Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
1. Because Congress doesn't get annual wage increases?
Wed Feb 13, 2013, 12:25 PM
Feb 2013

Any Congressional wage increases are voted on individually. There are no automatic pay increases.

AllyCat

(16,211 posts)
2. But they have no problem getting them, even if they aren't "annual"
Wed Feb 13, 2013, 12:37 PM
Feb 2013

It takes YEARS to get even a modest minimum wage increase approved.

Omaha Steve

(99,686 posts)
3. Congress Votes Itself a Pay Raise...
Wed Feb 13, 2013, 12:51 PM
Feb 2013

I'm sure most workers on the minimum wage would take the same as Congress gets as a guaranteed raise! The current minimum rate has stayed the same ($7.25) since 2009.


http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/agencies/a/raise4congress.htm

Salary will jump by $3,400 a year in 2004

By Robert Longley,

Want a raise? Don't beg to your boss. Just vote yourself one. That's what the United States Congress just did. For the fifth year in a row, lawmakers voted not to reject their automatic "cost of living" raise that will increase the annual salary of members by $3,400 to a total of $158,103 per year.

In 1989, Congress passed an amendment allowing for the automatic raises, unless lawmakers specifically voted to reject it. Which Congress did, until 2000.

The fiscal year 2004 Transportation and Treasury Department Appropriations bill included Congress' 2.2 percent pay raise, along with a 4.1 percent raise for federal workers and military personnel.

"Members of Congress have the only job in the country whose occupants can set their own salary without regard to performance, profit, or economic climate," said Tom Schatz, president of the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste in a press release. "Clearly, members must think that money grows on trees. With a $480 billion deficit, the escalating cost of the war in Iraq, and a stagnant economy, Congress should be curbing spending, not lining their pockets at our expense."

FULL info at link.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
4. I'm not saying they don't vote themselves raises. You were saying they get annual raises
Wed Feb 13, 2013, 01:06 PM
Feb 2013

which isn't true.

Omaha Steve

(99,686 posts)
5. Sorry if it sounded that way
Wed Feb 13, 2013, 07:52 PM
Feb 2013

Anyway tie it to what Congress gets.

Republicans always say businesses can't afford the raise! Why do they think taxpayers can afford raises for Congress?


Cleita

(75,480 posts)
6. There was a formula used back when I was in college and the
Wed Feb 13, 2013, 07:55 PM
Feb 2013

jobs I got were pretty much minimum wage. However this was back in 1958 and you could actually live on minimum wage back then. I think it was tied to going rents and food expenses that the number crunchers were supposed to keep track of. I wish I knew how they did it, but it did work.

JVS

(61,935 posts)
7. That would just bring an end to congressional payraises.
Wed Feb 13, 2013, 08:04 PM
Feb 2013

Between the sweet lobbying jobs they line up for after their terms, and the fact that most politicians are already wealthy before seeking office, they really don't need the money. It's kind of how putting a horse in the Kentucky Derby is nearly always more expensive than the stake money.

EvolveOrConvolve

(6,452 posts)
8. Why not tie it to CEO salaries?
Wed Feb 13, 2013, 08:11 PM
Feb 2013

Make the minimum wage something like 7% of the average CEO salary and the field might actually start to level.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Instead of indexing the m...