Congress Gets Another Pay Raise

[red states rule]

My, we should all be proud of the Dems. After a year where nothing was accomplished, they vote themselves a pay increase

I guess Reid and Pelosi will tell us the more money they make, the less corruption there will be

http://apnews.myway.com//article/20080109/D8U2JS6O0.html

[DrJohn]

So the republicans voted against the raise???

Or are they equally guilty of taking the money?

[Little-Acorn]

Republicans deserve the pay raise, for stopping the Dems' socialistic agenda so effectively.

The government governs best that governs least. A truism vividly demonstrated by this Congress.

[darin]

For what it's worth, $169K a year near DC isn't 'that' much. In fact, it's probably middle-class.

[manu1959]

For what it's worth, $169K a year near DC isn't 'that' much. In fact, it's probably middle-class.

169k a year for a years work......

but they work about 6 months so the effective salary is more like 340k

[darin]

I wouldn't say their 'effective' pay is 340k - but yeah, their pay is 169k for 6 months (or less) work - there at DC. I'm sure there is work outside of DC they must accomplish. But whatever - pay raises are a fact of life.

[hjmick]

For what it's worth, $169K a year near DC isn't 'that' much. In fact, it's probably middle-class.

For what it's worth, how many members of Congress weren't multi millionaires before they sought the office?

It's $169,000 for what? Three months of actual work, with three or four day work weeks and holidays off, taxpayer paid travel, better than average medical plan and an excellent retirement plan, is that $169,000 fair? Do they earn that money? I don't think so. My wife and I both work full time, with eight holidays a year, average medical, no dental, and a few weeks off a year (me five, her three), we barely come out over the $100k mark and live in California, just as expensive here as D.C. I'd imagine. I'd take $169k happily and not ask for a raise again. But that's just me I guess.

There was a time when members of Congress went to Washington, did the country's business, then returned to their homes to pursue their real jobs. They did not rely on the salaries of their government jobs, they worked for a living. Sounds like an idea whose time has returned if you ask me.

When it costs ten times more than the job pays just to get the job, then I'd say there's something wrong.

[Trigg]

This info is a little dated, but it's the best I could find.

Interresting piece of info that Fox had on the other day. Romney took no salary as Governor of Massachusetts.


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0630-05.htm


WASHINGTON - The US Congress, the domed bastion of democracy in the capital of capitalism, abounds with deep-pocketed politicians whose fortunes have made the legislative branch of government a millionaire's club.

In the 435-member House of Representatives, 123 elected officials earned at least one million dollars last year, according to recently released financial records made public each year.

Next door in the ornate Senate, whose blue-blooded pedigree includes a Kennedy and a Rockefeller, one in three people are millionaires.

By comparison, less than one percent of Americans make seven-figure incomes.

[darin]

Noboy 'got rich' though by being a Congressman/woman. Typically, people make their fortunes in private business, then run for office.

[Trigg]

Noboy 'got rich' though by being a Congressman/woman. Typically, people make their fortunes in private business, then run for office.

Exactly, which is why they need to stop giving themselves pay raises.

[retiredman]

Maine has two congressmen. One is a former paper mill worker from Millinocket... he certainly is not "getting rich" on a congressman's salary, but he's getting by.

[manu1959]

I wouldn't say their 'effective' pay is 340k - but yeah, their pay is 169k for 6 months (or less) work - there at DC. I'm sure there is work outside of DC they must accomplish. But whatever - pay raises are a fact of life.

so the other 6 months.........tell me would you work 6 months of the year for 169k

[Trigg]

Maine has two congressmen. One is a former paper mill worker from Millinocket... he certainly is not "getting rich" on a congressman's salary, but he's getting by.

I'm sorry but people do not "get by" on 165,000 a year.

He might not be getting rich, but he certainly isn't saving coupons for the weekly grocery visit.

[retiredman]

I'm sorry but people do not "get by" on 165,000 a year.

He might not be getting rich, but he certainly isn't saving coupons for the weekly grocery visit.

Why don't YOU try running two households....a home with children in school in Maine and a residence in Washington, DC... and fly back and forth between the two and see how far $165K takes YOU.

And, in any case, would you WANT your congressman to have to save coupons for the weekly grocery visit? Would paying congressmen minimum wage attract the sort of people YOU want to fill the legislative branch of our government?

[Gunny]

I wouldn't say their 'effective' pay is 340k - but yeah, their pay is 169k for 6 months (or less) work - there at DC. I'm sure there is work outside of DC they must accomplish. But whatever - pay raises are a fact of life.

Toss in their perks. Free housing in DC. Free parking in DC, and if you ever tried to park in the District you KNOW what a perk that is. Free trips home and back.

Lobbyists pay for most of their lunches and dinners.

I'll take the "measely" $169K with perks.

SOrry, but IMO, they DON'T deserve it. They accomplish little to nothing.

[retiredman]

I don't think their housing in DC is free.... got a link?

[Yurt]

I don't think their housing in DC is free.... got a link?

what does this have to do with pay raises? it's like arguing minimum wage...

[retiredman]

what does this have to do with pay raises? it's like arguing minimum wage...

I wonder, if you rented an apartment in Washington, DC, if your rent stayed exactly the same or whether, from time to time, it increased?

And I wonder how much it would cost you to rent an apartment in DC AND keep a home in your home state?

Certainly more than minimum wage could afford!:lol:

[MtnBiker]

Members of congress do have a Member's Representational Allowance that ranges between 1.2 and 1.4 million per member, intended for staff salaries and office expenses. It is conceivable that a portion of that allowance is used for housing of the congress member. As well as a $3,000 dollar annual income tax deduction for maintaining a second residence.

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=91

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=22

[Yurt]

I wonder, if you rented an apartment in Washington, DC, if your rent stayed exactly the same or whether, from time to time, it increased?

And I wonder how much it would cost you to rent an apartment in DC AND keep a home in your home state?

Certainly more than minimum wage could afford!:lol:

remind me again, who, who, controls the prices?

[retiredman]

remind me again, who, who, controls the prices?
a second term congressman from maine certainly has no control over the cost of apartments in the district of columbia.

[JohnDoe]

I don't think they should get an automatic pay raise, they make too much already imho.....especially if you look at the mean income and median income of the average person in the usa....

I realize that the cost of living anywhere decent in DC is high, but that also is a result of the incomes everyone makes there....if the incomes were not high, the cost of living would not be high just based on supply and demand.





Answer

Subject: Re: Average income in America
Answered By: pafalafa-ga on 28 Sep 2006 10:01 PDT

tonyrush-ga,

Your question is trickier than you might suppose, since income
statistics are generally given as median figures, rather than as mean
(average) figures.

What's more, they tend to be presented as income by household, rather
than by individual income.

However, with a bit of digging, it's possible to tease out what you're
after...average income numbers per person in the US.


The Census Bureau is the main source of up-to-date statistics on
income, and their most recent release of the 2005 data (made public
just last month, in August 2006), can be seen here:


http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032006/perinc/new01_001.htm
Selected Characteristics of People 15 Years and Over by Total Money
Income in 2005, Work Experience in 2005, Race, Hispanic Origin, and
Sex
[Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2006 Annual
Social and Economic Supplement


This table is chock full of different ways of slicing and dicing the
income statistics by age, race, gender, income level, etc, but
slightly more than half-way down in the document, you'll find these
data for "All People":



Median income -- $24,325

(Average Income) Mean income -- $35,499



Those are the data you're looking for.

The "Mean Income" is the straightforward average...add everyone's
income, and divide by the numer of people. The average income in the
US (for people 15 and over) is $35,499.


The "Median Income" is the midpoint of all incomes. If you listed out
everyone's income in rank order, there would be an equal numer of
incomes listed above and below the median income of $24,325.


You can read a bit more about means and medians here:


http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0001736.html



I trust this information is exactly what you needed, but if there's
anything else I can do for you, just let me know, and I'm at your
service.


pafalafa-ga


search strategy -- Used bookmarked site for Census data.

[MtnBiker]

I really do not have a problem with our represenatives making the amount of money they do as long as they are doing a quality job, which is certainly debateable. Do they make more than the mean income? sure they do. But this is how I look at it, there are more than 250 million people in this country and a little over 450 in the House and the Senate.

I'm less worried about their incomes and more worried about how they spend the other tax dollars.

[JohnDoe]

I really do not have a problem with our represenatives making the amount of money they do as long as they are doing a quality job, which is certainly debateable. Do they make more than the mean income? sure they do. But this is how I look at it, there are more than 250 million people in this country and a little over 450 in the House and the Senate.

I'm less worried about their incomes and more worried about how they spend the other tax dollars.
Based on their performance, they do not DESERVE a raise, let alone an automatic one imho....they are bouncing the checks....well..... borrowing from China and Saudi arabia and Japan to pay the bills....so they don't bounce the checks, but bottom line THEY are NOT doing their jobs and don't deserve half the money they are getting....i don't care if there is only 450 of them out of all of us.... grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. hahahahaha! sorry, they urk me!

jd

[red states rule]

Based on their performance, they do not DESERVE a raise, let alone an automatic one imho....they are bouncing the checks....well..... borrowing from China and Saudi arabia and Japan to pay the bills....so they don't bounce the checks, but bottom line THEY are NOT doing their jobs and don't deserve half the money they are getting....i don't care if there is only 450 of them out of all of us.... grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. hahahahaha! sorry, they urk me!

jd

I would not say the Reid/Pelosi run Cingress is a total failure. Dems have failed to push through their surrender in Iraq bill, the SCHIP rip off, the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, they have failed to lower gas prices as they promised. they gave up on their promise to work 5 days per week, and they dumped their PAYGO promise, and Dems are increasing the pork

All in all, Dems have lived down to all my expectations. Another opay hike comes as no surprise to me

[DrJohn]

I would not say the Reid/Pelosi run Cingress is a total failure. Dems have failed to push through their surrender in Iraq bill, the SCHIP rip off, the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, they have failed to lower gas prices as they promised. they gave up on their promise to work 5 days per week, and they dumped their PAYGO promise, and Dems are increasing the pork

All in all, Dems have lived down to all my expectations. Another opay hike comes as no surprise to me


So you're saing that the repubs won't take this raise???

[red states rule]

So you're saing that the repubs won't take this raise???

They should not. Here in PA 14 sitting Republicans were voted out of office in the last election over a pay raise

I was happy to help

I was opposed to the last one when Republicans were running Congress