Roy Blunt: WATB

Hard Times in the Congressional Dining Room

Representative Roy Blunt (R-MO) has fallen on hard times. How else to explain why the man is insisting on a raise of his already significant Federal salary $165,000 per year?

Mr. Blunt...said the raises were crucial for members of Congress who are not independently wealthy and must operate two households on the current $165,200 salary. The annual raise for this year was set at 1.7 percent, about $2,760.

Shorter Blunt: $165,200 per year, bad; 167,960, good. In all fairness, Blunt is one of the, ahem, poorer members of Congress, with a reported net worth of between $118,000 - $345,000, making him the 315th most affluent member of Congress. Lest we forget, however, Mr. Blunt is married to a high-powered lobbyist for Altria (formerly Phillip Morris Management Group), who still lobbies members of Congress. Why is it I doubt his pleas of poverty?

Abigail Pearlman Blunt and Rep. Roy Blunt smiling in the face of adversity

There's more: "Roy Blunt: WATB" >>

Bipartisan Concensus and the 110th Congress

After sitting in the minority for the past six congresses and being aggressively marginalized by the majority in the blessedly-defunct 109th congress, the Democrats have resumed the majority and set sail for the center.

"Common Ground" is the mantra on the hill as they try to reach bipartisan consensus on a wide range of social issues. On abortion, the focus is on prevention rather than expanding access. On gay rights, the focus is on issues of discrimination rather than polarizing issues such as gay marriage. I have no problem with gay marriage, and personally believe that the right to commit (legally and spiritually) to the one you love is a basic human right. However, before we get acceptance for gay marriage, we have to accept that it is wrong to fire a person from their job for their sexual orientation. It's time to frame the debate in terms that are not put forth with the singular intent of inspiring vitriol and contempt. I for one welcome the quest for common ground, after five years of steady decline in which one half of America openly expressed contempt for the other half and blatantly questioned our patriotism, because we had the audacity to exhibit that truly American trait of questioning authority.

I don't expect a trouble-free marriage. Hell, I don't even expect to get through the honeymoon without at least one histrionic outburst. The marriage is bound to be rocky, and a divorce might be sudden and vicious if a spot opens up on the Supreme Court.

But for now, everyone seems to be getting along. Republicans are crossing the aisle to vote with Democrats on popular issues, and the moderate Democratic agenda is meeting little resistance outside the cast of usual suspects (Roy Blunt, Sam Graves - I'm giving you the Librarian Glare).

The question in my mind is, will the Republicans stand up with the Democrats to oppose some of the more reckless decisions by the Decider and bring this president to heel?

There's more: "Bipartisan Concensus and the 110th Congress" >>

Blunt on the Cost of War

House Minority Whip Roy Blunt says he supports a balanced budget. And he wants to keep taxes low.

But with expensive new programs being proposed every day, this protection against tax hikes has never been more important.

Do you suppose Blunt was referring to Bush's "new" strategy to send 21,500 additional U.S. troops to Iraq at a cost of $5.6 BILLION this fiscal year? Or was he referring to Bush's expected call for an additional $100 billion for the war?

Probably not, because the Bush Administration has been funding the Iraq war through emergency supplemental bills, instead of including the costs in the Administration's yearly formal budget request for running the government. That means war costs are not included in the Administration's deficit calculations, and are not subject to overall spending caps. The Iraq war has so far cost the nation $350 billion.

Your children will have to eventually pay that bill.

Cross-posted at doclarry.blogspot.com

There's more: "Blunt on the Cost of War" >>

House Minority Whip Blunt Against Minimum Wage

Since Roy and his Boy are from the city in which I reside (as is John Ashcroft, plus Jerry Falwell went to college here) I'll try to keep tabs on him. As expected, Blunt has come out against legislation that would raise the federal minimum wage.

"The last thing Congress should do is pass legislation that imposes an unfunded mandate on small businesses that employ millions of American workers and are the backbone of our economy," Blunt said in a statement.

"Small businesses create good jobs, and often provide families with health care and other essential benefits. Congress has an obligation to protect job creators and the workers they employ by ensuring that any effort to raise the minimum wage is balanced with protections that enable employers to continue to provide jobs and benefits for workers," Blunt said.

"As Senate Democrat leaders have agreed, these protections are critical for moving a minimum wage increase. A number of House Democrats have voted in the past for these important worker protections. It is my hope that the same group puts partisanship aside, agrees with their Senate colleagues, and votes to protect workers and job creators."

Blunt doesn't use all the Republican talking points on this issue, but he does stick with a few. I especially like the "unfunded mandate" claim. Wonder if Rep. Blunt feels the same way about his own Congressional pay raises, which have totalled more than $31,000 since the last increase in the federal minimum wage.

The current federal minimum wage is $10,712 a year. Congressional pay has increased by just shy of three times that amount in the last 10 years. Considering the far less-than-40-hour work week for Congress, I'm surprised Rep. Blunt hasn't returned his pay raise.


And thanks to Blue Girl for "inviting" me to participate on this blog (quote: "Strannix, you and Doc Larry don't get to decline, I need help with the Ozarks, and I'll hunt you down with dogs!"). Talk about mandates!

Reporting for duty, sir?

There's more: "House Minority Whip Blunt Against Minimum Wage" >>