Friendly headlines greeted President Obama when he announced a freeze on White House salaries – at least on those over $100,000 per year.
Having embraced symbolism, Obama stopped rather than apply the same freeze to the entire federal government. Yet the average federal worker (civilian) makes $111,180 when wages and benefits are both included, according to a 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce report.
As the Cato Institute’s Chris Edwards noted at the time, “That is more than double the $55,470 average earned by U.S. workers in the private sector.”
Obama applied his pay-freeze rule only to about 100 senior White House staffers but not to the 1.8 million-strong federal civil workforce. If he’s sincere, and wants substance in addition to symbolism, the president should rein in all government salaries.
The private sector is making the “hard choices” Obama promotes. According to a December survey by Watson Wyatt Worldwide, 13 percent of American companies announced salary freezes in 2008, and 19 percent expect to do so during 2009.
“Families are tightening their belts and so should Washington,” the president told the nation. Still, he supports an $825 billion package that will:
- create 32 new federal programs at a cost of $136 billion;
- bail out states with over $200 billion so they don’t have to control salaries or lay off government workers, despite budget-busting spending; and
- saddle the typical American family of four with an average of over $10,000 in new federal debt.
It’s the largest expansion of government ever. Ironically it’s advancing at a time when private businesses are cutting back.
Even more ironic is that Congress thinks an economic mess caused by excessive borrowing and spending can be fixed by borrowing and spending even more aggressively.
Talk about missing the point!
The opportunity is ripe to reverse years of failure to control the federal payroll. That runaway growth is reflected not only by the number of federal workers, but by years of pay raises that far exceeded the cost of living.
Since 1996, pay raises for the Federal Civil Service increased by a cumulative 45.5 percent, compared to a 35 percent increase in the cost-of-living index. Put another way, for every $1 of inflation, federal workers received a raise of about $1.30.
Who determines federal raises? Usually, presidents (including Clinton as well as Bush) proposed smaller increases, but Congress intervened to super-size the pay raises, to the delight of the federal employee unions and their members.
It’s often been justified with claims that the civilian workforce deserved “pay parity” as Congress tried to play catch-up for years of sub-standard pay for our military. Arguments were heard that the FBI and other federal officers face danger just as soldiers do. That’s only partially true, however, because 92 percent of the civilian workers have normal and safe work environments.
It was also argued that we must maintain a quality workforce and prevent high turnover. Yet the voluntary attrition rate for federal employees is at historic lows, beneath 2 percent. This job security for most government workers far surpasses that for those at Intel, IBM, Target, Best Buy, Sprint, Caterpillar, General Motors, or a multitude of others that have laid off hundreds of thousands of people.
No wonder a new Rasmussen survey shows twice as many Americans now would prefer to work for the government (37 percent) than for a private company (14 percent). (Seventeen percent like self-employment better, and the rest aren’t sure.) That reverses prior trends that were pro-private sector. Government employees obviously have greater job security and better benefits than most workers, while the “shareholders” (taxpayers) must foot the bill.
And we must not forget Congress itself, where pay and performance go in opposite directions. Representatives and senators received an annual salary increase of $4,700 on January 1, bringing them to $174,000. These “cost-of-living” increases are automatic, unless Congress passes a law to forego them. There’s no time like now for them to do so.
Everyone on Capitol Hill is quick to condemn corporate bigwigs who collect exorbitant salaries. Those CEO’s pay packages and golden parachutes far exceed what Congress is paid, but companies should be taught by example, not just by scolding. Turning down higher pay for Congress would set a good example.
That would send a message to President Obama that we need far more than symbolic pay freezes for top White House staff if we’re going to control the enormous cost of government. It’s time to expect all of government to share the pain that the private sector is feeling, and lift a little burden off the taxpayers.
The devils are here
Ben Shapiro