Flush from the success of giving America’s lowest-paid workers a raise, members of Congress want to hike their own pay too.
Of course, federal lawmakers make a little more than the $5.85 an hour that stands as the national minimum wage.
Members of Congress make $165,200 a year.
Unless lawmakers vote to decline it, the pay will increase to almost $170,000 a year in 2008.
Federal lawmakers automatically get a costof- living raise.
Since the no-vote pay increase was approved in 1989, members of Congress have seen their pay almost double.
Frankly, the job should pay well. If it did not, qualified leaders might be less willing to serve.
As it is, most politicians could probably find better-paying jobs in the private sector.
But arguing that Congress deserves a raise because Washington boosted the national minimum wage seems comically brazen.
It took so long for the federal government to act on the issue that Pennsylvania and many other states had already raised the minimum wage. The lowest-paid workers in Pennsylvania make $7.15 an hour.
Meanwhile, the nation is engaged in a costly war. Residents and businesses, alike, are struggling with high fuel bills.
And in Washington, politicians are arguing about whether the government can afford to provide health insurance to more children without it.
This would be a good time for Congress to decline a pay raise. Some federal lawmakers have already stepped forward and said so. Rep.
Chris Carney, of the 10th Congressional District, would be wise to join that camp.
The move would make particular sense for him. Declining a pay raise would boost the Democrat’s credentials as a fiscal conservative.
Besides, it is the right thing to do.
In the end, the political price of accepting a controversial raise could be more than the 2.5 percent pay increase that members of Congress stand to gain.
