Lawmakers to Get Federal Pay Raise(Teachers Lose Tax Breaks)

[RedEarth]

WASHINGTON -- With little debate, House lawmakers on Tuesday included themselves as part of a pay raise that all federal employees will receive next year.

The cost-of-living raise would be the sixth straight for members of the House and Senate, boosting the salaries of lawmakers, now $158,100, by about $4,000 in the new calender year.

The measure stipulates that civil servants get raises of 3.5 percent, the same as military personnel will receive next year. Under a complicated formula, that translates to 2.5 percent for members of Congress.

Like last year, the only House member to speak out against the automatic raise was Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah. "Now is not the time for members of Congress to be voting themselves a pay raise," he said. "Let us send a signal to the American people that we recognize their struggle in America's economy."

But by a 235-170 vote, the House rejected Matheson's procedural attempt to get a direct vote on the pay raise. In 1989, Congress decided to make annual cost-of-living pay increases automatic unless the lawmakers voted otherwise.

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-congress-pay-raise,0,1349234,print.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines

this pay raise is no big deal, teachers will pay for it...no sweat...

"Meanwhile, a $250 federal tax deduction for teachers that helped defray out-of-pocket spending expired this year. "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=826603&mesg_id=826603

[NC_Nurse]

1. Where's my F***in'

cost-of-living raise? I'd be happy if I made half of what these people make!

Disgusting! So much for "sacrificing" during the country's time of need.

:mad:

[napi21]

2. They sure don't deserve it, but if they voted against it, would that also

mean the military, and everyone else would not get an increser as well? I think this also applies to social security recipients. They just increased their costs for medicare. It's not fair to restrict their annual increase.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

3. I'm a teacher

my district managed to give us a $400 pay raise this year. They did that by cutting out our dental coverage. It was that or no raise and a lot of teachers were threatening to go to nearby districts (I am in a big metro area in Texas).

The city government is strapped, the district is strapped, the state is strapped and our property taxes keep going higher and higher with another hike on the way.

Sigh.

[Deja Q]

4. Corrupt is as corrupt does

I no longer care about voting. They only want in because they live high on the hog FOR LIFE. Their post-public-service bennies are astronomical.

With the future so bleak, it makes no difference.

[2Design]

5. Every year they do this for themselves while cutting others

they are making 6 figures already while the rest of us are paying their salaries and their health care - while we go without

[Child_Of_Isis]

7. That's the plan!

Give it to them while we do without. We aren't important like they are....we just support them. And like another poster said...usually for LIFE!

[Deja Q]

12. Just like every kingdom throughout human history, except...

In past societies it was but one king and a small number of higher-ups who share the booty.

Today it's a king and a rather larger number who dine on us.

Everything's changed yet it's still the same.

[ixion]

6. gee, I haven't had a cost of living salary increase in about 3 years

must be really cool to be able to usurp other people's money. :grr:

[Green Lantern]

8. We need

to clean house. Throw them all out and start fresh, with a pay scale that starts at minimum wage with no benefits.

[2Design]

9. 4,000 x 15 years = $60,000 raises in 15 years - this is why they fight

so hard with lies to stay in office. There is no where else they can make this kind of money

[MichiganVote]

10. Precisely. Without these jobs they's all be unemployed.

Vote them all out. Every last one that voted for this joke.

[2Design]

11. This is automatic unless they decide not to have - the one senator

tried to have a vote that would show who voted for and against - they (rethugs probably) did not let that happen