- Members of Congress were set to chip in a few thousand extra dollars under a government funding bill.
- Then Elon Musk helped save it.
- This despite growing concern that it is becoming unaffordable to serve in Congress.
One of the most controversial parts of the short-term government funding bill that Elon Musk helped kill last week was a provision that would have allowed members of Congress to receive a modest pay raise.
While Musk argued against the so-called continuing resolution in a stream of posts on X, he said lawmakers would get a 40% pay raise if the bill passed.
In reality, members of the House and Senate would have received at most a raise of $6,600, or 3.8% of their annual salary of $174,000, according to the Congressional Research Service.
However, that provision was not included in the bill that emerged — and was signed into law — after two days of chaos on Capitol Hill.
That’s despite a growing sense from lawmakers in both parties that even if the optics are poor, raising Congressional pay is necessary to ensure that less wealthy people are able to serve and not be lured away by higher salaries. high in the private sector.
Sen. Markwayne Mullin, an Oklahoma Republican and staunch supporter of President-elect Donald Trump, told reporters last week that the demands and responsibilities of the job made serving in Congress “unaffordable” for those who weren’t already wealthy like himself. .
“If we’re not careful, you’re only going to get individuals who are millionaires, plus they can serve in Congress, and that’s not what it’s supposed to be,” Mullin said. “It’s supposed to be the people’s home.”
A salary of $174,000 is well above the median household income, but it hasn’t decreased since 2009. Adjusted for inflation, lawmakers’ salaries have essentially dropped by more than 30% in the past 15 years.
Members of Congress also face unique requirements, including the need to maintain two residences: one in Washington, DC, the other in their district. Those who can’t afford it often choose to sleep in their offices. Experts have also said it’s simply a matter of good governance: If lawmakers are paid well, they have less incentive to make money by becoming lobbyists after their term.
“I tell people the worst financial decision I ever made was running for Congress,” Mullin joked.
The provision inserted in the original funding bill was not technically a raise, but rather allowed for an automatic cost-of-living increase originally established by the Ethics Reform Act of 1989. These annual adjustments, which are usually salary increases with single-digit percentages, are designed to avoid the optics of lawmakers voting to raise their pay.
Rep. Joe Morelle, the top Democrat on the House Administration Committee, tried to play down the notion that members were getting a raise. “It just conforms to existing law,” Morelle told BI last week. “There is nothing extraordinary about it.”
Congress, however, has chosen to block these fixes every year since 2009, due to the inertia and political unpopularity of raising lawmakers’ salaries. In March, a group of current and former lawmakers filed a class-action lawsuit over those denials, arguing that their salaries were “unconstitutionally suppressed.”
Yet the politics of pay raises on Capitol Hill remain toxic. As word of the cost-of-living adjustment in the bill spread Wednesday, lawmakers in both parties came out against it.
“I cannot and will not vote to give myself more money when my constituents are feeling incredible financial pressure,” Rep. Pat Ryan, a New York Democrat, said in a statement that day. “Congress should focus on reducing costs for the American people, not giving themselves a raise. If this provision is not removed, I will vote against the continuing resolution.”
Eventually, the cost of living adjustment was blocked once again.
Musk did not respond to a request for comment.