So Obama has proposed a pay freeze for federal (civilian, natch) employees. Some see this as a dumb move, absent some concession from the GOP. Here is David Kurtz:
“Government goes first” usually means “Democrats go first” in these negotiations. Republicans then use that concession to redefine the “middle” as further to the right—at which point Democrats concede again and the whole cycle repeats itself.
Matt Yglesias agrees and also notes (correctly, in my view) that there is a a “political messaging gambit” at work here.
Like Yglesias, I agree that such gambits rarely work, but since we’re planning the messaging game, here’s my proposal, which I think should substitute for the pay freeze:
Obama should announce that he will refuse his salary. (Or give it back to the Treasury. Or give it to charity. Or whatever works—constitutionally, legally, etc.)
And then he should call on all members of Congress do to the same.
It pains me even to suggest this because I am happy paying salaries to our elected leaders and because demanding symbolic sacrifices from leaders is mostly a rhetorical stunt that rarely ever affects policy or, in this case, the fiscal bottom line.
But given that the pay freeze will also barely affect the bottom line—saving $60 billion over 10 years, or approximately 0.17% of the total federal budget over this time period (assuming that we spend roughly $3.5 trillion every year for the next 10 years)—it seems better from a messaging perspective to advocate for personal sacrifice by elected leaders instead of making life harder for some GS-8 who lives in Loudon County. Obviously, Obama and many members of Congress are wealthy enough that they don’t really need the money.
{ 5 comments }
For Obama to decline his salary is just political theater. He has a huge source of other income and the assurance of even greater income once he leaves office. The situation is very different for members of Congress, many of whom have no other source of income and no prospects for great riches after they’re out of Congress.
What ought to concern you is that the freezing of federal salaries will be a purely cosmetic device, as jobs are re-classified into higher pay grades. Given human nature and the mentality of supervisors, that’s what’s going to happen, causing total federal salaries to continue growing and creating the personnel equivalent of grade inflation, with probable fiscal consequences for years or decades to come.
Rob: Note that I didn’t say every member of Congress should do it, or that all of them could afford it.
But for Obama, of course it’s just political theater. That’s mostly what the pay freeze is too — except, of course, for those whose pay is frozen. Perhaps you’re right and people will just get promoted to higher salaries anyway. If so, it only reinforces my point that a pay freeze isn’t a good way to reduce the deficit.
For comparison’s sake, the prez makes $400,000 base/year. Reps and Senators make $174,000 base a year, with majority and minority leaders in each chamber making $193,400 and the Speaker making $223,500 per annum. If all refused their salary, we are looking at a total savings of about $93.5ish million, give or take (for example, does DC’s non-voting Rep draw the same pay?).
John:
I think GS-8′s who live in D.C. or Arlington or whatever should get equal sympathy to those who live in Loudon County and choose to spend their salary on gas and square footage of living space rather than on convenience and a short commute.
No wonder all our Congressmen and Presidents suck…only a fool would take on these jobs for such lousy salaries.
We should pay top elected officials millions of dollars per year, in exchange for them agreeing not to accept any form of outside income during and for a defined period after their term.
Comments on this entry are closed.