Congress Votes Itself a Hefty Pay Raise

I think I understand why the man in the street is upset over the pay raises for congressmen and senators. The average workingman in this country obviously thinks that a salary of more than $80,000 is already more than enough for the rank-and-file leaders of our country. It’s the Ralph Naders and other respected architects of popular opinion who confuse me.

A workingman may not readily realize that a lawmaker who is already making four times as much as he does could easily go into the private sector and earn well over $200,000 per year. But I would expect Nader and his associates to grasp that apparently elusive point.

The reality of the situation is really quite simple:

- If our government is going to work effectively, we must have capable leaders.

- Capable leaders are now, as always, at a premium in our country as they are in all other countries.

- If we don’t pay our leaders enough money to live at a level that bears some semblance to the station that their education and accomplishments entitle them, we subject them to the harshest of temptations. If we don’t pay them enough to live well by the standards of their peers, there are plenty of very wealthy and unprincipled people who will see to it that our leaders do have access to those levels--for a price.

- Senators and congressmen make speeches. If they make those speeches to the right groups of people, they are well paid for their time and elocution. These payments are called “honorariums.” It requires no great imagination to see that a company that, for several years, has paid a congressman $5,000 plus expenses for a 40-minute speech, might expect a more sympathetic attitude from that congressman regarding any legislation that may benefit said company.

- If we keep paying our House and Senate leaders at twice the going rate for a competent machinist and one-quarter or less of the going rate for leaders in private industry, we will ultimately be left with but three categories of leaders. Those who are already wealthy, those who are poor but honest and those who are, to some degree or another, beholden to the private interests that pay a large part of their real salary.

PHILIP W. LYON

Los Angeles