U.S. House votes against pay raise

It wasn't quite the direct vote that Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, has sought for years. But the House voted Wednesday not to accept a pay raise for 2010.

That came as it passed a rule for debate on a $410 billion omnibus spending package for 2009. That rule amended the bill automatically to prevent members of Congress from receiving a cost-of-living raise in 2010.

The rule passed on an overwhelming 398-24 vote (with all Utah members supporting it), and that fulfilled an earlier promise by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to forego the raise while many Americans struggle during the recession.

Matheson said, "Finally after eight years of trying — at my urging — we actually took a vote on the pay raise. But in typical fashion, it was done in a way that lacks the transparency and accountability that I think the public expects,"

He fought for years for such a vote because a 1989 law allows Congress to accept a cost-of-living raise automatically unless it votes not to take it.

Matheson said, "We probably ought to have an up or down vote every year just to create some accountability and transparency. It shouldn't be this extraordinary circumstance where we decide not to vote for it."

Matheson voted against the overall bill to which the no-raise amendment was attached, saying some provisions create concerns about endangered species rules and halts competition for some government contracts. "All this does is gum up the works and create needless complications in what should be a streamlined bill to conclude last year's unfinished (appropriations) business," he said.

On Jan. 1, Congress received an automatic $4,700 pay raise for 2009 — up 2.8 percent to an annual salary of $174,000 a year. Just before that took effect, Matheson blasted it, saying "the notion that Congress should be having an automatic pay raise without even a vote just doesn't pass the smell test."

Matheson has given his annual raises to charity through the years, and fought for years for votes on raises generally without success until now.

Some question whether Congress would have received a pay raise next year anyway because annual increases are based on a formula that might not allow it given the weak state of the economy.

E-MAIL: lee@desnews.com