Congressional pay raise not linked to performance

0 Comments | Insight on the News, August 19, 2002 | by Sean Paige

Congress quietly has given itself another pay raise--the fourth in as many years--increasing the annual salary of these reputed public servants to $155,000, a $5,000 boost over last year. In times past, when budget deficits and fiscal discipline were hotter topics, the automatic annual pay hikes would have caused a ruckus. Budget hawks (House Republicans usually) would have forced a vote on the matter, making everyone squirm and sending the raises down to defeat.

But the increases have in recent years become routine, slipped through quietly with nary a squawk. This was due in part to the temporarily rosy budget circumstances of several years ago and to a "gentlemen's agreement" between Republican and Democratic leaders not to exploit the issue. Deficits have returned and fiscal discipline is as needed as ever before, but even perceived hard-liners, including soon-to-retire House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas), are taking a softer tone on the subject of raises.

"I don't know why anybody in America would say, `Mr. Big Shot, get yourself elected to Congress and then be stupid enough to deny yourself the pay and benefits that your job warrants,'" Armey not long ago said on a Sunday talk show. "It's bizarre that people would have that kind of an unrealistic expectation of hardworking people."

That being a member of Congress is an all-encompassing, time-consuming occupation is hard to deny. But no one is forced by circumstances, hardship or conscription into a career as a vocational politician. What's truly "bizarre" is the notion that it's inherently as difficult as other professions, some of which may pay better, but few of which come with such prestige and perks--perhaps the greatest being the ability to get a healthy (and stealthy) annual pay hike without showing good reason for it.

And, according to at least one important performance measure, the latest raise isn't justified. The August recess and the end of the fiscal year loom, yet these "hardworking" members are way behind schedule on their most fundamental task--passing by Oct. 1 the 13 major appropriations bills that will fund the federal government through the next fiscal year. The House is expected to have passed only five of 13 spending bills by the August recess. Senate appropriators have moved eight bills out of committee as recess approaches, but only one has been passed by the Senate as a whole.

Such dallying virtually ensures another legislative logjam this fall. Accompanying it likely will be the kind of 11th-hour, everything-but-the-kitchen-sink "omnibus" spending bills that present pork-barrel politicians with an engraved invitation to plunder the Treasury. But "bringing home the bacon" is hard, hard work, according to pay-raise defenders. And members of Congress evidently deserve a hefty paycheck for the privilege of pillaging yours.