Pay hike is new obstacle for omnibus

Posted: Monday, March 09, 2009 5:25 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Congress, Democrats, Republicans

From NBC's Ken Strickland
The $410 billion spending bill being debated on the Senate floor could be in trouble, but not because of earmarks or increased spending. The whole bill could go down over congressional pay increases and whether members are willing to stand up and say -- in these economic times -- they want one.

Tomorrow, the Senate will vote on an amendment from Republican Sen. David Vitter that would require members to vote publicly on their annual pay increases instead of the current system that lets it kick in automatically. While it may seem like a political no-brainer, if the amendment passes and changes the underlying bill, Democratic leaders have suggested they'd pull the bill from the floor.

"This system of automatic, auto-pilot pay raise really is offensive to the American people," Vitter said in a speech on the Senate floor. "There never has to be any inconvenient debate, any inconvenient votes whatsoever. They just happen automatically, no votes."

But Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye says Vitter's amendment isn't about pay raises -- but is instead designed to kill the underlying spending bill "knowing that the House of Representatives has indicated they will not take this bill back up." The government would then likely have to operate under last year's lower spending levels.

Inouye argues that what Vitter calls "pay raises" are merely "pay adjustments" based on inflation. "Most Americans will tell you that when they do receive a pay adjustment to their wages, they do not consider that to be a pay raise." (The bill on the floor DOES eliminate Congress' 2010 pay raise, but goes back on auto pilot after that.)

EMAIL THIS

Comments

John Galt (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 4:46 PM) I get your point, and I am a raging liberal. Did you go back and read the person I was responding to? Because I am pretty sure they were a Democrat. I was responding to the radicalism of it. Anarchy for the sake of overthrowing; not for the sake of furthering a specific agenda. So yeah, I guess I seemed a little extreme, too; but it was a bigger point being made.

Clara Kansas City, MO (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 5:40 PM)

Now this would be change! While I'm sure that Sen. Vitter will be accused by some of political grandstanding, he should be commended for pushing this amendment. Contrary to what Sen. Inouye thinks, right now most Americans aren't receiving "pay adjustments", or if they are, it's a 10-20% reduction in pay. It's time to end the entitlement attitude in Congress. If the Democrats in the House refuse to go along with this amendment, shame on them (hey, it'll save $30 billion in spending for the remainder of the fiscal year).

Tim D., Harrisburg, PA (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 5:42 PM)

The Democrats have been doing so well lately. It would be a shame to have this stupid bill derail them. Refuse the pay increase and hail it as a triumph in bipartisanship. If they kill this bill, they'll look just as bad as John Thain and the other disgraced CEOs.

Brian Crooks, Naperville, IL (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 5:50 PM)

Is Vitter ever anything but a waste of space and air? Could someone ask his wife?

Who's Sane (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 5:51 PM)

Speaking as a private sector worker, I don't get an "adjustment" every year. It's offensive to think that the people in our Congress (doing such a fine job, BTW) think they deserve to get raises based on boomtime economics.

My wage needs some adjustment, but in the current market my receivables aren't helping. It's tough to get paid when you spend all your time trying to collect.

Bubba, Lufkin, TX (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 5:53 PM)

The country is at war. An econmic war with far devastating potential as or more than some wars we have faced. Our very military leadership position could even be threatened if we do not get things working again soon.

Let everyone do their part in their daily lives and jobs where they have one, serve somewhere or help someone, rather than spend more time whining in uncivil tones, armchair quarterbacking and complaining endlessly 40 days into a new administration after years of sitting back accepting 10+ years of bills and earmarks including the 2.6 billion tax cut (which is essentially spending) bill on 2001 that deepened this recession while enhancing the well off and not pretty much growing everyone else.

J. Richter (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 5:54 PM)

The idea that congress get 'career' benefits for one term of service is galling. The fact that they get auto raises is a slap in the face. The fact that these bozos continue to pose and feign competency in light of troubling times is disgusting. And the fact that they receive inflation adjustments while the middle class has deflating (if any) income well isn't that just SPECIAL? These people are so effing out of touch. Vitter's a poser trying to make hay and the rest of them are just gluttonous b@st@rds. In troubled times, I think we should cut government by 50% send a senator home, by proportional elected ratios. Now that would be some change I could believe in.

Clara Kansas City, MO (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:09 PM)

If you're making over $100,000 per year with all the benefits they have, I'm not sure you need a "pay adjustment." Even if Vitter's motives aren't particularly pure, that doesn't make this a bad idea.

Lily, Billings, MT (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:09 PM)

So Vitter is working for a dollar a year? If not we can't afford him. He is paid too much and his pay could be used to feed some poor kids in New Orleans. When he donates his pay and runs his office strictly on his own wealth, rents or owns a house or apartment in or near DC with his own money not from Congressional pay he will have a leg to stand on. Until then he needs to STFU.

eagle1776 (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:11 PM)

Senator Inouye needs to get out of Washington DC and
mingle with the public if he thinks "Most Americans" will tell you they do not consider upward pay adjustments to be pay raises. Most of us are having to forgo any type of increases due to the ineptitude of Congress and they have the audacity to want pay raises!

Mobile, AL (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:14 PM)

Sen Vitter is showboating

Talk about 'Changing the Subject'

Sen Vitter ran as a 'Family Values' Republican
He was caught using the services of a DC madame

Apparently, he enjoys being dressed in daipers by hookers
(among other things)

What would you give to have THAT YouTubed ??

A number of people are thinking about running against him, including an 'Adult' movies starlet, 'Stormy' Daniels

Sounds like a Classics IV song....

'...Oh Sotrmy
Bring back that sunny day....'

From Wikipedia:

'...In early July 2007, Vitter's phone number was included in a published list of phone records of Pamela Martin and Associates, a company owned and run by Deborah Jeane Palfrey, also known as the "D.C. Madam", convicted by the U.S. government for running a prostitution service. Hustler magazine identified the phone number and contacted Vitter's office to ask about his connection to Palfrey.[135][136] The following day, Vitter issued a written statement:

This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible. Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling. Out of respect for my family, I will keep my discussion of the matter there - with God and them. But I certainly offer my deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way.[137]

The statement containing Vitter's apology said his telephone number was included in phone records dating from his days as a member of the House of Representatives.[7] Phone records show that Vitter's number was called by Palfrey's service five times, the first on October 12, 1999, and the last on February 27, 2001.[138] Two calls were placed while House roll call votes were in progress.[139]...'

MSierra, SF (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:18 PM)

A CLOSE Shave for David Vitter !!

'...If he [Vitter] does something like that, I'm walking away with one thing, and it's not alimony, trust me," referring to the incident of Lorena Bobbitt severing the penis of her husband...'

From Wikipedia:

'..."It's obviously a tremendous loss for the state. I think Livingston's stepping down makes a very powerful argument that Clinton should resign as well and move beyond this mess", referring to the Monica Lewinsky scandal of President Bill Clinton.[144] In 2000, his wife, Wendy Vitter, commenting on the same scandal, said, "I'm a lot more like Lorena Bobbitt than Hillary. If he [Vitter] does something like that, I'm walking away with one thing, and it's not alimony, trust me," referring to the incident of Lorena Bobbitt severing the penis of her husband and to Clinton's wife, Hillary Clinton.[143]...'

Did they sew it back on ??

MSierra, SF (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:21 PM)

Hello? You have got to be bs-ing me. I lost my job. No one is giving me a new one. I have a Master's degree and 20+ years experience. I haven't had an interview in months even though I keep circulating resumes for positions for which I'm qualified. If Congress gives themselves a "pay adjustment" in the middle of an economic crisis of tsumani proportions, then every single one of them need to be voted out. Companies are cutting employee salaries or freezing wages - Congress needs to do the same.

Rose (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:22 PM)

But, WAIT !!

There's MORE

From Wikipedia:

'...Canal Street Madam
On July 10, 2007, Jeanette Maier, the "Canal Street Madam", alleged that Vitter was a customer on more than one occasion in the 1990s, when Maier was identified by federal prosecutors as operating a $300 per hour brothel.[161] The Times-Picayune reported that "Maier offered no evidence or documents to support her claim."[162] Maier said that Vitter "was not a freak. He was not into anything unusual or kinky or weird," and that he favored one prostitute in particular, Wendy Cortez,[163][164][165][166] the name of the prostitute with whom Vitter had been accused, during his 2004 campaign, of having had a lengthy affair. Vitter denied that allegation during the campaign.[167] On July 12, Cortez told the Times-Picayune that Vitter was "a regular customer" during his time in the state legislature, but that they "did not have a romantic relationship." [168] On September 12, 2007, The Times-Picayune reported that the woman, whose real name was Wendy Ellis, had passed a lie detector exam.[169]...'

He sounds like a 'Family Values' Christian

MSierra, SF (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:23 PM)

What's this about Roland Burris ?

Should he be kicked out of the Senate ?
Has he brought disrepute to the Senate ?

From Wikipedia:

'...Marianne Means, a syndicated columnist for Hearst Newspapers, reported that Republican senators gave Vitter a "loud standing ovation" which she characterized as hypocritical by contrasting this with the Republican attitude toward President Clinton's marital infidelity.[176] The applause came after Vitter privately apologized to his colleagues.[29]...'

a "loud standing ovation" ?

WHAT ?
No 21 gun salute ??

MSierra, SF (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:27 PM)

Now I've heard everything – Diaper Dave Vitter talking about something that he says is "offensive to the American people."

News flash – Dave, the money you spent on whores is truly offensive.

Joe Don, Topeka, KS (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:29 PM)

Democrats like taking other people's money. It's in their nature. It's in their DNA. Republicans aren't much better, but at least someone trying to keep these people honest.

Dan Fielding, MI (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:31 PM)

FR >>> But Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye says Vitter's amendment isn't about pay raises -- but is instead designed to kill the underlying spending bill "knowing that the House of Representatives has indicated they will not take this bill back up." The government would then likely have to operate under last year's lower spending levels <<

Well US Government, welcome to the club! Every, and I mean every, business out in the hinterlands is making due with less. You should too!! You might have to each layoff one of your 20-30 staffers too. How will you manage?

Lynn Wheatly (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:34 PM)

For once Vitter is right! TRANSPARANCY should rule this bill, and auto pilot pay raises are not transparent.

tim, la puente, ca (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:37 PM)

C'mon! Let's give Congress' "pay adjustment" to the American people! Starting with Obama's pay. Redistribute the wealth to the American people and maybe start paying for that NON-stimulus bill. Let's start with Obama's bank account and start redistributing the wealth. Set an example, Barry!!!

Broke and broker, thanks to Obama (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:39 PM)

Absolutely right Mr. Vitter - sorry Mr. Inouye. You might be right but let's let the Senate say they have to have a pay increase by a vote. Nor should such a vote be an exception this budget cycle.

RichardinDelmar (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:40 PM)

600,000 jobs being lost EVERY MONTH and they have the nerve to even consider a pay INCREASE??? Call it what you want - - raise or adjustment - - it's just WRONG!!

Buy me a car while you're at it (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:40 PM)

I support Obama, but agree with Vitter on this one point (Thought I would never write those words in succession!) - The bigger issue is whether we want to continue to delay the entire bill over the obvious, but relatively small imperfections for political follie.

Don't let perfection be the enemy of the essential -

Achilles, Las Vegas, NV (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 6:47 PM)

The problem Reid has with Vitter's amendment is both political and procedural. If the bill is amended in the Senate, then the House must re-consider the bill as amended and the House has said they won't do that. The political problem is obvious and so is the solution. Before taking up the appropriations bill, bring a separate bill to the floor to accommodate Vitter's proposal. Vote Vitter's proposal up or down as a stand alone bill then take up the appropriations bill.

Bruce Oregon (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 7:19 PM)

Hey where do I sign up for those pay adjustments that aren't pay increases?

Not a senator (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 7:21 PM)

Funny... it was Vitter and the Republicans who initially created, and passed, this pay increase bill several years ago... where the pay increases were automatic, and you had to have a majority vote no to stop it... Now, he's complaining, after he's gotten many automatic pay increases in the past... Hypocrite? What a surprise!

Mike, Cleveland, OH (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 7:38 PM)

I am an Obama supporter, but I must admit that this is something that the democrats should not fight. Most americans are lucky to get a pay raise in these economic times...

Just like the failure of CEO's ,this country has been let down by it's politicians and they should go without until our economy recovers.

GP NW Indiana (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 7:54 PM)

Vitter, no matter his past sins, is 100% on the mark. Good God, have we become so bitter that no one can speak up, even when they have something good to say?

Citizen of Rome (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 8:16 PM)

Oh, goody! A new angle on obstruction, from the Gay Obstructionist Party!

I wonder what they will think of next?

JC from IA (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 8:50 PM)

Gee would they rather see more Americans lose there jobs while they continue to take from the American taxpayer what little money they have left...If you add up all there spiffs they can afford to give up there pay raise....If not then its time for American to finally realize that they put themselves first....they are about to approve 14 billion roughly in the last two bills of pork barrel spending...Let see pelozi took a europe trip while denying a review of the stimulus, while Americans continue to lose jobs, Schumer thinks we like pork, so he love wasting money, Reid has a non shovel ready train to go over the bridge to no where, and the list goes on...Chance of them turning it down slim very slim...
they will come up with many excuses why, well Americans cant come up with excuses why they should lose there jobs as washington continues politics as usual, while we continue to pay there bill.

Russell Fox Wells, Me (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 8:57 PM)

It is actually better for them to get "automatic" raises or 2 or 3%. Otherwise what they will do is skip the raises for 2 or 3 years then give themselves a "catchup" raise of of 20%, because they haven't had a raise in a few years.

KC, Newport News (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 9:39 PM)

Any federal employee gets a cost of living increase, from the janitor that cleans the Pentagon to the Supreme Court justices. D.C. is an outrageously expensive place to live, and these people have to pay for two homes to serve us.

I wish everyone would have been up in arms when the Bush administration spent a half a trillion dollars to pay private defense contractos, when they could have made those hundreds of thousands of jobs available to government employees, where the salaries wouldn't be hidden at UBS.

Carlo, Baton Rouge, Louisiana (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 9:57 PM)

Are we forgetting that Republicans set up the system for automatic raises when they were the party in power?

What a bunch of hypocrites!

Justin, Londonderry, NH (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 10:13 PM)

w.

Thanks.

Bad Chihuahua (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 10:43 PM)

In this case the messenger does not matter. Just as members of congress need to shed themselves of private jets at tax payer expenses they should disallow this pay increase. It is not like they have done anything to deserve it over the last 8 years.

And I do so wish that my raises had kept up with the inflationary rate. I can honestly say that I have my companies highest rating for performance but my raises have average less than 1.5% a year over the last 4 years. This year wiped that out. My pay was reduced by 5% on "account of the economy". Feels a bit like a Bruce Springsteen song.

No pay raise should be automatic. Make them vote on it.

Brad Mayes (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 11:03 PM)

I don't know the answer to this. But isn't it possible that by denying the inflation adjustment, the Senate may actually pay more in salary this year? Some of the latest figures I've seen has 2009 with deflation of around 2 percent. So if there is deflation, paying them without an inflation adjustment would be providing a higher salary. I admit, I do not know all the intracacies but I think this should be at least considered.

Sam, Philadelphia, PA (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 11:12 PM)

"For once Vitter is right! TRANSPARANCY should rule this bill . . ."

-----

If he wants transparency, why doesn't he dump his earmarks out of it? That would pay for the payraise by itself.

On the other hand, has Congress HAD a good year? What have the GnOP done to help this country?

You'll get nothing and like it.

spaldingyourlanguage, colorado springs (Sent Monday, March 09, 2009 11:14 PM)

MEDIA MATTERS...MSNBC spreading MISLEADING (LIES) about the economy...Working with the republicans hoping President Obama FAILS!

FAITH, PENSACOLA, FL (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:09 AM)

You know, most of us "regular working" people don't get an automatic pay increase and we certaining have no "vote" in whether we do or don't get one either. I think since the majority of us have had pay taken away this year due to the terrible economic situation then so should the congress. Why should they prosper at our expense? The rich always find a way to get richer!

Marcia Gerber, Moline, IL (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 12:41 AM)

Vitter is just showboating, distracting and obstructing. Great for helping his re-election campaign, but totally off task at moving the country forward.

John, Morgan Hill, California (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 1:16 AM)

I cannot figure out how to write to Chuck Todd. I am hearing him on C Span say he doesn't understand AIG. I want him to know that AIG provided credit derivative insurance to Lehman Bros and when Lehman went down, AIG was liable to PAY FOR ALL THOSE TOXIC ASSETS. AIG was willing to insure them because of course Lehman would never go down. That is where the money went. This from Springfield, Oregon. I am listening to you talk about all this. Why don't you know this?

Gaias Child, Springfield, Oregon (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 1:35 AM)

HEY I DO get a "pay adjustment" almost every year. They "adjsut" my contribution for health coverage, it goes up, in 18 year it has NEVER gone down. These dirt bags, what is THEIR contribution for coverage unattainable to anyone else? Nice demo-logic "the people love us and WANT us to get a raise, "I MEAN ADJUSTMENT" he IS right, I want him to get the SAME "adjustment" I get, MORE CONTRIBUTION UP FRONT, LESS COVERED OUT THE DOOR & HIGHER CO-PAYS TO BOOT! Let that be their "in-touch" with America adjustment. Remind me again how you believe dems aren't out of touch with Americans?

welcome to changeville

Ted K, Hyannis, MA (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 7:48 AM)

I can't even beleive myself! I am actually agreeing with a Republican ... I need an exorcist! Vitter is absolutely right on this one. How can any Congressman/person accept a pay raise or inflation adjustment, when so many Americans (VOTERS) are NOT doing well? Beats me!

Rafael DeJesus, Roswell, GA (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:29 AM)

How many of these Washington self serving paper hangers have been laid off?? """ 0 """!

FACT , REALITY (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:49 AM)

How many of these Washington self serving paper hangers have been laid off?? """ 0 """!

FACT , REALITY (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:50 AM)

I, as many of you know from my prior posts, am a "raging Liberal", a strongly identified Democrat, and a huge Obama supporter.

That being said, I think a vote on pay increases for congress is a good thing. I don't know about you guys, but my pay has stagnated for 2 years now, without increases equalling inflation. And no, there is no automatic increases in my business, I get raises based on good performance, and congress hasn't been performing all too well as of late...

I think in these deeply troubling times that EVERYONE need tighten thier belts, including, and ESPECIALLY, our champions.

For my fellow dems on this board who seem to be railing against Vitter, let's remember who we claim to be: People who look for solutions as opposed to whining about the other side.

Vitter's idea is not bad, it doesn't seem partisan, and it seems like the right medicine for a deep national illness.

Ted, Mid Michigan (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 9:08 AM)

I find myself in the odd postion of agreeing with Senator Vitter. With times like these where the economy is in the toilet few people are getting automatic raises and Congress should not either. As a good example they should refuse to take a raise and make do with what they have like the rest of us. Once the economy is fixed they may be able to have a raise again. I don't think it should be tied to the omnibus bill, however. Sen. Vitter's bill can be a stand alone bill where they can vote up or down.

eagle1776 (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:16 AM)

For those who keep saying that it was the republicans who put the pay raise in place, check your facts. It was put into place in 1989. REview the link below and you will find that the dems were in control of both the house and the senate at that time.

http://www.ask.com/bar?q=what+political+party+controlled+congress+in+1989%3F&page=1&qsrc=2106&zoom=History+of+Political+Party+Controls+Congress%7CWhich+Party+Controls+Congress%7CHow+Long+Have+the+Republicans+Controlled+Congress&ab=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.infoplease.com%2Fipa%2FA0774721.html

fact checker (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:26 AM)

This is OUTRAGEOUS! A pay increase for what? Partisan politics as ususal? Asleep at the economical and regulatorial (or lack thereof) wheel? The audicity of these thug club, and congress is nothing but, is a disgrace when millions of people in this country don't have jobs, healthcare, you name it.

J. Revick (Sent Tuesday, March 10, 2009 2:48 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1829383