October 23, 2003

The "NO" Vote - Peterson, Murtha Screw Our Soldiers

OK, so let it be known that Pennsylvania Congressman John Peterson (R - 5th District) voted against a proposed pay raise for soldiers in iraq and Afghanistan. This shameless vote by Peterson is ironic - coming only a little over a month after he voted to approve the appropriations bill providing himself and other members of Congress a pay raise.

Peterson's vote on the pay raise issue is interesting as he voted both against and for a procedural matter that prevented Representatives from blocking the Congressional pay raise. Here is how it worked. Republican leaders introduced a procedural resolution that would prevent Representatives from blocking the pay raise in an amendment to the Transportation, Treasury, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act of 2004. Democrat Matheson of Utah argued eloquently for a no vote on the procedure:

Mr. Speaker, these are difficult times in our Nation. We are fighting terrorism on numerous fronts. Our economy is in serious trouble, unemployment is at record-high levels, and our future budget deficits are predicted to be the highest in the history of this great Nation.

Now is not the time for Members of Congress to be voting themselves a pay raise. We need to show the American people that we are willing to make sacrifices. We need to budget, live within our means and make careful spending decisions based on our most pressing priorities.

Mr. Speaker, let us send a signal to the American people that we recognize their struggle in today's economy. Vote no on the previous question so we can have an opportunity to block the automatic cost-of-living adjustment to Members of Congress. Regardless of how Members feel about this issue, they should all be willing to make their position public and on the record.

A no vote will allow Members to vote up or down on the COLA. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule. My amendment will block the fiscal year 2004 automatic cost-of-living pay raise for Members of Congress. Because this amendment requires a waiver, the only way to get to this issue is to defeat the previous question.


John Peterson voted yes for the procedure. Then after seeing that his vote wasn't necessary to allow it to pass Peterson changed his vote from yes to no. Now, one might imagine that his original yes vote was a mistake. I seriously doubt it. But it would be nice if I could go in on election day, make my vote, watch the nightly returns and return to the polling place to correct it. But you can't do that. Congressional procedures should never allow for such obviously bizarre procedures. How can we hold our Representatives accountable under such a scenario?

Peterson wasn't the only Pennsylvania legislator opposed to the pay raise for soldiers. Murtha (D) not only voted against it but he also argued against it on the floor. Murtha also voted to raise his own pay (but didn't even bother to change it afterwards). I suppose that adding to their individual wealth is more important to them than helping out the soldiers they put at risk (remember both of these hypocrits supported the war).

Posted by seamus at 02:21 PM | Comments (0)