Let Justice Roll

Members of Congress stand to receive automatic salary increases

By Rob Hotakainen
Kansas City Star/McClatchy Newspapers, 7/27/07

WASHINGTON | After raising the minimum wage by 70 cents this week, many in Congress are ready to give themselves a pay increase of roughly $4,400 a year.

That would take their annual salaries in 2008 to nearly $170,000 — unless a bipartisan coalition can block it.

Campaigning last year, Democratic leaders called it wrong for members of Congress to raise their own salaries until the lowest-wage workers got a break.

That happened Tuesday, when the minimum wage rose from $5.15 to $5.85 an hour. It will reach $7.25 an hour on July 24, 2009.

Under current plans, members of Congress in January will receive automatic pay raises estimated at 2.5 percent. In a show of bipartisan consensus, the House voted 244-181 last month on a procedural matter that would let salaries rise without a vote.

Rep. Sam Graves, a Missouri Republican, and Rep. Nancy Boyda, a Kansas Democrat, are among those pushing House leaders to schedule a straight up-or-down vote on the raise.

“It’s mystifying to me why the House leadership will not allow a straight up-or-down vote on a pay raise,” Graves said. “I vote against every pay raise, because taxpayers deserve better.

“This is the people’s money, and we need to use it on their priorities,” said Graves, a bill co-sponsor. “Increasing the pay of members of Congress is not their priority.”

In the Senate, Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold has introduced a bill to eliminate the machinery of automatic pay increases altogether, forcing lawmakers to vote whenever they want raises.

“I don’t think Congress should get a raise,” said Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri. “I think it would be a nice thing to tell the American people that we could go a couple years without a raise.”

Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri, the House minority whip, backs the raise.

He said most Republicans — “with great discipline” — had avoided the words “pay raise,” instead preferring to talk of a cost-of-living allowance increase.

Locally, Democratic Reps. Ike Skelton and Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri cast votes that would let the raise proceed. Another Democrat, Rep. Dennis Moore of Kansas, voted not to.

“Every member has some obligation to the institution for the compensation to, as much as possible, keep pace with inflation,” Blunt said. “I think this should be as good a job when I leave it as it was when I took it.”

Opponents said a raise for Congress would be ill-timed.

“According to the recent polls, Americans don’t like the Congress,” said Rep. Howard Coble, a North Carolina Republican. “Our numbers, lower than President Bush’s numbers, are in the tank. To enact this will do nothing, in my opinion, to improve our already diminished reputation.”

Rep. Lee Terry, a Nebraska Republican, said congressional popularity was at an all-time low because viciousness and the partisanship are “probably at an all-time record high.”

Boyda said she hoped the House would reconsider.

“In my district, the median wage is still going down, so it just doesn’t seem right for Congress to take care of itself,” Boyda said. “I guess maybe it depends where you’re coming from. … If we get a pay raise, I will donate it to charity.”

Congress approved the law making their pay raises automatic in 1989, giving them an easy way to avoid tough votes that could hurt them during re-election campaigns.

Since then, congressional salaries have nearly doubled, going from $89,500 to $165,200 per year.

By contrast, President Bush earns $400,000 a year. His salary is not affected by changes in congressional pay, although other members of the executive branch enjoy annual pay raises.

To reach Rob Hotakainen, call 202-383-0009 or send e-mail to rhotakainen@ mcclatchydc.com.

###