Why Congressional Staffers Hate the Vitter Amendment

Tonight, the House of Representatives will likely vote on the so-called Vitter Amendment, a bill that will be attached to a debt-ceiling increase and a continuing resolution to re-open the government. The Vitter Amendment would take away health-care subsidies for Congressional staffers. Via Twitter, I asked Congressional aides for their feelings about the bill. Here’s what they e-mailed me. We’ll update as new comments roll in.

A House Republican staffer:

It’s definitely a morale killer. We’ve been dealing with stagnant pay, long hours—including weekends and federal holidays—but hey, at least we have good benefits. This will suck. I know the public doesn’t have much sympathy, but these are not easy jobs. If they hate Congress, imagine working for it.

That said, I can understand the rationale and strategy in embracing the amendment and I don’t resent the Members who are pushing it. They know full well they’ll have to deal with the consequences.

A Senate Republican staffer:

I’ve been a staffer in a republican Senate office for 8 years. It’s extremely frustrating to have Vitter portray the employer contribution as some sort of exemption from the exchanges. My healthcare costs are already going to sky rocket, but being responsible for 100% of my premiums just isn’t realistic on my salary. I know I’m not the only staffer looking for a job off the hill because I knew this was a possibility. I can only assume the poor staff having to write the amendment language are hopefully throwing death glares at Vitter.

A Senate Democratic staffer:

You’ve got to be fucking kidding me with this. Wouldn’t the Vitter amendment lead to an actual exemption for Congress? If Congress, as an institution employing thousands of workers, did not contribute to its employees’ health care like most companies do, isn’t that an exemption? Maybe not an exemption under law per se, but an exemption according to standard practice. Either way, if that somehow makes its way through, I’ll be looking for another job. Congrats Tea Party, your eternal quest to starve the beast is chugging along full steam ahead!

A House Democratic staffer:

My anonymous thought as a Democratic staffer is that it’s going to be another awkward night in The People’s House, watching Republican staffers as they watch their bosses argue for stripping away their employer health care contribution from their already meager salary. I almost feel bad for the staffers … which is saying a lot, given the way the Majority has conducted itself.

A Senate intern:

I’m a senior in college, currently a paid intern in the Senate. The Vitter Amendment disgusts me. Already I fear younger people like me, pessimistic about the efficacy of government, will steer away from jobs in the public sector. And many of us even somewhat politically aware understand that staffers are overworked and underpaid. However, the allure is that you get to do something good, and in a sense, serve your country. But adding the burden of providing for my own health care is a bridge too far. In an already stalemated Congress, there are few incentives that outweigh that burden. The entrenched pessimism on the part of people my age scares me. We may not have faith in government but to change it we have little choice but to participate. That means voting, working in government or even holding office. But what are the incentives now? I know that people my age would be able to fix this. My concern is none of us would choose to be in any position to solve it in first place

A House Democratic staffer:

Please PLEASE keep me anonymous!!

I will make $22,800 this year after taxes. That is it. I am a 30 year old married congressional staffer with a 20 month old son who depends on my job for his health insurance. My husband has to pay for his own health care through his salary, and it would cost him over $1000 a month to cover the whole family. I just started in this position 6 months ago, after being out of work for a year and staying at home with my baby. I need my health insurance, and I cannot afford to pay $600 a month for coverage. Without this so called “subsidy” (the same “subsidy” congressional staffers have been receiving for years before the ACA) both myself and my son will be uninsured. With our combined salaries, my husband and I will not qualify for subsidies via the ACA, so we would have to pay for it all out of pocket.

I am not “entitled.” I am not a leech. I work. I pay bills. And my husband and I are trying to raise our son as well as possible. I lead a simple, middle class lifestyle. I am not riding high on the hog in any capacity. And neither are any of my co-workers. So I don’t know why we are being targeted. The congressperson I work for is married to a doctor, so they are set. They can pay for their health insurance without a “subsidy.” I can’t afford to. If I cannot receive the same assistance from my employer as the majority of Americans who get healthcare through their employer, I will be priced out of health care …

Sincerely,

an ANONYMOUS congressional staffer who is tired of being a political punching bag…

A House Republican staffer:

For those congressional staffers saying they agree and support their bosses call for the Vitter amendment, which is a major morale killer and kick in the gut to staff, all I have to say iS stop drinking [the Koolaid].

A House Democratic staffer:

I’m Legislative Director for [a Democratic Member of the House]. I guess what I find most outrageous about the Vitter Amendment is that it most hurts the youngest, least well paid staff who already make 25-35k a year in one of the most expensive cities in the country. We have several who fit that description in my office—they all went to top schools, got sterling GPAs, have awesome resumes that could get them hired at an Investment Bank or anywhere else, but they came here to try to make a difference. I make a somewhat healthier salary, and I’m married so I can hop on my wife’s insurance if necessary. But they don’t have those options. We’ll do what we can to make them whole if Vitter becomes law, but most offices won’t—especially on the R side. They’ll just ask another group of 22-25 year olds who came here for the right reasons to live on $20k a year. And they’ll get them to do it, but they’ll be less qualified, less intelligent, and they’ll be looking for the exit almost immediately.

It’s especially galling since they also could achieve the exact same purpose of being able to tell their base that they repealed Congress’s fake exemption from ACA by the “Vitter-lite” proposal which would only hit Members, and not staff. That they apparently decided that wasn’t good enough leads me to the conclusion that screwing staff is a feature, not a bug. The GOP would like to hollow out Congress, just as they have tried to do to many other federal agencies. The only thing better than getting rid of a federal agency is keeping it on life support, while the political hacks take their swings at it.

It’s short-sighted, it’s cruel, it’s unnecessary. I just don’t get it.

A House Democratic staffer:

What none of us on the D side have been able to figure out is, how can a self-respecting GOP staffer stand by their boss who is trying to stick it to them? Fine, Members are different for a lot of reasons—and if they want to vote to take away their own employer contribution, ok. But as a staffer, to be complicit in or even cheerleading your own five-figure pay cut? I can’t possibly imagine the source of the self-loathing behind that.

We stick with our bosses out of loyalty a lot—through sex scandals, campaign finance violations, shady land deals, whatever. We do it because they have given us a shot at being part of something we believe in, we have become believers in them along the way, and politics always has an us-against-them undertone anyway. But those scandals almost never involve the staff directly, so standing by your man doesn’t amount to self-flagellation.

This, however, is a direct assault on staff. How do you stand there and take it? Not only that, but how do you go out and promote it as if you’re fighting for some kind of justice?

Pity the poor legislative counsel who is drafting this thing right now gritting thorough that forced nonpartisan smile.

A former Republican staffer:

As a former GOP Chief, this sucks for staff. You’re now essentially saying we shutdown the government and threatened the full faith and credit of the United States just so that we can screw our underpaid, overworked, under-appreciated staff. It’s a big middle finger to folks who give up their entire lives for what is now a very crappy job.

Some offices may have the ability to help staffers mitigate the new expense by moving things around in the MRA, but most offices won’t have that flexibility as we’ve also been cutting congressional staff budgets consistently too.

I’d think the brain drain on the Hill will likely be quick and dramatic over the next year if this becomes law.

Congrats intern, you’re the new LD!

A chief of staff to a Democratic member of the House:

I am a Democratic House Chief of Staff w/ 17 years of Hill experience. I have 2 children, including one son with health problems. I have not gotten a COLA in 2 years (nor has anyone on my staff), and there’s little chance of that changing anytime soon. My husband is a partner in a law firm, so we are certainly more fortunate than many Hill staffers in terms of combined income (though his income has decreased each of the past 3 years due to the poor economy). But as a partner he has no employer subsidy for health insurance, so we have always depended on mine, and it’s a pretty significant reason I’ve stayed on the Hill all these years.

I can guarantee you that if our subsidy were taken away, I would immediately start looking for work in the private sector. I have absolutely no problem with participating in the health exchanges—this is, as many have pointed out, not about Obamacare. But there is no way I could stay in this job indefinitely if I had to shoulder the entire burden of my family’s health care. I care deeply about Congress and have always felt extremely privileged to work here and more than willing to sacrifice the higher pay, better hours and other perks I might find off the Hill. But there’s a limit to what we can absorb, and I know I speak for a great many of my colleagues.

I am proud, at least, that my boss recognizes how crazy and mean-spirited it is to treat Congressional staff this way, and I am grateful that he’s willing to take a tough vote on Vitter for the sake of his employees.

Thanks for asking!

Photograph: Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP