Editorial

Editorial

The people spoke...

and Congress listened

On Tuesday, the U.S. Congress took a vote on a 51 percent pay raise for itself, as well as several thousand senior officials in the executive and judicial branches of the federal government. Since salaries of other civil servants are tied to the same scale, the increase would have had a broad effect.

The Congress declined the raise, by an overwhelming 380-48 margin in the House of Representatives, and 94-6 in the Senate. The vote in the House was remarkable, not for the outcome, but for the fact that it was taken at all.

For months, the issue has been debated. Ever since the Quadrennial Commission issued its recommendation in favor of the pay hike, it’s been hot news. Former President Reagan said he approved, and so does President Bush.

However, the public seems to feel otherwise. A flood of mail has turned the tide of Congress against the pay raise, and representatives who a month ago seemed content to let the increase take effect without a vote have now vetoed the entire proposal.

For once, the wind of public opinion swayed the Capitol dome.

The entire affair illustrates how out of touch the federal government often is to the feelings of the American public. During last fall’s election campaigns, “deficit reduction” seemaAfobe among the few words our politicians knew.. - Presifirit Bush, in his inaugural address, spoke of the' government having “more will than wallet.”

Yet, with the election fading into the distant political past, the Congress proposes to raise its pay by more than half — without a vote of approval. When was the last time anyone you know got a 50 percent pay increase?

Even if their performance is outstanding, in the real world workers are not rewarded like that. If Congressmen were managers in the private sector, they would have long since been replaced because of their poor fiscal record.

In recent weeks, some members and their families have wailed about the high cost of living in Washington. But despite their housing woes, nearly every Representative seeks re-election every two years. Presently, the incumbents win more than 98 percent of the time. The Senate’s reelection ratio is comparable.

The money apparently isn’t tight enough to make them seek another line of work. And if they do decide to leave, there’s plenty of lucrative employment available —just ask former Texas Senator John Tower. He was paid nearly $750,000 for consulting work to defense contractors after leaving the Senate. Now he’d like to return to government — as Secretary of Defense. (But that’s another story.)

But let’s say, just for the sake of argument, that the members of Congress and their fellow senior officials do need — and deserve — a pay raise. That’s fine. We ask only one thing: -hat they at least display enough courage to vote in favor of the increase.

That, we believe, is what really disturbed the American