Congress did one thing: Raise its pay
"Their financial pat on the back is a 3.1 percent pay raise,
bringing their annual salary to $154,700 next year. Could
there be a worse time for the country's top elected officials
to pad their own paychecks -- for the fourth time in four
years? Rather they should refund taxpayers for this year's
sub-par performance."
Monday, November 18, 2002
seattlepi.nwsource.com
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD
By the time Congress dispenses all the spending bills to
cover the federal government's expenses for the current
fiscal year, New Year's Day will have come and gone. Note
that at this writing the budget year ostensibly began six
weeks ago.
Most Americans distinctly remember, with consternation if
not anger, the 1995 budget donnybrook between President
Clinton and House Speaker Newt Gingrich that resulted in
a partial government shutdown. They are not as likely to
realize that the current Congress is making history of its
own, albeit the irresponsible kind.
Only rarely do senators and representatives gavel their
session to a conclusion without having sent the
appropriations bills to the president. This year Congress
has come to terms on only two of the 13; not surprising,
considering the possibility of a war with Iraq, the pair deal
with the military.
Since Oct. 1, federal agencies have been operating under a
series of temporary resolutions, the latest of which is now
likely to be extended until mid-January when the next
Congress -- the one fully controlled by the GOP -- takes
office.
That not only means that federal agencies have not been
able to roll out their new initiatives, it means that billions
of dollars for a variety of security measures and other
programs will not be immediately available. In these
post-9/11 days, that includes more than $3 billion in
grants for local emergency teams, $500 million for the
Coast Guard and other spending connected to increased
domestic security.
So, without tending to its primary duty or the panoply of
pressing domestic matters such as extended
unemployment compensation, health care and Social
Security, Congress is hurrying through its lame-duck
session in order to get ready for the holiday season.
Well, bah humbug.
It should be galling to the Americans who so recently
re-elected them virtually en masse that members of
Congress have rewarded themselves for a job not well done.
Their financial pat on the back is a 3.1 percent pay raise,
bringing their annual salary to $154,700 next year. Could
there be a worse time for the country's top elected officials
to pad their own paychecks -- for the fourth time in four
years? Rather they should refund taxpayers for this year's
sub-par performance.
As the senator who triggered a roll-call vote on the
self-aggrandizement reminded his colleagues last week,
"Our budget is, once again, back in deficit. The financial
markets have been rocked, wiping out a chunk of the life
savings and retirement accounts of many families.
Thousands of workers who were laid off have not returned
to work, and families face increasing pressures."
Correctly labeling the automatic pay increases a stealth
maneuver -- they go into effect unless lawmakers vote to
block them -- Wisconsin Sen. Russell Feingold ended up on
the losing side, although 35 lawmakers, including
Washington's Patty Murray, voted with him.
Consider that Maria Cantwell,our other senator, accepted
the boost. In the House the way was cleared for the raise
without a roll-call vote. Consider also that any one of our
House members -- Jennifer Dunn, George Nethercutt, Doc
Hastings, Brian Baird, Norm Dicks, Rick Larsen, Jay Inslee,
Jim McDermott, Adam Smith -- could have made the
arguments Feingold did. If anything, their constituents are
hurting worse than Feingold's.
seattlepi.nwsource.com |
