Bill Overview
Title: To amend the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 to tie the salaries of Members of Congress to the salaries of the judiciary.
Description: This bill modifies the rate of pay for Members of Congress to align with rates of pay for Supreme Court justices and other federal judges.
Sponsors: Rep. Perlmutter, Ed [D-CO-7]
Target Audience
Population: People working in the federal legislative and judiciary branches in roles related to compensation
Estimated Size: 10000
- The primary population impacted by this bill will be Members of Congress as their salaries will directly change based on the legislation.
- Members of the judiciary won't experience direct changes in pay from this bill, but their pay will set a precedent for congressional salaries.
- The broader public could be indirectly impacted if changes in congressional pay influence recruitment or retention of members, potentially affecting governance.
- Taxpayers as a collective may see changes in government expenditures if congressional salaries significantly decrease or increase.
Reasoning
- The direct population impacted by this bill is relatively small, comprising primarily of Members of Congress and their closest staff. Changes to salaries, even significant ones, will have a relatively minor economic impact on the broader population.
- Budget constraints suggest that significant raises in congressional pay may lead to either increased taxes or reallocation of funds, but the actual impact on individual taxpayers is negligible given the federal budget's scale.
- Long-term effects might include shifts in the demographics or motivations of those who seek office, potentially affecting governance.
- Members of Congress constitute a very specific group with a high degree of public exposure, influencing public perception and their own self-reported satisfaction in unique ways.
Simulated Interviews
Congressman (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe aligning our pay with that of federal judges recognizes the importance of our roles.
- This policy will attract more talented individuals to public service given competitive compensation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 7 |
School Teacher (New York)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see how this affects me directly, but it feels like a misuse of funds when teachers are underpaid.
- Congress should be focused on improving public education funding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Federal Judge (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This won't change my salary at all, but it could change how Congress perceives our compensation as a benchmark.
- It seems fair for Congress to be compensated equivalently given their workload.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Political Analyst (Chicago, IL)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy symbolizes Congress valuing its own work but doesn't address bigger financial issues.
- Could improve Congressional recruitment and retention.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired Veteran (Rural Ohio)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm skeptical of this change. Congress already seems well compensated compared to average folks here.
- I would rather see more support for veterans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Congressional Staffer (Austin, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this leads to better policy outcomes and smoother legislative processes, that's beneficial.
- Staffers like me won't see direct effects, but the culture might shift.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Tech industry worker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this will influence my life directly, though changes in governance are worth observing.
- Public servants should be well compensated to deter corruption.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Social Worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This seems like a distraction from pressing social issues, like poverty and housing.
- Congress should address broader reforms than their own pay.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Government Contractor (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Indirectly, this could change project priorities if congressional focus shifts.
- I don't expect direct financial impacts on my work.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Small Business Owner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think congressional pay directly impacts me but I care about how our tax dollars are spent.
- Would rather see pay adjustments for essential workers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $45000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $45000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $60000000)
Year 3: $45000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $60000000)
Year 5: $45000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $60000000)
Year 10: $45000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $60000000)
Year 100: $45000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- Congressional salaries currently are not tied to performance measures or economic indicators, which could be a point of contention with this policy.
- Aligning with judicial pay could set a precedent for tying public sector salaries to adjustable criteria.
- Any major increases in congressional pay could face public resistance, especially during periods of economic hardship or government budget scrutiny.