If You Had Control Would YOU Cut Your Salary?
As part of last Summer's debt ceiling compromise The White House has released its report on the sequestration.
Under the deal, if Congress fails to agree on and enact $1.2 trillion in spending cuts, it would trigger an automatic across-the-board reduction in spending.
But don't worry about your dedicated and loyal representatives in Washington. Pay for members of the House and Senate will NOT be heading over the same "fiscal cliff" as their personnel and employees.
For nearly EVERY government office, salaries for employees will be cut. One example? The budgets for the Capitol Police and court security face an 8.2 percent cut.
Normal folks, like you and me, have suggested Congress look at their own fat pay checks as a place to cut spending.
After effectively giving themselves a raise a few months ago Congress has explained why a cut just can't be done right now.
You see, they say, there's this pesky little Amendment to the US Constitution (#27) that says that one Congress (us) cannot pass a law that affects the pay of a future Congress.
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of representatives shall have intervened.
Originally proposed Sept. 25, 1789. Ratified May 7, 1992.
This means the 27th Amendment prohibits members of Congress from changing their compensation until after the next election.
Isn't this a perpetual excuse? I hear a can being kicked.
The very people who voted to put these automatic spending cuts in place, won't see ANY change to their annual salary of $174,000.
Ironically, some tea party-backed lawmakers who campaigned on slashing federal spending are reluctant to give up their own pay.
Ironically, one of the biggest opponents of Congress cutting its pay is Nancy Pelosi - one of the wealthiest members.
America; The land of milk and honey. And working as a public servant and being able to afford both the milk and the honey.