Washington Times: Inside the Beltway:
In passing the 2005 Transportation, Treasury and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, Congress this week handed itself a pay raise - jacking up its annual salary nearly $4,000 above a current income of $158,000.It marks the sixth straight year that Congress has accepted an automatic pay raise. Hats off to two-term Rep. Jim Matheson, Utah Democrat, who last week made a procedural attempt to prevent the annual pay increase, but his measure was voted down 235 to 170.
All site contents copyright © 2004 News World Communications, Inc.
Matheson donates his pay raise to local charities every time his attempt to vote against this shit fails. More here:
The congressman's remarks did little to prevent what has become almost automatic since 1989 when lawmakers opted to take politics out of pay raises. House members voted 235 to 170 Tuesday on a procedural measure that essentially endorses the pay raise and allows the annual cost-of-living allowance to take effect.Not since 1998 has Congress turned down the raise, and it has only done so five times in the past 14 years. The base salary for members of Congress -- those in leadership positions earn more -- this year is $158,100.
Copyright ©2004 The Spectrum. All rights reserved.
Here are Matheson's comments:
Mr. MATHESON. Mr. Speaker, these are difficult times for our Nation. We are fighting terrorism on numerous fronts. We have commitments to keep our troops overseas, and we struggle to meet our needs here at home. Our economy needs a boost, unemployment is high, and our future budget deficits are predicted to be the highest in the history of this great Nation.Now is not the time for Members of Congress to be voting themselves a pay raise. We need to show the American people that we are willing to make sacrifices. We need to budget, live within our means, and make careful spending decisions based on our most pressing priorities.
Mr. Speaker, let us send a signal to the American people that we recognize their struggle in today's economy. Vote "no'' on the previous question so we can have an opportunity to block the automatic cost-of-living adjustment to Members of Congress. This vote ought to be cast in the light of day and on the record. A "no'' vote on the previous question will allow Members to vote up or down on the cost-of-living adjustment.
If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule. My amendment will block the fiscal year 2005 automatic cost-of-living pay raise for Members of Congress. Because this amendment requires a waiver, the only way to get to this issue is to defeat the previous question. Therefore, I urge Members to vote "no'' on the previous question.
Here are the House Reps who voted for Matheson's measure to be defeated. Keep this list in mind the next time you hear a Rep bitch about the budget deficit, a lack of funds for programs, or loudly voicing concern for the poor. Texans are ALL CAPS; Austin reps are bolded:
Abercrombie Akin Andrews Baca Bachus BARTON (TX) Bass Berman Biggert Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Blumenauer Blunt Boehner BONILLA Bono Brady (PA) Brown (SC) Brown, Corrine Brown-Waite, Ginny Butterfield Buyer Calvert Camp Cantor Capuano Cardin --CARTER-- Clay Clyburn Cole Collins Cooper Cox Cramer Crane Crenshaw Cubin CULBERSON Cummings Cunningham Davis (AL) Davis (FL) Davis (IL) Davis, Tom Deal (GA) DeGette Delahunt DeLauro DELAY Diaz-Balart, L. Diaz-Balart, M. Dicks Dingell Dooley (CA) Doolittle Doyle Dreier Dunn Ehlers Emanuel Eshoo Everett Farr Fattah Feeney Ferguson Foley Frank (MA) Frelinghuysen FROST Gallegly Garrett (NJ) Gilchrest Gillmor GONZALEZ Goodlatte Goss GRANGER GREEN (TX) Grijalva Gutierrez Gutknecht Harman Hastings (WA) Hefley Herger Hinchey HINOJOSA Hobson Hoeffel Hoekstra Honda Houghton Hoyer Hunter Hyde Israel Issa Istook Jackson (IL) JACKSON-LEE (TX) Jefferson JOHNSON, SAM Jones (OH) Kanjorski Kennedy (RI) Kilpatrick King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kirk Kline Knollenberg Kolbe Lantos Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) LaTourette Leach Lee Levin Lewis (CA) Lewis (GA) Linder Lipinski Lowey Lucas (OK) Maloney Manzullo Markey Matsui McCarthy (MO) McCarthy (NY) McCotter McCrery McDermott McHugh McKeon McNulty Meehan Meek (FL) Meeks (NY) Menendez Millender- McDonald Miller (MI) Miller, Gary Miller, George Mollohan Moran (VA) Murtha Myrick Nadler Neal (MA) Ney Nunes Oberstar Olver ORTIZ Osborne Otter Oxley Pallone Pascrell Pastor Payne Pelosi Pence Pickering Pombo Portman Pryce (OH) Putnam Quinn Radanovich Rangel Regula Rehberg REYES Reynolds RODRIGUEZ Rogers (KY) Rohrabacher Ros-Lehtinen Rothman Roybal-Allard Ruppersberger Rush Sabo Saxton Schakowsky Scott (GA) Scott (VA) Sessions Shadegg Shaw Sherman Simpson Skelton Smith (MI) Smith (NJ) --SMITH (TX)-- Solis Souder Spratt Stark Sweeney Tauscher Thomas Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) THORNBERRY Tiberi Turner (OH) Van Hollen Velazquez Visclosky Walsh Waters Watson Watt Waxman Weiner Weldon (FL) Weldon (PA) Weller Wexler Wicker Wilson (NM) Wilson (SC) Wolf Woolsey Wynn Young (AK) Young (FL)These people didn't cast a vote:
Ackerman
Baker
Ballenger
Blackburn
Boehlert
Bonner
Burton (IN)
Cannon
Conyers
Crowley
Engel
Gephardt
Greenwood
Hastings (FL)
JOHNSON, EDDIE B.
Kleczka
Langevin
McInnis
Miller (FL)
Nethercutt
Owens
Schrock
Serrano
Sherwood
Slaughter
Tauzin
Towns
Whitfield
ATTENTION: Comments are closed. You are viewing my old blog, archived for search engine purposes.
To view the new blog, please go to the homepage. To find the current version of this entry, search here.
I'd like a copy of those pdf files! I want to know who voted FOR, who voted AGAINST, and who didn't have the ba- - s to vote either way!
Can you say Term Limits? The days of the Professional, career politician SHOULD be over! 50 states need to vote for Strict Term Limits. Vote OUT every one who's been in office more than two terms. Vote IN citizen government representatives as was mandated in our own Constitution. Remember that document? It stood us in very good stead for a very long time. This country started its downward spiral when it started believing that our Constitution needed to be re-written. Laws are LAWS. And should NOT be interpreted to benefit those who are making the law. Amendments (that was supposed to mean changes) to the Constitution are supposed to be voted into place by a 2/3 majority of American CITIZENS. They are NOT supposed to be adopted by judges who want to interpret laws according to what THEY think, or what THEY want. They are NOT supposed to be interpreted in view of International Law.
Not until American voters wake up from their coma of complacency will this country again shine as it has in the past.
If you can think of a way to wake them, let me know.
Our so-called "leaders" are interested only in what is good for them. They have become so power-hungry that they don't give a damn what else goes on.
they get a big fat pay raise and here i am making $759.00 a month and have been told i was over paid for 4 different months and must pay back $2300.00 . and i only $759.00 a month so now i will have $50.00 a month less. whats wrong with this picture?. Roger Larson 2900 grand ave lot 2237 Kearney Ne 68847
Posted by: Roger Larson on April 12, 2006 08:21 PM