Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Opie

Congress will be Voting Themselves a Raise?

Recommended Posts

And before this becomes an “us vs them” thing...

It’s not really clear (to me at least) exactly who should have been at that hearing but there were Dems and GOP missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TobiasFunke said:

I mean it's not 100% of course, anything can get hung up, and I'm just relying on media reports that this one is a sure thing. It's a reauthorization, not a new bill, so that makes it much less likely to hit a snag. But yeah, there's hearings on basically everything. There were 13 hearings/markups going on at the same time as this one just in the House.

More broadly- in my experience it's a ridiculously busy and stressful job. Constantly pulled in five different directions any time you're at the office, risking stuff like this if you let someone pull you in the wrong direction, no wasting away the day screwing around on a message board or reading up on your favorite teams or hobbies. Kinda seems miserable, to be honest. Not all of them do the job that way, but I think most do.

Maybe we'll wait another 15 or 18 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2019 at 7:53 AM, Summer Wheat said:

I will bet that AOC will lead the way and won`t take the raise, that is not what she is about.

You lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Opie said:

Lol at AOC pointing to the lack of COL raise as anywhere near an impactful reason for dark money loopholes. They'd need a heck of a lot more than a COL bump to shut down that gravy train. She's such a fool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mr Anonymous said:

Lol at AOC pointing to the lack of COL raise as anywhere near an impactful reason for dark money loopholes. They'd need a heck of a lot more than a COL bump to shut down that gravy train. She's such a fool.

Yeah, that was a weird position for her to take. I think her reasoning is way off. Your last sentence, though, is probably more wrongheaded than anything she said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Maurile Tremblay said:

Yeah, that was a weird position for her to take. I think her reasoning is way off. Your last sentence, though, is probably more wrongheaded than anything she said.

Lol, I feel pretty good about it bearing out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it really a story that there will be a 2-3% pay raise for Congresspeople?

Stop the presses! A cost of living increase to a barely liveable DC wage!

yawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, zoonation said:

Is it really a story that there will be a 2-3% pay raise for Congresspeople?

Stop the presses! A cost of living increase to a barely liveable DC wage!

yawn

What percentage of people in DC make more than they do?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Yeah, that was a weird position for her to take. I think her reasoning is way off. Your last sentence, though, is probably more wrongheaded than anything she said.

It isnt a weird position. It is a dishonest one. She is trying to mislead people into thinking giving her more money is a good thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mr Anonymous said:

Lol at AOC pointing to the lack of COL raise as anywhere near an impactful reason for dark money loopholes. They'd need a heck of a lot more than a COL bump to shut down that gravy train. She's such a fool.

I am an AOC supporter but that is a lame excuse.  Just cast your vote and don`t say anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

Median income is less than 100k for dc. 

Most DC households don't have to maintain two homes (what we should really do is offer members subsidized 1 BR apartments instead of a pay hike). Also, that figure includes a lot of people who have subsidized housing of their own, people/families who bought a rowhouse or something pre-gentrification and now own it outright, interns and recent college grads, etc.

FWIW I make just a little less than members of Congress and live in DC with my family of 5. We're not poor, but we're also far from rich. I do it because the trade-off is working an easy, low-stress job that I like and that gives me lots of flexibility and family time. If I had to work half as hard as the average member of Congress for my salary I would have left for a high-paying swampy job years ago.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

Most DC households don't have to maintain two homes (what we should really do is offer members subsidized 1 BR apartments instead of a pay hike). Also, that figure includes a lot of people who have subsidized housing of their own, people/families who bought a rowhouse or something pre-gentrification and now own it outright, interns and recent college grads, etc.

FWIW I make just a little less than members of Congress and live in DC with my family of 5. We're not poor, but we're also far from rich. I do it because the trade-off is working an easy, low-stress job that I like and that gives me lots of flexibility and family time. If I had to work half as hard as the average member of Congress for my salary I would have left for a high-paying swampy job years ago.

 

Why are you such a congressional apologist? If their jobs were so filled with work and they were so busy they wouldnt be able to spend so much time on the campaign trail for themselves or others in the party.

Having lunch with donors isnt work.

They put their jobs on hold for extended periods of time quite regularly to be kissing babies in other states. 

Should we give them raises for that too? Maybe like a bonus program. Kiss ten babies in ten states and get 10k.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

What percentage of people in DC make more than they do?   

That do a job that demanding? I’d guess a massive percentage.   185k in DC is not a lot of money.  You dont pay these people and they become even more susceptible to corruption. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

Why are you such a congressional apologist? If their jobs were so filled with work and they were so busy they wouldnt be able to spend so much time on the campaign trail for themselves or others in the party.

Having lunch with donors isnt work.

They put their jobs on hold for extended periods of time quite regularly to be kissing babies in other states. 

Should we give them raises for that too? Maybe like a bonus program. Kiss ten babies in ten states and get 10k.

 

 

This is a weird reply to a simple post about cost of living in my city. But I'll answer anyway: campaigning and kissing babies is part of the job. We make it part of their job by voting for people who do cheesy op-eds over people who labor over bureaucratic details and other legislative matters relegated to the back pages of the newspaper. If voters preferred members who spent 14 hours a day poring over draft bills and speaking to industry experts over members who had lunch with donors and kissed babies, they'd be doing more of the former and less of the latter. It's not their fault we're idiots who choose leaders because a reality TV show convinced us they're good at business or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

Most DC households don't have to maintain two homes (what we should really do is offer members subsidized 1 BR apartments instead of a pay hike).

 

I've been thinking maybe the states and congressional districts should kick in something for their senators and representatives. Maybe pay them per diem. Or just an additional salary as determined by each district.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dgreen said:

I've been thinking maybe the states and congressional districts should kick in something for their senators and representatives. Maybe pay them per diem. Or just an additional salary as determined by each district.

I think the more you pay these people the better.  However that gets done.  Again, easily bought when you don’t make a lot.  Now, that obviously wouldn’t stop corruption.  

But this is not news.  It is stupid.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dgreen said:

I've been thinking maybe the states and congressional districts should kick in something for their senators and representatives. Maybe pay them per diem. Or just an additional salary as determined by each district.

I like the idea of just putting them up in various reasonably priced 1 BRs on the condition they can't sublet. That basically amounts to a a tax-free $30,000 raise for those who need it, would be rejected by those who don't (Darrell Issa ain't gonna slum it in a 1 BR in a Navy Yard high rise), covers a work-related necessity, and wouldn't engender nearly as much opposition.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

I like the idea of just putting them up in various reasonably priced 1 BRs on the condition they can't sublet. That basically amounts to a a tax-free $30,000 raise for those who need it, would be rejected by those who don't (Darrell Issa ain't gonna slum it in a 1 BR in a Navy Yard high rise), covers a work-related necessity, and wouldn't engender nearly as much opposition.

Yeah, something like this could work too. How much time do they spend in DC?

Whatever the compensation is, thoughts on it being funded by the states/congressional districts rather than federal? Wyoming would only have to come up with about $100k and California about $1.5m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

I like the idea of just putting them up in various reasonably priced 1 BRs on the condition they can't sublet. That basically amounts to a a tax-free $30,000 raise for those who need it, would be rejected by those who don't (Darrell Issa ain't gonna slum it in a 1 BR in a Navy Yard high rise), covers a work-related necessity, and wouldn't engender nearly as much opposition.

But Issa would still accept the apartment for use as a storage locker of sorts, which is why there should be no rule against subletting — so that the apartments would be lived in rather than used for lesser purposes.

Extra cash still seems like a much easier option than having the federal government become a landlord providing 1 BR apartments.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dgreen said:

Is there anything currently stopping states from paying their representatives something extra?

I think there’s probably a federal law prohibiting federal Congresspersons from accepting pay from third-party entities they’re not working for. If there’s not, there should be. Call it an anti-bribery statute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may try to get a raise from my boss, explaining that absent such I may succumb to unethical or criminal behavior to supplement my income.  They can keep me from that temptation, maybe. I will see whether that argument impresses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

I may try to get a raise from my boss, explaining that absent such I may succumb to unethical or criminal behavior to supplement my income.  They can keep me from that temptation, maybe. I will see whether that argument impresses.

Do you help to make policy in the legislative branch of a presidential democracy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that giving people more money makes them less susceptible to corruption doesn’t really jibe with my experience. There may be good reasons to raise Congressional pay. I don’t think that’s one of them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, zoonation said:

Do you help to make policy in the legislative branch of a presidential democracy?

I do not. I do help to make policy for the legislative and administrative/executive branches of a Council directed municipality that resides in our democratic republic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

I do not. I do help to make policy for the legislative and administrative/executive branches of a Council directed municipality that resides in our democratic republic.

You should get a raise.  I bet the lobbying pressures are enormous!

i bet you’d be good at that job.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

But Issa would still accept the apartment for use as a storage locker of sorts, which is why there should be no rule against subletting — so that the apartments would be lived in rather than used for lesser purposes.

Extra cash still seems like a much easier option than having the federal government become a landlord providing 1 BR apartments.

I wouldn't say landlord, it would just be a subsidy. Plenty of buildings nearby. But yeah, there would obviously be some details to work out. Not just the subletting/storage thing but also security if you put a bunch of them in the same building. I was mostly just looking for a more palatable move since salary increases seem to be a sensitive subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, zoonation said:

You should get a raise.  I bet the lobbying pressures are enormous!

i bet you’d be good at that job.  

I am directed by elected and appointed officials.  Any lobbying generally goes through them.  I have been approached.  I gently but firmly rebuffed and redirected those inquiries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congress should get paid the same as the median American income, if even that.

When did the idea of "public service" go out the window?  It's not supposed to be a cushy lifestyle that gets you rich.  It shouldn't be something that's so awesome that people want to take shady donations that beholden them to the will of corporations to make sure they can get re-elected into their cushy gig.  It's supposed to be a sacrifice, and a ****ty job that only people who really care about helping Americans and are willing to put their own life aside would ever dream of subjecting themselves to.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

Congress should get paid the same as the median American income, if even that.

When did the idea of "public service" go out the window?  It's not supposed to be a cushy lifestyle that gets you rich.  It shouldn't be something that's so awesome that people want to take shady donations that beholden them to the will of corporations to make sure they can get re-elected into their cushy gig.  It's supposed to be a sacrifice, and a ****ty job that only people who really care about helping Americans and are willing to put their own life aside would ever dream of subjecting themselves to.

i can see that side.  i can see the other side too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, FreeBaGeL said:

Congress should get paid the same as the median American income, if even that.

When did the idea of "public service" go out the window?  It's not supposed to be a cushy lifestyle that gets you rich.  It shouldn't be something that's so awesome that people want to take shady donations that beholden them to the will of corporations to make sure they can get re-elected into their cushy gig.  It's supposed to be a sacrifice, and a ****ty job that only people who really care about helping Americans and are willing to put their own life aside would ever dream of subjecting themselves to.

You lost me here.

As for the rest- that's a noble ideal, but it ignores reality. The reality is that if even if the job is a noble public service, you will get worse and fewer candidates if you pay less. The candidates wouldn't only be "only people who really care about helping Americans and are willing to put their own life aside." It would only be rich/old people who could afford to take the job without having to make that sacrifice in the first place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a job. Not service in Jesus of Nazareth's Ministry.  

No one is getting rich off a government salary.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, zoonation said:

That do a job that demanding? I’d guess a massive percentage.   185k in DC is not a lot of money.  You dont pay these people and they become even more susceptible to corruption. 

Right.  Rich people making lots of money are never corrupt.  It's the poor folk taking all the bribes.  And 185K is pretty damn good in the DC area.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, zoonation said:

It’s a job. Not service in Jesus of Nazareth's Ministry.  

No one is getting rich off a government salary.  

Yet many are still getting rich.  Interesting how that happens.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might have to change my mind about this. The sheer ineptitude that the House Democrats are demonstrating regarding the Mueller probe is pathetic even for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I might have to change my mind about this. The sheer ineptitude that the House Democrats are demonstrating regarding the Mueller probe is pathetic even for them.

Has that ever happened to you around here?  Should start a thread if it ever does. 😉

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.