Today, the House voted to reduce its own funding by 5%. “The measure, which GOP aides claim will save $35 million, passed 410-13.” All 13 who voted against the proposal (H.RES.22) were Democrats, and our very own Lynn Woolsey was among them.
Rep. Woolsey of course generated some controversy during the 2010 campaign when she voted for a pay raise for herself and her colleagues (that proposal was defeated). Now, she continues her record as a member of Congress who doesn’t understand that the federal government cannot continue its profligate spending. Even during the 111th Congress, in which the Democrats were in charge, most House members knew better than to vote for a pay raise while millions of Americans were out of work during a grave recession.
And now that the Republicans have gained control in the 112th Congress, the aim is to actually reduce spending. Saving $35 million is a drop in the current trillions era but it is a beginning and a sign that its the newly seated Congress recognizes the need for it to set an example in cost-cutting.
Lynn Woolsey, however, as evidenced by her vote, clearly believes she should not have to reduce her spending. Fortunately, nearly everyone else voting in the House today did not share her views of special privilege. She will have to abide by the will of the majority and cut back whether she likes it or not.
She will probably argue that having to trim $75,000 from her budget will mean people will lose their jobs. Not necessarily. The “hurt” of the 5% cutback can be distributed so that everyone makes a little sacrifice. That, after all, is what so many in America have already had to do. It’s time Congress shared (at least a little) in the general populace’s belt-tightening.
Shame on Rep. Woolsey for voting against the 5% cut.