Pay Raises Not Always Welcomed

By Audrey Hoffer
March 30, 2008

Lawmakers deal differently with boosts in salary

Washington - Most people would like the ability to set their own salaries. The U.S. Constitution requires Congress to do just that. But it never has been a chore it relishes, and it has struggled with a variety of systems to accomplish it.

From 1789, when congressional salaries were $6 a day, until 1968 when they were $30,000 a year, Congress enacted stand-alone legislation for 18 separate salary adjustments. Partisan battles accompanied many of those votes, and sometimes a decade would pass between increases.

Over the next two decades, Congress relied on a federal commission to recommend salary increases for top federal officials. Increases were accepted in some years, rejected in many others.

The 1989 Ethics Reform Act established a formula using changes in private-sector wages and salaries to set annual salary adjustments. Congress has accepted six such adjustments and rejected 12.

In January, members of Congress voted to accept a 2.5%, or $4,100, increase over the $165,200 salary established in 2006; an increase for 2007 had been rejected.

The standard salary for senators and House members now is $169,300, according to the Legislative Resource Center. Those in leadership positions make more. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi earns $217,400; House majority and minority leaders earn $188,100 and Senate majority and minority leaders earn $183,500.

Not every member of the Wisconsin delegation accepts the raise, and they have various ways of making a point about it.
Democratic U.S. Sen. Herb Kohl has never accepted one. His salary today is $89,500, the same as when he entered the Senate in 1989. Kohl returns all pay-raise money to the U.S. Treasury Department, his spokesman said.

Rep. Steve Kagen (D-Appleton) says he wrote a personal check this month for $975.50 and mailed it to the Treasury Department. That represents the 2.5% raise for the first quarter of the year and will offset a small part of the 2008 federal deficit, projected by the Congressional Budget Office to be $357 billion, Kagen said.

"Most Americans are not guaranteed a raise in their annual salary or hourly wage," he said. "Until they are, I will continue to send back my raises."

U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, a Democrat, and Rep. Tom Petri (R-Fond du Lac) treat their pay raises somewhat similarly. Neither keeps raises approved during their current term in office. Instead, they wait until the beginning of their next term, after an election, before accepting salaries received earlier by their colleagues.

Feingold says he returns pay raises granted during his term in office to the Treasury. Petri says he donates the money to local charities, including schools, museums and churches.

Both are guided by the 27th Amendment to the Constitution, which limits congressional pay raises, their spokesmen said. This amendment states: "No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened."

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Janesville) said in a statement: "Every time I am given an opportunity, I vote to oppose pay raises for members of Congress. In addition, I have and will continue to donate my automatic pay raise to charity."
Rep. Ron Kind (D-La Crosse) says he distributes the money from his raise among United Way chapters in his district.
Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Menomonee Falls) votes against pay raises, said his spokesman, but accepts them because he is legally required to pay tax on the raise even if it is declined.

A spokesman for Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee) says she accepted her 2008 raise.
The offices of Reps. Tammy Baldwin (D-Madison) and Dave Obey (D-Wausau) did not respond to requests for comment on their raise policies.