I object to the pay raise. $174 K is a lot of money. I think they should sit there until inflation catches up.
I imagine people’s reactions to their salary depend on how hard we work and how much we make.
And the other thing is that being motivated by a high, consistent salary doesn’t have the same corrupt motivations for you to change your policies to benefit your lobbyist backers that exists now.
It would be a great salary for me, up here in almost-Canada. If I still lived in L.A. … not so much.
$174 is a lot of money anywhere in the US, but the reality is that most people who are able to win an election here could make a lot more above board in some other opportunity, and the minority of people getting into elected positions for altruistic reasons under the current incentives are dwarfed by corrupt plutocrats and narcissists. We’ve been trying the “freeze their pay” method for years and it hasn’t worked.
It isn’t that extraordinary of a salary by itself in consideration of the expenses that are borne in serving that role, but it is a valid point that any congressperson arguing against a marginally livable minimum wage, affordable health and child care, and not doing their level best to find some workable solution to the massive wealth inequality but is using their insider knowledge to make favorable stock trades is an abject hypocrite. Unfortunately for many, that is a feature of the job.
Stranger
It has become a sort of habit that “smaller” measures about individual programs or authorizations passed in the one body, that everyone is OK with, instead of getting just promptly moved and voted individually instead get set aside to be all bundled into some bigger package later on, possibly attached to some Big Deal “must-pass” headliner bill. AND in some cases, as was mentioned in the case of that one particular bill, the later omnibus compromise version allocated more funding than the original – so they were holding out for that, getting a better deal w/o having to fight it out as an amendment.
The collapse of the regular appropriations procedure has led to this – there are supposed to be a dozen appropriation packages separated by subject matter passed before every FY begins in October. Hasn’t happened in decades, instead every year they’ve been doing CRs until they hammer out a consolidated “omnibus” appropriation throwing everything in that they can.
(In my own bailiwick, the delegate from Puerto Rico had two bills about updating FEMA administrative procedures approved in the House by unanimous consent all the way in January of 2023 . For almost 2 years the relevant Senate committee promised to bundle it onto some other major FEMA package they would work on… did not happen. ONE was brought up and passed in committee in the Senate in November 2024, and never made it to the floor.)
I feel this could have been passed as standalone bill due to the nature of urgency (children cancer research) and bipartisan support. No need to club it in an omnibus CR legislaton.
Politics as usual should be put aside for some causes and this is one such with bipartisan support.Schumer sitting on it for 9 months is unforgivable. He could have returned it asking for increased budget for this than sitting on it for 9 months.
These are the sort of habits/practises/processes/regulations(if any) which DOGE should look into and make legislative process more transparent and easier to pass.
Congress runs itself. The executive branch has no say in how Congress gets its job done. Congress is also completely transparent - every official act it does is entered into the congressional record, and you can trace back who voted for what at any time in the process.
Congress probably should reform how it gets things done, but Elon and Vivek have no standing to force it to do so - not that they have any standing as heads of an as-yet non-existent and unauthorized “government department” anyway.
Yes, fully agree. Elon and Vivek have no government role officially. DOGE, as I understand, is only a recommendatory body. But with his huge X megaphone and influence over a section of legislators (republican) Elon should use his power positively for once.
You’ve got to be kidding. Not only does any Executive advisory group have no business in determining how the Legislative branch takes care of their business, but neither Elmo or Vivek have any experience in any Legislative matters.
The separation of powers is one of the cornerstones of the American governmental system. It’s what made America different from the monarchies that existed when it was designed. While our system can, in no doubt, be improved, concentrating more power in fewer people is not likely a part of it.
Elon Musk will use his power to benefit Elon Musk. Positive or negative has nothing to do with it.
Pull the other leg; it’s got bells on it.
Of all of the people in the world that I might trust to actually use their “power” in a positive fashion, Elon Musk is absolutely not on that list. Much like his new bought-and-paid-for friend, Trump, Musk can only be relied upon to take actions that benefit himself.
Musk has created an EV market where none existed. He’s singularly responsible for advancing a market that is responsible for a sizeable reduction in CO2. He invested in charging stations all over the country because he knew what it took to jump start that market. Add to that battery manufacturing needed to support the market. He’s also created a private rocket company from scratch (in 2001) that is now years ahead of NASA and delivered it well below the public money spent on similar NASA projects. He’s working on AI technology and neuralink technology. Even though I don’t like him personally he is leagues above the skill-sets of the vast majority of Congressional representatives.
Congress, on the other-hand, hasn’t produced a balanced budget since the turn of century. !3% of the US budget now goes toward debt payments which is money that could have gone into infrastructure. They have failed their fiduciary responsibility.
Members of Congress have no magical legislative expertise. They are voted in without any test of skills. Clearly they cannot manage a budget.
As for Musk’s political influence it should be noted that ALL House Democrats voted for the revised bill while 34 Republicans voted against it. Trump is not the President and Democrats represent the current majority.
But I have heard pundits saying trump lost this round?
I’m part of a customer service team for the Patent & Trademark Office; the PTO has reserves to continue normal operations for a few months in the event of a shutdown.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that the 2018-19 shutdown, which lasted about five weeks, reduced U.S. economic output by $11 billion in the following two quarters, including $3 billion that the economy never regained.
Moody’s Analytics estimated the 2013 full-government shutdown, which lasted 16 days, reduced gross domestic product growth by $20 billion.
And if We The People had any sort of sense we could easily replace the lot with others who have the right skills and attitude. But we tend to prefer the ones who have a record of keeping the contracts going to the district employers at best, or those who show up “throwing red meat” at “the base” at worst.
And scorn for how governments function on the part of those who run private businesses is just arrogance just as much as the opposite would be. Republics are not proprietary businesses and should not be run like one, and vice versa.
If only members of congress could read a calendar and operate a calculator in order to vote on a spending bill that is on-time and within budget.
As I responded earlier, you’ve got to be kidding.
@Ash_trav511 was saying that Musk (et al.), as an advisory group of the Executive Branch, should be advising how to “make the legislative process more transparent and easier to pass.” It is, of course, specifically not the business of the Executive Branch to tell the Legislative Branch how to conduct its business. This has to do with a feature of our Government known as Separation of Powers, which was introduced, not to make Government more efficient, but to make it more robust. More able to withstand the influences of corruption and abuse than the other governments that were in place when it was created. It has worked pretty well at this. Not perfect and there have been challenges over the centuries, but it is the most powerful government in the world. IMO, changes are needed, but not to make the government more efficient, but to make it more resistant to outside influences.
You may be correct in all of those wonderful and marvelous things that Musk has done for us stupid Americans (although that is an opinion I do not share), although I would remind you that none of it would have occurred without the US government’s financial backing, a “feature” of our government that Musk is actively trying to eliminate (otherwise known as “I’ve got mine”).
As far as the marvelous EV market, it is not burgeoning the way it was. You know why? It is closely tied to the price of gas. When the price of gas is high enough to make it considerably cheaper to operate an EV, they market will come back, but high gas prices are not likely to happen with the Trump clownshow, and if gas prices do go high, the inflationary nature is likely to create a recession where nobody can afford a new EV.
I even wonder if the CO2 reduction you claim is accurate. With more and more renewable electricity being created, the CO2 emissions will be dropping regardless. Sure, if EV comprised even 50% of consumer transportation (we aren’t even close) I’d give it maybe. As it is, it’s a novelty.
When you add to the equation that Musk is a racist bigot who, like Trump, doesn’t have American interests at heart, but only his own, it is clear that he really shouldn’t be anywhere near the workings of our government.