The 2.5 % pay raise of $4,400 that Congress is accepting catches my ire because of two things. Last year, Dems said they would not accept a pay-raise until the minimum wage was increased--it was-- on the back of continuing the Iraq War (recall that the minimum wage hike was melded into the supplemental war bill).
So, instead of the Dems saying we will not accept a raise until we withdraw the troops from Iraq, they and their Republican counterparts are accepting the "automatic" pay hike. With about 160 troop deaths since the approval of the supplemetal, is it okay for Congress to get an extra $30 per death?
I don't think any legislator should feel good about accepting a raise since they have not done what many of us sent them there to do--to end this war.
3 comments:
More fun with math:
Two Iowa state senators expressed reluctance to index the minimum wage because they already increased it by 41%.
Congress is getting "only" a 2.5% raise. But working 40 hours/week for 52 weeks (and using the full increase in minimum wage, which actually occurs over two years), a minimum wage worker gets an extra--wait for it--$4368.
(That was my comment. I hit the button too quickly.)
I'm not sure if the annual increase was meant to match, but it seems to be in bad taste.
Here's another tidbit: The annual increase for all 535 members of Congress corresponds to about 13 Iraq-minutes.
Both CR and Anonymous get extra credit
Post a Comment