He's not alone: AOC and others have argued lawmakers should be paid more in order to protect against corruption and make the job more accessible.
Rank-and-file members of both the House and Senate are paid $174,000 a year.
That probably seems like a decent amount of money, and it is: The median household income in 2022 was $74,580, according to the US Census.
But consider that members of Congress generally have to maintain two residences — one in Washington, DC, and one in their home state — and that they haven't gotten a raise since 2009.
Inflation, meanwhile, has eaten away at the value of that salary over time: If lawmakers' salaries had kept pace with inflation, they would be paid over $250,000 today.
Rep. Patrick McHenry, a North Carolina Republican who served as the interim speaker of the House following Kevin McCarthy's ouster, told The Dispatch that congressional pay needed to be raised in order to attract "credible people to run for office."
Let's just build a big congressional dorm with furnished studio apartments and make them all live there when Congress is in session. It would save the government a fortune in cost of living reimbursements and security costs.
@MicroWave@steinbring We should not increase their pay. Instead we should simply provide housing connected with public transit so members of Congress can cut some of their costs and actually experience what it is like to live this way. They already get great healthcare and access to a fitness center and cafeteria.
In fact, the 100 highest earners in Congress more than doubled (https://ballotpedia.org/Personal_Gain_Index_(U.S._Congress) their personal wealth in a single year, with the top 10 "earners" increasing their wealth on average 422% in a single year!
A family friend was elected to Congress, and he had been an HVAC contractor prior to his election, and the move to DC was financially difficult because DC housing is very expensive and they still had a mortgage back in their district.
How did he work things out? He started accepting donations, and that's as slippery slope. He's become as corrupt as they come and I'm ashamed to have been his friend.
To be fair, they need a house in their hometown and a house in DC. That can be extremely expensive. You want congressmen to be financially independent so that they don't need to accept bribes and such.
are you fucking kidding me. if my salary had kept up with inflation, id be making 250k. if average people dont get that benefit, why the fuck should they.
on top of that, they have rules specifically allowing them to game the stock market with their insider knowledge.
if you cant make money being a congresscritter, youre just not trying.
while i agree that it's probably hard since you essentially have to travel and live in two places id have a lot more sympathy if they also didn't continually push for tax cuts for billionaires while opposing minimum wage increases, or voting against single payer while having government funded healthcare, or voting against the inflation reduction act...
As others have said, tie it to minimum wage increases.
Also... I would trade paying them ten times as much for a prohibition on them owning or trading in the stock market in a heart beat. It's inherently a conflict of interest that puts them at odds with the majority of their constituents.
If they're whining about making over twice the median income, they should consider making moves to lower the cost of living for everyone else. If it's not good enough for them, why should the rest of us suffer?
While I do agree that’s really not enough anymore, given engineering (for example) salary in high cost of living areas and I’d support an increase …
it’s up to Congress to give their successors a raise
given the Clarence Thomas issue, we can see that no amount of pay will be enough for some of them, given lack of ethics standards
we keep seeing articles about politicians being wealthy and minimal conflict of interest standards, so let’s see the evidence that salary is a meaningful part of their pay
Maybe I’m just frustrated having to go through annual ethics training for my company. Why am I, as an individual contributor, held to so much higher an ethics standard than people who make decisions for the future of our entire country? Why do I need to watch out go for insider trading when I don’t have insider information, compared to people with the access of Congress? Why is my standard for conflict of interest so much higher than someone who can actually take advantage? Heck, why am I held to so much higher a standard on discrimination and harassment, than people with so much power over their victims?
Maybe they should have thought of that at some point in the last 44 years instead of destroying the socioeconomic mobility of the lower- and middle-class in the country. Now the leopard is eating their face, too, and it’s extremely appropriate.
It's almost like being a public servant isn't intended to make you wealthy. $174k per Congressperson is more than double the average household income, so they can make it work.
Rank-and-file members of both the House and Senate are paid $174,000 a year.
That probably seems like a decent amount of money, and it is: The median household income in 2022 was $74,580, according to the US Census.
But consider that members of Congress generally have to maintain two residences — one in Washington, DC, and one in their home state — and that they haven't gotten a raise since 2009.
2x74,580 is 149,160
174,000 - 149,160 is 24,840 on top of twice the median 2022 census numbers.
Salaries havent changed in 20 years?
Can someone find how how many times their salaries did increase well beyond the rate of inflation?
How many years does the average rank and file member of the rank and file serve in office.
Also we are comparing a single persons salary to a household income, which shoud be taken into acount. How many households earning that 74,580 are doing it with a single income earner? If even half of those are not single individuals then compared to the average household income, the rank and file members of congress and the senate are effectively earning the equivalent of double their salary, or should be compared to other individuals earning less than $37,281 or approximately 17.92 per hour
Oh the poor old things. Imagine not getting a raise since 2009!! All the minimum wage workers can imagine just that, because minimum wage hasn't been raised since 2009, either. And a full time minimum wage job is going to provide a helluva less income than $174K.
I'm so tired of these privileged blowhards griping and complaining about how hard they have it while actively refusing to actually improve the lives of their constituents.
That salary means something different to a congressman from the Bay area or NYC, vs. a congressman from Boise or Iowa. Im down for pay raises generally.
They can literally print money freely via insider trading, which is why many of them are millionaires. “Don’t have wealth”??? k.
This crying for more taxpayer dollar handouts through one of their pet media rags garners no sympathy from me. Especially when many of them view their role as obstructionists who should prevent government from functioning entirely. It’s pathetic, they should fuck off to the geriatric ward if they don’t think the job pays enough.
But consider that members of Congress generally have to maintain two residences — one in Washington, DC, and one in their home state — and that they haven't gotten a raise since 2009.
Rep. Patrick McHenry, a North Carolina Republican who served as the interim speaker of the House following Kevin McCarthy's ouster, told The Dispatch that congressional pay needed to be raised in order to attract "credible people to run for office."
"And then, you know, the very wealthy few end up dominating the news because of their personal stock trades when most of us don't have wealth."
McHenry, a more mild-mannered House Republican than most, recently announced he would retire from Congress at the end of his term.
As of now, many members of Congress are, in fact, independently wealthy, and many generate significant income from stock trading.
Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York has long pushed for a pay raise for members of Congress, arguing that it's a safeguard against corruption and makes lawmakers less likely to seek income through stock trading.
The original article contains 340 words, the summary contains 176 words. Saved 48%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
If lawmakers' salaries had kept pace with inflation, they would be paid over $250,000 today.
You mean kinda like how inflation has fucked everyone else in the country too? Kinda seems like the guys in charge of this shitshow should be the LAST motherfuckers getting a raise.
If they 'can't live' on over twice the average income, we should do the ethical thing and remove their need for further income. Gallows are cheap to build and quite reusable.
Before we start making obvious jokes, remember the tale of Robert Hanssen selling state secrets to Moscow.
One of the things he complained about was how difficult it was to manage finances on his salary while living in DC. Now I’m by no means suggesting we give members of Congress a raise. They should be able to figure it out with how much they earn. But what about the federal agents and employees who earn far less, and have access to extremely valuable data?
And why is DC so GODDAMNED EXPENSIVE?? The zoning regulations in DC have got to be some of the dumbest in the country. Using a law from 1899 to justify the max height of buildings based of firefighting equipment at the time is pathetic. The law should be scrapped so supply can meet demand in a city that is becoming increasingly unaffordable, even for those making nearly 200k a year.
I don't understand!! The federal government was never supposed to be a retirement. It was about civic duty. That's the problem everyone wants to retire off the taxpayers. They don't follow the constitution anymore. I challenge you to actually read the constitution. They will say it how you interpret it but it's a simple document. The men that wrote it did it that way on porpoise. They could have wrote a lot more words to it but they didn't because they knew lawyer could twist the word for interpretation. Read the part were the lawyers say they can tax the individual income at the federal level. It only says they can tax the STATE for the different income levels in it. They use to just go off of population and tax the STATE per head count. No where in it does it say they can tax the individual directly.
The STATES use to collect the taxes and they State government would pay the federal government. Well the states kept taxing at the same rate not giving any money to the federal government. So now the people are double taxed.
Look up where to head supreme court Justice at the time said the 16th amendment gave the federal government no more power than it already had. Well before that they could not tax the individual directly and they don't really have the power now they just do.
Before you say I'm crazy look at the constitution yourself and tell me how you think it reads. That is the 16th amendment. While your at it look up the army clause where it says the federal government can only leave a standing army for 2 years only in war time. If not in war time its supposed to be dissolved and turned back to the stated.