In a recent development on Capitol Hill, lawmakers moved closer to securing their first salary increase in 15 years as part of a pre-Christmas bill intended to maintain government funding through the spring.
The legislation included a clause that aimed to remove the existing prohibition on automatic pay increases for Congress members, a detail first highlighted in reports. However, the bill faced criticism for its expansive nature, leading to widespread misinformation about the proposed cost of living adjustment for lawmakers.
Amid the debate, notable figures expressed concerns about a 40% salary hike, questioning how it could be labeled a ‘continuing resolution.’ In reality, the proposed increase would have allowed for a modest cost of living adjustment of 3.8%, translating to roughly a $6,600 salary boost.
“I was surprised to hear my pay was going up to $240,000 — that was news to me,” remarked Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., reflecting on the proposed adjustments.
Currently, the salary for rank-and-file members stands at $174,000, a figure that has remained unchanged since 2009. Some lawmakers, like Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-N.Y., advocate for equitable treatment with the federal workforce, which does receive periodic salary increases. Torres emphasized the reality of inflation’s impact even on congressional members.
Political Backlash
An automatic pay raise for cost of living adjustments has been stipulated in a 1989 statute, yet Congress has consistently blocked such increases. According to the Congressional Research Service, had lawmakers received adjustments since 1992, their salaries would now be approximately $243,300.
“When adjusted for inflation, member salaries have declined by 31% since 2009,” stated Brandice Canes-Wrone, a political science professor. She added that congressional pay lags significantly behind executive branch counterparts and has diminished relative to private sector wages.
While Congress is tasked with determining its own pay, giving any raises tied to inflation has become politically sensitive. Former Rep. Reid Ribble highlighted the implications of stagnant salaries on congressional representation, arguing that this situation favors financially secure individuals and discourages diverse candidates.
Despite a recent policy change allowing members to claim some lodging expense reimbursements, Ribble insisted that it fails to address the overarching issue of salaries not keeping pace with living costs in Washington, D.C. He underscored the importance of having a Congress that reflects the American populace in terms of age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status.
Ultimately, the government funding bill did not pass in its original form, along with any potential for increasing lawmakers’ salaries.
