Reader comments
Matheson again fights auto pay hike
191 comments | Read story
Spoc | 5:11 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Keep in mind that it is only this year's raise that he is talking about
donating to charity. Last year's raise he will be keeping this year as he
did with the previous year and the one before that. Matheson gets a lot of
political mileage out of his annual windmill jousting by simply delaying his
increases by one year. If he was truly sincere about it, he would be donating
every increase he has received since he started this political grandstand.
Posturing seems to be the secret to his success politically rather than actual
accomplishment.
shuttdlrl | 5:40 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Thank you Matheson.
shuttdlrl@aol.com
shuttdlrl@aol.com
Mark Twain | 5:40 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
'Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress.. But
I repeat myself.'
--Mark Twain
--Mark Twain
Comments continue below
Elsabio | 6:22 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Where are the so called conservative who represent Utah on this one? Congressmen
and Senators ought to be paying us for the "good" job they are doing.
He's a blowhard. | 6:44 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Where was his voice and cries during the trillion dollar bailouts given to
corporate america? And what about the trillons of dollars being spent to
support, aid, and abet illegal foreign nationals in america? Where is
Matheson's voice in making illegal foreign nationals and their employers
pay taxes to government? These raises are miniscule compared to what congress
and the president has done to our economy. He is being the spokes person trying
to take the heat off of the real important issues with this minor squable about
congressional pay. And the news media is eating it up, as usual. Whatever
Matheson or any legislator donates is just a drop in the bucket to what they
gain in kickbacks and special favors, a meaningless gesture. Sure, those getting
these donations love it but what person or instute wouldn't? It's akin
to buying votes with false intentions and should be illegal. Deception and
deceiveing to avoid the real needs of the people and our economy.
Surprised | 7:08 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
It's only a couple of million. They'll just print more. Not fair, when
I print my own they want to put me in jail. That is where every single member
and former member of Congress belong. Failures should not be rewarded. Pensions
should be rescinded, benefits cut, staff, etc. Not fair? Since when was
"service" meant to be a lifestyle and a pathway to an easy life? Clean
house and start over. A bunch of kindergarten kids couldn't do worse than
what we've been subjected to for way too long!! Both parties are worthless
and offer no true hope for the future. Now the hard part how do we do it?
John | 7:50 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
This is a grandstand play by a Congressman that knows it will reap him publicity
that is worth more than the few thousands he gives up. Everyone who has ever
worked in Washington DC knows that Congress would never vote themselves a pay
raise so they allow a commission to set the pay and it is automatic. But there
are always a few who want the headlines over substance.
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.
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.
Milo P Otis | 8:04 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
John: Why is being a good public servant grandstanding?
Penny Foolish | 8:20 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
This is a tired, annual story that Matheson tries to get play out of.... but
it's so patronizing to the voters....Big Deal that members of Congress, who
have to maintain 2 households; one in their home state, and one in DC (the
gov't doesn't provide housing assistance for them to do their
job...unlike the military).... They already earn less than any Federal District
Judge; less than Cabinet officials. How will anyone agree to run for Congress
in the future unless they are personally wealthy? We have enough wealthy people
in Congress who are distanced from middle class on tax policies, etc. Believe
it or not, the $169,000 adjusted for cost of living and the fact that they have
to maintain 2 households, etc., is really just a middle class wage. Matheson
ought to focus on big picture items, like the expanding welfare state,
entitlement spending which is 2/3 of all gov't spending... and the massive
redistribution tax policies coming our way from Obama.
Disgusting | 8:19 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
The Congress that has a worse approval rating than Bush gets a raise....because
they have worked so hard for it. What a joke! Why dont they give those that
are going to take the hit for the bailout a raise? They would never do
something like that, right? They figure that they should keep hush, hush until
it happens. Wont even take responsibility for it. What a bunch of crooks. On
topics like this, our government will never do the RIGHT thing collectively.
And, what is Chaffetz's stance on this? Come on out and prove yourself on this one.......
And, what is Chaffetz's stance on this? Come on out and prove yourself on this one.......
Eating his Cake Too | 8:22 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
This is a "freebie" for Matheson. He knows he can get brownie points
for being so magnanimous about not supporting a COLA for Members of Congress...
but also knows that it is futile and will go through anyway. He has frosting
all around his mouth.....
Matthew | 8:26 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
The current system was set up so that congressional pay would be de-politicized.
I want my congressional representative and Senators working for me, not some
lobbiest or fat-cat donor. This system keeps their pay consistant with the
broader job market. They could vote to delay the raise due to current
circumstances. That would be a much more rational response that attacking the
current system that improved many worse problems.
Sick of this | 8:43 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
When are the people going to take a stand? We all get angry aabout this but we
never do anything about it. There is strength in numbers. Why do we keep voting
in the same people? Every single person in Congress and the Senate that were up
for election should have been voted out this last time but we saw people under
criminal investigation that were running neck and neck with newcomers. WAKE UP
AMERICA and vote with your brain instead of a party line. We NEED to clean house
and write letters letting the current Congressmen and Senators know we are
watching every vote they make.
utah rose | 9:35 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
I agree 100% with surprised. They should take all of their benefits away. If
they have trouble paying for two houses, too bad. They should rent a 1 room
apartment in Washington or better yet sleep in their office.
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.
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.
Anonymous | 9:59 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Isn't Matheson the one who donates his entire salary to charity? Not just
the pay raise, but the whole salary.
Cats | 9:59 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
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. Either that
or they will be much more subject to bribes from lobbyists.
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.
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.
Jan | 10:39 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Spoc...your misinformed. Matheson has given his payraise to charity every year
he has been in office. I live in Southern Utah and have been watching donating
his raise to charity for years. Too bad the Republicans in congress don't
donate their payraise to congress!
0802 | 10:37 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
RE:Cats | 9:59 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
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.
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.
CBird | 10:52 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
I agree with Matheson. In fact, should not our politicians here in Utah take a
the dame route? Every year they take more and more away from Public Employees
but keep their free benefits, and perks How is that fair?
0802 | 11:06 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
RE: Surprised | 7:08 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
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.
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.
des | 11:09 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
To 'He's a blowhard:
Matheson voted against the bailout to the banks. Now he's against pay raises.
Shame on those 'tax and spend' Democrats.
Matheson voted against the bailout to the banks. Now he's against pay raises.
Shame on those 'tax and spend' Democrats.
Anonymous | 11:22 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
4700 * 102 = 479,400.
Doesn't congress deserve another half-million for a job well done?
Doesn't congress deserve another half-million for a job well done?
0802 | 11:24 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
RE: Surprised | 7:08 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008 CONT.
4. Completely revamp our foreign policy to a non intervention policy that our fore fathers would approve of. Eliminate all the US tax payers hard earned money currently being dumped into other governments, good or bad!
5. Restructure our military to reflect a freedom loving people. All we need is a strong reserve military with a small active duty component that is mostly responsible for training.
6. Now that we have eliminated about 85% of the current federal budget, you can eliminate all federal taxes on income, individual and business.
7. Return to a true free market. Eliminate virtually all federal regulations on business. Yes, people will actually have to take personal responsibility for making good decisions but so will business. No more bailouts for anyone!
So a plan isn't so hard. Its the public support that is. The nay sayers of this plan will come up with every conceivable tragedy and catastrophe that will ensue with a plan like this. They will try and scare people into going the other way. I say what we are doing now isn't working and will only get worse. Drastic times, drastic measures!
4. Completely revamp our foreign policy to a non intervention policy that our fore fathers would approve of. Eliminate all the US tax payers hard earned money currently being dumped into other governments, good or bad!
5. Restructure our military to reflect a freedom loving people. All we need is a strong reserve military with a small active duty component that is mostly responsible for training.
6. Now that we have eliminated about 85% of the current federal budget, you can eliminate all federal taxes on income, individual and business.
7. Return to a true free market. Eliminate virtually all federal regulations on business. Yes, people will actually have to take personal responsibility for making good decisions but so will business. No more bailouts for anyone!
So a plan isn't so hard. Its the public support that is. The nay sayers of this plan will come up with every conceivable tragedy and catastrophe that will ensue with a plan like this. They will try and scare people into going the other way. I say what we are doing now isn't working and will only get worse. Drastic times, drastic measures!
RedShirt | 11:44 a.m. Dec. 29, 2008
The funny thing is that if Congress was a business, most of them would be fired,
jailed for lying or using illegal accounting practices, or bribery. They should
be treated like a business, and either receive no pay increase or be let go!!
Anonymous | 12:16 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Isn't it interesting that the ONLY congressman from Utah resisting and
calling for cancellation of the current congressional pay raise is the honored
Democratic representative Matheson, THE ONLY ONE in a sea of blood red!
It doesn't matter if he's doing it for political gains among the voter base and/or actually has a personal aversion to what's happening given current economic conditions, the fact remains that no one single other congressman, all avowed 'fiscally conservative' Republicans, has stepped forward to join with Matheson on this issue. That should tell you how divisive and polarized the Republican caucus of Utah feels towards the only Democratic congressmen representing Utah, and also show that Matheson may now be more powerful in his influence (and sanity) than all the other congressmen from Utah combined.
Look closely at Matheson's stance on important issues and his voting record and you will find that he's more a Blue Dog Democrat than not, and quite frankly, Blue Dog Democrats are part of an agenda that's more representative of Utah's social values than the Republicans are.
It doesn't matter if he's doing it for political gains among the voter base and/or actually has a personal aversion to what's happening given current economic conditions, the fact remains that no one single other congressman, all avowed 'fiscally conservative' Republicans, has stepped forward to join with Matheson on this issue. That should tell you how divisive and polarized the Republican caucus of Utah feels towards the only Democratic congressmen representing Utah, and also show that Matheson may now be more powerful in his influence (and sanity) than all the other congressmen from Utah combined.
Look closely at Matheson's stance on important issues and his voting record and you will find that he's more a Blue Dog Democrat than not, and quite frankly, Blue Dog Democrats are part of an agenda that's more representative of Utah's social values than the Republicans are.
Spoc | 12:20 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Yes Jan, I may be misinformed, but my source was Matheson himself when
interviewed on the subject. This year our representatives will be averaging
$169,300 and the 2.8% would mean $4,740 given to charity and he will keep
$164,560 which includes last year�s 2.8%. If that pattern
were continued without ever having accepted the raises for the past 8 years, his
pay would be $138,778 and his charitable donation this year would be $34,470.
That is not the case. He has stated for the record that this year's
donation will only be this year's raise. The raise he got last year, this
year he will keep as he has done for each of the years he has been in office.
But just for perspective, this year's donation is only 6 one hundred thousandths of a percent of what he is going to take from you in bail out money for a problem he helped create by supporting Pelosi and Franks in their vote buying scam at Fanny and Freddy.
This is just his version of vote buying.
But just for perspective, this year's donation is only 6 one hundred thousandths of a percent of what he is going to take from you in bail out money for a problem he helped create by supporting Pelosi and Franks in their vote buying scam at Fanny and Freddy.
This is just his version of vote buying.
Wo unto Utah | 12:36 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
To He's a Blowhard: So Matheson tries to forgo his raise and all UT can
say about it is he is doing it for brownie points? Well. He's still doing
it. Also, Matheson DID vote against the bailout, both times. What more would
you like from him? From the other GOP representatives who voted FOR it?
So what if only the raise goes to charity? That's still pretty significant. How much did you give to charity last year?
Re CATS: Your responses are always so glib. Matheson is a democrat and proud to be one. Why would he want to be a Republican? That would require him to hate minorities, pretend to be pro-life but do nothing about it, protect big business at all costs, and disregard human life re: hurrican katrina relief FEMA mismanagement. I think he's happy to be a Democrat.
As far as re-electing the Democrats, well that is because of the 6-year Bush run wherein the GOP controlled everything and did nothing. Bush is a fiscal liberal in conservative clothing anyway. People were speaking out about 2000-2006, not 2007-2008, because that was the timeframe that created the problems.
So what if only the raise goes to charity? That's still pretty significant. How much did you give to charity last year?
Re CATS: Your responses are always so glib. Matheson is a democrat and proud to be one. Why would he want to be a Republican? That would require him to hate minorities, pretend to be pro-life but do nothing about it, protect big business at all costs, and disregard human life re: hurrican katrina relief FEMA mismanagement. I think he's happy to be a Democrat.
As far as re-electing the Democrats, well that is because of the 6-year Bush run wherein the GOP controlled everything and did nothing. Bush is a fiscal liberal in conservative clothing anyway. People were speaking out about 2000-2006, not 2007-2008, because that was the timeframe that created the problems.
Re Spoc | 12:41 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
So what if he has a lag on keeping a raise? Are you saying he should keep no
raises ever? Never have a cost of living adjustment? The fact is, he's
giving a significant amount of money away! When's the last time YOU gave
away your whole raise for the year?
More importantly, when is the last time you gave away 5K just like that? And don't count tithing in the mix. Just because the government allows that contribution to be considered a donation for tax purposes, very little of that money, if any, goes to the poor. Try giving tithing PLUS 5K to humanitarian efforts and then re-post.
The point is, Matheson is a blue dog democrat trying to shake things up. Matheson also voted against the bailout twice. What are the other boys doing to help the deficit? The UT GOP delegates voted FOR the bailout AND want the pay raise. Given the choice, I'll take Matheson.
More importantly, when is the last time you gave away 5K just like that? And don't count tithing in the mix. Just because the government allows that contribution to be considered a donation for tax purposes, very little of that money, if any, goes to the poor. Try giving tithing PLUS 5K to humanitarian efforts and then re-post.
The point is, Matheson is a blue dog democrat trying to shake things up. Matheson also voted against the bailout twice. What are the other boys doing to help the deficit? The UT GOP delegates voted FOR the bailout AND want the pay raise. Given the choice, I'll take Matheson.
Cats | 1:10 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
As someone with A LOT of years of experience in Washington, I can tell you that
Members of Congress are really not overpaid. Although based on some recent
events, I can see why a lot of you might think that.
The fact is that the constitution requires them to maintain a residence in the state they represent. They also have to live in Washington. Washington is really expensive. Some Members who keep their families in their districts actually do camp out in their offices or share a place with other Members. That does help with expenses. But, those who bring their families with them have to find a decent place to live.
In reality, many of these guys take a cut in pay in order to serve. At least that's true for Republicans. (A lot of Democrats run because they need the job.) Although public service can never compete with the private sector, these guys need to at least make enough to provide a decent living for their families. Believe it or not, that's hard to do in Washington on what they make.
I know you're mad but, please, give these guys a break. They're not over paid.
The fact is that the constitution requires them to maintain a residence in the state they represent. They also have to live in Washington. Washington is really expensive. Some Members who keep their families in their districts actually do camp out in their offices or share a place with other Members. That does help with expenses. But, those who bring their families with them have to find a decent place to live.
In reality, many of these guys take a cut in pay in order to serve. At least that's true for Republicans. (A lot of Democrats run because they need the job.) Although public service can never compete with the private sector, these guys need to at least make enough to provide a decent living for their families. Believe it or not, that's hard to do in Washington on what they make.
I know you're mad but, please, give these guys a break. They're not over paid.
Anonymous | 1:23 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
To 0802 and Woe unto Utah: My comments are based on YEARS of experience in
Washington.
By keeping the salaries of Members of Congress low you are really making it difficult for anyone but wealthy people to serve. John Adams, our second president, feared the same thing. We need to make it possible for those from the middle class to have a chance.
It is really hard to make ends meet when you are trying to maintain a house in your state and another one in Washington. Not everyone lives so close they can go home on a train every night like Joe Biden.
I think the reason that people make such a big deal about Congressional salaries is because it's something they can actually relate to. What we really need to be concerned about is the billions and trillions of dollars Congress is wasting. Salaries are a drop in the bucket.
Matheson is doing this in order to make a few political points. Apparently it is working with this group, but it really is trivial. Everything else he does is based on what Pelosi allows him to do. If you don't know that you're really naive.
By keeping the salaries of Members of Congress low you are really making it difficult for anyone but wealthy people to serve. John Adams, our second president, feared the same thing. We need to make it possible for those from the middle class to have a chance.
It is really hard to make ends meet when you are trying to maintain a house in your state and another one in Washington. Not everyone lives so close they can go home on a train every night like Joe Biden.
I think the reason that people make such a big deal about Congressional salaries is because it's something they can actually relate to. What we really need to be concerned about is the billions and trillions of dollars Congress is wasting. Salaries are a drop in the bucket.
Matheson is doing this in order to make a few political points. Apparently it is working with this group, but it really is trivial. Everything else he does is based on what Pelosi allows him to do. If you don't know that you're really naive.
Citizens | 1:22 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
need to know the facts. Everyone who is old enough to vote should be keeping
track of all Congress' actions while in office. These guys are corrupt to
the max because most people aren't paying good enough attention. And
regardless of Matheson's motives, Congress DOESN'T deserve a raise.
THEY SHOULD HAVE TO EARN IT!!!!!!!!!
Only In Utah | 1:39 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Only in Utah will people criticize a politician for making a stand against an
undeserved raise, as is displayed in some of these comments.
Good job Matheson.
Good job Matheson.
Re Anonymous 1:23 pm | 2:31 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
I was the Woe to Utah poster and I didn't say they shouldn't have
raises. All I said was that we should not complain so much when someone chooses
to give their raise to a worthy cause.
But, as a CPA with years of big business experience, I don't think it's fair to get a cool 2.8% every year just because. Their raises should mirror the economy and the amount of revenue raised by the federal government in any given year. So in some years, they could get more than 2.8%, but in a year like this, much less.
You also say they are grossly underpaid for what they do, but just because they travel a lot doesn't mean they pay for it all. They get per diem wherever they go, and they can deduct the mortgage and interest on BOTH houses on their taxes. Ever wonder why there is a two-house limit on said deductions? Now you know why.
In your last point, you note that Matheson does this to earn points. What's your point? Every politician does that. Why can only Republicans do it and not Democrats?
But, as a CPA with years of big business experience, I don't think it's fair to get a cool 2.8% every year just because. Their raises should mirror the economy and the amount of revenue raised by the federal government in any given year. So in some years, they could get more than 2.8%, but in a year like this, much less.
You also say they are grossly underpaid for what they do, but just because they travel a lot doesn't mean they pay for it all. They get per diem wherever they go, and they can deduct the mortgage and interest on BOTH houses on their taxes. Ever wonder why there is a two-house limit on said deductions? Now you know why.
In your last point, you note that Matheson does this to earn points. What's your point? Every politician does that. Why can only Republicans do it and not Democrats?
Re Anonymous 1:23 pm | 2:33 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
One last point: why do only Republicans condescend to serve but for all
Democrats it's a chance for a step up? That makes no sense. As a CPA, I
prepare returns for a lot of high net worth individuals, some making as much as
$40M a year.
Guess what? Not all of them are Republicans. My guess would be it's about 55/45 Republican, and that's only a guess because not all of them are open about it and some of them change their minds from time to time.
Guess what? Not all of them are Republicans. My guess would be it's about 55/45 Republican, and that's only a guess because not all of them are open about it and some of them change their minds from time to time.
KM | 3:19 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Good job Matheson! Why do the congress and sentate need raises? The majority
of them are millionares. they don't need the money. But, alas, we know
where there power grabbing, money grubbing hearts are.
Cats | 3:29 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
I'm sure that as a CPA you have a lot of experience. Well, I have a lot of
experience in Washington. I am only stating facts about what goes on there.
The FACT is that most Democrats in Congress are not as well off as most
Republicans. I don't think even the DNC would dispute that. Many
Republican members have been CEOs and make a lot of money. They often take a
cut in pay to serve in the House. This is not so true in the Senate. I'm
just trying to make the point that many of these Members make sacrifices to
serve.
Members carry the responsibility for the governance of the entire country. I agree, they haven't been doing such a hot job lately, but their responsiblity is much greater than that of CEOs that make many times more than they make.
Also, Members of Congress do NOT get per diem. They have equal travel budgets that they have to live within no matter how far their district is. This includes staffers that must travel on business.
I know this is hard to understand unless you have been there, but it's the truth.
Members carry the responsibility for the governance of the entire country. I agree, they haven't been doing such a hot job lately, but their responsiblity is much greater than that of CEOs that make many times more than they make.
Also, Members of Congress do NOT get per diem. They have equal travel budgets that they have to live within no matter how far their district is. This includes staffers that must travel on business.
I know this is hard to understand unless you have been there, but it's the truth.
Cats | 3:52 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
And to Woe to Utah: My point is this--Matheson is a Democrat and as such he
needs to stop trying to pretend to be a Republican. He puts on an act of being
a conservative because that's the only way Democrats can get elected in
Utah. It's disingenuous and voters need to realize that. If that's
what you want, then by all means, vote for him.
But, understand this from someone who has a lot of experience in Washington--he only votes conservative when the Speaker releases him to do so. HE WOULDN'T DARE DO OTHERWISE IF HE EVER WANTS TO GET ANYWHERE IN CONGRESS. They don't really need his vote on most bills. They only need his seat to ensure that they control the speakership and all the committees. That's how the game is played.
So when Matheson comes home and pretends to be a conservative, please realize that it is an act. His very presence as a Democrat in Congress insures that LIBERALS will control the agenda. If that is what you want then fine, vote for him. BUT JUST UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS WHAT IS GOING ON.
ANYONE with experience in Washington will tell you this.
But, understand this from someone who has a lot of experience in Washington--he only votes conservative when the Speaker releases him to do so. HE WOULDN'T DARE DO OTHERWISE IF HE EVER WANTS TO GET ANYWHERE IN CONGRESS. They don't really need his vote on most bills. They only need his seat to ensure that they control the speakership and all the committees. That's how the game is played.
So when Matheson comes home and pretends to be a conservative, please realize that it is an act. His very presence as a Democrat in Congress insures that LIBERALS will control the agenda. If that is what you want then fine, vote for him. BUT JUST UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS WHAT IS GOING ON.
ANYONE with experience in Washington will tell you this.
Re Cats 3:52 | 4:12 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
But that's UT's problem, not Matheson's. The state is broken
because it is a one-party system wherein the voting public will only look at the
letter next to the name.
But...you say Matheson is a liberal and you are greatly mistaken. He is a Blue Dog Democrat. He voted against the bailout, which would make him fiscally conservative. He is voting against a pay raise for himself, which would make him fiscally conservative. He has a proven record of not voting blindly along party lines. I'm sorry if you don't understand that, but that is the facts.
Bush, on the other, hand, signed the Partiot Act, increasing government's role into our lives. Bush single-handedly increased the deficit that was a balanced budget when he took office. Bush did NOTHING in 8 years to make abortion illegal. Yet he has an R next to his name.
ANYONE with or without "Washington experience" can tell you the letter next to their name does not tell the whole story.
BTW--ANYONE can tote "Washington experience" so you may want to clarify what you do. A 16 year-old flipping Burgers at Johnny Rockets in the district has "Washington experience."
But...you say Matheson is a liberal and you are greatly mistaken. He is a Blue Dog Democrat. He voted against the bailout, which would make him fiscally conservative. He is voting against a pay raise for himself, which would make him fiscally conservative. He has a proven record of not voting blindly along party lines. I'm sorry if you don't understand that, but that is the facts.
Bush, on the other, hand, signed the Partiot Act, increasing government's role into our lives. Bush single-handedly increased the deficit that was a balanced budget when he took office. Bush did NOTHING in 8 years to make abortion illegal. Yet he has an R next to his name.
ANYONE with or without "Washington experience" can tell you the letter next to their name does not tell the whole story.
BTW--ANYONE can tote "Washington experience" so you may want to clarify what you do. A 16 year-old flipping Burgers at Johnny Rockets in the district has "Washington experience."
Michael | 5:39 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
So even if they get the raise, they can have a vote for a pay cut. The cut can
factor in this auto-gain plus another 5 off that.
Tom | 5:39 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Looks like yet another indicator to me politicians think they are above and
better than the rest of us. Too bad for them reality does not agree and never
will. They need to remove themselves from their little made up reality and join
the rest of us in the real one. I for one have zero respect left for politicians
and one of the things they would fail to recognize is that is not because I am
some kind of low life - it is because they destroyed it.
I hope he is successful.
I hope he is successful.
Lame! | 5:44 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Congress deserves a PAY CUT! Maybe they get hit because of the problems they
helped cause with their spending and spending and being asleep at the wheel and
they might learn the value of a dollar!
wayne in virginia | 5:46 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
bottom line from all these comments--NO congressperson should receive a
raise--period! Their performance (pay-for-performance, which is the same
standard they hold civil service employees to) has been abysmal, if not
downright atrocious. Doesn't matter which pol. party you're talking
about; they're ALL in it together, and NONE of them deserve a
raise--especially now! Good grief, folks! Talk about the foxes having the keys
to the hen house! Wish I could vote myself a raise, too! Gee...!
Cats | 5:51 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
TO Re: Cats 352: My experience in Washington is quite sophistocated and on
Capitol Hill. It should be quite obvious from what I have written that I
wasn't flipping burgers.
You seem to have missed my point altogether. When Jim Matheson votes conservative it is because he has been RELEASED to do so by the Speaker. The Dems know he represents a REPUBLICAN district. Therefore, in order to protect his seat, they release him to vote "his district" on bills that his consituents are going to take particular note of.
It's the same game that Bill Orton played for three terms. When Bill got into trouble was when the Dems went into minority status and they couldn't release him. They needed every vote. That's when his true colors really came out.
I know you don't like to hear this, but it is nevertherless true. Utah is conservative because the people in this state believe in conservative principles. It isn't because they can't read the ballot or because they don't know how to vote any other way. The only way a Democrat can get elected in Utah is to talk like a Republican. That's how Matheson keeps getting elected.
You seem to have missed my point altogether. When Jim Matheson votes conservative it is because he has been RELEASED to do so by the Speaker. The Dems know he represents a REPUBLICAN district. Therefore, in order to protect his seat, they release him to vote "his district" on bills that his consituents are going to take particular note of.
It's the same game that Bill Orton played for three terms. When Bill got into trouble was when the Dems went into minority status and they couldn't release him. They needed every vote. That's when his true colors really came out.
I know you don't like to hear this, but it is nevertherless true. Utah is conservative because the people in this state believe in conservative principles. It isn't because they can't read the ballot or because they don't know how to vote any other way. The only way a Democrat can get elected in Utah is to talk like a Republican. That's how Matheson keeps getting elected.
Anonymous | 5:54 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
members of congress should strongly consider deleting "the honorable"
from their titles. it is ok for the rest of us to worry about jobs much less
raises. almost every member is comfortable and could easily give up the $4700
raise. there are plenty of other perks they could give back. congress takes
very good care of congress. the members, for the most part, are there to enrich
their own coffers. and the raise is peanuts compared to their retirement
riches. if woodward/bernstein wanted to do a REAL expose, they'd do this
one. gone are the days when folks went to wash to do their duty for the country
for a term or two. now they go to the employer of last resort for a lifetime
job--lord knows they'd be unable to hold down any other job, including toll
collector or ditch digger.
Liz | 5:53 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Where is Pelosi and Reid on this? Why aren't they outraged? Why are they
allowing this to happen? Their silence is disgusting.
Professional | 5:56 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Thank you Mr. Matheson. The raise doesn't stop with the senators; many top
government employee's salaries are capped at the Senators pay; therefore
there is a ladder up effect that cost tax payers plenty! How about someone
providing the total cost of this raise!
Allan | 5:59 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Congress wants the car exec's to work for $1 a year. Practice what you
preach Legislative and Executive branch!
Woodie | 6:02 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Now is the time for term limits. One term as a representative. One term as a
Senator. Then run for President if they chose. No lifetime retirement for
congressional service, only President.
jgdesert | 6:04 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
This talk of two households plus expenses for a job that pays only $169,000 is a
ridiculous argument. What is even more crazy is these folks spending several
million, or more for that pay.
However, would you expect a representative, even as a gesture, recognize that maybe now is not the time for a raise? Never. Do you think they believe their pay should be commensurate with the job they have done?
A government of the people, by the people, for the people is long buried with the rest of the ideals that this country was founded on.
However, would you expect a representative, even as a gesture, recognize that maybe now is not the time for a raise? Never. Do you think they believe their pay should be commensurate with the job they have done?
A government of the people, by the people, for the people is long buried with the rest of the ideals that this country was founded on.
rd | 6:08 p.m. Dec. 29, 2008
Why are we surprised that congress allows itself to flourish while the rest of
the country is in tatters. They are all ego maniacs with tiny minds that deserve
the hell they are headed for. The sooner the better as far as I am
concerned......As I see it, if america is stupid enough to allow this nonsense
it deserves what it gets....our founding fathers had a "ruling class"
like this and they did the right thing......they went to war!!!
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- 'SuperFreakonomics' just as fun 1:42 p.m.
- Beck is the new Oprah for thrillers 1:34 p.m.
- Zemeckis on his 'Christmas Carol' 1:34 p.m.
- 'The American house next door' 1:10 p.m.
- Make a printed-palm tree 1:09 p.m.
- Snakeskin makes fashion statement 1:03 p.m.
- Chabon explores manhood in book 12:59 p.m.
- Skateboarder stabbed at park 12:23 p.m.
- USA Today poll: U. 14th, Y. 22nd 11:51 a.m.
- TCU 4th in AP poll; U. 16th, Y. 22nd 11:32 a.m.
- Gay advocates trek to LDS office
209 - Dirk does dirty work in Dallas190
- Lobo suspended173
- House passes health care bill170
- Cougars crush hapless Cowboys145
- Speed has never been BYU's game136
- RSL rallies to advance103
- Utah Jazz fall apart against Kings102
- Thousands protest health bill101
- Provo company innovating engines98
Why do so many people live so close to refineries in Utah and elsewhere?
NASA's Stardust probe continues to bring new knowledge about the nature...
Advertisement
Latest comments
Congrats to TCU and BYU!!!
Very interesting Utah and their conservative politics don't want anything to...
The House bill will be detrimental to health care as it will take the...
Studs...
I SPENT TIME WITH HER IN JAIL AND SHE KNOWS SHE DID WRONG SHE MADE A MISTAKE...
Yea, the pac 10 is just loaded.
i didn't see the punch but teammates said that it happened. i saw the...
You are my neighbor. Your are not Canadian tell the true and you had never...
There are several go to type receivers on this team. Problem has been that...
I have to agree with Mr. Reichel on the interpretation of the Brahms Sympony...
Advertisements