>

Congressmen/senators and presidents should only make the average salary in the US.  If they want to make more money, they can make everyone else money
Under no circumstance should anyone be able to vote to give themselves more pay. >

That is somewhat comforting, but only prohibits the pay increase affecting the current session. In that members can serve indefinitely (there have been 33 house members who have served for 40 years or longer), this amendment is somewhat anemic.
My stance on this matter actually formed based on actions taken by the board of trustees my local city college. Amidst budgetary concerns (which led to the cutting of nearly 500 classes and the termination of over two dozen full-time professors), the board voted to increase their salaries by 100%. This is one of the absolute worst forms of corruption in my opinion, and seeing it happen in government is absolutely infuriating.
The clown show that's "representing" us should be representing us, not enriching themselves and working on behalf of the corrupt and wealthy. >

Of course! But they want to cut staffer's pay, and even eliminate some positions. >

So begins that inflation-wage spiral Jerome Powell keeps talking about… >

Not like the federal minimum wage needs adjusting >

Must be nice to get a pay bump that is more than what the average American makes in a year. >

Seriously. Sick of these assholes >

Couldn't they just get a second job? >

I don't understand why anyone is upset about this. These people work hard to create and pass laws aimed at hard-working, middle-class Americans. They deserve a $34,000, tax-free pay bump. While their constituents make less than that annually. 
/s >

Wonderful.....now Gaetz can be reimbursed by the taxpayers for his crossing of state lines with underage girls.  Ugh. >

These people are at the top of the food chain so they need to be compensated at a level where they will stay on the job and not be tempted by revolting door job offers. Many sleep in their offices and leave DC as soon as they can. This means they never have time to work together and are limited in the hours they can work while not traveling. It doesn’t help to say they shouldn’t make more than an engineer, etc. >

If we paid more money for Congress members, it would make it easier to recruit quality candidates. 
Instead we end up with too many grifters, liars, crooks and millionaires in office. >

Why not tie their pay to teachers' pay? Their corruption might fix the teacher shortage. >

Just FYI, this was a democrat driven change and it just reimburses their living costs while they are in DC.  Makes sense to me, jobs should reimburse you for work related expenses. >

$34,000 in work-related expenses? That's absurd.
Whatever the "reasoning" and regardless of who initiated the rule change, the ability to increase the pay of our representatives should be solely in the hands of the people that are being represented. Who would ever vote against giving themselves more money? >

It's not absurd at all with amt of time they spend in DC.  Half of that prolly goes to rent.  They didn't increase their wages, they decided they shouldn't be paying tens of thousands of dollars of their own money on work related expenses.  
It's quite reasonable change.  If you had a job that required heavy travel, you would be outraged if your employer didn't reimburse you for the expenses. >

it also lets more non wealthy people be able to do the job. >

The people elected to this position make $174k annually. They become wealthy by getting this position. >

Well that and insider trading and quid pro quo donations from lobbyists. >

GOP stackin' chedda >


A little-noticed rule change made quietly by Democrats in the final days of their majority last year could give House members a long-delayed increase in compensation, allowing them to be reimbursed for the cost of lodging, food and travel while they are on official business in Washington. >

So many states give lawmakers per diem and expenses to work far from home at state capitals. That’s always fine. It should never be a thing that only those who can afford to keep two homes should be elected. 
I’m actually fine with the notion going to Congress. Audit the shit out of it of course and every penny automatic public record.