Congressman Barrow makes nat’l news: Moves to block Obama’s Congressional Pay Increase

December 31, 2012 13:15 pm

by Bridget Cantrell · 17 comments

The Weekly Standard reports and it’s posted on Drudge:

A Democratic member of Congress is moving to block President Barack Obama’s congressional pay increase. The move, led by John Barrow of Georgia, is to prevent the pay increase that Obama issued through an executive order from going into effect.

“At a time when American families face real hardship, it would be irresponsible to allow Congressional pay to increase,” says Barrow in a statement. “Too many families face uncertainty in the New Year for Congress to get a bonus. Folks expect us to be looking out for them, not ourselves, and we should be working to lower taxes, cut spending, and get our nation’s debt under control. Congress should get to work, and I urge the House leadership to do anything and everything possible to stop this pay increase for Members of Congress right away.”

Barrow’s office explains: “The Executive Order called for a pay increase for Members of Congress and other elected officials of 0.5 percent after March 27, 2013. During tonight’s votes, Congressman Barrow will urge his colleagues to sign his letter to House Leadership urging them to bring legislation to the floor to block the pay increase.”

Here’s the letter Barrow is circulating to send to House leadership: 

Dear Speaker Boehner, Leader Cantor, Leader Pelosi, Whip Hoyer,

We oppose the pay increase for Members of Congress granted by Executive Order on December 27, 2012. The Executive Order would raise our salaries by $900 per year, beginning March 27, 2013.

We believe that it is inappropriate for Members of Congress to receive a pay increase of any size while American families and taxpayers continue to face tough economic times.

We urge you to bring legislation to the floor to stop this pay adjustment as soon as possible.

Three Jack December 31, 2012 at 1:21 pm

Good move by Barrow. Where are the ‘conservative’ GOPers on this one? Maybe they are putting together legislation to cut congress, executive and judicial branch pay based on failure to perform assigned duties. Nah, that would actually make some sense.

John Konop December 31, 2012 at 1:58 pm

Why not peg their pay increases and decreases to what happens to real wages for the average American? If the rate goes down like since the 70’s their pay goes down at the same % rate, if it goes up they get the same rate of increase by % . Why not put congress on a 401k savings like the rest of us? Should they not pay for their own retirement?

Three Jack December 31, 2012 at 2:12 pm

How about peg it on approval rating:
50% and above – give yourself a raise, pick the number.
20% – 50% – tagged to real wages
20% and below – cut pay in half and no appearances on any talking head shows

You really can’t make up this scenario:
– the largest tax increase in American history looms along with the deepest military spending cuts ever,
– total chaos in the mideast while the SecState is incapacitated with {fill in ailment},
– rampant violence including some instances with guns involved,
– fuel prices up 100%,
– education system disaster
– etc, etc, etc

so let’s give those responsible a pay raise. Unfreakinbelievable!

DavidTC January 1, 2013 at 5:15 pm

…why is the President increasing Congress’s wages in the first place? Aren’t those supposed to be set by the previous Congress?

Or is this one of those hilarities where Congress is _so_ dysfunctional they can’t even vote on their own wages?

mpierce December 31, 2012 at 3:25 pm

Pay = Base salary x (1 + (1 – debt/gdp))

John Konop December 31, 2012 at 3:39 pm

You realize for real wages to grow all must be in blance. And you cannot hide behind playing games with interest rates, printing money, easy debt………all of it shakes out via real wages……..

IndyInjun December 31, 2012 at 3:47 pm

As Mr. Bernanke will have beaten into his sorry arse by the Laws of Mathematics….

mpierce December 31, 2012 at 4:27 pm

Congress has more control over debt than they do real wages. Also what measure of inflation would they use. They already ignore food and energy. Benefits and pensions aren’t included in real wages.

Real wages are also facing pressure from globalization. Are they going to push for higher minimum wages and thus raise unemployment in trying to increase wages?

John Konop December 31, 2012 at 4:40 pm

Congress controls most factors that contribute to real wages ie trade, spending, energy, education, infrastructure…….

The real wage problem has very little to do with minimum wage. The biggest factor has to do with poorly negotiated trade deals, lack of fiscal controls, the lack of investment into vo-tech training verse NCLB, crumbling infrastructure, and not taking on health care cost rising 2 to 3 times faster than GDP.

mpierce January 1, 2013 at 12:52 am

I agree that minimum wage has little to do with real wages, although I believe it is tied into several union contracts. But that is typically where politicians look the affect wage changes.

Congress may control many aspects which affect wages, but they don’t set them and they have less control over wages than national debt.

Vo-tech investments and NCLB? I think you’re stretching. If those are your ideas of Congressional control over real wages, I’ll pass.

John Konop January 1, 2013 at 8:42 am

Right now we have 3 million job openings in the vo-tech. We have created the mess by requiring all kids to take college rep or out ie NCLB. The latest break troughs in education are just basic tracking based on aptitude. This is how the school district near Macon turned around the district. This is why Mass has way more success than Georgia in education. The best countries on the world all do tracking ie anti NCLB. The one size fit all Bush/Kennedy plan wasted a ton of money and kept pushing us in the wrong direction. Both parties keep selling public that some magical plan will change IQ bell curve. I have news it is what it is.

mpierce January 1, 2013 at 3:27 pm

I don’t disagree with you on the advantages of multi-track education. But that is not (should not be) the purview of the U.S. Congress. That is a state issue.

John Konop January 1, 2013 at 5:20 pm

NCLB is a federal unfounded mandate passed by congress. I do agree, schools should be controlled by a local issue. The jobs, training and economic needs do vary by community. Nothing in the constitution guarantees results, only a voice. Both parties have taking away our voices via NCLB, executive orders………..

Rick Day December 31, 2012 at 2:20 pm

Barrow: he so wants to be a conservative, doesn’t he?

This has enough ‘gotcha’ to get everyone gooey!

shank black December 31, 2012 at 4:30 pm

A little goo never hurt anyone. Who knows, maybe this is the start of something BIG? It starts with a spark.

A note from Bridget: You’re new here, SB. Welcome. A kind warning to not be vulgar. Rick Day is not the role model you seek.

ricstewart December 31, 2012 at 2:27 pm

He didn’t wait long after the election to begin his populist pandering again, now did he?

IndyInjun December 31, 2012 at 3:28 pm

John Barrow has a lot better claim on conservatism than do quite a few on the GOP side of the Georgia delegation and nearly all in the worthless legislature.

Running the RINO Burns and a slew of even lighter weight fakes since then has proven to be a waste of time and money for the Republicans.

I detested his Porkulous vote and I strongly dislike his party. (up from considering the Dems the spawn of Satan, courtesy of the equally rotten GOP having provided me multiple points of reference)

If he changes his party to GOP and his residence to Evans, Saxby would be a goner or any other of our worthless GOP officials Barrow should deign to oppose, for that matter.

This move is totally in sequence with his recent campaign. Barrow can totally brutalize statewide GOPers for their War on the Middle Class just like he did Lee Anderson.

Comments on this entry are closed.