It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


To give congress a raise or Not to give Congress a raise.......that is the question.

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 12:58 AM
Okay, so I have sifted through most of the 'fiscal cliff' bill and pretty much came to the conclusion that they did it again....They just kicked the can, as it appeared 80% of what I read was just 'strike 2012 and insert 2013' crap.....The reason it took three minutes to read is that there really isn't much to it....However, I just got to the Misc section, there is an interesting thing I need to research about NDAA. Which I find very odd to add to a domestically oriented bill, but the point of this thread...

So most of us have seen a couple of threads related to Fed employees getting a pay raise....So what takes precedence? The executive order the POTUS signed or this:


Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no adjustment shall be made under section 601(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 31) (relating to cost of living adjustments for Members of Congress) during fiscal year 2013.

As I understood it, the Pres just lifted the freeze on standard of living increase that Fed employees normally receive, but with this bill it places an exception on members of Congress....So did they add it on purpose, or literally not have a clue what they were signing and this was thrown in to prove that point?

The 401k's into Roth accounts might be an interesting topic as well, but I am curious why they 'modified the NDAA' as they did while making that change retro-active.

posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 01:33 AM
Ummm, perhaps a payoff, or bribe, for loyalty to The Exalted One? I don't know. I do know I am extremely unhappy that most of those worthless congressional cockroaches even have a job.

Never mind the fact that every last one of those wastes of skin would have been fired long ago if they worked in the private sector. Give all the do-nothings a raise.
Why not? When your trying to bankrupt a nation, you gotta keep spending, right? Even if it makes no sense. Spend, SPEND, SPEND!

posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 01:39 AM
reply to post by Mike U.

I still have no clue why they haven't been fired, lock stock and smoking barrel.....They keep complaining that 'companies' are not investing in future growth because they don't know what will happen tomorrow, but it is because they just keep hitting snooze on the alarm. It is no one's fault but our government that is at fault for this one, and they just want to keep it going....Keep us constantly distract with self-inflicted deadlines, whether it be the debt ceiling, tax expiration, or diary cliff...Wonder how long the GAP will take to wake up and realize it is a farce.

posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 01:52 AM
reply to post by pointr97

That is a question I truly wish I had an answer for.

posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 01:55 AM
Yes, these sons of b's voted themselves a pay raise, voted that everyone earning over $50,000 pays at least $1,000 more in taxes, and cut $1 of spending for every $46 in new revenue essentially kicking the can down road all in the same day.

:fl ame:
:flame :
:f lame:

I'm ready for war.

top topics

log in