'Most of us don't have wealth': Republican Congressman calls for pay bump, says $174K salary not enough to attract 'credible people to run.' Critics call him a hypocrite — here's why

Bethan Moorcraft
'Most of us don't have wealth': Republican Congressman calls for pay bump, says $174K salary not enough to attract 'credible people to run.' Critics call him a hypocrite — here's why
'Most of us don't have wealth': Republican Congressman calls for pay bump, says $174K salary not enough to attract 'credible people to run.' Critics call him a hypocrite — here's why

Rep. Patrick McHenry says members of Congress should be paid more if Americans want “credible people to run for office.”

The Republican lawmaker has called for an increase to the current $174,000 salary for Congress members — which has been set in stone since 2009 — arguing that skilled individuals with a desire to “serve the public and be effective legislators” should be paid accordingly.

Don't miss

“Most of us live on the salary,” the North Carolina politician told The Dispatch in an interview. “Most of us don’t have wealth.”

While McHenry’s quest to “get the highest quality folks” in the U.S. House could benefit the American people, his call for a pay bump has caused some critics to brand him a hypocrite. Here’s why.

Wage hypocrisy?

McHenry, 48, believes it's time to level the compensation playing field in Washington.

“You can’t have the executive branch and the judicial branch on a higher pay scale than Congress,” he told Dispatch. “That is absurd and really stupid for Congress to disadvantage themselves in this game of checks and balances.”

He argues that Congressional staff members, for whom he’s also urging pay raises, should “be able to go toe-to-toe with the people they’re regulating or overseeing in the executive branch” — and the only way to do that is to attract top talent to Washington with competitive wages.

A salary of $174,000 in 2009 would be around $250,000 today if it had kept pace with inflation. Both figures are far higher than the median income for U.S. households, which was $74,580 in 2022, according to the Census Bureau.

Read more: Find out how to save up to $820 annually on car insurance and get the best rates possible

On the surface, McHenry’s argument for higher wages checks out. But some of his past comments and political votes have come back to bite him.

In 2007, McHenry spoke out against raising the federal minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 because he thought it would actually harm some Americans’ ability to get work — specifically “the physically, emotionally and mentally handicapped” — because businesses wouldn’t invest in paying their wages.

His view remained fixed on this matter over the next decade. In 2021, he once again voted against raising the minimum wage from $7.25 to $15 — and now, his calls for higher wages in Congress have been branded as hypocrisy.

“Retiring Republican Rep. Patrick McHenry wants a higher salary for his buddies in Congress but voted against raising the federal minimum wage to $15/hr,” news podcaster Brittany Page wrote on X (formerly known as Twitter).

“If you feel your salary hasn't kept up with inflation, imagine how poor and working-class Americans feel, sweetie.”

Unfortunate timing

The timing of McHenry’s raise request leaves a lot to be desired. His comments follow hot on the heels of news that one-third of 100 trading members of Congress beat the S&P 500 with their portfolios in 2023, according to Unusual Whales — with some reaping huge gains from exceptionally well-timed trades.

Public scrutiny of Congressional stock trading has intensified in recent years, with politicians being accused of using their connections and insider information to score winning deals. In response to this alleged corruption in Washington, several lawmakers have tried to ban members of Congress from trading stocks — but their efforts have so far been unsuccessful.

McHenry — who recently announced he won’t seek re-election with his term set to end in early 2025 — distanced himself from the stock trading debacle. He argues that most members of Congress use their wages to cover everyday living expenses, with many having to maintain two homes: one in their district and one in Washington.

“The very wealthy few end up dominating the news because of their personal stock trades when most of us don’t have wealth,” he told The Dispatch.

However, he also acknowledges it would be hard to sway the public on the matter of Washington wage bumps, given that the “public view is that Congress is not getting much done, and that’s damn sure been the case [in 2023].”

What to read next

This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.