Posted: 12/19/2008 5:52:09 AM EDT
Yep, I would love to be able to vote myself a raise all the time.  
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1140019
Congress proves it’s recession-proof By Howie Carr | Friday, December 19, 2008 | http://www.bostonherald.com Will you be getting a pay raise next year? No, I didn’t think so. Well, guess who will be getting a little something extra in their direct deposits in a couple of weeks? The U.S. Congress - all 535 of those sticky-fingered windbags. Merry Christmas from the taxpayers. This is not a joke. Thanks for the subprime mortgage crisis, Barney Frank! Here’s your bonus for tanking the economy - another $4,700, on top of the $169,300 you were already making. Ho-ho-ho, and I’m not referring to Barney’s former live-in heartthrob, Hot Bottom. Isn’t it odd that this Yuletide pay grab is generating so little press? I spotted it yesterday on The Hill Web site, under the headline, “With economy in shambles, Congress gets a raise.” These same statesmen have been railing against Detroit’s Big 3 CEOs, demanding they take a dollar a year. Yet somehow it’s OK for them to chow down for another heaping helping at the public trough. And our delegation includes a couple of double-dippers - career hacks who are drawing both a congressional paycheck and a monthly kiss in the mail from the State Retirement Board. Come on down U.S. Rep. Bilk, I mean Bill Delahunt of Quincy. As the ex-Norfolk district attorney, Delahunt has been getting a state pension check since January 1997 - currently $4,801.98 a month. That comes to $57,623.76 a year. Then there’s Rep. John Olver of Amherst. Before he went to Beacon Hill and had his mind, such as it is, kidnapped by Billy Bulger, he was a professor at UMass. Olver’s been on the state dole since November 1992, and currently collects $2,263.21 a month, which works out to $27,158 per annum. Nice “work” if you can get it. Every year a handful of congressmen tries to freeze the law that gives them this annual pay hike. The co-sponsors are usually reps from marginal districts. Once they’re safely re-elected a couple of times, they forget about reform. This year, according to The Hill, the pay freeze bill had 34 sponsors in the House - 8 percent of the members. I’m sure there would have been even fewer if the solons had thought it was a serious proposal, which of course it wasn’t. They think they’re entitled, of course. After all, they could be making a lot more in the Dreaded Private Sector, right? Actually, we’ll have to take their word for that, because so few of them have ever actually had a real job in the DPS. Barney Frank? You’re kidding, right? Fast Eddie Markey? Stop, you’re killing me. The nearest thing we have to a mogul among our delegation is Sen. John “Liveshot” Kerry, and I’m not referring to his impressive credentials in the gigolo industry, but to his brief stint as a titan in the chocolate-chip cookie industry in Quincy Market. First the Legislature gets a pay raise, and now Congress. What recession? Ho-ho-ho. Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1140019 |
|
In their defense...
I worked on the Hill for a few years. Members, in reality, work a helluva bad schedule. It's not a life that makes marriage and family easy. The vast majority, other than DC area Reps, travel to DC constantly, have to maintain two residences and need to be perceived as 'visible' in the home district as well - which equates to LOTS of nights and weekends talking to little groups at home. When they aren't in session in DC they are usually in the home office every day or at different functions, tours, meetings, events, etc. The guy I worked for took two weeks alone with his family for vacation - just like most regular folk. For all this, the pay they get is in line with what a mid to upper-level exec in private sector gets. There are other .gov exec level jobs in that range as well. Personally, I don't think the job is worth it if you're you live off the salary alone. The guy I worked for was not wealthy and he lived off the salary. It is very close to a 24/7, on call kind of job if the guy is committed. That said - most of the members I met were completely arrogant, egotistical assholes and it peeves me they get any money of mine. But its a job I wouldn't do for that money –– so be it. |
|
Quoted:
In their defense... I worked on the Hill for a few years. Members, in reality, work a helluva bad schedule. It's not a life that makes marriage and family easy. The vast majority, other than DC area Reps, travel to DC constantly, have to maintain two residences and need to be perceived as 'visible' in the home district as well - which equates to LOTS of nights and weekends talking to little groups at home. When they aren't in session in DC they are usually in the home office every day or at different functions, tours, meetings, events, etc. The guy I worked for took two weeks alone with his family for vacation - just like most regular folk. For all this, the pay they get is in line with what a mid to upper-level exec in private sector gets. There are other .gov exec level jobs in that range as well. Personally, I don't think the job is worth it if you're you live off the salary alone. The guy I worked for was not wealthy and he lived off the salary. It is very close to a 24/7, on call kind of job if the guy is committed. That said - most of the members I met were completely arrogant, egotistical assholes and it peeves me they get any money of mine. But its a job I wouldn't do for that money –– so be it. I don't give a shit. Working in Congress for our country is a privilege and should be a burden. They aren't fucken royalty. They should be our servants. |
|
We pay them 114K too much.
Being a Rep or Sen. should be a 60K a year job. no more no less. Lets do some math! 
435 House Seats + 100 Senate Seats = 535 535 x $114,000.00 = $60,990,000.00 Thats ~61 million dollars that could go to better things. Fuck these guys. ETA: IIRC this is just base pay too. They get stipends for heading up various committees and what not. |
|
Quoted:
We pay them 114K too much. Being a Rep or Sen. should be a 60K a year job. no more no less. Lets do some math! 
435 House Seats + 100 Senate Seats = 535 535 x $114,000.00 = $60,990,000.00 Thats ~61 million dollars that could go to better things. Fuck these guys. ETA: IIRC this is just base pay too. They get stipends for heading up various committees and what not. Not to mention the full, free ride health care and travel expenses. Not bad for part time job. It makes me wonder why everyone isn't running for office. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
We pay them 114K too much. Being a Rep or Sen. should be a 60K a year job. no more no less. Lets do some math!
435 House Seats + 100 Senate Seats = 535 535 x $114,000.00 = $60,990,000.00 Thats ~61 million dollars that could go to better things. Fuck these guys. ETA: IIRC this is just base pay too. They get stipends for heading up various committees and what not. Not to mention the full, free ride health care and travel expenses. Don't forget all the other benefits, such as free mail. There must be other benefits that are paid out in cash, because some senators and congressmen keep large sums of cash in their freezers. Not bad for part time job. It makes me wonder why everyone isn't running for office. There I added a few things. What is their approval rating these days? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
We pay them 114K too much. Being a Rep or Sen. should be a 60K a year job. no more no less. Lets do some math!
435 House Seats + 100 Senate Seats = 535 535 x $114,000.00 = $60,990,000.00 Thats ~61 million dollars that could go to better things. Fuck these guys. ETA: IIRC this is just base pay too. They get stipends for heading up various committees and what not. Not to mention the full, free ride health care and travel expenses. Not bad for part time job. It makes me wonder why everyone isn't running for office. Don't forget the pension plan. I'm not exactly a UAW lover, but congress has no room to bitch. |
