Washingtonpost.com:

A potential Department of Homeland Security shutdown would directly affect lawmakers’ pocketbooks under a bill introduced in the House this week.

The Democratic measure, sponsored by Reps. Brad Ashford (Neb.), Gwen Graham (Fla.), Scott Peters (Calif.) and Ami Bera (Calif.), would halt pay for members of Congress if they don’t agree to a new round of funding for the agency by Friday, in which case DHS would partially close.

The legislation is similar to several bills that would have halted lawmakers’ salaries during the government-wide shutdown of 2013. Those measures never made it out of committee that year.

Federal statute only allows lawmakers to change the salaries of future members of Congress, so the new House bill would put their wages in an escrow account until the potential Homeland Security shutdown ends.

“All across the country, folks live by the idea that if you don’t do your job, you shouldn’t get paid,” Ashford said in a joint statement with the bill’s other sponsors. “The same should hold true for members of Congress.”

No Homeland Security employees would be paid in the event of a shutdown, but 85 percent of the department’s roughly 240,000 employees would remain on the job because their roles are vital to national security or funded from sources outside of Congress.

“If the hardworking men and women in the Department of Homeland Security will continue to go to work but not receive a paycheck, members of Congress who have failed to do their job should not receive a paycheck either,” Peters said in the statement.

With past shutdowns, Congress has always voted to pay federal employees retroactively after the funding lapses ended. However, the policy is not automatic.

Republicans have threatened to shut down Homeland Security unless President Obama reverses his plans to shield an estimated 5 million undocumented immigrants from deportation.

Congress is comprised of  idiots.  All over the world there are terrorist attacks.  We spend billions and billions of dollars per year to protect Americans at home and abroad from terrorists.  Stupid Congress plays Russian roulette with homeland security.  They deserve to have their pay frozen.  When 85% of those working for DHS are mandatory essential workers who will be working for free, Congress needs to shape up or lose their pay.

Most Americans tire  of these antics, especially over something as important as our security.  All this other crap is just that:  CRAP.

Rather than defending the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, the oath of office needs to state that they will defend the people of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.  Just a thought.

Shame on Congress for being the partisan AHs that they generally are.   Fund DHS and move on.  Get over the obsession with immigration.  Obviously something is wrong with our policy or we wouldn’t have 15 million people here illegally.   Let’s document people normally and stop playing games.  Funding of government agencies should never be used as extortion or ransom.

 

 

115 Thoughts to “House Dems try to halt Congressional pay”

  1. Wolve

    Moon-howler :
    He is upholding it just fine as far as I am concerned. I guess its all a matter of perspective. I remember you all trashing Clinton all the time too. it just got old and tiresome.

    Clinton got old and tiresome? I’d go for that, blogmeister, but it should be contemporary and plural. Anybody catch the brouhaha about that Clinton portrait in the National Portrait Gallery? The artist admitted that the shadow behind the Prez is that of a female, which he painted from a manikin draped with a blue dress. The Clinton crowd is demanding that the portrait be removed. Absolutely hilarious.

  2. Pat.Herve

    @Jackson Bills
    Wrong. Plenty of green card holders have a right to a SSN AND a driver license – how is this currently handled by DMV?? The honor system – No.

  3. Wolve

    Enforce the law against those who hire illegal immigrants. It works. I recall that, during the big economic downturn in 2008-2010 and the huge rise in unemployment here, we began to experience the phenomenon of reverse immigration stats on the southern border. No jobs? Going home.

  4. Wolve

    On another blog a couple of years ago, the blogmeister allowed an American citizen acquaintance to come on the blog and make a special plea. The man stated that he was a long-time skilled carpenter and home repairman who had lost his clientele to companies hiring illegal immigrants at very low wages and sans benefits. The man could not match the prices and was losing his trade. He begged anyone reading that blog to call him if they had some work to be done. Unfortunately, I didn’t; but I often wonder what happened to him.

    Easy to tell someone like that to change their career course radically or move away from home and family to better ground. Not so easy when you are the one being told, and the reason is that your government does not enforce its own laws.

    1. No one wants illegal immigration. I have had immigrants and non immigrants do work for me. I don’t see any difference in cost. I am not talking about picking up someone at 7-11.

  5. middleman

    A quick reality check:

    1. NO ONE is going to deport the millions of undocumented persons living and working in America.

    2. If the undocumented were going to “self deport” they would have already done it during the recession. They are interwoven into America and are here to stay.

    3. The baby boom generation has blown out Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid costs.

    4. The millions of undocumented persons here do not now pay into Social Security.

    5. Our southern border is more secure than it has ever been. There are 3,000 additional Border Patrol agents along the Southwest Border, and our border fencing, unmanned aircraft surveillance systems, and ground surveillance systems have more than doubled since 2008. Illegal border crossings have been cut by more than half. From 1990 to 2007, the population of undocumented individuals in the United States grew from 3.5 million to 11 million people. Since then, the size of the undocumented population has stopped growing for the first time in decades. Some of this reduction in growth is due to the recession, as noted above.

    6. According to polls, the majority of Americans, including Republicans, favor a path to citizenship for the millions of undocumented.

    7. Because of fear of their extremist tea-party faction, House Republicans refuse to take up ANY immigration reform, even the bi-partisan Senate bill.

    In light of these facts, the president acted. I agree that he is going right up to the edge of the law on this one, but it’s really the logical thing to do to address the situation as it is. The undocumented are not going to be kicked out, they work hard and are family-oriented, and they ain’t gonna self-deport, so stop breaking up families and get them into the system. Get millions more paying into Social Security. Stop demonizing them. These people deserve it. Americans agree with it. No one else had any plans to help them.

    Like it or not, America is changing and immigration or not, Hispanics are the fastest growing demographic. Get used to it.

    1. The baby boomers are just getting started. However, most of us have paid heavily into Medicare and Social Security our entire lives. No apologies here.

  6. Wolve

    #84 — Ho hum, the usual liberal talking points. They dont give a crap about anything but political power and won’t hesitate to sell out anybody or anything to get it.

  7. Cargosquid

    Pat.Herve :
    @Cargosquid
    And it is up to Judicial Branch to make that determination. There have been plenty of laws that go to SCOTUS to be decided. Congress has the power to fix it by creating a new law that represents its wishes – but alas, Congress has not (under R and D leadership) decided that Immigration is something that it needs to deal with.

    They already have a law that represents their wishes on the books. Too bad no one is following the law. Instead, the President is MAKING law and the Democrats are supporting him.

  8. Scout

    Wolve – with what elements of MM’s comment do you factually disagree? “Liberal talking points” isn’t a useful fact, it isn’t even an argument. It is just a label. Come up on the substance. You’re well capable of it.

    I’ve said it frequently before and have avoided this particular comment thread up until now because I am somewhat tired of the subject. One will always have immigration flowing toward countries with better economies and more liberal (in the old sense) political systems. We conservatives think this as natural as water running downhill and oppose measures by the recipient country to try to make it run uphill. The recipient nation, particularly the U.S., has always gained from immigration. The current system in the US is a mess. It doesn’t work. Make it user friendly, so as to discourage work-arounds by immigrants. As for those who came here on uninspected entry, prosecute those as you would anyone else for crimes of violence (although this is a lower percentage among immigrants than among the general native population), regularize the status of the rest as quickly as possible in order to ensure that they are regulated in their driving, their tax inputs, and make sure we know who they are. Citizenship can ultimately be part of the package, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be. Work permits and temporary visas are a good starting point. But to ensure the security and economic prosperity of this country we have to compete for immigrants across the entire spectrum of employment. We have to make it attractive for the best and the brightest and the hardest working to be here. There’s no advantage to the United States to being a smelly vat of anti-immigrant hysteria.

  9. Wolve

    @Scout

    So you say, Mr. “we conservatives” Scout. If I happen to hear from that out-of-work American carpenter and house repairman again, I’ll tell him the “Establishment” Republicans don’t give a rat’s ass about him. I can send the same message to the IT workers at SC Edison, since it is three Republicans (Hatch, Flake, and Rubio) who have sponsored Senate legislation calling for no numerical limits on H -1B visas.

  10. Wolve

    Sure wish I could get four back years of child credits and a big check from the IRS. There was this illegal immigrant fellow from Mexico in my old home state who put a long list of dependents on his 1040, including many kids of relatives who lived in Mexico and had never set foot in the U.S. The fellow got a check from the IRS for a cool $17,000. When the “conservative” media got hold of this and found that the IRS was giving out huge amounts of tax dollars in immigrant scams like this, the IRS claimed that they just were unable to stop it because it was too widespread. Yeah, just good family fellers all.

    But the same IRS can track me down and threaten me with a fine if I don’t have a health insurance policy that meets the specs of Obamacare, including my pre-natal and childbirth needs.

  11. @Wolve
    That was not a talking point. That has been my experience. I don’t see immigrants being a better deal than non-immigrants, especially if communication is an important part of the job.

    I hardly think it was liberal or conservative. Are you suggesting that I simply not have work done at my home because you perceive me as a liberal?

    I simply don’t see why my statement is selfish.

  12. @Wolve

    but the IRS screwed up. This isn’t standard procedure or policy.

  13. Pat.Herve

    Cargosquid :

    They already have a law that represents their wishes on the books.

    FOTFLMAO – thanks, best laugh I have had this month.

  14. Wolve

    Good Lord Almighty!!! Bernie Sanders, the avowed socialist from Vermont, sent a letter to Jack Lew at Treasury asking if there is a way the Obama administration could raise $100 billion in tax revenue through IRS action. Responding to a press question about the Sanders letter, Josh Ernest actually admitted that the White House has been looking at any way in which Obama can achieve his goals through executive action without approval from Congress. Unilateral raising of taxes (apparently corporate taxes) has been one of the things examined in that research process.

    The sanity of this White House has to be called into question. What’s next? Obama on national TV running the Constitution through a shredder?

  15. Wolve

    Moon-howler :
    @Wolve
    That was not a talking point. That has been my experience. I don’t see immigrants being a better deal than non-immigrants, especially if communication is an important part of the job.
    I hardly think it was liberal or conservative. Are you suggesting that I simply not have work done at my home because you perceive me as a liberal?
    I simply don’t see why my statement is selfish.

    Blogmeister, when I cited #84, it was attached to the post by middleman. When you inserted a reply between posts, the numbers were changed; and I didn’t see it or catch it before posting.

  16. Wolve

    Moon-howler :
    @Wolve
    but the IRS screwed up. This isn’t standard procedure or policy.

    Yes, indeed, the IRS couldn’t handle it because, according to them, it was too widespread and they did not have the personnel to go after it. That should not excuse those illegal immigrants (or anyone else) who have been taking advantage of the broken system to scam the tax dollars you and I pay into the Treasury.

  17. Cargosquid

    @Pat.Herve
    That would be current immigration law…which does NOT allow the issuing of any identity cards to illegal aliens, giving them work permits, etc.

    Current laws states that they are to be deported, employers fined if they hire them, etc, and secure the border.

    Instead of 10,000 Immigration agents, we’re adding 10,000 IRS agents for a failed Medical insurance scam called the ACA.

    1. Why do you think that? Immigration laws don’t usually address those issues. I think we are talking about policy.

      There are cases where some immigrants are issued various permits. I don’t claim to understand it but I know it happens because I know people who have them.

  18. Cargosquid

    @Scout
    “We conservatives”
    “uninspected entry”

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    “But to ensure the security and economic prosperity of this country we have to compete for immigrants across the entire spectrum of employment. We have to make it attractive for the best and the brightest and the hardest working to be here.”

    I’m sorry….but how does that statement have any connection to the current system of allowing anyone to walk across the border and stay as long as they want to, with eventual amnesty?

    Your description has no basis in reality in the wishes of the electorate. They want the law breaking to stop. They want Congress to take this seriously and stop listening to their Chamber of Commerce and La Raza friends.

    This is what the law requires. Until Congress changes the law to turn our country into an open border status as people seem to desire….. that is the reality. They are here ILLEGALLY, not un-inspected. Heck, even when we assist them across the border, like we did the last group…the children invited here by the President…. we didn’t “inspect” them. They weren’t vaccinated. Do you think it a coincidence that that paralyzing disease happened right after they were spread across the nation to schools that had to take them?

    We can’t deport the X amount of people. Funny…. WE conservatives warned about this very approach when we condemned the amnesty that the Democrats convince Reagan to pass…. “oh…no..there won’t be any incentives for more illegal aliens to come here….we’re going to secure the border and make the new laws more stringent…..we PROMISE.”

    We couldn’t discourage or deport them back then when it was supposed to be only 6 million. In 5 years…it will be 15 million……

    I’m sorry… but the proper term for this many people crossing a border illegally is “invasion” not “immigration.”

    Want to reform immigration? GREAT. Let’s simplify it. We can copy Mexico’s.
    Or Australia’s. Much more stringent.

    If you guys were serious about “reforming’ anything you would be asking for structures to handle the masses of new immigrants that need to be processes….like modern Ellis Islands. Until you do that, all you are asking for is a defacto amnesty that lets people walk into the country illegally.

    1. Cargo. Your rhetoric is not too far off from the language that prompted some of us to start antibvbl.net. You just can’t use words like “invasion.” There is no invasion. This administration has added 3000 more border agents. Crossing the southern border has slowed down greatly. Some of it is because of increased border patrol and some because of recession here and improved economy in Mexico.

      Please don’t be presumptuous enough to tell us what we are asking for.

      You sound like an add for FAIR or Numbers USA. I am sure Greg would appreciate it more than we do.

  19. middleman

    Wolve :
    #84 — Ho hum, the usual liberal talking points. They dont give a crap about anything but political power and won’t hesitate to sell out anybody or anything to get it.

    So facts are mere liberal talking points but we should set policy based on anecdotal assertions like Wolve’s? Scout is right, Wolve, you can do better than that.

  20. Censored bybvbl

    @Moon-howler

    Yup, it’s sounding like 2007 redux.

  21. BSinVA

    I know an undocumented alien from Central America that magically healed the sick, paid my neighbors back taxes, stopped a bank robbery and turned xxxx {child word redacted by admin] into gold at the same time. That beats an unemployed carpenter story any time.

    1. Better, but I bet you know a few big boy words.

  22. Pat.Herve

    OK, so now DHS is funded.

    How long does it take Congress to get to work on an immigration bill – any immigration bill? They will probably vote to repeal ACA instead.

  23. Wolve

    Middleman — Poor Scout may be suffering from some form of amnesia. He seems to have forgotten me, old Wolverine, and the times I have jumped his ass on another blog for trying to play Alinsky’s Rule No. 5 on bloggers with whom he disagrees. And then he forgets and tries to play it on me, of all people. Poor fellow. Must be amnesia. Scout is practiced on Rule 5. You and BSinVA are rank amateurs. Tsk, tsk.

    Reminds me of that old adage: Best way to get a good deal is to get rid of the middleman.

  24. Scout

    So, Wolve, what is it about MM’s points with which you disagree? That was my question. Simple enough. BTW, What’s Alinsky’s Rule No. 5? You seem well-versed in left wing agitprop. I lack your familiarity with it.

    As far as your apparent notion that Immigration law should be some sort of protectionist tariff to distort labor markets, I disagree. I find that a rather leftist hyper-regulatory, non-free market approach that probably has strong adherents within statist, unionist circles, but not one that has ever been part of America’s immigration policies. The proper goals of immigration policy are to ensure that America is the beneficiary of the advantages of immigration and to ensure that national economic security is promoted.

    And, yes, I have forgotten the instances you refer to on another blog. Perhaps it is amnesia, perhaps it is because your memory is faulty. Perhaps a link would jog my memory. Most of what I think of from you from another blog is more outburst, than analysis. Here, I think you try harder. You are capable of marshaling data when you make the effort.

  25. Wolve

    You finally came out of the amnesia, Scout? Har, har. Now, stop the silly nonsense, or I’ll start using Rule No. 5 on you. Do I know the tricks? Well, I certainly should after a life of butting heads with Marxist ideologues of all kinds. Which is why I no longer bother debating leftist talking points on the blogs. Bloody waste of time. Not above pulling a few hairs out of their noses, however —figuratively, I mean. You are just going to have to “get used to it” — to quote somebody or other on this blog.

  26. Wolve

    News from the PWC home front. Manassas Patch 3 March 2015: “Violent Gang Initiation in Manassas Led to Four Arrests.” MS-13. Three-month investigation. Manassas Police; City of Manassas Park Police; NoVa Regional Gang Task Force; Virginia State Police; DHS. Total of 43 warrants, with additional charges pending. Started in November last with an assault on a 15-year-old female by members of MS-13 during a gang initiation ritual.

    Long ways to go before we clean up these messes. Years ago, Mrs. W and I spent weekends relaxing in and enjoying eastern Long Island, all the way to Montauk. Hard to believe that there are now MS-13 and 18th Street clashes out there. Who would of thunk? Gang violence in Greenport and Riverhead?

  27. Scout

    Nope – still in it, Wolve. I have no idea what your talking about. If this is amnesia, I fear it is a permanent condition. BTW, with which of MM’s points (#85) do you factually disagree? That was my query.

  28. middleman

    I also have no idea what Wolve is talking about, but it appears to be a thinly disguised attempt to evade and change the subject from someone who is out of intelluctual ammo.

  29. Ed Myers

    Why should voting be limited to a person’s birthplace? We don’t make birth location a voting requirement for people who move state-to-state. “Sorry, only natural born Virginians can vote for gov’ner. You damn Yankees migrants can self deport back to Pennsylvania if you want to vote.” I can imagine this sentiment is strong but it doesn’t work this way for American citizens.

    Anyone with a residence should have voting rights in the district for that residence. I’m OK with someone who has multiple residences voting multiple times but the vote counts only once per level. If you have a home in NoVA and a condo in Miami then you should be able to vote for governor in two places but only President in one.

    The argument for multiple votes is that one is responsible for taxes in each place of residence. If the “no taxes without representation” is more than a bumper sticker phrase then we should honor voting by anyone who is subject to taxes.

    Which leads back to immigrants. Legal or not if they are paying taxes they should have the right to vote.

  30. Wolve

    @Scout

    Oh, Heavens, Scout, stop your claims of innocence. It does not befit you. You know my policy. If someone starts a post with the likes of “reality check” and ends with the likes of “get used to it,” he/she winds up in the file marked “obnoxious”and gets minimal or no discussion of issues until his/her ego is brought under control.

    Reminds me of that time a couple of years ago when one of our high level county Democratic committee officials decided to join in a blog discussion of the 2012 events in Benghazi and Cairo. He was so very anxious to defend Obama and Clinton. He began his post with “so much disinformation here…..” Then within his first paragraph it was very evident that he did not even know the difference between a U.S. embassy chief of mission and a CIA chief of station. Beyond explaining the difference to him, it was a waste of time to go further. Hence the policy.

Comments are closed.