Down in the halls of Washington, Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT)is fighting a lonely battle:
According to the Matheson, given the high costs of the Iraq War, the rebuilding effort on the Gulf Coast, and the rising energy prices, Congress should waive the 1.9 percent cost-of-living increase schedued to go into effect on January 1st.
More on the flip…
Connecticut’s congressional delegation is divided over whether delaying their own raise is a good idea, with most of the Democrats claiming that overturning the Bush tax cuts would be a far more meaningful and effective step to take to deal with our current fiscal crisis.
(snip)
Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro, D-3rd District, said the issue was moot with her. Since she came to Congress in 1991, she has devoted all pay increases to two scholarship funds, one named for her father, Ted, and another named for former staff member Maria Baez Perez. The funds give $1,000 stipends to college students from DeLauro’s district.
DeLauro, Larson, and Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., would consider freezing their pay if it was part of a wide variety of spending cuts and tax increases. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn., who said he also wanted a package of cuts, would not specifically discuss the raise.
“I believe in shared sacrifice,” DeLauro said, “and shared sacrifice means repealing some of the tax cuts for the wealthy.”
Unfortunately, it seems as though a few of the Repulican congressman have caught on to how well supporting a delay to congressional pay raises could play as a political issue. Chris Shays, of course, remains as politically tone-deaf as ever.
(snip)
Simmons, said chief of staff Todd Mitchell, thought that “as long as working families are tightening their belts, members of Congress should do the same.”
But Shays thought the flap was much ado about very little and stressed that the raise was the same kind of inflationary increase most American workers get.
“I don’t know if it’s an important symbol or not,” he said, “but I believe in a cost-of-living increase.”
Chris Shays, of couse, also believes in fighting expensive, unnecessary wars, passing massive tax cuts that we can’t hope to afford, and, theoretically, balancing budgets. Occassionally, something has to give.
Symbols do have some value. The policy value of putting off this cost-of-living increase is minimal; about $5 million. But the political value of getting the Democrats together to come out as the party willing to make personal financial sacrifices for the good of the nation is much greater. It would also provides them with more credibility when asking wealthy taxpayers to make their own sacrifices.
If the Democrats really want to be the party of responsible government and fiscal prudence, they may have to start at home.
