Groups Ask Presidential Candidates About Presidential Pay Raise

[Gary Ruskin <gary@essential.org>]

Congressional Reform Briefings				June 1, 1999

	Opponents of a proposed $200,000 presidential pay raise sent letters
today to eleven presidential candidates to solicit their views on the
pay raise. 

	Letters were sent to Lamar Alexander, Gary Bauer, Bill Bradley, Pat
Buchanan, George W. Bush, Steve Forbes, Al Gore, John Kasich, John
McCain, Dan Quayle, and Bob Smith.  No letter was sent to Elizabeth
Dole; she opposes the presidential pay raise.

	Following is the text of the letter sent to Texas Governor George W.
Bush:

Dear Governor Bush:

	On May 14, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal
Service and General Government approved a provision to double the
President's salary to $400,000 per year.  Do you support or oppose this
proposed $200,000 pay raise for the President?

	As you know, the President currently enjoys a salary of $200,000 per
year, with perquisites, a $50,000 expense allowance, living expense
benefits that befit a king, plus a near certain prospect, if desired, of
becoming a multimillionaire upon leaving office.  The value of a
presidential pension is $152,000 annually in fiscal year 1999.  Ten
years ago, according to The New York Times, Lloyd Cutler, then-chairman
of the Commission on Executive, Legislative and Judicial Salaries,
estimated that the value of president perquisites was then about
$500,000 per year.

	The President, as chief executive of the federal government,
traditionally receives the highest salary in the federal government.  As
top federal government salaries have risen to approach an unchanged
presidential salary, the President's salary increasingly acts as a cap
on the salaries of Members of Congress and federal judges. Some federal
judges and Members of Congress criticize the cap.  Although there is
still sufficient room under the cap, Members of Congress and federal
judges complain of  "pay compression" at the top of the federal pay
scale.  The protagonists of this presidential pay raise have large
ambitions.  They want much more expanded governmental pay levels at the
upper reaches of the federal pay scale.

	We oppose a pay raise for the President.  To the overwhelming majority
of Americans, $200,000 per year plus enormous living expense benefits,
pension, staff and lucrative future prospects is already a great deal of
money.  The President suffers no real privations.  The President does
not need more money, except to pay legal bills.  We have no lack of
exceptionally bright and talented people in this country who would be
happy to serve as President for $200,000 per year.  

	The President's salary and benefits come from taxpayers, more than 99%
of whom earn far less than the President.  Taxpayers work hard to fill
the coffers of the federal government.  It is wrong for the differential
between the President's salary and the median American's to grow any
larger, because such a high Presidential compensation package begins to
look as if the President were taking advantage of the taxpayers.  It
erodes the President's moral authority to govern. 

	To make matters worse, this raise is not to $250,000, or $300,000, or
even $350,000 per year -- but a full doubling of the President's
salary.  If the President's salary is raised, then watch for a round of
major pay increases involving thousands of high-level officials and
bureaucrats.  (And who knows what this would incite in the private
sector, and whether it could possibly stimulate an inflationary
mentality in both the public and private sectors.)
	
	The President draws a salary from a federal government that is
currently $5.6 trillion in debt.  If we are to reduce the federal debt,
the upper reaches of government must lead by example, and sacrifice for
the good of our country.  That means the President first.  Such
self-restraint is at the core of exemplary leadership models throughout
history. Our nation's frugality should begin in the President's home. 

	We want to know where you stand.

Sincerely,

Ralph Nader
Gary Ruskin, Director, Congressional Accountability Project
Russell Verney, Chairman, Reform Party
Paul Weyrich, President, Free Congress Foundation
John Berthoud, President, National Taxpayers Union
Steve Dasbach, National Director, Libertarian Party 
Starlene Rankin, Coordinating Committee Member, Green Party USA
----------------------------------------------------------
To read the Congressional Accountability Project's testimony on the
proposed presidential pay raise, see:
<http://www.essential.org/orgs/CAP/payperks/pressaltest.html>.

The Congressional Accountability Project is congressional watchdog group
affiliated with Ralph Nader.   For more information about the
Congressional Accountability Project, see
<http://www.essential.org/orgs/CAP/CAP.html>,send e-mail to
<cap@essential.org>, or call (202) 296-2787.

Congressional Reform Briefings are distributed to individuals on the
listserve <cong-reform@essential.org>. To subscribe, send an e-mail
message to <listproc@essential.org> with the following all in one line:

subscribe cong-reform <your name> (no period).

PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY

---------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Ruskin | Congressional Accountability Project
1611 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite #3A | Washington, DC 20009
Phone: (202) 296-2787 | Fax (202) 833-2406
http://www.essential.org/orgs/CAP/CAP.html |
mailto:gary@essential.org |
--------------------------------------------------------------