Jerid

Here come the Dems. Hot damn. Blockin’ Congress’ auto-payraise. YeeHaw!

Officials said Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California and Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, the party’s leaders, had notified Republicans they will try to add the anti-pay-raise provision to a bill that provides funds for most government agencies through Feb. 15.

“It is unconscionable that members of congress would get yet another pay raise while the minimum wage has been stuck at $5.15 an hour for the last 10 years. Senator Reid intends to do all he can to ensure that Congress won’t get a raise until working families do,” said his spokesman, Jim Manley.

I love this. The Dems plan to put a hold on the Congressional Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) until we raise the minimum wage. The COLA has to be approved each year, and it’s conveniently tucked in an appropriations bill so as not to make it look like any Congressperson has voted oneself a raise. However, I think the Dems should go further…I say kill the COLA.

In 1989 the Ethics Reform Act was signed into law to dramatically change several administrative and ethical issues dealing with Congress. One of the agents for ethics reform stemmed from scandal regarding “honoraria”. Simply put, honoraria allowed US Representatives to charge up to $2,000 per speaking event. Unfortunately, too many Congressmen took advantage of the honoraria provision to dramatically increase their income at the bequest of special interest and lobbying groups. The 1989 bill revoked the honoraria provision. As a tradeoff for the removal of honoraria, the bill instituted a cost of living adjustment which Congressmen would receive automatically (barring the awkward need each year to vote for their own pay raises). Today the automatic pay raise can only be denied in normal business if an amendment is inserted into the Treasury-Transportation Appropriations bill which funds Congressional salaries. The COLA is meant to adjust Congressional salaries to keep up with inflation and increases in the cost of living; however, since 2000 the COLA has increased Congressional pay by over $25,000 per year.

In recent years the push to kill the COLA has grown. Several Dems and GOPers support the measure including Lincoln Davis, Ron Kind, James Matheson, Kyl, Feingold, Cornyn, and Chambliss. However, popular support to kill COLA doesn’t exist in Congress because, well… people love to raise their own salaries.

COLA was enacted as a tradeoff to get rid of a compensation system that rewarded unethical behavior. However, in its place, COLA entirely circumvents governmental transparency. It’s in place to keep legislators from being put in the difficult position of voting to raise their own salaries when the cost of living has decreased their real income. While great in concept, the public deserves the right to be able to cast judgment on their representatives…even if our judgment is sometimes a knee-jerk reaction.

Share on Facebook

{ 2 comments }

Heads up, Marie Wilson will be speaking on Wednesday 11/29 at the OSU John Glenn School of Public Affairs at 4pm.
If you’re not aware of Marie Wilson, I’d seriously recommend checking out both the Whitehouse Project website and her bio.

If I didn’t have class I’d make the drive down for this one. It should be good.

Share on Facebook

{ 1 comment }

Fine, Speaker-Elect Pelosi is thinking about giving the GOP just that, except not the kind of bipartisanship they really care about. Via the Hill:

Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has drafted legislation that would grant soon-to-be-unemployed Republicans severance pay while they look for jobs after Democrats take over control of the chamber on Jan. 4, according to a senior Democratic aide.

Democratic aides have kept details of the proposed severance package secret, such as how much former Republican aides would receive and who would be eligible for compensation. And it is not certain that Pelosi will introduce the resolution on the House floor at all.

Aides do the gruntwork in Washington. They write our laws, take care of constituent services, and fill the basic roles that keep America turning. Through crafty legislation, DC politicians have ensured their salaries go up every year while they have largely forgotten the aides that do the most work for our nation. The Speaker-elect’s bill is a testament to both bipartisan spirit, and appreciation for the hard work these men and women have given for their nation.

And for curious minds, the Senate already has a hefty benefits package that allows aides to receive compensation up to two months after they lose their jobs. One of my dear friends in Senator DeWine’s office certainly needs that pay as she looks for work elsewhere. However, she’s not sad. She voted against her boss.

Share on Facebook

{ 1 comment }

Outgoing Congressman Jim Ryun, R-KS, needs someone to pass him a tissue on his recent loss to Nancy Boyda. Today in the Topeka Capital-Journal Ryun gave one of the primary reasons for the loss:

Rep. Jim Ryun, R-Kan., blamed his re-election defeat Thursday on a range of influences, including overconfident campaign volunteers, news reports that questioned his honesty and distortion of his voting record by Democrat Nancy Boyda.

Yeah, you read that right. He blamed his defeat on his volunteers.

Of course he didn’t think Mr. 38% hurt him at all:

Ryun said he didn’t think it was a political mistake to host Bush in Topeka two days before the election.

I just feel sorry for the guy. He’s so clueless. No more tears Congressman, no more tears…

Share on Facebook

{ 1 comment }

But don’t worry, Blackwell’s wrong too…

An article over at RABid caught my eye a couple of minutes ago about a judicial challenge to John Boccieri’s (D-New Middletown) new law barring protests at military funerals. The Beacon-Journal also wrote a McNews worthy article in their morning edition. The sudden spike in interest regarding the new state law, which creates a 300 foot buffer zone around funerals proceedings, is due to a recent court challenge as to the constitutionality of the law. Additionally, both Blackwell and Strickland have thrown fuel on the fire by publicly condemning the challenge and calling on the judiciary to uphold the law (nothing like a little seperation of powers there, eh boys?).

Rep. Boccieri introduced HB 484 earlier this year in response to the repeated actions of the Rev. Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church. Maybe you’re familiar with Mr. Phelps, he runs the website www.godhatesfags.com (coincidentally, 11 of Mr. Phelps’ 13 children are lawyers).The Reverend has pursued an agenda protesting military funerals across America over the past year. The typical protests consists of Phelps and supporters standing outside the gate of the funeral, shouting at the mourners, while holding signs stating that their loved one is burning in the fires of hell (or something to that effect) because America supports homosexuals. Yeah, he’s a top-notch guy.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I believe that in some instances limitations on public protests are needed, especially to protect the interests and rights of other parties (in this case, the mourners). Initially I was a big supporter of HB 484, however, lately I’ve noticed some real problems with the legislation…problems that will create unforseeable circumstances.

HB 484 is written pretty carelessly, and leaves some real questions unanswered. I’m not going to cut and paste the entire bill, but it can be accessed here (It’s short, like a paragraph long).

The most basic problems with the bill are that:

1. It bans “picketing or protesting” outside funerals. This picketing or protesting doesn’t have to be limited to a protest of the military funeral, it can be any protest at all. So the bill creates this 300 foot buffer zone where no protesting can occur. That’s fine, right? Well, what about cemetaries in the heart of cities? For the righties, if a cemetary were located within 300 feet of an abortion clinic or where a controversial speaker was presenting, they would effectively be barred from protest. For the lefties, what if a cemetary were located near a labor plant…picket lines could be compromised.

2. The law bans protesting “one hour before a funeral and one hour after”. Imagine what this could create at busy cemetaries. Say there’s a funeral at 10am, 1pm, and 3pm. The only time during the work day a protest could occur even remotely close to the cemetary would be from 11-noon because of the restrictions.

3. The language in the bill potentially creates a ban on protests along the funeral procession route. Think back to my first example. If the procession drove by Pre-term in Shaker heights, or by AK-Steel in Middletown, all civic protests would be legally shut down.

Strickland and Blackwell are both tooting their horns right now, calling on the judiciary to uphold this bill. I think they’re wrong (you should comment and tell me why I’m wrong). More than anything, I think this is a great example of an instance where both DEMS and GOOPERS are picking up some quick political points.

We need laws like Boccieri’s. However, legislators need to be careful when they craft legislation limiting our rights (especially when they limit our self-expression). In this case, it’s just sloppy legislation. Boccierri should go back to the drawing board and craft something that shuts Phelps and his cronies down in a more sensible manner.

…my two cents.

Share on Facebook

{ 3 comments }