Paying the Price

Consider their pluck, those brave souls: the cop who snips fuses for the LAPD bomb squad; the window washer on the 102nd floor of the Empire State Building; the Caltrans worker who rounds up stray dogs on the Harbor Freeway.

On Capitol Hill, there is one equivalent: the lawmaker who leads the charge for congressional pay raises.

It is a politically perilous, no-win task sure to bait the most ferocious citizen watchdog and offend even the most loyal constituent. These lawmakers’ colleagues love them for doing it, but few will ever stand up and publicly say so. They might as well write a nasty campaign mailer for their next election and hand it over to the opposition, tied up with a bow.

“It is arguably the least popular thing any member of Congress can do,” said Gary Ruskin, director of the Congressional Accountability Project, a nonpartisan group. “Congressional pay raises are a total snub to constituents in every district in the country.”

The latest to risk political life and reelection is Rep. Bill Thomas of Bakersfield. A renowned GOP attack dog rarely at a loss for words, he explained his role in the latest salary flap with a terse news release, then went out in apparent search of a 10-foot pole.

*

Many members of Congress feel the pinch. Some have spouses who don’t work, or kids to send to college. They need to maintain two houses--one in Washington and one at home. Stretching $136,700 a year can be a chore.

But several of the newer members also ran on a platform of fiscal austerity. They want more money but are loath to mention the R word.

Enter Thomas.

As head of the Administration Committee, Thomas is sort of like the mayor of the House, making sure the computers work, assigning the best parking spaces and seeing that the food is up to snuff. (He is credited with replacing the old swill in the Longworth Office Building with Starbucks coffee.)

Picking up grumbling within the ranks, GOP leaders asked Thomas to investigate the possibility of paying lawmakers a per diem, or allowance, for each day they stay in session. He reported back that House members could draw $125 from their office expense accounts and--best of all--the idea would never have to come to the floor for a vote.

Translation: A $20,000-a-year, tax-free raise, and no political consequences!

Alas, word spilled to The Hill, a scrappy Capitol Hill weekly. That’s when the flap began.

“If you are going to have a pay raise, you have to do it in the light of day, with a vote,” said one California House aide. “It’s when you start sneaking around behind the scenes and in the cloak of darkness that the public gets disgusted with it.”

Democrats and Republicans alike flew into a tizzy. House Minority Whip David E. Bonior (D-Mich.) warned of a “firestorm” if a secret pay increase was approved. Publicly, many members said they would not accept such a raise. Privately, they say something else. “I suppose I wouldn’t turn it down,” one senior Republican said. “But I wouldn’t vote for it.”

*

That’s where the 10-foot pole comes in.

Thomas doesn’t care to discuss the matter. “The House Administration Committee would consider a per diem proposal only at the request of the House leadership,” his news release said.

His chief of staff made it clear that Thomas only researched the idea and never actually “proposed” it. Just following orders.

Still, once word got out, Thomas’ office heard from more than a few constituents. “None of it was positive,” one aide conceded.

The same thing used to happen to former Rep. Vic Fazio of West Sacramento, who was the point man on many similarly odious chores when Democrats ran the House. His opponents used it against him every time. He retired last year after his elections got progressively harder and more expensive. While the salary issue was hardly the sole reason, it certainly didn’t help.

Now the per diem idea is officially dead. Some say it was just a stalking horse for a cost-of-living raise Congress automatically gets every year--unless members turn it down--which they have, for political reasons, every year save one since 1993. This year, if they reject the per diem, it might make the COLA easier to justify.

As for Thomas, he probably won’t suffer much from his brief but treacherous foray into the salary minefield. He consistently wins by landslide margins in his reliably Republican district. If anything, it will probably earn him points among his colleagues.

“People appreciate that somebody was willing to work for them and take the heat for them,” one GOP aide said.

But they’ll probably express it in private.