September 30, 2009 02:31 PM EDT
The Politico reported September 30 that the U.S. Congress is all set to allocate more taxpayer dollars -- to itself. How much more are we talking here? According to Politico, it's a healthy 5.8% (contrast that with the 2% pay raise federal employees are expected to get in January, or the 2.9% pay raise military personnel are expected to get).
The story says, "Under a House-Senate conference measure, approved by the House last week and poised for passage in the Senate on Wednesday, spending for the legislative branch will increase 5.8 percent this year, boosting Capitol Hill’s annual budget to $4.7 billion."
Nearly $5 billion? If my math is correct, that's nearly $9 million PER ELECTED OFFICIAL IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE. Seriously? Are you kidding me?
Politico continues, "The measure includes a hodgepodge of new funding for lawmakers: a $500,000 pilot program for senators to send out postcards about their town hall meetings, $30,000 for receptions for foreign dignitaries and $4 million for consultants — with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) getting up to nine each and Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) getting up to three more. There’s $15.8 million for salaries for the Senate Appropriations Committee — plus an extra $950,000 for the committee’s administrative expenses."
Almost a million dollars for administrative expenses for ONE committee? Are we getting the most bang for our buck, here, or is the term "administrative expenses" a cover for funneling the money somewhere else?
"Funding for House office buildings will jump a staggering 128 percent, to $84 million. Some of that money will go to replace a roof at the Rayburn House Office Building, and an additional $50 million is being allocated to renovate the Cannon House Office Building. The Architect of the Capitol will see a 17.8 percent hike to deal with infrastructure repairs, and the Government Printing Office’s revolving fund will increase a whopping 155 percent, to $12.7 million, to deal with technology upgrades and repairs, according to the conference report."
Oh, and it gets better (a relative term, in this case meaning better than last year). This increase of nearly 6% is dismissed by supporters as less than the 10.9% Congress upped its budget by last year!!
Okay, now for the competing quotes. First, Jake Thompson, spokesman for Democratic Senator Ben Nelson: "This is a fiscally responsible bill." I'll bet he said that with a straight face, too. Then there's Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense: "With an enormous deficit and rest of the country tightening their belts, Congress should be looking at doing the same." And Republican Senator John McCain: "The growth of expenditures particularly in these times is terrible."
Hey, what does Congress care. It's other people's money, right?
Okay, one more quote, and this one has to be considered right up there with the fiscally responsible comment. This one comes from a spokesman for Democratic Representative Debbie Wasserman: "We have not seen a significant increase in overall legislative branch expenditures since nearly 2001. During this time, significant cost increases have occurred, and the Capitol complex has also seen significant deferred maintenance. Many of these maintenance expenses become much more expensive if they continue to be deferred."
I have to ask, what did they do with the 10.9% increase from last year? That wasn't significant?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090930/pl_politico/27732
The story says, "Under a House-Senate conference measure, approved by the House last week and poised for passage in the Senate on Wednesday, spending for the legislative branch will increase 5.8 percent this year, boosting Capitol Hill’s annual budget to $4.7 billion."
Nearly $5 billion? If my math is correct, that's nearly $9 million PER ELECTED OFFICIAL IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE. Seriously? Are you kidding me?
Politico continues, "The measure includes a hodgepodge of new funding for lawmakers: a $500,000 pilot program for senators to send out postcards about their town hall meetings, $30,000 for receptions for foreign dignitaries and $4 million for consultants — with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) getting up to nine each and Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) getting up to three more. There’s $15.8 million for salaries for the Senate Appropriations Committee — plus an extra $950,000 for the committee’s administrative expenses."
Almost a million dollars for administrative expenses for ONE committee? Are we getting the most bang for our buck, here, or is the term "administrative expenses" a cover for funneling the money somewhere else?
"Funding for House office buildings will jump a staggering 128 percent, to $84 million. Some of that money will go to replace a roof at the Rayburn House Office Building, and an additional $50 million is being allocated to renovate the Cannon House Office Building. The Architect of the Capitol will see a 17.8 percent hike to deal with infrastructure repairs, and the Government Printing Office’s revolving fund will increase a whopping 155 percent, to $12.7 million, to deal with technology upgrades and repairs, according to the conference report."
Oh, and it gets better (a relative term, in this case meaning better than last year). This increase of nearly 6% is dismissed by supporters as less than the 10.9% Congress upped its budget by last year!!
Okay, now for the competing quotes. First, Jake Thompson, spokesman for Democratic Senator Ben Nelson: "This is a fiscally responsible bill." I'll bet he said that with a straight face, too. Then there's Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense: "With an enormous deficit and rest of the country tightening their belts, Congress should be looking at doing the same." And Republican Senator John McCain: "The growth of expenditures particularly in these times is terrible."
Hey, what does Congress care. It's other people's money, right?
Okay, one more quote, and this one has to be considered right up there with the fiscally responsible comment. This one comes from a spokesman for Democratic Representative Debbie Wasserman: "We have not seen a significant increase in overall legislative branch expenditures since nearly 2001. During this time, significant cost increases have occurred, and the Capitol complex has also seen significant deferred maintenance. Many of these maintenance expenses become much more expensive if they continue to be deferred."
I have to ask, what did they do with the 10.9% increase from last year? That wasn't significant?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090930/pl_politico/27732
.
.
.
