Loebsack, challengers agree, mostly, on pay raises

Blocking a pay raise for members of Congress is becoming a point of bipartisan agreement on the campaign trail in Iowa's 2

^nd

District.

Incumbent Rep. Dave Loebsack voted against a congressional pay raise April 27 along with Iowa's four other House members.

“Just like Iowa families who are cutting back, we should also cut back and do our part to help rein in spending and bring down the federal deficit,” he said.

That puts him on the same page as at least two potential GOP challengers Steve Rathje and Mariannette Miller-Meeks. They've said they will forego pay raises – whether approved by Congress or not.

Rob Gettemy and Chris Reed, both of Marion, also are seeking the GOP nomination in the 2

^nd

District.

Miller-Meeks, an Ottumwa ophthalmologist, will refuse a pay raise “before asking any single, solitary Iowans to do more with less.”

“If you can't give a soldier a raise or a senior citizen a cost of living adjustment, it's improper for your representative to ask for more,” Miller-Meeks said.

Rathje, a Cedar Rapids businessman, promised not to take a raise or a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), federal health care or pension “on your dime.”

For Loebsack, a Mount Vernon Democrat, who is up for re-election, “blocking the 2011 pay raise is a good start, but I want to go one step further - let's take a pay cut.”

Loebsack urged Congress to show a stronger personal commitment to cutting federal spending. He is a co-sponsor of the Taking Responsibility for Congressional Pay Act, which would cut pay for all members by 5 percent starting January 1, 2011. It would be the first time that members' salaries would be reduced since April 1, 1933, during the Great Depression.

That's “symbolic that you understand what people going through,” Miller-Meeks said, “but to say you are doing this to reduce the deficit, that's absolutely election-year pandering.”

The federal budget deficit is approaching $1.5 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Loebsack estimates his plan would save roughly $4.7 million a year. Members' salaries are $174,000 a year. When senators voted last week to block their COLAs, it was expected to save taxpayers about $1 million.

That's too little, too late, Miller-Meeks said. Congress should have refused pay raises beginning in 2008 when COLAs for seniors on Social Security were frozen and the financial markets started crashing.

“It would have boosted morale if people saw Congress freezing pay rather than take an automatic pay raise,” she said.

Loebsack, according to his staff, has voted to block a congressional pay raise every time it has come for a vote since he was elected in 2006.