Open Topic Sunday ... Kennedy Refuses Salary
Mark Kennedy is running for Mark Dayton's Senate seat out of Minnesota. Rep. Kennedy misses very few votes, and when he does it's for good reason. But he has vowed that he will forego his House pay for each day he misses while working on his Senate cmapaign. Captain Ed has the story, and so does the infamous Strib.
U.S. Rep. Mark Kennedy said Friday that he would not accept his congressional pay on days he misses votes in Washington because of his U.S. Senate campaign.
Kennedy, the Republican candidate for the seat being vacated by Democrat Mark Dayton, was one of only nine U.S. House members not to miss any congressional votes in 2005. But Kennedy said the demands of the Senate race could force a few missed votes this year.
Kennedy challenged his most likely Democratic opponent, Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar, to do the same.
Klobuchar's campaign manager, Ben Goldfarb, criticized Kennedy's move as a "phony gimmick" and said the campaign wouldn't respond further. He did say Klobuchar continues to draw her full salary.
Let me start by saying "bully" for Mark Kennedy. Look, we all know that one member of Congress's pay isn't worth a piss-pot in the overall federal budget. (C'mon people, we spend millions and millions before lunch; anyone really think that about $95,000 is really going to break the bank?) And personally, I'd like to see some integrity for people who were born with a silver spoon in their @$$ like John Kerry and Ted Kennedy; the rich in Congress don't need a salary. Their constituents should browbeat them into dropping their salaries. I understand that "just compensation" has to be given for those that serve the government, but I'm one of those kind of people that looks at Kennedy or Kerry and ask, "Do you schmucks really need more money?"
So I'm heartened by the fact that here is Mark Kennedy (no relation to the swim coach or the driver's ed instructor ... that I'm aware of) has decided to do this. This act alone not only shows the voters of his maturity (an honest day's work for an honest day's wage; no work, no check) as well as the fact that he wants this job, and he's serious about doing it. For Mark Kennedy, this isn't about entitlement or privilege. This is about going back to DC, with higher responsibilities, and doing a job for his constituents.
See, Mark Kennedy's a "party man." He recognizes that there is something greater than himself, and he's running on that. The status quo in DC doesn't see things like that. They look at their tenure in the House and the Senate as a privilege that only they are entitled to. For a very long time, a majority of Americans have grown disillusioned by their antics. They see the Abramoff scandal and all the representatives scrambling to cover their complicity in the scandal up. "Nope, no funny business coming out of Senator Reid's office on that; move along, nothing to see here!" The people see hos much disregard the Congress has for spending our money (Senator Lott's infamous quote that will hang him: “I’ll just say this about the so-called porkbusters; I’m getting damn tired of hearing from them.”). They see Senator McCain pandering to anyone and everyone in his own version of a "bridge to nowhere" . (HT to Chris Muir's hilarious cartoon from yesterday.) The immigration reform fiasco is annoying the hell out of America as Congress dithers on that issue worse than the UN does over Iran.
The prospective opponent against Mark Kennedy is Amy Klobucher (she will handily beat Ford Bell in the primaries), and she sees this as a gimmick? This is another thing wrong with the Left. See, we're the party of personal responsibility, and Mark Kennedy knows that his constituents wouldn't be happy with him if they were paying for him to do a job he wasn't doing. And Klobucher would be wise to remember that it was John Kerry who caught all sorts of flak, not only from his constituents in Massachusetts when he ran for president, but also from members of the state government including the governor. There were numerous calls for him to step down from his seat while he ran because he was never there. He still collected that paycheck, and refused to budge over his seat. Granted, Mark Kennedy isn't running for president, but he still understands what it means to the people of his state if he shows the same attitude the Left does, or that the status quo in DC shows when it comes to such things.
The voters he's counting on this year wouldn't appreciate that sort of laissez-faire attitude and leadership. So, he's setting the example while his opponent accuses him of gimmicking to the public. The difference is that Klobucher wouldn't dream of doing something this bold. She believes in entitlements. She believes in the privileged life that many in Congress lead. Mark Kennedy doesn't, and he's leading by example.
Publius II
Mark Kennedy is running for Mark Dayton's Senate seat out of Minnesota. Rep. Kennedy misses very few votes, and when he does it's for good reason. But he has vowed that he will forego his House pay for each day he misses while working on his Senate cmapaign. Captain Ed has the story, and so does the infamous Strib.
U.S. Rep. Mark Kennedy said Friday that he would not accept his congressional pay on days he misses votes in Washington because of his U.S. Senate campaign.
Kennedy, the Republican candidate for the seat being vacated by Democrat Mark Dayton, was one of only nine U.S. House members not to miss any congressional votes in 2005. But Kennedy said the demands of the Senate race could force a few missed votes this year.
Kennedy challenged his most likely Democratic opponent, Hennepin County Attorney Amy Klobuchar, to do the same.
Klobuchar's campaign manager, Ben Goldfarb, criticized Kennedy's move as a "phony gimmick" and said the campaign wouldn't respond further. He did say Klobuchar continues to draw her full salary.
Let me start by saying "bully" for Mark Kennedy. Look, we all know that one member of Congress's pay isn't worth a piss-pot in the overall federal budget. (C'mon people, we spend millions and millions before lunch; anyone really think that about $95,000 is really going to break the bank?) And personally, I'd like to see some integrity for people who were born with a silver spoon in their @$$ like John Kerry and Ted Kennedy; the rich in Congress don't need a salary. Their constituents should browbeat them into dropping their salaries. I understand that "just compensation" has to be given for those that serve the government, but I'm one of those kind of people that looks at Kennedy or Kerry and ask, "Do you schmucks really need more money?"
So I'm heartened by the fact that here is Mark Kennedy (no relation to the swim coach or the driver's ed instructor ... that I'm aware of) has decided to do this. This act alone not only shows the voters of his maturity (an honest day's work for an honest day's wage; no work, no check) as well as the fact that he wants this job, and he's serious about doing it. For Mark Kennedy, this isn't about entitlement or privilege. This is about going back to DC, with higher responsibilities, and doing a job for his constituents.
See, Mark Kennedy's a "party man." He recognizes that there is something greater than himself, and he's running on that. The status quo in DC doesn't see things like that. They look at their tenure in the House and the Senate as a privilege that only they are entitled to. For a very long time, a majority of Americans have grown disillusioned by their antics. They see the Abramoff scandal and all the representatives scrambling to cover their complicity in the scandal up. "Nope, no funny business coming out of Senator Reid's office on that; move along, nothing to see here!" The people see hos much disregard the Congress has for spending our money (Senator Lott's infamous quote that will hang him: “I’ll just say this about the so-called porkbusters; I’m getting damn tired of hearing from them.”). They see Senator McCain pandering to anyone and everyone in his own version of a "bridge to nowhere" . (HT to Chris Muir's hilarious cartoon from yesterday.) The immigration reform fiasco is annoying the hell out of America as Congress dithers on that issue worse than the UN does over Iran.
The prospective opponent against Mark Kennedy is Amy Klobucher (she will handily beat Ford Bell in the primaries), and she sees this as a gimmick? This is another thing wrong with the Left. See, we're the party of personal responsibility, and Mark Kennedy knows that his constituents wouldn't be happy with him if they were paying for him to do a job he wasn't doing. And Klobucher would be wise to remember that it was John Kerry who caught all sorts of flak, not only from his constituents in Massachusetts when he ran for president, but also from members of the state government including the governor. There were numerous calls for him to step down from his seat while he ran because he was never there. He still collected that paycheck, and refused to budge over his seat. Granted, Mark Kennedy isn't running for president, but he still understands what it means to the people of his state if he shows the same attitude the Left does, or that the status quo in DC shows when it comes to such things.
The voters he's counting on this year wouldn't appreciate that sort of laissez-faire attitude and leadership. So, he's setting the example while his opponent accuses him of gimmicking to the public. The difference is that Klobucher wouldn't dream of doing something this bold. She believes in entitlements. She believes in the privileged life that many in Congress lead. Mark Kennedy doesn't, and he's leading by example.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 10:23 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home