Reader comments
Matheson again fights automatic pay hike
191 comments | Read story
Get today's headlines via email
Good morning edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In News
Across Site
- Colliding causes: Gay rights and...
- Woman charged in Rasmussen death...
- Photos: Salt Lake Main Library...
- Powells, Coxes put differences aside...
- Amendments to gutted sex education...
- Requests to alter online news...
- Salt Lake City celebrates 2002...
- 'Wicked' tickets on sale May 11
- Sweethearts in real life also share...
- Despite data, Lyme disease sufferers...
In News
Across Site
- Powells, Coxes put differences aside...
- Colliding causes: Gay rights and...
- View live stream of services for...
- Focus returns to Powell children today
- Battling misconceptions: Faced with...
- Father-in-law dragged deeper into...
- Romney's 'Horrible Tuesday' signals...
- Josh Powell had 'incestuous' images...
- LDS bishop ordered to stand trial for...
- Committee will explore new '22...
In News
Across Site
- Prop. 8 declared unconstitutional
181 - LDS Church, others respond to Prop 8
87 - Families at odds over Powell's actions
54 - Gay rights and religious liberty
49 - LDS bishop ordered to stand trial
41 - Utah House blocks Sandstrom bill
39 - Powell call:'I'm afraid for their lives'
33 - Photos: Year of the Dragon
26 - Bill would cut auto safety checks
24 - Should SLC bid again for Olympics?
23







shuttdlrl@aol.com
--Mark Twain
I want the pay for members of Congress to be commensurate with the job they are asked to do. I don't want people to shy away from running for Congress because the compensation is below what they could command in the private sector. I would suggest Mr. Matheson take a closer look at the budgets being passed in Congress and ask Ms. Pelosi to allow an open amendment process on spending bills so that every member has to take a position on the spending process. When a Senator from New York asks for $250K for a Woodstock museum why not have everyone on record supporting or opposing those funds? Nah, better to oppose the pay raise and get the fluff story in the media.
And, what is Chaffetz's stance on this? Come on out and prove yourself on this one.......
With the economy the shape as it is, they should be ashamed of any pay raise and vote to forget that this year.
After all, people are losing their jobs, and the rest certainly are not getting pay raises if they are lucky to hold on to their job. And notice.....the majority of them are Democrats and have no problem getting theirs.
Most of these guys have actually taken a pay cut to serve in Congress. They need to be compensated because they actually do work very hard and MOST of them do a good job.
Having said all of that, the Democrats have done a lousy job these last two years and I think it would be funny, if it weren't so tragic, that the American people returned them to power. Apparently everyone doesn't understand how the power structure works in Washington.
Matheson's refusal to take the payraise is just a lot of grandstanding. It really is just a drop in the bucket, but it does seem to convince a lot of people here in Utah that he's a conservative.
Just bear in mind--If he were a conservative, he wouldn't be a Democrat. Just ask him who he's voting for for Speaker. When you voted for Jim Matheson, you voted for NANCY PELOSI.
Sounds like you have bought into the classic engineered argument used by politicians to justify there lavish pay and benefits.
"To Utah Rose, by taking their benefits and pay away, you are ensuring that NO ONE except RICH individuals will EVER be able to serve in Congress."
I have never made more than 75k in one year. I'm 31 years old and have a wife and children. I would be happy to do this job for a two to four year stint for 75k and no benefits. I can think of at least 10 others in my situation who would do the same.
"Either that or they will be much more subject to bribes from lobbyists."
Are you kidding? Last I checked, almost every headline about some major fraud in business or government has involved very rich people. I don't think your statement holds any weight. The amount of money a man makes is of no relevance if he has real integrity.
Its not as hard as you might think to come up with a plan. In fact, the biggest piece is there. We just need to get back to it. The hard part is getting the support from the apathetic people in this country that tend to have a short attention span. Here's a rough version of the plan:
1. Change over 1/2 of congress and 1/3 of the senate in one election year with those we know will support us. Their goal for the next two years is to gridlock the government until the next election cycle to maintain the status quo.
2. Two years later we change out the other half of congress, another 1/3 of the senate and the white house. Now its time to get to work.
3. Pass an amendment to the constitution that clearly defines what our founding fathers meant by "promoting the general welfare and providing for the common defense." Then eliminate all departments, branches, committees, programs and their associated funding. This will include almost every existing department. Appoint a committee to equitably distribute all assets of eliminated programs and departments to the states.