That's A Congressional "Bone-Us"
That's what Congressional staffers got -- to the tune of $6.1 million, a CNN investigation by Lisa Desjardins reveals. Matt Schneider writes at Mediaite. Republicans, in a time of belt-tightening, forked over $908,000 in bonuses, and the Democrats handed out $3.1 million.
Some representatives are happy to defend the expenditure like Democratic Congressman Jim Clyburn who said in a statement:"My staff worked extremely hard . . . including quite a few all-nighters and many weekends . . . and I rewarded them with an end-of-the-year bonus."
The rest of us are working are to not quite make ends meet, and we aren't getting bonuses, so maybe those of you who've fucked up the country, and your little elves, should be the last ones to get a bonus for it.
From the comments, timzank writes:
If you want to become physically ill, click on this:http://www.legistorm.com/browse_by_representative.html
look up your congress critter and see what his annual staff expenditure is and multiply it by 535.
Doesn't look like they're suffering to me. And note that the money listed is just for one quarter. Here's the money paid out by the lame Jane Harman, who just resigned, and who will probably be replaced by ficus-tree-in-a-pantsuit, Janice Hahn.
via @mpetrie98
They didn't even produce the budget they are obligated to do. They don't deserve a bonus, they shouldn't be paid, at all.
MarkD at June 28, 2011 7:20 AM
My Congressman was on the radio this morning, and pointed out that the Senate hadn't actually passed a budget in 800 days. Continuing Resolutions a budget does not make.
I R A Darth Aggie at June 28, 2011 7:29 AM
If you drill down into the list, it looks like most Congressional staffers are paid really pathetic salaries (most
Christopher at June 28, 2011 10:17 AM
Whoops, forgot my HTML encoding. To conclude:
(most are paid <25k), especially given that they live in an expensive city. One can argue that Congress needs fewer staffers, but it's not like they are living large on the taxpayers' dime.
Christopher at June 28, 2011 10:21 AM
so Christopher, you are seeing the dates, where it might be $15k per quarter... not that you might not be right, but can you tell me who, because that isn't what I saw, but I didn't look at everyone.
SwissArmyD at June 28, 2011 12:59 PM
Swiss, you're right. I misread the dates. Thought those salaries were annualized, not quarterly.
Christopher at June 28, 2011 1:50 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/06/28/thats_a_congres.html#comment-2311694">comment from ChristopherSee note in blog post above!
Amy Alkon at June 28, 2011 2:18 PM
Leave a comment