FIRE FOR EFFECT! Done.
Link Posted: 12/9/2001 1:46:08 PM EST
Hmmm, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this violate the 27th amendment? Article. [XXVII.] [Proposed 1789; Ratified 1992; Second of twelve Articles comprising the Bill of Rights] No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
Link Posted: 12/9/2001 2:00:49 PM EST
Originally Posted By libertyof76: Hmmm, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this violate the 27th amendment? Article. [XXVII.] [Proposed 1789; Ratified 1992; Second of twelve Articles comprising the Bill of Rights] No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
View Quote
No, I don't think it does, this law was passed a few years ago and as such an election cycle has already intervened - it's just an automatic increase - they have to vote to [b]stop[/b] it - which is what the senator from WI was attempting to get them to do, and was manouvered around by the midnite vote to [b]not[/b] vote down the increase... I know it's convoluted logic, but it's congress after all.
Top Top