Republican Lawmaker Who Voted Against Minimum Wage Hike Complains He Hasn’t Gotten A Raise
Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) says Congress can’t afford a pay cut because its last salary increase occurred six years ago, but he also objects to a minimum wage increase for others.
This is the same Nebraska Republican who, last year, was forced to apologize for refusing to give up his $174,000 congressional salary as many lawmakers did during the federal government shutdown.
The Huffington Post reports:
Terry, considered one of the Republican Party’s most vulnerable incumbents this cycle, rebuffed his Democratic challenger state Sen. Brad Ashford on Monday. Ashford wants to cut lawmakers’ salary by 10 percent and, if elected, would voluntarily return that amount until he gets the cut passed.
“What he’s not telling you is that Congress hasn’t had a cost of living increase since 2008, when I led the charge for a freeze,” Terry shot back, according to KMTV.
Members of Congress last voted to hike their salaries by $5,000 in 2009. Since then, concerns over the nation’s debt and the recession have led to several federal pay freezes.
“I give at least that amount [10 percent] to charities already, so I don’t have to do a campaign trick like that,” added Terry. “I’m already giving back to the community from my salary.”
“God bless them,” Terry said of his colleagues. “But you know what? I’ve got a nice house and a kid in college, and I’ll tell you we cannot handle it. Giving our paycheck away when you still worked and earned it? That’s just not going to fly.”
In 2013, Terry joined his colleagues in unanimously voting against a minimum wage increase. Rep. Terry needs to take the food stamp challenge in order to understand what struggling really is.
The last time minimum wage was increased was in 2009 from $6.55 to $7.25 per hour.
H/T: My BFF @ComgenKDT with thanks.
MIAtheistGal August 13th, 2014 at 12:49 pm
I’m of the opinion that congress should receive either minimum wage or whatever we pay our lowest paid military personnel.
But then I worry that only the rich would be able to serve as congress critters. Of course, that wouldn’t be any different than now.
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 12:51 pm
Here are the numbers: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/capitol-assets/congressional-wealth-risk-matrix/
MIAtheistGal August 13th, 2014 at 1:16 pm
Wow, that makes me sad.
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 1:32 pm
Yes, it’s a rich man’s club.
R.J. Carter August 13th, 2014 at 1:51 pm
Always question why someone spends millions for the opportunity to make thousands.
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 2:42 pm
Two reasons; First, its not their money. Second, there are tens of millions on the back end.
MIAtheistGal August 13th, 2014 at 3:05 pm
And don’t forget being plain ol’ power hungry!
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 3:31 pm
There’s that, too.
R.J. Carter August 13th, 2014 at 1:23 pm
I’m in the wrong line of work.
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 1:33 pm
Gee, R.J., you’re a mod now! How can you beat that?
Anomaly 100 August 13th, 2014 at 1:39 pm
All those Soros dollars I send him and he complains. The INGRATE!
R.J. Carter August 13th, 2014 at 1:50 pm
You don’t understand the accounting headache this creates. I have to keep the Soros dollars in a separate account from the Koch ones, so they don’t negate each other like an anti-matter/matter collision.
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 2:46 pm
Yeah, I forget which account is in the Cayman’s and which one is is in the Maldives!
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 2:43 pm
IKR?!?!? Always another complaint!
R.J. Carter August 13th, 2014 at 1:51 pm
And don’t think that’s not on my resume!
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 2:46 pm
That’ll get you more time with Ted!
Eric Trommater August 13th, 2014 at 1:04 pm
Monsanto pays their real salary anyway. The money they get from tax payers is just like extra cash for the little extras.
William August 13th, 2014 at 1:24 pm
Yeah but they work so hard.
R.J. Carter August 13th, 2014 at 1:30 pm
That’s a cool, eye-grabbing graphic, but it’s really not a fair comparison to state that days “in session” is equivalent to days worked. It’s tantamount to telling a teacher that he only works 9 months out of the year so why should he bitch about his pay?
If anything, the 133 days in session are the days that they work the least — sitting around in meetings, raising their hands to vote. It’s when they go home and answer to their constituents from their home offices that they really start to produce a sweat.
William August 13th, 2014 at 2:10 pm
” It’s when they go home and answer to their constituents from their home offices that they really start to produce a sweat”.
or as we in the real world like to call it “campaigning to keep their jobs”
R.J. Carter August 13th, 2014 at 2:16 pm
That’s what we with jobs do every day.
Rusty Shackleford August 13th, 2014 at 5:15 pm
I campaign to keep my job AT MY JOB, through my work. I guess you can’t campaign on your work as a Congressman when you’re not doing any, though.
R.J. Carter August 13th, 2014 at 5:21 pm
That’s a completely separate issue, though, from claiming that the only days “on the job” are the days that Congress is “in session.”
Rusty Shackleford August 13th, 2014 at 5:24 pm
It’s the only days they’re doing what they were hired to do. The days campaigning are essentially an application process, which, while applying to jobs can be hard, it’s not actually part of your job and not what we pay you for.
m2old4bs August 13th, 2014 at 3:32 pm
When I was teaching at the community college level, I got paid a substantial amount per hour. However, I got paid for lecture time only. Not for grading time at home, not for office hours, not for prep time. No vacation pay nor sick pay. Did not receive health or pension benefits. No perks, except I did not have to pay for parking. By the time all was said and done, my pay came out to be about minimum wage. Teachers have every right to bitch about their pay. Politicians don’t.
granpa.usthai August 13th, 2014 at 1:37 pm
DAMN GOOD OPINION. Been advocating that for years. If the country is in the 98%, so should our Congress be also. If Congress REPRESENTS the PEOPLE.
mea_mark August 13th, 2014 at 1:40 pm
I think a multiplier of the minimum wage would be appropriate. That way they couldn’t give themselves a raise without giving those at the bottom a wage increase. What that multiplier is, to be determined through debate.
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 12:49 pm
Trickle down Reaganomics stops at his house.
M D Reese August 13th, 2014 at 1:00 pm
Doesn’t this just make you want to weep?
granpa.usthai August 13th, 2014 at 1:33 pm
$83.65/hr. minimum rock bottom 52X40 not counting perks is no big deal in DC.
Don’t know what the price for a live in male prostitute would be for a 2 year contract, but assuming $500/day – doesn’t leave a whole lot of money to send back to the wife and kids. (only about $800 a week).
Eric Trommater August 13th, 2014 at 1:03 pm
Isn’t being a member of the house just an internship for the lobbying job members get after they leave office anyway? Most interns are lucky to get a housing allowance. They should count themselves lucky they get paid at all.
William August 13th, 2014 at 1:19 pm
Under the terms of Public Law 101-194, the Government Ethics Reform Act of 1989, lawmakers receive an annual adjustment in pay [a cost of living adjustment or COLA] equal to the change in the government’s Employment Cost Index for the fourth quarter of the prior calendar year versus the year before that (this constitutes a one-year time lag between when the pay raise is measured and when it actually takes effect). An automatic provision is made for this pay hike each year, and is self-implementing without any specific vote by Congress (i.e., passage of the overall Treasury appropriations bill enables the raise to occur). However, Members of Congress can, by majority vote, block the pay increase from taking place.
In other words, they get a raise unless they vote not to. They can in complete candor go back to their constituents and state that they did not vote for a pay raise.
granpa.usthai August 13th, 2014 at 1:26 pm
built -in campaign trickery?
tiredoftea August 13th, 2014 at 1:35 pm
That’s just a coincidence!
granpa.usthai August 13th, 2014 at 1:25 pm
I would like to come to this Congresspersons defense, please.
Equal Rights Marriage has caused the price of male prostitutes to skyrocket in the DC area. My suggestion to CongressMen who cannot have such affairs openly -due to religious constituents who may oppose such – is to get together and see if you can get group discounts, or shared secret partnerships. This would keep everyone who is not overly possessive happy -with a little extra change to send to the wife.
arc99 August 13th, 2014 at 1:30 pm
Look on the bright side, you are still getting your taxpayer funded health insurance.
So how about making sure that all Americans have the same health insurance options that you do?
fancypants August 13th, 2014 at 2:21 pm
I understand the new Chicago cubs owner is from Nebraska
it makes you wonder if Lee terry is a baseball card collector ?
Jeff Allen August 13th, 2014 at 2:42 pm
Since Congress worked 107 days in 2012, 126 in 2013, and are scheduled to work 113 in 2014, it’s a part time job anyway (the way it was intended from the start). Terry should have plenty of time to pick up another part time gig on the side to supplement his meager 174K.
whatthe46 August 13th, 2014 at 7:03 pm
its part time for them for sure with more than a full time salary, surely undeserved. 107 days at 8hrs is only 856 hrs and at min. wage in 2012 is $6,206, and that’s before taxes. i’m sure he spends that on a couple of suits, tie and tie clip. what a shame.
Mainah August 13th, 2014 at 6:34 pm
So much for the people who are working for it but can’t afford to dream about sending their kids to college. What a dink.
raise min wage September 25th, 2014 at 2:01 pm
Just a typical Republican. That’s why we’re better off without Republicans. Obama needs to use his executive power, and triple minimum wage over night.