The current salary for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $165,200 per year. However, in 1960 Congress was in session 350 days out of the year. This year, they are going for a new record, only 88 days in session, meaning they are spending 268 days in recess. This means they get paid almost $2,000 per day.
Personally I think they need to work more and get paid less, or at least stay the same amount and work a hell of a lot more than they do now. If nothing else, they need to give mandatory paid time off for the rest of us working stiffs.
Is anyone else pissed off about this, and why isn't anyone doing anything about it?
2006-09-15 13:47:18 · 11 answers · asked by Argus 420 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Its so divided at the moment nothing constructive gets done anyways. The elections are coming up so it will be interesting to see who takes control of the senate.
Yes i think they are paid way to much for the amount of work they do, but whats new with government beaurocracy?
Write your reps and senators and voice your displeasure!
Tell them to give some of that money to the working class people since minimum wage hasnt been increased for nearly a decade!!
2006-09-16 07:08:37 · answer #1 · answered by friskygimp 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
we easily receives a fee really nicely for what we do; this is really loopy that I make really a lot $one hundred,000 a three hundred and sixty 5 days as an O-3@6 years (with bonus). and that is the least i have been paid on the grounds that 2008, easily. sturdy difficulty our pay's going to go back again down contained in the subsequent few years. for sure, the human beings who do direct equivalents in jobs receives a fee a lot more effective than we do (regularly about double), in spite of the undeniable fact that the uniform, the benefits, and the pensions in case you stick round for them are worth something. plenty, easily. And shall we argue about the Congresscritters, yet i might want to argue it takes way extra education and skills to be useful at being a perfect court docket Justice or maybe a District decide than quite some the stuff contained in the defense force. Edited to operate: @Hayley: nicely, like the guy James stated, you'll probable spend all of it, and we received't have that, now do we? as well, i'm saving it as a lot as construct myself a defense force of mercenaries depending off each and every of the children who prefer to be in %. yet do not prefer to affix the defense force, which i will then use to attempt to take over an African u . s . a .. It takes plenty on the grounds that i recognize I received't have high quality on my side contained in the drawing near warfare. it really is also why i'm being very selective in my possibilities of African countries.
2016-11-27 01:16:48 · answer #2 · answered by reguant 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes it's appauling. Worse yet they take free trips sponsored by companies and say it's "educational" or some such. But they also set the rules, and the blame is all on us anyway, we put them there.
But I'm totally with you, Congress (Senate and the House) oughta work a lot more if they're really the voice of the people. As well as all the other branches of government.
2006-09-15 16:50:31 · answer #3 · answered by Silver Snake 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The pay is such a small part of what they really get from all the side deals and insider trading. As long as the people keep voting them in office they Will work for themselves. The only thing you can do is vote the bums out until you get people who will work for legal Americans.
2006-09-15 13:53:08 · answer #4 · answered by jackie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your family doctor makes those guys look like chumps. $150 for 5 minutes is just ordinary. You're worried about a lousy $2,000 per ;day?
2006-09-15 14:02:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
It's a question of power and who makes the laws and rules.
They decide if they get a raise. Raises should be put up to a vote by the people. At our jobs, we get a raise if they do a good job. It should be the same for them.
2006-09-15 13:51:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
They have to pay enough so that regular people can afford to risk leaving their careers to go to Washington. If they didn't pay much, only the wealthy would take that risk, since they wouldn't need the money anyway. You want regular Joes running for office, right?
2006-09-15 13:51:26 · answer #7 · answered by Eric H 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They are the ones in charge of setting their own pay so they tend to err on the generous side.
2006-09-15 13:49:33 · answer #8 · answered by Rich Z 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I will settle for them getting the same pay and not showing up at all. We would be much better off(IMO)
To answer your ? it is because they pay themselves and the power of incumbency is very strong.
2006-09-15 13:53:37 · answer #9 · answered by LightningSlow 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would love to do something about it. I actually have to try not to think about it because it enfuriates me.
2006-09-15 14:00:14 · answer #10 · answered by DRTa 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋